The Sun.
London, England, 1853-02-18 00:00:00

HOP DUTIES.

Mr. FREWEN presented a petition from the hop
planters of the county of Sussex and Weald of Kent,
and others interested in the cultivation of hops, assemi
bled at a public meeting held on the 14th day of Decem4
ber last, praying for a total repeal of the excise duty on
hops. The hon. member then proceeded to move
" that the excise duty on hops is impolitic and unjust;
and ought to be repealed." A deputation which had
waited upon the noble lord who was lately at the head
of the Government had received no support, and, there-
fore, had urged him to bring the subject before the house.
In the year 1849 the duty had been 145,6931., in 1850
424,7021., in 1851 and 1852 236,623 i., so that the aver- '
age was little more than • 200,0001. per annum. This
tax was first imposed in 1711, and considerably increased
in 1802. In 1805 it had been decreased 2d. in the pound,
but even now it amounted to nearly 141. per acre. A
large crop in fact, which ought to be a blessing, is by
the operation of this law actually made a curse. In some
cases the amount of duty paid for the hops grown upon 1
five or six acres out of a hundred, actually exceeds the
rent of the whole farm. He could prove that within the 1
last fortnight four-fifths of the hop planters of Sussex had
signed a petition for the total repeal of this tax. He
was aware that a meeting had been held at Maidstone,
at which resolutions had been proposed hostile to the re-
peal of the hop duty, but this would only show that the
gentlemen who passed those resolutions held in their hands
an improper monopoly. He was awar,thqt to-day. alave
doputation had waited upon the head,of the Government '
CliiiicAlpir of, the. M,lehequer,---graying,-tharlia
tax -might • not-he repealed; and it was natural for
planters of ample means to expect, by the operation of
this Large tax, to beat down opposition. The operatiozi
of the tax was to drive a large portion of the land out of
cultivation, and this surely was impolitic, and with
these views he had brought forward the present
measure.

Mr. FULLER was understood to agree with the
measure of the hon. member for Sussex.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER trusted
that the house would not now be led into the discussion
of the question: He would freely admit to the hon.
gentleman that the case of the county of Sussex was un-
doubtedly a hard one, as compared with some more
favoured districts. But lie regretted not to be
able to go any farther with the right hon. gentle-
man. The opinion of the hon. gentleman 'that the
tax was of slight importance to the Exchequer was
erroneous. Considerable importance was attached to
the 300,0001. raised by this tax. It was, however, im-
politic to consider any single tax by itself. It was im-
politic to remove a tax before it was decided how to raise
the necessary expenditure of the year. He was convinced
that the house would not sanction this motion. It
would soon now be seen what was the estimated
expenditure for the year, and then, if the revenue
of the year exceeded that expenditure, it would be
time for the honourable member to bring forward his
measure. He entertained no doubt that the house would
refuse to adopt the motion of the right hon. gentleman.
He had been called upon by an hon. member to give up
the whole of the advertisement duty, and he had heard
that night of a motion to be brought forward for the
repeal of the wine duties. It was his duty to give a
negative to the motion before the house.

Mr. BALL should vote against the continuance of the
tax, and was confirmed in this intention by what had
fallen from the Chancellor of the Exchequer with regard
to its inequality. The removal of this tax was only
carrying out that free-trade principle which had been
confirmed by the house.
Mr. DEEDES was sorry to say that it was not the
first time he had opposed the member for Sussex on mo-
tions of this sort. It seemed to him that it was
the intention of the honourable member to play Sus-
sex against all England, but he hoped that the
umpires would see to the fairness of the game. The
attempt to repeal the hop duty by a planter, was a sui-
cidal act.

Mr. F. V. HARCOTJRT, in a few words, whioh were
inaudible in the gallery, was understood also to oppose
the motion.

Mr. BRIGHT rose to protest against the doctrine of
the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He (Mr. Bright)
would give his support to the hon. gentleman, having no
notion that they should thrust aside the interests of
their constituents and their own strong feelings with re-
gard to any particular tax, just to oblige whoever might
hold the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer for the
time being. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUME hoped the hon. member for East Sussex
would pay no heed to the rebuke which the Chancellor
of the Exchequer had administered to him ; for neither
the hon. member nor anybody else would ever do any
good if they followed the advice of a Chancellor of the
Exchequer. (Laughter.) He (Mr. Hume) candidly
confessed that he had expected very different things
from the right honourable gentleman—a disciple of the
late Sir Robert Peel—(hear)—than the enunciation
of such a principle as he had laid down that night.
The hop duty was a bad tax in every one of its aspects ;
and when one county was found fighting one way
and another another way with respect to it, the right
honourable gentleman ought to perceive that there
was a combination against the consumer. Ho
thought it was a great point gained to have the tax con-
demned by a resolution of the house, because it ensured
its repeal or revision, as the case might be, as early as
the finances of the country would allow of it.
After a few words from Mr. ALCOCII, Mr. FREW=
replied, and the house divided :
For the motion.
Against.

, . 91
. 175
, • ---84

Majority against
THE MADIAIS

Mr. KINNAIRD moved that an address should be pre-
sented to her Majesty, praying that her Majesty would be
graciously pleased to take such steps as she may deem
most fitting for bringing under the notice of his Imperial
Highness the Grand Duke of Tuscany the strong feelings
prevailing among a large number of her Majesty's subjects
in consequence of the persecution now actively begun in
Tuscany of these who, secretly or openly, profess principles
held by her Majesty, in common with the majority of her
Majesty's subjects in this United Kingdom, which persecu-
tion appears likely to increase in intensity through the de-
cree lately promulgated, which re-enacts the penalty of
death against the so-called " depravers of the religion of the
state He asked for the attention of the house while he
stated the reasons which had induced him to bring forward
this motion. The fact was that a cruel and atrocious sen-
tence had been passed upon two individuals—in humble
life, it was true, but of nnimpeached character—and when
the tidings of that sentence had reached thiS country, sor-
row and indignation prevailed generally amongst all classes
of the population. That feeling was not confined to this
country, for in every Protestant state of Europe the same
feeling of indignation was experienced. It was not even
confined to the continent of Europe, but it was felt beyond
the Atlantic. (Hear, hear.) The American people had
expressed in the most unmistakeable language their sym-
pathy for the case of the Madiai, and the President of the
United States and the Minister for Foreign Affairs in that
country not only sent a dispatch to the Government of the
Grand Duke, asking for the release of those unfortunate
person, but, if he were credibly informed, they had also
offered to send a vessel to receive those persecuted people,
with the intention of giving them an asylum in the United
States, and providing for them hereafter. He wished that
in this country they had also taken that noble course. He
wished to prove to the house that this case of the Medial.
was not an isolated case, and he thought he shduld be
able also to prove that it arose from an ecclesiastical re-
action; that it was symptomatic of a determination on
the part of the heirarchy of the Church of Rome to put
down Protestantism by force wherever the civil power
would aid them in so doing. (Hear, hear.) It was on that
ground he asked the House of Commons to call upon her
Majesty's Government to invite the other Protestant
powers of Europe . to join them,
and in concert with Prus-
sia and Holland to enter a remonstrance, not ire dictato-
rial tone—not in a tone of menace—but in the name omf
ore-
ligion and humanity firmly and energeticallL
,rehear.)
strate against this great act of tyranny- (li
and tll within a very
Tuscany had stood for a long period,
who followed in
from the fact of its having mild rulers,
recent period, in happy contrast
who towards the end of
the footsteps of Peter Leopold,
t theother Italian states,
the last century, when law reformwas not so popular as at
present, effected a great reform
in
share of civil and l
the laws of his country,
and secured for Tuscany a greateru
reli-
gious liberty than was enjoyed by any other of the Italian
states. was never estab-
states. It was the fact the
liaised in Tuscany, and that the canon law was never an.
preme there ; and those unfortunate. people who were, as
most unjustly and illegally convicted, had
d under the very laws that were made to se-
that was now •
c the liberty of conscience . . invaded.
hbeeenbecolienvrie.dete,
(Hear, hear.) In the year
article
1848icle,
ofa cwohnisethituatllmnw existings granted
formsnted
to Tuscany, by the
of worship were not only tolerated but permitted. (Hear,
bear, hear.) Under the protection of that constitution, a
number of Florentines had enjoyed the advantage of at-
tending Protestant worship in that city in the churches
connected with the English and Prussian embassies. Ser-
vice was performed in the Italian language, and a con-
siderable number of Tuscan subjects attended for a con-
siderable time withoutbeing interrupted. (Hear, hear.)
It was in Juanuary, 1851, that, for the first time, the Go-
vernment interfered, and prevented their subjects from at-
tending those places of worship. He believed that police
agents were placed at the doors, and all citizens who ven-
tured to worship God according to what they believed to
be the rights of conscience were marked men, subject to
the surveillance of the police. In a very short time after-
wards 400 mandates were issued by the police, telling the
parties to whom they had reference that, if they wor-
shipped God in that form, they would be subject to from
eight to sixty days' imprisonment. In the month of
February, Count Ricciardini, a man who had never taken
part in politics, and of unimpeached character, was told
that a decree was passed forbidding him to enter a Pro-
testant church under pain of imprisonment. In th.e,
month of March he was informed by the police
that
he gave up attending service he would individ LIY"