The Sun.
London, England, 1864-02-16 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDO'

relieve agriculture from one of the greatest disabilities to
which it was subjected. It would open up a fresh branch
of manufacture, mad thus add materially to the stock of
agricultural wealth in the country.
Mr. MORRITT was not in favour of absolute repeal, but
thought that with the large surplus revenue two-fifths of
the malt duty might be surrendered without injuriously
affecting the publiv:Aucome. As to the bill on the table, it
could not be tarried into effect without fraud. Instead of
being a step in the right direction it would be a stumbling-
block; and instead ofsatisfying the farmer, if it made him
quiet for a timo, it would convert him into a rogue at last.
Mr, F.. LONG remarked that whatever might be the
merits of the measure, there could be no doubt that the
Chancellor of the Exchequer had honourably redeemed the
pledge he had giNreh to the deputation that waited upon him
last ye on the subject of the malt tax; but he advised the
right hon. gentleman to go the whole animal and see if he
could not reduce the tax.

Lord R. MONTAGU accepted the bill as something
more than an instalment, inasmuch as it removed a great
har:lstip from the farmer ; the one blemish in it was the
interference of the excise; but that was an evil which he
saw no means of avoiding.
Sir F. CROSSLEY doubted whether a repeal of the malt
tax would be really advantageous to the farmer, for the
immediate result would be the introduction into the market
of inferior qualities of foreign barley to compete with our
own produce. He locked upon the subject of the malt duty
as altogether a consumer's question.
Mr. HENLEY granted that it was a consumer's ques-
tion, but it was also a producer's; and he should like to
know whether Sir F. Crossley's constituents would be bet-
ter pleased with a tax upon the produce of the mills of
Yorkshire upon being told that it was paid by the con-
sumer. It was, perhaps, ungracious to look a gift horse in
the mouth, but he could not help thinking that the bill
would not solve the question whether or not malt was bene-
ficial for the feeding of cattle. The results of the experi-
ments made by the Government during the autumn ought
to have been furnished to the house.
Mr. DUTTON feared the bill would, in practice, turn out
a dead letter.

Sir F. KELLY was disposed to receive the measure in a

spirit of thankfulness, and suggested that sufficient interval
should be allowed for its consideration by the public before
the next stage was taken.
Mr. BARROW did not form any extravagant hopes or
expectations of the effects of the bill. It was very much in
the nature of a bone thrown to a hungry dog : there was
very little flesh about it.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the report of the experiments made under the superinten-
dence of Government agents would be produced as early
as possible. He owned he did not anticipate any magical
effects from the measure, nor could he hold it out as an in-
stalment or a step in the directiou of abolition or reduction
of so important a source of revenue as the malt tax.

The bill was read a second time.
The Collection of Taxes Bill and the Government Annui-
ties Bill were also read a second time.
In committee of the whole house, the CHANCELLOR of
the EXCHEQUER obtained leave to bring in a bill to amend
the laws relating to the warehousing of British and foreign
spirits duty free,
Leave was given to Mr. PAULL to introduce a bill to
facilitate the discharge of insolvent debtors in certain
cases; to Mr. C. FORSTER, a bill to abolish the forfeiture
of lands and goods on convictions of felony; and to Sir H.
BRUCE, a bill to provide for the better watching of towns in
Ireland.
The house adjourned at half-past 10 o'clock.

RAILWAY INTELLIGENCE,