member had marked out for himself. He attacked ministers, who he must be aware were in possession of the details of those matters to which he alluded; and without waiting to know from them what they had done, commenced by criminating them, for having done nothing towards the relief of the country. Such was the precipitancy of the hon. member, that on the very day the address was moved, he had prepared these attacks, before he could at all have been aware what was done or intended. His object was to entrap the house to a final vote on the entangled and complicated subjects which he had introduced. But on the occasion of voting the address, and very early in the discussion, he (lord Londonderry) had distinctly stated that it was not the intention of ministers to go into any discussion on matters which could not be at all fairly understood, until the details respecting them were laid before the house. He should not have done his duty if he had asked the house in that unprepared state, to decide a question so important in its results; much less was he disposed to join the hon. member in calling upon them to come to a decision upon the present question, which might lead them to so monstrous a conclusion. He would tell the hon. member, that if his object was to serve the country, and to devise the means of relieving it from its present difficulties, they ought not to assemble there to criminate each other, or to look back at the past, but to see what could be done for the present. Now with respect to a few of the hon. and learned member's exaggerations. The hon. member had talked of

the expenditure, and had taken three years of war, when that was at its highest. Now was that a fair comparison? or was it at all a fair ground of charge against that (the ministerial) side of the house, for the gentlemen on the other side were as eager to grant on those occasions, as any ministers could be to ask? And let it be borne in mind, that to the great exertions made by us on that occasion, we owed the proud situation which we were thereby enabled to hold among the nations of Europe. The hon. gentleman had next directed his attack against the report of the finance committee, and stated that the report was drawn up by those who were under the power of ministers. But was this, he would ask, a fair description of the independent gentlemen who had composed that committee, and who had drawn up a report which had done them so much credit? This was the species of accusation which was sweepingly thrown out against government, and against the arduous steps which had been taken in the public service; but he always found that it was one thing to carry on the measures of government, in times of difficulty and danger, and another to look coolly on, and only criticise and condemn when the danger was over. The hon. member had talked of the estimates, and of their enormous amount during the war; but were those to be coolly calculated in moments when the honour of the British arms was engaged? Was the duke of Wellington, in drawing up the lines at Torres Vedras, to calculate the estimates of his expences, and suspend his operations until those estimates were dis

cussed

cussed in parliament? He believed, that had such been the practice of that great captain, the country would not have had to record so many glorious achievements of her armies under his command. But when estimates, and their pressure upon the country, were talked of, let it be remembered, that the fever for military glory, as it was called, was not at all on that (the ministerial) side. He recollected well that a main support was given to those military measures from the other side, and he also recollected that not a word was said about the amount of those estimates when the enemy was at Bologne, and we fortifying the heights at Dover. At that time, an hon. member, general Crawford, who sat on the opposite benches, was night after night ringing in their ears the necessity of some stronger measures for the safety and defence of the country. Mr. Windham, a gentleman for whose memory he had the greatest respect, was an advocate, and a warm one, for strong military measures, and the system was canonized soon after by his being made war-minister, and when the learned gentleman opposite talked of the increase of millions in our estimates, he should recollect that a great part of them were increased by Mr. Windham's plan for increasing the pay and limiting of service in the army; and that some of the millions talked of might have been saved, but for that plan to which the hon. and learned gentleman himself had given his support. Another exaggeration of the hon. member was, that we had the same degree of taxation in peace as in war; but did the hon. member not take into account, that at the

close of the war we had reduced taxation to the amount of 18 millions-a relief which no country in Europe could boast at the time? He mentioned these points to recal to the attention of the house, the spirit of crimination and exaggeration in which the hon. member had spoken; but at the same time there was, in some parts, of his address, a tone of seeming candour and moderation which were well calculated to impose on many. Now what was the situation of the house with respect to this question? The speech from the throne announced the distresses of the country; and his majesty threw himself on his parliament, on that momentous subject. Now, he put it to the house, whether, in the address on that speech, his majesty could have got any conclusive answer on that point? Whether, in two or three days, the house could have come to any practical conclusion upon so important a question? On the occasion of voting the address, he distinctly stated that ministers would at a very early day be prepared to lay before parliament a statement of what they intended to propose, and that the subjects which they would touch would become matters of separate discussion. They did not wish to take credit for any thing which was not then fully made known and at the same time he stated that no member would be pledged by the vote which he gave on that occasion, to the support of any of the measures which might be subsequently brought forward. So he would now say, and by supporting "the previous question," with which he should feel it his duty to meet the hon. member's motion,

no

no member would be precluded from supporting any measure of reduction which might be proposed hereafter. By moving the " previous question," he meant not to say, that the subject which the hon. and learned gentleman had proposed might not be discussed hereafter, but merely that the present was not the proper time for the introduction. All he claimed was, that the house should not decide until they had the whole subject on both sides fully before them. The present motion of the hon. and learned member was indeed nothing more than an attempt by a party vote to cast a censure on ministers, and to withdraw from them that confidence which they possessed; for he put it to the house, he put it to the hon. and learned gentleman himself, whether without reference to our income and expenditure, without any knowledge of what ministers intended to propose, it could have any other object. He would say, if such was the intention of the hon. member-if the house should choose to go with him in with drawing their confidence from the ministers, why then it would be better at once that some others should be chosen, in order, before the house came to any decision upon the question of reduction, they might be informed of what was intended to be done. If the house should concur with the hon. gentlemen, he would say, let him (Mr. Brougham) take charge of the administration, and have access to those documents which were now in the possession of ministers; and having those papers in one pocket, and the vote of the house (which was much better) in the other, let him then judge

whether it would be prudent to come to any decision upon such a subject without a reference to those documents. But if, as he had just said, the house should be of opinion that the hon. gentleman and his friends should be placed in the situation which they (the present ministers) now filled, which he would admit, were objects of fair ambition to every man in the country, if the hon. and learned gentleman should, as no doubt he would be appointed to some high trust-that of chancellor of the exchequer, or some other of equal importance, his first object in coming down to that house would be-for he (lord Londonderry) would not believe him rash enough to be bound by what he had said there to-night-to implore them not to rush at once to a decision upon such a subject as the present but to suspend their opinions until he could lay the proper documents before them.

Mr. Calcraft requested that the house would consider what it was the noble lord had proposed to them, he had intreated them to vote for the previous question, because on Friday next he intended to bring forward his proposition for the relief of the agricultural distress. If the noble lord was sincere in his intention of relieving the agricultural interest, the assenting to the motion of his hon. and learned friend would favour instead of interfering with that object; for it would only pledge the house to the reduction of taxation as one of the means of affording relief. But what confidence could the house place in the noble lord's promises of relief? Had he not in the last session of parliament promised that the government would do all that it

could

could to alleviate the agricultural distress? And yet what had been done to redeem that promise? Why he had sent all the agricultural petitions to a committee, in which some of his own most active friends were the principal persons, and in which they had absolutely drawn up the report that was afterwards agreed upon. And what relief had that report brought to them? Or what relief did they anticipate from the project on which the noble lord had that evening talked so largely? He put it to the country gentlemen to determine, whether they could entertain any rational expectation of relief at the hands of the noble lord, when he had on the present occasion carefully abstained from contradicting the expression of the chancellor of the exchequer, that no reduction of taxation could take place. If the noble lord had had any intention of reducing taxation, he would have willingly stated that such a measure formed a part of his plan; but as far as he (Mr. Calcraft) could collect from what the two members of the executive government had said, it was certainly their intention to persist in the heavy taxation by which the country was oppressed at present. The noble lord with a view of rebutting the illustration which his hon. and learned friend had given of the extravagant expenditure of government during the war, had said, that the extravagant expenditure which he had complained of had all accrued from measures supported on his (the Opposition) side of the house, as if, though the noble lord had been in power, his opponents had been the sole directors of the expenditure of the country. The noble lord had stated that the extravagant suggestions

upon which the government afterwards acted, had come from Mr. Windham and general Crawford; but he would ask the noble lord, whether those gentlemen had not always acted in a distinct opposition of their own, and apart from the party to which he and his honourable and learned friend had always been attached. He (Mr. Calcraft) could at least say, that in the propriety of these suggestions he had never concurred; and could appeal to his past public conduct, in proof of the accuracy of his statement.

Mr. Ricardo, stated, that in his opinion, taxation was not the cause of the present agricultural distress. A country might be totally without taxes, and yet in the exact situation that England was at present. It was consistent enough in those who through the restoration of the currency had made a change of 50 or 56 per cent. in the value of money, and had consequently increased the actual value of the taxes in that proportion, though their nominal amount still remained the same, to say that taxation was the chief cause of the distressed state of agriculture; but it was impossible for those who held that the restoration in the currency had not created any thing like so great a change, to accede to such a statement, or to give their vote in favour of the proposition which his hon. and learned friend had that evening submitted to the house. From the line of argument which his hon. and learned friend had pursued in one part of his speech, he (Mr. Ricardo) was afraid, that he (Mr. Brougham) was going to prove that the very taxation which he wished to reduce was a source of benefit to the nation. His hon.

and

and learned friend had stated, that the manufacturers of leather, on account of the tax on it, largely increased its price to the consumer, and derived so much benefit thereby, as to be ready to represent it to Parliament as a very useful and beneficial tax. Surely by a parity of analogy, the agricultural interest, burdened as it was by taxation, might petition parliament against a reduction of it, since it was as much in their power as in that of the leather-manufacturer to make it useful in enhancing the price of their commodity to the consumer. His honourable and learned friend had, however, drawn a very nice distinction-so nice, indeed, that for his own part he was not gifted with ability to discern it, between the circumstances in which the leather-manufacturer and those in which the agriculturist was placed. He had said that in the case of the manufacturer the taxation was paid by the consumer; but that in the case of the agriculturist, it was paid by the seller, and could not be charged to the consumer. He could wish that the honourable and learned gentleman had stated to the house his reasons for such an assertion. If he were called upon to declare what he conceived the cause of the present depressed state of agriculture, he should declare the cause of it to be the abundance of produce now in hand, arising from the late abundant harvest, the quantity of land recently brought into cultivation, the importation of corn from Ireland, and various other causes which it was not material for him at that time to mention to the house. Indeed, the house would deceive both itself and the country, if it should come to a re

solution that reduction of taxation would relieve the distresses of the agricultural interest. His hon. and learned friend had stated, that unless something were done to relieve the farmer, much of the land would be thrown out of tillage. He (Mr. Ricardo) said so too; and it was to that very circumstance that he looked forward as a remedy. His hon. and learned friend, among the other observations which he had made, had made some upon a set of individuals whom he stated to be anxious to transfer the whole landed property of the country into the hands of the public creditor. For his own part he could not help observing, that he knew of no persons who entertained such wishes; neither could he imagine any cause which could lead any persons to entertain them. He himself thought that the landholder might be enabled to receive an adequate rent without any breach of faith being committed towards the stockholders. With regard to the stockholders, it might be supposed, from the language which had been used that evening, that it had been proposed to transfer to them the property of the landholders, and to leave the landholders entirely without resources. Now such a proposition never had been, and never could be, seriously propounded; but though he said that, he was prepared to assert that it would be most advisable both for the landholder and the stockholder, that the former should surrender to the latter a part of his property in liquidation of the debt that had been contracted. Indeed, as the stockholder received, in the shape of interest, taxes from the landholder, it might be said that a part of the land did at this moment ab

solutely