the resolution which had been adopted by the House of Commons in 1819, were wise or not, was not the question. But it ought to be recollected, that it was a resolution which was adopted by a very large majority of the House. If it were now to be departed from, what would be the impression on the country? What would be the impression on all Europe, in the present feverish state of the world? Did the House recollect the distinct and explicit terms of the resolution to which he adverted? They were these, "That in order to provide for the exigencies of the public service, to make such progressive reduction of the national debt as may adequately support public credit, and to afford to the country a prospect of future relief from a part of its present burthens, it is absolutely necessary that there should be a clear surplus of the income of the country beyond the expenditure, of not less than five millions; and that with a view to the attainment of this most important object, it is expedient now to increase the income of the country by the imposition of new taxes to the amount of three millions per annum." that resolution were not in the way, the right honourable gentleman might, perhaps, argue more effectually against the maintenance of such a surplus. But, with such a resolution on their Journals, nothing short of the most pressing necessity could justify the House in impairing the national credit in the eyes of Europe, by abandoning the surplus, which it had solemnly declared it was indispensable to maintain.

If

If, on the other hand, it was a question as to the amount of surplus, he contended, that five millions was not a larger sum than was necessary to maintain our credit in the eyes of the world; especially at a time when there was not a country in Europe which did not think it essential to

its own power and security to imitate, and in some instances to surpass, our plan for the reduction of the public debt. It was admitted, on all hands, that there should be some surplus; and therefore it became little more than a dispute about words, whether that surplus should be called a sinking fund, or by some other name.

With respect to the resolutions which had been moved by the honourable member for Abingdon, he quite agreed with the honourable member for Taunton, that if these resolutions were proposed as a substitute for the sinking fund, nothing worse could possibly be devised. The honourable gentleman's second resolution declared, "that it had been agreed unanimously by the House, that the only sinking fund which could be efficient, was that which was produced by a surplus of income over expenditure." That was the ground-work of the honourable gentleman's plan ; and the way in which he proposed to carry into execution this declaration of the House, was by proposing to do away with any surplus whatever!

The whole of the honourable member's plan was to transfer 41,330,000l. of stock from the purchasers of the land-tax, provided the whole 1,239,7017. were reduced and purchased. For what was commonly called the redemption of the land-tax, was simply the transfer of a portion of the debt from one class of individuals to another. Suppose the honourable gentleman found persons ready tomorrow morning to conclude the whole transaction, what would be the consequence? The public charge and the public income would be equally diminished. By the act of 1786, each separate loan was to be considered as a separate debt. For the interest of each loan a specific sum was provided, by specific taxes for that purpose. He would ask, whether if, with regard to any loan subsequent to 1792, any given tax-the sugar duty for instance-had

been appropriated to the payment of that loan, and we were now to allow that duty to be redeemed, any advantage would be gained? It would be very easy to write off all our debt in a similar way; but, when we had done so, we should be paying just the same interest, and be liable to the same charge as at present.

But, as the honourable member for Aberdeen* had said, on a recent occasion, we ought to look at the debt with reference not to the capital, but to the annual charge upon it. That charge being in no way affected by the proposition of the honourable member for Abingdon, he must say, with all his respect for that honourable gentleman's acuteness and ingenuity, that he thought the honourable member for Taunton justified in calling it a species of conjuring.

With the greatest respect also for the talents which had been displayed by the honourable relation of the honourable mover,† he must positively deny, that there was any resemblance between the present case, and the circumstances under which Mr. Pitt proposed his measure. In the present state of the country, the legislature had no object in view to induce them to call on the country to make sacrifices, for the purpose of keeping up the price of the funds. In time of war, such a proceeding might be extremely desirable; but, in time of peace, when, if there was any surplus of revenue, it was applied to the reduction of the debt, and when Government were no longer the creators and sellers, but the purchasers of stock, they could have no possible reason for wishing to raise the price of the funds. If, therefore, the proposed plan were worthy of adoption at any period, it would rather be at a time when public credit might be labouring from great drains upon it, than at a time when it was in circumstances of comparative eleva

tion;-it would be at a time, when Government were sellers, rather than when they were purchasers of stock.

The whole proposed proceeding, therefore, appeared to him to be delusive. And even if it were adopted, he rather thought that great disappointment would ensue, with regard to the extent of its practicable execution. A great many circumstances would conspire to prevent individuals from buying up the land-tax, and to induce them to prefer the ease and security of the public funds. The amount of the land-tax in each county was fixed; and was the same now as in the time of William the Third. It did not vary. But, in the event of the erection of a great number of buildings in any particular district, a new apportionment of the tax might take place. For that reason, individuals would be reluctant to buy what could not increase, but might diminish in amount. Under these circumstances, though he might be disposed to consider the proposition at another time, he did not think the present was the occasion, when we were required to bolster up the funds by such a plan.

He begged pardon for having trespassed on the House so long, after what had already been said; but, hearing the sinking fund attacked by honourable members of such high authority, he was anxious to show, that the abolition of that fund would be not only inconsistent with the declared sentiments and resolutions of Parliament, but against that sound policy which the country had hitherto adopted for the support of public credit.

The previous question being put upon Mr. Maberly's first Resolution, the House divided: Ayes, 72. Noes, 157. Majority against the Resolution, 85.

MERCHANT VESSELS APPRENTICESHIP BILL.

March 13.

The House having, on the motion of Mr. Huskisson, resolved itself into a committee, to consider of the Act of the 37th Geo. III. c. 73, for regulating the number of Apprentices to be taken on board British Merchant Vessels,

Mr. HUSKISSON observed, that great inconveniencies had arisen in the merchant service, from the existing regulations respecting apprentices. In some vessels, particularly those in the West-India trade, a certain number of apprentices were required to be taken; while, in the vessels in other trades, no such obligation existed. Now, this might be an advantage or a disadvantage, according to the circumstance of peace or war. In peace, it would be a disadvantage to be obliged to have a certain number of apprentices, when, for nearly the same expense, the same number of able seamen might be had. In war, it would be an advantage, when able seamen were difficult to be got, and when the tenure of their services was rendered uncertain by their liability to impressment-to which apprentices, in certain cases, were not exposed.

One object of his bill would be to make the advantages equal in all merchant ships; and this he proposed to effect by a clause, that every merchant vessel, in every trade, should have an equal number of apprentices, in proportion to her tonnage. For instance, in a ship of from eighty to two hundred tons burden, he would have one apprentice; and so on, in proportion to the tonnage. He also proposed to give to apprentices greater protection against impressAt present, those of seventeen years of age were liable to be impressed after three years' service. He proposed to extend that to four years; or that apprentices

ment.