The Sun.
London, England, 1822-06-13 00:00:00

E
/./.2

fused to comply with their wish. He (Lord Althorpe) had the
honour to know that Gentleman, and was sure that he had act-
ed from no bad motive, but he thought in this instance he had
not exercised a sound discretion. The Petitioners complained
of Agricultural Distress, arising from excessive taxation. They
declared it would be impossible for them to continue to culti-
vate their lan d unless relief were afforded. They therefore prayed
for a repeal of taxes to such an amout.t as should enable them to
cultivate their land and exercise their industry as formerly, and
they expressed an opinion that the country would nothave been in
the situation in which it was at this moment, had the people
been adequately represented in that House. He agreed with
every word contained in the Petition, which had been signed by
six or seven hundred freeholders, and thought it entitled to their
serious consideration.
Mr. CARTWRIGHT remarked, the case had been so fairly
stated by the Noble Lord, that he had no occasion to say much.
He was decidedly of opinion that Ministers ought to make
every retrenchment in their power, consistent with the'dignity
of the State and good faith towards the public creditor. It was
true that the burdens thrown on the country by the late neces-
sary war were great, but he was afraid, though taxes to the
amount of 4,000,0001. were taken off in the course of the pre-
sent Session, that even this would afford the sufferers but little
relief. He was not surprised to find that between six and seven
hundred freeholders had signed this Petition, as it had been
sent all over the county for signatures. After all, the Petition
was only that of the individuals who had signed it, and con-
sidering the efforts that had been made, it was remarkable that
but six or seven hundred freeholders had signed it, out of four
thousand, which the county contained. He wished now to say
a word or two with respect to the conduct of the High Sheriff.
The Noble Lord had done justice to that Gentleman's upright
intentions. If there were any man free from party motives,
it was the High Sheriff. Two farmers, persons certainly of
great respectability, had called on the High Sheriff with the
requisition. On looking over it, he perceived that it was not
signed by a single Gentleman of the county. He, therefore,
declined calling the Meeting ; but said, if they would bring him
another requisition, with the names of any of the Nobility or
Gentry attached to it, he would immediately comply with their
wishes. In declining to act on the requisition first presented,
he avoided all interference with the right of petitioning, as it
was open for the parties to call a Meeting as they had since
done, but for the High Sheriff to have called a Meeting of the
Nobility and Gentry of the county, when not one of them had
signed the requisition, would have been a new course of pro-
ceeding.
Sir J. NEWPORT was of opinion the High Sheriff ought to
have called a Meeting, on a requisition being forwarded to him
with the names of four hundred freeholders attached to it,
whether the Gentry had signed it or not.
Mr. COKE spoke in support of the petition, and adverting
to the course pursued by the Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr.
Cartwright) he admitted that he had a right to choose his own
line of conduct, but the country had a right to do as much, and
he hoped at the proper time they would remember what his
conduct had been, and mark their sense of it by choosing for
their Representatives those who would more honourably and
independently represent them. For the country Gentlemen who
had supported the Government through the late necessary war,
they well deserved what they had now got. But for them the
country would not now have been in its present ruined and
calamitous situation. He felt no pity for them, but he lament-
ed the distress of the Yeomanry. Ile wished Ministers knew the
real situation of the country. In that case he could not believe
they would go on as they did at present. He hoped the ex-
ample set by the county of Norfolk would be followed, and
that petitions would be sent not only from every county, but
from every Hundred in every county, and if this were done
it would not be in the power of a corrupt Government, or in the
power of that House, to prevent the voice of the people from
being heard.
Mr. CARTWRIGHT begged to be allowed to say one word
after the very personal attack which had been made on him.—
The Hon. Gentleman was generally so much occupied with the
affairs of Norfolk that he had not expected him to travel out of
his course to make such an attack. Why this was done he did
not know. He believed he (Mr. Coke) had spoken of him
(Mr. Cartwright) and others as having contributed to the ruin
of the country, by supporting Ministers through the late war.
In this he differed from the Hon. Gentleman. He (Mr. Cart-
wright) believed that if Ministers had not been supported as
they were, that the situation of the country would now have
been much-worse than it was at this moment, and perhaps even
that Hon. Gentleman's estate would have been less secure
than it was at present. The Hon. Gentleman had hoped the
County would remember him (Mr. Cartwright) on a future oc-
casion. He was much obliged' to the Hon. Gentleman, but
when he talked of independence, as he was in the habit of
doing, he (Mr. Cartwright) would tell him that he had
acted as independently as the Honourable Gentleman could
do. He was conscious that he had acted from as good
motives, and he should not have been ashamed to meet his
constituents at the meeting which they lately wished to be
called, nor should he be ashamed or afraid to meet them on
that occasion to which the Hon. Gentleman had alluded,
though he was equally obliged to the Hon. Gentleman for his
good wishes.
After a few words from Mr. B. LESTER, the petition was
read and ordered to be printed.
Mr. CURTEIS presented petitions from several Parishes in
the County of Sussex, complaining of Agricultural Distress.
Ordered to be printed.
Sir F. OMMANEY presented a petition from the proprie-
tors of London Bridge Water Works, relative to the proposed
new Bridge.—Referred to a Committee.
TOBACCO.
Lord BELGRAVE presented a petition from certain re-
spectable persons connected with the tobacco manufactory at
Chester, complaining of the distressed state of their trade.—
This they imputed to the increased extent to which smuggling
was carried on in consequence of the article being too heavily
taxed. The Petitioners stated that they themselves could buy
it for less, ready manufactured, than it would cost them to
manufacture it. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer were to
reduce the duty, which was now four shillings the pound, to
two shillings, he shewed, from a series of calculations, that
the Revenue, instead of suffering, would be likely to gain
25,0001. in consequence of the check which would thus be sup-
plied to smuggling.
Mr. H. BRIGHT spoke to the extent of the evil, and sup-
ported the prayer of the petition, and described the arrange-
ments made in Holland for smuggling. A most extensive
establishment was now kept up to prevent smuggling. Hereto-
fore it had been bad. He hoped its defects had now been cor-
rected ; but he was sure that the best way of checking the evil
was to diminish the duty, so that smuggling shOuld no longer
present such tempting profits to those who were disposed to en-
gage in it.
Sir J. NEWPORT had endeavoured over and over again
to impress upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer that smug-
gling could only be effectually repressed by diminishing the
duty. He corroborated the statement of the Hon. Gentleman
who had just sat down, with respect to the smuggling establish-
ments formed by the Dutch. He was confident that if the
Chancellor of the Exchequer looked into the subject, unin-
fluenced by the representations of those who were interested
in supporting the present system, that he would see the best
policy would be to reduce the duty ; and doing that, he had no
doubt he would increase the revenue.
Mr. H. GURNEY supported the prayer of the Petition.
Mr. LUSHINGTON said, Gentlemen had spoken as if
smuggling had largely increased, and as if the revenue were on
the decline. Both these facts he denied. Smuggling had de-
creased ; and to prove that the revenue had not declined,
he had only to refer to the accounts which were on the table of
the House. With respect to Ireland, the duty on tobacco had
considerably increased in the course of the last nine months.
Lord BELGRAVE inquired if he would go back with the
comparison through the last three y'ears.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER admitted that
in some instances the duty imposed might hold out a tempta-
tion to smuggling ; but he was far from thinking that the re-
peal of the duty would give to the Revenue in increased con-
sumption that which it would lose by such repeal.
The petition was then brought up and read, and ordered to
be printed.
Mr. GOULBURN postponed his motion for leave to bring
in a Bill to renew the Insurrection Act till the 18th inst.
Mr. C. DUNDAS presented a Petition from the Parish of
Noleingham in Berkshire, complaining of distress, which they
considered to have been increased by the restoration of the
currency. They prayed to be relieved from the burdens which
were now so severely felt, and expressed an opinion that a ge-
neral Income Tax on actual property, accompanied by the
repeal of other taxes, would be a just measure.—The Petition
was ordered to be printed.
The Irish Land Revenue BM was read a second time, and
committed for tomorrow.

THURSDAY, JUNE 13, 1822.