The Express.
London, England, 1850-04-24 00:00:00

what is technically called a " follower" stamp. That
is to say. open every der .1 the hest 'kin of which bears
an of rii/orerri item?, the practice is to im-
prers a U. stamp upon every successive (or
following)skin of parchment. Three following stamps
are of course upon der de representing consideratiocs
of larger amounts. Upon such deeds the progres-
sive duties and " following" stamps an to remain the
saw under the new measure as they were under the
old. The attempt therefore to impose upon the pub-
lic a belief that there will be a lase upon these 11.
stamp. is entirely based upon miscalculation.
Thu iv a sample of the whole return, which will
be more thoroughly reviewed when farther tiro is
afforded for its ooneideration. For the present we
content ourselves with publishing a letta on thu
subject received frost a correspondent.

TO TIM TIMOR OF TNT DAILY NEWS.
81a,-1 have hitherto confined my remarks to the
alterations proposed by the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer in the teat of tte stamp laws. and to the
effect which such alterations would have upon property,
which has not hitherto been subjected to the burden
of stamp duty.
1 beg now to offer a few observations upon the re-
port and return which have just been printed, on the
notices of Sir C. Wood, is reference to this subject, in
the hope that I may assist you in the progress of
pour discussion of the measure now before the house.
The returns though short are not easily intelligible,
mad that difficulty is increased by a variance between
the language of the report and of the returns them-
selves. bat I will endeavour to dissect them es clearly
as I can.
The two first returns consist of (1) a statement of
the total amount received last year in respect of each
denomination of stamps issued, as well ad raloreal as
otherwise, horn 10e. to 1,000/.; and (2) an estimate
of the amount received in respect of ad rabweni
stamps issued for conveyances not exceeding 1,000!.
The total amount received under the first head is
1.881,2234 15e., and of this it is stated that 1,000,0004
or about five-sevenths may be assumed to represent
ad valorem dut es; and that of such duties about two-
third. may be assumed to arise front conveyances.
Bat when the returns are looked at, these assump-
tions appear to be forgotten. For instance, from 10s.
stamp*, 27,8314 was received last year. Now, de-
ducting from this sum 2 7ths, the ad valorem amount
would remain at just 20,0004 ; and the gross propor-
tionate produce for conveyances, according to the
assumption of the report, would be less than 14,000!.,
and not 21,2594. as stated in the return. Again,
upon 1/. stamps 201,0751, was received last year: and
deducting from this sum 2.7ths, the ad valorem
amount would remain in round numbers 145,0001.,
and the grow proportionate produce for conveyances
would be lees than 100,0001., and not 138,1704 as
stated in the return.

But this is a more favourable view than it is
able to to take of the returns, and I put it forward as
the ordinary mode and ti explain why the present is
as exceptional ease. The 235. and 355. duties are not
In any cue (except as to the latter in regard to set-
tlements under 1,0000 ad valorem duties, and in
these denominations 238,0001. are embraced. There
remain, therefore, according to the report, only about
90,0001. to be accounted for in other duties not being
ad valorem, but these aro almost exclusively to be
occupied by the 10s., 205., and to a lees extent 30s.
stamps ; sad when it is borne in mind that a 10s.
stamp (independent of minor items) is common upon
receipts far 1,0001. and upwards, and in full of all
demands and memorials in Middlesex and Yorkshire,
as well is small conveyance', bonds and mortgages
—that a 1/. stamp is the proper stamp to be impressed
upon the sucoeding skins of any deed, on which an
ad ralorem duty has been placed, however numerous
those skins should be; and also upon the counterpart
of any lease granted at a rent lets than 201., as well
as for smaller items; and that 301. is the stamp
proper for the counterpart of every lease granted at
a rent above 201. per annum, it will be readily seen
bow very large a number of stamps, of these
amounts must be required for other than
ad valorem purposes ; and the return itself
bears witness to the truth of my statement,
for it shlwe (by the 21. stamp returns with a produce
of 110.0001.) that of mortgages and bonds for
sums between 100/. and 2001., and for con-
vevances between 1301, and 3001., there could not
hive been more than 33,000 transactions; while
it alleges that of bonds and mortgages for less than
501., and for conveyances between 20/. and 301. (which
are the only considerations requiring a 11. stamp),
there were 201,000 transseions; and as every soli-
citor can tell that purchases under 601. are not nume-
rous, and mortgages for less than 301. even fewer,
the only solution that can be given will be found in
the acknowledged fact that 20s. followers are the
stamps of all others which are most required, and the
presumption is mired that a much higher proportion
ought to have been assumed in the report for stamps
not required for ad valorem objects than has been
named.
,
But taking the report and the returns by tnem-1
selves, let us see what will be the result. The gross
produce of 10s., 205., and 30s. stamps (the grand re•
lieving items of the Chancellor of the Exchequer)
amounts to 330,414/. Deduct from this the 90,0001,
the assumed amount according to the report, of stamps
not used for ad ralorem purposes, besides the 235. and
335. stamps, sad there will remain 260,0001.; and
therefore, according to the same authority, the from
produce of the ad valorem conveyance stamps will be
170,0001, instead of 240,0001., as stated in the return.

These iemarks will show chat however useful these
papers may hare been in the oonsideration of the
11103241 t, they are not of much value in the elucida-
tion°, the question which .1 now immediately before
the House of Commons ; but there is one mode in
which the tables may be of great value,—namely, in
the calculation of the results of the measure upon
higher amounts, and of which, if no other currespon-
dent does, I may hereafter intrude upon you.
In regard to the scale of proposed duties, there
appears to be a great variation between the printed
statement and the reputed verbal statement of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, u, icstead of a scale of
2a per cent. up to 2001., and of se. per cent. above
that amount, it would /ECM that the scale is to be 2s.
per mat up to 501., 6s. per cent. up to 200 L., and ss.
per neat. beyond the latter amount.
April 23, 1850. A SOLICITOR.

REPORT OF BOARD OF INLAND RIIVINIIII TO
CHANCELLOR OF EXCHEQUER,
01 ?NZ PLONABLZ I7TICT 01 TZX OTANI, arrsirrz IT