The Sun.
London, England, 1865-02-09 00:00:00

tax by one-half. Lord DERBY'S Government, how-
ever, soon evacuated their seats, and with the advent
of the Whigs the farmers' prospects clouded over.
In 1863 the long continued discontent made itself
so actively felt that a committee was appointed, but
before its labours were concluded the bill for free-
ing from duty the malt used for feeding cattle
formed part of the Government measures. The
farmers declare that this has been a failure, but Sir
FrratoY KELLY thinks that it has done good service
in admitting the injustice of the burden. Now an-
other session has opened, the farmers and their ad-
vocates are determined to lose no time, but to press
upon the Legislature the strength of their claims.
Very strong arguments were adduced yesterday
on their behalf by some of the speakers. One of

theth, Mr. PCNNETT, the chairman of the Central
Association, declared that in these Free Trade times

the farmers were the only producers that were not
free. He further said that the grievance was not a
class burden, but a public injustice, since beer
which the London brewers now charged at ls. the
gallon, and the retailers is. 4d., might, but for this
tax, be brewed at a margin of profit at 4d., instead
of is. 4d. the gallon. In old times, before the in-
crease on this tax, farmers were in the habit of
finding their men in beer, and, if not, giving them
malt to brew for themselves. All these arguments
are, of course, very sound, and no one needs to be
told the advantages of cheap and good beer ; in fact,
they concern the townsfolk more than the country
men, for beer, so cheap as it might be, and compara-
tively unadulterated, would be the most powerful
opponent of those gin palaces which are the ruin of a
large portion of our population.
Still the question is not so much on the surface as
any uninitiated listener to the eloquent and logica 1
addresses of yesterday might easily have believed. In
the first place five millions is no trifling sum to take
off at ablow, and in fact it would not be possible to do
it without adding largely to other taxes or imposing
new ones. But even supposing the tax to be re-
duced by one half, we must remember that there
are other taxes which press heavily upon the com-
munity. Prudence is still taxed heavily in the shape
of fire assurance ; good tea and sugar are still
luxuries to the poor ; while many thousands of hard-
working men with families groan under the pres-
sure of the inevitable income-tax, which no economy
can avoid, no self-denial can prevent. If the sums
claimed annually, in the shape of income-tax, from
the struggling professional man, or the hard-driven
clerk, were able to be spent in life assurance, we
should not so often see the melancholy spectacle of
respectably brought up families thrown helpless
and penniless on the world, crying eagerly for ad-
mission into schools, asylums, or other charitable
All these claims must justly be
borne in mind when listening to the grievance of
any particular class, however large or influential.
But there is another aspect to the case. No one
can justly begrudge a remission to the farmer, but
will the farmer get the benefit? We fear that the
landlords are interested in keeping up the agitation,
and that, thanks to their persistent refusal to grant
leases which places the tenants at their mercy, no
sooner will the malt tax come off than the rents
will proportionately go up, so that the real profit of
the reduction will not find its way into the pockets
of the farmers but into the coffers of the landlords.
When the beer duty, amounting to upwards of three
millions, was abolished the public gained nothing
whatever. The great brewers, who made a show of
a trifling reduction, took care to make the publicans
atone for it, and thus what seemed to be a great
public boon really only served to benefit a few
capitalists. This, we fear, -will be in some measure
the result of the abolition of the malt tax, which is
at the most only an indirect tax whose burden is
spread over the community. On these grounds we
think the exchequer may very reasonably have the
benefit of it for another year, when matters will
probably allow of its reduction by one-half.

astitutions.