Star.
London, England, 1822-03-21 00:00:00

lir
He agreed with
ineasity-of lest
be was sure that

- -
to the amount of
felt as any other to ,
objections to this tax. In the . place, .
the poor rather than on the rich ; for the new modes
of lighting by lamps, gas, ac. were used entirely by
the rich, whilst the candles were used, by the poorer
sort. It was also a tax upon labour, for the la-.
bourer did great part of his work by candle-light.
This was of all taxes the worst. Being then of opi-
nion that this tax ought to be repealed, the next ques-
tion was, whether it Could be spared? lie was of
opinion that it might well be spared, and from the
Sinking Fund. He was not to be understood, how-
ever, as arguing against the existence of a Sinking
Fund; for he was of opinion that in a country like this
it was necessary to public credit to have a clear excess
of revenue over the expenditure. He objected, how-
ever, to that being called a Sinking Fund, andstill more
to that Fund being so large as 5,000,0004 He would
not leave this excess in the hands of Ministers.—
Thinking, therefore, that the 5,000,000/. Sinking
Fund was too large, he contended that the sum of
380,000/. could be spared out of it, • and the tax on
candles remitted. He concluded by saying that there
was no other tax, the remission of which would be
taken as a greater boon than the tax in question.
Mr. F. ROBINSON said he had but a few obser-
vations to make upon the motion before the House.
It would be his duty to oppose that motion, and his
reasons for so doing had been partly anticipated by
the Honourable Member who spoke last. Feeling as
sensibly as any other man the weight of the present
distress, he would not give place to any Gentleman
in wishing to relieve that distress as far as possible.
He could not, however, consent to relieve one class
at the expense of the community—(Hear, hear).—
Until he could persuade himself that this motion in-
tended relief without general prejudice, he could not
give it his support. Hitherto he had not been able
to arrive at that conviction in his own mind. Nirhatl,
was the state of the case ? This was a proposition
to increase the duties on tallow, which would either
raise the price of tallow, or it would not. If it raised
the price, then would it aggravate the distress which
was at present complained of, by increasing the-price
of candler, an article that was mostly used by the
working classes. But the Honourable Member, by
a peculiar calculation of his own, endeavoured to
chew, that though the price of tallow was increased,
by the imposition of a new duty, yet the price of
candles would not be enhanced to the consumer—
(Hear, hear).—This was sophistry which he (Mr.
Robinson) could not undei stand. Surely the state of
the case was this: at present, the duty upon candles
was from 91. to 101. that upon tallow from 31. to 41.
say 121. or 131. to both; but take off 9/. or 10/. and
lay on 20/. the new duty, and the consumer was a
loser by the difference—(Hear, hear).—lt was clear,
therefore, that as to the consumer this would be a
losing game. But it was said that it would be a be-
nefit to the agriculturists. Suppose this was the
case, he asked, would the House accede to the pro-
position, and serve one class at the expense of the
community ?—(Hear, hear).—The arguments used
by the Ilonourable Gentleman had been before put
forward by an advocate for this proposition ; but it
had been suggested, that there were other considera-
tions which operated to bring this motion before the
House. If the house thought that there were such
motives at the bottom of this proposition, they should
be careful how they proceeded. But even assuming
with the Honourable Member that the duty would
raise tallow 51. 10s. a ton (though how lie arrived at
that conclusion he could not say), yet this, upon the
whole, would give the grazier but 3s. in an ox—
(Hear, hear).—lle asked them, for such a trifle were
we to risk our relations with other countries? It was
to be observed, too, that at one time the Honourable
Member argued that it would raise the price of tal-
low, and at another, that it would not enhance the
price of candles to the consumer. But supposing
that the loss was visited upon the foreign grazier in-
stead of the consumer, he asked, was it wise policy
to deprive the foreigner of his just and reasonable
charge of profits? If this country acted upon so
selfish a principle, it might as well shut up shop at
once—Wear, /rear).—Such a system, however fine in'
theory, could not be acted upon, for it would.inevi-
tably create distrust and jealousy, and, eventually,
hostility in other Powers towards this country. Upon
all these grounds he opposed the motion.
Mr. RICARDO was pleased to hear such senti-
ments fall from the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite.
Ile wished that Government in future would regu-
late themselves by such opinions. If they had done
so before, they would not have laid on so many un-
wise, restrictive, and prohibitory laws upon the im-
portation of the produce of other countries. The
Hon. Mover had stated that the laying on this tax
would raise the price of tallow 51. 10s. per ton ; but,
from the premises which the Hon. Member gave, he
(Mr. Ricardo) could never arrive at such a conclu-
sion. He was persuaded that the effect would be to
enhance the price of candles here, for the Russian
grazier had sent the commodity here at the lowest
rate that he could afford it. Upon that ground he
was against this motion, for he never would consent
to benefit a particular class at the expense of the
body of consumers—(Hear). He was an enemy to
restrictions of every kind, for he thought every coun-
try should have the benefit of its industry. But be
was a little surprised at the arguments of the Hon.
Member for Hull (Mr. Sykes). That Hon. Member,
whilst he admitted the necessity of a clear surplus,
declared himself hostile to a Sinking Fund. He said
he would not trust Ministers with the management of
it ; but what then would he do with the excess? It
could only be useful in diminishing the burdens, by
eventually diminishing the great burden ; but how
such an instrument was to be wielded by other than
the Ministers hands, he (Mr. Ricardo) could not ima-
gine —(Hear, hear).—Several Gentlen;ea had talked.
of repealing this and that tax. One Gentleman had.
leak, -nether soap and candles; every one seemed to
have his hobby I—(4 laagh).—Now what he would
Suggest was neither one nor other of these, but a re-
pof the tax upon Law Proceedings—(Hear, hear),
—which was the most odious of all, and which at-
tacked the poor and !piddling classes in the heaviest
manner—(Hear).—This was the tax he would re-
peal ; and it the Sinking Fund wab to be applied in

catid nett* applied better

said, he did not entirely agree
(ember as to the benefits to be de-
- tax upon Law Proceedings.
might be more beneficially
.s to motion, it was doubtful whether
the price of tallow Would Ist raised at. lOs. per ton;
but it was certain that the candlesitould be raised to
the consumer. The tax whitish* considered the worst
of all was the tax uptm wool. When the tax upon
wool was raised before, it was true that Spain took off
but she also
part of the tax which it had Imposed,
forbid the importation of our wongoods.
additional duty was laid upon Russian tallow, it was
to be expected that Russia would lay on a tax upon
something else in retaliation. There was no saying
what effect such a measure would have upon the new
Tariff about to be made public. This country at
least should not throw the first stone. If additional
duties were to be laid on, let them rather act in reta-
liation than as aggressors. He-was an aclv(.cate fir
free trade, and he should, therefore, oppose restrkct
tions of any nature.
Mr. BENETT (.Wilts) supported the motion. li
Gentlemen were consistent in their arguments for
free trade, they ought to repeal the protecting duCe,
to the several branches of our manufactures. Its
Hon. Friend, whilst he repealed one tax, propo.E.l
another in lieu of it. An Honourable Member (Mr.
Sykes) had proposed the repeal of the duties ilium
candles and soap, but had not ventured to offer any
other tax in lieu of them. The Hon. Gentleman (Mr.
Curwen) seeks not to take away the Revenue in one
case, without giving a fair equivalent by the duties
on another—the equivalent he offers, by raising the
duty on the importation of tallow to 20/. the tor,
would amply make up for the repeal of any tax nit
soap and candles. He should conclude by cordially
voting for the Committee.
Mr. PHILLIPS observed, that it had been asked
why had not the manufacturers come forward in the
present state of the country ? He conceived that a
refetence to the Petitions on the table would shew
that they had come forward in considerable nu,nbei s.
He thought it most extraordinary to suppose that,v.-e
could not protect our own manufacture, against
manufactures of other countries. The tax upon the
importation of raw silk might, he thought, he repealed
with advantage, and would he the means of asst tin;
the agriculturists. Indeed, he considered that ever..-
repeal would be attended with advantage to them ;
for, in his opinion, commerce was the chief supito.:
of agriculture.
- - - - -

Mr. CURWEN shortly replied. He thought !t
hard that an individual had been mentioned in the
course of the present discussion. He (Mr. Curwen)
had had communication. with that individual on tilis
subject in the course of the last year ; but his opinin
had had no influence whatever upon his own. HI
thought all the principles of the new school of poi.
tical economy' contradicted themselves, and that
dangerous crisis was approaching. The revenue of
the country could not, in the present state of thi!,gs,
be collected much longer; and, when the revenue
could not be collected, the ruin of agriculture could
not be far distant. He should not press the que,tion,
as the sense of the House appeared to be against h'm;
but he wished Ministers to recollect, that although
the people of this country had hitherto borne their
burthens with eiemplary patience, they might, when
they found their grievances remained unredressed, be
induced to a different line of conduct.—The motion
was then put, and negatived without a division.

country to this pus -carried on In rideetning a tat at all, It
shatliade wilolldbeiniesstd &sit
_Y• than in tots way—.{Hear).
he nollisurabis Meth ber 'Os to we MI. T. WILSON said,
wing the burdens of the people, and with the hist Hon. Membe
the repeal of the tax upon candies, sired from repealing the t
360ig. would be as refollY There were others which
to the same amount. He d many repealed. As to this motif
tax. In the first place, Mewled on the price of tallow *add