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

wanted some 200,0001, more than his original eLan (la.
mandsd, and what does be du? He takes up his pen and
scratches out the two remedial measures intended to
mitigate and assist the difficulties of the suffering land-
owners of England, and then he gives for his reason that
the proposition was received iu such an ungracious man-
ner, he will now show his sense of our went of grati
tude. I have always thought, Sir, that Ministerial
propositions in this House were the result of grave
counsel and the mature deliberation of Cabinet confi-
dence and communication; that they were suggested by
a sense of public duty; by taking an unimpassioned sur
vey of public circumstances; that they were not brought
forward in levity or merely to gain party support; nor,
on the other hand, were they to be withdrawn from
any feeling of personality, nor in a tone of flippant ca-
price.—(Rear.) But what remains? The fact is, that
we were as guilty of ungraciousness who wereonly silent.
Recollect that that which was proposed by Government
as a consequence of mature counsel, as a matter called
for by a sense of public duty, was withdrawn on the
plea of our ungraciousness, and was extended to that—
I will not say adverse—interest, which had been parti-
cularly distinguished for the mean and almost indecorous
manner in which tbey treated the financial statement of
the Minister. The Right Hon. Gentleman had no right
to expect gratitude from us. He had done very little
for us—and if it was received without any demonstra-
tion of practical gratitude, he had no right to be as-
tonished. But according to his own notions he ex-
pected differently, although they who spurned him and
hie Budget were treated with additional favours; while
we, who treated his suggestions with respect, had our
claims to consideration depreciated, and had it an-
nounced in the face of the House of Commons that if
we had any claim it had been forfeited by our disre-
spectful conduct.—(Hear, hear.) But these are slight
considerations, though important in a certain sense—for
all this time remember that the interest suffering is that
which the Government are every night admitting to be
the only suffering one in the community, the interest of
which they counselled their Sovereign to recognise
the distress. Yet it is proposed to extend that which
is taken from us to a portion of the community which
we are every night informed is in a condition of unpa-
ralleled prosperity.—(Haar, hear.) I beg Hon. Gentle-
men at either side of the House dispassionately to con-
sider the circumstances at which we have arrived, and
the incidents which have occurred in this short but
eventful session. Is it not true that the circumstances I
have detailed are an accurate narrative of what has oc-
curred?—(Hear, hear.) Is it not true that the distress
which prevailed in one particular class was announced
and noticed in the Speech from the Throne, and that
the First Minister of the Crown, notwithstanding the
expectation raised by that announcement, acknowledged
to Parliament that he can do nothing to remedy that
distress? Is it not true that the House of Commons in-
terferes to assert that this remedy should be prepared?
Is it not true that, forty-eight hours after, the Govern-
ment brings in a Budget in which no remedial measures
are contained? and is it not equally true that this
Budget is withdrawn, and another substitued into
which remedial measures are admitted ? (Hear,
hear.) I would ask any men of sense and honour,
can they sanction a course of proceeding as unjust as
inconsistent ? Is this a line of conduct which tends to
establish confidence in a certain class ? Is it one which
necessarily offends the feelings of that portion of the
community, and leads them to believe that their claims
are not viewed in that spirit of justice which ought
to prevail amongst all classes of the community? I would
ask, has anything occurred in the condition of the
owners and occupiers of land since Parliament met
which makes any difference of opinion as to their con-
dition? No one can say there is any such. There is
no doubt, whatever may be the cause—whatever opinions
may bo held of the expediency or the necessity of the
legislation which occasioned it—no man in this House
will deny that the owners and occupiers of land in the
United Kingdom are in a state of unprecedented difii-
culty.—(Hear, hear.) Look at the main features of the
case. You have a diminution of rents, which we aro
informed may be taken at the rate of 10 per cent. [A
Voice, " More.") lam told more. I will say, however,
a diminution of rents to the amount of 10 per cent. I
do not know whether it is more, but I know it will soon
be more.—(Hear, hear.) Take the rental of the United
Kingdom at a moderate computation—at, say 60,000,0001.,
as that amount is accepted by the most eminent statists.
Well, here you have a loss to one class of 6,000,0001.
I do not say that this is a sufficient ground on which to
come forward and ask Parliament for relief. This is not
the point lam going to put before the House. You
have, and will have, a continued diminution of rents;
but I must remind the House that at a certain period
the diminution of rent ceases to be a mere loss to
the proprietor of the land; for when you have ac-
complished a diminution of twenty-five per cent., you
have, by an unnerriog law of economics, thrown
certain lands out of cultivation—your cold clays
and your thin land can never be brought into
cultivation on a diminution of 25 per cent. Now, I
will not say that any such diminution affords per se the
slightest claim for any class to come to this House to
ask for relief. But lam not of that school which looks
upon any diminution of rent as an abstract accession to
the national prosperity.—(Hear, hear.) And this you
will all admit, that a diminution of rent, even to the
amount of 10 per cent., or 6,000,000/. a year, is a cir-
cumstance which has a tendency to create distress among
the class which has to endure it.—(Bear, hear.) Let us
look first to the case of the occupiers of land. I shall
take a very moderate estimate of the amount of capital
invested in the soil by the farmers of the United King-
dom before that change in the law which has occasioned
this diminution of their capital. I shall take the whole
amount of the capital of the farmers of the United King-
dom at that which has often been stated, and by very
eminent authorities too, as the amount of the capital in-
vested in the soil by the farmers of England alone. I
shall take the amount of the capital invested in the soil
by the farmers of the United Kingdom at the time when
the repeal of the corn-laws took place at only
300,000,000/. Now a third of that has disappeared.
I do not mean to say that that circumstance alone con-
stitutes a good reason why the farmers of the United
Kingdom should come to this House for relief ; but
it is indubitable evidence that the class which
has undergone such a vicissitude of fortune must
necessarily be in a state of great distress and difficulty.—
(Hear, hear.) We cannot suppose that since that pub-
lic recognition of that distress and difficulty was made
by her Majesty in her most gracious Speech, and more
especially as that recognition was not made until the
suffering had become chronic—we cannot supplotkseely tothat
anything had occurred, or that anything is
occur, to remedy that evil. Well, then, I think I have
established this position, that if her Majesty's Ministers
are in the happy position of having at their disposal a
surplus revenue—if, as they themselves admit, there is
only one, although a most important, class in this coun-
try suffering great distress at this moment—if all other
classes are in a state of unprecedented prosperity, it
surely became her Majesty's Ministers to consider
whether, if they had resolved on a distribution of that
surplus in the way of remissions of taxes, it was not in
their power to propose such remissions as might alleviate
the distress and mitigate the suffering of that class.—
(Hear, hear.) And now I have to consider whether it
was in the power of her Majesty's Government to pro-
pose in the construction of their Budget any measures
which would have that tendency. I must admit that I
have considerable advantages—such as seldom fall to
the lot of a Member of this House speaking from the
Opposition side—ia arguing that point. Her Ma-
jesty's Ministers cannot call upon me, although the
task were but too easy a one, to substantiate the
statement that distress exists.—(Hear, hear.) They
have themselves given the most authoritative evidence
upon that head; and it must have been after frequent
councils—after profound deliberations—after lengthened
and mature researches—that they counselled her Ma-
jesty to make that declaration to the country.—(Hear,
hear.) And, therefore, it were hardly necessary for me
to advert to those great statistical facts, which, never-
theless, with the indulgence of the House, I shall briefly
allude to. I have another great advantage upon this oc-
casion. I might under ordinary circumstances have been
asked even if her Majesty's Government admitted the
distress as they did on the first night of the session—l
might have been asked by her Majesty's Ministers,
" What can we do?" But I can hardly be asked that
upon this occasion, because her Majesty's Ministers have
themselves in this session proposed measures to remedy
those evils—(Hear, hear)—have themselves, after due
deliberation, of course, proposed measures to the House
- efficiency or inefficiency of which may be matters
for future controversy and discussion; but the great fact
remains, that they have themselves, after having deli-
berated on the sufferings of the owners and occupiers of
land, devised schemes for the relief of those sufferings.
—(hear, hear.) Those are very great advantages—dis-
tress admitted by the Crown, nay, announced by
the Crown, and remedial plans nut only suggested,
but proposed by the Government. Happy interest !
which finds itself in such a position.—(Hear, hear,
and laughter.) Well, we have at once a
measure—and it is the first measure to which I shall
refer—we have at once a measure, the object of which is
to relieve this distress and which to a certain degree, in
the opinion of the Government, is efficient for that pur-
pose. It is the opinion of her Majesty's Ministers—and
it is the only one of their proposals which I shall pro-
ceed to consider—that it is desirable, or rather that it
was desirable, that the expense incurred by the owners
and occupiers of land in the maintenance of pauper lu-
natics should be borne by the community which is
generally interested in that subject, and that the tendency
of such a measure, if it were adopted, would be to afford
relief to the agricultural interest. In the making that
suggestion her Majesty's Ministers acted on a recom-
mendation in the report of the Lords' Committee on the
burdens upon land. That temperate, painstaking, and
thoughtful Committee, the business of which was con-
ducted by men consisting of both parties, and second to
none in either House of Parliament in their knowledge
of the rural life and interests of England—
many of whom were warm supporters of those prin-
ciples of political economy which regulate our present
commercial legislation—that Committee gave it as their
opinion that the charge for pauper lunatics was one
which ought to be removed from the land, and borne
by the community at large. Her Majesty's Ministers,
after having deliberated 011 that suggestion, made
a proposition to the House of a partial character,
but completely recognising the principle of the Com-
mittee of the House of Lords, anti brought forward that
proposition as one the tendency of which was to mitigate
this distress and to remove this depression. Well, then,
we have a practical measure before the House for this
object—no matter what may be the amount of the con-
cession or its degree of efficiency--we have a practical
measure introduced by the Government, after due de-
liberation. Ido not myself consider that that proposi-
tion of her Majesty's Ministers was by any means to be
despised. I agree with my Honourable Friend the I
Member for Essex (Sir J. Tyrell) that it conceded a ,
great principle; and I myself, on a subsequent occasion
reminded the Right Honourable Gentleman the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer of that fact; bat the Right Hon,

r
flteelleeran mieeindersteoti the ti.ndeeey of my o"ela'Le
tione. 1 I allied the admission of a
that proposition of the Government, not becatuer,.
would found upon that circueastance a precedent.. 70;
removing iron] reel property, and more especiall7 tr,
the land, the administration of the local taxation er the
country, or, rather, the local administration ef , ',A
principle mad° l'i
country. There is nothing I more deprecate, or vili,","t
I should more deplore, than a removal of Liu.,
local adminietrat.ioo, and such a course I have
never advocated.—(Hear, hear.) What I valued vine
that that was an admission that the local taxsiwf,.
which is a consequence of that local edministration, wee
.
of prope.
,_l°.
aTPeculiar
trerdaednmuispEoicunal‘p,hairctliic
In lavralkueinddas
embodied
the proposal of her Majesty's Ministers, and that adtla:,
sion might have led us to the consideration of some very
important circumstances, into which, however, I dell,
think it necessary to enter upon this occasion. 11%,
ras_,
now, I have pieced before the House one very
cnode
but eminently end essentially practical measure, thee
dency of which would be to alleviate the distress o' te
tbet .1
agricultural interest; and here I must observe Otero
wish to confine myself solely to a consideration of T.,
overwhelming difficulties which are now experienced ual.
the occupiers of the soil.—(Hear, hear.) This is a 0°,4
sure, mind you, that has been sanctioned and aPPre/eir
of by the Government, that has been submitted to their'
examination, to their mature deliberation, and that has
been introduced to the notice of Parliament under..,.,, the,
most remarkable circumstances. These circumst",;,
prove how deeply they must have considered the raat'er
and how anxious they must have been to arrive at snif
tisfactory conclusion with respect to it, because, cleeva
convinced as they were of the distress of the occuPiello
the soil, and notwithstanding the admissions of the 00).0,
upon the subject, they had themselves declared theirLs
ability to suggest a remedy for that distress, and it 'd
not until after a decleratien of opinion on the Partfiet
the House of Commons that they were induced tO, I
their ingenuity to work in the matter.—(Hear, he°Ndee
shall now remind the House of another measure, 1004
rate in its character, but which in the relief that it we 'be
afford would be very much valued by the farmers of !tit' $
country. lam nor, however, now recommending los
measure; for I am only going through this catalogue „ti,
the purpose of showing that it is not difficult to find Ilirstr
sures of a remedial character for the agricultural inter,eby.
one of which had already been selected and adopted eii
the Government. Many leading country gentleme° "o
both sides of the House—men well acquainted wi,th:ebt
provincial life and wants—have suggested that as o'reies'
the community at large have taken upon themselveetho
cost of public prosecutions, they should eomplete„„eti
duty which they ought entirely to fulfil, and take 7000
themselves also the expenditure of the gaols of the e; the
try, which are maintained for public purposes to",, this
public advantage.—(Hear, hear.) I cannot state avni, 0
moment the exact amount of the relief which o„.1.1",,„0
measure would afford to the agricultural interest—s"-boe
lost the account of it; bet it is one moderate in its' be
be
ratter, and yet it is one that from its nature ifuel",bet
extremely appreciated by the farmers. There are u'ebt
measures which the Government might have brodto
forward of a much more important character, but 0b,./.50
might have been adopted and would have afforded Pito
relief to the occupiers of the soil, while their al: of
would not have interfered with any of the prineiloei,e.
our present commercial system, or any of the Phos
ciples of our local administration; and I;i to
now before me one' of those measures. llt oe
call the attention of the House for a moment to the or
penditure in this country on the poor. The total
penditure on the poor in England and Wales, ote" lets
the county rate, amounts, according to the last 001001,
return, to about 6,200,0001. a year. Less than s,oo°'A 'be
of that sum is expended on the in-maintenance ae"try;
out-door relief of the pauper population of the eoulie the
while on other charges connected with the relief ot,' og.
poor no less a turn than 1,300,0001. is expended 113'1,0
land and Wales. Now observe that the items v,"00
form chat very considerable amount are items which etli
little, if at all, affected by the agency of your 100%10'
ministration. They consist mainly of your este," lnets
went charges—of the fixed salaries of the 13,000 owes
connected with the administration of the poor-la 101
(Hear, hear)—all of whose offices have been itrieli, ill
and devised in consequence of your recent changelod
the poor-law system.—(Hear.) Then, again, in Woo
we find a similar expense of about 370,000/. per 02,00
You have therefore altogether in the United iCingu'o
sum of 1,700,000/., which is fastened on real propeitd
which presses grievously on the land, which in Ireeiolf
presses entirely and especially on the land, and o;iis
is scarcely affected in any degree by that local °",,,00
nistration and that local government with svilleh;,'"oe'
all agree that it would be most impolitic and ',;eet
pedient to interfere. Now, the surplus of this JGO:
amounting to 2,000,000/e would have permitted the 0
vernment to have dealt with this great sums ep
ic'
is is my belief; that if her Majesty's Ministers bad' ili
, ete• _
pounded a well-devised measure for that obJe""rtbo
after that important recognition from the Throne e",set
continued distress and difficulties of a most ilne:a.sh
class of her Majesty's subjects, they had introduce°, -red
a measure they would have done more than mere Lee,
lieve a suffering interest from a great incuuth"-iest
They would have laid the foundation of that wise' nold
temperate, and that remedial legislation which
have adapted the cultivators of the soil in the jai
Kingdom to the novel circumstances and the neWi. -01,
dition in which your unexpected, and, perhaps. 'e„,,eld,
say, your hasty legislation has placed them. You "-,, ot,
have commenced a course of legislation the tended% of
which would have been to put an end to that It sli
classes, and that fatal controversy that is raging btteeltl
the rival industries of this country.—(Hear.) you 'v-(141
have laid the foundation of a great system of reteeo
legislation, which would have done much to bring h- el
good feeling to the community; and you wont", ,70$5i#
found all men of moderate minds and temperate chsr,;gb
dons rallying round you in such 111:1 effort. And 01°1-00
they could not have acknowledged that this Y"'eeeo
first step was equal to the occasion, they would the
recognised in it an earnest endeavour on the Port r)s-itir
Government of this country to do justice to a 005bopt
portant interest, which all men now, although per re'
$
not openly, acknowledge has been dealt with with ' il
It cipitation which is to be regretted.—(Bear, hear.) $lO
not my intention now to make such a proposal °e
House, or even to convey to the House that by the; si ros
g 0
lution which I bring forward I have any covert
Odd
of of recommending it. I do nothing of the kind. •I sw's it
have been happy to have supported the Governceeeor
they had brought forward such a proposal. Under the
dinary circumstances, after the announcement on 00
subject of agricultural distress in the Speech fre°2ol3
Throne at the commencement of the session, I
i'yoot
not, with such a surplus in the Treasury—l evoe'le-ioed
have shrunk myself; if the Government had not ...- or
to undertake the task, from offering to the House sl3b 0
portnnity of accepting the commencement of seislo
happy system of legislation. But circumstances
at iir
since occurred which, in my opinion, render it Ote'al 0
expedient fur me to propose to you to support sAiese,
measure. More than two months have now elapsed '',,t 01
the meeting of Parliament. The financial statete.„%elt,
the Chancellor of the Exchequer was made eight ",-00'
ago. It held out to an important class in the irods
munity the expectation of considerable relief
fieso
a tax of a very unpopular character. Circunlotsid
have permitted the intentions of the Ministry to nifo
for a considerable time before the community a ill
Ministry themselves having again been reinstaten.dlot
power, have come forward and again proposed a SLPt 0
scheme with regard to that important class, or rath-oto,
scheme still more calculated to attract popular fe; Dot
The expectations of the community, therefore, have it
only dwelt upon that plan, but they have dwelt tiPete 0
as a probable event, and have been accustomed of lore'
consider it as a gain entirely realized. I think, ‘t 001
fore, it would be most inexpedient to interfere wit"for
arrangement which Ministers have proposed with re not
enee to the repeal of the window-tax. But that "„b 0
the 'main reason that prevents me from offering ,911-,.00'
proposal as that to which I have referred as an tutee.oo°
tive for a repeal of the window-tax. I should act ,13-401,
sistently with all that I have said in this House, ,'",tll
what is much more important, I should act inconsisteßteg
with my profound and sincere convictions, if I took o et,
which would do exactly that which I am always atteVarip
ing to avoid and always attempting to deprecate—natde be
place a question before the House which would .01
essentially and entirely a question between town 1)le
country.—(Hear, hear.) Tne object of those hullos
efforts which I make with respect to our taxation fiel
been, if possible, to terminate that controversy, to 0° he,
those feelings, to put an end to that strife and rivalry ;6,
tween the great interests of the country; because .kory
lieve that it has already been productive 1 great hii 0
to the comMunity, and because I sineer y believe i° or
rife with very perilous consequences, if ontinued t 0 O•
national inatitutions.—(Llear, hear.) "otally. irresrote
tive, therefore, of any considerations, I fiever wouldl3o'
sent to briag forward a proposition
which would hemp
the relief of any one class and the injury of ' or-be
I would never attempt to obtain that justice for„ tbi
landed interest, which I am -meet anxious to obt°''',,el,
asuncdh means and in such a method. But 'it may! be little
lam aware that it is often said, that; there" is to
a conwsildther
advantagedea' "flaparaticely to the laud ill atteMP- itofie
athbblea
paioerutinotaroatisietd
ifsorbotrhnui, t'liooo r-
real property than the land. Now let us examine iitee
otherr a tes7k. billeeitShsf
statement which is so currept on the benches opP'itro
low, in the first place, the adoption of such a wetliel
n 3 that to which I have referred would givO, 6*.rot
to the amount of nearly 400,0001. to the landed:luneuls
of Ireland—(Hear, hear)—that portion of tbe oagr,ipgt
tural community which is probably the most El,' „e'd Ile
for if in England we have distress; if in Scotland r.).
have dismay; in Ireland we have desolation.--!-"eaoos
As regards Ireland, therefore, the benefit would ue "out
considerable, and would be greatly ,Opappreciated. ie
let us view the incidence of this remission of ttotBt„ioo-1
England, and we shall find, I believe, that in this '°lo3cl
try the benefit would scarcely be less ivaportant• diag
here I must observe that I am rather amused at fin
remiss
that in the case of any suggestion I make for a l'ell3;t by
of taxation to the landed interest, I am alwaYo Alii; eV
the retort that I shall assist other interests besides ctr
owners and occupiers of land. It is certainly rare- 00
rious that we, who are always twitted with belLeo, lea
champions of a particular class, should be told to'ii, its
are perpetually fighting the battles of other interests
every attempt that we make for the remission (If: tbet
tion.—(Hear, hear.) But let me show the Nols" din
the remission of taxation which would be involveid be
taking off these 1,700,000/. from the land would
very considerable; and that the statement that "De
la
a change in the system of raisin this amount W-- 0
g fader afford no relief
._ to the agricultural interest
faLacy which the farmer who is suffering 1300 d.
the burden of the poor-rate never can comPre"-ese
Observe his position. Here is a farmer paying 55,j; the
or 7s. in the pound for poor-rates. But he rete-esice
newspapers, and finds that the Chancellor of the J''''suse
quer tells him that that i 3 no burden on him, becgid.
the average of the poor-rate in England is but la'
.uag
in the pound.—(Hcar, hear.) Averages are veil niv e
to guide us in our researches, but they are not tile