Star.
London, England, 1821-06-15 00:00:00

to those Honourable Gentlemen, in a few cleys, to
make good those promises which they now made to
retrench the expenditure. He (Mr. Baring) con-
ceived that the first duty of the House was to take
rare of the means of providing for the wants of the ,
State; and, although he felt, as strongly as any man, 1
(or the distressed the agricultural body, yet hewas sure
that the country would scout the opinions of those
who would first vote•for the most extravagant scale
of expenditure, and would offer no other remedy foe
the distresses of the country, than to injure the pre!.
perty of those by whose assistance they and their
principles were supported for so long a time. He
denied that this motion came with the authority of
the Agricultural Committee. It was true that they.
iastructed their Chairman to give notice for a repeal
of this tax, but it was also true that they afterwards
resolved that the notice shoal.' not be given. But
there was more than this—there was a promise on
tl:e part of the Right Ilonourable Gentleman, the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, when this Committee
was appointed, that arty recommendation from them
would be most favourably received by Ministers.
That the Committee, therefore, sat with this impres-
sion on their minds, and if it was possible for them to
cc llect any facts upon the strength of which the repeal
of this tax might, with propriety, be called for, it
was reasonable to presume that they would have been
in possession of those facts. But the truth war, that
no evidence was received upon the subject, with the
exception of a short statement from one witness. He
WAS asked if the repeal of this tax would prove use-
ful ? He answered. that it was too trifling to be of
any material benefit. This' question and answer,
however, was expunged. He deprecated the notion
which he had heard thrown-out, that the loss of this
tax might be compensated to the Revenue by having
recourse to the Sinking Fund. He would put it to
any man of experience and common sense, what
would be the case of this country without a Sinking
Fund, to answer the possible fluctuations that might
arise?—to mcct any danger that might follow from
a sudden alteration in the state of France, or any in-
dive sition to peace on the part of America? It any
emergency should arise of this kind the Government
must necessarily have recourse to loans, and who
would be disposed to become their creditor, seeing
how indisposed they were to retrenchment, and the
y ,yiiii: off their previous engagements in a time di
peace: He conclude' by opposing the motion.
Mr. BENETT (Wiltshire) would support the ino.
ti en, not because the Tax was so trifling as that the
Government could easily dispense with it, but be-
cause the principle of it was impolitic.
Mr. W. BURRELL said, he considered the Tax
sow sought to be repealed as a most unjust one, if
for no other reason than that it operated so unequally
on the firmer. The Members on his side of the
House were reproached for having loaded the coun-
try with burdens, by supporting Ministers in a long
war. Ile had`supported them throughout the con-
test with France, from the conviction of the necessity.
cf doing so ; but with the understanding, that after
the war bad terminated, the burdens of the country
would also be taken away. " Oh," said the Minis-
ters, " support us in this war, and when it ends you
shall have a remission of all your burdens." Was
this the case? Did they realize their promises?—
We had at this moment every Tax that was created
duriea the war, with the exception of the Property
Tax, and that they should have too—(Hear,-hear).
And not only would they have the Property Tax, but
the Assessed Taxes also—(clear, hear).—Had Minis-
ters attempted anything 'yet in the way of relief ?
Had they propreed a single measure of economy?
The Hoe Gentleman considered that it would be im-
possiule for things to go on as they were. The Taxes
had pe to that idtch, that they would be the ruin of,
the country. Ile called upon the Landed Interest to
make a stand, and attempt the effecting of some-
tiring like practical economy. He concluded by
giving his support to the motion.
Lord MILTON exhorted the House to make this
motion the beginning of a series of measures for oco-
sons), ; for, as in the case of the Property Tax, Mi.
uistets would never retrench, unless the power of ex-
penditure were taken out of their hands—( Hear).
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER re-
quested toe House to recollect that this was only the
beginning of a series of assaults on the finances of
the country, the extent of which was to be measured
by the opinion of each of the individuals who had a
hostility to some particular tax. If this system of
attack should prove successful, it would be impossi-
ble for any Government to go on. He explained the ,
embarrassment which the loss of a tax that was esti-
ma:e.t at £5e0,000 a-year, would occasion ao the
country. He said that Government had carried eco-
tomy to the u.most extent possible; and if it was
imagined that the reduction of this tax would con-
'train them to any further measures of economy, he
could answer for it that the design was wholly unne-
cessary. Ile begged the house to observe, also, that
in considering the pressure of this tax upon the farmer,
they should recollect that his other expenses had been
considerably lessened. Ministers had the greatest
wish to relieve the Agricultural Interest—the causes
of that distress were beyond the controul of any one.
Their acquiescence in granting a Committee was a
proof of their disposition to relieve the agricultural
distress. He moved the previous question.
Mr. SCARLETT declared, that a more uncon-
vincing statement he had never, heard made, than
that which had just fallen from the Right Honour-
able Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer),
who had said that this was a Tax which the farmer
could well bear, because provender, and other neces-
series for his horses, were so much cheaper—that is,
in plain language, that the farmer was the better en-
abled to sustain the pressure of the Tax by the dimi-
nution of his means—(Hear, hear).—Did the Right'
Hon. Gentleman give any answer to the argument of
his (Mr. Scarlett s) Hon. Friend, who had se ably
sheaved the very unequal pressure of the Tax? Why
did not the Right Hon. Gentleman impose a Tax on
grazing cattle? The Right lion. Gentleman ad-
vanced another argument, and said, that the pro-
pched repeal was the commencement of an assault
upon the Revenue, and consequently on the public
credit of the country. But the Revenue was divided
iato two brindles—the one to support public credit
and public frith, which no one proposed to we.tken,
and the other branch went to support the extravagant
establishments kept up by Miniaers ; and it was the
inter which was a-sailed, and which required to be
contracted. if a part of the nineteen millions which