The Express.
London, England, 1851-05-03 00:00:00

848 for
t land, and funds. Why talk of referring a question of that kind—having —having ullowed the tax to be renewed in
sort to a select committee. Would the hon. gentleman throe years, and not having proposed any inquiry in 1849 or
not by an income tax but by a direct tax on capital, on . inquiry. But now, having declined to do anything of the
come down and propose that Indirect taxes to the amount 18.10—he now came forward and wished for inquiry.
of ten or fifteen millions bo repealed, and that and would have the tax voted on
such a tax as ho had referred to should be imposed. in order that that inquiry might be made. (Hear, hear.)
1 for one year,
That would be the obvious course for the hon. gentleman to The course the hon. member for Montrose" had pursued in
pursue—to obtain the decision of the house nut upon petty proposing a moulitication of the tax, heretofore had led to
details, but upon a great and important principle, leaving this absurd consamence—that he wished the tax to bo a
the details for future consideration. The hon. member for permanent one, and was supported by those hon. gentle-
Falmouth had said at once that his object was to impose , men who wished to do away with it altogethee. teeear,
twice the rate on real property. (Hear, hear.) But surely hear) They were exceedingly anxious for direct taxation
that was net a point to be decided on in ti select corn- in thew: days of indirect taxation. (Ikar, hear.) The hon.
mitten. It must be decidedon by the vote of the whole ment ber for Montrose wished to make the tax a perinuneut
house, and in that very committee in which they were ono, and was supported by those who would de away with
now considering the subject, if the hon. gentleman it at the first opportunity. However, the hon. gene
felt dispood to appeal to it for a decision, but let hint not tleman could nut help being greatly alarmed at
ride otl upon questions which did not bear upon the matter. seeing the care that was taken of his child by those who
(Hear, hear.) Let him not suppose that he was advancing , were oppoecel to him in all other political views.
the cause of direct taxation by restricting the continuance I (Hear, hear.) During the whole course of the do-
of what they had already got; nuor talk of matters ut detail bate, the fondling and itursiug that had been applied loth's
when he was aiming ut the only class which was now suf- , offspring of the 1 . gentleman, by those who were opposed
feting distress, and seeking to increase their burdens under to its very existence, must, he thought, alarm the hon.
Schedule A analW
schedule C. ear.)) The hon. member parent as to its future fate of becoming the just and perm-
far Montrose had avowed that his obje et was to make the rent tax he wished it. C• Hear, hear," and a laugh.) There
fficome tax, or rather the property tax, as he would have it, were other ground., on which hon. gentlemen
the debate,
&perpetual burden, but it would be obviously better fur very considerable numbers, during the course of
him, then, to retain as lung as he could what they supported the proposition of the lain. member fur Montrose;
already had, rather than seek to limit the continuance of a and, however much the lion. gentleman who last addressed,
portion of that which he wished to retain. For his own them endeavoured to conceal those grounds, yet it was evi-
part, he (the right hon. baronet) differed from the hon. dent that the object was to get rid of the income tax with n
gentleman. lie had never proposed the tax as a perma- view, finally, to the re-imposition of import duties
neat one. lie had always propos. cl it, as had been said by on articles of foreign produce. (Hear, hear.) An
the lion. member for Hoek. (8 r. Disraeli), as a tax oathr honourable alderman, in the vicinity of the hon. member,
' the cover of which certain changes in our fiscal system for Bucks (Alderman Thompson), acting as the fugleman of
might be made changes which he thought far his party, rose to support the imposition of duty on foreian
more desirable to maintain than it was desirable produce, that foreign produce generally being known to be
to relinquish a duty upon income. (blear, bear.) iheides, corn. (" Hear, hear, • and cheers.) But the hon. number
he would remind those who eon ed with him in his views of for Bucks (Mr. Disraeli) could not bear the eagerness with
COMM( reel' pulley that it was un ensible to carry out those which certain members of the party rushed !Inward on the
views unless a large portion of the revenue was certain. several questions of local taxation, the malt tax, and every
Ile had been twitted with having proposed the re- ether question affecting the general taxation of the country,
newel for three years because he thought it would then and declared that, after all their studied concealment, their
last out the existence of the present government; but, if real object wa% the restoration of protection. (Minis-
such a petty and mean motive had really been that which tonal cheers.) The hon. member for Bucks invo-
ked actuated hint, he should rather have acquitoced in ready followed with a dissentient deelaratiou ; but ho
the amendment of the hon. member for Montour. thought the hon. gentleman would WWI grow tired of
(Cheer%) But whatever changes might take place in the exercising control, and advising more prudence in the way
government he would put no man in a worse situation of their nut marching forward when he told them to keep
than that in which he stuud himself. (Cheers.) Nu man back. (Ileur, hear.) They would still go on breaking the
looking at the course which events had taken Inc the last line, and tiring off their muskets when he wished them to
four years could env what might happen in the next six reserve their tire, until at length he would be compelled en
or eight month.; and he die nut wish that either he or say to them, " You are too bad, I really cannot march
his successor should have to deal—whatever circumstances through Coventry with you." (Cheers and laughter.)
might he taking place at the time—should have to deal The hon. member far Bucks next charged the hon. Ineril•
with a matter of such importance and magnitude. her for the West Riding (Mr. Cobden) with the dreadful
(Cheers.) By proposing the renewal for three years, offence of making speeches in other plate a Now, there
he did not preclude the consideration of the quer were lulu rs as well as the hon. member fur the West Riding
tion the next year, if such a ere the will liable to thatcharge.(llear.) litheArai-corn law league made
of the ministry of the day ; but he did not render it imp- speeches in Covent-garden, surely the protectionists mado
native to deal with a great and difficult matter whatever speeches in Drury-lane. (Cheer.) If the members of the
might he the state of the country. lie did not think it Anti-ern law league carried their speeches at times be.
would be for the benefit of the nation that they should yond the bounds of discretion, it surely should to reinem-
have a financial crisis every year. On the contrary, lie con- land that there was such language used oa the oppoeite
sidered that would be most unfortunate, prejudicial, and side, that "if protection we re not reston el 100, 10e0
dangerous. Ile hoped, therefore, that a majority of the men were prepared to follow a leader." (Ministerial
house would reject the amendment, and that the, finances cheers.) They read these things in speeches out of doors,
of the country would mein eur the future that stability and if something to the sane effect was hearth in that
upon which the credit and privet of this country had bowie, how could it be supposed that anything el,. save the
rested. (Cheers.) restoration of protection was the object in view ? (Hear,
Mr. DISILtELI said the question before the committee hear.) After all, the character of the motion of the hon.
was whether the property tax should be renewed fur three memlwr for Moutrose had been changed by the support
years or for one. That was the real question upon which that had beim given it. The bon. gentleman wished the Min-
they had to decide. The intendment to the motion of the position of the LIZ for one year, and ilea theeliffieulty of ire
ministry, that it be for one year only, had ikVII made by a uspiality should be adjusted by inquiry. However, the
distinguished member of the gentlemen who support the supperter% of the hon. gentleman did not deelan. such to bit
govenuneut—(a laugh)—and all the argument had been their object, for they wanted no inquiry iit all. (Hear.
addressed to that (the iuppgaition) side of the house. The hear.) The hon. member for Buck', alone stated that such
hon. member for the Weet Riding (Mr. Cobden) had said was his abject. He, therefore, thought the hon. member
that there WWI no common object between the member for for NiollifOM, even though he shout.' succeed. would nut
Montrose and the hon. members ou the proteetioniet be meter the attainment of his object than before. Ho
side of the house, who had already declared their thought hon. members opposite would not go into the lobby
intention of supporting him. Now, the reason that with a vise to 311j11.4 the tax, but to put an endto it, and
ho (Mr. Disraeli) supported the motion of the create such a deficiency that their favourite view tend ola
hon. member for Montrose woe, that he thought the maces- ject —the restoration of duty on foreign imports, grain es-
ment that was promneel under the renewed property tax peciolly—should be restored to the country. (Hear,
was not fair—(cheers); and that he thought it not impos- !leer.) The language spoken in that respect that night
Bible to remove that unteiniess. (Cheers.) But it bad was not at all equivocal. Tho honourable number
been said that hon. gentlemen had supported that uncurl- for Devonshire, in supporting the motion, lectured them
meat for other reason.; but let them see if there was any on the necessity of following the example of the United
justice in that allegatiuu. The hon. member for Wilts, Statue, where native industry was protected. But every
answering the hon, member for Westmoreland, said that mason knew that the manufacturers of this country
he had proposed a duty upon foreign corn ; but the worthy needed not pr utection. Wheu their protection was
alderman had not, iu feet, meek. the slightest allusion to taken away they were not sufferers, lk-e111.141: they
1 the subject. The worthy alderman had, it was true, pro- went into the market.. of the world and competed !posed gaspspecific
for the deficiency which the right hon. with other producers on equal tenni. Therefore the only
gentleman ad predicted--namely, by dealing with persons requiring protection for native industry were Blob') the terminable annuities which would end between that who formerly enjoyed it, namely, the landed hitereas,
period and 1860-07. (Cheers.) The hon. members fur De- (Hear, hear.) When in 1812 the differential duties were
vonshire and for Wiltshire, and his noble friend the member much diatinielied in regard to some article, of manufacture
fur Stamford, had been equally inisrepressenteel. (Hear, many e.,nstituents of his (Lord John Russia's) came to
hear.) The hon. number for the West Riding had said him and requested that he would not vote fur the
that the conduct of the protectionists was too transparent ; tariff propoeed by Sir Robert l'eel. They represented that
!and he described the income tax us the foundation of our they cued,' bear competition with the foreign producer if
prosperity, and the only guarantee of our future fortunes.. not made to pay an Mere:wed price for flied in consegneuco
(Laughter.) %Yell, but he held in his baud 4 spirit, of the aitificied scarceness caused by the corn laws. Ho
nut delivered in that femme but in a place aleatat (Lent J. Russell) frankly stated that he could net comply
as famous, and which had had a great influence upon their with their request, and should vote for the diminution of
legislature. It was a speech, described us a speech by Mr. duty on articles of manufacture, at the sante Bute salting
Cobden on the income tax iu 181.1 befere the repeal of the his opinion th•tt the country would not long submit to
corn law, : "The income tax," mid he, "is a fungus foreign competition together with an artificially high price
growing front the tree of monopoly"—(loud cheers)—and in food. (Ilear, hear.) He was justified in so saying, be-
of that great monupey the corn laws; those laws render cause in a few years protection was done away with.
that tax necessary. (Ilenewed cheers.) Talk of popular (Ilene, hear.) His (Lord John Russell's) opinions
opinion—ho knew itot how they could value it enough when on the income tax had been referred to in the course of the
they saw that population so doctored, and instructed, and debate. In 1812 he (Lord J. Russell) oppueeel the income
deluded, and yet in the main judging rightly and justly. tax, and he then thought lie was justified in that uppoei-
(Hear.) Mr. Cobden, in the proplte•tic view in which lie lion; for he thought that if the differential duty un corn
had indulged so successfully, went on to say that with and timber was reduced then there would be no necessity
free trade there would be nu income tax. (Cheers, which to iiiipate the income tax. In 181.1 he supported the tax nit
Lusted some minutes.) Was it to be tolerated that the the ;remind. of the great benefit that would be receired as a
huu. member should charge the only suffering (gees with compensation. On that occasion he admitted it was liable
acting on pretended motives ? (Cheers.) The hon. to the objection of inequality, and he could not deny that
member for the West Riding, playing the critic on it was still liable to that objection. Ile could not see in
hi% friend and colleague, blamed hint for the course he had what manner these objections could be removed : and
taken, told him that he had got the innocent member for he feared that these who thought they could be
St..llbane into a serape—(greet laughter)—said that 140 removed would find, when they came to examine
protectionists had come down to take the hon. mover of the the question of imposing a lesser tax on pro-
amendment ut his wont, and that fret trade trembled and fee,ionel men than on mall landholders, the dila-
tottered to its base. (Hear, hear.) lie said that had the culty to be very great, if not insuperable. (ITear, hear.)
hon. member for Montrose brought forward the question At the semi, time he (Lord J. Russell) said that the only
properly, and tailed attention to the inequitible man- way in which the income tax could ridof by -
be got
ner in which' the profits on trades alit' professions were diminution of protection, opening new markets, and
assessed ho would not have endangered the existence furnishing all increased demand for labour, in which
case
of the government; but would have been sure of they might look forward to the abolition of the tax. The
being well beaten, Inceuse he would have taken a were his opinions in 1815. It was iiu lil * se
past eto conceal the
straightforward course. Then, why did not the hon tom- fact that the hon. members in opposition that night
s looked
' her for the efleet Riding take that course himself ? Why for a substitute to the income tax in a return toprotectie
had ho not made that proposition? (lieu', heir.) Because duties. In former times, when these duties existed, the
he had an idea that these terrible protectionists were not, nation was dependent for its food on the soil, and not on
after all, so callous to the sufferings of professional men as foreign countries. But that state of things existed no
he would have the house believe. (heer, hear.) Let the longer for the benefit of one interest in the country, enabling
hen. member bring forward that proposition iu which he the farmers to pay rent to their landlords. The duty, how-
was interested, and state his case; but lie (Mr. Disraeli) ever moderate, involved one of two consequence., Either
would not guarantee that he would be defeated by that a moderate fixed duty did not raise the price of
Pe -
co* or it
large majority which he supposed. Alter that fair warning, did. In ono case farmer% were enabled to re,
y high
let not the hon. member accuse others of veiling, under a rents; whilst in the absence i
of a fixed duty eliscon-
discuouion of the merits of the assessment of professional tent was caused amongst that clots. (Rear, hear )
income, an attack on the new commercial system. (Hear, 'They hadyesterday magnificentsight in this ' *-
a
hear.) Let not the house be diverted from the iseue. before which was Kiwi,- •
yang on many accounts. (Hear, hear, and
them
coma the old ruse of ere iug out, " This is a reversal of " Question" front Col. Sibthorp ) It •• '
was gratifying to see
our rcial policy." (Hear, hear.) Our commercial that this nation and the other- . •
nations of the erode were
policy, whatever its merit, or its deficiencies, was too vast a assembled in one place together,with the various products
creation to be shaken by a chance veto in that house. of talent and of 'industry. e ( en, hear.) It was irretify-
(Hear, hear.) That was ant the way in which they hie to see that the
means had been 'lined of placing in a
meant to small it, should they feel it their duty to take that splendid and magnificent • ' •
; building those thrum. prod e-
course. (Hear, hem.) They should not be diverted from e' i , • u
ions. ((tear, tear.) But what was the most gretifring of
' taking a frank course on all subjects in that house because all was to see the e—(elieers
great mass of the peopl )
an hon. gentleman, fearing lest the government should be some said amoun. tang to five hundred thousand, whilst
embarrassed, rose and (Iprotested, for the five hundredth others said it was as nearer to one. milliuu ethi-
time, that they were seeking to re establish the abrogated biting the utmost
good humour, with contentment
corn laws. ltegarding the income tax as a temporary mea- i
n their countenances and loyalty in their hearts—a:lv:ere)
sure and introducing a greater degree of direct taxation assembled to witness the splendid spectacle exhibited he-
intotthe stem of this country, hon, gentlemen on both
fore them. (Hear.) These people, some of them in poor
sides had been induced to submit to principles on which and mean habiliments, showing that it was difficult for
direct taxation ought never to have been established. For them by their industry to ecru a subeistence, saw, without
those who were sincere in their support of direct taxation,•
envy, without repining or complaint, the splendid equi-
and wished to see it enter largely into the financial system aof the rich pass before them, because as Inc believed
of the country, might rest assured that unless they made it pages
fel t that no injustice was exercised toward', them.
I universal, direct taxation never could succeed. (near. (Chy ' heat.) They must ?peke it as universal in its application mrs.) But if they were to be told that the rich derived
as indirect taxation, if they really intended it to be a por. htheir !Tomes and the means of supporting their equipages
y rafting the price of their dally food, they could then no
tion of the financial system. (Hear, hear.) Nothing was longer expect to see pleasing or Joyful countenances, nor
more popular out of doors than direct taxation—with thew could they * who were not directly taxed. (Cheers.) 'This was not authorities, the
Mrettrenee to the
their institutions; but un
taxation, but confiscation. 'The evil was not only expert- flue contrarythey might
eneed by the classes who were taxed; let the system be con- di
.content following the imposition of an wallet law.
tinned, and enforced on a greater scale, as was the tendency (Cheers.) lie had felt it to be necessary then *
to argue ues-
ta present legislation, and they would attack the ton in ta' '
is manner in consequence of what had passed In
capital of the country, and thus diminish the means theof the debate. Otherwise he should have been
of employment. (Hear, hear.) For thole reasons he felt course
content to argue it solely on the ground of theexpediency of
bound to support the ;imenulinent. Were it one that wo Id
e imposing the Income tax for one year or for three years. On
negative the imposition of an income tax, he would nut
that ground he should have argued that as the nation was
vote for it; but as it die not interfere with the financial one of ' •
hott ins prer:lcipal powers of the world, it would hath
arrangements either of this year or the next, but gave am-
ple time to the government to meet the difficulties, and be- of a prove
aent and uneafe to risk the duration
consider ble part of its income : he should
Cause he was sure that no government would attempt to have argued that as this Ur was liable to ob-
meet these difficulties and redress these grievances—unless •
eectio which even none of its promoters could corn-
such a course was taken, he would support the amend. - i as •
ment. (Hear, hear.) p etely gamey it was the more necessary that it should not
1 by year be subjeceedto popular discussion ;he should
Lord J. RUSSELL said, that if the house was placed in ilaere ' -
argued that at this time, a ve all, it was desirable to
any difficulty on the questiun now before it, it was owing to „h,.- • 's ,w that their financial system was sound and solid.
the course which the hon. member for Montrose had taken mar he.) These were considerations which, as they
in endeavouring to promote his own views and proposi- a( ffe c. te'd this whole house, so they should more peculiarly
to m.. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentlemen said he wished air. . vet those who took a more conservutire view on the sub-
for a permanent tax on property, Inc direct taxation, in pr • •
Jed. The noble marquis the member for Stamford asked
ferencc to indirect, and for a modificution of the present pint to mark with attention the declaration of his
tax on property and incline. The mineral l . usua , and par- hon friend that he wished for d'
liamentary way of proceeding to ellect such an °levet, • •
must universal and large in amount, because he thought it
would have been to propose these modifications when the
would cauet, those who were subject to it to be diseontented
income tax was before the house, and if those modifications with the amount and extent of those establishments wluch
were assented to, then to propose that the tax,
instead of being for three ears, should be the government considered to be necessary for the safety,
the honour, and power of the country. (Cheer.) Ile did
of permanent duration. But the hon gentleman said he remark that observation, but the moral he drew from it was
could not take that course., as it was a matter of acknow- different front that of the noble marquis. Ile did iudeod
lodged difficulty to make the tax equal and just: he there- Eerily draw the moral indicated by the noble marquis, but
fore called for inquiry. How came it that du •g t `alto drew from it the moral, that it wan not desirable)
whole time the income tax had lasted, from 1842 to lasli that this tax, which produced more than 5,000,0001. a year,
he had never proposed such an inquiry ? should be exposed to perpetual criticam and examination ill
Mr. HUME—I have done so three time,. (Hear.) the course a every lyear, and thereby running the risk of
Lord J. RUSSELL did not remember any east of the having the income fall below the expenditure, or of re-
kind. Since he haul been in the government, since 1810, he during their establishments below what he thought to be
did not remember having opposed inquiry on that subject. necessary for the honour and safety of the country. (Hear,
It was quite evident that the government could not propose hear.) And let the noble lord be assured of then, that ho
such an inquiry, as their views were in conformity with was not mistaken in this, that, whatever view induced
hint
those of Mr. Pitt and Sir R. Peel, that the tax could not be to support the motion of his hon. friend, it would not tend
made equal and just with the modifications proposed ; but either to promote the maintenanceof the establishments
if the hon. gentleman was for inquiry he should have pro- which he thought were necessary for the safety of ;Ito
posed it, and should have been the person to conduct that country, nor to the. safety of those institutions which