5d. an acre to the farmer. Could it be supposed that this would occasion any material injury? Still less could it be apprehended (as seemed to be apprehended by some honourable gentlemen) that it would cause any diminution in the existing rents of farms. So much for the first species of objection. He would proceed to the second; namely, that the proposed increase of duty would materially and partially affect poor people. Than this, nothing seemed to him to be more unfounded. He admitted that the poor must feel their share of the proposed increase, as they always felt their share of an increase of any of the duties on articles, either of necessity or which custom had introduced into general consumption. It was true that the increase of the excise duties on hides and skins would compel' the poor to pay somewhat more for their shoes; but even after the increase, the price which they would have to pay would not be so great as it was in the days of Queen Anne, when the original duty was imposed. It had been said that the poor would suffer not only indirectly, but directly. This he denied. The calculation which had been made on this subject was most erroneous. It would appear by that calculation that the duty would be increased 300 per cent. to the consumer. Into whose pockets would this exorbitant increase on the consumer go? The tanners denied that they would receive any of it. The curriers and shoemakers did not admit that they would receive much. But let the probable fact be examined. The weight of a' poor man's pair of shoes might be estimated at two or three pounds. The direct tax, therefore, could not amount to above fourpence halfpenny, or fivepence on each pair of poor man's shoes. As to the shoes of the higher classes, it was well known that a great part of the price paid for them was not in consideration of the leather, but of the fashion. He had still to reply to the third class of objections, viz. that the increase of duty would very much injure the manufacturing interests. He bad even been desired to postpone the progress of the Bill, in order to receive the communications of the manufacturers, and to hear their objections. He had received their communications, and he had heard their objections.-Every honourable gentleman present had doubtless a copy of the paper which he beld in his hand, containing the statement of those objections. The first objection in the statement was, that the increase of the duty would operate exclusively on

the manufacturers. Nothing could be more unfounded. Indeed it was directly contradicted by some of the objections in the latter part of the statement, for it was impossible for the manufacturers to support all the objections which this paper contained. They clashed. It was impossible that they could maintain that the price would be raised to the consumer, and at the same time that the operation of the duty would be confined to the manufacturers. He would here observe, that it was not intended to charge the additional duty on the stock in hand, and the manufacturers would therefore gain some advantage by the necessary rise in the price of that article, which they had laid in on comparatively advantageous terms. He would proceed to the consideration of the next objection contained in the manufacturers' statement, namely, that the increase of the duty would check exportation. How could this be? A drawback was allowed on exportation. Goods exported would be therefore free from duty, and there would be the single inconvenience, that during the interval between the manufacture and the exportation, the duties must be advanced, so that a larger capital might be necessary than would be requisite in other circumstances. The next objection urged by the manufacturers (although it had nothing to do with themselves), was, that the duty would have the effect of lowering the price of oak bark.-Now really if the manufacturers raised the price of leather to the consumer, so much as it was by some said they would do, they would be able to pay more for oak bark, instead of wishing to procure it on easier terms than at present. The manufacturers also complained that the increase would give an undue advantage to the Irish tanner. In what manner? The Irish tanners at present paid a duty somewhat less than that paid by the English tanner, and when the existing duties in England were doubled, it was evident that the Irish tanner would pay much less than the English tanner. But in what market could this affect the English tanner ? Not in the English market, for if the Irish tanner brings his goods to an English market, he must pay the English duty; and if, on the contrary, the English tanner carried his goods to an Irish market, he would receive the drawback, and would be subject only to the Irish duty. The remaining objections in the paper, containing the statement of the manufacturers, consisted of a reference to the hardships which the lower classes of the community would

endure from the increased price of leather. But as he had before observed, these objections were wholly incompatible with the first declaration, that the evil would rest exclusively on the manufacturing interest. As to postponement, he really did not see how delay could throw any light on the subject. The whole case was before the House. It was a very simple one. Similar objections would be made to any tax that could be devised. He was not one of those who concurred in the soundness of the principle, that the rich alone should be subjects of taxation.-Neither was it true, that taxes which bore on the rich were not felt by the poor. For instance, if (as had been recommended in some quarters) the Income Tax were increased in its operation on the higher classes beyond the fair proportion, what would be the consequence, but that the higher classes must diminish their expences; that they must dismiss part of their different establishments? They must dismiss the number of persons employed by them in the various occupations of life, and the evil would thus be communicated from the most exalted to the lowest members of the community. The true principle was, that as the rich and the poor had one common interest in the safety and welfare of the country, so the Legislature ought to take care that one common system of taxation should, if possible, be applied to them.

Colonel Bastard contended, that the only reason why the leather tax had not been increased these hundred years was, from a conviction that it would not bear it. It was acknowledged to be a land-tax equal to five-pence per acre, and the poorest as well as the richest land would be equally affected by it. He again recommended the sale and 'cultivation of the waste lands as a resource against famine, and of revenue.

Mr. Sheridan did not mean to enter into the arguments. against the tax, but thought that the Chancellor of the Exchequer could not resist the reasons which had been urged for some delay of its consideration. It would materially affect a very worthy and industrious set of people— he meant his former, and probably his future constituents at Stafford; and those who had witnessed the decayed state of its trade, and the want of work, there experienced, would pause before they assented to this measure. He knew no tax that would fall so much on the poor, from the quantity of leather which the ploughman had in his strong rough shoes, compared with the man of fashion in his light

ones. If it were to be paid only on the fine trappings, the smart saddles, and the hussar boots of our fashionables, he should not regret it. No article had risen in price so much as leather. When he had the honour to be Secretary of the Treasury some years ago, this tax was proposed but soon rejected.

A division then took place, when there appeared for bringing up the Report,

A yes
Noes

Majority

66

40

26

The Report was then brought up, and after several amendments, the Bill was ordered to be read a third time on Wednesday..

NOTICE.

Lord Castlereagh thought it proper to inform the House, that either to-morrow or on Monday, he should be empowered to make a communication relative to certain counties that had been disturbed. It would be a communication which would require no discussion in the first instance.

Mr. Sheridan presented a Petition from Mr. St. John Mason, praying that a dispatch from the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland to Mr. Ryder, which the petitioner characterised as containing unjust and slanderous charges of treason against himself, might be referred to the examination of a Select Committee. The Petition was laid on the table. The Report of the Assessed Taxes was brought up.

FRENCH OFFICERS PR SONERS BREAKING PAROLE.

Mr. N. Calvert moved, that the paper laid on the table, relative to French Officers on parole, be printed. He said the great number of French Officers who had taken an unfair and dishonourable advantage of the confilence placed in their honour, by the Government of this country, was almost incredible; and he thought son effective measures should be adopted to prevent the recurrence of similar breaches of faith, and the abandonment, by those who broke their faith, of every principle of morality; the numbers were so great that no former war was ever in the slightest degree to be compared to them. He thought therefore the Transport Board should be empowered to put an end to such shameful proceedings; or at least to render VOL. III.-1812. 3 K

them less frequent. While he was on his legs on this subject, he could not help observing, that the enormous number of foreigners residing in this country amounted to a great grievance. It was his carnest wish to give every degree of protection to such unfortunate persons as had been compelled to reside here from persecution in their own country; but he thought those who had come here, and still remained, without being able to produce proof of such being their situa tion, should be sent out of the country directly.

Lord Castlereagh thanked the honourable gentleman for the observations he had made. The subject deserved every consideration, and Government were very desirous to pay all attention to it, though there would be great difficulty in discriminating in a case so intermixed.

Mr. A. Baring said, he thought something was necessary to be done, as to Officers breaking their parole; but still, from some statements he had received, even those persons thought they had reason to complain. He then mentioned the complaint of a French Officer, who for that offence was now on board a prison-ship at Chatham. He was a man of great family and connections in France, as well as of education, and he complained of being put into the society of three or four hundred common soldiers of his country. He had stated that if an English Officer, being a prisoner in France, had committed the same offence, he would have been committed to close confinement, but not in such company as he was, for he was actually over-run and devoured, as it were, by vermin.

Sir J. Sebright said, that when an officer had proved he was not to be trusted on his parole of honour, he had brought upon himself a debasenent of character which justified his being connected with persons of an inferior rank; and though there were 400 common soldiers in the same place with him, he had, by his conduct, brought himself below their level.

Mr. Croker said, he was aware of the case alluded to. The gentleman, he begged the pardon of the House for calling him by such a name-(Hear!)-had attempted to escape, and was taken, upon which he was remanded to the same custody with the common men. He had stated such

excuses and palliations to the Transport Board, as induced them to give him his parole again, which he again attempted to break. Such, indeed, was the case-(Cries of hear, hear!), As to his complaint of being covered with