The Statesman.
London, England, 1822-02-27 00:00:00

i•

- -

it is part re.luctioe of the debt. Upon this question be
would first state his opinion of the profit and loss attend-
ioir these two courses. What would be the advantage
to any particular interest of this partial reduction of talr-
ation ? What proportion did five millions (for that was
the excess in question) hear to the annual income and.
chi annual revenue of the country ? The annual income
was 218 millions, the revenue from fifty to eighty mil-
bons. •So that,* reduction of five millions wear bear
a proportion of about one-tenth of the revenue, and
about one-fiftieth of the income. Such a reduction lie
outlay believed could not relieve the agrieattural inter-
_est ; indeed, he doubted whether it would be seriously
felt. So much for the summed profit attending the re-
mission of these five usilltooa in taxes. He would now
coosider the loss. This would consist in the giving up
of that Sinking Fund, which, kept within reasonable
"bounds, was the main prop of our national credit. The
destruction of this Fund would certainly increase the in
arrest of money; an increase which woulul be most se-
verely felt by the agricultural classes. The principal
advantage of low interest, was, that it assisted that 'Class
°which was suffering the most. In tact, by giving up
.this Fund, we should he giving op on one hand what we
gained upon the other. If, therefore, he was correct in
his statement of the profit and loss, could those who re-
garded the true interests of the country, hesitate a mo-
.enent in their choice? He might here be allowed a few
observations upon a political measure, which, like all
other political measures, had had its fashion. Ile meant
,*the principle itself of the Sinking Fund. This measure
was sot entirely Mr. Pitt's, although he haul proposed it
for the consideration of Parliament. When it was first
.introduced, it was not objected to by those who were
Trominent in their opposition to the Ministers of the
Aar. Mr. Fox not only approved of the measure, but
•assisted in the formation of the Bill in detail; and of-
fered some suggestions, which were properly and grate-
fully accepted ; and even after the death of the two great
.men he bad mentioned, it had been warmly extolled
Mr. Sheridan. Doubts haul been thrown upon its po
in a work written, undoubtedly with considerable a -
lity, by Dr. Hamilton, about theyear 1903 or 1804. Bet
if he (the Earl) hid succeeded to his endeavours to un-
derstand Dr. Hamilton, he thought the amount of Me
objection went to the retaining of a Sinking Fund I.
•time of war • because he contended that what was bob-
rowed from that Fund during that time was lost to the
country. Yet, notwithstanding all that had been urged
by Dr. Hamilton and others npoo this subject, lie (t_be.
girl) was firmly of opinion that the advantage of a War
Sinking Fund more than counterbalaimed any possible
-disadvantage resulting from it. it pessesard a moral ef.
sect, which was to be taken into consideration as well as
. the question of profit and loss. It should be recollected'
that during the last war we were fighting for our very
• existence • and that ode exertions in war gave us a more
viefavourahle view of our 000dition than we should have
in any other state. It had been contended, that with a
War SiakioF Fund we merely received with the right
hand and paid with the left; but what would be our site.'
ation without a Sinking Feud ? Could we expect to go.
en interminably in a state of peace? No doubt we hoped
for 'continuance of pear.; we wished as much as poi-
sibliroe avoid it war r bet war Might come did skulls'
we thee place ourselves in a *ligation which eery set-
eeedierg War must render worse and wore.? We ihoul4.
Jakinio mind that every other country which bad a' no-
• tional debt had else a Mulder Fetid. • Prelate and Artie.
eicalo it particular, were theletsconattries to' which oar
atubtrowation should be direeteil. The Icirmer haul a
&eking Vaud greater in proportion to its debt than
versa awl the Sinking Funds'? the latter was so consi-.
ioraltle as to promise theestinction of the debt iri twenty'
.yearsa Should we then proclaim to all the world that,
. with a national debt greater than that of any other, we
took no measure, except during peace, to lessen it ? He
trolled not; be trusted abut in the face of all Our diel-
solder we sbewld mainsail; sue Sinking Food thid
• if WI leftour debt lb posterity, we sherd(' leave some-
• thing likes Fund•for the payment of it. He now califs
to the question, whether any Measure could be devised
for relieving tbeanstiess of the Agricultural Interest.
• He-bid already mated his &We belief that that distrepp
cookluot be asetilled to extrusive taxation ' • and even if
it were otherwise, her waisittsfied that no reduction 'elf
taxation Which Parliament bed the power to make could
possibly reliore.•• He bad alsce stated his opinion as to
the cause of the distress. That tans he believed to be a
• peat-excitement, created by a warrin the course of
which we lad $o contend actually for our existence.
' This excitement led to an over production of the articles
of the'soil ; and high prices, which in our then situation
were the natural consequence, forced the very poor land
into anitivation. Why should not one production cause,
with respect to agriculture, the same effect which it did
to ever? other branch of the national wealth ? It wee
impossible for any man not to khow that daring the lag
war the high price of produce had actually forced Ls- ,
emote trams of poor land into high cultivation. In con:
erlering this part of the subject, it was a matter ofcourse '
to observe upon the situation of this country towards
Ireland, with respect ro the' imports of corn into the for.
ref from the latter. These imports had been greater
within the last three years than could be expected, after
making every allowance foeciieunistances which might
be supposed- to influence the importation. It was impos-
sible to conceal this fact ; fact which could be got rid
of by no legislation whatever. But was no one, was no .
Merest benefitted by this over production? It was the
deny of Horernment and of Parliament to kohl- the ba-
taste with even hands, as it regarded all classes of the
tommonity. For the Agricultural Interest he begged to
expeesehis high respect. ' Be would even say, that if,
witimitiojastice, betoolh lie permitted to throw a
featberinto one of the similes it would be into that which
contained the Agricultural intertst. But could It pos.-
sthly be contended that there was no advantage to no
person in the being able to purchase meat for fonrpence
a pound instead of eithtpenee ? Conld it be said that
Oslo was not a benefit, &stares it it went, to any class
Whittatter? He was ready to admit, that he thought it
to!ght go too far; but it was a subject which could not
lie regulated by law. The consumer gained by the fall
IN price; but the evil as far as regarded the produce
most be left to curb itself. It was obvious that the want
of profit capon produce would*diminish prodiction. lie
tarok it to be a palpable mistake to say that the distress
henefitted no one ; for, in the present instance, it bene-. a
fitted the majority. lb all great towns it had worked
benefit by lessening the amount of the poor rates. lie
bad been at some trouble to ascertain this fact ; and he
could pledge himself for the accuracy of his statement:
The poor rites of the parish in' which their Lordships
were assembled were neieqn so good a condition as
they were at present. Its fact large masses Of the cow-
'lenity had been benefitted by that which he repeated
ought tat to be touched by legislatlie interference. Ile
eat came to state to their Lordships a general outline of
the measures to which his Majesty's tioverrrnient had
thought it expedient to resort in die present situation
the country. The first related to the reduction of the
expenditure. Th's. in the course of the last year, would
kale been much greater, had it not been for the situation
of !relent': Whether Governmint in this reduction, had
galfin far cootie', it was for Perlhment to decide; but
' would beg to refer their Lordships to the Estimate of
tie Revenge sod-Expenditure, as settled by the Cons--
sillttee of Finance for the year 1817. The Committee
gasified that the permanent Peace Establishment might
*tth propriety be fixed at 17 'millions; bit the Estimates
fit the present year would skew a reduction 0f1,200.00W.
Weir tile sum voted by the Committee. He was free to
Welt that drini redactions had been mode, which, in
Lis opinion, shoald bevel em avoided but he wet pert,