The Express. — 1852-12-11 (London, England)

WALTER—If the hon. gentleman persists in that there was no malt tax at all. (Cheers.) lie suspected that bend, any party consideration; it was this—the disposition motion, I shall certainly divide with him, not, however, on the reason which, in the opinion of its opponents, deprived they had evinced towards general measures for the imthe ground on which he put it—that of want of confidence the reduction of the malt tax of all benefit to the consumer provement of our laws and the advancement of the people. in the government—hut on the more charitable ono of and the farmer was the very reason for which it ought to lie did not allude only to the reform of the Court of Changiving the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he is deter• be preferred to any other, and that was because it procured cery, nor to the programme of useful measures announced mined to commit political suicide, as roach time for repeut- for that clue a more free competition. If the country in the recent speech from the throne, nor even to the aims as possible. (Cheers and laughter.) were banded together against it, then the measure would measures that were now before the house, sincerely as lie Mr. ALCOCK should have no hesitation in voting have risen preeminent in the eyes of gentlemen oppo- approved of these. Ile looked for more to the liberal and against the proposition for increasing the house tax, though site—(cheers)—and they should be told that they enlightened speech of his right hon. friend (Mr. Disraeli) ' be should have some doubts on the subject if he thought it refused to cheapen the beer of the people. (Cheers.) Be- the other evening; for he saw there, for the first time, would endanger the proposed reduction of the tea duties. cause the farmer asserted that he was partially distressed— a pledge from the Ministers of the Crown, not merely of That was an undeniable proposition, and he believed there he was not to be partially relieved, and because mire- economy and retrenchment, but also of efficieeey in the was no man in trio country but must approve of it. Re strictea competition was sow to be the rule, you would not establishments. (Cheer..) Ho warned the house that the did not, however, see that it was at all necessary to pest. remove • restriction which prevented the farmer from same causes of dissension which rendered the former pone the question of the house tax until the question of growing his barley. Now, barley was a grain in which ministry No weak ano so incapable, in spite of the many the tea duties and the malt duties was considered. For this country was unrivalled ; in its wheat it was virtues and talents of the men who composed it, and of the his own part, be should be very glad to accept the offer to equalled, sal might even be eurpas.ed, but in that crop it genius of the noble lord who presided over it, still exremit one half the malt duty as an earnest that the Chan- was unrivalled; and yet you would not remove a restrie- toted; and in his (Sir E. B. Lytton'e) mind throe causes ceLlor of the Exchequer would, as soon as possible, abolish tion which placed an impediment in the way of its conics- would still prevent should that government return it altogetherailear, hear.) lie thought the country owed a ton. That was, theo, an injury to the farmer and the to power that unity and firmness of purpose deep debt of gratitude to the right honourable gen- consumer. It was a precise, and elaborate rejection of which could alone render effectual its own desire tleman for having been bold and honest enough one of the most fertile sources of revenue that Pro- to remove abuses, and which would alone preserve against toapropose the reduction of the tea and the malt duties. vidence had ever bestowed on this country. (Cheers.) the attacks of its own supporters that balance between safe (Ministeeial cheers.) He differed altogether from those hon. gentlemen opposite meant to say that they objected to reform and hazardous experiment, on which in his conwho contended that no benefit would be derived from the tax the householders for the benefit of the farmers; but stance he believed they must depend for the continuance repeal of half the malt duty. He looked upon that reduc- this amounted to a declaration against the extension of free iif their prosperity, and far the stability of the monarchy. tion se a boon not only to the consumer, but to the landed trade beyond the classes who lived in towns. (Ministerial (Loud cheers ) interest also. He said that it was right to give et cheers.) They could not object to the house-tax itself ; for ?dr.