ounds, which is just 'six shillings per dred; and yet, the sapient Elector as- es his readers,“thcir one fourth Will only “ the trifling sum of one and six- ce. as if, indeed, the landlord had a no pay more for one hundred acres nthetenant. Learned Arithmetrcran! clionl-boy would calculate better! I fear idea of the Tea, Ilum, and Tobacco, turbed yours-easoning faculties, for “your 1 seems to far surpass your Imam ire” in your laudable efforts “ to rescue cfrom the grasp of the iron handed pro- ors!” if. his second edition, we hays another

'vil List, with regard to the eflect it ould have on commerce. “(It‘is a mat- r of indifference whether the home Go- rnment pay our Civil List, or that the roprietors be compelled to do so, as m ther case, Bills of Exchange would be ually available; or should not the propri- orsconsent to give bills at the former par, ey would send us specieto fill our coffer.” theformercase, Iadmit it would be indif- rent, but the latter I deny, for this rea- n, that our civil officers would be paid by e Treasurer, and I doubt whether they ould prefer sterling gold and silver, to rprinted rags; and is it ‘not natural to ppose they would send elsewhere for teir necessaries; especially, as they could ay with a general circulating medium, ver more certain than bills of exchange! nd the superfluous parts of their salaries, f' such there be, they would save, with- ut ever benefitting the country there- ith. Such is not now the case, they are,

endorse their Bills to their which enables the latter to ake ready remittances. whereby a art, at least. ofthe circulating specie re- ains in the Island. In the next place, he says. ‘ the amount, fpaid by the proprietors here, would be aid out of their rental, into the Treasu- by which it would remain in the Is- and,” than which. a worse plan could not e devised to distress the people. uppose that the proprietors paid their 000l in Treasury Notes, and that our Civil flicers were paid in these Notes, though lam of opinion they would receive them with reluctance; they would be obliged to pay their merchants with Treasury Notes, ywhich a drawback would be laid on com: inerce for want of negociable Bills. Nor is this the chief evil, every proprietor of 20.000 has 5000 of them occupied. the annual rental of which amounts to two hundred and fifty pounds. forty-five of . inch will pay the proposed land tax; now, mt not clear, that the poor farmer would

THE BRITISH AMERICAN.

be the ultimate sufferer should his landlord‘ use coercive measures to enforce the pay- ment ofrent. especially if the tenantrywere some years in arrear. manyofwhom I know to be so. What mercy, I ask, could they expect from an irritated landlord, who Sees his tenants combining to divest him of his propErty? None! Are they then not the enemies of the people, who advise such combinations! time, alone, can develope.!!

The Elector says 4000 will pay the Civil List. as well as the expense of collecting. Let us consider. In July 1823, Several Lots 8m. in Prince-County were sold for Quit Rent. .1 should rather say.to pay the fees of those who sold them. In [82.5 a Committee ofthe House

of Assembly reported thereon; an abstract

ofwhich I give. to shew the people how much they have to expect at the hands of the tax gatherers!

“That it further appears to your Com- mittee by the said‘Acting Receiver Gene- ral, that the whole Quit Rents received by him, amounted to the sum of 3980!, about 4001 of which was collected by his depu- ties, in doing which, there were but few instances of actual distraint. as the parties generally settled by paying their Quit Rents together with the deputies charges for travelling, and other fees; and that the ex- penses incurred in recovering the remain- der of the said Quit Rent, and paid out of the Quit Rent Revenue. absorbed the whole oft/1c said 3980!! except 6701, which was handed over to the present Receiver General. out of which. there .is still payable upwards of 4001 due. on the before-~ mentioned proceedingslt”--Journals of the House qfflssembly, March 21. 1825. Fol. 51. \

What do you think of that Mr. Elector, it was quite as profitable to be a Receiver of Quit Rents then, as it may be hereaf- ter, to be a collector of Land Tax!

Mr. Editor. I have too long tresspnssed On your kindness. but the subject is oftoo much importance to the people; it would be, therefore, criminal to suffer them to be led to ruin by the mistaken advice of po- litical theorists, '

A TRUE FRIEND To run COLONY.

Charlotte-Town. March 11, 1833.

I perceive Mr. Editor by your Re- port of last Saturday, that you were enabled to get a glimpse of the proceed- ings ofthe House of Assembly; even though you'arc neither King’s Printer, or Printer of the House, (in uno !) nor one ofthe other great Officers ofthat Ho- norable Body. However, after all,you did‘but raise a corner ofthe curtain, and at the same time‘ our curiosity; and mine, was chiefly to know, what were the effusions of great B. and little B., and to whom it was their great minds

265

were excited to speak, “in that command- ing and determined manner,” whether to the House or to His Excellency

Mr. Hazard has given us the whole affair in his last Paper, but those effu- sions of course he has left out, they han ving been uttered obscure. Now, Mr. Editor, the exciting cause appears to have been, that three of the members conceived that the Governor had ac- cused the House of inconsistency; and they (not being in the slightest degree open to that accusation!) were natu- rally much offended. Their non-liability to the charge will be apparent or not from the answers to the following que- mes:—

Did not the House of Assembly in their Session before last, address the

Home Government (and also the G0\'€I‘-,

nor, praying him to use his best influ- ence to forward the same) for a supply of Arms and Accoutremcnts for the Mi- litia? And did they not last Session hind themselves to take care ofthcm on their arrival? and have they not this Session adopted and received the Be- port ofthe Commitee on Major Ran- kin’s Petition, in which Report the House is recommended not to sanction “ any measure whereby the industrious “classes will be taken from their farms “to attend Militia Musters” Perhaps, Mr. Editor, when those Arms were ap- plied for, it was in the hope they mi ht be distributed about the country t the inhabitants might destroy with them the ducks and geese, or perhaps to defend themselves from the Bears, which were then it appears more nume- rous than usual, since the Legislature were under the necessity of re-enacting a Law for their destruction, after having dropped it for a year. . Again, have we not one of the Mem- bers in the Report of his Examination before the House, (printed by their l’rinter,) declaring, that he did not know that the Governor had communicated his sentiments last Session, on the sub- ject of his inability to accept the Grant of 300i; and even telling the House, that he had answered His Excellency that it was the “first time he had ev’er heard of, such, a thing”? And yet, did not the ‘1 ernor send down a written message .7 and if 'an_ Hon. member may he referred to his own Journals, he will see it entered in page 103. Such being the case, why was the 3001. left in the appropriation Bill 3

There it is, Mr. Editor, to tbisidayJ

in perspective? I suppose the _latter.\ '

~