duty, and produced 600,0001. a year to the revenue. Should these be prohibited, a large sum would be lost to the revenue. The spirit that actuated the promoters of the present motion was that spirit which alone could do good, if carried into the committee. Even should no remedy be discovered, the impartial enquiry on the part of the committee would tranquillize the public mind.

Mr. Curwen said, that all that the English agriculturists required was, to be placed on a fair footing of competition with the foreign grower. If ministers did not remove some of the existing burdens, irremediable ruin to the nation would be the consequence. In the best and most flourishing times, the income of the whole empire could never be placed higher than 400 millions, while taxation amounted to 80 millions. At present the income was only 300 millions, yet taxation was the same. Thus the income being reduced one quarter, the expenditure had in no respect been diminished. In what situation then was the farmer? The average of grain, if properly taken, did not exceed 52s. per quarter; the consequence of which was, that the farmer lost not less than 3s. by every bushel of grain he grew. In wheat alone the agricultural interest had lost 15 millions. Barley and oats were always considered equivalent to wheat, and there they lost again 15 millions more. The value of his stock had been deteriorated not less than 18 millions, so that in England only there was a total diminution of 40 millions. The diminution in Scotland and Ire

land might be taken at the lowest at 15 millions; so that the capital of the country was reduced 55 millions; or, lest that should be considered exaggerated, he would consider it as only 50 millions. While the agriculturists had lost one quarter of the value of his productions, the rate of taxation had actually increased. That rate had formerly been considered as 20 per cent. but to that another burden of 0 per cent. must now be added for the diminution of the value of his productions, so that it actually now amounted to 26 per cent. Here was one great cause of the evil, enormous taxation. He defied ministers to contradict the statement he had made. Some gentlemen exclaimed to their landlords, "lower your rents." There were 72 millions of acres in the united kingdom, producing a rental of 40 millions; and the diminution already was equal to one year and a quarter of that rental: if this state of things continued, the effect must be to annihilate all landed property. A great polish proprietor had told him that 12s. a quarter would be an ample remuneration, and could the British grower compete on such terms? The wheat of the kingdom amounted to 18 million quarters, of which seven and a half millions were grown on the poorer soils, and that gave employment to 300,000 individuals, and produced a revenue of six millions; and if those were thrown out of employment as agriculturists, how could other employment be procured for them? A protecting duty should be imposed on wheat, in the same manner, as on butter, cheese, and seeds. The honourable gentleman

then

then entered into some details to show that the manufacturing districts had greatly decreased in their consumption of animal food; after which he called the attention of ministers, with much earnestness, to the precipice of destruction on which we stood at this moment. He repeated his former sentiments as to the propriety of taxing funded property. It was useless to go into the committee unless the members came out of it with a strong report, that would compel ministers to grant what was required. If the country were disappointed, those who checked its hopes must answer for the consequences.

Mr. Whitmore said, that it was in consequence of taxation that every interest in the country was depressed. There seemed to him to be a wish in the country to raise the price of corn beyond its natural level; while the value of rents had been raised disproportionably. He was thoroughly of opinion that the high rents would not last, because the fall of the price of corn would oblige the poor land to be taken out of cultivation. This he should lament as much as any man; but such was his opinion. The first remedy, and one of absolute necessity, was every species of economy in every branch of the revenue of government. He wished that a variable, and not a fixed duty should be placed on foreign corn, similar to the law of 1804. But, however those duties might be graduated, he thought 80s. a quarter too high a price to regulate the importation of foreign corn.

Mr. Honeywood urged the necessity of all practicable retrenchments in the public expenditure.

Mr. W. Burrell thought the great importation of 1818 and 1819, was the main cause of the present distress.

Mr. Tremayne spoke in favour of economy and retrenchment.

Mr. Wodehouse contrasted the expenses of labour and rates, and taxes of a particular farm in Norfolk, in the year 1791 and 1819; and contended that the price of corn being nearly the same at both periods, the distress of the farmer was mainly owing to increased taxation.

Mr. H. G. Bennet said, if the question of taxation was to be blinked, the appointment of a committee was a complete delusion. England could not afford to maintain her existing establishments; she could not support so large an annual cost for a standing army to keep up her colonies, and keep down her subjects. If the voters for a committee were in earnest, let them oppose the first grant of public money, and they would have credit for being sincere; but, if they took a contrary course, he (Mr. B.) must believe, and the people of England would believe, that they supported the present motion from interested motives.

Mr. Western contended that such protection should be afforded to agriculture, as to keep in tillage all the land now in that state.

Mr. Dennis Browne thought the only way to accomplish the great object of the committee was, to prohibit the importation of foreign corn altogether, leaving it to the discretion of parliament to decide when it was proper to be removed.

Mr. Barham said, that this was the

the last year that the farmers could afford to pay their rents.

Mr. Ricardo dissented from the doctrine that the interests of landholders and fund-holders, tenants and farmers, were all one and the same. He had generally been alluded to as a mercantile man, but the fact was, that he was not a merchant, nor a fund-holder, but a land-holder. But he would not look to his own interest on this subject, nor to that of tenants and farmers. He must, as an honest member of parliament, look to the general interests of the community, and therefore he must oppose any attempt to effect, what the land-holders had an interest in effecting the monopoly of the home market for their own corn. Countervailing duties ought to be carried no further than to indemnify them for any particular burdens which they sustained beyond the foreign grower. A moderate duty would have the desirable effect of preventing that fluctuation in the prices from which so much evil had arisen. He then proceeded to argue, that the present depressed state of agriculture arose, not so much from taxation as from excessive production. If lands were so poor as not to yield a profitable return in corn without an enormous price, as compared with what it could be procured for elsewhere, it was evident, that so much of the capital of the individual and the community was misapplied, and some more lucrative channel should be sought for its employment. As to what had been said upon the subject of the national debt, he had, individually no interest in it, because he derived no revenue from it; but he would say, that

the landed interest, the agricultural interest, the trading, and every other public interest, were pledged to the public debt. He had better hopes of the country than some of the members who had spoken, and his belief was, that we were near the end of our difficulties.

Mr. Davenport spoke in favour of the agricultural interest.

Mr. Calcraft said, he would resist any attempt to impose a higher protecting duty than what now existed.

Gen. Gascoyne said, that he would look with extreme jealousy on any measure which was at all calculated to raise the price of the necessaries of life.

Mr. T. Wilson conceived that the price of corn ought to be raised. If the farmer got a better price, the owner of land would of course get a better rent, which would enable him to pay his taxes, and government might go on the better. The question was then put. and carried nem. dis.

Among the members who were named as the committee, the following were named :-Mr. Gooch, lord Castlereagh, hon. F. Robinson, Mr. Brougham, Mr. Wodehouse, Mr. Sumner, Mr. N. Calvert, Mr. Dickinson, Mr. T. Wilson, lord Althorp, Mr. Estcourt, Mr. S. Wortley, Mr. Huskisson, Mr. Western, Mr. Baring, Mr. Davenport, sir H. Parnell, Mr. Calthorpe, Mr. Ricardo, Mr. Curwen, and Mr. D. Browne.

March 12.-Mr. Hume moved the following resolutions :—

"That there were in the service of Great Britain and Ireland, in 1792 (exclusive of the regular cavalry and infantry), 25,757 troops, namely, 3,730 of royal artillery,

4,425 of royal marines, and 17,602 of disembodied militia; and in 1802 (exclusive of the regular cavalry and infantry,) the number of 125,492 troops, namely, 7,872 engineers and artillery, 8,000 royal marines, 51,998 disembodied militia, and 57,622 yeomanry cavalry and volunteer infantry; being in number a larger force by 132,367 men, available for purposes of the government, in this year than in 1792.

"That it is the opinion of this house that, under the present circumstances of the country, it is expedient to make a large reduction in the amount and expenditure of its military establishments, and to approximate as soon as possible to the establishment of 1792, as recommended by the finance committee of 1817."

The resolutions were seconded by Mr. Creevy, but opposed by lord Castlereagh and lord Paimerston, the latter of whom pointed out several inaccuracies, which, however, were not acknowledged by Mr. Hume. On the previous question being moved, it was carried by ninety-eight against seventy-four, and the resolutions consequently lost by a majority of twenty-four.

The house then resolved itself into a committee, when lord ·Palmerston stated the military estimates of the ensuing year, which he defended at considerable length, and concluded with moving his first resolution of 81,468 men.

Mr. G. R. Dawson, Mr. J. Macdonald, Mr. Bernal, Mr. H. G. Bennett, Mr. Calcraft, Mr. Maberly, &c. but the original estimates of lord P. were supported by gen. Vivian, lord Catlereagh, and Mr. Huskisson. Twelve divisions took place, and the chairman reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again.

14.-The house having gone into a committee of supply, Mr. Brogden, the chairman, read the first resolution of the army estimates.

Mr. J. Macdonald entered into various calculations to shew that 16,000 of the proposed number might be well spared. He should, however, propose a reduction of only 10,000. This would still leave a force for Great Britain and Ireland, including regulars, yeomanry, and volunteers, of not less than 100,000 men, and by calling out the militia, in case of any emergency, there might, in less than three months, be raised a force of 200,000 men. He concluded with moving that for 81,000 there should be substituted. 71,000.

Sir H. Vivian opposed the motion. He contended, that with the establishment proposed, there would be only 5000 men for reliefs of the colonial garrisons, in consequence of which the troops must be only three years at home and nine years abroad.

Mr. N. Calvert supported the amendment. He was against retaining either Gibraltar or the Ionian islands. Gibraltar cost us 500,000l. a-year in the time of peace, and 1,500,000 in war; it did not command the Straits, and it was a source of perpetual irritation to Spain. The guards were

too numerous: their only use was to assist the police, and he would prefer having that service executed by an increased number of police officers.

Mr. Hume said, he would not part with the Ionian islands; but he would make them pay for the means of their own defence. The reduction of a considerable part of the guards, would afford the means of making the required reliefs to the colonial garrisons, by leaving a larger body of the disposable troops. The honourable member then replied at considerable length to the arguments advanced in support of the estimates. He contended that, including the militia, yeomanry, and volunteer corps at home and in the colonies, there would, after a further reduction of 20,000 men, be still left a force of not less than 270,000 for the defence of the empire. By such a reduction, there would be effected an immediate further saving of 786,000. It was a fact worthy of remark, that since the year 1816, the duke of York had filled up 1105 new commissions, while by the returns it appeared that there were 7000 officers on half-pay.

Mr. Goulburn defended the estimates, and went into various details respecting the civil and military establishments in the colonies and foreign settlements, to shew that all possible attention had been paid to economy.

Mr. J. P. Grant said, that from the papers on the table, it appeared that for the same service for which, in 1792, 42,000 men were employed, there were now not less than 66,000 required. Allowing 4000 for the new mode of reliefs, there was an excess of

20,000, which might safely be reduced; but the motion of his honourable friend went only to a reduction of half that number, and the refusal of ministers to assent to this was, of course, the more unjustifiable.

Sir R. Fergusson insisted that the governor of the Cape of Good Hope was most scandalously over-paid. over-paid. In all the colonies, as compared with 1792, the officers were nearly in the proportion of ten to one, and their salaries were raised in the same proportion. The proposed reduction should be made in the guards and cavalry.

Sir R. Wilson contended that our light cavalry was not a description of force that should be sent abroad. He thought the garrison at the Cape too numerous, and the emoluments of the garrison too large. The longer we retained the Ionian islands, the more we should get embarrassed with them, politically and financially. He concluded with adverting to the war by Austria and Russia against Naples, and said that sooner or later we must interfere; for we never could look tamely on a Russian fleet entering the Mediterranean, as he had reason to believe, was at this moment intended, to take possession of Sicily.

Mr. Goulburn stated, that the governor of the Cape of Good Hope had only an income of 10,000l. a-year, and that all the former military allowances had been withdrawn.

After some further discussion, in which Mr. Evans, Col. Wood, Generals Hart and Vivian, sir F. Blake, &c. took part, the proposed amendment was negatived,

on