The Sun. — London, England, 1803-07-14 00:00:00

, , , other ativantages it brotight Were ,ksnSiderajne, but which were , aceompanied by duties that svere often expensrve and laborious; or ,whether it was an Income out - of trade, either more or ltss lucrative, , as the pursuit of the possesior may he more or less. laborious,' or more or less hazardous; the principle . , was to leave earls class in its station, not to parti.: eidaiize it with any distind charge, but to charge all Income alike', lest s , ene persons might be driven oat of their present 'pursuits, atittinto others, - by which inconveniences must result, and those •of various kinds—The ' object. Wal e that each should remain in its present state, or at • least that there shouldoot, bv'any Legislative provision, be an in., ducement by which one class might be deserted and -another over. stocked. - He- 4 ;:erefore doOted very much the soisdiry of the reasoning' of ' the' Hon. ' Gentleman, on the propriety of taxing •some classes of Property higher than others of the same amount. The illustration given by the Hon. Gentleman, of the principle for which he was contending was, that, Merchants, or persons engaged in a large wholesale trade, should not, if they paid 'the Income Tax, charge it upon the Consumer, as they would do,, and as the retail dealer did in the case of the Shop Tax. He would not stop to diseussthe corredness,' of this illustration, but he could not help obserys ing, that it came rather singularly from a. person, who with a large phalanx of his friendghe was: happy, for •the interest of the Country, 'that their numbers were now considerably reduced) had uni. : formly opposed .and inveighed against the Income Tax, and who had even called evidence to thellar• -- to shew that it was inepossible that the Shopkeeper could levy the Tax upon the Consumer. 'The 1-ion. Gentleman:had now, it 'appeared, changed 'his °pi.' pion upon, this subjed; but. if the ;present opinion • was carted, the Tax could not operate heavily upon the Wholesale Dealer, and if it did not, , there was an end of his objeCtion. Upon the .whole, there ' fore, he was nor shaken in the opinion -he enter. , tained; that the Report ought to be brought up; 'hy any of the arguments he had heard front that lion. Gentleman. At the same time, he i conles-,ed, that consistently with the principles and opinions he en. eertained, he could not but have strong objections to, the Bill in its present shape. His Obje4tions were not founded merely upon minute matters of de. tail, but upon &teat and fundattieittal principles, which be (houghs ought never to he departed from. He bad always stated, and was now reads, tri state, . . that he was as much a friend to the principle of the Income Tax as ever,, but at the same time it had al. ways appeared to biro necessary that the Legisla ture should, as far as it c old, make the Tax gene. Yid and equal in its operation, not only from the ob vious -equity of such a proceeding, , but because it was the only way of prevcntirg' the - Serious incon. venienee that wouid result from deranging acid dis. turbing the different tundes in which persons' had thought proper to employ their capital and indus. ... tr y. It ;heie was one point more clear than another i n t h e , venerable authority which the Hon. Gentle. man had, quoted, it was,:' that the Legislature should riot entfeavour, by any. Laws, or Taxation in the shape of regulation, to interfere in manner in . . .which capital or 'industry should be employed. It followed, . then, that a Tex upon Income-, in order hot to depart from its true character, should he, as :far as it.wad 'possible, general and equal, varying ' . in its, atno..nt -according to the gradations of proper. ty, but extending . genetally ' and equally to every species of Income arising - from the employment of , tapital, to the Possessor of land, 'whether as an , Owner or as an o,:cupier ; to capital, whether lent out upon is'idividual security, employed •in trade, or aniseed in the Public. Vtinds of the Country. This *as a'principle which appeared to him to be sacred, - but it was one. which, as the Bill now - stood, was departed from, and to that part -of the Bill in which i it was depat ted from he could not possibly assent. It Was not, , therefore, his intention 1 i impede the operation of the Bill, 'because AmendMents might ' be made in a future stage, which would bring back the operatiotrot the Tax to its true principle.} Per. haps, as he was now on his legs, it would be as well ' if he were to state generally the nature of his objec tions, and 'to give his reasons for thinking that the House would not'do its duty, if, before the Sire ArE It ' left the Chair, it did nut vote an 'instruction to the Committee, declaring the sense of the HouYe, that in every instance in which there was a departure from that system of equality which ought tOper wade the whole measure, that the Bill should be brought back to its true principles. The inequality he Compfairied of, was of this sort ; he believed it Was meant (for it was not very dist indly eiptessed) that r .• as far as inteteSt wa s paid, t h e . eerson paying i t r should be a ll owe d to di sc h arge himself of the 20 per irefit. on the proportion of the interest ; but this he would pass over for the -present, as it wthild be necessary to make an alteration hereafter in 'the , wording of . the Clause. He objeda to 'this Bill, I 1 because tedeparted from the .116116 1 11 e of a General T ax; as applying to Land, and as applying to the 1 . Fueds (of the last he would say a few 'word s . lry. 4 .i l d. .by, because. he considered' It as a breach of eon -traEl): he also objed e d 40 i t app l y i ng to person's ~, w ho were most entitled to indulgence.' What he spoke 'of was, the distindioo which, was made in the i Afferent .classes of Income,' and to the exemptions which were given in certain eases to persons pos t sessingAifferent species of property. Exemptions were given to persons under'a certain degree a in- Come who were engaged in trade, or whti followeciany , profession, or who possessed- any place; but the same exemption was riot - given to persons p ossess i ng a si - , . mtlar amount of property, if derived - from land .occh.. pied by himself, or fr om mone y veste d i n t h e F un d s. F .This, then, , wasone of his - 'objedions to this Bill, that it did not 'operate equally and generally uport •thelike amount of Income'. He certainly had 'no objedion to any mitigation of the Tax, as far as it affeeted the Lower Classes of ' the Community ; a ll he contended for was i that if any mitigation,was ; . adopted, it should be general, and apply equally to all. He objeded to giving any. exemption to poor persons possessing one species of Incoine, and not giving it to others, unless some very good and con. ~- . v incing reason could be assigned for it. When this pill proceeded to touch upon th e Public Fund's, it appeared to him nothing' leas than a -breach of - those te l eat ed eternises made ,by the Legislature, and re.. coaled in k very Loan Bill that had ever been pails. ed. Wn it eft - ea this breach of faith would have . , onnti 010ertliS titany. e futiate Loan ttaf'osiight he 0 eontraCied for;- he wftrtiOratoW willing to discuss. There was one ground that would probably be set up in answer—it was one that appeared to be ailed upon inmost instances, though not in all, and that was, a distinetion between the Income arising from ~capital employed with industry, and the:' Income arising from 'capital employed without inditstrY, such as 'booty in the .:Funds.: This distinction ap peared to him not to be wise or just. Suppose the profits iif'a'Man in trade were is per cent., of the proprietor of land 3 per cent., and of lite per, son having his capital in the Funds . 5 per cent., if the tax of . 1-26th, imposed by. this Bill . was taken from those incomes, the remaining a 9.2 . 0ths would bear the same proportioh that they .- did before the Tax Was levied, consequently the' pro_ fits of, a man who employed his capital with in. dustry, would still have the same superiority over those or a. man who had his 'capital vested in the' Funds•or in Land Now, this would' be giving a bouoty to persons to enter into .trade, and to per. sons ititr4e, and would give them exemptions to trade.at.a. time, and wader circumsta nces in which !the, Trading Interest was as much, indeed, more ,inVolved than any other species of property.-- • , But it was impossible fairly to make these distinc. . rims in a general Tax, because if the Tax operated only upoO one, it would give a premium to another, and that only for disturbing that order of things under :_which this country had increased in prosperity, and , had become the envy and admiration of the world, which had enabled it to bid defiance to the attempts of its enemies, anti which afforded a Much more Sure criterion to ad. upon, than could be derived from all the pedantry of law, and all the formalities of po. chive institution. But how was this distindion acted upon in this Bill ? If it was right to_give a preference to one class 4,,versons over another, (which he totally denied ) ) surely that preference ought to operate generally. In incomes above tsola a year, there was no distinction. .Those persons who would 'be entitled to an cut-tnano, if their income was below that sum, lost the benefit of it when their income exceeded it, anti they were thus made the' victims of chit, new and. unjust principle. If the principle, was a good one, it ought to be general, and a man was as much entitled to the benefit of it if his In. come exceeded 10. a year, as if it was below that sutra. This principle was, therefbre sta bad in itself, ao pregnant with mischief, , and (even if it was a good one) so partially acted upon, that he hoped it would. nor be.persisted in. - Agaits, if a person had a small portion of land, which he did not chdose to ler, hot cultivated - himself, he would not he entitled to, the exemption., consequently the Bill made a diS. rinCtion in favoor of Capital against jodustry. But consider the situation of persons who had property in the fond; ;, how many of them had. Inconies on. der 101. or under .6(11'. a-year, whose age, Whose sex, whose2situatiort, tyhose infirmities, gave them no option as to the, disposal of;their capitals, who . held. their property •as a life income, . under Trustees, whose 'wfatehed• pittance admitted Of' no iniproventent, and who had ,'not• even the comforts . resulting from hope, and yet these ; were the persons .whii iii additiOn to their grievances, were precluded from those" exemptions ' which t'ere extended to others. a aaßut there still remained another'objtsdion, this Bill 'touched uptin the Public Funds ;. it was a violation of a positive compact with the Public • Cteditor, and in his opinion gave the first blow 60 Public Credit. •-He desired it to be remembered, that there was not . a Loan which had been made, ha which Parliament had not pledged itself that the interest should he paid without any deduetionHe knew there were some who carried their opinions so far with regard to the sacredneSsofiticorrie arising Worn "the Funds, that they thought such income ought to be exempted out of a general Tax upon 'lncomeHßut this he thought` was going too far, hecause persons could not complain, . Whose income ariving'fromCapital in the Funds, was only taxed in the same proportion as if their capital had been employed. in any other way. The pro. portion in iiii - ich this Property w as no w taxed, Was . certainly small, but if the principle was once esta. .blished, the proportion 'might easily, he extended, and if it was onCe_admitted that the interest for a new Loan tnight be provided, by deduCting.from the interest which had been stipulated to be paid for an old one, he should be glad to know upon 'what terms Government could exped, to borrow motley in fu. tore ? This .he ,was sure could never he intended, and least of -ali,at a moment when it was so neces.: nary to support Pohlic Credit, to maintain the cha_ railer of Parliament, and to preserve the faith of the Nation. But the very Bill wnich contained such a . vi. olation of Public Faith,' wal proposed for the pur. pose of raising a large part of, the Supplies within the year . , :in order that the Funding System might not lie•alfiefed ;, surely then flit the io.v and paltry Consideration of i the Income which was to be de. rived from this breach of faith, Parliament would not - consent to overturn that edifice which it had tidied with so much pains. These however were, as he before stated, not general ol?jeftiOna to the Bill, beeause in the Committee it might be . altered, and nothing more was necessary than to Make the exemptions general, and to give: the same abatement to Income derived from Land or the Ftinds that was given in other cases ; and he wished now to give notice, that before' the SiEAK Elt left the Chair he . ' should propose :an instruction to the CoMmittee to that effeel. ~ • Mr. WM, SMITH explAried. The ATIURNLY-GENERAL said, that the oh. servations which the House had just heard, came from a quarter 10 which so much respect was due, and from a mind SO enlightened, that. he felt consi derable difficulty ; in rising to stare his reasons for , differing from his Right Hon. Friend. He contend ed, that there was nothing in this Bill WhiCh tiros inconsistent with the Public Faith, or with those principles upon which Parliament should legislate ' upon a subjects of this kind. It appeared to him, that the Public Faith was kept with the person yho had property In the Funds, provided that no tax was laid upon his capital that was not laid upon ca pital of every kind—This certainly was the prin_ ciple which was adted upon in this Bill, and it was one Which he thought Parliament ought to aft upon in such a case as the present : lie did not, however, mean to say, • that it was invariably died upon in this Bill. Thcie was certainly no &dottier; art the tate o f Vumtea or tligiect Noeetty, be the attiont !el/et so large 'or sip sMall lout when they came to the c ise where Capital and Industry were conjointly etopbTed, there • was a degree of indulgence cer tainly extended -to the . Lower Classes.: it was necessary they should. be protected, and he did not think that .by so doing, the ,principle was at all broke in ,upon. It appeared to him, that the Small trader must derive a greater profit from his capital than the man Who, traded with a very large capital. He apprehended that a small trader must make more than Joh per cent. upon his capital ; that is to say, that he •who makes 1561. or 1601*. a year by trade, had. not often 'a capital of 'mine than 2 or 3001. therefore much of hisinctinie must depend upon personal labonr, and it was this class of persons that it was proposed to exempt to a certain degtee,-and he thought the principle was a good one—ln order , however to apply the principle more generally, ' something of this sort might be necessary,- that as the persons in trade to whom he hiid alluded in ge., nerd did not possess a capital of more than 2001. perhaps an exemption -might be extended' to capital of, other descriptions to the same extent—lt• might therefore be proper to extend the exemption to the Landholder and to the person haViog. property in the Funds to the amount of ,tol. a 'year ; 'and if this proposition was adopted, there Would not be in his opinion any, ground for, Asserting _that this Bill contained any thing like a breacli: .of Too. •If he considered this as 'in any' degree infringing npon the faith of •Parliament pledged to the 'Public Creditor, nobody would be more anxious to oppoSe it than he Would, 'because: nothing could be more absurd than.: fur the paltry consideration of so or 60,0001. a year, to violate . the Public Faith; but he contetuled that if the pro position which he had suggested was adopted, there would be no pretext for such an assertion. One principle which had been stUaliously ailed upon was, to avoid calling for disclo , ure, except. when it was absolutely necessary, and it had been done in every case in which it was pUssible. The House seemed upon - a former occasion inclined to make 'a greater exemption in favour of those whose income was de . - riVed from personal labour, for however eloquent . Iris Right Hon. Friend might be with regard to the situation of Widows and Orphans whose property was in the Public Funds, yet the situation of the person whose income depended upon personal La bonr, was also entitled to great ,coosideratiOn, because it would cease.-either by his death or by. illness, Whereas the other case the properly was permanent ; • therefore die one was more carious than the other. This then was the prin ciple of thi it .Was to impose ecitial duty , upon ev e ry species o f . I ncome d er i ved out of Cain . - talp 'excepting only 'such income in particular cases as was derived horn personal labour.. He traisteds that his Right Hon. Friend would not persist in : moving the .lostrudion to the Committee, because it would be alio use to insure the alteration pro. posed,, and the Committee had power to make the alteration themselves if they slatruld think fit, with out any insttudion, Mr. •GREGOR contended, that the Bill would fall very heavily upon Land, much More so than upon other species of property ; he, however, would ,not oppose the S.r,EAkssis. leaving the Chair, be cause the _Bill might he littered in the Committee. Mr. KINN/111W repliedat some length to the A T Tort.NEs. Gstlaaa.t.,, and gave notice, that he should Move for aninstrudion, to the Cnmmittee to o b ser ve the proportion in the Tax upon Land, that was agreed upon in die 9th Article of the Union` hetweto England and Scotland. He then .al. luded to what had passed 'in the early Parr of the Debate, with regard to the motion of the SECRS. TAR( at WAR," which`was put off till Monday,. and censured Ministers for not being prepared with the Bill, and, after what lie had seen of their conduet, he doubted whether the Stipplies of the Country ought to be trusted in such hands. Mr. WILBERPORCE expressed his concurrence in what had fallen from his Hon. Friend (Mr. Pt TT,) and concluded that the operation of the Tax ought to ,be Made as eou a l,as pos,Thle. He said he should vote for the instruCtion of which his Right lion.. Friend had given notice. Mr. DetsT wished to know whether the Right Hon. Gentleman (tjie CH . NcrLtoat of the Exc Hr. QUER) had stated to cue Contractors fir the last Loan his intention to propose a Tax upon the Funds. Ths CHANCELLOR of, thr EXCHEQUER, said, if he was convinced that the rihtic faith, would be Violated by the prekent measure, he would be among the fitSt to deprecate it. He had 'not, however, heard the principle of the Bill called in qtiestion previous to this night. The present measure did not involve a aistioaion between different species of Capital, but Between Income arising from difFe rent species of capital ; the- Income arising from the capital vested in Land, and. in the Funds, and the c:ipital employed in Trade. ''l he tli“inion . in thiS respea had been very accurately stated by his -Learned and Honourable Friend (the ATTORNEY'. GENERAL), With respect to the charge of this being a breach of faith, he had never till 'this day heard such an o'bjeLtiob. He had conversed With Many perfealy well acquainted with the subject, and. all, that they claimed Was,- that the operations of the Stock Exchange might not be impeded, and that the non-payment of, the Tax might not impede the transfer 'of the Stock. As to the question H•held by the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Dstr), he: should have th6ught that that lion. Gentleman must have known that' he stated to those who contratqed for the last Loan the PropositiOns which lie intended to submit to the House. With respeet to the ob servation of the HO, Gentleman (Mr. WILBER FORCE.), as. to the equality of taxation, he ,Was convinced it was nat to be attained by any exertion. In proposing the present measure he never aVoided the name of an Income Tax, for . the purpose of giv. ing it a preference over, the late Income Tax, but to guard against persons being 'misled by a n a me which 'he thought did not accurately. belong to but by which, however, it might be called. It. appeare4 that the number of Returns under the last Aet of Income, under I gol. amOutited to 218,000. the greater part of whorrt Would be carnpelled to - a disclosure, if the proposed exemption was adopted. He thought that n. 4 good.could arise, from adopting the instiuttion'proposidhy his Right Han,. Friend, • di the powen or the. Cortinitttee l .With their op:iGn i would rerAain precisely t'te,s:one, 'and , therefore he hoped his Right Hon. Friend wt,4l t hot press it. Mr. PITT` said he had heard nothing to 6ortvkde him of-the impropriety of the Instruftion of Whieli he had gben notice, and he should therefore sist in proposing it. Mr, DENT explained: Sir WILLIAM CURTIS obServetl, that th*. Right Hotip Gentleman (the CktANeELLOtt of lip , : EXCHF"QUEit) diii state to the Contractor's for th e las t 14 , 1 an, .the measures he intended, to 'bring for. Ward. With respea to the last Income .Tait,' the praetice and the princiele•did not very.well accord ; he should use his endeavours in the Committee to render the present measure as palataNe as p , ,ssible: Sir HENRI' MILDMAY made se.%.et.d obs-rvations as to the prOpriery of ro,lking-ded ti...l,ns in favour of - those who had large families. He thought the late Income Tax a better measurg than the present. The CHANCELLOR of the EXC.' 11EQUER • said,: it was norpo3sible to pro,vide in the present Bill for any diduCtinns with respea , to those - ,who had large families,' but it was intended to bring its another Bill'respeding that objecl, and perhaps it would be' thought that an exempt ion in such cases from the Ho u se and Window Tax, or the Tax on , . Carriages and Horses, might go a great way towards the object proposed. _ _ 'Di.. - 1-AirIiENCE observed, that . this had beets stated to be 'a Tax ~n IncOme arising from cvital, it was theitanre a 'nix on .1116.irtic ari , ,ing from cOnsequetitly a partial Income Tax, He should' so part the in , truaion because he consideied thAt die Fax onght to by equal, and tcolie so it must, be made rqii.ti in ail its branches. , 'Lord iM IPKESBUNY said he was sorry his PA& non. Friend' had . propoSed the instrudion.. He did not conceive that such an instrudion was consistent with the common praCtiee of .the. House. respeding Bills at this nature ; and,' he submitted Whether, when the omission'of a few words in the Committee would answer the proposed purpose, it was not better to let it. go at. once to the Com.• mitteewithout any instrumi ? lie was of nion, when the formei Income 'Fax was proposed, that the fair way would have been to make no exemptions, big to have left all persons affected it to find their natural level.. To that however it was ithswered, that some of the classes would not have any immediate opportunity of ,raising the price of their commodities. lie did not .mean to .say, ,that to take the same Tak from all deserip. tion's of Ir(cotne was advistable, but wheti the (quality ofthe late Tax on Income was talked of, it should be considered whether any thing. like equality could be stated in the proportion of 'Tax paid by thosz incomes above 2031. and those less.. In this Bill it was proposed to TA all Income arising frpm whatever source equally ; but the In. come arising from labour from hour to hour, and from day to day, was distinguished.from that ari, sing from permanent sources. This lie thvtight was perfectly fair ; arid the objections made upon this 'subjeCt would, he thOught, be fully answered. by the Amenciment of which his Huh. and "Learned . Friend (the ATTORNEY GENERAL) had - given not ice. Mr. BAD INCTON remarked, that he saw ne rea. son why the distinOion taken by the lii . th oura ble and Learned Gentlern.to(the ATTORNEY GENERAL) which made iol. a.year arising from the Funds equal to 2001.. eapirAl employed in Trade, should not be extended throughout, hy'Which toool. a. year arising front Trade, •would be equal to provedloool., in. the Funds, which proved the fallacious criterion wiich the Honourable 'and Learned Gentleman had adopted. . Sir WI 'LLIAM.GBARY observed, that he did not sCc any distindion• between the present and the laic income. Tax with tespen to t:le. Funds,' as by the latter the Funds were equally taxed. Mr. FITT ' in explanation,' said, he had never contended that the Fund.holders ought to be ex.. 'emptud ; but 'that below a certain "arnoorlt of In come the same exemptions ought to he extendel to the holders' of Funded and Landed Property, as to the possessors of Leonia derived front other sourees. Mr. ELLISpiI thought the Bill defeCtive; but would not votedor the Instralion, which he con. ceived to be an attack. upun Hiin iViajesty's sters. • ,• • " • , After a fcw words from Mr. Roo. W! CAW, General GA,coytte ) and Sir %VI W. I AM GEARY, ill OX pi a (la t ion, The Report was ordered to be taken into further consideration, and to be re.eclinrnitted. Mr.:P/TT.' , ,said, he had heard nothing to con vince biin of the impropriety of the Instrunion 'Of Which heliail•giv'en notice. If he thought, that the Bill contained something contrary to 'the, public faith, he hall, a right to call upon the, I louse to ex. press its ,senseof snch a measure, by requiring the Committee to .alter that which was thus injurious to the publie,faith ; and he humbly conceived, that if the House, so instrueled the Committee, that Conunittee must air} conformably to the tistratiotsi k tks to what had been said of his attacking His MA. jesty 4 .s Ministers, it was uonecessary for him to re. pc( strch an assertion. With reSpett to what ,ha t i been said bythe Right lion. Gentleman he CHArr. caLLott qt the Exctmyttp.),. that be did not know of the objeOion now Orought forward till this night, he knew his (Mr. -Parr",) feeliuga upon • the subjca, and that he. would bring it before the House if the obj , !Ainn Was. not Norte away. He had, waited till the last mmnent in . the hope. that :that objediots would be done away ; and that not being the care, it. was only taw left to hhn t.l , - bring forward his Motion. He therefore moved, that ilsilould be an Instruaran'to the'Committee to in eke provision in the Bill, :foe the like exemptions and abatements with, respe4 to Incomes arising twin L4f1,1 and tit ,! as with respect to ,InComes arising from Trade, l'rofessiOns, FnPlortnents, The SPE AKER doubted. whether such an In struetion was regular, it being unnecessary.' He had always understood' tha,t Stn lostruaion to a Corn. mirtee te as only regular inthe case livhere it was to empower drat Committee to do that which they liali . nit otherwise power to do, in which cast the Qom. intttee had an option. He did not rreollea any precedent of an Instrudicri siectilak-to the present.