ALLEGED NECESSITY OF THE CORN-LAW, TO COUNTERACT THE UNEQUAL PRESSURE

OF TAXATION ON AGRICULTURISTS.

HAVING in our paper the week before last reviewed the general arguments in favour of a restrictive corn-law, we now proceed to those which have a special reference to the actual condition of Great Britain. The arguments of this secondary class are generally put something after this fashion—" Admitting, for argument's sake, that the Free Trade doctrines are true in the abstract, the trade in grain in this country is an exceptional case." It is asserted by the advocates of a restrictive corn-law, that there is a peculiarity in the condition of our agricultural interest, when compared with the condition of other classes of society, that would render it advisable to extend to them the protection of a law restricting or prohibiting the importation of foreign grain, if such a law did not already exist. And this peculiarity is said to consist in that interest's bearing more than its due proportion of the burden of national taxation. Even though it were proved that it did, the question would still remain—Is a restriction upon the importation of foreign grain the best way of redressing the inequa- lity of the pressure of taxation? Would it not be better to re- vise our system of taxation with a view to render its pressure more equable, than to subject the whole population to scarcity by act o.f Parliament The agricultural interest constitutes the majority in both Houses of Parliament : it has the power of adjusting the burden of taxation according to its views of justice and expediency, or even its likings. If the agricultural interest do indeed bear more than its fair share of taxation, the remedy is in its own hands —it can equalize the pressure of taxation. If the power of taxing were in the hands of some other class, there might be reason in putting up with a substitute for justice ; though even in that case, the compensating power of a law which by impoverishing all classes of the community (the agricultural class among the rest) rendered them all more sensible of the burden of taxation, might be questioned. But, waiving these considerations, we proceed to the question—Is it true that in this country the agricultural class bears a heavier burden of taxation than the other classes of the community ? This part of the subject cannot be passed over, though it has been too often discussed to admit of any novelty, beyond a passionless resume of exhausted statements.

Five classes of burdens are enumerated by those who answer this question in the affirmative as bearing exclusively, or with greater weight, upon the agricultural interest—Land-tax, Tithes, Itighway-rates, Poor-rates, and Church-rates. Let us see the bearing and amount of each of these burdens separately.

1. The Land-tax. The Land-tax in England was fixed during Queen Arnim's reign, in round numbers at 4s. in the pound ; the total rental of England being assumed to be 10,000,000/. ; and conse- quently, the total amount of the tax being then 2,000,0001. per annum. Parr gave the landlords the option of redeeming this tax at the same rate, notwithstanding the immense increase of rental in a century ; and they have availed themselves of the advantage to an extent that has reduced the amount brought annually into the national coffers to something short of 1,200,0001. The rental of all England is at present estimated at 40,000,0001. In Scotland the amount of Land-tax was fixed in the reign of Queen ANNE likewise at 4s. per pound ; the estimated annual rental of that burden being then 200,0001. The amount of Land-tax paid in Scot- land is consequently 40,0001.: the annual rental is now 4,000,000/. In Ireland there is no Land-tax. The pressure of the Land-tax upon the agricultural interest may therefore be easily estimated—

Annual Rental. land-tax.

England £40,000,000 £1,200,000 Scotland 4,000,000 40,000 Ireland 13,000,000

Total £61,000,000 £1,240,000

The Land-tax of Great Britain is a tax upon rent, paid by a part only of the landowners of Great Britain ; and the ratio borne by the amount of the tax to the rental of the country is somewhere about 5d. in the pound. In return for this, the landowners are ex- empted from the Probate and Legacy duty. The annual value of all the real property of Great Britain, under the assessment for the Property-tax in 1814-15, was valued at about 60,000,0001.; the annual value of all other property at rather more than 116,000,0001. Assuming that the proportions continue unaltered, it follows, the annual amount of the Legacy-duty on personal property .being about 2,200,0001. that the annual amount on real estate, if exigible, would be about 1,138,0001. The exemption, therefore, from the payment of Probate and Legacy duty enjoyed by the landowners, more than compensates them for the burdens of the Land-tax.

2. Tithes. Tithes are not a tax paid by the landowner : Tithes are as much the property of the person to whom they are paid, as the rent is the property of the landowner. All lands paying tithe have been held from time immemorial, on the understanding that the tithe of the annualsproduce does not belong to the landowner. In buying and selling land, the tithe is constantly excluded from the estimate of its value. Doubts are entertained as to whether the right to tithes is absolutely in the Church, or held by it of the State upon certain conditions, the right of property being in the State—but the landlords' they certainly are not. The landlords, however, have contrived to acquire possession of the tithes in a good many instances. In England and Wales one third part of the land is tithe-free ; and of the remainder of the tithes one-fourth part belong to laymen ; in other words, one half of the land pays no tithes. In Scotland a portion of the tithes is held by the Crown, but the larger proportion is held by laymen, frequently by the owners of the land. When the tithe is paid to a lay impropriator, it is clearly of the same character as the fines or quit-rents paid by copyholders to the lord of the manor—it is not a tax to the State. When tithe is paid to the Church, the only difference consists in its being paid to a corporation instead of an individual. The land- owner has no more title to reckon his tithes among his public burdens, than the farmer his rents, or the merchant the interest he pays upon the borrowed money he trades with.

3. Highway-rates. All the great lines of road in the kingdom are maintained chiefly by the money levied at the turnpikes from those who use them. There are many exemptions from the pay- ment of tolls in favour of the agricultural interest—none in favour of other classes. The farmer or farming landlord pays no toll for manure, or for horses going to the farrier, or for cattle going to pasture. For a circle of considerable radius round all our towns— along all the great lines of mercantile traffic—the chief burden of supporting the highways is borne by the non-agricultural classes. On all turnpike-roads the agricultural class pays for the use of them at a lower rate than other classes. If parish-roads are made and maintained at the expense of parishes, streets are paved, watered, lighted, and kept clean, at the expense of the townsmen. In both cases, the road is made and kept up by the parties who make the most use of it. And this consideration leads us to the true view of the question : if highway-rates are paid for making and repairing roads, full value is given for the money paid. The gain which those who pay the rates derive from the diminished expense of conveying their goods to market in consequence of the roads being kept in good travelling-condition, is at least worth what they pay. If these highway-rates were not paid, the wear and tear of the agriculturist's horses, and the loss of time incurred in struggling to market along unmade tracks, would take more out of his pocke. than the highway-rates do. Highway-rates, paving and lighting-rates, and turnpike-dues, are the means that have been fallen upon for the purpose of apportioning as nearly as possible the share of the expense of maintaining roads paid by each in- dividual to the use he makes of them. If a great number of our road-trusts have run in debt, and if our landowner and their tenants be responsible for these debts, they incurred that responsibility by taking upon themselves the sole management and bungling it.

4. Poor-rates. This is an unlucky topic for those who maintain that the heavier burdens borne by the landed interest entitle them to a monopoly of the grain-market at home. The new Poor-law was stoutly supported by the landlords, and the new Poor-law hat materially diminished the amount of their assessment to the poor. They ought to abate proportionally the amount of protection they claim in the shape of a restrictive duty on imported grain : are they prepared to do this ? But let us examine their allegations more narrowly. It is not agricultural property alone, but every kind of immoveable property, that is liable to the poor-rates. That the expense of supporting the poor under the old law was greater in agricultural parishes than in towns, was owing in no small degree to the worse management which prevailed in the former, and the vicious principle upon which relief was admi- nistered. No one is entitled to claim relief for expenses in- curred by his own mismanagement. Again, were it not for the constant drain of population from the agricultural districts to sup- ply the demands of the great manufacturing towns for labour, the poor-rates of the rural parishes would be much heavier. A con- siderable proportion of the employed labourers of our manufactur- ing towns would but for these marts of industry have beeu rural paupers ; and few if any of these immigrants from the agricultural districts are sent back as burdens to their native places when they become unfit for labour or unable to obtain it. Allowance must be made by the agriculturists for the large number of paupers taken off their hands by the manufacturers. Lastly, the Scotch agricul- turists pay literally no Poor-rates, and the Irish agriculturists have only paid for a year or two a trifle not worth naming. The estimated annual rental of Scotland and Ireland is about 17,000,0001. — within a trifle of the half of the estimated annual rental of England. The annual amount of Poor- rate paid by the holders of one-third of the annual rental of the empire is less than a farthing in the pound. The discrepancy be-

tween the amount of poor-rate paid by the owners of the remaining two- thirds and the other classes of society has been materially di- minished by the operation of the new Poor-law ; and from the ap- parent excess which still remains, must be deducted the labourers born in agricultural districts who find employment and even sup- port from the poor-rate in our towns.

5. The Church-rates are not paid exclusively by the landlords and their tenantry. The shopkeepers pay the Church-rates in towns, as the landlords and their tenants pay them in the rural •

parishes. The whole country contributes to the upholding of the Irish churches. And if the heritors of Scotland are held bound to build and repair churches and manses, this is a very inadequate return for the amount of tithe which they have contrived to appro- priate to themselves.

It appears from this examination, that four out of the five cases of alleged excessive pressure of public burdens upon the landed in- terest—Land-tax, Tithes, Highway-rates, Church- rates—are utterly untenable ; and that the fifth, the Poor-rate, has been much exag- gerated. In relation to this tax it must be kept in mind, that the excess of pauperism of which they complain is in no small degree occasioned by the Corn-law itself. By creating an artifwial scarcity, it makes paupers. And it must also be remembered, that in addition to the exemption from Probate and Legacy duty, which we brought forward as a set-off against the Land-tax, and the exemptions from turnpike-dues, there are yet remaining several exemptions from taxes to which other classes are liable, which go to compensate any possible excess of Poor-rate to which the agricul- tural classes may be liable. All horses engaged in husbandry are exempted from the duty paid upon all other horses engaged in labour. The agriculturist may keep as many shepherd's or herds- man's dogs as he pleases without tax ; the artisan or shopkeeper cannot keep a watch-dog without paying a duty. The farmer's dairy is exempted from the window-tax ; and by this means many agriculturists escape that impost altogether, although they inhabit houses that would render any non-agricultural occupant liable to it.

Upon the whole, therefore, the nearest possible approximation we can make to the comparative pressure of taxation on the agri- cultural class and on the other classes of society, would lead us rather to believe that they are under-taxed than that they are over-taxed. At the same time it is clear, that an artificial scarcity— rendering all classes of the community poorer—never could enable an over-taxed class to bear its burdens more easily.

Two branches of our proposed review are now exhausted. In the Spectator of August 14th we showed the direct and immediate -effect of the Corn-law ; in the Spectator of August 21st we pointed out the illusory nature of the benefits attributed to the Corn-law by its advocates ; and in this paper we have shown there is nothing peculiar in the condition of our agriculturists requiring such pro- tection. It only remains to take into consideration the conse- quences of repealing the law—to inquire more especially, what the landowners have to fear from the decreased rentals and increased pressure of mortgages, assumed to be the necessary consequence of such a measure.