14 



as likely to confer the greatest blessings upon them." Gentlemen, 

 after being somewhat taken aback by such a sweeping assertion, 

 I turned to my friend near me and said, " I venture to think that 

 the day will come when the British farmers will refer to those two 

 Acts in the simple words of ' Thank you for nothinfj.' " Gentlemen, 

 I ask, is not that now your reply? As far as the Hares and 

 Rabbits Bill is concerned, I am bound to admit that I see very 

 little difference in the condition of things ; but where any difference 

 does at all exist it is seen in the fact of the farmer having been 

 deprived by this Act of the power to claim compensation for damage 

 done to his crops. Then as to the 



REPEAL OF THE MALT TAX, 



I do not regard it as a repeal at all. It is simply a substitution 

 of one tax for another, which is no relief, whilst its practical 

 operation is best shown by the patent fact that you and I cannot 

 sell our inferior barley at any price. Now to what is this due ? (A 

 Voice : "To the repeal of the Malt Tax.") Yes, sir, that is my 

 opinion also, and I will endeavour to show you why. Mr. Gladstone 

 succeeded in inserting clauses into the Act that practically offered 

 a premium on inferior light foreign barley and other substances 

 to the exclusion of our own home-grown barley. He created 

 a standard of 1,057 degrees as the specific gravity of every 

 two bushels of malt, whilst 42 lbs. weight of malt or corn of 

 any description, or 28 lbs. of sugar, was deemed the equivalent 

 of a bushel of malt. If it fails to come up to the standard, 

 then the extra duty is to be paid on the raw material. French 

 barley, if even only 53 lbs. per bushel, will give a higher 

 standard than our damaged barley, therefore French barley, poorer 

 though it be in appearance, is imported to our detriment. In the 

 years 1872 and 1878 I believe the quality of barley was as inferior 

 as we have it this year ; but during those years maltsters and brewers 

 succeeded in converting such barley into malt and beer of various 

 degrees of quality ; whilst this year the case is far different, as the 

 maltsters dare not attempt to make use of it for fear of not coming up 

 to the hard and fast standard, and fearing that they may be mulcted 

 in the payment of an extra duty on the raw material. Therefore 

 I feel justified in saying to the present Government, in return for 

 these two wonderful efforts of legislation — " Thank you for nothing.'' 

 "Whether w^e shall have any further legislation in the direction of 

 relief in the matter of local taxation I know not, but you will 

 observe that Mr. Gladstone has a great dread that if he helps the 

 tenants in this manner, the landlords will get the benefit, and this 

 is exactly what he and his Radical supporters do not want. Far 

 rather would they allow the tenant to continue to suffer than 

 that the landlord should receive any benefit. But enough, gentle- 



