The Sun.
London, England, 1846-01-20 00:00:00

BURDENS ON LAND.
(From the Times.)
For years past " the peculiar burdens on land" have been
one of the chief points for the corn-laws, and at the first
alarm of their approaching fate the cry was raised as usual,
and, turned into a claim for compensation. Almost every-
thing that the farmer paid was a peculiar burden. The na-
tional taxes themselves, diffusive enough as e veqb'scly
knows, were a peculiar burden on land. " The taxed agri-
culturist of England" was contrasted with " the untaxed
Russian." and " the untaxed Pole," ..as if no ether class in
the island was taxed except the farmer, and there was no
such thing as a Custom-house known. The soil, 'we were
told, is mortgaged for the payment of the national debt.
Everything, it appears, is paid by the soil. It supports the
Church, the poor, the prisons, the roads, the police, all for
the general good, with only a very moderate share inthe bene-
fit. Mr. Shelley having chanced to say at'a Brighton meeting
that " be did not believe there were any special burdens on
land," the. Lord. Lieutenant of the county publicly took
him to task. " Surely the collector of rates could not have
called upon him, 'nor the waywarden for the repair of the
roads, nor could he be aware that it was the. laud that paid
the tithes." We are to conclude, therefore, that there is no
such thing as a highway-rate, a lighting and paving-rate, a
police-rate, or local rate or tax, or rent-charge, or ground-
rent, or payment of any kind except the simplest form of rent
ever heard of, in a town. Brighton, especially, where the
challenge was made, is an utter stranger to these oppressions,
and has no more occasion to sympathise with the complaints
of the agriculturists than it has with the " Groans of the
Britons." It has been replied a thousand times that the
taxes are equally paid by all, and that all have, therefore,
an equal right to protection ; or, which comes to the same
thing, none have a right to a special protection; that
the titheowner is only a sort of landlord, and, if
not an improving landlord, is, in most instances, a
resident and a charitable one, and that way-rates
are a profitable
,investment, and an outlay attaching
to all kinds of traffic. It would, in fact, be as reasonable to
call port dues a special burden on the merchant, or canal
dues or railway charges a special burden on the retail
dealer, as way-rates,on the farmer. The pretence of an ex-
clusive agricultural burden, in the shape of poor-rates and
other rates levied on the same assessment as the poor-rates,
may not perhaps admit of so ready an answer. The com-
plaint, if it means anything at all, means that by some acci-
dental unfairness in the principle of assessment, land is
rated very much higher than other property, or that on the
same profits
the burdens which ought justly to devolve on other occupa-
tions. These are points which demand inquiry. The agri-
culturists will be well pleased to hear that their complaint
as to the burden of the rates will not be dismissed without
a hearing. It is destined to occupy a prominent place in the
impending debate. An order, has, we believe, been issued
from the Home office, to the poor-law unions, for a return
of the rates in the past year, distinguishing the amount
levied on land, and that on other kinds of property.
This peculiar burden, therefore, will have every
chance of a hearing. Should the ill-used class who
are groaning under its unequal pressure possess any genuine
statistics on the subject likely to conflict with the brazen ta-
bles of an official return, we advise them to set to work ime
mediatelv. At present there is a serious probability that the
return will indicate at least as great a burden on other kinds
of property as.on land. In 1826 the poor-rate amounted to
6,966,1671., of which land contributed 4,795,4821., and
other property 2,170,675/. As this was twenty years since,
perhaps it is unnecessary to remark upon it, Some light,
however, may be thrown on the question by observing, that
in 1826 the poor- rate in agricultural districts included a large
proportion of labour-rate, that is, of mere wages; and that
in other respects the .expenditure of an agricultural parish in
the southern and midland counties included items elsewhere
left to the private ledger or to private bounty. Without, how-
ever, attempting to„ analyze the complex sums of 1826, we
pass on to 1841, by which time the proportion had con-
siderably changed. The total was 6,351,828/., to which land
contributed 3,316,5931., and other property 3,035,235/, Here,
then, is something like an equality.. On this statement the
poor-rate cannot be called an exclusive burden on land. At
least, there is only one supposition
on which the complaint
would hold good, and that supposition is one of which the
protectionists happen to betray a very particular horror.
They commonly allege that the capital embarked in agricul.
ture is considerably greater than that embarked in trade and
manufactures. There is a, calculation going about amongst
them on this subject so utterly out of all reason that out of
pure kindness we will not quote it. But they. are never so
moderate as to rate the agricultural interest at only; three
or four times' as much as the mercantile and manu-
facturing. Apply this estimate to the return of the poor
rates fir 1841. If the capital of agriculture is twice all
other property, but only pays about as much to the' poor-
rate as other property, it follows, by the rules of Cocker, that
the capital of agriculture is only rated half as high as other
capital. It follows that every thousand pounds invested in
land pays only half as much as a thousand pounds invested
in houses, shops, warehouses, manufactories, mines, roads,
canals, railways, or other property; consequently that the
poor-rates, so far from being a special burden on the agri-
culturist, are specially burdensome—viz., twice as burden-
some—on other classes. .
privilegecreof We are inclined to think we could argue better
for the protectionists than they do • for themselves.
They will, of course, reject . the offer as a gratuitous
delightinsult,..aofn !Lich.and
dm' immemoriallg
them-
selves. We will, however, commend to their own natural
understandings • the mu tally destructive character of
idlTreannaandthl
their arguments. In one page, or one column, or one sen-
tence, they maintain that they are the largeat, the wealthiest,
and the most important interest in the country ; in the next
that they are the most highly rated, and deeply burdened,
and so forth ; the fact being, that their aggregate rating
is just about equal to the aggregate rating of the
other interest. This fact being ascertained, it is impos-
sible that they can maintain at one and the same time both
their other points. If their capital is great, their rating is
little; if their capital is little, their rating is great. The
two quantities vary inversely, being the factors of a given
product. Agriculturists are either the most important
class and the least burdened, or the least important
class and the most burdened. They must not aspire
both to greatness and suffering. They are not both princes
and beggars. They must make their election between the
two, and that beanies. Before next Monday we expect to
hear an authoritative declaration from 17, New Bond-street,
either that the agriculturists are important and favoured, or
insignificant and spited. We urge neon them this dilemma
with all the more earnestness, because there is every reason
to expect that the result of the present inquiry through the
poor-law unions will be very much at variance with former
returns, perhaps the very reverse of 1826. Since 1841 there
has been an immense increase in other rateable property be-
sides land. Many hundreds of miles of railroad have been
brought into profitable operation Cities and towns
have increased, and even been created. Moreover, new, and
fairer and more searching assessments have been everywhere
made. Counties, cities, and parishes have been rated anew.
The hair's-breadth scales of the Property-tax have been
brought into play. What if it should turn out that land, in
the poor's book, is only three-eighths or one-third of the
whole rateable property ? Such a result will aggravate the
difficulty and straiten the dilemma we have described. The
protectionist will have to admit either that the rateable agri-
cultural property is only one -third of the whole in the king-
dom, and is fairly rated; or that it is more than a third, and
lightly rated; or that it is less than a third. and heavily
rated. The first, of course, is the best for his purpose. But
there is an end at once of the peculiar burden. •

Her Majesty and Prince Albert's visit to Osborne
House, Isle of Wight, is not expected to take place until the
first week in February. The embellishments and repairs to
the:edifice, wliich include the grand portico or entrance with
massive stone columns, hiVe been completed, and also the
rock and rustic work ; and the whole building will be finished
by August next.
Lord John Russell has arrived in town, accompa-
nied by the Earl of Minto, from Minto House, where his
Lordship made a short stay en route from Glasgow.;
ARTISTICAL DECORATION OF PUBLIC ROOMS --
The large room of the Cafe de l'Europe, in the Haymarket,
has been enriched lately by its spirited proprietor, Mr. Hem-
ming, with a series of fine full-length portraits obtained from
a palace in Bonn, on the Rhine, which fill the spaces formed
by the pilasters that support an entablature running round
the room, and, together with some good casts of ancient and
modern statuary, give an effect of substantial and tasteful
•elegance not found in many other coffee-rooms. Anxious to
see works of fine art become a necessary part of our houses,
we mention the room in question as a good sign and an
example wc.rthy of imitation. The portraits include Francis
L of Austria, Charles Alexander of Lorraine, James Edward
Stuart, Maria Leckinskai daughter of Stanislaus of Poland,
and'Louis XV. The majority of them are ascribed to Riego,
and two, at least, are very superior works.—The Builder.
NEW SUSPENSION BRIDGE FOR RAILWAY PUR-
PosEs.—A patent has just been obtained by Mr. 11. H. Rus-
sell, formerly an assistant of Sir Isambard Brunel in the con-
struction of the Thames Tunnel and other public works, for
a new mode of arranging the curves in suspension bridges,
by rneans'Of which the vibration ar.d oscillation of those
structures are entirely neutralised, and thereby rendered
availablefor railway purposes. The novelty of the invention
consists in the arrangement of the chains, which alternately
are relieved by the support which is given from the lower
portion of the catenary curve, it being supported in the pier
immediately under the summits or points of bearing of the
upper chain which interlaces at the centre of the span, thus
distributing the weight of the moving power alternately from
the higher to the lower chain. We shall take an early op-
portunity of giving a more minute account of the principle,
which, if it realize the expectations of the patentee and
• many of his scientific friends, will be of essential service in
lessening some of the expenses and difficulties incident to the
• • formation of railroads.—The Builder.

GAME TRESPASS IN THE ROYAL PRESERVES

Yesterday morning a labouring man, named William Pond,
was brought before the Windsor bench of magistrates (Mr.
T. Adams, Mayor, and Messrs. Blunt and Legh), charged by
James Austir, a gamekeeper in the service of the Queen,
employed in Windsor Groat Park, with trespassing in search
of game "on a certain piece of plantation land, in the pos-
session and occupation of her Majesty:" 'William Makin, a
gamekeeper in the service of the Crown, deposed that on Mon-
day last, he saw the defendant, with two other men, who
at person. Four wiress found by witness
were unknown to him, beating in the plantation with sticks,
between the Sheet-street Lodge and Spital, in the Great
Park. The other two ran off and escaped, but witness pur-
sued the defendant, and caught him in the meadow. Upon
wtfioiel, rune
edlaoufspteeorotwo the spot where the
three men were seen beating the plantation. Upon the !
searching(afnodr
tthei e
snaringghai mm eikioeotefhpi
haredgamekeeper
nothing
Aw s
de-
fendant being taken, he threatened to use his knife. The
defendant denied that he had a knife in his possession ; all
that he bad in his pocket was a pipe and a comb. The de-
fendant also denied that he was in search of game, whatever
the other two men, whom he did not know, might: be after.
The witness, who was asked by Mr. Legh if he saw the knife
in the possession of the defendant, replied that he did not
see it, but that he put his hand to his waistcoat pocket
when he made use of the threat to use one. The Magistrates
having consulted together for a short time, aid having eli-
cited from Hakin that he had never seen the defendant tres-
passing in search of game on the royal preserves before, the
Mayor, addressing the defendant, said, that this being his
first offence, the Bench would deal leniently with him by
fining him in the amount of IGs. and cedering him to pay lls.
giving him the option of . ither
costs, thus paying the guinea
or being imprisoned for 14 days in the borough gaol. The'
man said he bad no money to pay either tine or costs. .11e
was then conveyed to prison in the custody of the gaoler.
Last evening Mr. Bedford held an inqueBt at the
Prince's Head, Buckingham-street, Straml, on the body of
a fine full-grown male chili', apparently recently born.
William Lee stated that about twenty minutes. past Seven
o'clock on Saturday mornik,g last, he was passing along
John. street, Adelphi, when he observed a brown paper parcel
lying on the pavement, in front of the private entrance of the
Adslphi hotel. On his opening one end of the paper he dis-
covered it to contain the dead body of si full-grown male
child, which was scarcely cold. Mr. Bainbridge, surgeon to
St. Martin's Workhouse,ssaid that he saw the body soon after
it was brought there—there was no external mark of violence
upon it, and from the appearance internally, he was of opi-
nion that the child had died from the. want of proper atten-
tion. The jury returned a verdict hi accordance with the
medical testimony.