66

other side of the House, is, that we do not | quarters of wheat per acre, we have now six or seven quarters, and other grains in proportion; recognise, on the part of Members rewhile root crops are also much heavier, and their presenting the agricultural districts, any value per ton is as great or greater than ever— grievance or losses incurred by them which thanks to the numerous consumers of butchers' entitles them to ask anybody else to submit meat." to taxes which they do not pay themselves. I mention this in the outset, because I Hon. Gentlemen opposite seem to doubt have observed in the papers this morning this very point themselves. The hon. Ba- a letter written by a Member of the Cabironet the Member for Hertfordshire (Sir net-["No, no!"]-but if he is not a Edward Bulwer Lytton) says, that a great Member of the Cabinet he is an exponent deal depends on the way in which relief is of the policy of the Ministry-and he states granted. "Do it graciously," he said; to his constituents, that although the Goeven if you don't grant that the farmers vernment do not intend to propose a return are distressed, still they think they are, and to protection, yet that they do intend to therefore give them something, in the way propose compensation, and that the Budof the abolition of the malt tax, which get is the first step towards it, and that may console them." This is a very senti- the repeal of the malt tax is peculiarly a mental way of dealing with a great ques- measure of relief to the landed interest. If tion which involves a sum to be counted such is the case, I say that we are entering by millions, and one which I do not un- on the old controversy between town and derstand. I deny that there is any dis-country-and you compel us to go into tress which entitles them to ask for compensation. I had a note the other day from one of the most enter rising and intelligent farmers in the East Lothians, which I will read to the House, as I believe it will afford not a bad explanation of the condition of the farming world in general. He says—

"The farmers of the Lothians of Scotland, es

sentially a wheat district, never were, as a body, in a more flourishing condition; and the demand for land, in consequence, is beyond all parallel for the last 30 years. Every farm that is to let brings an advanced rent of from 10 to 30 per cent. I have four years of my lease to run, but have made a new arrangement at an increased rent of 15 per cent, which I begin to pay immediately, and I have always one-fourth of my land in wheat. Two farms have been let in this parish within the last six months at a similar advance to my own, and an adjoining farm, belonging to the Marquess of Dalhousie, is at present to let, the factor being in London with the offers in his pocket to show to his Lordship's commissioners;

this controversy in a spirit that I thought was never to have been revived. An hon. Gentlemen opposite says, "Carry out your principles of direct taxation with regard to the duty on soap and on paper." I say that I am ready to carry out direct taxation if you propose a tax which shall be equitable, and levied on all kinds of property alike; but my objection to the Budget is, that it does not carry out direct taxation fairly and equitably. The proposal now made with regard to the house tax is most unjust. What do you propose? You have already imposed a property tax of 3 per cent on all land and on all houses. You next go to Schedule A, and you lay an additional house tax of ninepence in the pound, or 33 per cent, making the tax on houses to be at the rate of 6 per cent as against 3 per cent on land. Then you 'say, "We want more money by direct taxation," and you come with your scheme of capital and skill, have offered 30 per cent in- of compensation, or rather, I should call it crease on the rent which the farm was let 19 spoliation, and you go to Schedule A years ago, when it was advertised for six months again, and select houses, and lay on anand then let to the highest bidder. My brother other ninepence in the pound, or another took a farm last week adjoining the one on which 33 per cent, thus making the tax 10 per he resides of 225 acres imperial, and for which he pays 20 per cent increase of rent. Sheep farms cent on houses as against 3 per cent on have brought higher additional rents; but I have land. But that is not all; for we all know said enough to show you that any talk of agricul- that in making an assessment on real protural distress is sheer nonsense, and for myself I perty and on houses, you assess houses at have done, and am doing, as well as I could possi-a much fewer number of years' purchase bly desire. One of the principal reasons for this is, that where land is properly drained, by a liberal use of guano and other artificial manures, the crops have been increased one-half at least, and every acre is made to carry as much corn as can stand. It costs me upwards of 700l. per annum for artificial manures, on a farm of 650 imperial I know several farmers whose outlay in proportion is greater; but then, in place of four

and I know for a fact that first-rate tenants, men

acres.

than you do land; for land is usually assessed at 30 years' purchase, while houses are only assessed at the utmost at fifteen the same rate of taxation on both of them, years' purchase; and therefore, if you levy you cause a double pressure of taxation upon houses as compared with land. If

square, for instance. You would find houses built there on land held on a 99 years' lease, and at a ground-rent of about 50l. a year for each house. Well, the person who had put the bricks and mortar on the ground, or who has bought it, is subjected to this direct taxation, but it does not reach the ground landlord. He carries off his 20,000l. or 30,000l. a year, and is left untouched. Is there any justice in that? Let me remind you, further, that the householders in towns are subjected to very heavy charges of another kind: to a vast number of local charges, not only for the support of the poor, but for police rates, for highway rates, for lighting, and for every description of

you invest 1,000l. in land, and 1,000l. | cumulated as much savings as enables them in houses, while the one is assessed at 30 to become possessors of small houses, with years' purchase and the other at 15, if this inordinate taxation? Your notion of you lay the same tax on both of them, it justice is to say that they shall pay at the is in fact double on the sum invested in rate of 21 per cent on their investment, in houses, making in the whole 10 per proportion to the 3 per cent which is all cent, and that brings the whole amount that is paid by the owners of the large you levy on houses up to 21 per cent, and landed estates. Take another example. that is what you propose to levy on houses Look at the vast landed property in the as against 3 per cent on land. That is a metropolis owned by noblemen who let it great injustice on the part of the Govern-out on building leases. Take Belgravement, and the House will do wrong even to attempt it; for even if it is carried by a majority, do you think you will ever be able to maintain it? Do you think that the intelligent people of the towns will ever submit to it? Do you think that those centres from which radiate the light and intelligence of the country- ["Oh, oh!"] Why, whence do you get your literature and your science? Is it not from the towns? I never heard that we went into country hamlets to seek for such things. I say if you pass such a law you cannot expect it will be submitted to, and it will be the worst thing that could happen for you, for you will revive the old controversy between town and country-impost; and bear in mind that inequality but not in the old form, when hon. Gentle- of the pressure of the rating which I allumen opposite could say it was a contest ded to before-that the smaller number of between cotton lords and landlords-but years' purchase that this house property is they will have every little market town rated at, presses with equal severity on the taking sides against them, for they will all owners of that property in assessing it for see the injustice that is practised on the the local rates, as in the case of the proowner of house property. Your argument perty and the house tax. Not only thereis that this house tax would be a tax, not fore has this property higher general taxes on house property, but on rents. I think, to pay-proportionally-but it has higher myself, that this, as well as every other taxes to pay for local purposes. You cantax, would ultimately be felt more or less not expect a system of direct taxation which by everybody. But at all events, as re- would work like this, can ever be carried gards the great proportion of house pro- out. And what is this direct tax to be laid perty, it can be clearly shown that you tax on for which we are now discussing-for it the owners as well as the occupiers, inas- is the house tax which is now before you? much as there are a large number of houses It is to be laid on for the purpose of enabling in the towns which are owned by those who us to remove one half of the malt tax? live in them. Let the House see how the The right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of tax will work. You have benefit building the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr. Christopher) societies whereby frugal mechanics and has stated, with his usual frankness, what humble tradesmen manage in the shape of the object of it was. He tells us that the weekly payments to get together sums of Government are about to take off one half money sufficiently large to build or pur- of the malt tax for the benefit of the land. chase houses for themselves, and many of The Chancellor of the Exchequer, however, these houses would be generally 107. houses; tells us that he makes the proposition in -and in future they will be still more nu- the interest of the consumer. Well, which merous than they have been, for I am glad are we to believe? I certainly think the to say the saving character of this class of Government would do well to come to some society is increasing, and they are now understanding with respect to their prinhappily bent on improving their dwellings. ciples, or, at least, if they cannot agree, Well, what kind of justice is it to meet that one or the other section of them should these men immediately that they have ac-engage to be silent. My idea of the malt

which you propose to make up the deficiency. As the right hon. Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) has put the case-as the case merely of the consumers

tax is precisely that of the Chancellor of the Exchequer; that it is a tax paid by the consumer, but, that, undoubtedly, as with all taxes laid on a commodity we produce, the producer is subjected to incon--it is open to objections of a serious kind. venience and to loss by it. The illustration The right hon. Gentleman says that beer, which the right hon. Gentleman gave is like bread, is a primary necessary of life; precisely analogous. The cotton printers and that idea has been complacently reprotested against the 34d. per square yard peated by all the hon. Gentlemen who have duty on printed cottons, because that duty spoken on that side since that it is a netended to hamper them in their business, cessary of life, indispensable to the health and to diminish the consumption of their and strength of the labourer. Now, the goods. I quite agree, therefore, with fact is, that there is a wide difference of the right hon. Gentleman, that the con- opinion on that subject; and I have resumer will primarily be benefited by the peatedly said, both in this House and out remission of the malt tax, and also that the of it, that the great difficulty you have to producer will be benefited, although to a meet in dealing with the malt tax is, that small extent comparatively. But I have there is a large, a growing, and an influalways understood that the great grievance ential body in this country-some of them of this tax consists in the Excise regula- very fanatical, too-who hold the opinion tions which it imposes. This does not affect that beer is not only not a necessary of life, the farmer, it is true; but in one way it but that it is a very pernicious beverage does affect him. An intelligent farmer to the individual, indulgence in which leads with whom I have the honour to be ac- to the infliction of serious evils on the quainted-one who has been a free-trader community. You think they are wrong, from the time the Anti-Corn-Law League no doubt; but you have to deal with that began its agitation-I mean Mr. Lattimore, class, which, within my knowledge, is a of Herefordshire, a person who is a model-numerous and a highly influential one farmer, and admitted to be so by all his among our constituencies; and I think neighbours-Mr. Lattimore was the first that, wrong or right, they are entitled to be who converted me to the importance of re-heard in this House. This class is not pealing the malt tax, on the ground that it speaking wildly, or without considerable would enable the farmer to feed his cattle authority; and it may not be amiss if I with malt. How far this is a valid ground read to the House what has been said on I cannot say; but I have so much faith in the subject by certain persons, begging Mr. Lattimore's judgment, that I believe it hon. Gentlemen not to give way to any to be a valid ground, and I have always lively emotion until they have heard the considered the claim of the farmer to the names attached to this document. These repeal of the tax to be founded upon that persons sayfact, if it be a fact. I have, therefore, publicly stated, that if we could by any means ignorant times, and imbibed by Englishmen in "An opinion, handed down from rude and produce the necessary revenue without the their youth, has become very general-that the malt tax, I would advocate its total remis-habitual use of some portion of alcoholic drink, sion; but I have at the same time always said this, that I would never be a party to imposing a substitute for the malt tax. I don't know that you could point out to me any tax, however little objectionable in its form, which I would substitute instead of the malt tax, if the amount of revenue it produces is indispensable. And I am not less strongly opposed to removing only onehalf of the malt tax. I voted some two years ago against the proposition of that kind of my hon. friend the Member for Derby (Mr. Bass). My objection to the remission of one-half the malt tax is on principle: I won't agree to halve an excise tax, especially the malt tax. I object, independent of my objection to the way in

as of wine, beer, or spirits, is beneficial to health, and even necessary to those subjected to habitual labour. Anatomy, physiology, and experience of all ages and countries, when properly examined, must satisfy every mind, well informed in medical science, that the above opinion is altogether erroneous. Man, in ordinary health, like other aninot be benefited by the habitual employment of mals, requires not any such stimulants, and canany quantity of them, large or small; nor will their use, during his lifetime, increase the aggregate amount of his labour. In whatever quantity they are employed, they will rather tend to di

minish it."

Now that is a very strong opinion, and that "opinion" is signed by upwards of seventy of the principal medical men of the kingdom; amongst whom I find the great names of Sir Benjamin Brodie, Dr.

Chambers, Sir James Clark, Mr. Bransby | done out of the battle for protection-with Cooper, Dr. Davies, Mr. Aston Key, Mr. this difference, that you will be far more Travers, and Dr. Ure. I think that after easily beaten. And what is more-you having got such a declaration as that, I are going to fight a battle not worth fightam entitled to say that this questioning for. I can hardly bring myself to whether an increase in the consumption regard this as an attempt at compensation. of beer would increase the health and I did not want to allude to the thing; but strength of the people of this country-is, the statement of the Chancellor of the at least, an open question; and in this Duchy of Lancaster does not leave me a direction, therefore, I claim leave to differ chance of passing it over, and I've been with the Chancellor of the Exchequer and obliged, in some respect, to deal with it in his friends. And observe that this in- that manner. There is another proposal creased house tax would fall on very many in connexion with this subject, in regard thousand professors of "temperance, to which I think the Chancellor of the and that some of you avow your object, in Exchequer has really quite wrecked his imposing that tax, is to cheapen the price character as a financier; and that is the of beer. The teetotallers among my proposal to remit one-half of the hop duconstituents would naturally say, "We ties. I have often had communications don't want to be relieved from the malt with the growers of hops in Sussex, who tax; we have already repealed it, so far as have represented that they wanted the we are concerned; we are trying, by tracts whole duty off, but have expressed appreand lectures, to induce our fellow-citizens hensions in consequence of the Kent hopto imitate us; and we think your Budget growers advocating only a removal of half unjust, and we won't have it;" and, more the duty; and I have comforted them in than that, they believe that the consump- this way, "Don't alarm yourself for a tion of malt is pernicious to the interests moment; for after the great doings of Peel of society, and take pains to persuade we shall never have a half-and-half Chantheir fellow subjects that it is so-and yet cellor of the Exchequer making two bites the Government ask them to submit to the at a cherry." Here is a most exceptional house tax, in order that beer may be tax-the only tax you have collected upon cheapened, and that a greater consumption the produce in the fields and gardens of of it may be occasioned. Had the Chan- the country-worthy, no doubt, of Persia, cellor of the Exchequer put his proposition or of Turkey-but too ridiculous for this on any other ground-on the scientific England of 1852. How is it collected? ground that the malt tax was a nuisance Every September the Chancellor of the to the trader, and that it prevented the Exchequer sends a little army of taxfarmer giving desirable food to cattle-all gatherers into half a dozen counties; and the principles of political economy would every Member of Parliament knows that come to his aid, and we would be com- every spring he is asked by some unforpelled to acquiesce in the project. But as tunate poor fellow to use his influence to it is the obstacles you have to encounter get for him this temporary employment in are twofold: first, that you substitute a collecting the hop duty. In September the partial tax not levied equally on property hops are picked, carried, and dried; and the generally; and next, that the malt tax is Chancellor of the Exchequer disperses his to be reduced for a purpose to which the little army of taxmen over half a dozen coun great bulk of the people are indifferent, ties. They take stock of the hops, and and to which hundreds of thousands--I thus an estimate of the tax is got. It comes have heard them estimated at millions- sometimes to 200,000l. a year; someare wholly opposed on strong grounds of times to 300,000l., sometimes to 400,0007. moral principle. Such being the case, I a year; hardly ever to half a million. It don't think you have the least chance is a very uncertain tax. Thus it has all whatever of passing a house tax. I don't the evils that can attach to any tax: it is know what a present majority of this cumbrous and costly in its collection; it is House may do; but I can tell you you uncertain in amount, no Chancellor of the can't maintain that tax if you do pass it. Exchequer ever being able to calculate to You have seen lately with the window tax any positive amount on it; and it bears how long-lived is an agitation against an with most unequal pressure on different unjust impost; and, depend upon it, you parts of the country. In some districts are embarking in a contest out of which the hops are hardly worth half the price you will come as disastrously as you have of hops grown in other districts; and as