The Bee-Hive. — 1872-03-30 (London, England)

HENRY TRAVIS.  THE BUDGET.  Tills is the long and short of Monday night's debate in the House of Commons. The masses of the people are still loft out of consideration. It is a " Rich man's Budget," as Sir T. SINCLAIR characterised it. Where ate the people's champions, now that their battle has come to be fought ? Whore are our BRIGHT'S, our BAssEs, our BnAssEYs, our Itr4lwins, our FAAVGETTB, M,ORLEYS, MITNDELLAs, and our IIuonESES ? In fact, where is the whole paraphernalia of the Cobden Club, and Where, 0! where, is the Financial Reforni Association of Liverpool? It is true 4r. BRIGHT wrote a b'hort letter the other day which went the round 'of the newspapers. in favour of a "Free Breakfast Table." He  also told us that a Government lyho could not rule this country for less than 60 millions a year, was not worthy of the confidence of the country; but this we fear, has fallen as fiat as water on the minds of the people's (so-called) advocates. We fear that these the people's champions (so-called) are rich men, and being so are no better than the rest of human nature, liatle to fall in with what ,suits the interests of their class.  Now, what we wish to point out is the fact that so long as taxes are levied on commodities so long will the masses of the people bear the heaviest portion of the burden of taxation, relatively to their means; and so long as these (so-called) Champions of the people's interests neglect to insist on a reversal of the present policy of taxing commodities, we fear they will lay themselves open to the charges of falling into the dilemma of acting the part of ignorance or hypocrisy. For instance, what can be a more glaring hypocrisy than for Mr. Lowt to assume the position (as Mr. GRIEVES said on Monday night in the House) of " not caring what became of particular industries as long .ns commodities were made cheap for the multitude," whilst at the same time he was adopting a Budget calculated to create famine prices for all these commodities which the multitude of necessity Inuit consume? One article alone (malt) it was proved before a Committee of inquiry of both Rouses, in IR6B, that if the tax on malt were repealed We should have 'butcher's meat at least 2d, per lb. cheaper, and as this is 20 per cent. of its Value, and as the United Kingdom consumes 80 millions' worth every year, this tax, alone raises one of our first necessaries of life to a price which is 20 millions more than it would be without such tax, besides making the iriottieudo. pay 41. to 3d. a. pint for. (bad.) what could be got at id. per pint .(good and wholesome) bee if the Malt Tax Were off. Now the latter is an unasoertained quantity, but may be safely estimated at 5 millions more, so that we have hore a robbery from the people (or multitude) of 25 millions a-year, which does not benefit the revenue one farthing, besides obstructing the agriculture and commerce of the country to such an extent as to grind the face of the poor in a hundred Ways. What has become of the Yorkshire Society for the repeat of the Malt Tax, who adopted on the 2nd of May, 1870, the following 'form of petition to the House of tOMMOIAS ? " Ist. That your petitioners grow barley and other grain in the said county. 2nd. That they have heard with amazement that it is proposed to reduce the duty on sugar, and not to touch the duty on malt. 3rd. That the value of malt depends alone on the sugar it will produce. 4th. That one cwt. of sugar, a foreign production, which is equal for brewing purposes to one quarter of malt, is to be taxed ss. sth. That one quarter of malt is to be taxed 21s. Bd. oth. That this is 'a proteetiven duty of Ws. Bd. in favour of the foreign article as 'against the British production. 7th. That eliaMpagne, 'a foreign prodnetion, ttid the 'rich aian's drink, is taxed at 5 Lax cent., and that beer, a home production, and the drink of the people (or " multitude," as Mr. LAVE has it), is taxed at least 70 per cent." Mr. Bureau must certainly have committed (political) 'suicide by taking office under the present Government. If he had insisted upon being Chancellor of the Exchequer he 'could then have given us a Free Breakfast Table without any delay, or danger of interfering injuriously with any class Or interest ; and not only a Free Breakfast Table, but also dinner and supper table. We hope the people will bear these facts in mind whoa a new election comes, and make their cry and vote be in favour of the candidate who pledges himself to support this  MomAs Burans.