Зображення сторінки
PDF
ePub

satisfied, they will remain un-, " able to take down from his shaken now. The reader will be" shelf a Blackstone, or a Riamused to see, that Mr. RI-" cardo!"

CARDO's project for dividing the

SCOTCH MINE STOCK.

land with the fund-holders, origi-A small Quantity of this much

nated with one of the silliest of my

antagonists of 1806! Oh! Perry! How" happy the

Mr

Any Brother Stockholder wishing to esteemed property to be sold.--. increase the amount of his Stock may apply by Letter only (post-paid) to X. Y. No. 2, Southcot Place, Wid

Spa-comb, Bath.

The best bidder at per cent. will

"nish Legislator must be to be have the preference.

Printed by C. CLEMENT, and Published by Joan M. CORBETT, 1, Clement's Iun,

VOL. 39.-No. 12.] LONDON, SATURDAY, JUNE 23, 1821. [Price 6d. · Published every Saturday Morning, at Six o'clock.

TO

MR. CURWEN.

very well worthy of our best attention, and particularly when viewed in conjunction with what has

On the Husbandry-horse Tax.-been, by Sir EDWARD KNATCH On Salaries.--On Mr. Muschett BULL and others, said about Sa and the Fund-lords.-On Sirlaries, and with the extraordi Pompous Jollerhead's probable nary efforts that the Fund-lords fate. are now making against poor Sir POMPOUS JOLTERHEAD, Kensington, 19. June, 1821. backed as the Fund-lors are by SIR, Mr. MUSCHETT and by that We have, at last, your Bill great long-eared tooter, the before us, for the repeal of the Times Newspaper, at once the husbandry-horse tax, which bill, tutor and caterer of all the fools if it be carried, will take from the that inhabit these Islands. THING (for I never knew what In some parts the speech by name to give it) about half a mil- which you introduced this mealion a year. I propose, with sure was good enough. Your your leave, to make some rc-declining to propose any substimarks upon the debate, which tute for the tax was right, and took place in the Grand Coun- was founded in sufficient reason, "cil of the Nation," upon the You were right also in saying, motion to bring in this bill; for, that this was only a small beginthough the measure itself would ning in this way; that if the Mibe useful, the discussion of it, if nisters could not bring the inwell conducted, and if made to crease up to the expenditure, embrace matter with which it is they must bring down the latter to ultimately connected, will be of the former; that all must come much greater use than the mea-down, from the king to the lowest sure itself. officer in the state. But when I shall insert every thing ma- you got into distinctions between terial in the debate at the end of light soils and heavy soils, your, this letter; for it contains nfatter speech smelt of the earth. When

2 L

Printed by C. CLEMENT, and published by JOHN M. COBBETT, 1, Clement's Inn. [Price Sixpence Halfpenny in the Country.]

[ocr errors]

you talked about a tax on the horses as the land at Fulham, the plough; when you talked about former not being worth half a the necessity of new enclosures; crown an acre a year, and the and especially when you talked latter being worth from ten to about this tax weighing heavier twenty pounds. But, because upon the farmer than the mall- this fact is undoubted, it does not tax; when you got into these follow that the husbandman, or things you floundered and beat the landlord, of Bagshot suffers about sadly. Let me, therefore, more acutely from the horse-taxendeavour to steady you a little; than those of Fulham do. For, for, though you are " a curious before a man goes to farming at "sort of a man," you have good Bagshot he takes all out-goings stuff in you. You say good into consideration; and he certhis; but, then, there are bad tainly dues not forget the article ones that come out with them. of horses! Therefore, when he My wish is, that we may con-makes his bargain, he reserves tinue to have all the good things all that is required for horses, and none of the bad ones.

Now, Sir, as to soils, how can this tax affect light soils more than heavy ones? You will say, perhaps, that light soils require, in proportion to the amount of their produce, more horses than heavy ones. Perhaps the epithets light and heavy, ought to Le poor and rich; for, you are not to be told, that the very heaviest are the very worst. Taking you, then,

to

and just the same way that he makes reservation for tithes. He has the rent in one eye, and the horses in the other; and the extra cost on account of horses over the cost of rich land, he withholds from rent. As to the landlord, if he have purchased since the tax was laid on, he cannot complain; because, he knew the rent, and his purchase-money in an exact proportion to

was

[ocr errors]

mean poor when you say light, that. If he inherit the lands, it is an undoubted fact, that poor indeed, from distant descent, or land, in proportion to the amount possessed them before the tax was of its produce, requires more laid on, the tax operates partially horses than rich land; in other against the owner of poor land; words, that the new-enclosed land because it takes a greater proon Bagshot heaths require, for the portion of his rent than of the same number of crops, as many rent of the owner of rich land.

[ocr errors]

The consumer pays, in the end, jendeavour to assimilate animate to this as well as all other taxes; inanimate beings. No wonder but, then, the tax must operate that those who consider men as equally. If my neighbour and I machines, could consider horses But, after all,

as implements.

[ocr errors]

make soap of the same quality; if we both sell (as we must) at the suppose it to be a tax on implesame price, and if I pay a tax of ments, is it more so than tithes, 2d. a pound while he pays a tax land-tax, and all other taxes paid of only 1d., it is clear that the tax by those that use implements? I bears heavier upon me than upon disapprove of the tax, as I do all him, and that I myself, and not the taxes exceeding about seven the consumer, pays the Id. a millions a year; but I equally pound on the soap. However, disapprove of this being attacked observe, it is the landlord, and on false and foolish grounds, not the farmer, that suffers in this which, besides their intrinsic case; only "for more grace," I demerit, do harm to the cause of suppose, the fashion of the day is, reduction; för, such grounds are to put the howl into the mouth of easily exposed, and they viciate the farmer. Stop a bit! I shall the thing in support of which they see you less coy. I shall hear are brought forward. you speak out, and put your own cases forward.

With regard to this tax being a" tax on the plough." Why not call it a tax on the harrow? A tax on the roller? the Dray- Cart ?

The enclosure of more" waste" lands I never expected to hear proposed as a good to the coun try after the publication of my Letter to Mr. COKE. The enA tax on closure of "wastes" increase emAnd Mr ployment! How? When a farBROUGHAM, 100, that hero of mer does not employ men now, Westmoreland', he must object to is it for want of land? Is it bethe tax, not because it, like all cause he has his land as clean, as other taxes, produced misery; well fenced, as well-drained, and but, because it was a tax on the as rich as it can be? Oh, no ! “implements of agriculture." I It is because he has not the means never knew a Scotch Feelosofer of payment. And, would he, the turn of whose mind it was not then, have the means to break to make clear things dark, and up and fence new lands? Madwho did not, whenever he could, ness! The "wastes" allotted,

[ocr errors]

J

« НазадПродовжити »