tecting duty ought to be laid on Foreign Corn. The question should not be viewed with reference to the taxes paid by land in this country, as compared with other countries, but with reference to the manner in which taxation pressed upon the various classes at home. Mr. Ward successively investigated the alleged burdens which pressed upon the land; they were told, for instance, of buildings and repairs; but such outlay formed a part of the ordinary expenses of property, and could no more be classed under the head of "burdens" than a similar claim with respect to factories and machinery. According to Mr. M'Culloch, cotton cloth could now be had at a quarter of the price which was given in 1814; yet no one talked of bringing in a bill to indemnify the manufacturers for that diminished price. Poor rates were said to be another burden; but from returns moved for by the Member for East Norfolk, it appeared that of 444,000,000l. paid for poor rates during the last ninety-four years, the land paid only 55,000,000l., whilst houses, mills, and factories paid 240,000,000l. The laying down of railways, which are sometimes rated at 1,500l. per mile and in other cases at 600l. per mile, had proved a great relief to the land owners. Highway-rates were said to be a burden; but highways are indispensable adjuncts to landed property, which would be almost valueless without roads: the City of London might as well call for a tax upon Cornwall to pave Cheapside, as the landed interest call upon the public. The Churchrates amount to 500,000l., of which two-fifths are paid by Dissenters; and when they com

plained, they were told by Sir Robert Peel that they took their property subject to the tax. The same answer would apply to the landowners: who belonging for the most part to the Established Church, should be the last to complain of Church-rates. Lord Stanley, in 1833, speaking of Irish tithes, declared them to be a public fund, set aside for public purposes, without claim on the part of the landlords. Mr. Ward entered at some length upon the question of the land-tax, originally granted to indemnify the Crown, and commuted in 1689 for a uniform tax of four shillings in the pound on

an

one

assessment then fixed; the effect of which was, that with the increase of property the tax, although in some countries still amounting to nearly four shillings in the pound of the real value, was in many instances as low as five farthings, and in others as low as one farthing. He compared this burthen with the corresponding impost upon land in Austria and France; where the land-tax is respectively one-half and fourth of the indirect tax, while in this country it is only one twentyfifth. He then turned to the exemptions of land-remission of duty upon farm servants, houses for husbandry, windows, insurances, auction duties, carts, shepherds' dogs, &c., &c., exemptions which fall principally upon farmers, stewards, or bailiffs, overseers, or clerks under them, persons connected with the proprietary of the soil.

In respect of the probate and legacy duties, the land had enjoyed an important exemption; if these duties had been paid since 1797, the amount would have equalled that actually paid by personal property; but the landed

interest had enjoyed an exemption equivalent to 78,800,000l. In conclusion, Mr. Ward deprecated the double debate which would be raised by the amendment of which Mr. George Bankes had given notice.

Mr. George Bankes said, that if he were not prepared to negative Mr. Ward's proposition, he should not have taken that opportunity of offering another subject for the consideration of the House. He complained, that, whereas Mr. Ward professed to be ready to give up protection in all cases, one interest had been insidiously singled out; and he objected to the Corp-Laws being the first stone removed. He quoted Mr. Cobden, who said that "the law of England gives the poor of England the right of subsistence on the soil, and he is the first mortgagee on the landlord's estate;" but the landowner was not only pledged to bear that, but the national creditor also. Mr. Bankes believed that the land-tax in Germany and France was liable to burthens, such as the maintenance of the poor, which are imposed upon land separately in this country, under the names of county-rates and poor-rates. He adverted to the attacks of the League upon the landholders, and more especially to Mr. Cobden's attack upon himself. Mr. Cobden had said that he did not pay more than 8s. a week to his labourers; but Mr. Bankes quoted several letters from tenants on his Dorset shire estate spontaneously written, and shewing that the rate of wages for various kinds of labour, ranged from 10s. to 25s. or more; with a variety of other contingent advantages, such as beer, wheat at the fixed price of 6s. per bushel, cot tages rent free, and gratuities of

money. He mentioned an occasion in November last, when he went to visit a part of his property where he did not usually reside, in order to minister to the wants of the poor during an anticipated hard winter. Mr. Cobden had said that the people in Dorsetshire were ill-clothed and ill-educated; their clothing came from Manchester, Mr. Bankes having spent many hundreds in clothes and other necessaries; two schools had been established in the parish, and at the head of the subscription-list stood his own name for 250l. with 5007. money lent, without interest, and not to be called for until payment should be convenient. Mr. Cobden had called upon him to prove what benefit the Corn-Law conferred upon agriculture; he replied that thousands upon thousands of acres had been brought into cultivation in his neighbourhood, which never could have been cultivated, if the protection of that law had not been given. In a parish comprising an area of fourteen square miles, and a population of 15,000 or 16,000 persons, there was not an able-bodied person who was receiving relief. Mr. Bankes then animadverted on the Anti-Corn-Law League, the sole object of which appeared to him to be to create excitement and dissatisfaction throughout the country; when they had obtained sufficient notoriety, they would propose a repeal of the corn-laws in that House; in the meantime they sent their emissaries and spies into the country to disturb the peace and comfort of the peasantry. "I beseech Her Majesty's Government," said Mr. Bankes, "to protect us; as a faithful and dutiful subject of the Crown, I request and demand it."

He

concluded by moving - "That it is expedient, as a remedy for a state of anxiety embarrassing and unfair to the agriculturists and injurious to commerce, that the attention of this House be directed to the continued existence of Associations which, in matters affecting agriculture and commerce, pretend to influence the deliberations of the Legislature, and which, by their combination and by their proceedings, are at once dangerous to the public peace and inconsistent with the spirit of the constitution."

Mr. Cobden said, that he had not attacked Mr. Bankes individually, nor had he charged him with giving less wages than other people; but he had good reason to know that able-bodied labourers in Dorsetshire could not get more than 7s. a week for their labour. He could produce documents shewing a very different state of things on Mr. Bankes's estate from anything he had represented to the House. Why, there were people living in the Isle of Purbeck, Occupying cottages that were more like rabbit-huts than fit residences for human beings, cottages that had been complained of by the surgeon to the union as likely to produce disease. There was one startling fact, supported by official authority and which the honourable Member had not grappled with-one out of every seven of the people of Dorset was a pauper; and yet, with this fact staring him in the face, the honourable Member got up and read to the House letters stating that there were no people in Dorsetshire wanting employment. Turning to the subject before the House, Mr. Cobden said, that if the inquiry were refused, the country would at once decide that

it was because honourable Gentlemen opposite knew that they could not make out their case. He vindicated the peaceable agitation of the League, and mentioned a course of meetings which he was holding in the agricultural counties, and to which farmers came from a distance of thirty or forty miles, who dared not attend meetings in their own district.

Mr. Wykeham Martin opposing the Motion, said that Mr. Ward had forgotten the heavy tax on the transfer of landed property.

Mr. William Williams, on the other hand, contrasted the costs of mortgages on personal and real property, the maximum of mortgage duty payable by the landowner being 251.; and he entered into a variety of calculations to show how generally unequal was the pressure of taxation on the

poor.

Mr. Milner Gibson asked, what Mr. Bankes would do if his resolution were carried? Would he advise the Government to suspend the Habeas Corpus Act? or, like Lord Castlereagh, declare the meetings of the League illegal? He then stated some general arguments for Mr. Ward's Motion.

Sir Robert Peel said, that he could not vote for the amendment on two grounds; that it had no immediate connexion with Mr. Ward's Motion, which merited a direct affirmative or negative; and he decidedly objected to the dealing with acts that the House might disapprove by way of resolution, which constituted no law of the realm; and could have no ulterior effect.

If the House thought the law improperly administered, it could move an Address to the Crown to put the existing law in force,

which would be a censure on Ministers; or if it thought the law defective, it could amend it by legislation but resolutions could be binding on no one. He must, however, object to the Committee; because, fairly to represent the House, he might claim that the Ministerial side should have a majority in the Committee, and then would it be satisfactory to Mr. Ward? What would be the nature of the evidence? and how prevent the Committee from exhibiting a mere conflict of opinion? Mr. Ward, for example, said that land was exempt from the probate and legacy-duty: he denied that, for all leasehold property is subject to it: Mr. Ward and he differed, and how was the point to be settled? Not by referring it to a Committee, but by volunteering to give returns tending to show the proportion of public taxation borne by the land; to the production of which Sir Robert Peel had no objection. The late Chancellor of the Exchequer had shown that the land contributes 1,600,000l. to the State in stamps on deeds and conveyances; the amount of the legacy-duty being 1,700,000l. Formerly, profits and stock in trade were assessed to the poor-rate; but the difficulty of ascertaining the value had caused those sources to be exempted: the land, however, was tangible, and on that the burden remained. It might be said that though no one would be influenced by the report of a Coinmittee, people would be influenced by the facts collected but those facts could be as well obtained by returns. Adam Smith and Mr. Ricardo admitted that tithes were a charge on the land: but how could the question be settled in Committee,

whether Mr. Ward, or Adam Smith and Mr. Ricardo were right? But he did not rest the claim of the land to protection exclusively on the plea of special burdens: last year he had stated, that after protection had endured for a hundred and fifty years, and capital had been in vested on the faith of it, the protection must not be rashly or suddenly withdrawn. Besides, there was an immense population dependent on the land, whose inter est must not be lightly disturbed. He had uniformly accompanied the maxim, "Buy in the cheapest market and sell in the dearest," with the qualification, that regard must be had to so artificial a state as ours in the application of that abstract principle. And if Mr. Ward obtained this Committee -whose inquiry might last for two or three Sessions-was he prepared to vote next week for total repeal of the Corn-laws? Mr. Ewart had a resolution on the Notice-paper that the question ought to be settled without delay: Mr. Ward's settlement of the question was to transfer it to a Select Committee, whose labours could not close with the present Session! If he were convinced that it was for the interest of the country at large that the law should be altered, he would not one moment hesitate to adopt that course; but he was not so convinced. The change of the Cornlaw, the Tariff, and the undue panic, had already had a tendency to disturb the application of capital, and to suspend employment, and the continuance of doubt must have evil consequences; therefore he could not consent to the appointment of the Committee.

Lord Howick rose, chiefly for

concluded by moving - "That it is expedient, as a remedy for a state of anxiety embarrassing and unfair to the agriculturists and injurious to commerce, that the attention of this House be directed to the continued existence of Associations which, in matters affecting agriculture and commerce, pretend to influence the deliberations of the Legislature, and which, by their combination and by their proceedings, are at once dangerous to the public peace and inconsistent with the spirit of the constitution."

Mr. Cobden said, that he had not attacked Mr. Bankes individually, nor had he charged him with giving less wages than other people; but he had good reason to know that able-bodied labourers in Dorsetshire could not get more than 7s. a week for their labour. He could produce documents shewing a very different state of things on Mr. Bankes's estate from anything he had represented to the House. Why, there were people living in the Isle of Purbeck, occupying cottages that were more like rabbit-huts than fit residences for human beings, cottages that had been complained of by the surgeon to the union as likely to produce disease. There was one startling fact, supported by official authority and which the honourable Member had not grappled with-one out of every seven of the people of Dorset was a pauper; and yet, with this fact staring him in the face, the honourable Member got up and read to the House letters stating that there were no people in Dorsetshire wanting employment. Turning to the subject before the House, Mr. Cobden said, that if the inquiry were refused, the country would at once decide that

it was because honourable Gentlemen opposite knew that they could not make out their case. He vindicated the peaceable agitation of the League, and mentioned a course of meetings which he was holding in the agricultural counties, and to which farmers came from a distance of thirty or forty miles, who dared not attend meetings in their own district.

Mr. Wykeham Martin opposing the Motion, said that Mr. Ward had forgotten the heavy tax on the transfer of landed property.

Mr. William Williams, on the other hand, contrasted the costs of mortgages on personal and real property, the maximum of mortgage duty payable by the landowner being 251.; and he entered into a variety of calculations to show how generally unequal was the pressure of taxation on the poor.

Mr. Milner Gibson asked, what Mr. Bankes would do if his resolution were carried? Would he advise the Government to suspend the Habeas Corpus Act? or, like Lord Castlereagh, declare the meetings of the League illegal? He then stated some general arguments for Mr. Ward's Motion.

Sir Robert Peel said, that be could not vote for the amendment on two grounds; that it had no immediate connexion with Mr. Ward's Motion, which merited a direct affirmative or negative; and he decidedly objected to the dealing with acts that the House might disapprove by way of resolution, which constituted no law of the realm; and could have no ulterior effect.

If the House thought the law improperly administered, it could move an Address to the Crown to put the existing law in force,