The Sun.
London, England, 1852-12-15 00:00:00

("151:11fa \
..---------••• ...„
" ‘, A -:' v,- :. i': • 'z'''‘, p
. ....--
any severe eye the dry details of a financial proje ~ , 4 •.: ,
(Hear, hear.) No, those were not the classes the st,) Z. ...., :l. ;; .1i 7.
4'
quote as giving a cordial reception to their x,:e4 ,2-::;!.;'. . 1
~_,,. ..f..
(Hear, hear.) It was the industrious clerk, striving,to,.ki i
.....
support his family upon an income of not 1501. arStalff-:•'..:.-..:,,;;11 .c
(cheers)--it was the energetic mechanic, just emergiiii,..i .?.f...-`!.ii
ft. . . . .
into independence--(cheers)—whom they must ask wlii-'2.,..J 5.5
they thought of the budget. (Hear, hear.) Sure he was 7\EN ..7.•
this budget could never be popular with those classes in
this country ; and he called upon the house, in the name
of those classes, to resist a budget which was based at
once upon tyranny and injustice. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON observed, that if the
hon. member (Mr. Osborne) was disappointed in the
budget as meagre, others, such as the members for Hali-
fax and Cambridge (Sir C. Wood and Mr. Goulburn),
complained that it contained too much, and that it would
have been wiser if he had divided it over two years.
(Hear, hear.) He (Ms. Alderman Thompson) conceived
that the budget was a bold, and wise, and statesmanlike
budget. (Cheers from the Ministerial side.) It was one
which, in his opinion, deserved the confidence of the
country— (hear, hear)—and, he believed, with the ex-
ception probably of the persons assembled within those
walls, it had it. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The hon.
member said the budget was framed in a revengeful
spirit. Did he mean to say that the working classes
would receive no benefit from the reduction of the duty on
tea, and from the reduction of the sugar duty in July ?
[Mr. Osborne—That is not in the budget.] Well, but
when be complained of the hardship upon those who
occupied houses at rents between 101. and 201., it was
proper to show that they found relief from the course
of legislation adopted of late years, and that they •
had more than an equivalent in the reduction of duties
on foreign commodities requisite for their comfort.
(Hear, hear.) Of all investments, capital invested in
201. and 101. houses was the most productive. They
generally paid from 10 to 20 per cent. ; but parties
always calculated what the taxes were, as well as the
rent, and the tax was a landlord's tax. An hon. mem-
ber (Mr. Cobden) attempted last night, but failed, as he
(Mr. Alderman Thompson) thought, to draw a distinction
between the tax on land and that on houses. He (Mr.
Alderman Thompson) did not mean to say that he was
prepared to vote for a double house tax, but he was pre-
pared to go the length of voting that the tax should be
extended to houses of 101. rent. (Hear, hear.) The
hon. member for Middlesex expressed his approbation
of that part of the budget which related to shipping, but
intimated that a reduction of the timber duties would
be deemed a greater relief than the remission of dues.
He (Mr. Alderman Thompson), knowing something
of shipowners, was very much startled at that pro-
position. Yesterday, he met with the largest ship-
owner in England, and when he said so, he must be
taken as meaning the greatest shipowner in the whole
civilized world. That shipowner, on' being asked
what he thought of the proposition made by the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, said, " Nothing in the world
can be better." " Not better than the repeal of the
timber duties ?" he (Mr. Alderman Thompson) replied ;
" Pooh, the repeal of the timber duties would be a mere
drop in the ocean," was the response. With respect to
that part of the Budget which had reference to the
sugar-growing colonies, he must say, that though relief
would be given to a small amount by the facility given
for refining sugar in bond, he was of opinion that the
course of legislation which had been pursued with re-
spect to those colonies had been unjust. For the last
year he admitted that the import of sugar grown in the
British colonies had been considerably increased ; yet
that increase might be attributed to the great quantity
which was planted in 1850, when there was a differen-
tial duty of 7s. per cwt. He was afraid that in the
next two years, when the Duties on British and foreign-
grown sugar would become equalised, it would be found
that the West Indian colonies would fall off greatly in
respect of production. (Hear, hear.) With respect
to the duty on tea, he had always laboured under
the apprehension that if that duty were continued at a
rate equal to 240 per cent., while the Chinese admitted
British manufactures at a duty of 5 per cent., and
America, which was the next importing country, in
point of quantity, to the United Kingdom, admitted tea
from China without duty, the time might come when
the Chinese Government might say they would charge
more than 5 per cent. on the cotton manufactures of this
country. With respect to the income tax, he admired
the courage of the Chancellor of the Exchequer in propo-
sing a modification of the present uniform rate of charge.
When he heard the Secretary for the Home Department
allude last night to terminable annuities, he hoped that
the injustice which a uniform rate of income tax involved
in that case would be considered, and relief afforded.
With reference to the censures cast on the Chancellor of
the Exchequer by the right hon members for Halifax and
for the University of Oxford, in consequence of the pro-
posal to extend the income tax to fundholders in Ireland
he (Mr. Alderman Thompson) agreed with the noble lord
the member for Lynn, that the debt was the debt of the
United Kingdom, and not of England solely. By the 6th
clause of the act sth George IV., passed to facilitate the
transfer of stock in Ireland, it was enacted that each
stock should be deemed, reputed, and taken to be one
capital or joint-stock. It was not the poor shopkeeeper
or the landowner that was the stockholder in Ireland.
It was the banking interest; and the joint-stock banks
in Ireland were carried on not by Irish but by English
I
capitalists, who were making large profits. (Hear,
hear.)

Sir B. HALL said, that the question the house had
to decide in the first instance was, whether the house
tax should be doubled, or should continue at its present
amount. He was surprised to hear that the Chancellor
of the Exchequer was not disposed to take issue upon
that question, but only wished the house to determine
that the area of taxation, as regarded houses, should
be extended. But that was not the question. The real
question was, should the house tax be doubled for the
purpose of repealing the malt duty ? He would en-
deavour to show that the increase of the house duty was
unfair and unjust, and that the distinction drawn be-
tween the tenant-farmer and the tenant-tradesman was
invidious, and ought not to be carried out. He would
show that while by the proposed . plan the inhabitants
of towns would be additionally taxed 4 or 5 per cent.,
the inhabitants of rural districts would be relieved 50,
60, or 70 per cent. The noble lord the member for Dur-
ham (Lord A. Vane) said last night that if any unpopu-,
larity attached to this tax it would be owing to the mem-
ber for lUarylebone, who had excited the people at public
meetings against it. He could assure the noble lord he
was extremely mistaken. The Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, in his speech on Friday week, spoke of the intelli-
gence of the inhabitants of the metropolis ; and he assured
the noble lord that they at least had sufficient intelligence
to understand subjects that were brought under their
consideration, and were able to see whether they were
likely to have a tax inflicted upon them that was unjust.
It was the conviction of the people that to double the
house duty would be an' injustice, and they were deter-
mined to oppose it. It was therefore, to a great extent,
a matter of indifference whether the present proposition
was carried or not. It the tax were imposed, it would
be only for a short time, as petitions would flow into the
house in numbers similar to those of 1833 and 1834, and
the Government would be obliged to abandon the tax.
He was in favour of direct taxation, so far as it could be
justly carried out ; but, if they made direct taxation un-
just, they would render the system odious, and this, he
maintained, they were now proposing to do, both in re-
ference to the house tax and the income tax. In refer-
ring to the window duty, the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer said that the people of the metropolis urged its
repeal solely on sanitary grounds. He (Sir B. Hall) was
surprised to hear that statement, not only because it was
wholly unfounded, but because the right hon. gentleman
ought to have known that it was so. The right hon. gen-
tleman was at the time one of the loudest declaimers against
the tax. It was one of his earliest propositions in reference
to political subjects that the window tax ought to be re-
pealed. The sanitary question had not been raised till re-
cently, whereas 20 years ago the window tax was con-
sidered a very vexatious impost. According to a return
which he had before him, the alteration of the house
duty in the city of London alone would impose a tax
upon the inhabitants to the amount of 73,108 L, whereas
the window tax amounted only to 69,300/., so that there
would be an increase of taxation to the amount of
3,8081. in that portion of the metropolis only. But if
he went further, and compared the amount of window
tax paid in 1851 with the amount of house tax to be paid
in 1853, and then also compared what was paid by the
towns • and what by the counties, he should be able to
show that the proposition was most unjust towards the
inhabitants of towns. The Government might carry
their resolution in committee, but they never would be
able to pass it into a law. He would just statethheowhotulsiee
s seeevening
his
mhue,,i
icoaaheffntthheaetbeuu udgtr
country,
intelligencet:
case would stand in St. George's, Hanover-square. The
increase of
damutoyunint
Bwsi3ndwoweudlduthyein6l3B,s2ll2wi.a_s 4b7e,in3sgoaz.n;
budget-
speech eor(si2rsapHerance)nte.xp
Thfheaewrewevaewrrrof town ap. • it was
fot°r°the
this success of the
the commencement o
aamndonhae saidthe so still.
scheme ; they would never consent to
and he was quite sure that if they taxation, and
sition in the house, they would carried their propo-
sition be able to carry it
into.effect in the country. (Hear, hear.)
Sir J. DUCKWORTH said he was desirous to accept
the invitation of the Chancellor
of
the Exchequer to ro-
gard the budget as a whole er
comprehensive
scheme of taxation •and, and
as
one
light,
ookmg on it in that he
was prepared to give his support to it and to the prin-
ciples it involved. Representing a city deeply interested
in the welfare of our shipping, it was unnecessary for
him to say he approved of all that portion of the budget
which related to that interest, which was admitted by all
persons, as well as by shipowners, to involve a just re-
laxation of the taxation and burdens which pressed upon
that important class of the community. On the whole,
it did not appear unfair or unreasonable for the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer to impose direct taxation on the
country to the whole extent of the reductions and advan-
tages of his scheme. But a large imperial question was
involved in the vote they were called upon this evening
to give, which would be one expressive of their opinion
as to whether or not the Government were desirous of
treating all classes of the community, as respected taxa-
tion, fairly and justly. Now, though he confessed that
the class among which his constituents ranked would
have been treated unjustly by so large an increase of
taxation as that proposed, yet, as he understood that that
increase of taxation was not affirmed by the resolution
now before the house, but that, on the contrary, it would
be open to them hereafter to discuss the extent to which
this taxation should go, he Was prepared to give his vote
in favour of maintaining the Government in the position
which they now occupied, and which he believed was