The Sun.
London, England, 1851-04-12 00:00:00

EVENING,

'SATURDAY

Gentl,:enrin voted for the repeal-of that tax, and ob-
served, that pebEc etedit.tiyast he at a low ebb if it
could not afford to lose 5,500,000/. of money. Weil, on
a subseciar.qa oecsAon the Honourable Gentleman
hal expressed his *willingness to dispense with the in-
come-tax, amounting to 5,500,000/. more. Here wa
once 11,000,0001. sttuck off the royenue. He did not
consfler the Hon. Gentleman to be consistent in sup-
porting these two propositions, besides which, in doing
so, the Hon. Gentlouati was altogether at variance with
Lord Stanley and the Right Hon. Gentleman the Mem-
ber for Stamford, win, as cautious, wary, and practical
men, had not al:owe! theMselves to be pledged to aciy
such propositions. lie should vote against the resolu-
tions of the lion. Gentlomul, not because he had no
sympathy for the egicultural interest, but because he
would not be the folbwer of such a leader. _

Mr. J. SANDARSdid not belies; that the agricultu-
ral
interest was unduy taxed, and he therefore felt it
his duty to oppose tin proposition of the Hon. Member ,
for Buckinghamshire. But his chief reason for opposing
the motion was the fear he entertained that, if such a
measure were carried it would strengthen the Pro-
tectionist
party in that Muse, and enable them to main-
tain their principle of protection at least by keeping it
as an open question. H) entertained a further objection to
the motion on financialgreunds. He believed that if the
income-tax were reentered a.great deficit in the revenue
would occur, and the country would be placed in aperil-
ous position. He world deplore the success of the
motion, because he say in it the first step towards the
resumption of class tolicy, which would have the effect
of lowering the aristocracy in the eyes of the people.
Lord JOHN MANNERS wished, with the permission
of the House, to recall attention to the immediate sub-
ject of the motion brought forward by the Hon. Gentle-
man the Member fcr Buckiaghamshire: Ministers
fully admitted the distress of the suffering agricultural
interest, but while they did so they took no steps what•
ever towards affording relief. The question was simply
this—would the House of Commons vote that justice
should be refused to an interest of the country that
was suffering? The Government, speaking by the
President of the Board of Trade, said that it would
not assent to the measure of justice or mitigation of re-
lief, and the Noble Lord at the head of the Govern-
ment, following up the statement of the Right Hon.
Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, told that
suffering interest that they should look for relief to the
closing paragraph in the Queen's Speech. The Right
Hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade
had over and over again declared that the agricultural
interest must look for relief to the continued prosperity
of the manufacturing interest. Now, for the purposes
of debate, ho (Lord J. Manners) had admitted the ex-
istence of that commercial prosperity, although the Hon.
Member for the West Riding had found it convenient to
qualify the statement. When they were asked to look
for relief to that prosperity, they should assure them-
selves that it was placed on a firm foundation, and wits
likely to continue. He could not bring his mind to be-
lieve that prosperity, however great it might be at the
present moment, was so based; and even if it were so,
it would take an immense amount of proof to esta-
blish the fact of lii reacting favourably on English
rather than on foreign agriculture. The Circulars
of Mr. Littledale, of Liverpool, showed that the country
was not in so prosperous a condition as some
people supposed. The trade report, which appeared in the
Times of that morning, corroborated the fact so far as
Manchester was concerned. These were the words of
the report:—" On Thursday the downward tendency
was less marked, aed greater steadiness of prices pre-
vailed, but the extent of transactions was small, and
buyers appeared to be confining their operations to the
narrowest limits. Many of the private letters by the
list overland India mail are said to have been very
dispiriting, and scarcely reconcileable with the encourag-
ing tone of the accounts by the previous mail. Under
these circumstances some of the export houses in that
trade have closed their purchases for the present, or
operate with much caution. In the Levant trade accounts
continue to come of a harassing character; not only do
the markets appetrito be abundantly stocked with prints,
which are almost unsaleable at any price, but plain cloths
and yarns are depressed in price, and unremunerative;
still exporters in this market are doing quite as much
here to-day as they have done for some time past. In
the home trade business continues very languid, not-
withstanding the fineness of the weather, and an opinion
is freely put forth in some Quarters, though not generally
acquiesced in, that it is in a great degree attributable to
the steadiness with which the working classes are hoard-
ing their savings to visit the Great Exhibition. In
our account of last Saturday's market it was stated
that the increased exports of cotton manufactures to
India and China were 1.000,0001b5. of yarn, and
39,000,000 yards of cloth. It should have been that the
total increase of exports in the last three months, as
compared with the same period last year, was to that
amount in yarn. The increase in yarn was rather over
that to India (1,367,0001b5.), butlis counterbalanced to
some extent by a falling off to other ports. The increase
in the exports of calicoes is 39,000,000 yards, of which
14,500,000 nearly aro to India, and 10,500,000 to China."
With these practical opinions before him, he could not
convince himself that the manufacturing interest was in
the prosperous condition which the Free-traders affected.
Under all these circumstances the Hon. Member for
Buckinghamshire came forward and said, " admitting
that distress, and having a surplus to dispose of, apply
it in mitigation of that distress." Ile did not ask for an
appropriation of the money for the benefit of the land-
owners. Let the Government not rest secure in the be-
lief that the pressure of this distress had not extended,
and would not extend to the labouring classes. A report
which he held in his hand, and which had been published
that morning at Spalding, showed the extent of distress,
and the increase of crime, which now prevailed in South
Lincolnshire. In the midland counties, with which
be was connected, he knew that crime had largely in-
creased from the want of employment. Mr. Justice
Cresswell, in his recent charge to the grand jury, at
Liverpool, said he was totally unable to account for the
large increase of crime in that district which the calen-
dar exhibited, and the presentment of the Suffolk grand
jury, which was of the same melancholy character, di-
rectly attributed it to the want of employment, and the
inability of landlord; to give it in consequence of recent
legislation. If it were true, therefore, that this pressure
had not yet reached the agricultural population gene-
rally, these, at least, were tacts which the Government
would do well to inquire into. It might be a matter of
indifference to Hon. Gentlemen sitting opposite that the
owners and occupiers of land should sink under the load
of difficulties that oppressed them, or that the old an-
cestral houses of England's gentry should find them-
selves obliged to close their doors against the claims of
hospitality; hut let them beware hoty they tampered
with the employment, how they diminished the wages,
and how they curtailed the comforts- of the peasantry
of England and Ireland. Let them pause before they
enlarged the injury that had been done, and show to
this suffering interest that they were willing, at least, to
endeavour to avert the ruin, which, in his conscience, he
believed to be impending.—(Rear, hear.)
Mr. BRIGHT remarked that Hon. Gentlemen oppo-
site did not seem to think it was judicious to discuss the
Budget of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. They
agreed that it was applicable to the country, and that it
must pass that House.—(Hear.) He considered that
the speeches that had been made by the Hon. Member
for Northampton (Mr. A. Stafford) and the Noble Lord
who had just sat down, must do great damage to their
leader.—(" Hear, hear," from Lord J. Russell.) He
was convinced the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) was
of opinion that any project of a return to protection was
the merest delusion. That Hon. Gentleman knew that
so long as Members of his party would have protectien
they were destined to sit oa .the shady side of that
House, and that they never would cross the table to the
Ministerial benches—(Hear)—and accordingly the. Hop.
Gentleman took his tone in this discussion, and avoided
protection as a thing that was irrevocably and finally
settled.—(Hear, hear, and cries of " No, no.") The
lion. Gendeman made this proposition for the benefit
of the agricultural interest. The labourers were once
" the agricultural interest," but now they were left
out.—(Criss of " No, no.") The agricultural interest
now consisted of the owners and Occupiers of land,
and it was said they had
a special claim to a spe-
cial relief. They assumed that they were suffering
throughout the United Kingdom; but they brought no
proof that the owners or occupiers of land were suffer-
ing much, or at all.—(Cries of " Oh, oh.") He thought
that they had failed in showing that they bad any spe-
cial claim for relief, even if they were suffering. The
Noble Lord at the head of the Government, with that
want of caution which not unfrequently distinguished hie)
—(Cheers, and laughter)—had admitted the distress in
a paragraph in the Queen's Speech, which was an invi-
tation to the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire to' baits
in the first week of the session a discussion on the sub-
ject—(Hear)—and the Chaticellorof the Exchequer had
committed another blunder—(Laughter)—when he
brought forward a proposal as. applicable to the agricul-
turists, and which, having once 'brought forward, he
ought to have adhered to.--(llesta) He was prepared
to dispute half the case—that oWnera-of land were stiff:r-
ing distress—or had the; slightest ground whatever to
come to the House for reliefe It Was staled the bther
.night that there had been a fail of rent in Herefordshire
of 25 per cent., bat that'could not bestrue generally, as
the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire had placed the
reduction at about ton pealeena.. He :did not belieVe the
average reduction was ten percont. lie believed the re-
duction was only a temporary remission of rent, such as
had been usual with landlords on,. special occasions.
He believed the reduction of rent bad been very small,
and nothing in comparison to teat loss which owners of
other kinds of property were constantly sustaining
throughout the kingdom. Ile would ask what' class
escaped so completely unscathed in time of commercial
disaster as the landowners? It was stated at Ayleabury
that land only returned .2i per cent. Why, that was
proof of its more than, ordinary security. The Hoe,
Gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) had stated that though
6,000,0001. had been lost 10 the landowners from the re-
duction of rent, yet that this reduction formed no' suffi •
cient ground for appealing to. that House. This was
quite different to the dectribel usually held in that
House.—(Hear.) But if the 'Working classes generally
were benefited by the loss ofstaat 6,000,0001. which the
landowners ought never to have enjoyed--(Hear)--that
was a sufficient recompenspes-(llear.) He would' take
the consumers belonging to the agricultural interest, and
ho asserted they were not suffering to any extent which
entitled them to be considered a Buff ring class. He came
then to the occupiers of land, sad he was not disposed
to deny that they might suffer from the temporary low
price of produce. Bat it must be recollected that suffer-
ing was not a new thing. ft was a common malady
this suffering; but there was nothing whatever to show
that the suffering arose from; the legislation of that
House. He wished to strip the question from:dela-
sion.—(Hear, hear.) The Honourable Gentleman (Mr.
Disraeli) did not wish to go back to protection. Did
Hon. Members opposite agree to that?—(Hear, hear.)
The Hon. Member (Mr. Disraeli) did not wish to relieve
agriculturists by raisieg the price of corn. His propo-
sition was to trausfer the burdens on certain descriptions

APRIL

of property to the Consolidated Fund, stud to place them
lon the people generally. Now, with respect to the al-
-1 le,ged burden of tho poor-rate he would state a few facts.
He had a return from 1836 to 1812, showing how poor-
rate was levied on laud, houses, and other property; and
he only wished it came down to 1851, as he was satis-
fied it would be the best answer to the statemept that
land was too heavily burdened. In 1826, according to
the rental, the poor-law burden on lend was 69 per cent.;
in 1833 it was 63 per cent.; in 1841 it paid 52 per cent.
So that in fifteen years the amount fell from 69 to 52
per cent.—from two-thirds to one-half; and if he had
the returns up to 1850, he believed the fall would be
found to have beea in the same ratio, and that laad
did not now pay more than 40 par cent. The Hon.
Member for Westbury said 45 per cent., but he believed
it was 40 par cent. The amount of the po w-rates in
1833 was 8,600,000/. Ia 1842 it had fallen to 6,500,0001.;
and in 1850 to 5,395,0001. Now within the last eight
years, during which time that new course of commer-
cial legislation—free trade—had been practised, the
poor-rates had fallen about 1,300,000/. He had made a
calculation of the poor-rate paid by the land, which, in
round numbers, he would take at 5,500,0001. in
1826, when the amount paid was 69 per cant. The
amount paid in 1850 he took at 40 per cent.,
and, therefore, the sum now paid was not
more thon about 2,158,000/. So if they went
back to 1833 they would find the landed interest paid
more than double the amount they paid now. Then the
railways paid 300,0001. in poor-rates to parishes to which
they never contributed a pauper, and, houses were
springing up everywhere which were taxed to the poor-
rates. But he came to the alleged distress of the farmer.
The imposition of taxes on the necessaries of life of the
working classes would not benefit or relieve the farmer.
Reductions had been made from time to time, but those
reductions had all gone to enhance rent. The Right
Hon. Gentleman, if he came into power, would advocate
that line of policy which would end in raising rents.—
(Hear, hear.) Farmers were the victims of a vicious
system. But that vicious system was of the creation of
Hon. Gentlemen opposite. They had made the farmers
dependent on them up to the year 1846. As a cotton
maufacturer, he should be sorry to entrust bis interests
to the country party or to political parties. The evil of
farmers was that they held too much land. If they took
more land than they could find capital to cultivate they
were on the road to ruin, just the same as the landowner
who bought more land than he could pay for merely
to augment his political power.—(Hear, hear.) With
respect to the game laws—(Cries of " Question")e-they
were as pertinent to the question as the redactions of
poor-rates and other propositions. It was proved
before the Committee that the injury done by game
to the farmers was more than the whole amount of their
local taxation—(Oh.) The injury done by gentlemen
in sporting over the farmer's land was immense, and if
the law did not induce them to give up their sport, at
least other reasons ought to have effect on them.—(Hear,
hear.) It was the natural effect of passing from a vici-
ous system of forty year,' standing to a better system,
that suffering should prevail. But tenant-farmers had
it various periods sustained suffering, and if they ex-
rected to better their condition, it must be by the reduc-
ton of rent, the application of more capital, and the
adoption of a better system of oultivatioe. The Noble
Lord the Member for Colchester had alluded to the in-
crease that hat taken place in crime. Now, he would
give the Noble Lord the number of persons taken into
custody in Manchester since the year 1842, and the
Noble Lord would see that crime had not increased in
that fart of England. The number of persons taken
into eastody in Manchester in

1842 were ... ••• ... 13,801
1844 ... ... 10,700
1846 ... ... 7,600
1848 7,200
1849 ... 4.600
1350 ... 4,578
—(Hear, hear.) A similar return for the whole of Eng-
land and Wales would show that the committals had
diminisaed from 31,000 in 1842, to 27,000 in 1849, not•
withsi aiding the increase that had taken place in the
population.—(Hear, hear.) The proposal brought for-
ward by the Hon. Member for Bucks would only serve
to delude—not the owners of land in that House, for
they understood these tricks—but the farmers of the
country.—(oh:) Ho believed that one great result of
the repea. of the corn-laws would be that the farmers
would no longer regard themselves as a separate class,
having stecial claims on the House of Commons to at-
tend to their interests. The sooner the farmers made
themselves independent of their landlords, so far as the
feudal syeem was concerned, the sooner they could
make a lefrgain with their landlords in the Game way
that they nude a bargain with their grocer, the sooner
would the?: get out of their difficulties. The only way
to relieve agricultural distress was for the farmers
to exercise those virtues and talents by which the
rest of heir countrymen prospered. If they did
that he believed that, with the means of corn-
municatior, and with the markets they possessed, not
only the agricultural, but also the manufacturing in-
terest, world be found to triumph.
Mr. REYNOLDS said, the Hon. Gentleman had in-
formed tin House that the motion of the Hon. Member
for Buckinghamshire was intended to delude the House,
and delude the farmer. He regretted ho did not include
a certain mrtion of that House, and himself also—
(Laughter—as he was about to vote for it.—(Hear and
laughter.) He was particularly anxious to state the
ground upm which he felt it his duty to record that
vote. He heard his Hon. Friend say that there was a
protection required; and he agreed with him that if the
propositim of the Hon. Member for Backinghamshire
could be construed, either directly or indirectly, to mean
proteetim, he would be found voting against him. If
it could an construed to mean an attempt to raise the
price of bread, he would be found voting against him.
But whet was the motion ? That in the financial ar-
rangernants for the year due regard should be paid to
the interest cf land. In his proposition there was not a
word about protection—(Hear)—but it occurred to him
that it bore this construction, that as there was a sur-
plus 0f2,000,000/., there was a reasonable struggle be-
tween the two interests as to which would have the
larger relief. Now, paesieg from England, he would
cross tie Irish Channel, where there was an island con-
taining 3.000,000 of inhabitants. The eight millions in Ire-
land delved their support chiefly from agricultural pur-
suits, aid Ireland ought not to be blotted out of the map.
Let them consider what the agriculturists had to deal
with. Within the last year 1,500,000 quarters of wheat
had arrived from France—more than one-half of it in
flour—and within the last two months a cargo of fl err
had arrived in Dublin, also from France, and he had it
on the best information that not more than a week had
elapse' since it had been taken from the mill. In this
country the capital invested in flour mills would not re-
alise ono-fourth of the original investment. He defied
any honest man to prove that free trade bad conferred
any benefit on Ireland. He (Mr. Reynolds) was a gree-
tradet—(A laugh)—but he was not for one-sided reci-
procity. They had given Ireland the poor-law, and ho
had ro doubt they had done so with the best intention,
but that law cost the landlords of Ireland two millions.
—(Hear, bear.) And then there was the grand jury
teas on laud alone to the amount o‘f 1,300,000/. per
annum, and which was devoted to the support of gaols,
hospitals, and lunatic asylums. Iu addition to these
burthons, the tithes hat been ceuverted into a rent-
charge, and they had made the Church the owner of the
fee, and not the landlord. lie recollected that a charge
had been brought against himself and other Irish
Members for voting as they did on the 14th of last month,
and it had lesea said what an extraordinary set of fel-
lows these Irish Members are to vote as they did.—
(Hear, hear, and laughter.) Twenty Irish Members
voted in the minority, some voted the other way, and
some got tickets of leave.—(Laughter.) Ho would toll
them what happened to some of these Members. Their
constituents read their votes and their speeches, for
somehow these matters became known.—(Laughter.)
Meetings were held, and votes of censure were passed on
some of them [An HON. MEMBER—Is that all?] No,
it is not all: there was something more.--(Laughter.)
Votes of censure, as he had said, were passed on 601113 of
them, and absolution was given to others on the terms
that they should go and sin no more.—(Laughter.) Pro-
tection was the cry, but ho was not to be gulled by that
cry. The time of delusion for Ireland had gone by.
The people of Ireland road the votes and the speeches of
their representatives, and he hoped they would read his.
—(Hear, and laughter.) It was not protection that was
meant by the present motion—it was a scramble for the
booty, and that the agricultural interest should get a share.
—(Loud cries of "Hear, hear," from the Ministerial
benches.) * It was said that the object of the motion was,
to put out one Ministry and to put in another; but even
at that risk he (Mr. Reynolds) would give his vote for
the motion.—(Hear, hear.) He came into that House to
support the Noble Lord; but, if the Noble Lord had
deserted his principles, ho (sir. Reynolds) had not de-
serted his.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) He might be
told that this vote would not decide the fate of the
Minister, but he could not help that. It mattered little
to Ireland who held the helm of the State, provided the
Government attends d to the wants of the people.—(Hear,
hear.) It mattered little to him whether the Noble
Lord or the Right Hon Baronet (the Member forßipon)
—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear," and laughter)or the
_Noble Lord whose name had been so notorious 'in con-
nexion with protection, held the reins of power.
land wanted measures and not men. They had get
rid
of the sectarian and political prejudices whiehhha. so
their
long been the bane of the country.. ;Upon One .p
parties were bound up together, and that it was tohi do .point
bud
best to raise Ireland from the position
colleagues
othea
the
eislation attentionh of had placed
Nobleher L.
Lord
deaand r, hear.) l
ar Lt
liini
to c
he
fact, that they would have the majority or the Irish
Members voting in favour of the motion theof Hon.
(M. Disraeli).--(Cries r I).—(Cries of
‘l,loe Member foreorh.,, a Bn
and
c, n
og.h” te)ti s
a
rh
e lion. Member might cry
Lat
n(oMxiro.ulsietorrdieisv)i.d—e,
him remind the Government that fifty-threelrish Mem,
hers voted in favour of the motion of the
" No," but one could not speak for 150 Members.
Right Hoe,
and be would not longer trespass on their attention.
CG
reine tsl eomf
ie ihvei
dbef.7 er for
Members Stamfordwere
They were about to enter upon the Easter recess. The
Irish Members were on the eve of returning to Ire-
land, and if he (Mr. Reynolds) should be asked his
opinion as to the manner in which Ireland had been
treated by her Majesty's Ministers, he should feel it his
duty to give them the'worst possible character.—(ole)
The CHANCI?,LLOR, of the EXCHEQUER thought
the lion. Gentleman had no need to occupy so much
time in telling the House his reasons for votiug against
the Government. It was not many nights since he had
informed the house that whatever were the principles of
the Government he should oppose them.—(Hear.) They
all knew the cause. But though the Government might
regret the loss of the lion. Gentleman's support, they
could not on his account compromise their principles.
He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) should not, there-
fore, attempt to reconcile the termer votes of the Hon.
Gentleman with his recent votes, nor to explain the dif-
ference between his previous speeches in favour of free
trade and his present speech in favour of protection.—

12, 1851.

(:Tear.) Neither should he (the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer) occupy the House fur any time, as he had done
so only very recently. He would merely observe to the
Noble Lord the Member for Colchester that he ought
not to give creience to the gessipping stories ho might
hear; and with respaet to the Hon. Member for Beckre
he should not follow him into all the facts of his speech,
but confine his observations to the details of the
motion. Like his Right Honourable Friend (Mr.
Labeuchere), be was a good deal puzzled by the
lion. Gentleman's motion. As it originally stood it
had some sense, but now it had none. The Hon. Gen-
tleman declared himself favourable to a repeal of the
window tax; but on the face of such a declaration now
ho had taken the extraordinary course of moving an
atnentimeat on the motion for going into Committee to
repeal it. The Hon. Gentleman had, it is true, talked of
some indefinite relief; hut he had made out nothing
clear, except that in which he had had the assistance of
the Right Hon. Gentleman near him. The purpose of
the amendment was to de!eat the repeal of the window-
tax, because if it was carried the motion for the repeal
of that tax would be lost. If the Hon. Gentleman sup-
ported, as he said he did, the proposition of the Govern-
ment, ho should not have moved his amendment. The
Hon. Gentleman said the proposals of the Government
gave no relief to agriculture. Did country gentlemen,
however, pay no window-tax? Did tenant-farmers use
timber—(Hear)—or live in houses which paid window-
tax? If they did, then, would they not get relief to tko
same extent as the rest of the community?—(hear,
hear.) The Honourable Gentleman said that the pro-
posals made to repeal the duty on seeds, and to take a
portion of the expense of lunatic asylums by the Govern-
ment, was received with silence. He (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) begged to say that it was, on the
contrary, received by the Hon. Members for Peterbo-
rough and North Warwickshire with opposition. Yet the
former was the single one paid by the occupying tenant.
If, therefore, the tenant-fsrreers complained hereafter
that they did not get their seeds as cheap as they might
have got them, it was to the owners of the land and not
to the Government, they owed it to.—(Cries of " Oh,"
and Hear.) When he (the Chancellor of the Exono-
quer), however, withdrew these propositions, he was
prepared to prove that he gave the aerictiltaral interest
under his new plans far more than he withheld from
them. What siegle tax, except perhaps the income-tax,
pressed so heavily upon the agricultural interest as the
window-tax; and was its reduction, therefore, nothing ?
The amount of relief to the agricultural interest, through
the relief of the charge for lunatics and the duty on
seeds, amounted to little more than a farthing in the
pound on the rating of that interest; but, besides a house-
tax being a more just and equal tax, he (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) could show that the repeal of the
window-tax gave an amount of relief that born nO pro-
portion to this amount. Taking eight counties in Eng-
land, of which two were manufacturing counties, with a
large town-population, and six purely agricultural, the
result of the remission of taxation was es follows:
. .

Lancashire paid 1 the amount of the present window-tax.
Yorkshire
If ),
Hampshire 9-3
), .1
Bedfordshire
)9 51
Essex

:1
Lincolnshire ... t 31 99

Norfolk
Suffolk
The relief to the last six was, therefore, much greater
than that to the first two; and it could not consequently
be said that the agricultural interest in those counties
did not get relief, at least in the same proportion as the
town population in the manufacturing counties. The
whole amount that had been proposed to be taken on
the Consolidated Fund for tho support of lunatic asylums
was 150,0001.; but the remission of the window-tax on
the six last named agricultural counties alone was equal
to 70,000/., or one-half of the whole sum in question.
It was true he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did
withdraw what he proposed originally to give; but it
was equally true that he had not been unmindful or
negligent of the interests of agriculture. The Noble
Lord the Member for Colchester had said the proposi-
tion of the Government had no regard for the peasantry
of England. But the fact was the other way, for the
peasantry were never so well off as now.—(Hear, hear.)
The reduction in prices had been, in these respects,
greater than the reduction in wages. Prices had, in
some cases, fallen one-half; would any Hon. Gentleman
say wages had fallen in the same proportion?
Mr. BOOKER said they had in the iron districts.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
these were not agricultural districts, to which alone he
he had alluded. The Hon. Member for Busks had put
into his mouth an argument he had never used. The
Hon. Member for Sraford had warned them against
rural demagogues. Now, such persons as would go to
tenants—incite them to pay no rent—and recommend
them to mount their horses and ride into Manchester,
these he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) held in as
much abhorrence as the Honourable Member himself.
But the policy which Honourable Gentlemen opposite
pursued and advocated might encourage rural orators to
do something in another sense. He could not help
thinking, notwithstanding that they so carefully con-
cealed it, that the main object of the Hon. Members
who supported the present motion was the establishment
of the ss. duty on corn. With respect to the window-
tax, Lion. Gentlemen said he should have carried the
tax lower. Now there was no doubt but that he might
have so arranged the tax as to bring some 25,000 or
30,000 more houses under its operation; but in so doing
he would not hare realized a greater revenue than
40,0001., and for such an amount as that he did not wish
to hazard the success and popularity of the entire pro-
position by bringing such a large number of persons
under taxation for the first time.—(Hear, hear.) Ho
saw no reason to doubt that the House was in favour of
his proposal, and if they agreed with him they would
vote against the motion of the Hon. Member for Buck-
inghamshire. Let no one fancy they could agree in
opinion with the Hon. Member for Bucks and with him
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) also.—(Hear, and
cries of " Divide.")
Mr. W. MILES said, the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer having thrown overboard the owners and occupiers
of land, now sought to reconcile his total neglect of that
class of persons, whom he stated to be in a condition of
great distress. The Right Hon. Gentleman stated that,
although the owners and occupiers of land were in a
state of distress, the labourers were not so, for that they
had every article of necessity at only one-half the price
it used to be. Then, he would ask, was the labourer's
malt, his tea, his coffee, his rent, less by one-half than
formerly.—(Bear, hear, and loud cries of " Divide.")
The Right don. Gentleman said that the Hon. Member
for Buckinghamshire had a design for the re-imposi-
tion of a duty on corn behind his present motion.—
(Loud cries of "Divide, divide.") Such was not the
case. He had not heard one word lealing to such a
conclusion in the speech of the Hon. Gentleman or any
one who supported him. They ought to consider well
to what they might drive the agricultural interest. If
they refused that interest justice, nothing was left them
but to try, not the feeling of the House, but the sense of
the country. They would endeavour to go back to the
system which was believed to ba thoroughly expired.—
(Cries of "Divide." The Hon. Member here went into
various statistical details (which were very impatiently
received by the House), proving the depreciation of
landed property and produce, and the consequent dis-
tress prevailing, and concluded by announcing his inten-
tion of supporting the motion of his Hon. Friend.
Mr. NEWDEGATE and ether Hon. Members,
amongst whom was we believe Sir R. Peel, rose together.
There were cries of " Divide, divide," and e Peel, Peel."
The Hon. Gentleman proceeded to address the House amid
much noise and confusion, but was totally unheard in
the gallery. Ile was understood to say he considered
the remedies proposed for the agricultural classes as
totally insignificant in amount, and entirely dispropor-
tioned to the wants of the case.—(Cries of " Divide.")
The Hon. Gentleman having in vain attempted to
make himself heard amidst the uproar that prevailed in
the Howe, resumed his seat.

Lord J. RUSSELL rose to say, that, as he thought it
most desirable the House should divide that night, lie
trusted, in order to enable them to come to a division,
which could nut then be far off, that those Hon. Gentle'
men who wished to address to the House their reasons
for their vote would be listened to.
Mr. NE WDEGATE again rose, amidst cries of
" Spoke, spoke." All that ho had wished to state was,
that ho had expressed a distinct opinion that, as the
Right lion. Gentleman had proposed to remit or reduce
taxation to the amount of 1,500,0001., and as one-eighth
of that reduction would apply to the most distressed in-
terest in the country—the agricultural body—it was a
vary insignificant equivalent for the distress of which
they complained. lie also wished to say that the Right
Hon. Gentleman had, on two occasions, unfairly endea-
voured to saddle him with the. onus of withdrawing his
paltry tender of delayed justice. He had said nothing
whatever with respect to the transfer of the cost of the
paper lunatic asylums to the Consolidated Fund being
insignificant.
Sir R. PEEL said, in order that no misconstruction
might result from the conscientious vote he was pre-
pared to:give that night on the motion before the House,
and being. unwilling to detain the House with any state-
ment of his views, however desirous he might be of
doing so, if they were discussing any financial or com-
mercial scheme, with the view of introducing changes
in _the free-trade policy of 1846 —(Elea.r, hear)—Yets
as one of that class comprised under the denomi-
nation of owners and occupiers of land—that class whiCh
was allowed to be suffering under great and unparalleled
distress—that influential class from which greater and
more enduring benefits flowed to the industry of the
country and the poorer classes than from any other—
certainly than from the paltry professions of certain po-
litical economists—as one of the country gentlemen of
England, whose interests were not antagonistic to those
of the poorer classes, but were rather indissolubly united
with their permanent prosperity—as such ho felt that he
could not give a silent vote on the present occasion, but
state briefly that, Free-trader as he was and landed pro-
prietor also, he would give hi 3 vote in favour of a measure
which declared that, is any relaxation of taxation, some
and
occupiers should be paid to the claims of the owners
occupiers of land.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord NORREYS, whs spoke amidst great impatience,
and continued cries for a division, opposed themeti on,
and warned Hon. Members that every vMemberote
given
fa-
vour of the cleverly worded motion of the
for Buckinghamshire was an indirect vote against the
wiLhthreefeEr..xenchcee.
cittioewr,hontf
repeal of the window-tax.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE explained
had been said by the Chancellor of
dtuurear interest—re
his having repudiated the boon
trio agricultural
thegri rue,
wee wrung from the la-
to clover seeds—th
would repudiate a boon which
bour of the poor.
After a few words
In explanationE, from the CHAN-
CELLOR of the EXCHEQu
Colonel SIBrefORP told the Noble Lord the Member
for Oxfordshire (Lord Norreys) that he should never
attempt to stand for that county again. After the speech
of that night the Noble Lord could no longer be con-
sidered as the farmers friend,