The Express.
London, England, 1864-06-21 00:00:00

COLLECTION OF TAXES BILL.

The adjourned debate on the third reading of this bill
was resumed.
Sr J. TROLLOPE said be took exception to this bill
on three grounds. First, he thought that it wee exceedingly
unneosinary to disturb the present relation between the ter-
payers and the machinery by which the taxes bad hitherto
been collected ; secondly, if it was admissible
to alter the system at all, that it was exceedingly unadviea.
hie to do so by • permissive bill ; and thirdly, he thought
all bills which contained a large and sweeping exception
were equally inadvisable. He apprehended that if the bill
passed it would only be the prelude to more compulsory
measures. (Hear, hear.) He also feared that the local
coromnsiooent of taxes, whose services were of great value
to the country, would cease to perform their duties, because
they would find them irksome and otherwise discouraging.
He could not undoubted why, if the bill wee good for Li-
verpool and the other lug* towns in the kingdom, London
should be exempted. (Hear, hear.) It might be that the
representatives of the metropolis had put some kind of
pressure upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer ' • bat they
need not flatter themeless that if the bill paredd in its pre.
sent form it would be conclusive. (Hear, hear.) If it
came into operation at all, the probability wee that it would
ultimately have to be made compulsory throughout the
length and breadth of the land. (Hear, hear.) For himself,
if a change was to be made in the law, he would
prefer that it should be applicable to the whole
kingdom. The effect of the bill would be to
establish sous prefects, who would have the entire
control of particular districts and arrondissement., in mar-
ket towns and other places, with offices for the receipt of
taxes,which would form a focus of espionage of the most
objectionable character. Taxes now cheerfully paid would
for the future he collected by government officers, who
would rigidly return the defaulter to the Exchequer, and
the expense of the process for recovering those taxes would
be twenty-fold their amount. Is this way • species of
tyranny would be exercised all over the country. Coder
these circumstances he thought it was • great pity that
the right hon, gentleman premed the bill. (Hear, hear.)
He should be obliged to take the seem of the house upon
it, and believing that it required calmer and more complete
consideratioc, he should move that the bill be read a third
time that day three months. (Hear,)
Mr. FACILE, in seconding the amendment, mid that the
Chancellor of the Exchequer had, happily for himself, es-
caped the opposition of sixteen metropolitan members by
exempting London from the bill. Petitions had bees pre-
sented against the bill by the different metropolitan
borough.. and also from all pert. of the country, and there
could be no doubt that the measure was most unpopular.
He had heard no good grounds given for the change, and
the larp towns were with good reason jealous of the me-
tropolis bilUg exempted.
Mr. OOX, as one of the 16 members who were charged
with having their mouths closed, wished to say that his
mouth was not cloud, and that he had intended to have
seconded the amendment. (Hear, beer.)
Mr. S. BOOTH said it seemed to him when this bill was
introduced that the provisions to enable the ratepayers to
send their taxes by post-office orders, and not having to pay
the taxes over again in eau of the defalcation of • collector,
ware beneficial. But he was disagreeably impreesed when
he found that the metropolis was to be exempt. He was
told, moreover, that it was sot so much in large towns as in
the country districts that the bill was intended to operate.
Then under the old law the ammo= were paid by a pound-
age, but under this bill they were to be paid three half-
pence • line for their certificates. This in point of fact
amounted to little or nothing. Voles he beard some satis-
factory explanation on these point.. he should vote lushest
the bill.
MrAYRTON expressed his surprise that the hon.haronet
objected to this bill on the ground that it was • permissive
bill, seeing that that was the principle on which much
of our local legislation was based. The metropolis had
been exempted became the Chancellor of the Exchequer
found it necessary either to have special provisions adapted
to the peculiar circumstances of the metropolis or to exempt
it from the operation of the bill, and he had chosen the
latter course. It had been said there had been a compro-
mise with the metropolitan members, in oonsequeoce of
which they bad withdrawn their oppoeitioo to the bill, but
there bad been us compromise at all.
. .

Mr. HORSFALL said he still thought that the bill
would coefer a great boots on the ratepayers, bat there
was a stroog feeling sgeinst exceptiocal legislation. Is the
committee he moved to strike out the proviso exempting
the metropolis, bat was not successful, sod as he dis-
approved of that proviso he should vote against the third
reeding.

Tbir CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
could not omposive how the bill 000ld be a good bill or • bad
bill from the sole fact of the exemption of the metropolis.
If the bill were • good bill for the ratepayers generally. the
fact Out the metropolis was excluded from it was • dised-
'tutus to the metropolis ; and if, on the other hand, the
bill cceelllled on the ratepayers generally to make lecriflose, or
if it placed them under disabilities, it ought to be rejected
altogether. The exclusion of the metropolie ought to be
taken in C0012411i00 with another feature of the bill—its
being • permissive bill. The boo. baronet who moved the
rejection of the bill founded his objection on He being •
permissive bill. It would be impossible to pass the bill if
it were not permissive. The idea of wyenthinx out of the
hands of the local committees the patronage they enjoyed
was an idea absolutely visionary. As to the metropolis,
it was known to the government that the commie-
sinners themselves would hays excluded it from the ope-
ration of the bill, eves if it bed hese included in its
provisions. The melropolia mu therefore in • position to
have exempted itself, with the exception, Perhapt._ of a
few outlying districts. If the proposed system had been
extended to London, the government would have had
create • new set of offices for the purpose of conducting
their business ; and then they might have been exposed to
the odious suspicion of uodertalcing legislatioo for the sake
of acquiring new patronage. One of the reasons why
the bill was required wu the slowness of the
collection of the revenue in the country. It was
rid that the bill we. unpopular, but if that was
really so the government would certainly Dot have pro-
posed It. Its object wee to introduce asetainty, regularity,
and responsibility; and, is • wad, to correct the defects of
the existing
Sir S. ICOIrCOTE mid that he confessed he ap-
proved of the main principle of the bill, end should be
glad to see • system adopted whereby taxetion should be is
the bands of collectors appointed by the government. But
this was • very delicate question. The house was asked to
give to beards of Lod tax in various parts of the country
permissive powers ; and the hon. gentleman opposite (Mr.
Ayrtoa) had said that the permissive system had farmed
the bees of • gnat deal of their legislation is maim
times, se is the mu of the local government est. But
there wee all the didersoce in the world between legisligies
wins. the pervasion yr 6 the beads of She laaperes,