The Sun.
London, England, 1832-06-02 00:00:00

THE TITHE OWNER..

Amongst the 'many crierances of the present system of
thes, there is one which seems totally to have escaped
he attention of the Legislature, whilst imposing taxes, by
vhich the agriculturist is cruelly oppressed, and f,,c
vhick no redress has been afforded, viz. the incumbent has
wen mo-t unjustly permitted to sweep off one tenth of
~e clear produce of the soil, free from all public taxes ex-
!ept the land tax (parochial taxes not being public taxes).
The farmer paying all these taxes as well for himself as
for the incumbent whilst raising his crop, the incumbent
rot contributing one sixpence, nor his tenth reduced. Is
,his equal taxation ?

By statute 2 and :3 Edw. IV. c. 2, there was a prohibi-
tion against the importation of wheat, while it should I e
under 6s. Bd. the quarter; of Rye, when under 4a. the
quarter; and barley, So. the quarter ; so that wheat was
then ten•pence per bushel : from which we may fairly
draw this conclusion, that ten-pence per bushel for wheat
.vas then a remunerating price to the farmer.
The price of wheat has been always taken as the stan-
dard fur regulating labourers' wages; one penny per day
being at that time the wages of labour, sixpence p?r week
would enable the labourer to buy half a bushel of wheat
per week, and to have one penny to lay out in other arti•
des ; but there were then no assess•-d taxes, none on malt,
hops, soap, bricks, tiles, glass, &c. or numberless other
direct and indirect taxes to be then paid by the farmer for
the benefit of the incumbent, over, above, and in addition
to the labour, manure, and other expenses of cultivation.
Wheat is now eight shillings per bushel instead of ten-
pence ; and if wages, as before, are to lie regulated by the
price of wheat, the labourer ought now to be receiving
only 4s. 61 per week, which would enable him to pur-
chase half a pusliel of wheat per week, and have sixpence
to lay out in other articles. But labourers' wages are now
10s. 12s. and 14s. per week, us, owing to the taxes, they
cannot lire upon less; and these additional wages the
farmer must pay; and no deduction is he permitted to
make from the tithes of the incumbent, in whose hands
are placed the most tyrannical means of enforcing his de-
mands. The blind iejustice of the laws, not having from
time to time thrown a proportionable part of the burden
of the war taxes upon the incumbent; so that in propor-
tion as the land has been deteriorated in value to the land-
lord by the expenses of cultivation, in the same proportion
have the tithes been increased in value to the incumbent.

If the farmer takes a ploughshare to be new layed, or a
plough-horse to be shod, the blacksmith chat us him (in-
stead of Is.) 3s. assigning as his reason for so doing, that
he has to pay his taxes, and must charge them upon the
consumer ; and so says the iron merchant to the black-
smith, and so says the smelter to the iron merchant ; but
the oppressed farmer is not permitted to say sa to his in-
cumbent, nor is he permitted to give less than the tenth ;
when in fact (were justice done) in proportion to the taxes
laid, the farmer ought not to set out, ner the incumbent
to receive, more than one twenty-fifth instead of a tenth.

I❑ the Reign of Edward the Fourth, there was a coinage
of gold coin, of the value of 6s. Bd. of that time, which,
according to Folkes on Coins, would now be worth, at the
relative value between that era this, 14s. Id. ; so that
were there no Taxes, Wheat, instead of 6s. Bd. per quar-
ter, would now be worth 14s. ld. ; but Wheat, by the
oppressive weight of the Tare,, is now worth 645. the
quarter, always bearing in mind, that this difference is
entirely caused by the Tuxes, of which the Incumbent
reaps the benefit, because, instead of a 10th of 645. which
he does receive, be ought to receive only a 10th of 14e. Id.
It is a favourite dictum of the Church, that the Land
was bought subject to Tithes. So it was, and so it ought
to be ; but our ancestors bought or obtained it when these
Taxes did not exist, and they never could have supposed
it possible that they were to bear all the burdens of
Taxation for those Tithes, but that the Incumbent
would be made to contribute his due proportion, according
to the general principle of Taxation.
If a farmer over-cultivates his land, thereby hoping
to employ labourers, and so keep them off the pa-
rish, the incumbent is a gainer in two ways, first, by the
increased value of the tithes, to the produce of which he
contributes not any thing; and secondly, by the diminu-
tion of the poor-rates, to which he must contribute. A
rare encouragement this to cultivators. In short, in some
places, the taxes, the parochial rates, and the tithes t.)ge-
ther, have swallowed up the whole produce of the I aid,
leaving nothing for the landioi d. Toe tithe dependiri
not upon the rent, but upon the produce, let the landlord
take 20s. or ss. the tithe remains the same.

What can be more unjust than that doctrine of Nullum
tempos occurrit Ecclesice, when by the statute of limita-
tions a period for making his el iins is fixed against every
subject in the kingdom, even against the King himself.
Ecclesiastics are excepted. The reason is evident, for in
those days there were no lawyers but ecclesiastics, and who
took good case of their own interests.

The statute of 2 and 3 Edward VI. c. 13, furnishes but
too ready a means of exercising arbitrary and tyrannic d
power to the incumbent against the farmer, enabling bins
to recover three times the value of the tithes, should there
be any the least defect in the vetting of thee, out. And the
incumbent often insists opt n more than the tithes are
actually worth, and acting upon this principle, obtain it
by this threat; " You ought to give me more than the
ti hes ate worth, in order to avoid the annoya.tee I ran give
you by collecting of them." Can any more powerful rea-
son be given for repealing this law, which has so ling
disgraced the statute book ? Let equal justice be done at
list, better late than never. As the land is burthene l with
taxes, let the tithes contribute their due proportion thereto,
and not the landlords every thing.

During the past wars the clergy contributed ❑othing
during the growing of the crops, but the landlord contri-
buted not only his own share, but the share of the in-
cutnbent also. The eyes of the landlords are tiow open :
they wish not to rob the Church, but have a right to com-
plain that the Church has too long been permitted to rob
them. They will no longer submit to this flagrant in-
justice ; but the Legislsture will listen to their complaints,
and grant them redress.
Illy, 1832.

JUSTITIA.

The following gentlemen compose the Select
Committee on the Drama :—Mr. E. LYTTON BULMER,
Mr. LAMB, Earl of BELFAST, Mr. SHELL, Mr. GALLEY
KNIGHT, Mr. STANHOPE, Mr. J. STANLEY, Mr. EL-
LICF., Mr. EVELYN DENISON, Lord PORCHESTER, Mr.
LENNARD, Mr. MACKINNON, Mr. GILLON, Mr. W.
BROUGHAM, Alderman WAITHMAN, Mr. JEPHSON, Co!.
DE LACY EVANS, Mr. J. CAMPBELL, Mr. IL BULWER,
Mr. DUNCOMBE, Lord J. RUSSF.LL, Sir CHARLES WE-.
THERELL, Sir GEORGE WARRENDER, and Lord MAHON.

The following are the gentlemen on the Corn.
mittee " to examine into the state of the disturbed coun-
ties in Ireland, and the efficiency of the laws at present in
force for the suppression of outrages against the public
peace."—Sir H. PARNELL, Mr. STANLEY, Sir G. Mu it.
RAY, Lord EERINGTON, Mr. DAwsoN, Mr. RICE, Lord
KILLEEN, Colonel CONOLLY, Mr. CRAMPTON, Mr.
MORE O'FERRALL, Mr. T. LEFROY, Sir C. CooTE, Sir
J. BURKE, Mr. WYSE, Mr. J. GR.ATTAN, Colonel PER-
CEVAL, Mr.WALLACE, Mr. J. G. GORDON, Lord OXMAN-
TOWN, Lord DUNCANNON, Mr. O'CONNELL, the Earl of
OSSORY, and Mr. JAMES LAMBERT.

A disposition prevailing in the public mind,
is consequence of what has been said in this Journal, to
celebrate the passing of the Reform Bill on the day on
which Magna Charts was signed in the year 1215, we
have taken pains to ascertain the day of signature with
precision. A copy of the Act itself, with an introduction
by BLACKSTONE, was published by the University of Ox-
ford in the year 1759. The following extract front that
introduction might seem to give some authority to the
opinion of our correspondent Accot dingly, a large
meadow between Windsor and Staines, about half way
from Odiham to London, was appointed tor the place of
conference, and the Tuesday in \Vhitsun week, or 9 li of
June, was first agreed on as the time of the Congress, for
which purpose the KING came to Merton, in Surrey, the
day before, and there granted letters of safe-conduct to
the Barons, but the meeting was afterwards deferred till
the Monday following, and the safe-conducts were
continued to that time, the KING being then at Wind-
sor. On which last-mentioned day, being Trinity
Monday, the 15th of June, the Barons Caine to the place
appoined in great numbers, and the KING, attended by a
very few (and those only seeming) friends from among
the prelates and temporal Lords. They encamped apart
from each other, like declared enemies, and then opened
the conference, winch lasted for several days, and did not
come to a conclusion till Friday the 19th of June." It
should appear, however, that the Barons had many other
accounts to settle with the KING, besides procuring the
sanction of Magna Charts, and the four days following the
15th may have been employed in the considertrion of those
and was signed and sealed
other Reforms which were then enacted. The Ch irter
had been undoubtedly prepared by Archbishop LANGTON,
upon the model of that which he had discovered as
granted
evidence upon this point
can stand against that of the Charter itself, which cifir
concludes,—" Data per manurn nostratn iu prato q mud
on
the
first by
dKaiyng of Hinz:tit
merging.
g. 1. ,
vocatur Runningm2(l), inter Wittdelesurum et Sta. es,
QUINTO DECIMO die Jugii, anno regni nostri
~septinatit
decimo.""r Times.