The Sun.
London, England, 1851-02-12 00:00:00

WEDNESDAY EVENING,

!nullity at large, for in such benefit the occupiers and culti-
vators of larel would receive a full nod cluiple• o share. The
Hon. Gentleman said it had been recommendtd that the
farmer should employ lucre labour upon his land, but that
impediments to the employment of such additional labour
were created by the law of settlement. Well, he (the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer) seas very glad to Lear the !lon.
Gentleman say so, because it would appear that the Lion.
Gentleman was of opinion that the law of settlement ought
'to be amended. But was it not well known that the Hon.
Gentlemen sitting near the Hon. Member for Buckingham-
shire were the parties who had opposed an a'teration of that.
law? He hoped than that when his (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer's) Right Hon. Friend (the President of the
Poor-law Board) brought in a Bill for the amendment of
the law of settlement, he should have the support of " the
country gentlemen." As to the difficulties which were
formerly alleged to exist in the way of obtaining capitai,
for the improvement of agricultural land, no such excuse
certainly could be alleged in these days, when capital was so
plentiful as almost to tempt people to embark in dangerous
speculations. He would not follow the Hon. Gentleman's
argument about partnership. He (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer) did not think that joint-stock companies were
the best means of duly cultivating the land. Many joint-
stock companies, no doubt, combined great intellect ; but he
confessed that he should be uncommonly sorry to let a farm
of his to the management of a joint-stock company, and he
believed that the Hon. Gentlemen who sat near the Hon.
Member for Buckinghamshire entertained similar views.
The Hon. Gentleman then talked of a national rate for the
support of the poor. The Hog. Member for Sontersetehire
had some practical knowledge of the subject, and he re-
membered him saying that it would be the greatest
possible misfortune and evil to have this country con-
verted into a great national hospital.—(Hear, hear.) But
all these were very unimportant parts of the proposition of
the Honourable Gentleman, because, if he meant anything
at all by his motion, he (the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer) supposed that the Hon. Gentleman meant that re-
lief was to be obtained from what he called the unjust
burthens upon agriculture, the customs' duties upon tobacco,
and the excise upon malt and spirits: Now, did the Hon.
Gentleman propose to abolish the largest portiOn of those
duties ? He wished to be informed upon that point, because
the leader of the party opposite in the other House had said
distinctly that he thought the malt-tax was a bad tax to
have repealed, and that he was not prepared to support a
repeal of it. How did the Hon. Gentleman propose to sup-
ply the deficiency of the revenue which would be occasioned
by the repeal of that Vex? He remembered the time when
the Hon. Gentleman was not so chary oftis suggestions.
He remembered that the Hon. Gentleman, at a public
meeting in Buckinghamshire, before the year 1849, stated
that the mode of relief which he should propose was
the raising of an additional sum of 5,000,0001. upon the
land-tax. The Hon. Gentleman, it appeared, had aban-.
Boned that proposition now. In 1849, the Hon. Gentle-
man came forward with a distinct proposition for
the remedy of the evils under which he repre-
sented the agriculturist interest to be suffering. The Hon.
Gentleman proposed an increase of 7,000,000/. upon the in-
come-tax, for the purpose of supplying the deficiency in the
revenue. That proposition, if carried out, would have con-
siderably increased the charges upon the owners and occu-
piers of land. No wonder, then, that he had abandoned
that proposal. Well, then, how did he now prepare to meet
the difficulty? The Hon. Gentleman must propose to re-
impose all, or some of those duties which had been recently
repealed. How else could he supply the deficiency in the
revenue? But the Hon. Gentleman was entirely silent upon
that subject. And would the House permit such a retograde
step to he taken, when the benefits already reaped from
the repeal of the duties on corn, &c., were greater than
could have been anticipated by some who supported their
repeal? It was all very well for the Hon. Gentleman
to speak of taking off the burthens upon agriculture,
but before he did so, it was his duty to point out sonic
equivalent substitute. An increased income-tax he could not
propose. There was not, he (the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer) contended, any alternative left to the Hon. Gentleman
but the re-imposition of all or some of the duties which had
been recently repealed. Before such a retrograde step was
taken, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) thought the
House would pause. The Hon. Gentleman had selected
1849 as the test to which he would refer. The Hon. Gen-
tleman had to make them a present of the general prosperity
of the country, because it would have been utterly impossible
for him to deny it. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer)
would in the first place state very shortly the result of the
legislation of thedast few years in a financial point of view.
The revenue in 1841 was 48,084,0001., in 1850 it was
59,810,000/. ; and now as to the amount of relief from taxation.
Hon. Gentlemen would no doubt admit, that year by year a
considerable reduction had been made in the amount of taxes
levied upon the country. In 1843, taxes to the amount of
411,0001. were taken of? ; in 1844, 458,000/. ; in 1845,
4,535,000/. ; in 1846, 1,551,0001. ; in 1847, 344,000/. ; in
1848, 535,0001. ; in 1849, 388,01301. ; and in 1850,1,289,0001. ;
the total amount of taxes repealed or reduced since the year
1841 was 10,763,000/. The taxes imposed during the same i
period amounted to 5,656,000/., leaving a balance in favour
of the public of 5,107,000/.. and,
.in the face of that remis-
sion of taxes, there had been au increase in the revenue of
4,726,0001. That, he thought, proved the beneficial ten-
dency of the recent legislation. In the years which he had
referred to we had passed through a famine, wars, and con-
tinental disturbances, which had disturbed our trade regu-
lations. We had also, during the same period, alarms of
disturbance from the sister country. A similar period had
scarcely elapsed in the history of this country. It would be
'a perfect waste of time in him to attempt to prove the
general state of the manufacturing and commercial districts
of this country. With the exception of the evil which had
arisen from high prices of cotton, and some temporary de-
pression in the iron trade, he believed that the commercial
and manufacturing interests of the country never were in a
state of more steady and sound prosperity.— (Hear, hear.)
He would not appeal to the increased importation of con-
sumable articles to prove the existence of general abundance.
He would take shortly the test to which the Hon. Gentleman
himself referred—viz., exports. In 1848, the declared value
of exports was 48,946,000/.; in 1849, 58,848,000/. ; and in
1850, 65,756,000/. But he did not think it was right, to
start at 1848 in making the comparison. As he had previ-
ously stated, the exports of that year were in his opinion
diminished by the disturbances on the continent. His Hon.
Friend the Member for Warwickshire (Mr. Newdegate) had
dissented from that view, and said that he (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) was altogether wrong, that the continental
disturbances had interrupted continental manufactures, and
an increased demand would therefore come to our markets.
But he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would not take
advantage of that position. It was his duty to state that
which he believed to be the truth. He (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer) believed that the exports of 1848 were dimi-
nished by the disturbed state of the continent. He would,
therefore, go farther back, and take a year to which the
Hon. Gentleman referred in his comparisons, namely, 1841.
The declared value of exports in the year 1841 was
51,217,000/. The declared value of exports in 1846 was
57,786,000/. In the year 1848 the exports fell to 52,000,0001.
In the year 1849 they had risen to 63,596,000/. ; and the
total exports in the present year would be upwards of
70,000,0001.—(Cheers.) Well, then, compare such results
with the exports of several years ago. He did not think
that any man could deny the truth of his position, namely,
that after three years of an almost unparalleled crisis, capi-
tal was so abundant that capitalists were tempted to enter
upon hazardous speculations with the view of turning their
money to account. And if it were also true that the work-
ing classes in the manufacturing and agricultural districts
were well employed, well fed, and attended to, surely it re-
quired some boldness to assert that our past legislation had
been ruinous and mischievous.--(Hear, hear.) Was it pos-
sible for the country generally to be in a state of prosperity
without the agricultural interest participating in that pros-
perity? Must not that interest be benefited by the
increased demand which manufacturing and commercial
prosperity would create for agricultural produce? There
had been an increased demand for that produce in Glasgow,
Liverpool and other towns. Nobody, indeed, could deny
that there was at the present moment a great demand for all
the produce of agricultural districts. All the agricultural
produce that had been imported into the country had been
consumed ; but he never could believe that with that great
demand which now existed for the agricultural produce of
our own country, and the great increase of our manufacturing
and commercial prosperity, the agricultural interest could
not help profiting by the general happiness and abundance
of the country at large. He believed it was true that no
protected interest ever lost its protection without suffering
for a time, however certain was the ultimate improvement
to be derived by that interest from the abandonment of
its monopoly. He would take th© case of silk,"as it was
familiar to every one. It was said that some silk manufac-
turers were reduced, to ruin in consequence of the change
brought on that interest by legislation some years ago,
when protection was • taken from them. If it was true,
as the Henourable Gentleman alleged, that the present
legislation of this country was based upon protection to agri-
culture, it was based upon protection to manufactures just
as much. - (Hear, hear.) Protection had been taken away
from manufactures, and they had prospered in spite of the
loss of that protection. Why, then, should not agriculture
also ultimately prosper though deprived of that protection
which it once enjoyed in common with other branches of in-
dustry which had prospered after the loss of their protection ?
The agricultural interest was the last sufferer, because it
onlyfew supplied ears
sied our home markets ago, and already our
was the last that enjoyed protection. Protection had been
into ion
ownbtaukte
catered
Ititakewr
manufacturerseacyl
sfuroccm e sssiflukl i onlyy competition with other parties,
aof whom they were much afraid when they, enjoyed
protection.
On loolting at the silk returns for the last three
years, he found that the declared value exported of the ar-
ticle called " stuffs " was in 1848, 238,0001b5. ; in 1849,
396,0001b5. ; and in 1850,
i 48/,0.001b5. Of other silk ar-
ticles, in 1848, 96,0001bs ; n 1850, 106,0001b5. Of mixed
213,0001b5.; and in
articles,bme e 5 been
3ins 00
deprivedlBd4 1
bBs,
of lsA6p,srooot
protection,
o.dn there were 10,000Ibs. ex-
ported the gilove trade, which had
; in l 8
ported in 1848; in 1849, 15,0001b5. ; and in 1850, 31,0001b5.
Gloves, unquestionably, were but an unimportant article;
but it was a proof of the utter fallacy of the position that it
was impossible for a trade to prosper which had been de-
prived of protecting duties. 11,e would now take the case of
an article of agricultural produce. He took an
active part
in the removal of the duty on the importation of wool iu
the year d 842. He was not successful at that time, but in a
year or two afterwards that duty was removed. No little
apprehension was expressed by thou producers of wool in this
country of the mischievous effect upon our wool trade. But
what had been the result of the removal of protection? The
demand for British wool bad increased at home and abroad.
the British agricul-
turist of the
The exportation of British wool was, in the year 1848,
3,900,0001b5. ; in the year 1849, 11,200,000Ibs.; and in the
year 1853, 12,000,0001b5. ; that was to say. the
distressed exportation
trebled
statein three years.
agriculture,N
Wrist could not compete with the foreigner on British soil?
Were they not rather proofs that the agricultural interest of
Voerreththaretht
this country must eventually be benefited by the abolition of
protection? and that eventual triumph for the agricultural
interest must be attained, as be believed, h
by
a glorious ap-
plication of capital, and industry, and skill in the cultivation
of the land; and he was happy and proud to say that such
application was manifest throughout the country.—(Hear,
hear.) It was by so doing that the manufacturers of this
country met and beat the world after the peace of 1815. He
believed that by a similar course the agriculturist might do
so now. The most befitting language in which lie could ad-
dress the agriculturists of this country, both with reference
to their own situation and that of the country at large,
would be that of a Noble Lord of acknowledged talent,
looked up to by gentlemen on the other side of the
House, than which nothing could be better. expressed, more
forcible, or of more universal applicpon. He alluded to
the speech which had been accused of inconsistency, but in
which he himself saw none—a speech addressed by Lord
Stanley to the Agricultural Association of Bury, in which
he gave sound advice to the agriculturists of that district,
and which might be very well applied to the country at
large. On that occasion, ho said that he believed that we
were far from being arrived at that extent of capital which,
being permanently sunk in the soil, has led to an artificial
fertility. Nor are we in a condition when we can say we
have arrived at its natural felicity. With regard to the cul-
tivated state of the land, the Noble Lord then said, " I have
seen land in such a state of absolute neglect, that I have
stared with astonishment when I have asked and been told
what was the amount of rent-the landlord was nominally
paying. I have seen lands paying--I don't say th© head