The Sun.
London, England, 1835-03-11 00:00:00

ATTORNEYS' CERTIFICATES.

Sir JOHN CAMPBELL presented a petition from a per_
eon named Blaker, an attorney, beseeching the House that the
duty on attorneys' certificates might be repealed.
BOARD OF AGRICULTURE.
Lord HENNIKER presented a petition from a parish in
Suffolk, praying for the reinstatement of a Board of Agricul-
ture ; also another
.petition, praying that the charges for at-
tending the poor mtghtbe paid for by a general tax.
Mr. A. BARING presented a petition from Essex, com-
plaining of agricultural distress.
Mr. KELLY presented a petition from a number of Li-
censed Victuallers, complaining of the amount of the duty on
Spirit Licenses. He hoped that the Chancellor of the
Exchequer would take the matter into his serious eon-
sideration, and thereby prevent the necessity for any Mem-
ber to bring the subject forward; but if this were not
done he should certainly bring it before the House himself.
He could easily prove to the House that this tax was as mis-
chievous and vicious in principle as it was unjust and partial in
its practical operation. He trusted, therefore, that Sir R.
Peel would propose some mitigation of this tax in his budget.
Sir R. PEEL said that it was all very well for constituents
to petition atiltat asAy taxes which they might find burthen- ,
some; but t ;it aol\ most unreasonable for Hon. Members
to apply for thi: ' dot' one tax after another, unless they
,r 4
could find, and we -ready to propose, some substitute.
Mr. ROBINSO'N was of opinion that the whole taxation
tjtf,,, titit country should be referred to the consideration of a
tt4i)

committee. Last year the Chancellor of the Exchequer had
been obliged to give up the house tax, and now there was
every appearance of the present Chancellor of the
Exchequer being placed in a similar situation with
respect to the Malt Tax. He knew that many Honourable
Members came to that House pledged, as respected that and
other taxes, without being able to exercise their judgment.
But he thought that the experiment which was about to be
made that evening.was not fair to the Right Hon. Baronet,
and not calculated for the security of that House, nor of
the public. The only way, therefore, would be to refer the
whole taxation to a Committee to see how the public
burdens could be diminished, that they should be
justly distributed, and that the lower classes should
be relieved ; he should, therefore, rote for the repeal
of the Malt Tax, because he thought it would oblige him
to do this, and to substitute a tax on the property of the coun-
try—it was not fair to propose the abolition of any tax unless
they were ready to find a substitute for it.
Mr. C OBBE TT said, it was not to be expected that
everything a man said upon the hustings was to be observed in
that House, although there were 400 members who had
pledged themselves to vote for the repeal of the Malt Tax, and
who he believed would abide by their pledges in that respect.
He differed from the Hon. Member ( Mr. Robinson) that it was
the duty of every Member who proposed the repeal of a tax to
find a substitute. That was for the Chancellor of the Exchequer
to look after, and if he did not require it, there was no earthly
reason why any one else should trouble themselves about it.—
( Hear, hear, and laughter.)
An Nom. MEMBER, whose name we could not learn, and
who spoke from the Opposition benches, said he was very
happy to understand that so many Members were pledged to
vote for the repeal of the Malt Tax, and he hoped that those
Hon. Members would bear in mind the fate of Sir George
Murray.
Mr. KELLY regretted that the petition he had presented '
should have led even to an approach to any premature discus-
sion of the very momentous question which the House was
called unon to discuss this evening ; and he begged to assure
the Right lion. the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that the
two subjects were perfectly and necessarily unconnected.
Lord G. SOMERSET presented a petition from Chep-
stow, complaining of agricultural distress.
Lord G. L ENNO X presented a petition from the Clerk
of the Peace for the county of Sussex, complaining that he
had been put to considerable expense in making out certain
returns by order of the House. He had applied for payment
out of the County Rates, but he had been refused, and he had
also applied to the Home Office, but with similar success. It was
a great hardship upon this officer to be obliged to employ
clerks, and pay out money to the amount of 701. I Is. 5d., and he
( Lord G. Lennox) trusted the Right Hon. the Chancellor of
the Exchequer would suggest some mode by which he would
obtain compensation.
Sir R. PEEL said the returns in question had been called
for by the House, and he had great doubts as to the propriety of
paying such demands out of the public funds, nor could he do
so until some ne,-, arrangement had been made.
After a few words from Mr. FINS,

Sir R. PEEL observed, that the only way to prevent
Hon. Members from moving for expensive returns was to have
the expense defrayed out of the public funds.--.( Hear.)
Sir JOHN CAMPBELL said, in some instances expenses
incurred in this way were paid for out of the county-rates, but
he believed the county had no right to do so.
An HON. MEmirrß suggested that those Hon. Members who
moved for the returns, should be obliged to defray a portion
of the expenses.—( Hear, hear.)