The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-06 00:00:00

PRIVY COUNCIL.

The Earl of RIPON moved the second reading of
the Privy Council Appellate Jurisdiction Act Amend-
ment Bill.

Lord BROUGHAM thought that the East India
Company were entitled to the highest credit for their
desire to promote the ends of justice. They were ready
to spend 40,0001. or 50,0001. for improving the appeals
from the native tribunals.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE thought some means
should be taken for making known these alterations to
the natives and the tribunals of India. and it would be
well, if the interests of the people of India were to be
so largely affected, that every portion of the subject
should be well inquired into.
The Earl of RIPON said that he proposed to defer
the operation of this Bill until the Ist October in the
present year, but, if that were not sufficient time, he was
quite ready to extend the period.
Lord CAMPBELL suggested that it would be just as
right for Government to defray the whole of the costs
of appeals from Scotland, as to take the expense of those
appeals upon its shoulders, and he thought it would be
better that another Court should be established to con-
sider those appeals.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH had understood that
these appeals were heard before a Committee of the
Privy Council, and he thought it was strange that no
one acquainted with India was a Member of that Council.
Lord BROUGHAM explained, that though none of
the judges were persons who had been in India, yet the
Privy Council had the advantage of such persons in the
capacity of assessors.
The Bill was then read a second time.
AUCTION DUTIES BILL.
On the motion for the second reading of the Bill for
the remission of the auction duties.
The Duke of RICHMOND said that he should move
that this Bill go into Committee this day six months, on
the ground that it was uncalled for by the country and
injurious to the agricultural interests. The Government,
by their late measures, had brought distress upon the
agricultural interests, and he should like to know how
the farmer was to go on, if they continued removing the
trifling protection he already possessed. When he asked
for a repeal of the Malt Tax, the Minister said it was
impossible to zet a revenue sufficient to make up for it;
and when the Minister was asked to contribute
300,0001. or 400,000/. to the county rates, he turned
round and said it would be of no use to the agricultural
interest. Thus, on the one hand, it was too little; and
on the other hand it was too touch. The landed inte-
rest had to pay for the maintenance of every prisoner
taken upon the land, and to pay for half his prosecution
at the sessions or the assizes. Now, he should like to
know upon what principle these charges were inflicted on
the agricultural interest. Again, they had to pay for
the support of clergymen in every parish, and yet the
Government compelled them to provide a chaplain for
all their gaols and workhouses. Now, be should like to
know what the manufacturing interest could say to this
extent. They had to maintain the wives and children
of prisoners, and when they were transported, if the
prisoner had any property it went to the Crown, and
not to the county rate ; and, on the other hand, if there
were any recognisances forfeited the Crown received the
penalty. Now, he should like to ask their Lordships,
whether it was right that the agricultural interest should
bear all the loss, while the Crown received all the profit?
Now, he would propose that Government should pay
half of the county rate, and contribute at the same time
from 20 to 50 per cent. to the poor-rates of the country.
It was not fair that the whole of the expense should be
inflicted on one party, and to establish that principle he
would move that the Bill be committed that day six
months.

The Earl of DALHOUSIE said the auction duty was
a most demoralising tax, and frequently led to the com-
mission of perjury. It was one, too, which pressed most
severely npon the poor, while at the same time it was a
convenience to the rich. The poor man was obliged to
pay the duty, but the rich man resorted to an auction
to ascertain the value of his property, and
then sold it by private contract. Now, let their Lord-
shipa add to these considerations the fact, that the tax
was one of an entirely unproductive character, and he
was sure the House would be ready to admit with him
that Government was not to blame in seeking to remove
it. He considered that the present was a tax which the
Government was bound to do away with, and they had
brought forward this measure for the purpose of doing
so, on the grounds he bad stated. He would not retort
on his Noble Friend, because he did not wish any bitter-
ness of spirit to be introduced in the measure. He was
more anxious to prove to his Noble Friend that the
attacks he had made on the Government were
unfounded, than to retort upon him. He de-
fied his Noble Friend to show what were
the articles in the tariff that had produced the results to
which he had alluded. The Canada Corn Bill was not
one of those measures that had been productive of the
evils to which his Noble Friend bad alluded. The
importation of live stock could not have produced such
an effect, for what was that importation? About 4,0001b5.,
which was but a small quantity compared with the con-
sumption of this country. The quantity of meat con-
sumed in this country was no less than 234,248,0001 b.
per annum, while the importation was only about
3,800,0001 b. ; was, it therefore, possible that they could
have the effect of driving people to a workhouse, or
producing the evils which had been alluded to. Then
with respect to timber, he defied his Noble Friend to say
that the reduction of the duty on that article had not
been productive of great benefit to the consumer of that
article. Then, again, the reduction of the duty on cot-
ton ; was not that of importance, he would ask, to the
agriculturist?—(Hear, hear.) Then, with respect to
coffee ; was it to be said that that was not an article of
great consumption among the agriculturists ? And, if
it was so, could it be said that the reduction of the duty
on that article was not a great boon ?—(Hear, hear.)
What was the fact? Why, the duly on that article, in
the first instance, was 16d., fom that it had been reduced
to Bd., then to 6d., and lastly, to 4d.—(Hear, hear)—on
colonial coffee. Then with respect to sugar ; had not a
great benefit been conferred on agriculture by the re-
duction of the duty on that. article ?—(Hear hear.)
And the same observation might be made with repect
to glass.
The Duke of RICHMOND—We do not grow glass, but
we do timber.—( Laughter. )
The Earl of DALHOUSIE said, that his Noble Friend
might joke, bat notwithstanding that, he should not be deterred
from his assertion, that the reduction of the duty on glass had
been of great benefit to the agricultural interest. There were
other classes who were not in a condition to object to the im-
position of these duties whose case was equally hard with that
of those to whom his Noble Friend had alludel, and who might
bring the very same objectidn. But he was bound to maintain
that the tariff had been instrumental net only in promoting
commercial prosperity, but also in improving the condition of the
agricultural classes ; and if a discussion were to be raised on
the several items of the schedule, he was prepared to defend
every one of them, and to show that the agricultural classes had
not been neglected by the Government.
The Earl of MALMESBURY said that, unwilling as he
was to intrude upon the attention of the House, he could not
refrain from accepting the challenge which the Noble Lord
had just thrown out. He would not descend into particulars,
but be would beg to draw the memory of his Noble Friend
back for a period of three years. it would be recollected
what were the principles upon which the present Govern-
ment began their reign, and what the expectations were
which the country had formed on their first taking office.
Three years ago they were told that the burden of the income-
tax would be unfelt because the remission of duties upon other
articles would so decrease expenditure. There was another
subject to which be thought it necessary to allude. The re-
mission of duties on timber had been classed with the remis-
sion of duties on glass. The agriculturists might be benefited
in some small indirect way, but that benefit would be very
largely exceeded by the injury which they would have to en-
dure by the competition of foreign timber without our own.
Lord MONTEAGLE must say a few words, for if the Noble
Duke on the cross benches should divide the House, he felt
bound to go out with him, though he should vote on different
grounds to those which the Noble Duke bad assigned. The
auction duty was about to be remitted, not only without any
pressure from without, but in the absence of all complaint. . It
was a duty not diminishing, or likely to diminish, for, drn
yer:rig
the last ten years, it had increased 50,000/. The Go e:
ment had calculated upon erroneous data for their surplus.
That surplus was only about 150,f 001., and grounded omn thelt
assumption that the sugar duties would bring a large su .
was expected that the greatest bulk of sugarwould be in-
troduced at the highest duty, and would amount in
quantity to 365,000 cwt. ; but the contrary was the fact, for by
a table now upon their Lordships' House it appeared that the
sugar brought in was of the lower 'qualities., and the quantity
was not more than 2,283 tons, making a difference of nearly
300,000/. a year in the duty it would yield. His objection to
this measure was that they were parting with this revenue at
a time that they could but ill afford it, and he begged the
House to observe that he did not agree with the Noble Duke
who had moved an amendment, because he was far from think-
ing the agricultural interest had any just right to complain of
the Government. There was nothing in the conduct of the
Government calculated to injure that interest; and
be was therefore somewhat surprised to hear the remarks
which fell from the lips of the Noble Duke. He was prepared
to contend that all the former measures of the Government,
which the Noble Duke alleged inflicted evil on the agricul-
tural interest, had, on the contrary, a tendency to improve it.
The Canada Corn Bill, which was one of the most important
of those measures, had certainly lowered the price of wheat
in this country ; but this fact was no proof that it had
inflicted injury on the agricultural inteiest. ..Then, on
the • other hand, • instead of that interest; having
been neglected, Parliament had always evinced a
onerous des re to entertain any propeti6i,o4 of a practical

nature, which was calculated to improve or relieve that in-
terest. For instances the duty, some short time ago, was
taken off the leather consumed in making shoes for agricultu-
ral labourers, while the tax"s were removed from all horses,
carts, and dogs used for agricultural purposes. The Noble
Duke had asked, why the manufacturing interest was not taxed
to the same extent as the agricultural ? Now, in his opinion,
it would be more wise in the supporters of the agriculturist to
seek for a removal of the burdens imposed on manufacturers,
instead of calling upon Parliament to augment them. The
best customer of the agriculturist was the manufacturer; and
their Lordships might depend upon it, the consumer of agricul-
tural produce had more right to complain of unjust taxation than
the producer. On these grounds he should vote for the amend-
ment. Before he sat down, however, there was another point
which he wished to bring under their Lordships' consideration.
The income-tax was introduced in a time of exigence, and it
was, therefore, thought advisable that her Majesty should con-
tribute to it. Now, as that time of exigency had passed, he
thought the Sovereign ought not to be called upon to pay either
the income or property-tax.
The Earl of WINCHILSEA said the auction duties had
frequently led to the commission of fraud, and on that account
he was glad to see the Government were about to remove them.
He did not altogether agree with his Noble Friend that the pre-
sent measures of the Government would be of no advantage to
the agricultural interest. In his opinion, the removal of the
duty on glass would prove a source of great benefit to the
agriculturist.
Lord STANLEY said great misapprehension existed on the
effect of the import duties, and to prove his assertion, he begged
to call the attention of their Lordships to the following facts :
In 1843 the quantity of salt pork imported into this country
was 7,600 cwt., and in 1844 it was !,090. In 1843 the quan-
tity of beef imported was 3,400 cwt., and in 1844, 999 cwt. In
1843 the quantity of bacon was 2,006 cwt., and in 1844 it was
280 cwt.

Lord BEAUMONT declared his intention to support the
measure, because he believed the varying and changeable cha-
racter of the auction duties led not only to great inconve-
nience, but to the committal of immense fraud.

The Marquis of NORMANRY, as he understood the Noble
Duke intended to take the sense of the House on the question,
wished to statethat he should vote with him, not because he
objected altogether to the measure, but on the ground that
these reductions in taxation were calculated to render the in-
come-tax perpetual.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and their Lord-
ships divided, when there a; eared—
"' "

Contents
Non-Contents
Majority —ls
The Bill then went through Committee, and was ordered to
be read a third time. '` _