The Sun.
London, England, 1822-04-04 00:00:00

PUBLIC DEBT.

A person from 'the Bank of England brought up a paper,
containing an account of the amount of the public debt, fundea,
and unfunded, with the interest paid thereon.—(Ordered to be
printed).

_
COURT OF REQUESTS.
Mr. C. CALVERT presented a petition from upwards of
1000 persons, residing within the jurisdiction of the Court of
Requests in Southwark, complaining of the excessive- rate of
fees required to be paid by that Court, and praying that leave
might be granted to bring in a Bill to amend the Act under
which these fees were demanded.—Referred to a Committee to
report if there is ground for bringing in a Bill.
Mr. LYTTLETON moved for a Return of the amount of
the Country Bankers' Notes, issued between the 10th October
1818, and the 10th October 1821, and also the number of Coun-
try Banks in England and Wales, which had taken out licences
to issue notes, between the Ist January 1819, and Ist January
1822.—Ordered.

Mr. H. BLAIR presented a petition from certain Scotch dis-
tiller's, complaining of the restrictions under which they labour-
ed, and praying that they might be placed on the same footing
as the English distillers•
DISSENTERS' MARRIAGES.
Mr. W. SMITH presented Petitions from Dissenters from
the Established Church, playing for relief from certain pro-
visions of the Marriage Act, from Kent, Tavistock, in De-
vonshire, Hackney and Chichester. The Honourable Gen:
tleman stated that he had a plan of his own for the repeal
of certain parts of the Liturgy relating to the marriage of
Unitarians, which would in a very simple way relieve the Pe-
titioners.

CATHOLIC PEERS.
Mr. CANNING said, that in consequence of his having been
frequently asked whether the motion of which he had given no-
tice for the 30th instant, was positive or conditional ; he rose
for the purpose of stating that positively arid 'certainly he in-
tended to bring on that motion on the 30th a April.

ng April.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.
On the motion of the Marquis of LONDONDERRY it was re-
solved.that the House at its rising should adjourn to that day
fortnight.

AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.
Mr. J. BENETT rose to present a Petition from certain
Agriculturists in the county of Wilts, complaining of distress.
He was of opinion that the agricultural interest was particu-
larly deserving of the assistance of Govermnent, from the sa-
crifices which it had made to assist in carrying on the war.—
He was at a loss to know what the country would think of the
wisdom of that House after reading the Report of the Agri-
cultural Committee, which proposed no measure for their re-
lief. The Committee said in their Report, that the English
farmer had possessed the monopoly of the home market fcr
three years, and inferred from this that the principle of mono-
poly was bad, and that the: prosperity of the Agricultural In-
terest should depend upon a sounder principle than that from
which the system of protecting duties proceeded. He was a
friend to the principle of a free trade, but he would contend
that, in the present unnatural state of the country, it was im-
possible to have a free trade. If the country could throw ott'
its enormous load of debt, it might then return to the princi-
ple of a free trade ; but until that were done, the restrictive
system must continue, and the Agricultural Interest had as
much right to derive benefit from it as the manufacturing or
trading classes. By the removal of taxation only could the
English farmer be enabled to compete with the grower of
foreign corn._ He was not an advocate for what were called

high prices. It would be better for the farmer to obtain one
shilling profit out of a bushel of corn sold at six shillings, than
to derive the same remuneration from a bushel of corn sold at
ten shillings ; because, in the former case, the cost of produc-
tion would be less, and the article would find a readier sale.—
He was convinced that the Report of the Agricultural Com-
mittee would spread a feeling of disappointment throughout
the country. Landlords would now say, " We expected much
from the Committee—we have received nothing, and we are
lost." He knew this sort of language would be held in the
country. He did not think that the situation of the country
was so deplorable as some persons imagined, but it was neces-
sary to look our affairs in the face—to resort to effectual mea-
sures, and not to slight palliatives. He trusted that some of
his Hon. Friends would not permit the subject to drop without
offering their opinions upon it, lest it should be said that the
country Gentlemen had neglected the interests of their consti-
tuents, and the House had turned a deaf ear to the complaints
of the country. He moved that the Petition be brought up.
Mr. ELLICE did not rise, as his Hon. Friend well knew, to
oppose the Motion for bringing up the Petition, but for the
purpose of doing that which he was anxious to have done on the
night the Report of the Agricultural Committee was laid upon
the table—namel, to draw the attention of the country to the
measures of relief which Government and that Committee had
proposed, in order that after the holidays the House might be put
in possession of the expressed ()pinions of the country front
one end to the other, on the subject of those measures. No
doubt it answered the purpose of the Noble Marquis (Lon-
donderry) to deprecate any discussion at all with respect to the
report. That advice was precisely in conformity with the line
of conduct adopted by Government during the whole session.
When the Agricultural Committee was appointed, he had ver.
tured to express an opinion that the Committee was not insti-
tuted to inquire into the complaints of the Agriculturists, and

devree a reineelee for them; but. because. Uinieters did not,
Mt their way clearly before them, for the purpose of amusing!
the Agriculturists, and in the mean time enabling Ministers to
co on with the public business of the-seesionn The Committee
lead been/ altogether about sift week's engaged in considering the
eubject Which- bad been referred to them, ;and the result of
their &liberation was contained-in the report which had been,
'artnight up, Now, he would ask the, House what benefit could
result to the suffering agriculturist from anymeasure contained-
in that report ? Would it not have been the fairer plan, if,
MiniSters, at the commencement of the session, had said to the.
hgriculturiets, " Hampered with a load of debt almost beyond
endurance,and a mass of taxation, we are unable to afferd you
any relief ; but we' will not send your petitions to a Committee,
the appointment of which will only divert the attention of the
klouse from a full consideration of -the subjeet." In •lookin
at the report, he f gound, that the only subject which had occu-
.Died the attention of the Committee was the mode of raising
the-priCe of corn in the couptry. • If the •House had been told
before the Conimittee had lAen appointed, that the only gee's-
rion which it would take into consideration would be in what
way prices might be enhanced, he believed the House would'
never have consented to its appointment. The report, besides,
was remarkable for many omissions. He had examined it
-carefully, and, in
.no part could he find it statedhow far the
distresses of the country were to be attributed to one cause or
_to another. - In one paragraph -the Committee said in effect,
that they would not state whether the existing distress arose
from over preductift or other causes; all they wished to do
• was to devise some measure by which the farmer could-get a
remunerating price, without considering the interest of the
consumer. If the Committee had' intended to perform their
ditty, and to devise some measure- for the cure of the evil of
which diameountry complained, they ought to have sought for
the cause of the distress. They might have considered whether
taxation, and an expenditure great beyond necessity, and what
he had before called, and what he now again called, in convic-
tion, the erroneous meaeures with respect to the currency
adopted by that House in 1819, had not had a share in pro-
thecing the present situation of the country. All these sub-
jects, however, the Committee had studiously kept out of view,
and they had been for six weeks ,engaged upon one object--
that of. raising the price of corn in the market ; and when the
mode in which this was to be effected came to be examined, the
report assumed, thellibeeter of a tie§ue tif-noetrums, to which
no gentleman who did not wish to divert the attention of the
House from a right consideration of the subject would have
agreed.'
_At the commencement of theereport, one of the-causes
ot.distrees was stated to be the -immense quantity of corn in
the market beyond tile demand. The Committee, if they
had thought fit to reflect, might have found the cause of this
in the damaged state of the harvest in the south of England.
The farmers,
.he contended, would have been obliged to
thrash out their corn, even if they had had no rent to pay, for
the straw was wanted for fodder, and the grain would not keep.
He begged to ask the framers of this report how they could ven-
ture to attempt to raise the price of good corn to the consumer ?
Be admitted that the average of all qualities was 47e.7 but the
arerage of good corn, which ought alone to be taken into con-
sideration; was from 555. to 60s. per quarter, which was be-
tween 25 and 30 per cent. higher than the price of wheat in any
other market in the world.' If, then, the price of labour were
dependent on the price of food, the productive industry (as had
teen formerly the case in Holland, when a similar experiment
was tried) must leave the country. He did not state these
things with any invidious intention, but merely to show that
the Committee had been mistaken in its view : it was morally
impossible to raise the price of grain to any great extent beyond
what it obtained in other kingdoms. It would be found that
before the war the price was generally only a little higher than
that of the continent, anti to such a state of things wiem'ust re-
turn. He did not wish to trouble the House with a series of
remarks upon what be must call the further absurdities of the
report : it would be evident to the country that the Committee
had only, sat to enable Ministers to ride over the session, and
after taxing the country to the full extent of what it couldbear,
to dietnissehe Members to their constituents. Such had been
the object, and such, probably, would be the result. The re-
port rather gave the subject the go-by, but at the same time an
allusion was made to the alteration in the currency as one reason
why the price of grain was reduced. One consideration would
throw great light upon this point—viz: the decreased Issue of
dountry Bank-notes: hence arose three-fourths of the difficul-
ties.a.nd distresses at present felt. It appeared,by returns from
the Stamp Office, that_.
• In 1814 the issue was - - £11,000,000
In 1810 - • 7,000,000
In 1818 • - e - • 12,000,000
' in 1821 - 2,500,000
a most rapid and important diminution. -In 1819 he had given
it as his opinion, that the depression of the currency was at its
height in 1818. Ile had always disagreed from the Honour-
able Member for Portarlington (Mr. Ricardo) that the price of
gold was to be taken as the standard of the depression. In 1818,
the debt of the public to the Bank of England was at its highest,
the circulation of its notes was nearly at its greatest amount, anti
the quantity of country notes issued beyond any former year.—
He had been aware that the depreciation of the standard, on the
passing of Mr. Peel's bill, wild benefit the labouring classes of
the community ; for the price of provisions would fall instantly,
and the price of labour only-very gradually. In Coventry, up
to this hour, the price of labour was the same as in 1818, whilst
the price of provisions was only half. Mr. Peel's Bill, in fact,
imposed a tax of from 30 to 40 per cent. upon all property, and
to that extent exempted the creditors from sustaining their share
of the-burden; He was satisfied that the fit and rational course
would have been to have raised the standard of gold to
about * 51. 10s., instead of fixing it, at .31. 17s. Blid. Upon
ore part of the question, the degree of relief to be expected
from diminishing taxes, he was probably a little of the opinion
of Ministers. These were times when nothing should be dis-
ghised ; and he must say, that he knew of no effectual relief,
bnt either by the repeal of Mr. Peel's Bill, to which he would
never consent, or by reducing according to some rateable scale
the contracts and taxes on this country, to the amount from
which they had been raised by the bill of 1700. It had been
his opinion that the currency was depreciated one-third ; the
Hon. Member for Portarlington thought it about 10 on 12 per
cent. aided as it was by the forced importation of gold. He
wished now-to say a word or two as to what might be done by
the House. Had the Committee produced a full report upon the
whole subject, he did not see how the House could have digested
in this Session any specific plan of relief. What then was the
_nett thing to be done—the next duty of Parliament ? To re-
duce the amount of taxation in every way, and to have dimi-
nished the expenditure to the lowest possible scale. As it was
clear that nothing effectual could now be done, he recommend-
edthat after the holidays the repeal of all taxes shouldbe pro-
posed that did not encroach on the payment of interest to the
public creditor ; and that at the same time no exertion should
be spared to put the charges of the nation on a footing that
would call as little as possible for fresh privations. This was
now all that was left to' be done. By reference to the assess-
ments to the property-tax, it appeared that in 1815 the landed-
interest was assessed to the amount of 47,000,0001.: from this
stun 15;000,0001. were to be deducted for debts and incumbran-
ces, leaving 32,000,0001. What was the state of the same class
at this moment, reduced by a revolution as effectual as that of
France, but without its violence ? The landed property of the
country was deteriorated one-third, and the incumbrances had
been augmented ; so that what in 1815 was worth 32;000,0001.,
was now worth not more than 18,000,0001. or 19,000,0001. This
was the, whole income of the landed nobility and gentry of the
realm, while. the public creditors and annuitants were double
their former amount. Surely this situation of affairs was fright-
ful, and the only remedy suggested by die agricultural coin-
mitte was to raise the price of grain to the consumer, or to ag-
gravate the already abominable corn-bill. He felt as deeply
as any man for the sufferings of the agricultural interest, and
would be at all times ready to relieve them, but not at the ex-
pence of die other classes.of the community. •
Mr. F. LEWIS did not consider this- at all a desirable mo-
ment for going into the vast range of matter connected with the
report.—(Hear.)—The Hon. 'Gentleman who had just sat down
had, however, in such strong terms attacked the Agricultural
Committee, that it became necessary for him (Mr. Lewis) as a
member of it, to express a hope that neither the House nor the
Country would concur in the censures that had been so freely
bestowed. The Hon. Gentleman had charged the Committee
partly for-what it had done, and partly for what it had not done;
but when he said that the proper course foreit to have pursued
was to have investigated the causes of the distresses, and to have
ascertained how far they arose from taxation, and how far from
a change in the currency, he (Mr. Lewis) must beg leave to say
that he widely differed from the Hon. Gentleman. Had that
course been recommended in the Committee, he should have re-
solutely resisted it ; because, although he had very often heard
Honourable Members argue that the distresses were attribut-
able to the change in the currency, he had never yet heard any
individual hardy enough to say, that the step that had been
taken in this respect ought - to be retraced. The House had
given-the Committee, in the order of reference, no such power
or instruction; and to what beneficial or practical result could
it have led, -to rip up what no Honourable Member had been
found daring enough to attack in any substantial form ? To
have assumed this power, and to have inquired what taxes might
or might not be fitly repealed, would have been a direct inter-
ference with the duty of the ivhole House, which was the labour
of every Session, and for which a Session was hardly ever found
sufficiently protracted. In fact, the present was but a sequel
of the Committee of last year, from which a long Report had
proceeded, in the main points of which he (Mr. Lewis) con-
curred, and which entered into all the reasoning applicable to
the subject, and the probable remedies that might be resorted
to. The whole matterwas, therefore, exhausted, and it would
have been unwise on this account, if on no other, to have gone
over the whole ground again. He took this, therefore, the
earliest opportunity of disdaiming on his own part, (and many

other members. of -the Committee would no doubt agree with•
him) any intention -to increase' the existintr prohibitions upon
and impediments to the importation of foreign grain, or to raise
in any manner the price of grain to the consumer: Upon this
point there were individual members of the Committee
.who thought otherwise; but it was the object and study of
the framers of the Report not to make any change in this re-
spect.

Mr. *WESTERN said, he could not concur in the censure
passed.on the Committee by thd Hon. Member for Covedry
(Mr. Ellice.) . They had not been guilty of any omission, or
neither the, alteration in the currency nor the question of re-
ducihg taxes, had been referred to i theirt. consideration. Though
he did not approVe of the measures recommended by them, he
must do justice to the intentions with which they were proposed.
—(Hear !)—lt was not fair to the Committee to say, that their.'
only, object seemed to be to raise the pricaof corn. It was in
point of fact merely a continuation of the Committee of last
Session, which had been appointed in consequence of the peti-
tions presented to the House on the subject of agricultural dis-
tress. In the ptesent Session also, various petitions had been
presented,- complaining of the Act of 1815, as affording no sort
of check to prevent foreign corn from being poured into the
market in any quantity, when the price in alie home market
reiiched a certain price. The Committee for this .reason proposed
to themselves to provide some remedy. against the evil. -The re-1
thetly proposed he did not approve of. He thought it would be
injurious to the British grower ; but he must say, that it was re-
commended in the spirit of affording relief to the agriculture Qf
the country: So far, however, from doing this, he felt no hesi-
tation in saying, that it would only increase the dismay of the
agriculturists, and that it would have been better to let the law
remain as it stood. Even admitting that through some unex-
pected and unforeseen events the change might, in the course of
years, be productive of advantage, he thought it was injudicious
to introduce it.now. It was impossible to say in the fluctuating,
state of the Continent, whether the duties proposed by
.the
Committee would er would not prove an effectual check against
excess of importation; When lie saw the increasing difficulties
of the country; that the distress went on increasing, and was
likely to continue so till some effectual reniedy were applied,
he would daily, again and again, revive these discussions. He
stated the other night that the farmers of Essex were under the
greatest difficulties, and that two-thirds of them if called upon
to,pay up their accounts would be found insolvent. Many of
his constituents in that county had since assured him that such
Was the fact. Their capital was gone, for in fact the landlord
hiid been living upon it for some dine. Was not this a state of
things that imposed a necessity on the House of making
diligent inquiry into the causes frem which it arose, and
the remedies that could be applied. An immense portion of
the' difficulty was attributable to the alteration of the cur-
rency. The Honourable Member for Chichester (Mr. Hits-
kisson) stated in a publication of his, that the manufacturing
distress of 1818 and 1817 arose from overproduction, and was
in part N. be attributed to an alteration in the currency. Ex-
cess of produce might have had some effect in producing the
prepent agricultural distress ; but he contended that it was
ahnost exclusively to be, attributed to the change of currency.
They had been told that there was a superabundance of produce
in France as well as here. There was a superabundance, but
then he could state, on very good authority, that it did not pro-
duce. the same difficulties there that existed now in this country.
It was not the value of agricultural produce alone that had fal-
len, but that of every other production. He had no doubt that
the distresses of the country would at length compel them to
give up the Act of 1819. The House would be obliged to re-.
trace its steps; He saw clearly that- this must be the result.
The advance of prices in consequence of the measure of 1797
' was at least 401. per cent. If they looked to the tables in Adam
Smith, it would clearly appear that nothing else could have
produced such an increase in the price of corn. For 150 years
previous to 1792, there was little or no fluctuation in the price
of corn. In the course of 20 years, from 1792 to 1812, the price
had doubled. What could have caused this but the alteration
in the value of money.? Enormous taxes had been laid on since
1797 1 an immense debt had been contracted in a depreciated
currency, the interest of which they were now compelled to pay
in a currency greatly increased in value. They were paying m
standard currency double the value of the amount for which
they contracted. By this means such -havoc had been made in
'the property of the agricultural anil industrious classes, as had
never been occasioned even by civil war. By the measure of
1797 the prices of produce were doubled ; the rents of the land-
lords were doubled, it was true but it should be remembered'
that taxes were also doubled, that outgoings of every kind were
doubled, and that-therefore the landlords were not a bit better
off by the increase of rents. If the standard should conic down
to what it had been a century previous to 1797,-the conse-
quence would be, that the value of property must be,reduced
to one half what it was at present, with all the incumbrances
still remaining. Taking the incumbrances into account, such
as dowers, settlements, agencies, repairs, not to speak of taxes,
he would say, that the net income of landlords did not amount
to more than one half the nominal. What, then, east be the
consequence of a further reduction ? It was not the agricul-
turists alone that were distressed.- Let them look at West In-
dia property, the change of currency, had as great an effect,
upon that, and every other species of property, as on the agri-
cultural.—.-Even looking at the labouring classes, he was dis-
posed to draw a different conclusion to that of the lion. Nlem-
tter for. Coventry, (Mr. Ellice.) He (Mr. W.) contended, that
their situation must eventually. be rendered worse by the Bill
of 1819. The price of labour, did not, it was true, immediate-
ly follow the-price of co;n, and in this way, the alteration in
the currency had for a time an effect beneficial to the labourer ;
but the moment the price of labour settled down to the price of
corn, the situation of the labourer would be rendered worse, for
he would be paid less for his labour, and remain still chargeable
with the taxes, in a currency greatly increased in value.—
Never were any effects so unjust, so disastrous, and so cruel, as
those produced to the public creditor, by the measure of 1797,
and those inflicted on the public debtor, by that of 1819. If
some person more capable of doing justice to so important a
subject did not bring it forward, he should feel it his duty to
do so before the close of the Session.
Mr. RICARDO said, no one was more aware than lie
was of the evils of the variation of the currency, and he had
consequently at all 'times used all his efforts to produce a fixed
and invariable standard of value, but still he cotelel not agree in
the effects which the Hon. Member for Essex alleged that the
Alteration of the standard had had upon the agricultural in-
terests. If they for a moment looked at the effect of the altera-
tion of the currency, they would perceive it was impossible it
could be the main cause of the agricultural distress. Let them
suppose the taxation, what they knew it was, about 50 millions.
In considering the effect of the- currency upon this taxation,
they must deduct the quantity which would go further in con-
sequence of the rise in the value of money—say about 10 mil-
lions. They had then 40 millions of taxes, the burthens of
which would be increased by the operation of the change of
the currency. What portion of this was borne by the tenantry
of the country' ? One-fourth of the sum was the utmost
amount borne by the tenantry, leaving the landlords out of the
question, or ten millions. Supposing the change in the value
to' ave been according to the extravagant calculation of the
Honourable Member for Essex, 25 per Cent., the utmost in-
crease of the burthen on the tenantry was '2,500,0001. , Could
it be possible that the distress of the farmers could be attri-
buted to an increase of burthen to the amount of 2,500,0001 ?
(Hear !)—lf this was sufficient to reduce the tenantry to dis-
tress, was it not merely because the landlords continued to ex-
act the same amount of rent ? But it was not- the fact that
they exacted the same rent. They gave up on the average
about 25 per cent.. Whence then was the distress of the land-
lords ? they gave up 25 per cent. and retained 75, which was
equal in value to the hundred. How then were they injured,
but by the portion of the taxes which they had to bear ? Surely
these taxes could not swallow up the whole of the net produce
of the country. An increase of burthen on the landed interest,
of ten per cent. could not swallow up the whole of .the rent of
the landlord and the profit of the tenant. • But did he say that
the landed interest had suffered to no greater extent ? He said
they had suffered to an infinitely greater extent; but that
other causes had been assigned, quite sufficient to account for
it to his mind, and quite independent of taxation and cur-
rency. The great cause was the abundance of produce in the
country, from a succession of good harvests, from the great
importations from Ireland, and: from an abundance of other
causes. But it appeared to him quite impossible that this
state of distress could last.—(Hear !)—lt was quite impossible
that the surplus produce of the land, should be only sufficient
to pay the taxes, leaving no rent nor profit.—(Hear !)—He
should now say a few words as to the Report of the Coln-
mittee.—The Report of the Committee of the last Session con-
tained some admirable propositions., The first part of it was
worthy to be compared with any iteport that had proceeded
from a Committee of the House of Commons, and gave it a
title to be placed by the side of the Reports of the Bullion Com-
mittee and the Committee on the Bank. That part of the Re-
port contained some most sound reasoning as to the Corn Trade.
It shewed that the Corn Law of 1815 was in itself a cause of
the agricultural distress that it produced two evils ; that in
times of scarcity, when the price here rose to a certain height,
the ports were opened, without reference to the price of grain
abroad, and the country was liable to be deluged with grain.
This was one great evil. Another evil was, that in time of
plenty, when from 'a succession of two or three good harvests
there was more corn in the country than could be consumed by.
the people, in consequence of the artificially high price at which
it was kept by the Corn Law, it was necessary that a great fall
must take place before it could find a vent by exportation.
Now, what was the inference to be drawn fiom this statement,
but that measures should be taken to bring prices to the level
of the Continent ? If that had been done, in case of a surplus
Production of corn, after a small fall,, exportation might take
place to foreign countries, and our own market would be re-
lieved. Instead of following up their previous reasoning, the

other part of the Report was totally inconsistent with the corn-
mencement.
All the absurd 'notions as to the nature of coun-
tervailing duties were advocated: It was asserted that a coun-
tervailing duty should be equal to the difference of the expence
of raising corn here and in other countries, whereas a counter-
vailing duty should only be equivalent to the tastes • by- which
growth of corn was burthened, and to be safb and effectual,
should be accompanied by an equal drawback or bounty on
exportation, so that the grower of corn in England might enter
into 'fair competition with the Foreign Power, both at home
and abroad, just as if no taxes existed. But there could be'no
end to this- system of counteracting duty, if it were to depend
upon the quantity of expence incurred, in the cultivation of
poor lands for an imperfect produce • for the imposition of
countervailing duties on this score would apply to the produce
of grapes in this country through the prec,ess of hot-houses, in
order that these grapes should be manufactured .into wine,
which the English should exclusively prefer, with its enormous
expence, to all foreign competition. The enforcement of this
system was indeed so absurd, that he was astonished at the
judgment of those by whom it was recommended. Before
this country was densely peopled, it Vas, no .doubt corn;
petent to us to .produce, from our own' fertile lands, an
ample supply, not only for our own population, but to render.,
Great Britain an exporting country for corn. Our situation
was however vefy different, -when, from the ihcrease of our po-
pulation' the cultivation of our poor lands became necessary.
In what he was urging, he had no doubt whatever that he was
much more the advocate of the . agriculturists than those who
were their most prominent and professed friends. He was in-
deed always their earnest advocate, as he shbwed himself by
his conduct upon the Agricultural Cominittee of ,the last Ses-
sion, when he voted for every reasonable concession for the re-
lief of the distress of the agriculturists, from a hope that when
such distress was removed the country would return to sound
principles; but now he had to lament, from the two last para-
graphs, that there was no promise, or even disposition, to make
that return. On the contrary, he witnessed alesolution to per-
severe in the old system which created in his mind cansiderable
discontent. But Estill lie would support -the farmers, and espe-
cially in promoting
.the repeal of any taxes which "appeared to
press exclusively upon them ; for he felt that the repeal of any
such taxation was most desirable on the score of common jus-
tice, provided the tax upon any particular class of the people
were not transferred to any .other class.
Mr. H. G. BENNET rose to protest against the doctrine
that taxes had nothing to do with the distresses of thQagricul,
tural interest. He professed not to be able to go into the cal=
culations which his Hon: Friend had stated, but he couldaitate
that in 1792 prices had been as low as at this moment: But
the teases had been at the utmost but 19,000,0001. including
collection. Nothing had then been talked of butahe prosperity
of the country. The 3 per cents.- were at par, every man re,
ceived his rent, and every one thought the country had never
been more prosperous. Why was there such a difference now ?
Why, but because the taxes were now 56,000,0001. and taken
out of the produce of the country, Whether arising from land or
industry Here was a country, than which there was none
more industrious in the world, possiessing a soil, if not the very
best, one of the fairest, and a climate among the best in the
temperate part of, the globe, and particularly fitted for agricul-
ture. Let them look to the state of the people who lived in
this country. From one end of ' the land-to the other; they
would /find nothing but the cry of want.. (1-lear, hear I)—His
Honourable Friend said this was owing to a superabund-
ance of produce. Too much corn grew—the trees grew too
fast.' But the cause of distress was, that there were such de-
mands on their pockets by the Crown, the church, and the poor,
that nothing was left to the landlord for rent, or to the culti-
vator for profit. 'Why was this so ? Let them look back to 1792,
and they found prices the same, and the country rich. But in
'1822' the country was in the greatest distress. Nothing but mere
words and sophistry could be urged to show that the demands
of the Government did not occasion this state of distress. This
coutry, under the operation of the Government, was approach-
ing to the state of India. He doubted not that the land would be
cultivated ; but as the Zemindars in India had heendispoesess-
ed, so gentleman after, gentleman would disappear in this coun-
try, and the end would be that the Government, the Church,
and the poor would become the proprietors. A revolution, un-
equalled in effusion of blood or ravage of property, had. been
going on in this country for the last twenty years, but .particu-
larly during-the last.four years. No example of such a revolu-
tion was to be found in history ! His Hon. Friend had enter..
edinto a calculation to shew that only 2,500,0001: of the taxes
pressed upon the tenantry, in consequence of the change in the
currency ; but. he had left out of view the various payments
which they were obliged to make now in an improved currency
to the same nominal amount as in the debased currency. He
knew of_ Gentlemen. who had been in the receipt of 60001. or
80001. a year, and non, received not 12,0001. a year. This had
not been occasioned by extravagance on their part, but by the
allowances which they were obliged to make to younger chil-
dren, and other burdens. Many were compelled to live in lodg-
ings in London or Bath; or to go abroad, instead of bringing up
and educating their fbanilies at home, as their fathers had done.
The Bill of the Right Hon. Gentleman for resuming cash pay-
ments he looked at with. reverence: It deprived the Right Hon.
the Chancellor of the Exchequer of the-usual resources in slew-
corner and Chauge-alley. He was quite unwilling to embark
even in the discussion of this question again. The only mode
of relief, and of
.great and effectual relief, was the reduction of
taxes. It was a joke—he had not a word to express his contempt
for the opinion which would represent that reduction of taxes
was not the only means of saving the little remnant that was
left, and keeping the hand of the tax-gatherer out of it. He
would say " Get rid of that juggler, the sinking fund, and give
the people the 5,000,0001. or 6,000,0001. which it takes from
them : if that will not do, the first creditor is the plough :. the
Gentlemen of England mist not be stripped of their estates,
the farmer Must not be deprived of his pittance, and we must'
come to an accommodation with the public reditor." Though
it might now seem bold to say so, he was sure that he should
live to see that result, and that the Right Hon. Gentleman (the
Chancellor of the Exchequer) and the Noble Lord would be
seen coming forward, and, Under the plea of necessity, advocat-
ing,such a measure. He should hold it inexcusable, if every
thing were not done to prevent this, and to pay strictly every
shilling due to the creditor. But if this could not be done, they
were bound, as public men, to do what every private man did,
to come to an amicable arrangement for paying a portiOn of the
debt, before they should come to have none at all to pay.—
(Cheers.)—He could consider the Agricultural Committee only
as a Committee of landlords whose object was to raise the price
of corn. Had it been a Committee of Merchants, they would,
he had no doubt, have come to a conclusion directly. opposite.
For the consumers at large, he would say, that the Committee
and the Report had no other object but the raising of. prices,
which would be a LONDONDERRY
calamity.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY felt it necessary to offer
a few remarks after what had occurred in the course of the de-
bate, but more especially after what had fallen from the Hon.
Member for Shrewsbury. He did not know how it might strike
the House, but he had heard nothing this evening to convince
him that it would not have been better to reserve the subject for
discussion when the attention of the House might be directed
to some more practical measure than had been suggested in
this conversation. He would put it to the House whether the
Hon. Gentlemen opposite, if their sentiments were such as
they, had avowed, had not lost much precious time since the
opening of the Session, in which they might have submitted
some measure to the House founded on the reasoning which
they had just heard. It was singular that course had not
been taken which the Hon. Member for Essex was disposed
to favour, and which it seemed probable might have been sup-
ported by the. Hon. Member for Coventry, for although
he believed him to have been one of its ardent supporters
at the tixue it_paased, lie had ever since seemed to have misgiv-
ings on the auhject, and anxious•to atone for the part he' had
.taken by censuring the measure on every occasion. He
thought the Honourable Member for Essex ought not to have'
contented himself with complaining of the measure of 1819
as he had done that night. 'Though he (the Marquis of Lon-
donderry) was prepared in every possible point of view to
uphold this Bill, with the sentiments entertained by that
Hon. Gentleman, he should rather have blought forward some
practical measure. He ought not to have endeavoured to
make the country dissatisfied with its situation, but should
rather have endeavoured to prevail on Parliament to repeal
that act which he thought so injurious to the best interests of
the country". He could now understand the course pursued by
the Hon. Member far Shrewsbury. He could not before un-
derstand why it was thought desirable that with imperfect
views they should,enter into the discussion of a subject which
came before them ih no practical shape. But he could stow see
the object of the Honourable Member for Shrewsbury, and he
must enter his itost solemn protest against the purpose which
he had in view for if he understood him. right, lie wished to
sound the public mind through the channel of the distresses of
the agricultural classes, to ascertain if they were disposed to
favour that most flagrant deviation from sound policy as well
as from common honesty--a breach of faith towards the pub-
lic creditor.—(Hear, hear !)—Could a British House of Com-
mons sanction such a measure, it would relieve no class in the
community, but it would overwhelm all classes with ruin.
Were it possible for them to be dishonest and base enough to
listen to a project of National Bankruptcy, the result must be
most calamitous. If they could adopt the idea of abandoning
the Sinking Fund to repeal taxes to that amount, it would
prove as injurious as unjust, and the faith of the nation would
be sacrificed without relieving the existing distress. To ascer-
tain this it was not necessary to wait for the consequences of.
such an experiment. Every man at all acquainted with
the subject knew that were this done, it could afford no
essential relief—it would be but a drop of water in the sea.—
(Hear
!)—Nay, he would go further and say, that if she
whole weight of our taxes could by possibility be removed—as
well those which were necessary to support our establish.

ments, as those which were demanded to enable the country
to fulfil its engagements—if all the taxes could at once be swept
away, that degree of relief would not be afforded that no dis-
tress should. be felt.—(Hear.)—This was not the first time
that the Mil. Member for Shrewsbury had attacked the Govern-
ment of the country—not the present Administration,' but the
Government generally, by imputing to them all the distresses
that were the subject of complaint, by making them answer-
able for all the burthens throyn on the country by the late'
war, and for events long since passed by, over which they
could have no controul. Thitllon. Gentleman might take a
lesson from his. Friend near him, the Member for Portarlington,
who had shewn how small a portion of that distress now com-
plained of had been thrown on the suffering individuals by taxa-
tion. Any man, who took a rational view of this subject, must
know that he was attempting to mislead the public when he re-
presented that the existing distress could be removed by any
remission of taxation. H must take this opportunity, after
what had been advanced, of stating what he knew the feel-
ings of the country to be on this subject. He would never
believe, and he thought he knew its temper well, that the
country, under any degree of suffering, would so far forget
itself as to favour injustice. He would not believe that
under any circumstances they would be disposed to break
faith with the public creditor. The security which the Hon.
Gentleman proffered to • offer, in the first instance,—by not
calling on the public creditor to compound till the effect
of reducing taxes to- the amount of the Sinking Fund had
been tried, was no security at all. They would give, by
taking such a course, only a brief delay ; for the certain
consequences of such a step were sufficiently known. The
distress was caused by the distress of the seasons, and the
markets ; and therefore it was obvious could not be cured by
the remission of taxation, even though that were pushed to the
length of national bankruptcy. On this point there could be no
doubt ; for if a Parliament could be found so degenerate, and
a people
.so destitute of honour and common honesty, as
not to start at the idea of such an abandonment of principle,
the most sordid calculation-would forbid the adoption of such
a measure ; as the want of protection for all the great interests
of the nation, which must be felt in that case, wound make it
worse than usqles4, and instead of removing the evil it would
only' have the effect of largely aggravating that distress, which
it was vainly proposed 'by such means to remedy. And here,
when they heard so much of the distress of the country, they
must give him leave to say, that the Agriculturists were the
only class in the community who suffered. The manufacturers
of the country were in a state of great activity of exertion, and
a great increase of their social comforts had taken place, which
were likely to continue. The commerce of the country was
flourishing, and in every part the utmost activity was to be re-
marked. He would repeat it, the only body of men now suf-
fering under the pressure of distress was the agricultural part
of the community, and their situation was to be traced to
the course of the seasons, and the consequent state of the
markets. Though abundance was desirable, yet carried be-
yond a certain point, it occasioned evils like those now felt.
From extensive competition the markets declined, and the '
price of corn shaken, that of every other article of agri-
cultural produce must totter. Whatever was the situa-
tion of the agricultural classes, it was not to be supposed
there were no indications of prosperity. He should rather
say, that the country was generally in a prosperous,
state. This was not the time to enter at large into the
subject; but when every country in Europe complained of
the same distress which afflicted the agricultural classes in
England, afid when the distress extended in an equal, if not in
a superior degree, to America, where it could not be imputed
to excessive taxation, it could not be maintained that the evil
was caused by the amount of our taxes. Such being the cir-
cumstances of the case, the House might safely go to its ad-
journment without any apprehension that the opinions express-
ed by the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury on the subject of na-
tional faith, would find any favour out of doors. He believed
it to be so well understood by the public, that it was known a
national bankruptcy must be as fatal to the interests of those
for whose benefit it might be intended, as to those of the parties
at whose expence it should be proposed to be made.—(Hear !)
To this every feeling, as well of policy as of morality, was op-
posed, and in this country no principle was held more sacred
than that which bound them to do justice by those to whom
the country was indebted.—(Hear, hear !)
Mr. BENNET explained. He had broached no doctrine of
the kind. He had only stated that the measures of Ministers
were driving along in that course which would, terminate in a
national bankruptcy. That he repeated.—(Elear, hear!)—The
measures which had defrauded the creditor in 1797,1 and the
debtor in 1822, were rapidly proceeding to ruin the nation
(Hear hear !)
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY had understood the
Hon. Member to recommend the reduction of the Sinking
Fund ; and if that would not do, a composition with the public
creditor as a private individual compounded with his creditors.
Mr. BENNET—The Noble Lord has understood me cor-
rectly.
Mr. ELLICE begged to explain. He had stated on every
occasion that the currency, of the country had been left long
enough at the discretion of the Bank and the Government. He
had constantly opposed every attempt to interfere with the
standard adopted, and he had on that ground differed from his
Hon. Friend the Member for Taunton (Mr. Baring), who had ;
proposed silver and gold as the.. standard. In supporting the
Bill of 1819, he had expressed his fears for the consequencesl
of that measure ; and he had also contended (as Hon. Gentle-
men might recollect) that, even if the standard was depreciated
to the price of gold at the particular time, no relief whatever
would follow to the country.
Mr. RICARDO explained. No man, he said, since he had
been in the Housel had more strenuously than himself advocated
the repeal of taxation.
Mr. PEEL would put it to Members themselves whether any
thing like full discussion could be had, at the then moment, and
urged' the impropriety of partial discussion, as tending to throw
erroneous views before the country. For himself, he rose mere-
ly to enter his protest against being supposed to concur in the
doctrines of the Hon. Gentleman opposite ; but he could not
forbear observing, how easy it would be to shew that the dis-
tresses of the country could not be owing to the causes assigned
for them. 'Neither the existence of distress, nor its extent
England, could be denied ; but if he (Mr. Peel) found other
countries labouring under the same distress with England, and
if he found in those countries no alteration of currency, no
weight of taxation, none of those causes to which the distress
of England was ascribed, then he was justified, at least, in
contending that it was not entirely out of those causes that
the distress of England had arisen. Now, both in Flanders
and in Switzerland the greatest agricultural distress existed at
the present moment. In' parts of Switzerland the pressure
was so severe, that the land-owners actually could not buy
tools to till the ground with. Switzerland had neither heavy
taxation nor changed currency to complain of ; and it was evi-
dent, therefore, that, independent of those circumstances the same
evil which now afflicted England might exist. There were other
facts presenting themselves uponthe surface of the subject, which
went to negative the effect of the causes to which our distress
was imputed. The operation of those causes had been (as re-
garded the country) general ; the distress was only partial. And
the 'House should take notice how completely the Bill of 1819
had falsified. the predictions of those who had opposed it. Gen-
tlemen on the other side had most positively declared that, if
the Bill passed, the revenue of the country must fail : but the
Bill, had passed, and the currency had improved, and the re-
venue, notwithstanding, had gone on increasing. He asked
that the Bill should be fairly tried, not by its effect upon
a particular interest, but by its effect upon the state of
the whole interests of the country. ' He desired that the state
of the manufacturing interest might be taken, the state of
the poor's rates, the comforts enjoyed by the manufactur-
ing population, and the tranquillity prevailing in the manufac-
turing districts. He asked, also, that reference might be
had (in looking at the Bill) to the general state of commerce
in the country ; and that an Unfair stigma might not be cast
upon the measure, merely because there was a pressure upon
the agricultural interest. He asked this,. first, because he could
not admit partial distress to be a fair criterion ; and, next, be-
cause he would not admit even that partial distress to be occa-
sioned by the Bill. The Right Honourable Gentleman con-
cluded his speech by apologising for having been led so far
into discussion. He had risen merely that his "silence might
not be construed into acquiescence in what had been said by
the Honourable Gentleman opposite, and to claim a suspen-
sion of the judgment of the House until the subject had been
considered as from its importance, it deserved to be.
Mr. CALCRAFT did not insist upon the billof 1819 as one
of the very material causes of agricultural distress; although it
did press in some measure upon that interest as well as upon
others : but when the Right Hon. Gentleman relied upon the
prosperity of the manufacturers, he (Mr,. Calcraft) would tell
him that the very distress of the agriculturist was one great
source of that prosperity. He.was bound to declare (although,
he knew the doctrine would even by his own friends be ill re-
ceived), that the agricultural, distress arose out of the too great
production ; and that over-production created such a competition
in the market, that the tax which the grower paid he was unable
to throw upon the consumer. The manufacturer was well off,
because the price of produce was ruinously low. The agricul-
turist was starving, because be raised produce under heavy bur-
dens, and because he was compelled to sell, if lie sold at all, at
prices which would not reimburse him. And' what was the re-
lief proposed for all this suffering ? One million was to be
laid out in corn for the purpose of warehousing. But he (Mr.
Calcraft) did contend that that measure would do nothing
at all for the agriculturist. The million must be laid out in
corn which would bear warehousing, and that kind of corn was
already at a fair price ; it was the damaged refuse corn, which
could not bear warehousing, which hung upon the hands of the
farmer and .kept down the market. The warehousing plan
• would do no good at al to the grower, and it would do a great

debl of harm to the consumer. Gentlemen could scarcely fail
to have observed, that the price of bread was high as compared
with the price of corn : that arose from the quantity of damaged
corn in the market, which could not be made use of in the way
of making bread. It came, then, to the question of what ought to
be done ? and, upon that point, he (Mr. Calcraft) did call the
attention of the House to the declaration of the Noble Lord
opposite (the Marquis of Londonderry). The Noble Lord said,
that, suppose that the whole taxes of the country, much less
-5,000,0001. of them, repealed, the grower of corn could not be
relieved. The Opposition had been charged with extravagant
propositions, but let the House only consider that single pror/o-
sition of the Noble Lord. About 70,000,0001. of,revenue were
collected; the collection was made at a very great expence, ; the
'mere net revenue nearly doubled the rental of the whole kiligdom,
and yet the Noble Lord said that its repeal would pot helithe far-
mer! A more monstrous proposition had surely never been uttered
by any Gentleman, or many assembly. The short truth was, that
it the price of produce could not be raised., the c,harge of pro-
duction must be lessened, and that lessening must take place in
different branches of expense, and in different ways--by abate-
ment of rent, by lowering of tithes, by diminishing poor's rate,
by reduced price of labour, and last, certainly not least, by a
proportionate lessening of taxation. With what face could tto-
vernment ask the landholder to abate his rent, while it told hint
that no end would be answered by abatement of taxation ? Ile
did not say that it was possible to reduce taxation in an equal
degree with rent ; but he did insist upon every point of reduction
which could be made consistent with the engagements by which
the country was bound he went no t'arther; honour, Justice,
and sound policy, alike demanded thatthose engageraents should
be fulfilled. But Honourable Gentlemen on the other side de-,
precated the discussion of the subject at the present moment_
No wonder, upon such a report as they had got up, that they
should deprecate discussion; for, of all the docitments that had
ever been sent forth to suffering people, none surely had ever
been 'so calculated to disappoint all expectation. It would hay.:
been better by far to have met the thing at once, and to have,
told the people " We regret your distress, but we can do nothing
,
for you. lle (Mr. Calcraft) gave notice, that' when the re-
port came to be discussed, he should 'feel it his duty to read
the petitions upon which the Report proceeded'; he should then
discuss the docuinent paragraph by paragraph, to show how
inefficiently the Committee had executed the duty intrusted
to them.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY explained.
Mr. 11. GURNEY expressed his firm conviction, that the
great distrem (which might more properly be called the great
pecuniary embarrassment) of the country, had been produced
entirely by- the effeci of the Bill of 1819.
The petition was then read, and ordered to be printed.
PENSIONS.

Mr. BANKES moved for an Account of all Pensions
ex-
ceeding 1001. per.arinum, paid out of the Civil List ; the like
account as to Pensions charged upon the 44 per cents duty;
and the like as to charges upon the Civil List of Ireland.—
Agreed to.
• POLLS IN YORKSHIRE.
Mr. WILLIAMS WY NN moved to bring in a Bill for the
further regulating the eleetioni of Knights- of the Shire in
Yorkshire. The Hon. Member's intentiorr was, that two Mem-
bers should be chosen by the West Riding, and two by the
North and East.—Leave given. • . - , .
MARRIAGE ACT.

Dr. PHILLIMORE having moved the second reading of
the Marriage •Act Amendment Bill, . • -
Mr. BERNAL called,, the attention of the • House to the
clause which respected the publication' of bans. The. Act prO-
vided that where one of the parties was a minor; the bans should
be published in the parish in which that party might reside. He
(Mr. Bernal) wished to know, in case both parties were minors,
in which parish baris- were to be published, or whether they
were to be published in both ? . • -
Dr. PHILLIMORE just stated, for the information of the
Hon. Member, that he did not apprehend any difficulty would
arise. The provisions of the act would be better discussed .here-
after in Committee.

The Bill was then committed for, the 19th of April.
'ROYA T., BURGHS ACCOUNTS BILL.
The LORD ADVOCATE" moved the committal of the
Royal Burghs Accounts 8i11.,'
In answer to queitions from Mr. HUME and Lord A.
Ha-
•st the Learned Lord stated that the Bill was only to be
committed pro forma and then printed.
The Report was ordered to be taken into further ennsidera-
don on the 26th of April.
SUMMARY PROCEEDINGS BILL.
The Report of the Summary Proceedings Bill was received,
and the thud reading of the Bill was fixed for Monday, the 2211
of April.
The Committees of Supply and Ways and Means were post-
poned, and the other orders being disposed of, the House Ad-
journed to Wednesday, the 17th instant. • .