The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-16 00:00:00

MILITIA.

Lord MONTEAGLE presented a petition nume-
rously signed from Leeds, praying the Parliament
would not at this period sanction the calling out of the
militia.
_ _

IMPORTS FROM IRELAND.
The NOBLE LORD, before sitting down, begged leave
to give notice of his intention to move for certain returns,
to which he expected the House would have no objec-
tion. They were as to the amountof the imports of grain
into this country from Ireland.
I ROTECTION TO AGRICULTURE.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented upwards of 200
petitions from various parts of the country against
the repeal of the present protection to agriculture, and
praying that the House of Commons be dissolved before
any attempt was made to decide the question. The peti-
tions were from the counties of Wilts, Kent, Becks, and
gs in favour of agricultural protection
ford, in E-sex ; also petitions from
fSirl eIY
Stockbridge,
a
ockbhrleiadlrdggeei,nm Chelmsford, in
places in Wicklow, Berk-
shire, and Yorkshire ; also a petition from distillers in
the south-east district of Scotland, from farmers and
others in the county of Somerset, and. Lincoln, all pray-
ing that their Lordships would not alter the present ex-
and also praying that the measures pro-
place (House of Commons), which were
ipsct, isne gd ci
no r
ann- lost wh
es
r,
calculated to cause so much damage to the agricultural
and other great interests of the country, should not
receive the sanction of their Lordships, in the event
of the Bill being passed by the House of Commons.
The Earl of STRADBROKE presented a number of
petitions from different places (the names of which we
could not catch) to the same effect.
PECULIAR BURDENS ON LAND.
Lord BEAUMONT rose to submit to their Lordships
the motion to which he had given notice to enquire into
the peculiar burdens on land, the impediments which
existed to the improvement on agriculture as well as to
enquire into the present system of Excise duties.
Although he understood that it was not the intention of
the Government to oppose that motion, their Lordships
might probably expect that he would enter into the
reasons why he submitted so important a motion to
their consideration, and why also those with whom he
had hitherto in general acted, refused to comply with a
similar motion when moved by other persons. He had
ever upheld that peculiar burdens on land, and
protection t) agriculture, were matters very
Josely connected. They must regard both subjects
from the same point of view. Either they mnst remove
the peculiar burdens on land if they attempted to re-
.nove the protection which agriculture enjoyed, or they
must, in common justice, continue protection if they
permitted those bnrdens to remain. He found that be
was fortitltd in this opinion by men whose authority
was of considerable weight. He found that Mr. M'Cul-
loch, Mr. M‘Gregor, and if he mistook not, his Noble
Friend on his left (Lord Brougham) were all of

_
opinion that there were peculiar burdens on land.
The object of his motion was to inquire what those
peculiar burdens were. If it were submitted to his
choice whether the burdens of land and protection to
_ .

agriculture should be removed or both allowed to con
:inue, he would have no hesitation in selecting the con

tinuance of the burdens and the continuance Of protec.

tion rather than the Wmoval of both, and be influenced
in coming to such a determination by national con•
siderations, by economical considerations, and by
motives of a sense of justice to the colonies.
He believed that the continuation of protection would be
the most economical bargain that the country at large
could xtrike with the agriculturists. It they granted a
sum of money for general purposes, in which it was
their desire that all classes should equally participate.
He believed it was for the advantage of the
country at large, that they should make
an agreement with owners of real property to pay this
large sum of money for these purposes, in considera-
tion that they should he allowed a duty Oil the importa-
tion on foreign corn. The motive on which he preferred
this choice of the two was because he believed it would
tend to make this country independent of foreign na-
tion., and at the same time encourage industry at
home. He further believed that the adoption of that system
had one great advantage, inasmuch as it would enable
them to give certain other advantages to our colonies,
and enable them to admit their corn at a lower duty than
that imposed on the corn imported from other countries.
But there seemed to be no longer a chance lof having
such a proposition as this submitted to them, and he spoke
rather in anticipation of the possibility of protection
being entirely done away with ; because, had he not an-
ticipated such a possibility, he never should have thought
of submitting such a motion to their Lordships. He
might here as well state that the object he had in view
was not to delay the consideration of the question of
protection, because from what he bad already stated he
thought their Lordships would see that he considered
the investigation. of the peculiar burdens with the inten-
tion of equalising
of all duties there, as a measure by itself. Having
them ,as the consequence of the repeal
thus, he trusted, explained the motive and reasons why
he selected that moment for submitting his motion,
and by implication shown the motives which induced those
with whom he was associated for refusing to grant it on
a former occasion, he would proceed with as much brevity
as he could, to consider the peculiar questions which be
thought the Committee must take into their considera-
tion. In speaking of those taxes which ware raised from
real property, he wished to draw a wide distinction be- •
tween the two classes, into which he intended to arrange
them. He found in the Poor-law Commissioners re-

ports—he found twenty-four distinct rates enume-
rated; but the only classification of them was
this,—that ten were raised on the basis of
the poor-law; 8 raised in practice, though not in law;
and 6 raised on other bases. The operation of the law
was, that they were raised from property and practice.
The distinction which he wished to draw was this—that
he wisqed to distinguish those which were only for local
purposes—which only interested those people for whom
they were raised, and those in the immediate vicinity.
Now he wished to make this distinction between those
taxes and those rates which were imposed for general
purposes, and those taxes and those rates which were im-
posed for peculiar purposes,—the one being borne for the
benefit of the whole community, and the other only for
the advantage of a particular district. The taxes which
he wouid designate for local purposes were the
drainage rates, the sewers rates, and the rate for the rural
police, and he should no more think of imposing the ex-
penditure for the purposes of these rates upon the com-
munity at large than he should think of imposing the
especial rates for towns upon the rural population ; as,
for instance, he should no more think of imposing the
rate necessary for the improvement of the Marsh
lands in the East aud West Ridings of Yorkshire.
on the inhabitants of towns from the peculiar burdens
of the agricultural residents than he should think it ne-
cessary or just to impose the burdens which had
to be borne by the residents in cities for peculiar
purposes, from which the rural population de-
rive no advantage. The rates which he should
designate as the rates which were particularly imposed
on the inhabitants of towns were the paving rate, the
lighting rate, the water rate, and those other particular
burdens which were not all necessary for the mode of
life of the inhabitants of towns, these were
what he called the peculiar burdens of towns,
and he should no more think of impos-
ing them upon the inhabitants who were charged
with the cultivation and improvement of the marsh lands
of the East and West Ridings of Yorkshire than he should
think of imposing upon them the expense of affording a
better supply of water to the inhabitants of Exeter. It
was usual for these rates to be imposed by the inha-
bitants of towns, through the agency of public
meet ngs, called by the inhabitants themselves, and
ratified by a special Act of those inhabitants.
Now the burdens imposed upon land for peculiar pur-
poses are the rate for drainage, the dyke rate, and the
rate for the support of the rural police. These rates
were for particular acts, in which the rural
population were specially interested. But there
were other rates which were imposed for general
purposes, such as those for the maintenance
of the poor, public security, and the support of the ad-
ministration of justice ; and without protective duties
he would no more think of imposing them upon land
alone than he would think of imposing them upon the
fundholders or upon any o ther particular body in the State.
The maintenance of the poos-rate was an object of pecu-
liar interest to all classes, whether manufacturing or
agricultural. He trusted that he had said enough to
convince their Lordships that the maintenance of the
poor was a national and general object. If the militia
were called out, it was not for the purpose of defending
the mere acres—it was not for the purpcse of defending
the capitalist—it was to defend the country generally,
and, therefore, all classes were equally interested
in paying the militia rate, which was made for the pro-
tection of every person, and not of peculiar individuals.
Thus, the rates for the maintenance of the poor, the de-
fence of the country, and the administration of justice,
were common to all, and equally paid by all, aud were
distinguished from other rates levied for less general
purposes. He wished to see how far the relation between
real property and every other kind of property extended,
and he wished to see the relative position of landed pro-
perty and property that consisted of houses
The poor-rate was originally founded on the same basis
on which most other sates were founded. It was not
real property alone that was liable to be rated for by an
Act of Elisabeth. Every man was rated according to
his means and ability, whether his income was derived
from land, from trade, or froth funded property. That
had since degenerated, and now, by the law of the
land only real property was liable to this tax. He
would wish to know the effect of this law
on the capitalist, whom embarked his money ie
trade, as distinguished from the effect it had on thn
agricultural community. If a person invested his
money in building a mill, he would be rated
according to the letable value of the mill.
He would have to hire the mill, and the mill would be
merely rated according to its rateable value, and not at
its rack rent, as in some cases land was. It would only
be rated at two-thirds, or one-half, as in the county of
Westmoreland. There land was rack-rented, and
houses were rated two-thirds, while mills were
only rated one-half. That was the way this
great capitalist contributed to the poors'-rate, yet
he made vast sums of money, for he collected from the
entire neighbourhood far and near—from the agricul-
tural districts—able, healthy labourers, capable of con-
tinued exertion ; and unless the manufacturer received
some cheek in his trade, his profit would go on in-
creasing. Then what did he do ? He dismissed
those persons by hundreds and thousands, and they
were thrown upon the agricultural districts, which were
obliged to support them. The capitalists derived the
profits of their manhood, and the agriculturists sup-
. ported their age. Now let them contrast this with the
operation of the law upon the farmer. The farmer had
no choice whatever, he was bound to employ
those men or to increase the rates, and
many farmers he knew in his own district
employed a great many more labourers than the purely
economical working of the farm required. That was
the difference between himself and the capitalist, but let
a glut come on the trade of the towns of Leeds or
Manchester and the labourers would be obliged to re-
turn to the rural parishes, where the farmer was obliged
to contribute to their support, and where he cbuld not
derive much benefit from their labour, because their pur-
suits had been confined to manufactures, and these were,
therefore, fitted to cultivate the soil. This was the diffe-
rence he drew between the effect the taxes had
on the capitalist and the farmer. He would
now proceed to show it operated between • land
and houses, or, rather, he would allude to some of
the deductions which had been made from figures,
which appeared in regard to difference of lands and
houses, as placed in the report of the Poor-law Commis-
sioners ; but be might, in a parenthesis, state that, in
his view of the case, the difference was not between
land and houses, but between the propietors of real
property and the rest of the community.
It seemed that in the year 1826 the land paid at the
rate of 69 per cent., while houses paid in the proportion of
26 per cent., whereas in the year 1841 the land paid
in proportion to 52 per cent., while houses paid in the
ratio of 37 per cent. In this statement it would appear
that the burdens on land had gradually been reduced,
while those imposed on houses had increased. But to this
he would answer, that those whose eyes were open would
see that there had been between the two periods referred
to a gradual increase of towns and villages, thus in-
creasing the number of houses and decreasing the quan-
tity of land. Every day the number of houses was in-
creasing, while the quantity of land was decreasing, the
latter being taken up by railroads and new towns.
' They saw day by day that which was formally field
ground used for the erection of houses, or used up for
other purposes, taken up for railroadsor objects of a
similar kind. This showed how it was that houses in-
creased and land diminished, and explained the ap-
parent descrepancy between the two returns. He migth
illustrate the point by one or two strong instances. At
Newcastle there was an extensive parish which formerly
was land, but now it was occupied by a new town.
He would also refer to Brighton, which formerly was
a fishing village, whereas now the houses had so much
increased, that it had become a great town. There
was another point to which he would refer,
while speaking on this subject. It had been
said that houses were perishable property, and
that therefore they ought not to be rated so high as
landed property. He was willing that this should be
so, and he would take care on a future occasion, if the
free-traders used it as an argument, to meet them with
their own weapons. If perishable property was to be fa-
vourably considered, what was more perishable than the
farmer's capital, that which depended upon the season,
which might perish from a decay in the seed or a blight
in the blossom, which a thunder-storm or any other
destructive operation of nature might annihilate.
He would say to them, do not use this argument, c r
lie would tyke good care that it should be made
to tell on behalf of the great question of protec-
tion.—(Hear, hear.) The 'seas!, would show how it
would befriend the cause of agricultural industry. Ile
would further say, let them look at the oppression of the
poor-laws—he leferned to that part of the system re-
lating to settlement. To the old law of settlement
he had an utter objection, as it operated most in-
juriously to the agriculturists without doing any
real good to the manufacturer.—(Hear, hear.)
What happened when there was a sudden check in the
demand for manufactures? The labouring artisan re-
turned to the rural districts, and when the demand for
manufactures returned then the manufacturers could
with difficulty find men to work their mills, while the
rural districts were overcharged with paupers.
This had occurred lately in Manchester and in Nor-
wich. Their Lordships might rely upon it, that if
they adopted free trade in corn, they must apply the
same principle to the labour market, and the first step
towards that must be the abolition of the present law of
settlement. The law of settlement made the labourer a
bondsman to his parish, and it prevented him going into
the dearest market to dispose of his labour. To this
part of the poor-law system he trusted they were ap-
proaching an end. He had alluded to this matter in
consequence of its having been reported to be
the intention of the Government to offer
as a compensation to the agricultural interest
an alteration of the law of settlement. That alteration,
even if it should be carried out to the extent of Sir
James Graham's Bill of last year, would not be satisfac-
tory. But he believed that the repeal of the corn-laws
very
onor ou u that
results. making
The a
to resi-
dence would be curried, and then the proposed alteration in the
law of settlement would fall to the ground.—(Hear.)
ewould
ol
The present measure proposed by the Government was
most.
objectionable.to m
Heconsidered
of a few years the means of obtaining a settle-
mu td
u leadsure would have a tendency to force women likely to
give birth to children from one parish to another, in
order to get relieved from the burdens of the chil-
dren born there, and as to an industrial residence
of a certain number of years, as being the means
of obtaining a settlement, he considered that measure
to be impracticable ; it would be too heavy a burden
on the towns. He believed that in time of a sudden
check in trade, when hundreds were thrown out of
work, the towns were scarcely able to support them•
selves. He thought the measure would be no compensa-
tion whatever, the only remedy was to get rid alto-
gether of the law of settlement. His Lord-
ship then alluded to the highway rates. He
maintained that the highways were as much fer the be-
nefit of the town as for the country, through which the

road passes. Indeed there were cases where two towns
formed the termini of their being the only parties who
derived any benefit from it. They are of little use to
intervening country accommodation, and bridle roads a: e
used by the farmer ; he has little or no business on the
highway. He had had an account taken at the several tolls
of the number of vehicles which passed through, and the
result had been that the majority belonged to the inhabi-
tants of the towns at the different extremities. He would
allude incidentally to the question of tithes. lie did
not, howevr, consider the tithes were a burden on the
land.—(Hear, hear.) lie did not wi,ll to be misunder-
stood upon this matter. Previous to the commutation
of tithes they were a burden upon the cultivators of the
land. They objected to laying out their money upon land,
as they did not wish that th benefits of their labours
and enterprise should be applied to other persons.
Since the passing of the Tithe Commutation Act, tithes
did not intefere with the cultivator of the land,
as by the provisions of the Act they were
constituted a certain debt upon the property itself.
That was merely looking at the question in the light of
buying, selling, and barter. The produce of the soil
was the same, and produced the same to the occupier as
if the tax did not exist at all. It merely reduced the
value of the fee simple. He looked upon the
land-tax and the tithe in the same point of view
as charges upon the land. •He considered they were
merely charges upon the land, but did not interfere
with the production of the agriculturist. lie looked
upon the tax as he did upon indirect taxes. In
France, where land was sold under the in-
direct taxation, the loss sustained was borne
by the seller, but it did not fall upon the
farmer. This kind of tax diminished the value of the
land in both countries. He would pass over one or two
points which he intended to refer to, as he did not wish
to trespass on their attention much longer, and he would
come to the last point to which he wished to
call their attention —he meant the malt-tax.
It was said, that that tax was no burden on land, but
he believed that this was an erroneous statement. The

tax he admitted was equally paid by all, but that por-
tion paid by persons who were consumers of beer, &c., fell
in the end upon the agriculturist. In addition to tt'is, how-
ever, he would point out the direct amount of duty which
interfered with the agriculturist. It interfered with the
agriculturist to the extent of the barley to which
the tax amounted. If the tax, therefore, did not
exist, the barley would be increased to that amount, and
the agriculturist would be so much benefited. If any
proof of this were wanting he would refer to the circum-
stance that, notwithstanding the increase of population
of late years, the amount of duty did not keep pace with it,
That was the burden, but that was not the only hard-
ship—that was the amount of the burden, but the-hard-
ship went still further—and by not allowing him to use
his barley as he likes for other purposes, they placed
him in the same position as they would a
manufacturer, if they were to say to him, " You
may manufacture cloth, but you must not wear a
coat made from it." They defied, they prevented him
from using the barley produced by his own soil. That
was a serious burden, in addition to the one he had
named, and he could give a great many authorities—
M'CullochAand others—but he considered it unneces-
sary, because when the duty on printed cottons was re-
pealed, there was a great increase in the trade in that
article, and he held that a similar result would ensue if
the duty were taken off malt. There was another article
of Excise which he thought particularly heavy on the
owners of real property, and which, if it were not re-
quired for the purpose of creating a portion of the
revenue, would be a great advantage to the proprietors
of land—he meant the article of hops; but if they
came again to the general taxation of the country, he
wished to know what portion of it the agricultural body
was exempt from? They were exempt from the Cus-
toms' duties as they contributed as much to them as any
other body of the community ; they also consumed and
paid duty upon innumerable articles which paid cus-
toms' duty. From what taxes then were they exempt ?
They paid the Post-office and stamp dnties ;
the stamp duty for the transfer of property fell
peculiarly heavy on them, and was so enormous that he
considered it one of the greatest hardships under which
any portion of the community laboured at the present
moment.—(Cheers.) And he must say this, that if
there was a subject which might obtain a moment's
attention from his Noble and Learned Friend
on the Woolsack it was this ; and if he would
suffer him for a moment, he would say if there was a
department against which the agi iculturists had reason
to complain to the Noble Lord, it was the enormous
duty which they were thus compelled to pay—(Clieers)
—and he had especial reason to complain, because in all
the reforms which had taken place in which the portions
of the community participated, care was taken to con-
tinue the burdens upon land.—(Hear.) And again, when
the law relating to the transfer of property was carried
by the Noble Lord, it was found of such a nature as to
be a difficult matter to get a conveyancer to adopt it,
and in thousands of cases it was impossible to transfer
property without being obliged to pay for six or seven
sheets to an attorney. Then how long had they left the
question of the registration of der ds unsettled? In
every other country conveniences for the purchase of land
were so great compared with those of this country, as to
cast a blot on this country, and to induce every one to do
all in his power to obtain some alteration in it.
He would, before he concluded, refer to that which his
Hon. Friend intended to add as an amendment, and he
would wish to know what were the numerous exceptions
proposed in that amendment. The legacy duty was cer-
tainly a case in point, and he would allow it to be fair
that it should be exempted. Certain property belonging
to the agriculturists was exempt from insurance_ The
farmer's property, such as stacks, &c., was from its nature
exposed to danger, and that property was not to be se-
cured by insurance. He was sorry to say the danger was
increased in consequence of the very violent language
sometimes addressed to the labouring people. The per-
sons who addressed it to them did not mean to do the
mischief they did—they were emissaries from others,
who were not aware of the high tone they adopted. He,
for one, when he used to read the strong language made
use of, used to remark:—" There will be some more
stasek-burning in the district." He bad no peculiar ob-
jection to strong language ; he thought that it
sometimes added to the interest of the debate,
and he was perfectly indifferent to the hard names
which were heaped upon the agricultural body, of which
he was a member. At the same time, he felt that he
had not terms strong enough to use in condemnation of
the violent language which sometimes led to so much
mischief in the country. The Right Hon. Baronet at
the head of the Government had brought forward certain
measures which he intended as a compensation for the
withdrawal of protection from land. He would say
thut these measures were no compensation, and if
they did give any, the difficulty of ascertaining
the benefit it would confer would be enormous, as they would
have to ascertain the precise loss which the withdrawal of pro-
tection would cause, and the precise gain which the diminution
of taxation would afford to the English farmer. He would
then turn to another question, and he thought that if it could
not be shown that the impositions on the protection of corn in
foreign countries were commensurate with the imposition on
real property in this country, they would fail to show that
British-grown corn was in a condition to compete with
foreign corn. He had seen some attempts to render this
assertion a fact to the minds of the people, but he thought it
would be extremely improbable that any such attempt should
succeed. If they were to take the whole amount of the
taxes imposed upon towns, or what were properly called
civic rates, and would compare them with the communes
or department districts in France, they would find that
taxes imposed in that country stood as five to four with those
which were laid on the inhabitants of cities and towns here. This
was no fair comparison with the impositions in France, but
they would find that it was not quite so high as that in Eng-
land.—(Hear, hear.) That was not the way to put the
case—they ought to take the amount of costs imposed for
realising the produce of one hundred acres of land in one
country and the amount of costs imposed for obtaining a
hundred acres in the other country, and if they could show the
amount was the same they would make out a good
ease. But by this mode of calculation they would
find that in England the cost was nearly double
that in France, that in the German States it was more than in
that proportion, and that in Turkey and some parts of Russia
it only bore the proportion of two in a hundred. It was even
notorious that Great Brituin was taxed in a far greater
degree than in any other foreign state, at least on
Europe. He had now come to his conclusion
and he felt compelled to say a few words with respect to him-
self. He had always conceived that the system of protection
was absolutely required by the peculiar burdens imposed upon
land ; yet if he found the c•intinuance of that imposition was con-
trary to the tendency of public opinion—that it was likely to
raise one class in opposition to another, he should feel it his
duty to refrain from further opposition to the measure, and
instead of wrapping himself up in a sulky humour, and aggra-
vating the evil of domestic sehisna, he would endeavour to
pacify the conflicting feelings, and he trusted his Noble
Friends would use their powerful influence in prevent-
ing that hostile disposition and unnecessary difference
which might arise between the manufacturer and farmer.
The Noble Lord then continued—My Lords, I have never
joined in the abuse of the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of
her Majesty's Government. I believe in the sincerity of his
convictions—l believe that he thinks he is doing for the best in
the measure he proposes-_I respect his courage. But this I will
say, that if in the present Parliament he carries this measure, it
will not be the triumph of opinion, but the triumph of par-
tizanship—l say, not the triumph of opinion, because he will
have carried it against the opinion of the country, as declared
at the last election ; he will have carried it against
the opinion of the House of Commons, as declared
in various divisions ; he will have earned it against
the opinion of the House of Lords, as also deleted on numerous
divisions ; but lastly, and above all, he will have carried it in
defiance of the opinion of a majority of the Cabinet.—( Great
cheering.) I :say, my Lords, that I shall submit to the
triumph of opinion. Let the Government look to that
point; let them appeal to the country; let
them ask what the opinions of the country are ;
let them follow that up by securing a majority of the
opinions in the House of Commons, and again in this House,
and I myself will no longer offer a factious opposition to the
measure.—(Cheers.) I believe that then your Lordships will
no longer oppose it ; and if that shall be the
case, it will be in the fullest sense a triumph of
opinion, but as it now stands it is merely an able manoeuvre of
party politics.--( Great cheering. )
Lord BROUGHAM rose to second the motion, but was
called to order by the Marquis of LANSDOWNE, who said
that in that House it was not necessary that any motion
should be seconded.

On the question being put,
Lord BROUGHAM said that he wished only to speak to
their Lordships a very few words, in answer to his Noble
Friend who had made mention of his name in connexion with
the opinions he had expressed in 1820. Far from differing
from the motion of his Noble Friend, he ( Lord Brougham)
considered that the burdens he had enumerated fell exclusively
upon the land, and he went even further, for he was very far
indeed from taking his views on the subject of the tithes or
land-tax. He did not admit, with the Noble Lord, that the
land-tax or the poor-rates were not peculiar burdens.
He did not wish to enter upon the subject to-night, there being
no opposition to the motion of the Noble Lord. He would not
therefore follow that Noble Lord, or enter upon the discussion,
as the consequence would be to anticipate that which would be
brought under their Lordships' consideration in a short time. It
was not his desire to bring about a foregone conclusion in antici-
pation of the inquiry which must shortly take place. To enter upon
the discussion now would be to forejudge the labours of the
Committee. He would go into Committee, though he still
entertained the opinions which he held in 1820 and 1822 re-

specting the burdens upon land. He differed with the Nt?litil
Lord in a considerable degree. He thought that the btlen!
on land were not only greater in some respects were
he had represented them, but also there
burdens in some material particulars which bad . net,
been referred to—still, though admitting the grea
of these burdens, he did not agree in the conclusions dr%
os r
by the Noble Lord, namely, the proposition that the Pr P,uer,
mode of compensation was by taxing corn by
imposing
on the importation of foreign grain.—( Hear, hear.) H° s'
theil
not anticipate the corn-law debate by snatching a debate on
question before their Lordships. The question of the coru :11:1
would be brought before them properly, timely, and regular ;
3 o
as soon as the measure came from the other Hous%,est
must say in the present inquiry he greatly lamented
ing out of view, in his opinion, the greatest of all the
sive burdens of land. What he referred to was the Posi"sit
of the landowners and farmers, which was different fro ping
other kind of erupt()) ers. They had not the power of !so
into the labour market, and selecting the chepest labourers
of
workmen. The manufacturers had amongst them n°l' tie
that patriarchial relationship which existed ni_ork.
agricultural district. They could turn off their wooly
men in a day, whether they had been in
.t „of
ery lee a year or ten years. They could tarn thereof • 5,3
time if they (the manufacturers) were able to get
(tilt aper workmen. It was not so with the farrners---he(Lord
labourers they employed were employed upon what le, eta'
Brougham) called the patriarchial relation, and tbeyo
core s
ployed a great number of workmen when they tnight
supply 'of labour at half the price. his' buolt
tiona of the poor-law did alone impose
olid
arose from a feeling of attachment to those sch
Rit°
been engaged in the services of the farmers in the cu 400
behalf
the
of the soil. No one felt stronger than he did the force 00,0
rsarticular burden. When a Noble Lord died he eAeridpet'
' left eighty thousand pounds or ninety thousand ponc"ivaatf-
sonal property, on all of which he paid probate and leeelsoble
One word with respect to the stamp duties to which bts thin
Friend had referred. There never was a greater error 00
supposing that the late improvements which had taken WO
in the law were not beneficial to the landed interest;fe, bar
did they think of the abolition of fines and'recoveries? 11001. sod
self, knew one landowner who had saved between 5'A
6.000/. by the change, and he had known another frien7bobir"
delayed his recoveries until after the Act of 1832 plow ''a the
he gained a large amount. Then there wasthe changes; esII,
law respecting leases. Instead of ten sheets for ale lybal
belle sheet was now required, and instead of ten skins :pall
a skin was required. There was no additional 0 sod
upon that, on the contrary there was a large redacnobetaer
this reduction it was which made many persons denbt abaci
the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not oppose Ogres (I,ors
Ile did not, however think it is duty to do so. " right
°
Brougham) certainlythought the landed interest had eereScle;
complain of the stamp duties, perhaps more than theta atalr
sive burdens. It was worse than the aleavala of lain' OM
duties pressed most heavily upon mortgagers, for the tso, tss
might, at any time, say to the mortgager unless ilia csss4.
your interest you shall change your securities, wh,i,,,te that vit
16,000/. or-12,000/." He (Lord Brougham) wisur;roati°
would not live long before he saw the tax on the s"
fist
property replaced by a tax upon succession. nate eti
Lord DACRE (whose remarks in the opening cosi'
speech were inaudible in the gallery) stated that he "reclitir
protection to be giving a certain advantage to soln,e,,rtrsael pf
application of capital, or giving some encouragernec`—sidar,
to some particular enterprise, which might be c 0 rot
particular advantage to the country who granted this JO;
'To this protection it is that the agricultural interest l ea
He consideree, from the great improvements whicholair,,,
made, the facilities of communication, and the incr,etistict...
cation of the capital of this country, and from the 9,.4„d of I',
turns which had been made to this House, that this kin
tection tection should be removed from the agriculture of this dice
(Hear, hear)—he considered also that protection wsstrys ebrrei
to maintain the balance or equilibriuxi of the e°°,ll„ 00,401
from circumstances of taxation or some other ean'",pat.isA
00
of the application of capital had been destroyed- , aft ,
has been destroyed by the protection which has bee; aenbs
to personal property beyond all bounds of reason on. ovgi
He would not enter into detail but would tako his li:1,800o"
broad brsis of the injustice which had been-done to the
by the imposition of a grinding property-tax iraria be
country in the shape of a poor-law. Justice 9 (SI As Poo
to the farmer by the removal or equalisation of sir - that •
• d
of taxes.—( Hear, hear.) He felt convince the ,
agriculture of the country. He felt convinced the, " giro
culture of the country was equal to compete with th, a
fro
tore of she world. if they were granted equal °lnstil
application of labour—( Hear, hear)—and an „et- be':o
disposal of the products of that labour:—(lleig'rettiti
The Noble Lord then went into some statistical decay
to the valuation of real property, and proceeded tonoperto
great portion of taxation fell upon one-fourth of trbrfOrd
of England, to the exclusion of other property, `cf th. 01
well entitled to be chrrged. Such was the position °101e4.0
property of England. What he wanted, therefore, retitt,
taxation, and if that were carried out, and no undue Peel is
of taxation placed upon real property, the oply
riots of this country would be able o'4 otopetlitsi
whichpo r"donto;seisoll
contend with, but to overcome the foreign c 01,0
It was not from inadequacy, on the part of the 0111 trs
property, to meet the demands which were ragleeljoetiseie
under the existing laws, that they sought their.,rald 110
abolition, but a deep sense of the injury
Meted upon them, by withdrawing a
taxes to which other portions of the cod tears
were subjected, whilst those peculiar to them,'
to other parties were continued.—( Hear, hear-float-o'a I
another subject to which he wished to refer. s' ires isfo
and thousands of persons had established thew' tber'ol
' combination, and although he did not like to express eitotis.it
he could not forbear saying that it wus an no* Lorre
combination, and as an old friend of the privileges of r oalr,.
for half a century, he could not too stroneiktol 'ss
the attempt which those persons were making to c°-htstarga
liament—to control the freedom of election, and t°l°,,terr,ot
nomination of counties, and this, too, after the conlPO'''srasis-00
which the laws relating to the election of Members 0!..` igbto,,a
had undergone, and when they were aware that their tat
rd
elective franchise were derived from that lel Oro
bit
When he saw all this he hoped they would resist 9°401 j.
which were jforced upon them by these persons•—: di;tr,!
Lord, during the whole of his address, was ha'Alos% for
the gallery, but during this part -only detached the
could ba caught.) 'Then with respect to sit t-erol
duty. There had been no consumption ofhstgeoreitise
pared with the increased population, whisk " easel est
was an argument in favour of a modification of t, coal.
Malt was a commodity which the agriculturiobik's I
apply to the purposes which were most 016,11 padd
out the fiat of the Exciseman, and with"- es;
duty of 30 per cent. on what he had produced-0 shay,
If foreign timber was imported into this counts til.°,ais
duty, it wonld be an unfair competition with DO toisn"-40
the grower of which had been liable to increased role
consequence of it. So it was with English whes!,t'h the?'
wheat would be brought in duty free to compete lei for is od
duce of the English farmer, which had beet' rated, 11%4
tax and every other tax to which property was liebAlieselyr'
not intended to tresass on the time of their Lori for oci
length, nor did hey ntend to enter on the subject an. 11.00000
but he certainly thought that before protection ezido, tope
all these points should be taken into considerat'°oe
Noble Lord here made some remark referring (s' u"
et 'Of
stood) to a speech of his that had been misreprese hag
spoke in so low a tone that it was quite inaudible in t Cemote
, He had there an extract of a speech deliveredai, froie too
garden on the 18th of December. The extract 'et so4foro
Times, and he (Lord Dacre) had taken measures Lord ~„0
whether or not it was correct. [The Noble hear, rod,
. read the extract, which, as near as we could the rod,
the Noble Lord was scarcelS audible. I hope,,, to
will bear how great a terror has been createe -Mobs
name of 40s. freeholder, a power lately
eventually humble the proud aristocracy to the d°9oo.ltaot
leg said this, he would be grieved to imagine that
ate 01,,,n0r
ter of that country wotld allow Parliament to seParoterfer'olit
passing some measure to restrict this 4: snood
with the Constitution.--(Hear, hear.( 'ay swtbsel
reforme, he recollected the creation of the .0.0013
jj
freeholders of Ireland, and the repugnance with d 005 the
had passed that measure—necessity, however, bad tot
ereatrd, t.
tam. He did not, however, wish i 8 any waYided tt" thsi
right of voting, either in county or borough, Prft"belie-„,eie
were conducted on constitutional principles. tse'neriti
all diftiulties would be removed if some arrangent--„ pr°4
tered into to equalise taxation, and so secure to - oty
of the country. dine° t pir
Lord MOUNTEAGLE rose to move an alne°„,t, 11e ir
motion of his Noble Friend. That amendfce front° ids)
lieved, would not meet with any opposition either osite 9 u•
ble Friend or any of the Noble Lords on the oPPp foaled
Ile begged here to say, he would be sorry to take Noble_AO
the doctrines which had been laid down by the to the
( Lord Beaumont). He did not wish to anticipaiootoe the
of the inquiry, but he must protest against the dressed bad
laid down. His Noble Friend bad add be 'art'
House in a fair and candid manner, rhno oe
made a series of admissions on L: ht— be „flub;
There was one material point in which
p° t"- relir
tamed a similar doctrine to him (Lord Monteagl, ao
ject of the commutation of tithes. Tithes, "fhere sl7g,io_t•
depend on the same principles as rent. If s° 'moot) "et
groend for its protection unless he (Lord Beau", bei3e...gle)
tamed that protection was due to it not for tholontr-.
the country at large but to uphold rent. Ile (L°r olinencejsed
would like any Noble Lord, or any writer oi ed f ryts
show the difference between 255. an acre derive s sled",
subject to tithes, and 20e. paid on land with hs- 5 the the
to the clergyman. The effect would be precise You to
sot
and he could not see how they could talk of Preto 004 de.
• to t larera
unless it was to be considered as protectio try a ro
nut for the benefit of the clergy, or the con° foes
lie denied that the commutation of tithes Inade.4tijort t°:ord'
in the question ; the principle of protection in re°
ed their I'l ill
was precisely the same as before, and he caution f „opera iq
ships of the great danger there was to the rights rep esise,bile
supporting any clamour against rent which had tra
connexion with this question of tithes. reiselYooo.,
Begs payable to the landlord stood in P rierglAote
same position as five shillings paid to tfnebe osoot.„'",ted
and. in arguing the question of protection, tion °°lP-teoser
like. If there was any inequality in
a the islet theft
I.oe '
property beyond what was fair and importationlett° one
that inequality, but do not give Pr
society or interest at the expense of all the others.
.1.5

The LORD
Wl,o,oalrsiaoe aiCvl:oo,llclDocSk'. SUMMARY.
repeal of the IAaNwCsE. LL 0 R took his seat uP°ll W.
jot 0
tshepectoirtnio:ns were presentad for and itgil-
The Earl of RADNOR moved for returns relatO t i •
the export of grain from Ireland.—Agreed to• - ciat•
Lad BE,I
meat
of • UMONT then rose to move for thellePPnecir
ai a Committee to consider the nature or 0
man
!tit - burdens upon land, and also as to the 1:01-tbe
liand7illichintetrheest.
the ExciseH duties
_presste.c_lid oPtrat the
thesubj e lei tc
c eusfs it y o f protection peculiar
habdutroduelauwgsarYi csuupl so
were
umtullerle,ign-cl' and
intimately' connected that if the one WAS to be rettlwier.
thethe
continuance
ought to be removed also. He should Preh,,
most of both to the removal of bot, 14/1, go
could
bargain that the community "res.
son,
I, strike with the agriculturists. lii'.4 re
e
t .. '''r this preference was, that it Wor;ld ,/33.try
is indrpendent of foreigu countries, cncourr,ge ittuticd
railt boon, and enable us to favour our ceionies by
" ~t;
ittulg
their corn at a lower duty. lie, however, S,
s.thought that they had no longer any chance, and be C-he
e'lotiert'd the removal of these duties. t`9 toil
„olti"
pas:ienn: of the removal of protection, tiof
w.; an irquiry to throw obstacles in the
ledvali to
the of the Ministerial measure. ne e bat
the ryport of the Poor-law Cominissioners to SO.. t
ere v. ere various rates h vied exclusively on real Pro"
Perty—some of them, such as sewers' rates, droll:
rate. and police rates, were Merely
local. e
sho,4ld not think of removing those to I.- -
lieve
local As
he ' thong
s tleliootiugalbt t
profited by
districts,
ythemiiets'
these. iti:e3reesotatois alsoteve

~ ,Sb i
t upo.-

a Ag'ipit .

relatiog "

D. 01131.
he"oppw
of the aPecoer
the 1:4-1 3 the
the
[llPthilitt
go, 2nd
I 0
were a
be rem" far
uid P-
rot%
. Jr'rg
res.
or;1(1 131-td
.
es
op
jes novi
„evert „
co
be
Lou the
,s a 9 cod
;don, or
be vio to
,ppealedh,‘
sho'
►real e,
avail
)01.

to e
9t9 61°11
ioa/PlitSeS

ought to pay no attention, but to taxes for general pur-
P-se,, such as rates for the poor, the preservation of the
country, and the administration of justice
imposed exclusively on land, he
thought the attention of
the Committee ought to be directed.
The maintenance
of the poor was a general and national object, and the
expense should be defrayed out of the national funds.
The same argument applied to the militia
the expenses of the administration of
justice.ra an te
By the
to
origirial Poor-law Act of Elizabeth, it w',.s enacted that
every man should be rated according to his ability, so
that it was not intended that it should be exelu-
Sive!y
r a tax upon real property.
ever, from the difficulty
makingE ventuthaell
of
!tient, it had become exclusively a tax oy ' a shs n
r assess-
-
Property, and such it was at preset
rental of his mill,
present,
and now the
Proprietor of a mill only paid up h
Which he might at any time shut uptaned thus escape from
Plying the rates, while the farmer had
the rates,
had no choice,
he must either employ men or increase
Then again in the
, houses did not Pay
same
t,) the poor-rate that the land paid. It wasPrtr°ul3e"tthi7t
tthe proportion of payment on the part oo
ha proportion of late increased, but that was property.
fwlitnognseto the in-
erease of the, number of houses, and the conse-
%lent decrease in the quantity of cultivable
isue ~, •
Re , gto the increase of houses. and of railroads.
admitted that houses were perishable property, and
land
rated was not ; and, therefore, they ought not to be
ought to be
to highly : but if perishable propertyhe
crops of
I.ho°treetetl, what was more parable than t
protection ?
the f
and what was more entitled to
t The
law of settlement, too,
and
was injurious ttoo the agricul-
reuaral; betlY, and was of no good to the manufacturer,
free trade
.111 red alteration. If they established
ti)bociples In the corn market, they must do so iu the
of settlement.
tit
du?
.rnarket, and destroy the law
extentellted that an alteration in law of settlement, to the
GRAHAM, would
proposed last year by Sir !ate tho effect of relieving the agricujlt.uraltiimntoeiroestto,
towns
al..vto the effect
RI '"1 making residence for a certain
impracticable,
add
a settlement, he thought it was
compensation
Thec if Practicable would
Were ' with regard to the highway-rate—the note—the highways
cot: alore for the benefit of the rtaowns than of the
higno„tY' The farmer derived little benefit from the
gethileltYhal ll.e would allnde for a moment to tithes alto-
PNI. ' v did not consider them. a burden on land.
lige,
-Its to the Commutation of tithes, themyesnetrioofutsblye
kro'hstered.with cultivation, but from the moon
the
pro-
They
they Petty.
The, lie looked on the land-tax in
tast;„ were charges on the property
a similarm rely light.
like
likols, and not peculiar
lburdens.nd in France,
were
France,
Whisiithe direct taxation
thew e considered not to be °allay. burden. whatever in
the 41`itlyation of the soil. It diminished the value of
Ntftod' btlt did not interfere with the cultivation.. He
lited "ed that the malt duty was
it, but inasmuch
a peculiar burden on
le • . All whoa e beer paid a portion of .
-ate. ,
i, - rams pai
mac red to prevent the production of barley, in s
Ili -t was a peculiar burden upon
.agriculturelturiats
s. etl, With
duties, the agriculturists
...kik) regard to other
°t he, th,, Customs and Post-office as much as any
paid to the
fitt Portion of the community ; they
(11AltilT1/11(4e, 'end in all the law reforms the Stamp
up.
Ile de„-,•11,113a the transfer of landed property was
keptov e rn -
hiectl'ed that the measures proposed by the Gtt °trm ntea
toutt any compensation.
the fcrkeefProteetion, it was the. difference between what
ad udder r would obtain for his corn under. the present
IkPo the system of free trade, which it would be
"Ible t
Ikitioo t° calculate. With regard. to the comparative
ths et) ?LI the producing agriculturists of England.
eittrifd_
!44441414M, he contended that the prod.ucing. agri I
shad iof tngland were much
.highei taxed...
dared ILIP4YB advocated protection, but if public opinion
i eh!t ems ,
bi, see ith , co be done away with. he would submit,
ieleht lui- best endeavours to palliate the evils and thelie
'IN ~ grY contention between class and class.
14, . Luit, ,
L'llllt f "4°Se who acted with him. would, if beaten,
ttlei) 'a
ter
4 fair fight, and do their best to promote
1114'ree°:,.ritY of -trheeoutry. If, however, the measure
his tied i •
I, It% a u this Parliament'
mea-
it would not be the
're acedublic opinion, but of
of the Lords
party.. tactics—aai
til ril illonposition to the opinions
vre
niar;l4llJ:nrie'ty of the Cabinet, by an able mancou
t 0.., polities.
hiellilhilitononA .
td ht said that he retained the opinion
lii4naPtse4ll, - expressed in 1820, that there were
7sti 144 Leg Peculiarly on land; and he went further
both
Cli1114:1:ths and l'llhle Friend, for he considered. s upon land.
t the same as peculiar burden
th-ltat :tile time he denied that the proper way to
Pik
lrest4,- the landowners was to impose a duty on
:it th"isliti!tina of foreign corn. He feared, however,
1764 irep:utintrY would not take witnhdinowintsers,cope the
in his
,%ility tt4ut burdens upon the la
'thou to N,
1 e e into the labour market to purchase his
be
r'is•-th the cheapest rate, in consequence of what
of the
might call the patriarchal state
Nes "al districts The farmers and . land;
Itt°azi pBrt)tid probate and legacy duty on their pe
k 4143,
keerty in
common with the rest of the com-
"ltts,i"ltt there were many burdens borne exclusively
1411:11te.thl:he r.ecent law changes had saved immense
L v agricultural interests, and the stamp. duties
the 'll t
. krtd,cll"ebY diminished. Yet lie admitted that
sat; interest had cause to complain of the stamp
ItAk 0'1" he should wish to see the tax changed from
Latalt alienation into a tax on succession. . h
tr'liltig 14cat
the eoeo - considered that any p.oronteoefticoanpiwtahl which
%tealti,,,t,age an unnatural application
removed, but the
1,h4, Niue 4011 of the soil, ought to. be
14%t 11t required some protection, as a set-of to the
ta, aud •
•11 tu improper protection Nsr.'hich ha
00711 i Personal p o erty in this country. The
41,--4141;sills2P'rty-tax rlePvied on agriculture under the
0N,,,t 7(ltHred that the agriculturist should have
4 kis °I Protective compensatiou. It amounted to
e eerty-tax of twelve per cent. on
lt Pert, , real
Pr 'or all personal property was
°tee(' exempt.
Real, I°ll Were withdrawn there ought to be some
tit'slnissiou of special taxation, so as to restore an
keL r,t)t°lburdens. The Noble Lord then alluded to
t(`.o,:c Speeches made at one of the League meetings
the Iltt Garden, in which one of the speakers, alluding
iii'llkei
i;_rtY shilling-freehold movement, called it
in
tilde,it, °Leh would lay the hereditary aristocacy i Nor R and called upon the Government to adopt
tft401.4%14.° put down the League.
ietilelLeNTEauLE then rose to move the addition
itilktttY7ll'l,l°4 °I which he had given notice, via., that the
thlii4hy'tt/I,ll,sid extend to the peculiar exemptions e
pe,diti v agrieultura.l interest. It was necessary that
I, 41 ; " shoUld be made, in order to secure an i.m.-
eat eiqei
%rt, an rY, and therefore he did notantici-
He
IleltPlitaNtea (IPPOsition to his proposition.
kt c't
hit ' ills Noble Friend on the frank
ith Nll4l.„4Peet'h, and was glad to find that he did
ProCc:,,lt It co'ilitriihe as a peculiar burden upon land ; and
lis4 "'Nei ; constitute no ground for protection unless
1'441,11'4 re, ".e intended as a protection for rent only
Ivese-1*
thereattile general interests of the community.
of h en; nor tithe was the cause of price—theyse
thot, arid
1114etleenees of price, and not the cause
the
41
ll'lls ,!Y both stood on the same grou.dd
to Ile elitlicm-e difference between the rent paid
%sid " tttd that paid to
is area , the clergyman.
,to 1, ohm.
14 t the 44 the dangers connected with trans-
taell43eer the e of the poor to the State were so greatbe_
' the e adopzionOf the plan impossible, and
t Feb re h.,
'41.01 y,%;":
•been a great alteration during the
44 Os Propeni In proportion of the ratabilityertoyf,
h arse " greatly in favour of landed pro.p
ti4st4 he
Net
twealta and substances it was so difficult
'eteoltdralaistre.t.e•ailY itupossible. Then, with regard to
th 11 404 of ~
*II the s ) slice, one-half was
tee„, hod burdens e, and if the State were to already
b,
ar
h 't
4' the the manage-
,t
no. pruset_
..°State musthave
,t eshi tn'Oteentio,s 'lra g, and they must have a
it, a wise ", an alternative which he considered,._
)41, kalt (In°. Then with regard to the malt
4' -etitla of had Participated more largely in the
malt-
d, the dut:ttitition than any other article. Two-thirds..e
kbictu Ivlieti been remitted since 1815, and n
,Ivhicli-t,brisrs le! anY further reduction would benefit the
d,o, • the d ' Inasaluch as at present the manner ill
erße, Ilty ~,,,
„ a higher as levied enabled the maltster to
'4 ZI'S
v price fur barley than they would
1111 h Vie be and it also affoaded the
Prei reserios arleY-grower, a close monopoly c't
ilt 14
and distilleries, as against
te" of sugar the
4r. -4 - and Other articles that might
'Ard 14 t
til • c.,,it to , ",, 11° - establishments. Then with
Isiqii eientif, -sing Malt by feeding cattle, the
14t e °halal
11% ,t"eic as nult sts declared it was not so ncu-
Y 'ditties
lie
barley. As to the probate and
kt4llltitY 0; Ltlea,..".osidered that they imposed an.
'N' oil t 1 'lltloo favourable to the lauded
flies[ as lough tl •
:lea,
hm
be let inequality was not .so
mks, seize(
en imagined. The agriculturist,;
tL
4, 141,es
and in regard to draining
eltl4oipth,ns
in
eariou3 othcr articles, and all
"qt.,, ':lax ill f In the auction Bill of last year were ex
)I Yhi 4°°llr of the agricultural interest. He was
itt:( ‘l4siti INT1)01.°
their organisations, but he would
ttelit, 1/,
0,i,".1_,1ne League to do with this ques-
b,(l th ,h; bed to ace the League cease, and he
l'ititsitli;th,l4..ti the1':t.,:411.,,,,u,t_er3, or it acre anxious it should
ILr4(1; t° on- j, `'• uestr°Y the League was fit the
Nttiti,
1,,,, ~,.‘1 in the course Which the had ii.,,,v
1/11 Of ,47, Nobi.',l Lord concluded by the
'Tamil h,, , ...., • • moving
v u Tin given notice.

The Earl of ESSEX expressed his intuition of voting
for the Ministerial measure.

Lord STANLEY rose to protest against the doctrine,
that tithes and land tax were not burdens on the
land. The claim of the tithe owner was as
sacred as that of the landlord and the
landowner had TIO right to complain of the tithe, pro-
vided he had purchased his Lind subject to tithe; but he
denied that rent and tithe stood on the same
footing. Rent was the surplus of profit. Tithe was
to be paid undiminished, whether there was profit or not.