and immediately abolishing this branch of the revenue, he had submitted a gradual plan, and proposed to effect the measure by three successive gradations. There was certainly more party management than financial dexterity in such an arrangement. The house might be more readily persuaded to sacrifice 500,000l. of taxation this year, and a further sum in the next, than to repeal the entire tax at one sweep: but he did think this mode of proceeding was open to very serious objections. Unless they were prepared for an infraction of the system which was recognised but a few nights since, they would not lend their countenance to this progressive principle of reduction. Let them recollect, that if this motion was carried, there would be no barrier against other reductions. There was a powerful party in the house, whose avowed object was to destroy the sinking fund; though, by that means, the credit of the country would be laid prostrate. Let not hon. gentlemen suffer themselves to be entangled, or become in succession allies of the common enemy. If honour

able members were not on their guard, the enemy would obtain a triumph, even whilst the house was decidedly against them. The repealers of one night would boast that their scheme was drawn up with a view to the conservation of the sinking fund, and afterwards would come the honourable member for Nottingham, and press for the repeal of the leather tax, and for another slice, no less indeed than 600,000l., from the sinking fund. Now from the state of the

money market, the saving effected by the reduction in the 5 per cents. would not exceed 1,200,000l., and 1822.

the whole of this, together with the extra 260,000l. of the sinking fund, would be counterbalanced by the diminution of the malt duty. He hoped the house would beware then of the trap which was here set for it; he hoped it would be seen that gentlemen opposite had no fund in their view, that indeed they talked of no fund but the inexhaustible one of retrenchment. Was the hon. baronet (Sir J. Sebright) in his place, when his majesty's ministers had opened their plans of retrenchment — plans which had, he would venture to say, surpassed the expectations of the house? They had indisputably gone beyond the suggestions of the finance committee, nor was it to be supposed that they closed the account of reductions. must be remembered however, and it would be nothing short of gross ignorance to forget, that as far as reduction had gone, there was pro tanto less field for it remaining. The proposition before them went to shake our financial system to its base: it went by a side wind to rescind the vote to which they had already come. In the army no

It

reduction could at this moment take place. Honourable gentlemen opposite were willing to grant what additional troops might be requisite for the immediate exigency, and it seemed also to be admitted, that the navy and ordnance were at their lowest establishment. It was only in the civil branches of expenditure that retrenchment was considered practicable: and what very extensive saving could be effected on the two millions composing the civil list? Let not honourable gentlemen then, proceed to shake that system which they had recognised,

D

and

and inflict a fatal wound on public credit, for the sake of premature or speculative retrenchments. When the proper time arrived, ministers would not fail to evince the same disposition that actuated them now, and avail themselves of the first opportunity of cutting down useless expenditure. But he called on the hon. member for Ripon (Mr. Gipps,) and he called on the house, in the meantime, to keep faith with the public, not to recede from the pledges given in the midst of a financial operation, so nearly affecting the interests of the stockholder, and the future credit of the country. If our financial system was to be sacrificed, at least let it be pulled down openly and directly; but he conjured them not to trifle with their former vote, nor get rid of it by a course of proceeding so prejudicial to the character of parlia

ment.

Mr. Brougham rose, but immediately gave way to

Sir T. Lethbridge, who said his majesty's ministers were not, he feared, sufficiently apprised of the existing distress. For his own part, the speech from the throne raised a suspicion in his mind, that it was not intended to grant that relief, without which he trembled for the consequences. Under this impression, he had considered their proposed retrenchments as inadequate; for taxation, if not the primary, must be regarded as an auxiliary cause of the distress. He did not mean to contend, that in a country possessed of such great resources as this, taxation under ordinary circumstances was an evil of such magnitude, as was by some persons supposed; but he was satisfied that the country,

in its present state, could not continue to pay the taxes now existing. He perceived with regret, that the landed interest was falling in that house. He did not know the causes which had led to this result; but it was powerfully impressed upon his mind, that the gentlemen who represented the landed interest in that house, had by some extraordinary means been induced to turn their backs upon themselves. In the view which he entertained of the present wants of the country, he did not feel inclined to rest satisfied with a reduction of the salt tax merely; but, in the absence of a greater proposed relief, he would cling to that a drowning man would catch at a straw. He did not differ with ministers on the subject of their general policy; on the contrary, he looked up to them as men of great and splendid character. In their general line of policy they possessed his confidence, and he believed they also possessed the confidence of the people of England-he meant the legitimate people, for the honourable member for Hertfordshire (Sir J. Sebright) had drawn a just distinction between the real and the false people, describing the former to consist of the manly yeomanry, and the latter to be composed of a certain unfortunate portion, the population which inhabited the great manufacturing towns. But although he at present placed confidence in ministers for their general policy, he would tell them, that if they persisted in the resolution which they appeared to have adopted, of sacrificing the landed to the monied interest, he would soon withdraw it from them. He was convinced

that

that ministers would dread to lose the confidence of the country. He knew them to be men of great talents and sound understanding, and that they would not wish to govern the country without carrying with them its confidence and support. He entreated them, therefore, for their own sakes, to reconsider the resolutions to which they had come upon the subject of the distresses of the country. He was persuaded that the aggregate monied property of the kingdom did not bear its fair share of the burdens of the country. With respect to the question before the house, he wished that the repeal of the tax had not been proposed to be gradual, but total and immediate. He hoped, however, that the motion would be carried; for although the relief it proposed was small, yet it was something. Nobody ought to be surprised at the sentiments which he had felt it his duty to submit to the house. In the name of his constituents he represented their distresses, and called upon government to come forward with other measures to afford them relief than those they had proposed, which were totally inadequate for that purpose.

Mr. J. Martin stated his intention to vote for the motion.

Sir Edward Knatchbull could not concur in what had fallen from the hon. member for Somersetshire (Sir T. Lethbridge) with respect to the individuals who represented the landed interest in that house. He was satisfied he expressed the sentiments of every man in the house, when he said that in his opinion they discharged their duty fairly towards their constituents, not permitting them

selves to be awed by the threats which were held on the one hand, or the influence that was proffered on the other. If, as had been contended, the members who voted for the resolution which the chancellor of the exchequer had proposed on a former evening, had by that vote pledged themselves that a sinking fund of 5,000,000l. ought to be maintained; then, indeed, he who had voted for that resolution, would be guilty of inconsistency, in voting, as he intended to do, for the motion before the house. But he was of opinion, that the effect of that resolution was only to pledge the house, that the maintenance of a sinking fund was necessary, without saying any thing of its amount. He did not believe that the sinking fund would be endangered, if the house should resolve to repeal the tax upon salt; for ministers could effect further retrenchments to meet their diminished income.

Mr. Thomas Wilson expressed his intention to vote against the motion.

Mr. Brougham could not refrain from directing the attention of the house to the very extraordinary course which the debate had taken. All the speeches which had that night been delivered, with the exception perhaps of that of the noble marquis, although they came from both sides of the house, were the same in every respect except the concluding sentences. If any person had heard nearly the whole of each speech, and had only not heard the concluding sentence of each, he would have been led to believe that a more harmonious or unanimous assembly had never before got together. Not D 2

one

one member who had spoken had said a word in favour of the tax which formed the subject of discussion; but, on the contrary, all had reprobated it as bad in its principle, odious in its machinery, and impolitic in its application; but somehow or other it happened, that those persons, who were united in the opinion of the impropriety of the tax, differed in opinion on the practical part of the question; some wishing to repeal it now, and others being desirous to abolish it at some future period. One ground which was alleged for maintaining the tax, was the necessity of keeping up a sinking fund; and another was, that government had not yet carried their intended retrenchment sufficiently far to allow the tax to be removed. Now he believed that ministers would as soon consent to abandon this tax, which all men united in "condemning, as effect the retrenchment of which they talked. If the house were that night to take away the tax, and leave ministers to supply the ways and means by which the sinking fund was to be preserved, they would never see any more retrenchment than was sufficient to supply the deficiency arising from the tax. He was confident that if the motion were carried, and he wished it was of the extended operation desired by the hon. member for Somersetshire, ministers would do as they had done on a former occasion; after having stated that they had effected every possible retrenchment, and on that ground objected to the abolition of useless placesthemselves come forward, make still further retrenchments, and abolish the very places they had

before defended; and thus the country would gain two important objects-a reduction of the expenditure, and the removal of a most odious and oppressive tax. The noble marquis had attempted to mislead the members who voted with him in favour of the resolution, which was adopted by the house a few evenings back. He understood that resolution only to confirm a resolution of the house in 1819, by which a sinking fund was recognized to be in existence. But the necessity of keeping up the fund was not within the four quarters of that resolution. Gentlemen who had voted for the resolution alluded to by the noble marquis, might therefore, with perfect consistency, vote in favour of the motion that night. Even those members who were of opinion that the sinking fund ought to be maintained at 5,000,0001. were not precluded from voting for the repeal of the tax, unless they meant to say, that in voting for the resolution on a former occasion, they not only pledged themselves to support the sinking fund, but declared against all retrenchment; for if any gentleman thought that retrenchment to the amount of 500,000l. could be made, it was perfectly consistent in them to vote for the motion. He hoped the house would take warning from the use which the noble marquis made of the vote into which he had beguiled them on a former occasion, and not suffer themselves to be again duped. If at the time the chancellor of the exchequer proposed to the house that resolution of which the noble marquis had said so much, any hon. member had said to the house" Do not vote for that re

solution

solution, for if you do, you will pledge yourselves against all reduction of taxation, because the meaning of the vote is not only that a sinking fund of five millions is to be kept sacred, but that no man shall vote for the repeal of any tax, however odious it may be."If any person had said this, he believed the noble marquis, in conformity with his usual tactics, would have replied-" Listen to no such proposition: vote for the resolution now, and when the taxes shall come to be discussed seriatim, you may then make up your minds either to retain or reject them."-Honourable members, however, incautiously voted for the resolution, and then the noble marquis, having got them in his own keeping, having nailed them as it were, said, “You shall not vote for the repeal of this tax, however unjust and injurious it may be, because you have pledged yourselves against the repeal of any tax until there shall be a new surplus of revenue." From this specimen of the conduct of the noble marquis, the house might anticipate with certainty that their vote of that night, if it should be unfavourable to the motion, would be construed into a pledge against all reduction during the course of the present session. When the hon. member for Aberdeen should show, in the committee of supply, that such and such places and salaries were useless, and ought not to be retained, the noble marquis would say, "You must not abolish these offices, because on Thursday night you voted against the repeal of the salt tax, on the ground that no further reduction could be effected." [The marquis of London

derry uttered an expression of dissent.] He certainly had understood the noble marquis to say, that the reduction was complete for the present session. He now, however, gave him to understand, that he contemplated further reductions. All he could say was, that if the noble marquis did entertain any such design, he hoped the house would force him to carry it into execution. Experience proved how necessary it was for the house to impose on the noble marquis the necessity of redeeming the kind of half pledges which he was in the habit of giving on the subject of economy. If the house should repeal the salt tax, the noble marquis would do as he had done in 1816, and at a later period, when he stated, that reduction was carried to the lowest possible extent that was consistent with the security of the public service-reduce still further. Before he concluded the few observations which he had thought it his duty to submit to the house, he begged leave to remind them, that upon the last occasion, when his hon. friend brought forward his motion for the repeal of the salt tax, it was defeated by a small majority of nine only. What would be the effect produced upon the country?-he did not mean those parts of the country which had been stigmatized in the course of the debate, though he did not think that the opinions of any part of the people were to be undervalued, unless they were proved to be wrong, but the most estimable and thinking part of the community-if, at the time his hon. friend made his motion, when the distress which pressed upon agriculture was as nothing compared with

what