Star.
London, England, 1816-05-25 00:00:00

%

I

. ~ •

',bat wtp *ow pursued more recommended the Bill
to the Treasury, but made it mortoppressive. ft,
ought to be recollected, that thou; bit was only at
Present threepence per head. who ctspliivay ,where it
would stop ? The Salt Tax was n* at first 155.
a bushel, Tor no Minister could have made such a
preposition, nor indeed any people submit to it—so
would it be on this occasion, until at length the bur-
dens Were laid oti, 46 straw by straw. until the camel's
back was broken." Toe principle of this tax was
h4lily objectionable—it wera directly to the. taxation ,
a an article of prime necessity, particularly affecting
the lower classes of society.—(lkw,hclr, hear.)
Mr. ROSE thought it was itupossible to raise
a large revenue without taxing articles of general
coesumption. He had always heen of opinion that
it wits, better to tax property than consumption ;—.
and. since the former was discontinued, the latter
must be resorted to, or what was to become of the
Revenue
Mr. LYTTLETON thought the 'arguments of
the other side of the House -very fallacious, and he
could not sitifer the Bill to ,pass withnua entering his
protest against it.. It appeared that Ministers were
deterniined to propose such taxes as would make some
people regret the abolition of the Property Tax.
He believed, however, that it would be found tbat
any property-tax would fall ultimately most severely
on the poorer clasies.
The Bill was titer read a third time and passed.
WARR OF ADMIRALTY.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY wished to have a question
answered respecting a Noble Lott', the Marquis of
Worcester. On looking at the Army List he per-
ceived that he was still an Officer in a Regiment of
'Hussars, though be had accepted a- situation of
Commissioner of the Admiralty. Either the Noble
Lord could not do justice to his situation in the
army, or the situation of Commissioner was useless
and should be abolished.
Lord CASTLEREAGH was not prepared to
answer the Hon. Baronet.
Mr. ROSE gave notice, that on Monday next he
should move for a return of the expenditure of the
Trinity H,:use for the last ten years.
Lord ALTHORP wished to know if the situation
of the President of the Board of Controul was to be
filled, as it had been vacant now some time.
Lord CASTLEREAGH said that certainly the
office would be tilled, as it had been one of great la-
bour when he held it, and still continued to be so.
AGPICt'LTUIIZ.

On the motion of Mr. F. Lewis, the House 'went
into a Committee on the Agriculture.
Mr. F. LEWIS intended to move an adjournment
of the Resolution of. his Honourable Friend the
Member for Esser, which had been under consilera-
tiOn by the Hou..e at the last adjournment f the
Committee ; but before he did that, he thought it '
proper to mike an iibservation on the conduct of
Committees above stairs. They had agreed to seve-
ral negative propositions, and had come to several
resolutions on rape-seed, one of which, that which
tended to the prohibition of the duty on that article,
be hoped the House would agree with. With respect
to Tobacco, he could not but believe that the duties
ought to be cootinued, as much cf the r2venne might
be lost by smuggling if they were in any way altered
or taken off.
Mr. BROUGHAM wished that the penalties on
Tabasco should be taken off. He could see no reason
wby the duties raised abroad in our Colonies could
not, with equal propriety and effect, be procured
from home:goon Tobacco, nor could he tell what
his Hon. Friend, who spoke last, had metnt by the
smuggling of that article. Prohibiting the growth
of the article in this country was only giving a pre-
mium to the fanners of America. He, theretore,
was for throwing open the cultivation to the farmers
of this country.
Mr. PRESTON was sure it was necessary to
ad,.pt every measure for the relief of the aviculture
of the country, which was in such 1 ruinous comb-
lions He was sae of those who voted for die Corn
because he thought agriculture required it. He
denied that there was any superabundance of grain
in the country, and lamented the depreciation.

-:

Lord CAS.TLEREAGH called the Hon. and
"Learned Gentleman to order, the ciuestion was not
about grain bat about tobacco. He wished the Re-
solution should be postponed.
After' a fewfarther observations from Mr. Pareirres
and Mr. F. Lawn, the Resolution was postponed.
WOOL.
Mr. FRANKLAND LEWIS said, he hadgiven
notice on a former occasion, that he should move a
Resolution for giving a free export to Wool. Since
that time there had a great anxiety prevailed
throughout those parts of the kingdom concerned in
the woollen manufacture, respecting any alteration
in the laws on such an important subject. The Coni-
mittee had not catered into extensive inquiries with
regard to wool, and therefore he had not obtained as
much information on it as he couldwish—but yet he
bad sulßeient to convince him of the propriety of
submitting a proposal to permit the exporta of wool
under certain regulations, as it would afford a pro-
tection to the woolgrower. On no subject was there
'treater misunderstanding than concerning wool.—
some persons even went se far as to think that there
should be n register of all the wool shorn in the
Itiogdom, to prevent the possibility of its exportation,
arid they thought that effectually preventing the ex-
ortation of that article would be doing every thing
for the prosperity of the country. But he would un.
dertake to shew that the notion's of those persons were
quite unfounded and erroneous. Indeed the preven-
tion cf the exportation of 1/QOI had been so injurious
to that article, that while every other article rose in
price, that had experienced very little advance. In
the reign of Edward 111. the price of wool was SOs.
a•tod ; and it had not advanced since that period in
stay proportion to other'artieles. The exportation of
it was not prevented nearly so early as was generally ,
supposed: not till 1660, and it was remarkable
what a reduction of price It experienced immediately
after the prevention. In 1677 there was a very able
tract published on the subject, in which it was stated,
that wool which before the prevention brought £l2
a pack, brought then but rel. When therefore it
was considered that the anntial quantity of the wool
in the country amounted to
.upwards of a million of
pads, it would,beseenhow injurious to-the national
prosperity the measure of preventiogWas. He their
amitped law a binary of tote pouralfalaush trod at

.

-

•J

different *ode, andshowed-that it was mut...
lis England *eh on the`conatedt. In the year
it awned, that, while English wool sold in nem.
at 6d, a pours), it sold in France it 10d. and in some
time after when it sold at 9d. is England, it sold it
14d. in France.. At the end 'of the American war
English wool, which sold in England at £5 the pack
sold in Amsterdam at 420. Now, it Mutt be asgreat
disadvantage to the grower of wool to be prevented
from obtaining so much• a bestet market than he
could at borne. The manulactarers stated, that al-
lowing the exportation of wool would destroy the
trade, but the monopoly of the home market for
cloth wai the main prop of the trade, and of that, al-
lowing the exportation of wool would not deprive us.
The whole annual value of the woollen manufacture
of the country was twentreight millions, and of this
there was exported but to the value of five millions,
while a great part of even this was exported to Ireland
and to our colonies. What danger then wasto be appre-
hended on *tits subject, when the export was but as 5
to 28 There was no monopoly of the raw materials
of silk and cotton, and yet the manufacture and trade
in those articles had increased prodigiously. The
trade of silk had increased more than that of any ar-
ticle, except sugar or wine. The cotton trade had
increased .° considerably that the value of it was
more than a fourth part of that of the woollen manu-
facture. The cheapness of labour abroad was•ad-
duced as an argument, that if the exportation was
permitted, the trade would be destroyed. But there
Was much misconception on' the cheapness of labour.
Our manufacturers were more skilful than dif ma•
nufacturers abroad, and therefore were worth hi
wages. Besides our vast accumulation of capital no
other country could pretend to. Some persons main-
tained that there was something peculiar in English
wool which would make foreign countries take it
manufactured, if they could not get it in its raw
state. Now if this could not be maintained, there
was no ground for the prevention. Bet it was ep
very absurd, that it was almost absurd to argue
against it. The long wool of Romney Maish 'was
peculiar to this country. But foreign nations dd
without this wool, and yet have very fine cloth. All
the manufactures of France and Spain are of short
fine wool, and some of their cloth is as fine and as
good as any of ours. Russia, Sweden, and Den-
mark, took none of our wool; and still they ma•
paged to war their own cloth. Was it not then too
much to ask our landed interest to give up the foreign
market for their produce on such grounds? The
Americans only traded where they got long credit ;
and this they could get ne where but in this country,
and therefore on the market we could depend. He
should, therefore, propose a resolution to permit the
exportation of wool, under such regulations as would
' afford protection to the manefacturer ; and would
wish that the permission should be extended to Ire-
' land; which, indeed, ought to be allowed, though
England should not.
Lord LASCELLES would not advert to former
times, when the circumstances were quite different
from what they are at present. No complaint had
reached Parliament from the growers f wool, and he
maintained it would be unwise and impolitic to sub-
ject so important a manufacture to any dangers from
speculative views.
Lord MILTON was far from thinking there
would be any danger from the resolution. He argued
at great length to spew the policy and ospoclicncy .t
allowing the exportation of wool, and said that that
measure had been recommended by Adam Smith,
las one that would tend most materially to 'the pros-
perity of the country. If any law cramped any par-
ticular branch of industry, it would cramp the wealth
of the whole.
Lord CASTLEREAGH suggested, that as no
ultimate decision could be come to on the subject this
Session, it would be better to postpone the resolution,
and let it lie over for next Session.
' Mr. BRAND wished that there had been a duty
imposed on the importation ot rape seed; and thought
that such a measure, if it had been adopted in time,
might have prevented the alarming excesses which
they heard had taken place its pm of the isle of
Ely, as it would have enabled the farmers to obtain
sufficient prices for their rape-seed to support the peer
labcurers, who were now almost forced 'by hunger
into outrage.
Lord CASTLIMAGH. Mr. BRAND, and Lord Lets.
=WM respectively explained.
Mr. BARING complained of the long discussions
and the agitations created in the public mind on seb-
jects of this kind; and he thought the business should
be put an end to, and set at rest at Once.
Mr. TJERNEY wished this business might be
soon decided;—in order to afford an opportunity for
bringing forward another subject of great importance
which stood for that evening.
Mr. F. LEWIS was equally anxious with other•
Gentlemen to save time, and to dispose of the slues!
tion at once.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
thought the best way would be to postpone the qua•
tion to a future Session.
Mr. CURWEN said. whenever this propositiOn
came to be discussed •be should give at hie decided'

sm
ammo.. • -
0
r i 47. 1-btOORE wished to pot an end to the
question as seen as possible.
The original Mown was then negadved, the
amendrueats having been previously withdrawn.
The Committee was ordered to sit again on this
1 day sennight.