4S 



ANNUAL REGISTER, 1805. 



further debate, the house divided, 

 for the original motion 75, for the 

 amendment 92. — Majority 17. 



On Monday, the 4th, the ques- 

 tion being put on the second read- 

 ing of the salt duty bill, 



Lord William Ilnssel opposed it, 

 as a measure infallibly productive 

 of the most grievous hardships to 

 the poor. The mere report of such 

 a proposition had already raised 

 the price of bread an assize, and the 

 rise it must occasion in the price of 

 salt meat and salt fish, such essen- 

 tial articles of sustenance to the 

 poor, would place those articles 

 beyond their reach, and amount 

 to an absolute prohibition, lie, 

 therefore, moved, " That the 

 " bill be read a second time this day 

 *' six months." 



The Chancellor of the Exchequer 

 said, it was a most unpleasant and 

 painful thing to him to propose 

 taxes affecting the lower orders ; 

 but we were engaged in a contest 

 for the defence of both rich and 

 poor, and no mode of raising the 

 supplies seemed to him less objec- 

 tionable than the present. That 

 the interests of the lower classes had 

 not been abandoned, would be 

 shewn by a reference to the times 

 from tiie year 1793 to the present 

 time, in every instance of which the 

 poor had been much exonerated at 

 the expence of their superiors, as 

 was proved by the income, the wine 

 duty, the foreign spirits, and a va- 

 riety of oilier taxes. This tax 

 would operate gen( rally, but insen- 

 sibly, upon consumption, and the 

 trihing fraction in expence was not 

 such as could possibly affect the 

 price of bread. 



Mr. Fox thought ihe tax highly 

 objec (ionable, as it attached to one 

 «f the direct necessaries of life, for 



tlie poor could not possibly subsist 

 without bread and salt provisionSj 

 whereas, in many articles of con^ 

 sumptioiij the lower orders had a 

 remedy, either by discontinuing 

 them altogether, or using them in a 

 more sparing manner. 



After some further debate, the 

 house divided, and the numbers 

 were, for the second reading 92j 

 against it 60, majority 33. The 

 bill was then read li second time, and 

 committed for the next day. 



On Wednesday, the 6th of March, 

 Mr. Sheridan, in pursuance of a 

 notice previously given, moved for 

 the repeal of the additional force a6t. 

 He confessed that the whole of what 

 he had to say, upon this subject, had 

 already been anticipated by the 

 masterly and unanswerable speech 

 of his right honourable friend, (Mr. 

 Windham) on a former night; but, 

 as that speech clearly proved thait 

 the act, on which the present mili- 

 tary state of the country was found- 

 ed, was a scandalous one, and a dis- 

 grace to the statute book, it was 

 natural that some person should 

 move to repeal it. On the night al- 

 luded to, the right honourable au- 

 thor of the bill (Mr. I'itt) thought 

 proper to observe a persevering and 

 dignified silence, leaving the duty of 

 reply to be performed by his right 

 honourable friend (Mr. Canning) in a 

 very laboured r.peecb, of a catiimaraii 

 species, plenty ol noise, and little mis- 

 chief to those it was intended to an- 

 noy. The volunteer system he consi- 

 dcred to be ustf ul and admirable. He 

 had no doubt ot its having made s 

 very strong impression on Uona- 

 pUrfe and his ministers ; for, how- 

 ever they migiit calculate on the 

 means of meeting any army wt 

 may raise, no enemy could caU 

 culate on Vt'hat may be produced b) 



a natioi 



