The Sun. — 1849-03-14 (London, England)

LOCAL TAXATION—ADJOURNED DEBATE. On the order of the day for the adjourned debate being read, Mr. DISRAELI rose and presented a petition from a numerous body of holders and occupiers of land in different parts of England, agreed to at a meeting held in St. George's, Westminster, and which petition was signed by the Duke of Richmond as chairman of the meeting. The petitioners stated that they perceived with deep regret an apparent indifference in the House of Commons to the interests of the tenantfarmers to whom they had been accustomed to look up as their natural protectors; they also attributed their present condition to the recent legislative changes in the country, and although they did not consider there was anything equivalent for the protection of which they had been deprived, they isought some mitigation in the remission of the local and, general taxation of the:country, and in the repeal of the malt tax.—(" Hear," from the Protectionists.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, when the House adjourned on Thursday last, they had before them two counter-propositions, namely, that of the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, and the other came  from the Hon. Member for Montrose. It would now become his duty to state the course which the Government intended to pursue, and which they recommended the House to adopt. In the first place, he was quite ready to do justice to the Hon. Gentleman behind him (Mr. Hume), and he admitted his claim for candour both with respec; to the ultra views which he entertained and to the proposition which he had submitted to the House. The Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Disraeli) was a great master in the art of oratory, and he used it to much purpose, and it seemed there were Hon. Members who were prepared to follow him in adopting a proposition which they did not understand, but from which they expected some undefined good. He told the House when they got into Committee that he would propose some mighty scheme, and he referred to a proposition which a Noble Lord had devised with respect to Ireland—(Hear, hear)—and that it would have been more beneficial to that country than any measure which had been passed for her relief during half a century ; but he did not give the House the slightest intimation what that scheme would be. His Hon. Friend behind him (Mr. Hume) was clear and plain-spoken. He knew that his Honourable Friend near him intended that the Honourable Member for the West Riding should commit political suicide, fur his Honourable Friend (Mr. Hume) had it in contemplation to do away with counties.  Mr. HUME said his proposition was to do away with the Excise and not counties.—(Roars of laughter.)  The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was perfectly true his Hon. Friend proposed to do away with the Excise ; but in a much more general scheme of instruction the Honourable Gentleman said he was justified in claiming to be the most candid Member of the House. He said he proposed to do away with counties.—(Hear, hear, and cries of " No, no" from Mr. Hume.) At any rate he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) thought it would somewhat impugn the new character in which his Hon. Friend (Mr. Hume) came forward in being the farmers' friend. —(" Hear, hear" from the Opposition.) In the amendment which the Honourable Gentleman proposed, although the two duties on malt and hops were those which he proposed to reduce, he referrid to certain other duties to the amount altogether of nine millions and a half.—(Hear.) He begged to call the attention of the House to this fact, that the proposal of his Hon. Friend was based on a previous reduction of expenditure, to the amount of ten millions.—(Hear, hear.) The total expense for the army and navy was eleven millions and a quarter ; and his Hon. Friend proposed to do away with ten-eleventbs of that expenditure, which was necessary for the defence of the country.—(" No, no," from Mr. Hume.) That was the position in which his Hon. Friend proposed to leave the House, and that was the essential preliminary to the reduction in the taxation which his Hon. Friend proposed. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) thought this question was fairly discussed on the previous occasion, on the motion of the Honourable Member for the West Riding; and he did not think he should be justified in occupying the attention of the House in further discussing a matter which he thought had already been fully discussed and decided; and in calling on the House to negative the amendment of his Hon. Friend he believed he simply called on them to re-affirm that decision which a few weeks ago they came to by a large majority. He therefore should propose to the House to negative the amendment of his lion. Friend the Member for Montrose, and to leave to the decision of the House the proposal of the Honourable Member for Bucking • hamshire. Now, turning to the proposal of the Honourable Member opposite (Mr. Disraeli), he must bear testimony to the calm and temperate tone in 4 hich he brought it before the House.—(Cheers from the Protectionists.) It had been asource of the greatest satisfaction to him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer). not only on the former occasion but on this, that those great questions had been brought before the House in such a manner as to avoid any heat, or any party spirit, or any. angry feeling. He could also perfectly agree with the lion. Gentieman in the eulogies which he had bestowed on the farmers of this country. He perfectly concurred with him in declaring his full confidence in the attachment of that body to the institutions of their native land., He also perfectly concurred with him in the truth of the statement of the distress in which they were many of them labouring, in consequence partly of the recent changes which had been effected in the laws respecting agricultural produce.—(Hear, hear.) And in saying thus much he would beg to impress upon him, and upon