The Sun. — London, England, 1842-04-09 00:00:00

tc: as anxious' . that that practice should as speedily as possible be discontinued, and because he thought ' eat object would be best promoted by an adjournment.l l t 11 Monday.—(Hear.) He believed that no advantage had been gained b_Y Hon. Members opposite, nor.coulci they ' r sin any without making the . practice a Standing Order or the House: He hope'st that this question would be tried time after time. lt had not `by the smothered 'h the majority of 31, an d if lion. Mentbers persevered in pressing the right. of the people, there was little doubt that they would eventually sueeeed.(Hear, hear.) Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said he had stated, in asking the. House to receive this petition, that if there had been any Standing Order of - the House, any rule or re gulation, any lex scripta against presenting a petition osi the subject of . a tax under the consideration of the louse, he would have been the last man in the House to , oppose such-a Standing Order. But there was, in fact, no such Standing Order or regulation.—(Hear, hear.) There was a Standing Order against the presenta ti 'n of a petition asking for relief out of the public purse, without the consent of the Government. debate of last night showed that there wore prece dents on both sides—that there was not an uninterrupted stream of precedents against the presentation of such petitions as . that -.now under discussion. He (Mr. D.) had shown that in 1811 petitions of this kind were not only received but submitted to a Committee of the whole House, - when there was under consiaeration a I.t it for levying taxes to the amount of 1,300.0001. to Eight Honourable Baronet quoted two or three peesen tation of such peti peecedents in 1795 against the t esns ; but if the Right Hon. Gentleman looked to the year 1815, he would not find that those petitions were rs,jecteed nemine.contratliccute. In that year, on a divi elfin respecting the presentation of a petition of this na ture from the City of London, the numbers were, if he were not mistaken, 108 to 69 against the presentati on . The Speaker had aid down that there was no rule or a.anding Order against the presentation of such, but that it was merely a usage. He (Mr. D.) maintained th tit that usage was .not. continuous from the lime of the Revolution. All their rules 'and recedents, unless based on common sense and justice, and supported by. public opinion, amounted t nothing, and ought not to be attended to by the House. The Hon. Member for Surrey (Mr. - Kemble) tomid fault -with him (Mr. buncombe). because Hon. Gentlemen came down to the House and seemed pre pared to suppert the presentation of the petition. He (Mr. buncombe) certainly had stated to several of his mends that the question should not stop there. Unless they laid down a, Standing Order against if, day after day, when any of his constituents or stay other portion of the coimnunity placed a 1. Brien, such as the one now cil-esetc, , d to, in Isis hands, he would:place that petition. before the House, and the oslinin of its rejection by the House should rest upon the resnonsible decision which a majority of the House sseuld come to. He agreed . most willingly in the sug g stion of 'adjourning the subject to Monday next, when tit live o'Cleels Ise would ask the Muse whether they ould reteeiVe the petition, which, till then, he should keew in his. possesSion. . GIIISON wished to know. what distinction - lea; drawn between the duties on corn and duties on in come, that petitions could be presented against the' one and not against the other ? lie wished to ask the quese iion, as the practice on the matter had not been •rinly. agreed to. For his part, he looked upon the e. ties on corn as much a tax upon bread, as the three . per cent. was a tax upon income. dir It. PF,EI, sdd that the duties on corn were not ertsposed in Committee of Supply for the service of year, and therefore the general rule respect the preSentation ,of petitions - applied - to them ; whereas the income tax was proposed for the service of the year, and the practice was not to petition against propositions of that nature. After- a short conversation across the table between Mr. T. DOXeoetnt, and Sir R. PEEL,, it was arranged that the Debate should be adjourned until .Mondae. at Five o'Clock. THE TARIFF. Mr. R. t'ALMF,TZ presented a petition from the land owners and. tarniera of Berkshire, expressive of their -,irs te!the petipee;sl alterations in tho'Corn-laws, and of tl 3 alterations in the tariffesith regard to the duties on the importation of cattle and previsions, and praying the House nut LO:COl:St`ilt to thosealterations. MA itINE IN6URANCE. Captain PECIIT;LL presented a - petition fiom the i erchants and' Shipowners of Brighton, Worthing;and Gniehester; praying that the duties payable on the effect ing of marine. insurances might be lowered. INCOME TAX. Mr. G. W. WOOD had a petition to present on the tbject of the income tax, which, he thought, did not fall ithin the rule laid djwn laSt evening for the guidance or the House in. these matters. It was not a petition B : .;ainst the income tax. Its prayer was, that the House would adopt every other expedient for equalising the re 'enue and the expenditure before resorting to a measure to demoralising,- unjust, and inqui:dtorial as' an income .‘x.—(Cheers and laughter froth the Ministerial benches.) The SPEAKER, said that the petition came within ilte rule, and therefore could not be received. THE SUFFRAGE. Mr. S. CRAWFORD gave notice that, on Thursday, the 21st April, he would call the attention of the House to.varions petitions of the people praying for extension of the suffrage, mid for ether amendments of the repte sentatite system, as stated in these petitions, and to move the House to take the same into immediate consideration. ROMAN CATHOLIC SOLDIERS IN INDIA. Mr. O'CONNELL begged leave to ask the Right Hon. larouet, the Secretary at War, whether it was the in -I,ntion of the Government to provide for the spiritual wants and religious instruction of the Roman Catholic soldiers now on their passage to India ? Sir H. HARDINGE gave an answer which was almost . . inaudible, but .he was unaerstood to say that from papers brought forward by Lord Ashley, in 1839, it would be seen that there were already seventeen Roman Catholic chaplains in. Bengal. DEFEAT 01? THE BRITISH TROOPS IN AFFGHANISTAN. Mr. EASTCOTT begged tO - ask the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government, whether he in tended to make any statement to the House as to the t.auses of the war in Affghanistam ; and farther, whether the Right Hon. Baronet would bring forward any facts, In enable the House to form a judgment on the justice and policy of that war ? Sir ROBERT PEEL said that several extracts from official documents respecting the war in Affghanistan were laid before the House some time since. Those ex . tracts conveyed all the information which it was at that time expedient to furnish. As to the late events, the iovernment had no better information than the melan- chuly, statement already laid before the public. As to the causes of the late enormous Josses, 3..1d the peculiar motives and circumstances actuating those in command, the Government had but very imper feet knowledge, and were as yet informed principally t..rough private goni•ces. PESTILENTIAL BURIAL HOUSES. Cut. FOX stated, that he and- other Members of the, Committee for the improvement of Towns, had latelyreeeived a statement affirming that in a Build ing • called Enon Chapel, in the midst of a t . ,ensely populated district of the metropolis, not less than 12,000 bodies had been interred since 1823 _ _ _ or 1824, in a superfices nut so large as that 'louse. It was suspected, indeed, that very many of :Ose bodies had been made away with in other ways. The flooring of this vault consisted merely planks laid to•gther without bricks or mortar, or any other kind of protection' to those walking on the floor. from the eluvium arising from the bodies below. He under itootl ,that it was intended to open the upper hurt' of which these planks were the floor for a school for ii.oman Catholic children on Monday next. He begged ]cave to askwhether the Right Hon. Baronet, the Se cretary for the Home Department, was aware of those f.cts, and N;iliether he had taken any steps to prevent those proceedings ? S r J. GRAHASI. said, the matter was . under the con sideration of a Committee of the House, with a view of ..:Mitng a legislative measure on the subject. As to the. Point • to which the Hon. Member had directed his :Lttention the selection of the chapel the Hon. Mem ber ..hand referred to as a place of education for children, be - did not know how he could interpose his authority. • lie was afraid that lie had no direct power ti.vint;rtere. INCOME TAX. On the motion of Sir IL PEEL, that the Order of the Day, for bringing up the Raport of the Committee of ‘`/?Lys and Means, be read, Lerd • J. RUSSELL ruse. He said—Sir, being al wadi, informed that the proposition for an income tax been agreed to by a Committee of Ways and Means, being aware that the House has already de- Cded that no petition can be received on the question, nti the,greand that this House has this tax under its eouitideration, I conceive that before bringing up the nerfore, I arafully justified in moving a resolution which shall convoy my souse of the present state of our financiftl , and. commercial afiltirs, and of the r omedy , that should ba applied to them.—(Hear.) It' it has ever been the misfortune of any Member of this Committee- to take a gloomy view of the ,present state of public .atfairs,and to picture to the House our r% retched situation with respect to the future prospects ,I)t . „,xhe etrm try, I ant h al o, to say this i s not my pos i t i on. osed to think th at, w i t h re the' tontrarY, at:,disp Qf the question, t h e Govern '•,pect. to too financial Pail I:lent-have taken too Serious a view of the difficulties 4,f that situation—(Hear, licar)—that they ha ve raiz . earculatcd as to the nature of. the evils which now us ; auti that their remedy, although not totally .tapplicabl t ., is. beyond and beside the occasion. --(Hear.) he view which the Government, takes, as I un it, that the financial difficulty, the to; am deficiency as it was cml!ed one ening, is t h e • great evil Z hich we ought to ; and that, we should make those w y a ro s a nent b els ilr in our measure,laws with respect to corn reSnent to raw produce— with respect to manu Fac i tu e 7 u s t ir : - whi c h the interests m .. of the country a.: the ow' Sir' my generally speiikin g , N view, d / country that ou r fi nancial cali f r f.fr` 'no such extraordinary of at propel:4d. ; but . that there are • have serious dill Fitts ofiocting commers-,ial . and nianufa !turi ng oortiou of our people—atfceting our situation as regards )u_• trade, and the future stability of our manufactfrregs is!to that .second portion, ratl; . l - than t o the first., that our deep attentien s.iould be dir e ct e d , and in that quarter that the chi;( remedy shollcl be s , ( Hear, hear.) Le me Sir, that the d e fi c i ency fur the ear, for which we are now to provide, is stated by the flight lion. Gentleman . at about 2,570.00 but that the pronosalol. ; '.,:dit'agqt4,,.of an ,income tax, and secondly, of taxes with re itPN.chtAVe4ind, is order th. , ..t Ireland may bear at least some p , rtion - Or ti public burden; arid lastly, the amount of =!i?,9001. to be raised at home from other sources,' Kill giVe as • tile :!1 which the flight iron. Centerr'D'i - doses' should be levied on the country, 4,361,0004 It is not, then, for our immediate financial deficiency; it is not for the deficiency as it now stands, and as it has been Government itself, that this great effort is to be mad e. , stated lel s. th v e Sir, in order to-euable us to consider, andin so far a order to place duce in a elearer view the necessity which now exists,t reeofenrcetroned, formert(s aokeecatshideneso i :s n k a s - e a t r o e have been piooosed and have been enacted, an . - o occasions on . " o r : ew propo sed, d cli t incom taxes must The difficulty which you had to enl l tion by large majorities. _ Which the Loose did not confirm, but negatived the proposes you had been engaged in war, and • counter when the income tax was first proposed, was of this nature. Tor several years terms, and increasing every you were adding every year to the amount of your debt, raisin , money on very disadvantageous year, therefore. the . interest of the public debt. In ev th y e vear before the income tax was imposed, a loan of 'fifteen millions was raised for the service of the year. In that year the assessed taxes, I think, were trebled, but there was a provision with respect to those assessed, that every person who would be obliged by those assessed taxes to pay more than a tenth of his income, should declare that such was the fact. and thereby should he exempted from any overplus beyond that amount. In the following year, notwithstanding the imposition of those assessed t axes , which then produced more than four millions, it was found that there was a defi ciency of ten millions for the year. The pressure of the war required that& very great effort should be made, and the Mi nister of that day having the Hoeise and the country with him, in favonr of the prosecution of the war, thought it necessary, and, I think, rightly, thought it necessary not to go on increas ing the debt in such an immense ratio, but to ask for a still further effort from the country, in order to make the revenue near:y equal to the expenditure of the war. As seam an that war was over, the succeeding Minister (Mr: Addington) came to the House of Commons, and proposed at once that the income tax should be discon tinued. It is fair to say—l do not remember what provision was made by Parliament in that respect—but it is fair to say that'the original tax was made liable to the charge of the debt for several years to come in respect el the war. I am not quite aware of the manner in which the provisions were made. Mr. Addington then thought it necessary to abolish the tax upon the declaration • of peace. When the country was again engaged in war filet tax was renewed, in order' again to prevent an immense accumulation of debt, In 1806 by that Act, which has often been referred to, a tax was proposed of ten per tent. Lord Lansdowne, who was• Cha.neeller of the Exchequer at the time, stated that the loan which had for some years been ten millions aevear, had in the previous year increased to twenty millions. 'lt was in order to avoid if possible such a growing accumulation of debt—the imposition upon the posterity of that generation of a debt in creasiog at the rate or twenty millions a-year—that the Go• vernmeut of the day proposed the imposition of the tax. When . the peace arrived, it was proposed, indeed, to continue the tax for two years, I think for the purpose of• paying off the debt, but the proposition was resisted by Members on both sides of the Home—it was resisted generally by the independent Metnbers of the House who then supported the Government. After several nights discussion the proposition was defeated, and I thick it is stated by .Lord Brougham, in the introduction to one of his speeches, that it was considered as thereby established that the in come tax should be reserved for a period of sear and for that alone. Many years afterwards such was the case with this tax when there was a very great pres s ure on our finances. But, Sir, it may be asked, has this tax ever been under discussion in this House in. times of peace? It has. In the course of the year 18.34 it was proposed to reduce the malt tax to the amount of ten millions, at thd same time that there was a nroposifion for a reduction of the window tax. Orr that occasion Lard Althorp proposed a reso'ntion to the effect, " That a reduction of the malt tax to the amount of tee millions, and of the window tax at the same time, could only be supplied by an income tar. which at the present is not expedient." Lord Althorp then declared that " he confined his resohition to the time at which he moved it." But he also made • several statements as to the general proposition of an income lax. Ile said that he " thought it was not prudent to have a small property tax." He thought " that ten or twelve millions should he made by it if it was imposed at all." But he went on to say, that " he never knew a tax so unpopular as an income tax when it was ,in operation."—( Hear, hear.) He said " it was de tested," and lie asked " what more inquisitorial powers could be employed than were required for the collection of such a tax? —( Hear, hear)—end it was impossible that it could be made to bear on all parties of the community." Now, Sir, at that time what was proposed was to propose a taxon property. and not on income—( heir, hear)—and I must see , that the Right Hon. Bart. opposite said on that occasion nothing which was at all inconsistent with the course which he is now pursuing. Ile said that, he would not refuse the tax in time of war, nor in sonic circumstances even in time of peace. liut he said at the the same time that "it was a tax which required inquisitorial powers—which required a rigid scrutiny into private affairs, and which would lead to fraud and perjury."—( Hear, hear.) But, Sir, it seems to be the opinion of some that it i.; possible to get rid of the inquiry into men's. affairs, and yet to have a tax on income which would supply the deffciency. But I think the • Right Hon. Gentleman himself in the debate, to which I refer, said that there must be inquisitorel powers, and he has on the present occasion admitted that necessity, or else encouragement would be given to fraud and perjury —as the men only who were 'not disposed to give a faithful account of their property would pay the tax, and those who chose to give false and evasive returns would escape the impost. I think, Sir, from the whole that I have said, that it appears that whenever an income tax has been proposed, that income tax has been proposed fur the sake of supplying a deficiency of not less than from 10 to 20 millions in the current year in the ex penditure of the country.—( Hear, hear.) It was imposed in 1798, when you were borrowing money at 47—( Hear, hear) — when you were paying 46 per cent. on all the money you bor rowed.a-( Hear, hear.) Let me ask if there is any resemblance between that situation and the present situation of the country. --(Hear.) Your deficiency does not amount to ore-twentieth of your annual income ; ansl althcugh that deficiency has existed for Seale years, yet the credit of the country continues unimpaired.—(Cheers.) During that period, your Three per . Cents. have been at 89 and 90, and you have been able to bor row money at less than 31. 10s. per cent., while otber nations, whiCh have had to borrow money during the same period--I may mention Austria, Russia and Holland, as examples—h ave had to pay 5 per cent. f or the money advanced to them,— (Cheers.) I state this, to show that there is nothing in the present state of uffairs to require this extraordinary effort ; that there is nathlng in the present state of affairs, that should. make y,ou contradict the assertion of former Parlia ments, an assertion supported by the generality of politi cians, that an income tax ought to be reserved for a time of war, or, when imposed in -a time of peace; it should only be imposed tinder oircumstances of great difficulty—of dicuflilty equal to the difficulty under which a country must labour in time of war--(Cheers)—and that it ought not to be bad recourse to merely to get rid of ordinary difficulties.—(Loud cheers.) Sir, let me state again what appears tome to be the general objections to this tax—objec tions which made the country so eager to get rid of this tax as soon as peace was declared, and which have hitherto made Chancellors of the Exchequer refrain from proposing the adoption of it, when by so doing they might have re lieved articles of consumption from many of the duties levied on them. In the first place, I think it a great objec tion to this tax, that it proposes to tax the funds. It appears to me, that you ought not to impose any tea on the funds unless you were labouring under such dilleelties that you can hardly find resources for your Exchequer without it.---( Hear, hear from the Ministerial benches,) I am aware that Lord Althorp proposed a tax on the transfer of stock— ( Ministerial cheers)—but I am aware likewise that his own friends pointed oat to him the impolicy of such a tax— (Cheers)—and that he was most vehemently opposed by the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite.—(Opposition cheers. ) Now, I am not saying that a tax on the funds, accompanied with a tax on landed property and L on the profits of trades a n d professions, may not be expedient. That is not what I said, and it is not the nature of the argument I wish to put. The nature of the,' argument I wish to putis, that the funds being the gene ral deposit of the savings of the country, that being the deposit of the savings of many persons engaged in merchandise abroad, it is not expedi-mt, if it can be possiblysevoided, to lay a tax en those funds. It is of great advantage: that I.ondon should be the chief money market of the world.—( Hear, hear.) It not only increases the riches of Lo n d on as a capital, bat also the wealth of this country, that merchants look to London as the great money market of the world. It is advantageous, there fore, that the funds should be frets from taxation on that ac count.—(Hear, hear.) Is it not likely, if 3ou place a tax on the funds, that either Amsterdam or Paris will be come the chief money markets of Europe and the world ; that whatever capital may succeed London as the chief money market, that country will engross much of the wealth that falls into this country in consequence of the prefer • cove now given to it.—( Hear.) That is one general objec tion to an income tax. Another is the admitted inequality of the tax.—( Hear.) It is an inequality that has not, and indeed cannot, he denied.—( Hear.) It is obvi,its that with respect to three or four persons who possess 3001. a year, that ono may have that 30eld a year, which belongs to himself and his heirs, without any exertion whatever on his own part. The second person may have it in terminable annuities, which partly re present capital; and the third person may have it by exercistug a dangerous and unhealthy profession ; as, for instance, a sur geon in the country, who exposes himself in all weathers, and who bas laid up a portion of his small income to make a provision for his tainily. In that instance you tax capital as well as income. Those engaged in trade were likewise sub ject to the same disadvantage, and was it right to place such persons in the same situation with those who had 4001. or 5001. a"year secured to them without any exertion of their own ? What is.the answer? Is it denied that this inequality existed ? By no means. But the Right Hon. Gentl eman p o i nte d out, ,and pointed out not only with great ingenuity, but with sue vess, that there were other inequalities. That though there were some inequalities there were others, fire or six, or ten or twenty, for which we could find no remedy. Others may say that they could find a remedy, but the Right Hon. Gentleman did nut profess to provide one. He pointed out that there was not only one, but many inequalities; but is not this a reason why a tax, so confessedly unequal in its operation, and so different in its pressure on the different classes of the community, should not be resorted to without great and overbearing necessity. Another and odious objection to this tax is that it was stated an inquisitorial examination mutt form part end parcel of the tax. It is quite impossible that you should avoid it. It is impossible that you should take the declaration of lersons withoutfurther inquiry as to the amount of their incomes. I may be told, and I have heard it said in the House, that it should be a matter of indifference—that persons should not be afraid of telling the amount of their incomes. I must say, that for a commercial country, that. is a very extraordinary doctrine. —( Hear, hear.) Who does not know that, however firmly commercial affairs may be conducted by an individual, there may be occasions in which the publication of his accounts would be very injurious to his credit e and inconvenient to his future prospects ' • and are you now to lay do wn as a maxim that there is something cominal or guilty in such a man saying, '• I do riot like my affairs, my accounts current, to he .preelaimed at Charing.. cross and over the world ?" Let me observe, in respect of this objection, there is a peculiar unfitness in theiiine at which this tax is proposed.—( Hear, hear.) Duririr , the latter part of the war, and indeed from the year 1797, the currency was gra dually more and more depreciating. he consequence of that depreciation of the currency was somewhat similar tithe effects remarked by the historian to have been produced by the dis covery of the precious metals in America, which was aecoin panied by their depreciation. The consequence was the increase of trade, and the wealth of the country, whilst capital and fixed incomes were lowered in value. Thus trade and currency were in a flourishing condi tion, but is that your positien at present. You are now deal ing with trade in a state of great difficulty and embarrassment and at a moment when you hope it may recover, but you do not see any strung symptoms of any recovery. Why, - a.. such a moment it is peculiarly injurious to individuals that their affairs should he known anal promulgated___( vicar, hear and I do not speak merely for individuals, but that which is inconvenient and injurious to individuals .generally, i s inconvenient and injurious to the country at large. You cannot do that which is hurtful to men engaged in trade generally, especially to men of small capital, and who are struggling with present difficulties. You cannot impose upon them additional embarrassments, without acting injuriousey towards the trade of the country. Having stated that the proposal of the flight Hon. Gentleman is to obtain, by taxation, a much larger sum than that which thedeficiency alone culls for, I come to the second part. which relates to the duties occasioned for this I:eon • • • the ty . of the eoun— ii.:esiteitil,ria,teic:::doi:gt t i o t : new tariff,. ,, and the deticienc , y , thereby bat P tr su el IS twine difficul Lens well competent to jut' *0 that o ~.orniuus that having necessarily a very e '' large amount of taxes, and hay- I 1 ing likewise to compete with foreign countries in the corn- 1 merce of the world, we should thereby be sulsjected in time to Mr. Baring,verygreat stated etnharr it as t the sments. In 1821 Lord Ashburton, then , House of Commons that hitherto their manufactures and commerce hasl flourished, becaMe they had flourished without difficulty ; because they had not met' with any competition in the markets of the world ; but the war being concluded other nations would have the opportunity of turning their attention to commerce and manufactures, and'it was necessary they should take legislative means to enable this country to meet the difficulties it would have to encounter.—( Hear, hear.) He made this statement in presenting a petition from the City of London, a petition which was generally in favour of measures that might be called measures of free trade, in favour generally of the repeal and relaxation of prohibitions and restrictions. In 1830, Mr. Huskisson made a somewhat similar statement ; he said, as was referred to last night, that this country could not go on under their existing Corn-laws and their existing taxes, hav ing to meet that competition in the markets of the world. He stated also, and I think it cannot be denied, that it was impos sible for the English manufacturer to raise his prices in foreign markets beyond what the foreign manufacturer would ask. His only resource was to reduce those prices, and in order to reduce those prices it was necessary to reduce the cost of pro duction, and for this purpose be must lower the wages of the persons employed in that production. Now this is a process which has been going on, with a few interruptions, for a series of years; we have now to encounter the competition with foreign manufactures carried to a much greater perfection than they were thirty years ago. We have to meet them in the markets of the world, and we have to meet them not only loaded with taxes, but loaded with burdens, which make the price of subsistence and the ptice of all articles of necessity, greater in this country than in any other country in Europe. Hear, hear.) What are those burdens ? Mr. flume, in giving evidence before the Import Duties' Committee—a Com mittee which th s year I msy venture to quote, although last year that Committee was the subject of general sneers and taunts by those who were then s thing on Vais tide of the House, butes ith whom in 1842 its Report is a book of autherity, since even her Majesty's Government is not ashamed to act on the principles it lays down. Sir, Mr. Hume, before that Committee stated, that, if he could buy an article for Is:. and that by the effect of law and pro tection, that article was raised to Is. 6d., he called that ad ditional 6d. a tax.—( Hear, hear ) This is a principle which cannot be controverted; whether or no, it is paid into the Exchequer, that amount is a tax, and is levied at the expense of the great body of the community.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, we proceeded onthose . principles last sear—p: ineiples not so much admitted then as they are now —vi e proceeded on that princi ple to say, that there should be moderate duties on the great articles of consumption, which were effeetul by taxes of this kind, and we took corn, sugar, and timber, as the three great articles on. which we proposed first to preceed.—( Hear, hear.) I do not wish to avoid, far from ic, any odium that may attach to the Government of the present day of taking away protection from other articles.—( Hear, hear. ) Because the principle we stated as a general one, and though we thought those were the inaln articles which first required the attention of Parliament, we never meant that the same principle should not apply to all those articles to which the tariff of the Right lion. Gentlemen refers —( licar, hear.) On the present occasion, therefore, I shall act on the same principle as last year. I declared last year that you was acting on a vicious circle of protection ; that your manufacturers are to take articles from 'the colonies at a dearer price than would eompensote them, and that the colonies were to take our manu factures at a dearer price than they could get them at other ports, and that, in that way, you were acting in a vicious circle of protection, instead of giving every body an opportunity of getting every article he wanted at amo terate price. Sir, the first article to which I shall refer on which the letelget of last year was ptoposed, and I must refer to it now, because the Right Hon. Gentleman in his speech made what seemed to me a very unfounded argument against the proposition—that ar ticle is sugar. Au argument used by the Right lion. Gentle man, and often repeated by others, to the effect, that if you re dude a duty, you cannot he sure that by increased consumption you will have any increase in the amount of that duty. er even the same amount for many years to come. lie supported that pro pesition. by instances of wine, rum, tobacco, turd other articles. hat principle may be very true, but that is not the principle n which my Right Hon. friend proposed his reduction of the sugar duties.—( Hear, hear.) It was indeed quite a different one. My Right Hon. Friend said, last year, that foreign sugar was subject to a duty of 635. per cwt. Now this i 3 not a duty which gives a certain revenue to the State which might be di minished by a reduction ; but it is a prohibitory duty, and one which prevents, except in one or two extraordinary years, sugar from coming in from foreign colonies. my Right Hon. Friend proposed to reduce this onty to 365., and very justly argued that we might from this obtain a perfectly new revenue. Sup posing, as has been said, that this encouragement should cause foreign sugar to displace a million cwts. of West India production, you might say it deed that this was an unfair dimi nution and hard treatment of the West India interests, but still, as a question of finance, it cannot be dented that the change would be greatly in fav,cur of the revenue, for we should then have one million hundred weight from foreign colonies, paying thirty-sit shillings instead of the same quantity from our own colonies paying 245. daty.--e Hear, hear.) It is clear that the principle on w hi c h Hon ' Gentlemen opposite rely, is wholly inapplicable when they assert th t this change in the tariff would yield no increase to the t evenue. In truth the Right Hon. Gentleman never touched my Bight Hon. Friend's preposition at all.—(Cheers.) 1 shall now take the items in succession. My Right Hon. Friend said the other day that if you took the average consumption of seger for eleven years, there ought to be an increase of 31'2,600 cwts., and that by the duty he proposed, there Would be an increase brought to the revenue of fs - 67',000/. I think that was a very fair estimate, and I do not see why the incontrovertible prin ciple en which my Right Hon. Friend calculated should not be admitted as part of the financial resources of her Majesty's Government.—(Hear, hear.) With respect to timbers the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite proposes to throw , away 600,000/. altogether on the timber duties.—(Cheers ) I agree that if the Exchequer were overflowing, and if you had with perfect ease reduced some other duties, you might also make a greet reduction on the duties on Canadian timber lion in the present state of the finances, I think the Original proposition, to add 10e. to the duty en Cettaditn limber, and to take ss. off that on Bailie, weulti add considerably to the revenue, without being hardship to the consumer.—( Hear, hear.) That preposition, according to the calculation of Lord Althorp, would have given 750,0'0. !_rny Right Honourable Friend only to o k it a t 600,000/. Now, the oilier tClanhill ing article is the article of wheat, anti my night Honour able Friend has stated, that if the proposition of an r Bs. duty' had been applied to all the wheat that had been admitted last year, an additional duty of 530,000 e world Haste I been received. An argument was opposed to that ei my ;'light Hon. Friend, by the Ri g ht Ho se tire Caneellor of the Ex chequer. The Right How, Mhtlernan had said, that +here was no proof that se fetal an amount of wheat would hare paid the duty, ' feet! filet it would have been a hardship tg the emte sumer to have had that additional duty to pall, ittettiel of 3s. tics., or some such amount, which Was the average of the duty. Why, so ftet trom its being a hard ship to the eensorner, the consumer would have had the corn ott better terms.than he had it according to the law which existed last year.—t Hear, hear.) We have it on record that the wheat in bond from the month of June to the month of September, increased, I think, 225. in price. Nit if at that period an Its duty only had been paid, it is evident that, with an addition of his. only, and Rot an addition of 225., wheat would have been brought into the market, not, I will allow, that the seller would have sold it merely with an addition of 65., he would have got his profit by it, but his profit would have been somewhat diminiihed ; that of the fort ign importer would have been somewhat diminished, hut the whole of the 81. duty would have been given to the benefit of the revenue, and not at the expense of the consumer, but at the expense of the foreign importer s of the foreign grower, axed of the merchant in this country, who made those enormous profits owing to your absurd law which, happily, you have now tried to repeal, al though you have not placed a much better law in its place. Sir, an observation was made last night, to which I must beg pardon for referring, as to the change which I was supposed to have made in the proposition of a fixed duty. My proposition last year was, that there should he a fixed duty of its. ; but 1 stated to the House that I did net calculate that that duty would be enforced in times when there was a prospect of a se vere scarcity in the country, and when wheat naturally rose to an inordinately high price ; and I proposed that the Queen in Council should luive the power in such cases of remitting that duty. Now, that proposal wrs not founded upon any notion that it would be a real and actual benefit to the consumer that the duty should he lowered. If the importer can send corn with a profit, as it is supposed he can, under the new law, when wheat is at 6es. or 645., how much more could he sell it with a profit when wheat in this country is at 745. or 755, ? Rut I confess it appears to MC, after the strong opinions that were stated by the opponents of a fixed duty , in this House and in the country, that if different parties should combine in order to force up the price of wheat in the prospect of a scarcity, that it was necessary to hare some means I or another by which the prospect of a real scarcity, anti when prices rose very high, public discontent should not be excited. illy view was that the law might on certain occasions be kept back, so that it might be restored whenever an immediate ne , cessity is required—and I certainly had some fear upon con • . sidering how many would cry out against the operation el the law in such a case--I had some fear that if the law was then kept down by a clamour against the Executive there might he a difficulty in maintaining the Les till after that necessity had ceased. With that view, therefore, I stated that when prices rose very high, and there was a great scarcity, you might then provide by law for that necessity. Now others have differed from me in that respect. Ido not say that J was right in that opinion; but still I must say it appears to-me that, with a fixed duty, you must look in some way or otter to its beingtaken off at periods when there is a great scarcity. But that does not prevent, nor I think would prevent, the usual operation of the law being such, that there would be a regular and constant supply of corn in this country; the price would be kept mode rate; merchants would import corn as repoilarly as they would cotton or any other article for which there was a demand s and that the necessity would seldom exist for making any altera tion. The amount calculated by my Right Hon. Friend as that which would be :del iced from his proposed alteration, was, for sugar, 578,0001.; for wheat, 53 t,OOO/. ; for timber, 630,000/. This would give an increased revenue of 1,717,000/., and this without imposing any burden on the people ; on the contrary. diminishing the taxes paid by parti cular classes to particular individuals—en increase of the pub lic revenue, and at the same time an increase of the public comfort and the public, happiness—an increase accompanied by no inquisition into private affairs, accompanied by ne ine quality in its operation—an increase from the most legitimate sources, and becoming a Parliament which was apxious to .pro- • vide for the general welfare.—( Cheers.) But, Sir, I must admit that if you proceeded to legislate upon other articles, and weir them into consideration at the same time, there would be a diminution of revenue. The Right Honourable Gentleman has taken the alterations in his tariff as causing a diminution of 270,00 W. lie has frankly stated that he anticipates a diminution of 170,0001. en the article of coffee. Now, I think that on the article of coffee he has made an unnecessary sac. ifice.—( Hear, hear.) He h made a difference of no less than 100 per cent, between colonial produce and foreign produce— a iu tub greater difference, I think, than it is at all necessary to make. My Noble Friend near ale stated that he thought, for the purposes of revenue, you might keep rid. and Oil. as the duty. The proposition which was made by the Government last year was an altera• tion without much loss. it was a duty of sd. on colonial coffee, and of Bd. on foreign. Now, that was still a differential duty of no less than 75 per cent. Hut I think that from that reduction you might calculate on an increase of ten per cent. 00 the consumption, and on a loss of no more than 70,0001., which with the other reductions, would amount to 360,0001. .And I think it would be better, with respect to the 1,717;000/., to leave a large portion of it, in the present eituatien of the country, for the purpose of a further reduction of duties hereafter, and for the contingenvies which the State may require. I should not propose, there ttthlai ke in e .ta a yai l t s ,o, o s77eo t , h ti a t t there fore, after taking away this 360,0001.. to take the whole of the surplus, as there is a deficiency of 2,570,000/. But I surplus,eYivoeno no m rt i h g e h st t calculate upon having pro bablyobit-Lee:es. thousand pounds, ig p h o t un a d t s, loa i s n t and you would only have to provide for the 2,000.000/. in the way of taxa ion. You would have two naßs of r . ut , deficityS tr cY u , dea notrteo inadstrike ff t e i :r o ) tf‘lnptbl plates the r i i t s u imposition of new from proposedt at t o o f lastt m rtx i l year. • you last yeir, and by which I consider a coa,iderable partial' of tier deficit^icy Vt . 01.1 i 1 „ r think that it is neeessary toaee ; it, is that r shall move the resolution, " That this House is pretty sensible of the evil of a continued inadequacy , of the public in come to meet the public charges, and will take effectual imea• stares for averting the same in future years." With respect to the mode which should he adopted for this purpose, without taking upon me the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer, I think thst Most of the receseary measures which have been suggested have been better than the proposit ens of the Government. (Cries of " Hear, hear,'' and a laugh.) There is one proposition which has been mooted in this House, and which perhaps is a tax not desirable to adopt if there was no necessity for it—still I think it would be preferable to an income tax—l mean a tax upon the succession of real pro perty equal to the probate and legacy duty on persone.l pro perty. I know the Chancellors of the Exchequer, and amongst them my Hon. Friend near me, and Lord Althorp, have said, that there was a duty on the conveyance of real property equal to the amount of the probate and legacy duties. But, Sir, although that may be hue, yet I contend that it still leaves untouched a great proportion of that species property, because a great portion of the landed property has gone on descending in succession from. father to son, or to some near relative, for the lest 150 years, and to not one particle of this description of propel ty does the duty on conveyances attach. Now, Sir, I do nut see any reas n, why, if it he a great object to impose a new tax, a tax of this nature should not be adapted in preference to an income tax. Then, Sir, there have been various taxes repealed, some of which might be reimposed, not taxes on articles of consump tion, on articles of necessity ; but there had been taxes taken off cei tour-wheeled c arriages, on male servants, and other taxes of a like nature, paid by the rich; and I can see no reason why we should not reimpose such taxes, rather than impese an income tax. From 1821. to 1823 there were 6,000,000/. of taxes reduce t, and of this amount a turn amounting to no less than 2,300 000/. was taken eff the assessed taxes. The Right Hon. Gentleman, before he brought forward his proposal, made an allcsion to what had been the result of increasing the assessed taxes. The Bight lion. Gentleman stated that in 1810 the assessed taxes had been increased 10 per cent., and the result of that measure had been to produce an actual in crease of I per cent. in the assessed taxes. This, therefore, showed that the produce at the ass issed taxes has not sufihred any diminution in consequence of the impnsiticsn of an addl. timed 0 per cent., and I thought when the thght lion. Gen tleman made the • statement, that he was about to propose an increase in the assessed taxes, es the former in my hand a return mom d f or b y M r . H o s t iles, experiment hail already so compl e t e l y succeeded. I have which shows what had been the e ff ect o f a re d uct i on o f th e assessed taxes. A consist-rabic reduction was made in the as sewed taxes from 1821 to 18:31, and the effect of that reduction was to bring a greater change to account. The return shows that at the time of the reductim it was estimated that it would realise 3,623,000/., whereas it had actually realised no less than 4,271,0001., showing an excess over the estimated amount of 648,000/e, showing that the operation both of an increase and of a diminution hail been to increase the amount realised, thus showing the buoyar cy e f this source of reeenue,_ ( ) An increase in the assessed taxes has this advan tage over the proposal for an income tax. If you pro pose an income tax, you must set all your ma chinery in motion for a periol of five years ; if afterwards you find that your revenue has increased, or that your establishments can be diminished so as to enable you to do away with the tax at the end of that period, you will have in curred all the unnecessary difficulty, and all the unnecessary odium Of the charge. You may lay on taxes on articles which arc generally teed. You may lay ihern en windows and car riages, Which are obviously used, and you may easily take them off; but if you impose an iiicome tax which is to produce four millions a year, because I thank the Right Hon. Gentleman under-estimated the produce of the tax—you may be sure that the Chancellor of thi Exchequer will be in no hurry to take it oaa—( Hear, hear.) 'I he lax is certain for three years—it is probable for five years—and it is probable for five years or ten years after that therefore, Sir, what I should urge en the House is, first, that this tax has been hitherto imposed only in times of extreme necessity—that it has been only imposed due ieg perilous wars with powerful enemies, and has been taken off on the return of peace—that hitherto Parliament has not thought fit to adopt an income tax in time of peace—that it is accompanied with inequalities, awl w.th an inquisition into private • affairs which renders it peculiarly odious, which was the reason that Lord Althorp d. eared that it was more unpopular, and more destestable than any other tax, that in going to men's means to obtain an increase of revenue, that increase may be assisted and made so complete as to supply any deficiency you re quire by taxes, much more just to the people on whom they are imposed. and which • can be taken off when the necessity ceases. -e Hear, hears) I should not despair that a proerisitii n which appears to me so reasonable would be ac cepted by the House, but that I observe it is declared and avowed thiet the matter to be considered now, isnot to provide for the necessities of the revenue, not to provide for deficiencies, but that the business to be considered is to contrive in what manner Hon. Gentlemen can best give their support to the Administration of the Right Hon. Gentleman. With respect to another mefoure, an Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Wal lingford, had askci many Members if they would agree to such a Cern 8.11 as they suppoi ted, if it had been proposed by me ? and they all answered that they Would not.— ( Hear, hear.) I have seen it stated, over and rivet' egaih, by H6n. Gentlemen to their OonfitittlehtS, that they were opposed to the Corn-law which they passed—(Laughter)—which they had voted for— and which they voted for contrary to their convictions.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) I have observed • that they are still more so against the proposed tariff —( Hear) a sthat they viewed it with ettat elartii i that the totaleqttchces of the Wirt: Wad bb injliriblis to the farming interest-gene t-ally ; but the question with him was not whether it was good or useful—(haughter)—but that they must support the Go vernment of the Right Hon. Baronet.—(Cheers.) Sir, I must say that that declaration makes the despair of being successful in the proposition that I heme to make. I think it, however, my dill to make. it; atid to eltet tlifst proptisitigh to the Beam of bristiioni as a means by which I think you can atasid the infimtion of the tax b. fore you. Those Gentlemen who have So ill-used the constituences who trusted them with their interests, tell me that if they opposed the Government of the Right Hon. Baronet they would he aiding the enemies of the Corn-law. I ti,k, *hat fight h , i.ire'thet Gentlemen to that I stir the bitter eheiley fif the farilier? t Wish to WO e that Which is a n advantage to the agricultural interest. My belief is, that you would have a more abundant supply of corn, and in the first place, that those who would gain cheaper food would have the Means of purchasing, more mapufattures ; in the second place, else mentitietkirt giCh Mesh efepltiyment in meter tO send goods in hessian for that corn; and in. the third place that general prosperity would thereby enstie among the labouring' classes, agriculteral mehefactheinge and that the ageiculture ef this 'ailtintbi, stimulated by aOrimetit len, would iniprov ( i) and adlienee ; its means of production would be B.Vigniented, fresh demsnds would arise for this production, per haps ultimately the price would not be greatly less than we•see it at the present moment, but that price would be concomitant with the general well-being etrel welikre of, itH e l l lakt classes of the essnittelintqa if ilaliTS my belief, wiles right have they at use as the enemy of the farmer, because I sup ported that opinion—because I proposed what I thought was a measure by which the farmer of this country would obtain an advantage Meet' the feifilign find ducer ? But if I went further tbnialais aboliehinte the duties altogether, are there hiet tqh as ffiehttly tb the farmer es any Hone G en tleelets tipliate who are in faibar of s icll a 070: I sitieh ? Who has shown himself more devoted to agriculture in the course of a long life than the resent Lord Leicester ? Who in the present day has been more devoted to agriculture. more fond of its pursuits, that, Lord Spence's.? Butglendo not think that even the proteetlo a whi c h I pl'opie Slight 4:.ti be permanent ; they think that agrieulttire mak faine' etCrt unaided by protection, and afithehtdil i fiehlty; ateitist hillureigh competatintt. Ate these Nhble Lards enefrlies of the fartilgrn that account? no means. But those gentlemen who thus taunt me with being the enemy of the farmer, seemed to be composed of the same heavy clay as are the acres which they possess. They• rail at me as the bitter enemy am proposine a totnewhat diminished tompitred With that tallith they h of ave the hith a e r r pm t r o eort in c lo job et ne7 audae:e' I Hese I baeat the ijsettiA l iii Ile ceiving the farfiterieet Loud cheers.) In - 1839 I etiblehed to the world, and I declared in this House, that I thought a mn derate fixed duty was-the best system on will Is the Corn.laws could be established. In 1840 1 declared myself in favour of a similar alteration in the law. Most of the laleinhers of the late Government in this house, and smile hi the tither House, declared in favour of the seine sestem, add itats it, feet pen olio was at the head ot thb Gile ,a contrary opinion, being the o b T up a ir b nn a tthstatot, of ahhiiiieds cow l o hl h oe a l a ge nu l te l es i i., e t l va i vio i n i, ue, l have conceded the point, and it might thus have become a united measure of the Government? Was there any deception towards the farmers in this?— (Hear, hear.) Was there not due preparation for thorn ? Have they had due preparation in the prestnt insttnee ? ( Loud cheers.) I was not the Man who seill that be was bah-, fident, if his party wets its PoWtsis, tile preSent pPetecliein would be continued ; 1 was rot the man who said that if any alte ration were made in the Corn -laws the Government would be faithless in making the proposition. I was not the man who said that he had no doubt but the present Corn-laws, or an equivalent protection, would be continued, and that if an equivalent protection was not continued, he would oppose it,, yet afterwards, in defiance of that promise s anti that pledge, voted for the change.—(Loud cheers.) 1, theta am not the one who is the bitter enemy of the farmers ; it was not I who led them into this mistake, who induced them to expend their capital in resorting to expensive processes, under the notion that an injurious and vicious law would be maintained far their sole purpose and benefit, so that thereby they could afford to give rents for land which it ought not tO yield. They have been misled and deceived, and if they are angry in finding them so misled, let that anger be directed against these who bad justly incurred it.—(Loud cheers.) Let them not try to throw off on Gentlemen en this side of the House, nor on the Members of the late Administration, the indignation which had been justly excited by the ni,envery which, during the last election, was so carefully concealed.—( Loud cheers.) But let those who have so acted, thinking, I Suppose, that the plans now proposed are the best t h a t can be obtained, let them manfully avow and make them-elves re sponsible for any change of opinion they may have undergone; or, if they do not, they will justly excite the distrust of those who have confided in them, and incur the contempt of the country, whose inter es ts they have negl ec t e d.—(Ch eers. ) f ur, Sir, is it right a f ter a ll, to impose an i ncome tax of nearly four millions sterling, a tax which is of so inquisitorial a cha racter, so partial, and so unequal, far tho purpose of supporting an administration?—(Cheers. ) • If they can sa y t h at i t i s j u stified by public nece ss ity, th at public necessity (mils f..r this infliction , 1 am ready to ray that they are right i n f ac i ng t h e difficulty—that they are right in imposing on th e countr • a ta x, even unjust and partial th oug h it may be, because pub necessity cannot be reasoned with. Rut if, on the contrary, they are not convinced that, this is a case of public necessity, if it be only for the sake of supporting the tariff, and - the Administration of which they are adhe rents, that they impose this tax, I then say, that though they may be successful in its imposition at the present moment, yet, they may depend on it,•that such a sacrifice of the interests of the country to party views—( Hear, hear)—and party purposes, avowed as it is with respect to the Corn-laws and the tariff, anti which seems Miele' to influence them which regard to the in come tax—l say, if they make such sacrifices of the i n t eres t s aonfd I thetchoirtivirty‘i ~ i then not be sil l de%d g t , hseaythat the Liouse of C ommons, country sooner or later, which th e y have elected with other hopes, and wjth ie her expec tations, hav e b etraye d t h e trus t %silica was ga nerously con fid e d I in them.—(Loud c h eers. ) be Noble Losd conclud e d b y moving the follosinss resolutions : That it has been stated to this H ouse , on o ffi c i al aut h or ity, that the deficiency of gin come to meet the expenditure of the country, may be estimated, for the year endin the bth day of April, 1842, at 2,350,0001 , and on th e sth day of April, 1843, at 2,569,000/. 'I hat this House is fully sensible of the evil of a continued inadequacy of the public income to meet the public charges, and will take ea. fectual measures for averting the same in future years. That, by a judicious alteration of the' duties on corn, by a reduction of the proh i bi tory duty on fore i gn sugar , a nd an a dj ustment of • the duties e n ti m b er and coffee, the advantage of a mod era e price to th e community may b e com bi ne d w i t h an increased re venue to the St ate. That, in addition to these main articles o f general consumption, the interests of trade will be promoted by the repeal or re d uct i on of var i ous pr o hibito ry and differen lel while it duties, and th a t extended commerce w ill i m p rove t h e revenue, gives empl oyment to i n dustry. That th e amount of taxes taken off, or reduced, from the terminatio n o f t h e l ast war to the end of the year 1836, exclu-iveof the tax on income, maybe stated in round numbers at 23,873,000/. That the in come tax, having been first imposed in' a period of extreme ii ar s i h id n :tri o n t g i . , a ea • e rr o o , s a t „ j c i t e i r l i a l N o i n n e g esiar ioe „ n wp a stie n pe i a m le p d os o e, n ) the en e r j. e g - e e n s e t Y a tin flit , „ „ t Of supplying the present deficiency, viiihout c.luincLog the price of the necessaries of life, or embarrassing trade, it is the opinion of this House that the renewal of a tax, inquisitorial in its cha racter unequal in its tressure, and whichl has hitherto been cbtisielefed as the financial reserve of the nation in tithe tif war, is net called for by public necessity; and is therefore not advis able."— (The Noble Lord resumed his scat amidst loud and continued cheere.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was impossible to hear the Noble Lord etteak without pleasure. Ile (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had always listened to the Noble Lord with intet est and admiration, but never more so than during the delivery of thee.peech he had just concluded ; for if anything were wanted to cenfirm him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) in approbation of the course Iserseeel by the Government, of which he was a member, he could find it in the speech, ',and the reaolution of the Noble Lord.--(Hear, hear.) Having now hatted all that could be urged against the measure of the Government, or in support of the alternative that was before them, he (the Right Hon. Gentleman) was now convinced that the House and the country would be mere than ever satisfied with the Measure which the Noble Lord had now arrested by his resolution. The Noble Lord said the Go vernment took too gloomy a view of the situation of the country. He (the Right Hon. Gentleman) begged not to be included amongst those gleotny speculators. lie never uttered senti ments of d. spoteleney or alarm, or of distrust of the capabilities and energies of the country; but he maintain e d that it was right that we should preiasely know our difficulties in order that we might prpeerly endeavour to surmount them. No country, however abundant its resources, cceld he free from oveasional periods of difficulty, and that. with which we had now to struggle, though furnishing much cause far anxiety, suppled also grounds f r the highest consolation. The Noble Lord said our emergencies did not justify the m easur e o f she Goveineaent. Whatever might be the Noble Lord's ideaof an emergency, his speech fully justified the course he condentred. '1 he Noble Lord alluded to two successive years of deficient revenue ; the deficiency in the first being 2,400,0001., in the second 2,60000/. Though the Noble Lord went no further, it was consolatory to hear him attaching a grave importance to a deficiency whiell'he would not in 1639, when there being a deficiency of 1,800,C00/., he (the Right Honourable Gentle man) proposed a resolution that it was imprudent to reduce 1,600,0001. of revenue, and the Noble Lord voted against it. He hailed it, therefore. as a step in the way of improvement on the part of those with n horn the Noble Lord is connected, to find That they admitted the existence of a continued deficiency to a large amount, and that circumstance called for au energetic and effective measure to equalise the revenue arid the expendi ture of the country.—( Hear, hear.) The deficiency in the revenue had riot arisen in the p:eeent. year, or in the year pre .ceding, but was the result of continued deficiencies dining the last six years, without any efforts having been made to meet the evil. He believed th.t if the present state of things were allowed to continue it would finally paralyse the energies the country. The contemplated deficiency for the present year was stated by the Noble Lord at 2,500,000/. ; but he would ask the Noble Lord, as a gi-eat statesman, and as one who looked fere and to rule the (lest Mies of this weary, to leek a.lii tae t o the future, arid to, consider what the sacrifices were which this country might hereafitr be called upon to -make. The Noble Lord fad admitted that the preser t Government, when they came into office, had found a deficiency, and that that deficiency still continued, but he forgot to add that, inde pendent of this actual evil, they had a prospect of incurring large additional expenses in future. The Government had to consider the state of our affairs in China, and they could not forget that our relatiene with that country might involve us in a great additional outlay, however sincerely they might hole to •be enabled to • avoid it. But, so 'wadded to this evil, the Noble Lord stated that the trade and manufactures of the country were in a most depressed condition, anti that they were called upon to adopt every means iletheir power fee the purpose of affording to those interests ef fectual relief. Why, what was the principle on which the mea• sure of the Government had proceeded ? Had it not been to afford to the utmost of their power relief to the trading and ma nnfacturing interests of the country ; to amending those laws which regulated the importation of foreign earn and other arti cles of foreign produce; and in doing this to provide the means. of avoiding the necessity of incurring a fresh deficiency, whilst they misfiled that which hid hitherto existed?—(Cries' of " Hear, . hear.") Ti a Noble Lord stated, that what- ever might be the necessities of the country, they were . nest such as to justify the imposition of an income tax, upon which he bestowed all those usual epithets of opprobrium to which every tax was more or le:s subject. He stated that it was a tax which should be imposed only in time of wars or of of great emergency, and reminded the house that in - the year 1797 Mr. Pitt, found it necessary to resort to it, in order to pro. vide for the increasing necessities of the country. If the Noble Lord had read the speech of Mr. Pitt on that occasion, he must have found that it was not merely because the country was engaged in war, but also because . - it was necessary to maintain the public credit that ho had proposed so large an income tax for the public.-L( Hear.) It was on that ground that Mr. Fitt urged an the Reuse the adoption, in the first place,' of the triple assessment which was the foundation of the income tax, and ultimately of the income tax itself. It was useless to say that Mr. Pitt intended the in come tax fur a source of revenue to be had recourse to in time of . war. On the contrary, Mr. Pitt pledged the property tax for the repayment in times of peace of the loans created in tim e of war. So far was Ali. Pitt from expressing any opinion thet the income tax ought never to be had recourse to except in time of war, that he expressly stated that it was a tax that might be had recotuse to whenever any emergency might arise rendering it necessary for the purpose of tuaintstinitig the public credit and sustaining ;he revenue of the country. It was perfectly true that in 1603 Mr. Addington had thought it expedient to repeal the tax ; but Mr. Addington did not leave the loans which had been contracted unprovided for. Mr. Addington - did not incur debts without making any provi• ion for their ultimate redemp tion. He'repealed the p operty tax, it. was true, but he im- - potted four rathions of oilier taxes in lieu of it. He imposed a malt tap of tete millions—he imposed additional import duties, to the amount of one Million—and one million additional cf as sessed taxes, and thus he realised the frier millions of property tax. It was needless now treexamine hethi r the cominct of Mr Ad dington in so doing was expediaht or net. When the Noble Lord suggested an inert ase in the_aesessed taxes, as not pressing on thq poorer classe , s of the community, it. shoule be recollected that of the atautit Collected from the the assessed taxes, by far the greater part was colleCted from those very classes. • Mr. Addington stated, in proposing the assessed taxes at the time he took off the property tax, - that he proposed them for the vette/le Of Hying the journeymen who were em ployed by shoekeepees, ,end who acted as ser vants for the respective proprietors of those shops. The war broke out aeaau the next year, and the tax was re atid at, the plate •it was again repealed.. He (the Chancellor of the Flichequea) was one of those -who at the • time voted against the rope al, being toneinei.d that if it had been continued for a short time, other imposts Which pressed • heavily on trade and matiufactures would have la en re - lazed ; ?Ind that; if that sacrifice hid been made, it would have pro (laced ctbilimensiifiti pthapfrityi—(Rear, hear.) The Noble Lord who had just addresed the lieot Called cn bins (the Chancellor of the Exclegeer) to give authority to the opinion of Lord Brougham, who took a leading part in.proeuring the ikapetil. - cf the tax, The Noble Lord (John Russell) ca,lect on him to give that authority to the opinion of Lord . Brougham, because that Noble and Learned Lord had stated in an intro diletipn to some book which he published, that it was a tax hiigtit to ,be irerved for a time of war. But he (the ( hancellor of the IrAtitte!) thought that, •11 a-guing for the repeal of the tax at the ,tithe referred to, Lard Brougham la:.d a great strews upon this point, thst the 4jovern- H4ttt kit tljat, day was keeping up a war establishment in timed peate, aim flat tale w as kept up to maintain them ; and so ettorig Was this opinfofi in 48 14.ase and in the country, that OcertimNit wttS oViged to frier the eitimates to a Select MearseatY the. gable Lord ( Sord John Russell) alto referred to ! id Ahtibip i t deelerarson in 1834, that he was unwilling to propose inettint tttx in time of peace, and called on them (the Ministers) to . be gover n ed by that declarration , But he (tn 6 chencellor of the Ex tiftetinerl had a fight to claim theslippy.: of Lord Althtifp; hhd If tt• at . to 118 OCUt,. * „ Preteerat, 4 ai . 4 fre6iidhit itt tgvedf of the trteAsure under consideration. What was the staig thifilgl the t/tztt cit: easion ? The repeal of the malt tax was proposed, and the debate of the malt duty that the debate with respect to the repeal of the property tax took place. —( Hear, hear. ) The imotint *eel 2:600;000/., and what did Lord A thorp say}? ids ChaiießllJr of t ItF2 Ei',ththiti4 at a, time when it was the fahildn eilrelP.elii theahffell of tip Tpasery, lie could boast of 1,500,0001. at the elo.ie finahßt - nd with that sum it was proposed to do away with 2,500,000.. of taxation. The whole sum. Government would lose would be 4,000,000/.. to meet which they had 1,500,0001., so that had the measure been effected, the consequence would be that et the coil of a yar there *ad be a Ileffeieney of 2,500,0001. Llifd .Althofti fehnd. ItitiaMf ti •giftiatidn Ivhigh the pro. Sea o'v't-nttst - iftt ere tett hi iirede&seciee=illi isi With a deficiency of 2,500,000/., and sthat ibis fhb LtitO Althorp then? He said if the measure were eseeiBdi it was impossible for him to effect the reduction of taxation proposed to the House unless by the imposition of a property tax, such as the House may now ad. pt. lle said that with such a deficiency as 2,500,000/. 3 he must resort to a property tak.—(l - 16ar.) And ht had the ilternetiet d those sonreee of taatiun, *hititi *ere piditted otit to the attention df the by the Noble Lord 1 and bk said thia at a titnks tithed 640 was not a growi ng d e fi c i e n cy of s i x Of leitsti iei4tl. He found himself in such a positio n With 2.500,000/. defi ciency, that he must either . abandon the proposition of a a repeal of.tho tax, br impose preperty tax. —( Hear, bear. ) theti, theo:entild be tiny itFbftg rrecedent derived front the authority of the individual, it was that in a prottltiit pttee,'in which there was not, as the Noble Lord admitted, such a pr6sa! sure as on the present octeeion, Lord Althorp, in his caVacity of head of . the Exchequer, thought it his duty to propose a property tax as the means of keeping up the revenue. It was of all importance to Maintlin the credit of the country. It is necessary to Watch eerefelly is system of loans during peace. • They ate necessary instruments in real, b!leatil!e thijti • trade is crippled; and there are additional burdens tit tht people ; but in war loons are contracted with a moral certainty . that on the return of peace the resources of the country would he set a. liberty to meet them. .But When loans were taken in time of peace, they must look forward 'o war with the certainty that their means would he crippled when that time arrived. They had been taur.trd with taking this plan otit of the armoury of the State, this precious weapon in time of pence. If it was wrong to take this weapon out of the armoury of the State, which was most effective in time of war, what should be said of the Government that resorted in a time of peace to a system of loans, which of all others was best adapted to a time of war. But what were the objections of the Noble Lord to the income tax ? He fi rs t s ay s th a t by it we impose a tax on the funds. He thought that they owed this objection • to the situation in which the last election placed him as the Member for the City of, London: He perfectly agreed with the Noble Lord that to impose a tax on the 'funds would be extremely injurious.—( Hear, hear.) But the income tax bore upon funded, as well as on every other kind ofproperty, and was not, therefore, liable to the objections that were urged in 1831, when a tax on stock was proposed under the name of a transfer duty, and which was even sup ported by the Noble Lord, nre.veo tenderly. anxious on behalf of the fund-holder, The Noble Lord said, if we taxed the funds the merchants would fly from the Exchange of London, Amsterdam, and mile: towns, whose credit was unfettered by taxes. Now, one fact was baiter than a thousand arguments. When the income tax was proposed, the funds were eB4—the day when the measure had been discussed, and scrutinized all over the country, they were above 90.—(Hear, Lear, and cheers.) The Noble Lord said the tax was unequal—slices us a tax that was, not. Ile said, you might raise the money by a tax on corn ; but would that tax press equally on all classes ? • It. appeared to him that no tax would operate more equally than the income tax, the inequality of which had been so much complained of. But the Noble Lord said that the tax was of an inquisitorial ebaraeicr. Now he (Sir. Goulburn) did not deny that, in order to aseertasn the amount which different in dividuals should pay, it. would be necessary to make inquiries.of au embarrassing nature, which it could he impossible upon all occasions to avoid. But he lisped be should take every pre-. caution to prevent the affairs of men engaged in trade from being disclosed to their detriment to persons in their vie:nity. His object would be to give every facility to parties to make payments without having recourse to anyundue disclosure of their affairs ; and without entering into the details of the measure he hoped he should he enabled so to frame it as to obviate many of the objections made upon that head to, former income taxes. The Noble Lord had stated that the late Government would have been enabled to equalise the expenditure and the revenue of the country if their financial measures had been adopted; end the Right Hon. Gentleman the late Chancellor of the Ex el'eVer I Vtd.f!Stitna.t.ed thf, of which woulu ‘couhthaeo'been the result of adopting the plan of the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite? Why, that at the end of the year they would have found them. selves with a deficiency of 800,0001., with a prospect of an increased deficiency et the end of the ensuing year from those causes to which he had alluded. The Noble Lord had stated several means of -supplyieg this deficiency. The first resource to which he referred was a tax upon the succession to real pro p. rty.. Ile (the Chancel.or of the Exchequer) had often seen reference to that subject, but he could not help thinking that those persons who spoke upon it were greatly mistaken in their views. There appeared to be a very general opinion that no thing but personal property paid legacy duty. There could not be a 'greater fellacy. Legacy outy was paid to a large amount in the shape of charges upon real property.—( Hear. ) A very large } roparticn of the legacy duty at present received %tee in tact derived irom charges upon land. Another error was the suppoeitiort that all personal property paid legacy duty. There were many UFrB Ise which personal property might be settled in the same way as landed property itself. If, for instance, a man who had 500,1)001. in the funds, married, and had his marriage settleMent Made in the ordinary way in which settlements were made of landed property, that property devolved upon the person who succeeded to it as exempt from legacy duty as any real estate whatever. The property which would be affected by the contemplated alteration was chiefly personal property of the value of 501., 1001.. or 2001. a-year ; and be asked the House whether in a time of general difficulty and emberrasseneet that was a desirable object.—( Hear, hear. ) Ile might state with a view to show by approximation, which was all thst could be done, what was the proportion of real and personal property which at present paid the legacy duty ; he had i'ata in his possession by which he could show that a large proportion of the legacy duty . had arisen from charges upon real property as contradistinguished from personal. He was afraid he had tired the House.—( Hear, hear.) It would he in the recollection cf the Ilcrinse that, in 12 - 95, Mr. Pitt intreduced too mcasurt s one of which waste make landed erceretty, passing by devise, subject to a out). ; and the other was to imps se a similar taxation upon the legacy of personal pr operty. In that Act, it was proposed to except settled pro perty, That Act. was rejected, but the. Act for imposing legacy duty on personal property was passed. In 1805, Mr. Pitt, not deterred by this reject.on, zgain proposed a legate duty On charges upon tend ; and the proportion of the burden of this tax; borne by charges on land to that borne by personal pro perty might be omettlated front the het, that in the six years preesding ItiO3, the duty paid on personal property alone was 5,100,0001. ; but, in the six years following, the amount th rived f om the duty on both personal . and landed, was 8,860,0001. Now, dednctieg the former from the litter sum would leave 3,760,00(1. as the • amount paid by the land lie thought it right to shOW, inthe first instance, that those who declared that the pissent•legaey duty dal not apply to land were in error, and.he hoped that he had satisfectorily that there was good reason for not resorting to these meant of - deriving an amount of revenue. But, if not, he ceuldfortify himself with the opinien of the Hon_ Member for Pols - mouth, who stated in explicit language that it would nothe expedient. —f Hear, hear.) A proposition was made on the subject in 1810 by the lion. Member for Teignmouth, expressly to the -same effect as that made by the Noble Lord ; and what. did the lion. Alernber for Portsmouth say on that occasion ? He said that “Nothing was so delusive as to suppes s e that because a legacy duty attached to personal property, nothing was paid on the descent of real property." And lie went on to say that a great part of it was paid by per sons considered free from all liability to the duty. He was glad that these oeiniwis fortified hit own, though he migh ? t, atleuce others, but so far from property not paying, the charges on estates by tamps and other means was consicere able. 'I he last point noiiced by the Noble Lord, was a recom mendation to increase the assessed taxes. Those gentlemen who supported this I canon-c, spoke as if the assested taxes fell oily on the higher classes. if any gentleman had been Chancellor of the Exchequer he would be aware that commu nications were constantly received, showirg that those taxes pressed severely on the less wealthy. It the Noble. Lerd tbeught they could raise two millions by the assessed taxes, he was in error, or he must lay it on the light ants windows of the poor. Then, with respect to the house tax, a large portion of the houses of fins country was exempted from the tax; about two-thirds of the houses were exempted altogether. The house tax, too, was only a species of property tax, operating on one kind of property atone, and they might, by placing a heavy charge on a msn's house, attack his means through his habit a ion. The great weight of the tax, however, must fall upon the poorer classes of the community. He would . read to the House the words made use of by Sir'John Key, when Lord May - or of London, in relation to the house and window tax. That was an authority to which the Noble Lord ought nt bow. --(Cheers and laughter.) Surely the reprei•entative of the City would aloe- some weight in the authority of the Lord Mayor.—(A laugh.) It was, moreover, the opinion of a man. not opposed to the Noble Lord, but one who had been con nected with Noble Lord, both in City and in general politics, and who was as mueh entitled to admiration in the one situation as he Was in the other.—(Cheers and laughter.) Sir John Key said that the City of London objected to the house and window tax as a tax unjust in principle.--(Cheers from the Ministerial benches)—as a tax that in its operation was oppreesive and inquisitorial—(Ministerial cheers)—and vexatietis in its imposition and collection—( renewed Minis terial cheers)—aura that no modification could make it a fair and equitable tax. Having told the House what it was not, Sir John Key proceeded to inform them what it was, aud he described the house tax to he a property tax, but net an equal property tax; a .propertf tax pressing upon one description of property only ; an unfair tax, a tax press eg unjustly upon the industry of the 'country.—(Cheers.) It seas an income tax in its most odious form—( Continued cheers.) — because it touched net the great masses of wealth, but pressed solely opon industry. 'I he old income tax, said Sir John Key, which hati been so execrated, was a heavenly tax in comparison to Loud cheering And laughter from the I Ministerial benches.) '1 lie Noble Lord surely could not have consulted his constituents before making his speech this even ing, or rather he had consulted his constituents' vocabulary, and applied to the property tar, which they called a heavenly tax, those terms which they had applied to the very tax which the Noble Lord would propose to substitute for it.— (Cheers and laughter.) He was ashamed of himself for having so long tresrpas, , eel upon .the' time of the House. but atter the speech of. the Noble Levi, he had felt it would he impossible for him to abstain from addressing them in vindica tion of the financial treasures of the Government. He hoped he had satisfied •he House that the occasion este one which called for exertion to orerceme the finaneialelifficulties of the country—that there tves nothing in the present crisis calculated ' to produce feelings of gloom if they met itlike men, but thet they were called upon to snake an energetic exertion to repair the hnances of the country, sorts to place them once more on a just and proper fating, lie would trust to their readiness to make good the want of income of the county when they found that. the country requited it. Time had been allotted for .ascertainine the opinion of the country, amid he hoped to.tind that the feel ing which was entertained upon that measure, •when it was first proposed to the 1-louse, had been confirmed ; and although they would not, like the Lord Mayor of London, sty that it is a heavenly tax, they would, he wansure, be ready to submit to it, as the best means of repairing :he finances, and enabling them •to give rel,ef to the trade, the manact ures,. and corn merest of the country ; and however he might differ in politics with the Noble - Lord, the Noble Lord hail no less admitted it to be one of the many evils existing it, the country. Air. WILLIAMS said that he had listened with great atten tion to the Right Hon Gentleman, and he regretted to say. that he bad not succeed in convincing him that the proposition of the Government was the best means cf making up the pre sent deficiency ih the revenue. Although the Right lion. Gentleman was confirmedin his opinion by that expressed by a , Lord Mayor of London some 15 years ago, he (Mr. Williams) must say that that confirmation was not at all to his (Mr. Wil liams's) satisfaction. The 'CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER intimated across the table that the opinion•he had. referred to was ex pressed not more than ten yeaes ago. Mr. WILLIAAIS said it had not at all removed his objec tion to the Right lion. Gentleman's proposition. He (Mr. Will i ams) was exce e di n gly pleased to find that the Noble lord. the Member for London, in his resolution, had adopted .one proposition which he (Mr. W.) had ex p iesse d Isla ' lr._Fnfion Ithich was now not. liable to the legacy of priposing the House, viz., to subject all tleser l l ; P f ti a cm ie of a t i i ty, as oi.,..htr, property. The Noble Lord had. awn with respect to as eased eo il li ane., \ considered the window seref e ant wrldit/on to his propo s ' . incom e tax, crag much better 1 L a : e a% n a i n o d st ti c l i i t li jelo Pf tl fl a e tlies still he thought than that most unjust. unequal', anal inqnieisortat as it was proposed by her Majesty's Government. - N o :tvithe standing the opinion expressed by the Right Honoterahle Gene trijuet and most unequal. It was true, t h e rt i gmn ni , (ale. Williams) must say, that th e t ax , as i t Wee re posed, mat ill Right Hon. Gehilerhilli hex/ justified that inequality, by the equality existing in levying ether tastes, But he (Mr. Wile . hams) had' often emeplained in that Hottest. of that inequality, arid of its great irjustiee. He had often shown in that House how this inequality existed. Ile was glad that the Right lion. Oenttefitan h& , .1 made that admission, and he had lisped the ilfert hens: Genfienien'e attention would b e ca ll e d to w h at he hitfisi at miiiiitt e d• to ate an injustice, and thence to a general revision of the taxation of the country. There were one or two eas es which gift great dissatisfaction to the country. With r geld to the prontwition of the Noble Lord, lie must say, that he did not think the Noble Lord had tileds out a very good case. In the first place, he (i%lr. Wile liems) winch preferred the timber duties proposed by her Ma jetty's Obvt, , tr 'tent to those suggested by the Noble Lord. Her !Majesty's Govetoment had dealt fairly with respect to that very important attiele. Ho knew of no article in that country more important than tlffiliet j not only was it a very useful article in building, but, if the ditty was lower, it would enable them to bull l tlseirand thus enable them bett er to c ome jt ;: iv kh the ships foreign teap'h sh e ip r Owner. If they increased their ship s i ng, Ive y fe . sy greatly added to the employment of capital. :It else greatl oath! tad ifet grit ployment of seamen. He believed y that nothing was so well calettitttfA as a protection against foreign countries as the manning of ships In the mercantile ser vice. He must say that, with regard to the artiehref coffee, which wae the next item in the Nible Lord's resolution, that thotight the Unvernmeot had dealt most liberally ivith it, but to thmight they hid made too great a difference between_ • colsnial aria ft:Weigh eoPto He thought their proposal would have been much better If the difference which existed now be tween colonial and foreign ecfteo-4ii., 6tl. or 9d., and Is. 3d., had been continued. He thought that a differential duty of .fifty per cent. was an ample and more than sufficient protection to the colonies. He did think that every encouragement should be given to the consumption of entiess. considering the present position a Chinni He thought that a . duty pf sixpence a pound on foreign coffee would greatly increase the conaatoln tion, and not at all diminish the revenue. With regard to the proposition with respect to sugar, he had already Men expressed his. opinion. He could hope to see the treaty entered into•with foreign countries cohere sugar was grown for the abolition of slavery. Utility could accomplish this with the Brazils Spain would soon adopt the same course. With regard to - he other I proposition of the Noble Lord, he had said often before in that House, that he was decidedly in favour of a free trade in corn. But if any duty was proposed, he thought that a fixed duty, I such as the Noble Lord had before proposed, or Otte will leas, would be infinitely better thanwhe measurnof her Majesty', Government, which had yesterday passed that Horne. Buf with regard to the reduc: ion proposed, he had before stated that he considered theerresetit renegers a itorisiderable amendment on the old law; but still he thought that as much income would have been produced by antis. duty, and th it in the course of a year more, .while at the same time the price would Le leas to the consumer. With regard to the taxes which had been abo lished .since the war, he must say that any tax that would fall on persons poss. ssiog prcperty would be much more pre f eratOe than to have the assessed taxes restored. He consi dered that the industrious classes were already most unjustly burdened, and he, therefore, said th et any taxes that mould again affect them le a peculiar manner ought to be certainly avoided. After reading the resolution of the Noble Lord, he must ray that he wa s no t at a ll prep o ssessed in f avo ur of the proposi ion, as set forth in. these resolutions. But the Noble Lord had made considerable addit ons to his views in his speech, which hal altered his (Mr. Williams's) opinion altogether with regard to the proferwed Mode of making up the deficiency in the revenue cf the country. lii consequence of this he had given no tice cf his (Mr. Williaws s) propositions, which he still con sidered better than those of the Noble Lord. —( Hear, hear.) The .first propesition was with respect to real property, or pro perty of every description, not liable to the payment of the same amount of * duty as was then paid upon personal property to the legacy and probate duty. The Noele Lord had not named what he (M. •Williams)W - considered a most unjust ohs tinctioa. Take, for instance, a man who left his children 301. If that property consisted of furniture, that furniture has! to be valued, and • if that furnitute w;t_- valued wt SOl, rheaschin fcti bad to pay the 10;acy tol4 pr'- bate 'duty ---I Cries • of `ilea:, hear" I—if .a rich , Netilernstn 'w " , th 1 00,0001. a year, he paid neither taxes nor duty. The Right Hon, Baronet shook his head; now he would ask hint if the Duke of Cleveland, the Duke of Norfolk, or Alarquis o eiee Herifird, who had just come into such immense estates, tv these Noblemen aid any duty whatever wen their estat. t l a i x e ;( it i ' ) J u r. t t i tif . t ) t . te ve y a , sz , o , t ,j r he c :t a thats sure: the were e n re ig a i t it a, l l :o %a . b le to a 10 "; he nos right, thew, in asking if such a state of thine . " would readily furnish the House with the informs't i n n • au m otahrn o gel s yu t i :I„, u ).(aa n il j .np u tlri s i t a: ? iclai ini lr ep l ia, e srroo d t do proportion u t i o sh ih t e he an r , i ,i ch un in t a o r f i t i ci iis pa p y ro ;: w r ., ea l s . any argument found i e : d eslft- o ° 7l ‘b. them. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had referred to Ow' self-evident, he oenueler thought i b e en o a t dv a a i n t n t c s i a c e s d i anticipate B e a t : g e r : l, 1. ? ": j 61 1;;• eas, n amount of taxies in the year 1825. He (Air. W.) wished the - • Right Honourable Gentleman had come to a later pell'd , for there was a vast difference in the value of property then and now. If he calculated tIM amount of pr o e • perty as in 1825, and what it was now, he would -; have a much larger revenue than he would have had in 18•25• lie hal heard persons who were well acquainted with this sub j ject, and they had estimated the increase of property at from two millions to two millions and a half. Tee next part of Ilia proposition referred to all annuities, pensions, dividends, and salaries, and provided that they should be hableto-a certain ire position of taxation. For all salaries up to 2501. or 300/. r.- year, he proposed a tax of 6d. in the pound, or two and a bait per cent. Several gentlereeer had stated to him that there was great ohjiction to this proposal. If he did not consider that the proposal was founded in justice, be would never have proposed it. He would state shortly to the House his reason for im posing this tax. When they looked to the present state of the country, with the exception of those two great interests, the landowners and the West India . Proprietors, sall° were protected by menepoly created by legislattoa ; in that liouse -- with the exception of those 1- ' 0 1 classes, every class in this country was thi - n . in a state of suffering. The merchant, the manufacturer , the j, shipowner, and the labourer, all were in a state oe.great depret sion.mid suffering. That he believed no one could guest on. If they compared these classes - to the same classes ef six jeers ago, they would find that six years ago they were aleie to pay twice as much taxes as they could now. Seeing then ,'hat this - cease was in this state of suffering and distress, it we old be unjust to add a greater weight to taxation to that which alhea n Y pressed them down, not only so heavily, but so unjuetpa Another reason why he made this proposition ors the v'a-tSe of money now and same years ago. During the war tt'f . salaries of public men were very much increased. They Ines • also consider the fall in wages, and yet out of these wages the, • taxes principally came. lie referred to a most able worh - • written by the Right Hon. the S.ecretery Sir the Home Denaart— ment on this subject, who was a very high authority. r ie (Mr. Williams) had read a great many works, and he es nevi read any in which the view of the writer were ex- h eih more ability, i.e would say, with more justic e ' The Right ;lion. Gentleman ;Anted that the difference in value o f m and in 1813, which was the last year e; the war, was at 30 per cent. Now there was not an : -, re ased an opieion on the subject, "° virtual ho had ever ea '`re. .; .• e t did nut hear- out the Right aier'n. Baronet in this. But if ' (Mr.Williarns) were to expreseaaa °pluton, he should think il l ' the Right Hen. Gentleman hats eother unaer-stated the than otherwise. The. amount of taxes :'ss 1813 was 81,000,00 0 • and the value of gold wes Si. 6s. 2d, the o.‘erce. At the prese t : l time the taxes were about 58 millions, w h e lh: the value of g,'` was 3/. 17s. Mid. In 18/2 the price of whet. - was 1225. 6e,'; - now the price was 625., sa that they hed to s amount of taxes upon salaries, while they could ge a two na h - 13 way the saw - tees of weeat when they could have but one in 1812. fn la • . , according to A lm contracts at Greenwich Hospital, the, Ft': of • beef was 9d. a pound; he did not know what the c on:t a . t was at the present time, but a very large quantity Was c6°., ~ stoned, and he thought he should not be far from the trut''. ' when. he maid it w s not more than 6d. per pound, so that th e y had a pound and a half of beef now to one pound in 1813 : 'The - present condition of every one who would have to paY tax would make the burden upon him a great deal heavier th in 1834. He ( Mr. Williams). never knew a man pay 'O'' ) °, hail not the means to do so. Hume in his " Essay on a3reth e r e , said, that under the eircunniteneet of heavy debt in which tn' country was placed, the revenue must - be raised from a cop' tinned' tax on annuities, or -what was the same thing, from 9! mortgage of those annuities. They must come to this in " le end ; the Right Hon. Gentleman said that a long time ag" . * and he (Mr. W.) must say that it did the Right Hon. G e r tleinan great credit, that he had foreseen it. He agreed with t e r Right Hon. Gentleman in one point, and that was that a hates-fo amount of expenditure this House might vote, it was bound place the means of raring it in the hands of Government , that in a manner very differently from all that had been done late.—( Hear; hear. 'I Now if his (Mr. Williams's) plans we e ; carried oat, it would secure to the Government a sum o f fr' • 4,000,0001. to 4,500,0001., which would be amply sufficient fi " r • the exigencies -Of the country. He would make one o'l observation only .befoie he sat down, and that was th a a ' much dependence - should not. be placed upon the Bank of land. lie knew 'that the Bank was very willing to aceman'be date the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but still it rnigli t . t e unable to afford, the required accommodation. On th e re of January of this year, the Government had not ab ° ,e, • aalthe,ooo/. to pay a debt of 9,000,000/. ; and if, whe n al 100 cation was made for more advances, thirteen Direc t te e had said, " No," • •in what state would the Gove ran' o . have been ? He .would press this Matter on the atoell tion of the Right Hon. Baronet, as being a subject , t he worthy of his consideration. And again he would remila te e Right f lon. P.aronet, that in the comer of a few years the xl would apply for a new. 'charter, and then it would be we ' ,i e e the Right tion. Baronet to be able to meet them, w i t h o ot h' under any apprehension, or any dread, but on a fair footirilete independence. Ile thanked the House for the attentio n ea t which lie ;had been heard, and he begged to give notice, I"ta,e after the Noble Lord's motion was disposed of, he shouldn' re e the following resolution—•" That it. is the opinion of this c° s ; / ,. mittee, that, towards raising the supply.granteei to her 31 0 1 4 , 0t 5 anti for the reducing, as much as May be practicable , the new payable on malt, sugar, and tea, there shall be charg c ` a ; nually the several rates and duties following, that is to.,eedi fir audio respect of every annuity, pension , stipond, dicl2:log. or sa!ary, pryabie out of the public revenue of the United the 4 dornof the annual amount of 1501. to 3001., for every ! i " io r shillings, sixpence ; of 3001 to'soo/., for every twenty one shilling of 500/. to 7501. for every twenty sl'" ge r" on shilling and sixpence ; of 7501. to 1,0001., foe fo r twenty shillings, two shillhtgs •• of 1,0001. to I,so° L e es I every twenty shillings, three shillings ; of 1,500/. ar ,wards, for every twenty shillings, four shillings, on the ~ t e • thereof. For. and in respect of all lands, tenements , here' : meats, heritages, and real property of every description , t j'i 7n 1 shall be charged to every person on coming into pbesel thereof, by ieheritance or bequest, a duty equal in arooeartr, ; theyrobate and legaeyduty now payable on personal prel i `f Ili', j Sir- R. INGLIS.; said that after the excellent speech ° did • Right lion.• Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he ee el l not rise for the purpose of following the Hon. Member th r . t , g to his speech ; but he rose simply for the purpose of submi t° . el° his Right Hon. Friend, the First Lord of the Treeen r '; alteration which he took the opportunity of suggesting ti,. ° ` c his avproval.. The Right Hon. Baronet had pledged "e': istenee of his Government upon the success of this prep t cid measure, but though he stated that, he expreseed' r es e ; same time, his willingness to listen to e any co i•municat' - beg e lating to the details of the measure. The Right Hon. Bar t ' t lO 4 by stating that lie could expect no sacrifices on the part ° oaf; 4 whose incomes did not exceed 150 e. per annum.• v 7 f o t therefore, that those whose incomes were below that sure-tede not in a position to bear the tax, which ought to he It v a . o ll , J; ;1 others, he begged to submit to the. Right Hon. Gen n c % Dc e that an equal advantage should be given to those whose l! l _ c e should exceed 1501., that was to say, that; those whore Vl' was 2001. ehould pay the tax only on the surplus 50/- 4 J lieved there as as no modification of the Right lion. Beton' ; which would so much tend to make his measure gener a ffee rr `, ceived, as this—the alteration would make ve ry lit tie 0 4 tit it in the amount expected to he received by his Riel!'oe., !' Friend. but to the peon whose . income was only.'er ie would be a great and thankfully received boon. 11' - hes e I another suggestion which he begged to make befer, e r ee s ., down ; he believed that the country ge nerall y wounit. til with more satisfaction a property ta x . of 4 or 5 per an nit to be compel:eel to submit to all the machinery of theee r tax. 'He begged to rccommed these suggestions to '"ojerrer, I sideration of the Right non. Baronet, because he they would greatly tend to lighten the burdens of the t e • t oit je they would press heas7eat- J t onn e (e.-; Mr. P. M. STEee z aRT said he considere d . uel le" threatened tax was a most. inquisitorial. odious:, a o t le ss. nary imposition ueon the 1 ;ere to be subjected to it,peesple this country, b t eeal s iee. he igreed . with the en t° : r, the grinher for Oxford, that they should endea.voy , tx It as little burdensome as possible, S.) apt - roved of the suggestion of his Hon. Frienn a , o o,l. 150/. ought to be made the unit in calenalaiing the e / his J o De ; the tax.—( Bear, hear.) To the last s. la nd. in that spiel that ct e hegestiol, l . - , e be w e j t te e j Friend he (Mr. Stewart) would make no' remark' - r oe' or' the f se teo -d5- i was going now to make desperate war agaheet t heP The Right Hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor ehf th e tiope - .6 thl said that he, as a financier, helped in 1816 in " he 0 1 'O , derteking to continue for two years that tax, and , t ott e , he less quite sure if the property tax had been cotejele,treeic., two years, after the close of the war, our finroces et been in a much more flourishing state story t hanV e se c s . lie (Mr. Stewart) said that in looking back in fli t e the.ploposition of Mr. Vansittart to continue a ,ith draf e ' it was the duty of the Government in honour to " se e( one could look but with sympathy on those who c a u ti e jatie r 01 1 : 1 .1 feet of the revenue, lie would just make one q by a ea. show the opinion that Was entertained of that ' 3 ; e iew e ct: who might be called a highs authority. Mr. flari‘a,r,./et Ashburton, thus spoke, after an eloquent and showing the impoirey of continuing that tax afte l uetle e " Since there is a debt of 820,000,G001., it. is o f tee quence whether twelve more be added ; hut it l a s tet ire.,o s§; eat importance that the people should be Illic", 00 , se - te e : / a meat unjust, unnecessary, and odious impo",lje, it ja: were the words of; Mr. Baring in 1816, and he s ` t ee r( cifpretshuem a t h h t a I t l b w ( m ut an t . 4eT io in w, op t p h o:it i i i o ig n 1 0 : a tleman said, and lie (Mr. Stewart) ag recel e. 7 e ' unie. ta thi I ;the/ they . did right in boldly looking theie .. P ie ; j the face; but the Right honourable Gentlen'a er e lite , " e r was not merely the deficiency of 2,500,000/., r a. ieh, 0 .itf j. bad to provide ; but they had to cure the evil , °' see wac b t e / I se , ficiensies for five or six years past. He ( 3-Ir L, [r _' l 4 say that lie agreed with this Noble Lord. t y talco. fle d ; cy London, that there had been a , g!oonly ri e `„ olag ri t i aeh • tl ai matters, and that these deficieriehee had b" e l eu eY •, mystified, because he did assert that the defic_ h i g ti 4to had to deal with now, as a financial coy ntry v ir i J iat e n ex i ; r eti' siseply time detieiency of 2,4500,000 e. :r o ,2ht Oen, iet e r T e it meguified in the first instance ! tou o l7 e the first night of the financial measure. rnan s t s. . e , and t oy reletive to• our affairs in Affghan .t) mixed uiewith the question—he (Mr. -`i s ter s t a ti chail i , ro . o . thought very is properly—the difficulties c°,_iesoi.;(lo toe He had no access toerial doeutnentsa 11 . e l, " bur I. t hf light upon his knowledge of Indian ill , , r ; l a c tri ' e eowil i ii th , ;,0 account, written by Mr. Ponce, %c hic , s urplu s t e en 1840, it appeared that there was a s arge_ e ok it , venue of the four Presidencies of India. 11.e:Lt t settt`' d f ifty; i et e . titete was a considerable surplus at but in the accounts of the revenue,. bundredthousasouu. these was a Souri,hiug surplus of six c , . ed thou . quartito . . With reseeet to China, airraiteila'• of three loin 1r It 0 of which certainly upwards Jig for the r ansoi el out of the eie me dia:it, of dollars, pe se who.were net It wow impossible! to convince tthaot. was a°3thu s ' "rhan tj ; the history of the ioneme tax h and nothing ite tax to all interne and perposhs, the aehit j° e • .tiO i ,; had ten 0 14 could justify a tax to i vel i6(.0 Toe j e coe . which it was levied. )o.el declared tu e ,übje Bill which Air. Ponsonby I liberty of ad. ile of the pole , h tas. w t , with the prihsae t .,„oh a l ter eat- .„ L e e ect et es sedetiVsuel was in 1793 that the first t the 31srqui, , s te. i• But whe' t th the pra. again introduced the subject. eriods,ow. oars nvee's9t and in 1806 Henry Petty, hoc' es , he (ere cfp of tile country at Loth of t1111.6:P a;,. said that if it I‘l ,- . Pitt ~in iott-cdoeitig I t contest which they were then yid r li r • 1 i att heiliate t est sudden tax must be obtained ly a on that eccasien re.11,,,h0 d by Mr. Pea the c lefioica c Y ( to ()Leah' supply requisitle'ltl.ei.nsg'i,g,;erd°,u'rris.;s The sum require t o ollte'_;e t ee to be made upon the present. occasion el to ra'se these teth ei &t he e ! 1798, when air. Pitt required r' to 13,642,00" • or -se" Estimates arnoun money, the Navy lions of money withiu the year, u,here,acsas 0 - 1,4 Nue" income tax, i.eates- t r . made his proposition for an f „rime), at , , the j.i r --eighteen and twenty millhihs o ~ere Army Estimatet to 8,840,000/. hi 160te wits: ! S ea l n l'ofDhct the Estimatee for the . .Nevy ao eessetti,ooo/. - Svcs" it e per, 0 3 front ,t 0: • , • proposed by the Right ou. Baronet, the. -i-orttrb`'.o`'ile;:;lll'''le-il ~' TI LE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY MORNING, APRIL 9, 1842. ll