that tax. He was of course aware that the national income must have been much reduced since that period; he was therefore prepared to assume that it was now not 150,000,000l. but 120,000,000l. He intimated that the gross taxes of the country bore upon its gross income in the proportion of 45 per cent. Of that 45 per cent. he estimated 22 per cent. were for the expenses of the civil and military government of the country, and 23 per cent. to pay the interest upon the national debt. Of the latter he did not contemplate any reduction; so that it was out of the former-out of the civil and military government and expenditure, that the reduction must be made. It was true that the consumer paid the general taxes, but he admitted that that was not the case in agriculture. He admitted it, because he knew that the price of the bushel of corn was the same in 1790 that it was in 1820. In the month of December of each year the price was precisely the same. Agriculture was, therefore, placed in the situation of being obliged to sell its corn at a low price, and yet at the same time bear all the great increase of direct and indirect taxation of late years affecting it, with the advance of rent also incurred within the last thirty years; so that agriculture had now to pay the whole accumulation of burdens imposed upon it since 1792 out of its capital. That, he thought could not be denied. He knew it to be true in the county in which he chiefly resided; for there the agriculturist could not pay his rates and taxes except out of his capital. If it was in vain to attempt affording any relief to one class by an advance of price, without repressing another, he could see no relief for the community, except the government were conducted upon principles of the most rigid economy. He was one of those who was ready to support the public credit at all hazards; that was a national bond to which they were bound to adhere, and the faith of which nothing short of a convulsion ought to shake. He had heard with great regret certain opinions now and then dropped in that house, which went to tolerate an interference with the national faith; but he totally dissented from such opinions. He thought it a much better security for the fundholder to have the people satisfied, than to have an additional million added to the sinking fund. In delivering these sentiments he was actuated by no private feeling, for he would not in the event of any change in administration seek office; he had, therefore, no personal interest in the result, and was alone induced to take the step he had taken by a sense of public duty. He had heard a rumour that a retrenchment to the amount of one million was likely to be effected. He thought that insufficient, and was of opinion that if the present administration could not conduct the affairs of the country at a more economical rate, they ought to resign their places to competent successors, who were ready, with every regard to the public security, to do the business of the nation upon more advantageous terms for the people. He saw around him many agricultural gentlemen, whose votes he was entitled to expect if they were sincere in the wishes they expressed for public relief. He hoped also to have the votes of such members as sincerely desired to conciliate the people. He hoped, alike, to have the support of the advocates for maintaining inviolable the public faith. He concluded by apologising to the house for the time he had occupied in making his statement, and by assuring them that his sole object was the promotion of the public good. He then moved the following resolutions: "That the finance committee appointed by this house, having stated in their fourth report, on the 5th of June, 1817, that the estimates for the supply of the year 1818 were as follow:-For the army 8,500,000l.; the navy 6,000,000l.; the ordnance 1,150,0007.; and the miscellaneous, 1,700,0007.; making a total of 17,350,000l. and that the supplies for the year 1820 exceeded those for 1818 by the sum of 1,963,300l.; it is therefore expedient that the supplies for 1820 should not exceed those for the former year." The Chancellor of the Exchequer rose, and said, the honourable gentleman had grounded his speech upon comparisons between the estimates for the public expenditure at different periods; and he rested his main arguments upon the obvious reduction which he thought ought to take place in the public expenditure on account of the different circumstances in which the country was placed at the several periods which he assumed for the purposes of establishing his economical principle. He had principally set out with a comparison of the expenditure 1821. between the last year and 1792. It would be remembered that the expenditure of the year 1792 was the very lowest which had been estimated since the period of the American war. Indeed so low had it been framed at the beginning of the year, that before the close of it Mr. Pitt found the estimate insufficient, and a larger sum became necessary; so that in point of fact the original estimate of 1792 had been never realized, for an augmentation took place at the close of that year. (It was here observed by several members on the opposition benches, that that augmentation took place in consequence of the preparations for war.) He admitted that at the close of the year some increased precautionary measures were deemed desirable, and also some preparations for armaments were considered proper. The honourable member had estimated the total for the year 1792 at 7,719,4901. and those for last year at 19,313,3007; and he had talked of the enormous difference which was apparent in the expence venue of the country at the two of collecting the reperiods he had assumed, avoiding, when he adverted to the circumstance, to state that the great difference between the amount of collecting the revenues at the two periods was necessarily occasioned by the great augmentation of the amount to be collected at one of them over and above that of the other. Besides, the honourable gentleman's comparative calculation was founded upon a fallacy; for he ought to have seen that before the data on which he made his comparison were correct, he should have struck out from last H year's year's estimates that part of the expenditure which was created by the war for instance, there was an increase on that account of upwards of 5,000,000l. upon the pension list, and 500,000i. more or thereabouts, under similar heads, created in the same manner. When these indispensable deductions were made to correct the data, it was true there would remain an expenditure about double the amount of that estimated in 1792. He had already explained the impracticable reduction attempted in the estimates of that year. When he had to account for the excess since that period, need he remind the honourable gentleman that there were 19 additional colonies to be defended now more than there were in 1792, and of course an increased charge at home, arising out of colonial casualties? It was quite impossible to undertake the management of public affairs at so low an estimate as that attempted to be acted upon in 1792. The honourable gentleman should, in point of correct order, have withheld his motion for a few days, until the army and other estimates came regularly before the house, and then he could have shown more accurately the details upon which he depended. Indeed, he had begun at the wrong end; for he had assumed an expenditure as fixed where it was uncertain, and that a reduction could be made without proving in what manner it could be realized consistently with the public service. The honourable gentleman had, he repeated, altogether overlooked the accumulated charge which had become fixed and imperative by the half pay and pension list, which, as well as the increase of the public debt, formed the price which the public had to pay for the glories of Trafalgar and Waterloo, and for having been placed in the high attitude of being the liberator of Europe, and acquiring fresh renown for the national character. With respect to what the honourable member had said about the reduction of prices, the best answer to that would be found in the nature of the public expenditure. The pension list could not be increased nor diminished according to the price of subsistence; and other allowances equally fixed in their nature must remain at the same rate, independent of accidental fluctuations in prices. The honourable gentleman opposite (Mr. Maberly) had adverted to what he termed a rumour, that in the next year a saving of about 1,000,0001. was likely to take place in the general public expenditure of the country. was happy to have it in his power to verify this rumour, and he had the satisfaction to state that the house would perceive when the estimates for 1821 were laid before them (which he hoped would be very shortly), that the reduction in the estimates for the public expenditure of 1821, as compared with that of 1820, would amount to considerably more than 1,000,0001. sterling. That was, that the public expenditure for 1821 would be much more than 1,000,0001. less than the expenditure of the year 1820. He Mr. Calcraft said, it appeared that in 1792 the charge for managing the civil and military affairs of the empire was somewhat more more than 7,000,0001, while in 1820 it had cost no less than 26,000,0001. He allowed that what was pledged to the public creditor ought never to be touched, and that retrenchment could, therefore, only apply to this sum of 26,000,0001. After objecting without reason to the form of the notice of the motion, the right honourable gentleman had complained of the comparison with 1792, alleging that the establishments were then below what the safety of the state required, and that they had, on that account, been increased by Mr. Pitt. True: but why were they increased? Not because they were inadequate for peace, but because there was every appearance of an approaching war. When subjects of this kind were first started after the peace of 1815, even the colleagues of Mr. Pitt, in this and the other house of parliament, had started from this point, viz., that ministers were bound to account for every shilling of expenditure beyond the charge in' 1792. He did not mean in any way to dispute the propriety of the pension list, amounting to 4,500,0001., which was an addition since 1792. He held that it ought to be considered as sacred even as the rights of the public creditor; and as he wished to argue the subject fairly, he would admit also that our new colonies required an increased expenditure. But then, said the chancellor of the Exchequer, "when you talk of reductions, you choose the wrong time and the wrong mode: you begin at the wrong end." This was always the answer: the proper time never arrived, and the proper mode never was adopted, and the proper end was never discovered. Yet what were the right honourable gentleman's time and mode? which was his right end and which was his wrong end? He was never to be disturbed in his sublime operations of arithmetic; and when any motion was made on the subject of finance, he satisfied himself with coming down and exclaiming "What are you doing? why do you interfere? I am going to save more than a million; only wait till my estimates come down, and you will be gratified and the nation happy!" This might be true; he might be about to save 1,000,0001.; but let it be remembered that he had added two, and by special grace and favour was and favour was about to let 1,000,000l., still continue added to the burdens of the people. After various observations from Mr. Huskisson, Mr. Ricardo, Mr. Lushington, and others, the house divided on the previous question. curse, he could not call down upon them a heavier than thisthat the prayer of these petitioners should be allowed to pass unnoticed. He could not concur in the opinion of a noble lord (Liverpool,) that the existing distress had arisen from the superabundance of last year's crop, for in Suffolk, in Norfolk, and in Cambridgeshire, the crop of wheat in the last year had been deficient, though that of barley had been abundant. Too much stress had been laid on the increased returns of malt, which were to be ascribed to the abundance of barley only. There was some latent evil in our system of corn laws which defeated their purpose of protecting the farmer against foreign importation. The warehousing system hung over the home grower like the sword of Democles, suspended by a single hair. He would suppose that there were 800,000 quarters of wheat warehoused. The moment the market rose to a remunerating price, this stock of wheat was thrown into it; and the farmer who, sent his corn there, in consequence, found himself, contrary to his hopes and expectations, in a market already glutted. The following was the return of property made by the owners and occupiers of land:-The owners of land returned 4,297,2471; the occupiers 2,176,2281, making a grand total of 6,473,4751. The property returned by the trade was two millions and upwards. He did not mention this for the purpose of drawing any invidious distinction between the trading and the agricultural interests of the country; but to show that the proportion which the land bore to the other branches of the public revenue was as three to one. If we were desirous of remaining a great agricultural, as well as a great trading nation, if we did not wish to degenerate into what our great enemy had called us, a nation batiquiere, we were bound to assist the agricultural interest. It was impossible for the country to go on so for any length of time. After stating that the only way of saving the country from ruin was by meeting this question boldly and manfully, the honourable member concluded his speech, amidst considerable cheering, by moving that the petitions relative to the distress of the agricultural interest should be referred to a select committee, who should be empowered to report to the house their opinion thereon. Mr. F. Robinson was pleased to find, that, from what had been said, it was not in contemplation to bring forward in the committee any measure to disturb the laws relative to our currency, nor to look for relief through the medium of any operation on the public debt. As to any reduction of taxation, he hoped the committee would consider how far such a measure might affect public credit. He feared that, without giving up all hope of reducing the debt, it would be vain to expect any great relief to the agricultural interest by means of diminished taxation. Pains had been taken to impress on the agriculturalists that the only adequate protection was high duties on foreign corn, In 1812 many articles might have been imported duty free, such as cheese, butter, and various kinds of seed, that now paid a high duty |