The Sun.
London, England, 1854-05-15 00:00:00

~~--.~
=~

went. (Hear, hear, hear.) He believed the Empe-
ror of Russia had been misled as to the course which
this country would puree. He thoughtaif Lord Claren-
don had adopted in 1853 the language he adopted last Jan.,
we; should! not now be involved in war; for it was
clear the Emperor of Russia did not wish for war any
more than we ourselves did. If the Emperor of Russia
had been confidential with our Government, they ought to
have been equally confidential with him, and have told
him that if he once crossed the Pruth, and entered
the Principalities, anxious as we were for peace, we
could no longer permit the status quo to continue,
but must have recourse to force of arms. That was the
language they ought to have used to Russian last June.
With respect to the malt duties they always got 12,000,0001.
of taxation froin barley, out of 15,000,0001. of excise
taxation.' (Hear, hear.) Don't let gentlemen imagine
this malt tax was a barley question ' • it was a tax of 11. or
1/. ss. on every acre of cultivated land from John o'Groat'a
to the Land's End. (Hear, hear.) Exactly 20 years ago,
viz., in 1834, he heard from Mr. Gladstone the most elo-
quent speech he ever heard on the West India interest.
How did the present measure act on that interest ? It was
to all intents and purposes a protective measure to the
West India interest. Hear, hear. They would not tax
the shopkeeper or the man with an income between 10/.
and 631., but they would lay a tgx on the national
beverage, which was consequently a tax on the poor man.
(Hear.) Why did they not tax yarn, or cotton wool ? If
the duty of a halfpenny a yard hit the manufacturer too.
hard, did they think a tax of 100 per cent, on malt would
not hit the landed interest and the consumer far more
oppressively? The effect of the malt tax was to make•the
produce of malt four times dearer than it would if that
tax• did not exist. If this tax were repealed the demand
for barley would increase at least three-fold. The natural
effect of that increase-would be to produce a larger re-
venue, for we, who are' the barley growers of Europe,
would grow less wheat and oats than we do now.
By our present fiscal laws we' now depress the price
of wheat and oats at least ss. the quarter. They
were now about to increase the wrong to the agricultu-
ralists by adding to the tax on barley, and he was
really at a loss to know to what motive to attribute
this blow aimed at the agriculturalists. If there were
'no licenses; no penalties, no more interference with
the trade of the agriculturist than with any other trade
—the maltster and the publican would not, as they do now,
pay three taxes, besides the tax that goes to the Chancellor
of the Exchequer ; for, at the present, this tax took from
the public, not 5,000,0001. but 20,000,0001. The brewers
had already sent out their notices that they were going to
raise the price of beer, and the 'Government had no means,
by reason of their present laws, to check in any way
this gigantic monopoly. And this was what they called
free trade ! (Hear.) In contrasting the financial proposals
of the present Government with that of his right hon.
friend the member for Buckinghamshire (Mr. Disraeli) the
difference was striking, for in the celebrated budget of his
right hon. friend he saw but one animus, that of reconcil-
ing our financial system to our new commercial system.
(LEFT SPEAKING.)