§ Mr. Henry Handleypresented a Petition from a parish in the county of Lincoln for a reduction in the duties on Insurance of farming-stock. He felt bitterly disappointed that the noble Chancellor of the Exchequer had not taken into consideration the circumstances of the agricultural interest, and relieved it as well as the mercantile interest of the article of insurance duties. Nothing would tend more to the suppression of incendiarism than an alteration in this point. He had a motion on the subject, but trusted, that before the time fixed for bringing it on, the noble Lord would take the matter into his favourable consideration.
§ Lord Althorpobserved, that there would have been a difficulty in reducing the duty on insurances of farming stock separately from that on farming buildings, &c.; and if he had proposed a reduction of all insurance duties, a deficiency would be 465 created of so large an amount as to prevent other more pressing reductions.
§ Mr. Cobbettsaid, the noble lord (Lord Althorp) seemed determined to take off no taxes by which the great bulk of the population could be relieved. There were not fewer than 300 Members in that House who came in under a pledge to vote for the repeal of the malt, the hop, the soap duties, and the duty on newspapers. He was quite astonished to find that an hon. Member asserted that the people of England expected nothing more than the Budget proposed by the noble Lord. They expected a great deal more. They expected the total repeal of the Maltduty. Barley was but 20s. a quarter, the duty on it when malted was 20s. 8d. And the price of a quarter of malt was not less than 60s. This did not arise from the expense of malting.
§ Lord AlthorpBarley is more than 20s. a quarter.
§ Mr. CobbettIt was not more in the county of Norfolk last week. The additional twenty shillings in the price of the malt was occasioned by the excise regulations, which subjected the maltsters to much unnecessary expense, inconvenience, and difficulty. The drink of the whole people was produced from this article, and they expected that the duty would be taken off. They would then have their quarter of malt for 20s: instead of 60s. for barley was convertible into malt without any expense. The people would despise the Reform Bill and the reform, they would be ashamed of their jubilees and their rejoicings on the success of that measure, unless 40s. a-quarter were taken off the price of malt. This duty was one cause why young people were driven from the farm-houses, because of the expense of supplying them with beer; and it led also to the abuses arising from beer-shops. A Sussex farmer, in his evidence before the Committee last Session, said that forty-five years back all his labourers brewed their own beer, and drank it with their families; that, however, at present none of them brewed unless those to whom he gave the malt. Country gentlemen ought to attend to the wants of the agricultural class, in place of prosecuting poor fellows for killing their pheasants and hares; and it would be much better if Lord Althorp took off the malt duty, in place of removing the duty from tiles and other articles. The whole amount which Lord Althorp pretended to take off in his Budget would not give 466 one farthing relief to the people at large.
§ Petition laid on the Table.