Star.
London, England, 1822-05-10 00:00:00

AGRICULTURAL REPORT.

The House then, upon the motion of the Marquis
of LoNnonsently, having gone into a Committee for
the further consideration of the Agricultural Report, I
Mr. DENISON rose.—He said that, having before
presented a Petition from a County which was once
the most opulent, but now the most distressed in
England, he conceived he might venture to offer an
observation upon the subject before.the House. That
opinion he would state in a very few words. He had
attended to all the plans proposed in this House, but
they appeared to him to mistake the true cause of the
evil ; which was excessive taxation. This, the Hon.
Member contended, was the true cause of the evil ;
but if Ministers would at least remit two millions and
a half of taxes, _which was only half the amount of
the Sinking Fund, it would alleviate the general dis•
mess in a very great measure.
Lord ALTHORPE began by defending his amend-
ments upon the plan of the Hon. Member for Portar-
lington (Mr. Ricardo), which were not sufficiently
understood. The. Noble Lord said, that his Amend-
ment was to this effect: to impose a protecting duty
of twenty shillings, in the first instance, which would
he fixed, and not diminishing, like the Honourable
Member for Portarlington's duties, and to give a
bounty, not of seven shillings, but of eighteen shit-
' lings. This was the outline of his plan. But he also
approved of the duties imposed upon taking corn out
of bond, because they were so regulated that this corn
should be consumed first, and it might not be neces-
sary to open the ports at all.
Mr. ItICA RDO said, that he did expect, on the
present question, to have the support of his Noble
Friend .(Lord Althorpe), but he was rather surprised
at some of his propositions. He was at a loss to knoW
on what ground we could justify a drawback on ex-
portation to the amount of eighteen shillings. His
Noble Friend, the Hon. Baronet (Sir Lethbridge),
and the Hon. Member, for Code Castle (Mr. Bankes),
all agreed in one objection to his proposition—he
meant that which referred to indirect taxation. They
seemed to think that he had not made sufficient al-
lowance for its operation on agriculture; they consi-
dered that indirect taxation pressed more heavily on
the agricultural than any other classes. It might be
so to a certain degree, but, in the present case, the
application was exaggerated. Tne price of produce
was composed of the wages of labour and the profit
of the capital stock. He understood that the princi-
ple his Hon. Friends adopted was, that- in manufac—
tures the coat of production was made up by the price
of stock chiefly, and that in agriculture it was made
up by the price of labour. Helloubted if such was
the case ; or, if that was the right mode of consider-
ing the question, if he could shew that the dead ca-
pital in agriculture was as much, in proportion to
the whole capital employed, as that of manufacture.
His Noble Friend had stated, that all the price of the
produce of land was made up of labour. Was there
not a dead capital employed in buildings and in.seed?
and had not the manufacturers also the same in their
'buildings and in machinery ? With regard to the
ten shillings duty which he had proposed, he would
.beg to have it understood, that it was rather more
than was required. He had made; in that calcula-
tion, allowances for the Poor-rates,. which, though
not altogether paid by the agricultural interest, af-
fected them to the greatest part of their amount. If
he had adhered strictly to his own ideaa, he would
have proposed that duty at seven shillings, instead of
ten shillings. While he was on his legs,- he would
say one word to: an..Honoura—ble lietideman (Mr.
Bankes), who had alluded to_ iolitical economy ra-
ther-harshly—i-who had spoken of the wisdom and
happiness of our ancestor,. He (Mr. Ricardo) would
say,. that the present generation had all the wisdom.
of its ancestors, and alittle more ezperience(Hear).
If that argument bad any effect, we should not have'
made any improyepents in science—we should not'
have invented the staam-engine or gas lights. (Hear).
It was not because '
the nation had been happy and
had gourishedi that it formerly knew everything.