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

were voted to supply those establishments were
repealed, the public credit of the country would
derive support from that very circumstance. But
the Right Honourable Gentleman answered, that
Ministers had resolved to reduce next year. That
was an additional reason why Honourable Members
ought not to hsve granted the sum, because if the
Right Hon. Gentleman was in a condition to re-
trench next Session, that was a proof that he could
at present allow the taking off of £380,000. The
Right Hon. Gentleman had used another argument,
of rather an affecting nature. If, said he, lion. Mem-
bers insist on the repeal of the tax in question,
the consequence would be, that the country would
he deprived of the benefit arising from the services
of the present Ministers. That he (Mr. Scarlett)
could not believe—(Hear, hear). When the question
of repealing the Property 'fax had been before the
House, the same threat came from the Right Hon.
Gentleman and his colleagues; they declared they
could not stand if that tax were repealed--(No, no,
from the Ministerial side). The lion. Gentlemen
might cry " 10, no ;" the answer to which was " yes,
yes."---(llear, liar, and a laugh). They did—he
would repeat it, they did alarm their friends by
threatening to resign their places if that tax were re-
pealed ; but it appeared that they were not in earnest
—(Hear, flear,4ear). But he (Mr. Scarlett) would
assert that the finances of the country would be im-
proved by the repeal of the present tax, and that the
increase of taxes did not tend to increase the Revenue.
The proper application of the Sinking Fund was not
in keeping up the price of stock and funds, but in the
repealing of the taxes, and remitting a portion of
them to the people; and it was on that ground he
would vote for the motion. He hoped that Hon.
Members would persist in compelling Ministers to
adopt a system of economy. The best mode of sup-
porting.the credit of the country was by retrenching
unnecessary expenditure; and Hon. Members should
never forget the maxim, Magnum rectigal est parsi-
nsonia. He hoped that would not In lost sight of.
Mr. HUSKISSON thought the House should pause
before they diminished the actual amount of taxation.
He was fully sensible of the distress of the Agricul-
tural part of the community, and could he think that
the tax was obnoxious to the farmers generally, he
should consent to the repeal. But in the 112 Peti-
tions presented to the Agricultural Committee, one
only had prayed for the repeal of the tax in question.
Formerly the tax had been 17s. on each horse; but
in 1815 the tax had been reduced to half-a-crown on
all horses employed on farms below £2,000 a-year.
Was not that a material relief? The tax like all
others, must spread itself generally over the whole of
the capital of the country. The taxes repealed in
1721 had been those on pepper, cloves, cinnamon,
and nutmegs ; but in 1722, the Administration of
that day bad proposed, as a substitute for the taxes
so repealed, a tax on Papists !—(.4 laugh). Upon that
principle, the Hon. Gent. was bound to propose some
I substitute for the tax he proposed to repeal. The
Honourable Member for Sussex, and other Honour-
able Friends who sat near him, and now called for
the repeal of this tax, were not acting consistently on
this occasion. He would ask his Honourable Friends,
if they were not amongst those Members who voted
the necessity of keeping up a Sinking Fund, to keep
up public credit?—(Hear)—lf they were amongst
those who held such an opinion, then they acted un-
fairly in now proposing a repeal of this tax, with-
out proposing an efficient substitute—(Hear, hear).—
The taxes for the present year were already assessed,
and it would be April next before the assessment for
that year would be made.
Mr. W. BURRELL said he rose merely to observe,
in reference to what fell from the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman (Mr. Huskisson), that though he voted with
him for the three millions of taxes, yet he did not
feel himself bouisd by that circumstance to vote in
I
support of the Agricultural Horse Tax—(Hear, hear).
Sir J. NEWPORT hoped the Landed Interest in
that House would always bear in recollection the
manner in which the votes they had given were
taunted by the Right Hon. Gentlemen that night.—
They were taurad because the); did not give their
vote in support of Ministers. The Right Hon. Baronet
then complained of the delay of the Agricultural
Committee's Report, and, in reply to the demand of
the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Huskisson) for a
substitute for the present Tax, he (Sir J. Newport)
would recommend a tax on Placemen!—(Hear,hear).
That would be the most proper substitute, and would
produce the greatest revenue—(Hear, and laughing).
Sir C. BURRELL rose to support the motion,
'and adverted to the hardship which this Tax im-
posed upon farmers, who might have had four or five
small farms on their hands, which tenants had thrown
up to them. Having so large a farm as these united
would be, the farmer would, in that case, be subject
to the greater ratio instead of the less. He entreated
the House to take this matter into their hands, as the
landlords had shewn so great an indifference to the
interests of their tenants.
Mr.o A LC RA FT strenuously supported the motion.
Mr. BROUGHANI contended that this tax sinned
against all the principles of taxation, since it was a
tax upon tools—the horses being the tools of the far-
mer. He would vote fin its abolition on three,
grounds :—First, that it was a tax upon labour; se-
condly, that it was unequal in its operation, the grass
lands being exempt; and, lastly, because the worst
lands would be most heavily taxed, since those lands
which were poorest, and therefore required most
horses to till them, would be most heavily taxed.—
He would give no substitute, but tell the Ministers
to economize. The House might depend upon it,
that if Ministers were cramped in their means, they
would adapt their Estimates to circumstances; and
that they would, to use an old phrase, " cut their
coat according to their cloth"—(C'/leers).
Mr. CURWEN, amid loud cries, shortly replied.
The House then divided, when there appeared
For repealing the Tax - • 141
Against it - - - - • ' - 113
Majority against Ministers - —tr,B!
_

The result- was receivc.l uith the loudest cheering.
Mr. CURWEN then brought up his Bill, pursuant
to the decision of the House. It was read a first
time ; and, on the question that it be read a second
time to-morrow,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose,
and put it to the Hon. Member whether, i❑ courtesy,
he ought not to postpone the second reading of this
important Bill to a longer period than that which he
had hied?—(llear).
Lurd MILTON was of opinion that, considering