The Express.
London, England, 1853-04-29 00:00:00

r '! -

. -
depended upoin the constantly inereuing employment of the
muses atthopeophrt and they could lot secure that em-
ployment unless by constantly removing the impediments
placed in the way of their industry. (Hear, hear.) These
impedimenta would glow greater in proportion as our com-
merce and gavigatioo increased. Take for instance the
customs regulations. There had bees a great and very just
outcry from the merchants is consequence of the obstacles
gupultaitinotnehe.
(Hear,warofthehierarcolmmTereshosebyretghuelaCtuiosntosmw-heoTeusebraed-
enough when we bad to deal with only 30 or 40 millions of
annual exports and imports ; but they were grievous and
insupportable when we came to deal with imports of 70 or
80 millions. Not merely that, but the velocity of transac-
tions had Increased. Screw propellers were taking the
plum of sailing vessels; it once required thirty or forty
days to make the voyage to America ; now we did it in twelve.
Hence the grievance was greater which subjected merchants
to the same delay at the Custom-house. (Hear, hear.) These
barriers must ultimately give way. But how ? We could
not alter the tariff so as to enable certain kinds of goods to
come in free, and without examination, unless by a total re-
volution as regarded the import duties. (Hear, hear.) We
could not allow bales of cotton, though duty free, to land in
Liverpool, without the Customhouse officer thrusting his
wire through them, to see whether they had not been con-
verted into bales of tobacco ; and if the duty of Is. a pound
were retained on tobacco, this would very soon be the case.
Unless the duty on tobacco was reduced to 3d. or 6d., the
object would fail altogether ; and he hoped there would be
no such increase of smoking in this country as to cause a
3d. or 6d. duty to yield as much to the revenue ea the pre-
sent duty. (Hear, hear.) With such a :eduction there
would be a lose of two or three millions at the least, and it
would save to be made up by direct taxation. (Hear,
hear.) We must make up our minds, in the interest of all,
poor and rich, for the preservation of our commerce, to a
constant remission of those duties. Every year since
1842 had witnessed a remission of indirect taxes.
Though none had been proposed lest' year, the
self-acting progress of the sugar duties was going on.
This would goon, and must go on—(hear, hear)--and the
question was, how to raise means to enable us to carry it
ea. Coming to the practical question before the house, he
found there was in effect a deficiency ; for he looked upon
this remission of indirect taxation as so inevitable, that
though the Chancellor of the Exchequer had a surplus of
400,0001. or 600,0001., he was obliged to lay on fresh taxes
to meet this inevitable demand. He had proposed the
income and property tax, in an elaborate, able, and very
subtle argument. That part of his speech war the lout
satisfactory. (Hear, hear.) It was the most declamatory,
and the least conclusive. He had alluded to Mr. Pitt, and
to this tax having served our purpose during war, and said
that therefore it ought not to be used in a time of peace. But
WAS it not time we had done with ..hat argument /—because
there was always this obvious answer to it—that other
the customs and excise duties—had done their work
tomes—the
g the war ; and if it were a reason why a tax should
not be used during peace that it had been so useful in time
of war, then they ought to pat by this giant of the custom-
house, in the same way as the giant of the income-tax and
give him repose until another war. (Cheers.) But nobody
proposed that. And
why not ? Was there aaything in-
trinsically worse in an income tax than in a tax upon
tea or wine ? Did it cause greater oppression in its
incidence? (Hear, hear.) Did it obstruct commerce
and impede industry more than an indirect tax ? On
the contrary, however oppressive it might be felt to be
by many people on other grouods, he had never heard this
complaint alleged against it. (Hear, hear.) Much had
been said about its demoralising the trader, by means of the
sallamessmont. But did not the levying of the excise
duties produce more demoralisation than any direct tax?
It was said the self-assessment offered an irre-
sistible temptation to fraud. That might be remedied.
He did not see why any one should be called on to assess
himself at all. In America, where direct taxation was
levied for all the purposes of the separate states, nobody
was called upon to make an assessment of himself. The
tax-payers elected assessors, experienced, sober, discreet
men, who assessed the value of their neighbours' property.
Why should not that system be adopted here? Why should
not the income tax payers elect assessors, who should be au-
thorised to use's the income of their neighbours? The right
hon. gentleman could not agree to any modification of the
income-tax. A fallacy ran through his arguments on that
subject which he should have thought would have hardly
escaped so acute a logician. They all amounted to this:
—" Don't tell me that you can at all diminish the evils;
I'll show you that evils will still be left behind;
therefore, I won'tallow you to touch them." (Hear, hear.)
The right hon. gentleman admitted the grievance. Who
could doubt it ? But if he put on trades and professions
only something like bid., and 7d. on real property, that
would be to some extent a diminution of that injustice
which the right hon. gentleman himself admitted. They
might deal with terminable annuities after. The plan of
the actuaries however was an arithmetical vette, which,
however well it might look upon paper, would never work
in practice. They might at least have a mitigation of the
injustice which had b. en admitted, though they might not
be able to apply the remedy to the full extent. (Hear,
hear.) He admitted as the result of the committee on which
he sat that there were greater difficulties in the way than
he expected—(hear)—and what he heard there shook
his confidence as to the practicability of getting all
they wanted. But, at all events, that was no
ground for doing nothing. (Hear, hear.) If they were
to do nothing till they arrived at perfection it would put an
end to all sublunary reform. 'Hear, hear.) Arid he was
afraid they must stop short of that. (Hear, hear.) The
course which he took with regard to the income tax re-
quired explanation. (Hear, hear.) In 1842 he opposed
the proposition of Sir R. Peel, because he refused to deal
with the sager duties, and wanted parliament to agree to
the income tax to repair the ue. He was placed in
the same position in 1815. In 1848 he voted against the
motion of his hon. friend (Mr. Home), who proposed to lay
on the tax only for a year, in order that there might be
time for inquiry, and on this ground, that there was danger
at that time that gentlemen opposite wanted to abolish the tax
altogether, and he '(Mr. Cobden) wanted to preserve it. His
hon.friewicarried his motion,and when they came outofeom-
mittee the right hon. gentleman opposite in 18.52 attempted
to carry out his views of making a distinction between per-
manent and fluctuating incomes, which showed that he and
his party were actuated in 1851 by the best possible motives,
and that the had a &wilds intention of dealing with the
question. (Hear, hear.) Having taken that course with
regard to the income tax, he had again to deal with the un-
modified income tax, upon which the government, he be-
lieved, were ready to stand or fall, for he understood that
they would not agree to any modification. (Hear.) At
the same time, he had presented to him another portion of
the budget, which he believed Would go far not only to
redress the inequality of the old income tax, but which was
a bold and perfectly honest proposition. (Hear.) Whatever
might be the issue of this proposition, the right hon. gen-
tleman would have earned for himself the weed of pro-
posing a straightforward resolution, and endeavouring to
grapple with a subject which had defied Mr. Pitt in the
plenitude of his power. (Hear, hear.) The right hon.
gentleman had proposed to deal with the subject, and the
time would come when somebody must deal with it.
(Hear.) At the pigment moment, looking at the income
tax, coupled with the legacy. duty, seeing that they were to
stand or fall together—viewing them as the keystone of the
arch of the whole Bridget—he would take them both
together, and take them with both hands—(hear)—and he
felt bound to say that in the north of England he did not
find the same active opposition to the equal rate of duty
which was laid on all classes. lie believed they felt more
aggrieved at the inquisitorial character of the tax
than with Its unjust and unequal assessment. He
thought the right hon. gentleman did well to extend
the tax to incomes of 1001. If they Gould deal
with this tax in the abstract, he thought that it ought
to be levied on every person where it would pay the cost
of collection. (Hear, hear.) He said, " deal with it in
the abstract," assuming that no other taxes existed ; but
where poor people had to pay more taxation in proportion
to their means than the rich, he felt bound to endeavour to
compensate them at all events by levying on the property
of the rich and those who were above them in station
a greater amount of, direct taxation. He would not
therefore levy the tax on wages, and he thought the right
hon. gentleman acted wisely in drawing the line where he
did. (Cheers.) He new came to the question of
the application of the income tax to Ireland. (Hear,
hear.) That seemed to be the great difficulty with
the government on the present occasion. The represeata-
tires for Ireland would not suppose that he was anxious to
impose any unjust burden on them. (Hear, hear.) He
was an advocate for religious and fiscal equality be-
tween the two countries. (Hear, hear.) As far as regarded
religious equality, aotwithstanding partial outbreaks of
bigotry in this country, nothing should induce him to put a
fetter on the Roman catholic*. (Cheers.) As regarded
religious practice and observances he would leave them as
free as they were on the other aide of the Atlantic. (Hear,
bear.) He wished to eee perfect religious, commercial, and
financial equality between the two countries. (Hear, hear.)
Every tax that was put on this country must be put on
Ireland. He did not want to lay heavy burdens either on
England or Ireland. But he wished to speak plainly on
this matter. He had seen the working of this system of
levying heavier taxes on the ope country than the other,
and his felt convinced that they could have no safety in the
working of their legislative system if they had members
fiom one part of the United Kingdom more tightly taxed
than others. (Hear, hear.) He had seen for • long time the
effect of this discrepancy of taxation. The effect of it was,
that the Irish members generally took very little interest
in the imperial expenditure, incept where it was a question
of tranferring money from the exchequer into Ireland.
(Hear, hear.) Hence it was that the Irish members gene-
rally fought so strenuously for the bauble of the Lord
Lieutenancy. (Cheers) Hence it was that they fought
for Kilmainham Hospital, which was nothing but a nest of
jobbiag. (Cheers.) He sat on the committee on Kilmain-
ham, and he spoke with some knowledge of the facts.
(Cheers, and " Oh, oh.") What was the reason that the
statesmen of this country objected to representatives from
the colonies sitting with them in a common legislature 1
The first and striking objection which started up was, that
the colonies did not pay imperial taxation, and were not
liable for the debt of this country ; and therefore
it was thought that it would not be safe or proper for them
to sit here and Jest with matters of taxation which did not
concern them. (Hear, hear.) What happened on the last
occasion that he spoke on the subject of the budget ? The
hon. member for Belfast voted for the imposition of the in-
come tax on his constituents of Barnsley and Leeds who
were largely engaged is the spinning of linens—Belfast
being engaged in the same trade. (Hear, hear.) The hon.
member for Belfast voted fur the income tax on that occa-
sion. How would he vote now? (Hear, hear.) If the
hon. member voted against putting a similar tax on Belfast,
now was it not clear that they ought not to allow men to
sit in the same House of Commons who represented dif-
ferent interests, and where they could help the minister to
put taxes on their neighbours. if they allowed the colonies