tioned for any repeal, from a conviction nion. Respectable as might be the opithat neither the manufacturer nor the con nion of the hon. member, and of the tanner sumer required it, and also because there whom he had consulted, he could not help was at present a visible alteration and im- thinking that the House had a far better provement in their business: it farther criterion to go by on a subject of this kind, stated, that the reduced amount of the and that was, the opinions of the tanners duty paid by tanners for the last year or throughout the country, who, in hundreds two, was not occasioned by a falling-off of petitions, had laid their grievances bein the trade, but to the large manufac. fore the House. It would have been as tured stock on hands, from the extensive well, in viewing the subject, if the hon. purchases made from South America after gentleman near him (Mr. Grant), instead 1812, and which being laid in largely un- of dealing in general principles, had conder favourable circumstances, answered fined himself to particular facts. He for the years during which the reduction would have then found, that the export alluded to had occurred. At present, of the unmanufactured article had douthough the number of tanners had de bled since the additional duty, while that creased, the trade 'was in an improving of the manufactured had decreased to less state. The decrease in the number of than one-half what it had previously been. tanners was to be accounted for from the For the five years prior to 1812, the trade getting into the hands of greater ca- amoun: of unmanufactured export was pitalists. In consequence of the opening 5,603,395 lbs. weight; for the five years of new roads, the communication from since it was double; namely, 10,710,0731bs. the places where bark was obtained and During the same periods, the export of the the great towns, was greatly facilitated, manufactured article was, before 1812, and the trade had in consequence been 2,449,720lbs.; since, it was less than one. getting more and more into great towns, half that amount; namely, 1,142,111 lbs. and into the hands of great capitalists.- so that the operation of the act was to From having received better information, double the export of the raw material, he did not think that the state of the and to reduce, in the proportion of onefinances of this country, at the present half, that of the manufactured article. iime, would allow the repeal of this tax ; The foreign manufacturer was, therefore, nor did he think, if it were repealed, that thrown into other countries. Of course, ministers could do without some other tax a great home consumption must necessato an equal amount in place of it. rily continue. But how was it carried on?

Mr. Methuen said, he never knew so Was it not obvious that the sum thus strong a feeling in the country against any raised was drawn from one pocket into tax, as there was against that which it another? The poor, therefore, paid their was now proposed to repeal. He believed, part of it; and the rich were obliged, in that were they to search all England over, the shape of poor-rates, to supply the they would not be able to find one tanner means thus withdrawn from the lower in favour of the tax, except the tanner classes, by an impolitic tax of this kind. who had corresponded with the hon. gen. The wealth of the manufacturer was the tleman who spoke last.

great source of the revenue, and by his Lord Compton contended, that the ar. industry and activity taxation was largely gument used by an hon. gentleman, that supplied for the interests of the state. no additional tax had been laid on the This tax vitally affected the reproductive leather trade from the reign of queen Anne power of the manufacturing interest, and to the year 1812, was most unfortunate for it only wanted three or four such injudihis side of the question ; for it proved the cious imposts to cut up by the roots the view which the different chancellors of resources of the state. He should, therethe exchequer, who had succeeded each fore, vote for the repeal. other during that period, entertained of Mr. Benson said, that the hon. member that subject. Had they thought such a for Bristol had urged as a reason for the tax justifiable, they certainly would not new view which he took of the present have been so long without imposing it. question, a letter which he had received

Mr. Marryat begged to explain his from a person extensively engaged in the vote, which, instead of being opposed to tanning trade. The hon. gentleman had that he had formerly_given, like that of said, that the writer of that letter had a the hon, member for Bristol, would be in perfect knowledge of his own interest; perfect consistency with his former opi- and he thought he might say, that the

hon. gentleman, in voting for the repeal | of the tax, and then so suddenly voting against it, had also a perfect knowledge of his own interest [Cry of Order!]. From the inquiries which he had made into this business during the recess, his former opinion was confirmed. Had he had any doubt respecting it, from the evidence of the gentlemen brought forward by government in favour of the tax, he should have drawn the conclusion, that its repeal was essential to the interests of the country.

Mr. Hart Davis wished to ask the hon. gentleman, upon what grounds he had presumed to impute to him, the being actuated by improper motives in any vote which he should now give, or which he had ever given in that House.

The Speaker observed, that the language of the hon. gentleman fairly bore the interpretation which had been put upon it. It was a language which, by the rules of the House, the hon. gentleman was not warranted in holding. The words made use of by the hon. gentleman certainly conveyed a personal reflexion against the hon. member for Bristol; and he should be wanting in his duty if he did not now declare his opinion on the subject.

Mr. Benson said, that if by the language he had used, he had given any of fence, it was very much regretted by him. Nothing could be farther from his intention than to convey any personal reflection against the hon. gentleman. All that he had meant to say, with respect to the conduct pursued by the hon. gentleman, was, that as when he gave his former vote, it was supposed we were on the eve of an election, this circumstance had had its influence. He did not mean any thing personal to the hon. gentleman; but that, with the view of standing well in the opinion of his constituents, he had made use of a little manœuvre which all of them understood very well.

Mr. Lushington said, that the result of the inquiries he had made were very different from that expressed by some hon. gentlemen opposite. The sense of all the tanners whom he had consulted upon the subject was in favour of the tax. On an average of five years before the imposition of the tax, the drawback on the exporta tion of leather amounted to 52,000l.; but if the consumption of leather since that period was less, and the exportation something more, was it fair to say that the tax was the cause of it? The con(VOL. XXXVII.)

sumption of leather, like that of every other article, had decreased from what it was in time of war; the diminution in the consumption of that article, ought not, therefore, to be charged as a consequence of the tax. It was generally known, that the leather tax was in a flourishing state at present. The tax was a productive one, and therefore ought not to be repealed upon unsupported statements. He was aware that it was the interest of the leather manufacturers to have the tax repealed, and he was not surprised that they should so earnestly persevere in petitioning for that purpose, as it would in fact be taking 160,000l. from the public and putting it into their own pockets. But could that be advanced as a parliamentary reason for the measure? If the tax was repealed, some other tax must be laid upon the public to replace it, and which would perhaps be more severely felt than the present. The noble lord who introduced the question had used many observations in support of it, but none of them seemed to answer his purpose; at length he said, that the number of persons employed in the leather trade had considerably decreased since the imposition of the leather tax, which, according to the noble lord's statement, was a strong argument in favour of its being repealed. But allowing the number of manufacturers to have decreased, it was by no means calculated to support the proposed measure, if he could show to the House, that though the manufacturing of leather was placed in the hands of a fewer number of capitalists, yet the whole amount of the manufactured article had increased, and was still increasing. If this was found to be the case, it would turn out that the public, instead of being injured, would be benefited by the alteration; as the business, being carried on upon a large scale and by persons of large capital, leather would be sold at a price which smaller manufacturers could not afford to do. To prove that the whole amount of the manufactured article had increased, he would instance the case of Messrs. Brewil and Co. whose business had increased five or six fold within the last few years. If the noble lord on the other side of the House doubted that statement, he would read over the account. Here the hon. member read the account, which stated, that in 1809 the taxes paid by Messrs. Brewil and Co. amounted to 1,973., in 1817 they amounted to 5,937, and in 1818, 6,716. Thus, though there (4 H)

facture, But his great objection against the consolidated fund above the charge, it the tax was that it fell unequally—that it might have been another matter ; but pressed most severely on those who were there being no such excess they were least able to bear it. Every tax on the bound in justice to the public creditor, to necessaries of life had a direct tendency to a

see that if they repealed this tax, they increase the price of labour ; and the ef. carried to the consolidated fund an equal fect of any tax like this, on a necessary amount of revenue. The hon. and learned of life, was immediately felt in the in- gentleman was for having all taxes on necreased price of labour of all those who cessaries of life done away with. The used it. While they were raising, there- taxes on beer and malt were on necessafore, this paltry sum of 180,0001. with ries for life-the whole of a large revenue one hand, they were obliged to put their of lwenty millions a year, might be said, other hand in their pocket to pay it. But therefore to be raised on the necessaries of besides, all the objections applied to it life. Was the hon. and learned gentleman, which applied to a poll tax-a poll tax, in pursuance of his fanciful theory, anxious indeed, it was, except that it was laid on that the whole of this large revenue should the feet instead of the head [laugh]. be done away? It had been said, that if. Every person paid so much, let his occu- excise regulations, by which the trade pation be what it might. The peasants, was impeded, were repealed, the process who wore the heaviest shoes, were the of manufacturing might be improved, as it highest taxed by it. As the tax was laid formerly was in France. But this arguon by weight, they paid twice as much as ment did not apply; for it was not prothose who now heard him, who wore posed to repeal all the tax on leather, but lighter shoes; coarse leather paying, as the additional tax only. The repeal of much as fine. All the objections against the additional tax would cause the same a poll tax, therefore, applied to it. It regulations to be continued, with less adwas a poll tax of the worst kind, falling vantage to the public. He had read all most burthensome on those who were least the statements and listened to all the arable to bear it. These were the grounds guments which had been used against this on which he had been an humble oppo- | tax, and he confessed that if the House nent of the measure in 1812, and these had been in a condition to perform the were the reasons on which he should sup- agreeable duty of repealing taxes, the port the present bill.

leather tax was not that of which he Mr. Huskisson wished to explain an should be the first to recommend the reerror into which he was surprised the hon. peal. It was obvious, and it had been and learned gentleman had fallen. He argued by the hon. and learned gentleman, had said, that if this tax were taken off, that the burihen of the tax did not fall on the House might proceed as they had the tanners, but, as in the case of all condone before, without substituting any sumable commodities, on the public, who other. If the hon. and learned gentleman were the consumers. Yet, if the hon. and alluded to the property tax he was totally learned gentleman read any of the state. mistaken. There was an obvious distinc- ments which had been put forward on this tion between a tax only for the duration subject, he would see that those who were of the war, and this iax which formed most active in demanding this repeal, part of the Ways and Means, and was grounded their enmity to the tax upon carried to the consolidated fund for the this, that the tax could not be thrown from páynient of the interest of the debt. This the manufacturers upon the consumers. tax, he must inform the hon. and learned The only circumstance which gave a gentleman, formed no part of the supply of show of an argument in favour of this bill, the year, and whether they were to abate was, that the tax had been laid on almost 5,000 or. 10,000 men, there would be no immediately preceding a time of great difference respecting it, as it was pledged pressure. But a much stronger statement

the loans granted on the faith of parliament of any other part of the excise duties. In The whole amount of the permanent taxes the malt trade, for instance, since the adcarried to the consolidated fund were not ditional daty had been repealed, there had equal to the charge on it; and therefore been a dimination of the number of lievery body must see that the tax could cences, an increase of the number of not be repealed without the substitute of bankruptcies in the trade, and a diminuanother. 'If there had been an excess of tion of the produce of the old duty, from three millions to less than 1,900,0001. tions. The amount of the fees to be paid The noble member for Northampton had on all such pardons was much greater said, that he should vote for the repeal of than those who had not taken the trouble this tax, as well as the salt tax, in order to inquire into the subject could probably to compel the ministers to resort to the imagine. They amounted to 1101. on property tax, or some other direct tax. each pardon. It was obvious, that the But he hoped the noble lord, before he great majority of those who received parconsented to repeal this tax, would be dons, could not pay this expense, and the confident that his new associates would | House might be curious to know how the consent to the imposition of some tax in difficulty had been got over. In fact, very place of it. In this case, as in the case of few of those to whom mercy was extend. all commutations, the consumers would ed, obtained this complete pardon, which not be beneficed to the whole extent of alone could make them competent witthe tax remitted. In consequence of the nesses in a court of justice. There had additional tax, there was an additional been only twelve pardons during the last quantity of capital employed in the leather seven years ; and he was convinced, that trade, and till that capital was shifted to in consequence, great impediments had some other employments, the dealers been thrown in the way of public justice. would charge their customers with the in. He could not better illustrate this than by terest of it. The right hon. gentleman stating the circumstance which first called then went over the various arguments his attention to the subject. In the disthat had been urged by the gentlemen trict of Oxfordshire with which he was opposite, and insisted, that on all the connected, some of the worst sort of grounds, it was the interest of the tanner crimes had been committed for some time alone that was consulted. This was a withi impunity, and there was at last a trade that had suffered in common with all prospect of bringing the perpetrators to others in consequence of the return of punishment by means of the evidence of a peace, and, like all others, it was gradually man who had formerly been convited of a reviving. But it was rather at the interest felony. The act of the 31st of the king, of the public that the House ought to which made persons who had been conlook, than at that of individuals; and for victed of larcenies competent witnesses the interest of the former he would say, ' did not apply to felonies, and it was nedo not consent to repeal this tax, as they : cessary to sue out the pardon under the will not have the benefit of it. He would great seal. The parties who conducted maintain, that a greater injury could not the prosecution were, however, astonished, be done to the public than by experiments when they found that the expense of this of commuting taxes on articles of con- pardon would be 1101. in addition to the sumption, as they would not diminish the other heavy expenses which they were price to the consumer. There was no obliged to incur, and they were almost tax, in fact, that could be repealed with deterred from pursuing their object full benefit to the public, except direct finally, they did proceed, and were thus taxes, and if any reduction could possibly subjected to a considerable burthen. The be made, these should be the first that hon, member observed, that if there were ought to meet consideration.

any thing in the case or character of a Lord Compton said, he had not pledged person convicted which rendered it proper himself to support the repeal of the salt to extend to him the mercy of the Crown tax; but in general he preferred direct to by the grant of a pardon, it was too much indirect taxation.

to say that such person should be comThe question being put, “ That the pelled to pay the expense which at prebill be now read a second time," the House sent attached to such a grant. To redivided: Ayes, 130. Noes, 136. The move this evil was the object of the bill second reading of the bill was conse- which he meant to bring forward. He quently put off for six months.

did not think it proper to extend the pro

visions of the act of the 31st of the king to PARDONS UNDER THE Great Seal.] felons, and therefore he felt the necessity Mr. F. Douglas said, that as he under of another course of proceeding, in order stood no opposition would be made to his to guard against the mischief, on the one motion for leave to bring in a bill to dimi- hand, of allowing the officers of the Crown

a nish the fees on Pardons under the Great to derive pecuniary benefit from the exSeal, he should make only a few observa-tension of the royal mercy; and on the