The Sun.
London, England, 1821-02-22 00:00:00

and domestic trade ; and if any further informa-
tion were deemedneCe"ary, he would give every
facility, in his power for its being obtained. He
had stated his 'apinion to be, •that much distress
prevailed from excessive prOuction ; while the
Noble Marquis attributed it to -diminished con-
sumption. As to the Consumption of Gread-it•was
impoSsible to obtain- a Correttestimateof that; but
by the way in. which the revenue was collected, a
pretty accurate account might be obtained of
all the other. articles' of consumption, encept
where smuggling might be. ornployed ; but even in
the latter case•the consumption, if it could be
obtained, would, be found to be much larger still.
'He 'therefore wished for comparative accounts of
all exciseable articles consumed in 1820, and the
three preceding years. should also move for
accounts of acme articLes in the Customs. On
the first arti44Wthaic io''Yi.fieer, In 1818; 15;
of strong beet the average of barrels, was
5,356,000; In this, and in small beer; there was
very considerable increase Over the average of
the three for Mer years. In candles there had
• been an increase of the average amounting to
3,545,000 lbs, In coffee, however, there had'
been a diminution to the amount of 550,000 lbs.;
'and in hides and skins a diminution of 1,523;000.
In malt there was an increase of above a mil-
lion; and in salt and rock salt, for home con-
suinption, an increase 'Qf 48,000 lbs. ; but in rock
salt for exportation the increase amounted to con-
siderably above, three millions. -There had been
an increase of more- than four millions in hard
soap ; and in soft soap there had been one of
669,000 lbs. In British spirits the increase was.
1,578,000 gallons ; hnt in Foreign spirits there
had been a diminution to a very considerable
amount. In the consumption of tea there had
been an increase to the amount of 356,000 lbs.;
but that of tobacco and snuff had diminished by.
167,000 lbs. In wines too there had been a con-
siderable diminution.—Why he brought these ac-
counts before the House was, to shew that in the
general there was an increase, and not a diminished
state of trade, though in wines, Coffee, and some
others there was some diminution. There was no
reasonto thinkthat therewas a decrease in consump-
tion of bread, when those articles with which it was
generally used were mot diminished in their con-
sumption.. It was impossible to say that the
comforts of the People of England had diosi-
ytished, when their consumption of the articles of
life had increased. He wished the Muse to con-
sider whether they might. not do more injury
than good for the country by interfering with the
restrictions of trade. He believed this country
had grOwn up in spite of, rather than by the re-
strictionson trade ; but if thil, were constaatly
tampering with our laws no man could be secure,
and no speculation could be safely undertaken.
In many of the absolute Monarchies trade had
greater advantages, and fewer restrictions than
lucre. But the merchant had no security, as their
laws might be changed through favour, fear,
caprice, private interest, and igsoraiice. He
was still of opinion that the distress of agri-
culture arose principally from large tracts of
waste land being brought into cultivation
for corn. One circumstance' was gratifyings
namely, that the agriculture of Ireland had in-
creased. ' He had been of opinion, that by keep-
ing on the Property Tax.they would, have clone
best, for they. could then have -diminished the
amount of indirect taxes. Any attempt, how-
ever, to renew the ProPerty Tax on a hirge-
settle would bring still greater difficulties on the
country. He then moved for returns of the
comparative consumption of exciseable article§
for the last year, and the three foregoing years.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN shortly replied.
Ire contended, that in Birmingham and Glasgow
there was a great diminution in the consumption
of food. •
The Earl of Livearoor. said, he `could in-
quire into those facts; but he thought it impos-
sible to account for the increased consumption of
other articles, and the diminished consumptionof
food.
Lord Easxir, said, the course of Ministers
might be compared to a celebrated Doctor, who
told his patient that he must go-on- with his Me-
dicine, until he was obliged to say, an under-
taker was fitter for him than a dOctor. The No-
ble Earl had talked of increased consumption,
but had forgot to tell the real cause of our dis-
tresses, which was a destructive system of war,
which had occasioned' an additional debt of
700,000,000/. to whicTi those who had profited
most by the wars had contributed but little;
while the burden hid fallen on the agriculturist
and the consumer. .The taxes and the poor rates
would soon swallow up the whole landed interest
of the country. It would not do to tell the peo-
ple of England,, that no remedy could- he found
for their distresses. It was their Lordships' flats,
to meet the question fairly, and to inquire into
the best means of giving the industrious employ-
ment and food. He had 'asked a Magistrate of
Hertfordshire which were worst -off, those who
contributed to the rates, or those who received
them ? His answer was, the first, undoubtedly,
were infinitely the Worst.
Lord KING said, they owed the distresses of
the country to more causes than Swift's projecting
College could have found out. It was the,
greatest paradox ever uttered-.by any Minister,
to say, that increased productidn caused increased
distress. He contended that there had been a
decrease in the-grow th of articles of agriculture,
and Consequentlythere,thust be a decreaged con-
sumption. • The 'war had occasioned a.'great
crease in capital ; an4l the only cure for it was
economy. The want Of controul in-the Trensurv;
and the:lavish- Apenditpurd of: the Government-
, had caused the evil. The Noble, Earl :night