The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-10 00:00:00

tion of the Government to appoint new commissioners to
carry out the plans which had been designed.

Lord PALMERSTON admitted that complaints had
been made of the management of the present Commis-
sioners of Sewers. Those complaints principally arose
from the circumstance of a want of drainage required by
the metropolis. That want was chiefly, if not entirely,
owing to the fact that the funds at the disposal of the
commissioners were insufficient. Therefore, much that
ought, perhaps, to be done, was necessarily left undone.
The commissioners would do their best to make the
drains where most required, as far as the means at
their disposal would enable them to do it. The com-
mission would expire in the course of this year, and it
would therefore be necessary this session to introduce a
bill on the subject. It was not, however, intended to
make any new arrangement. What would be proposed
was that the present arrangement should be continued until
better grounds were afforded for bringing forward a now
system.
Lord GALWAY, on behalf of Lord A. VANE, wired
the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether there were
any returns, or other official documents, on which his
statement of the expected amounts to be derived from
the succession duty (as proposed) was formed ; and if
so, whether he would have any objection to state these
sources of information, and to lay any documents from
which they were derived on the tarde of the house?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
there were no documents whatever such as the noble lord
referred to in the possession of the Government.
THE BUDGET.
RESUMED DEBATE.
The house then went into Committee of Ways and
Means.

The first resolution as proposed by the Chancellor of the
Exchequer having been read,
Mr. PALMER moved the following amendment :
" After the words ` for every 20s. of the annual value or
amount thereof,' to insert `such annual value of any lands,
tenements, or hereditaments, being the net annual value
thereof, after due allowance made for repairs, insurance,
and management."
He assured the committee that it was not his intention to
raise a new debate upon the general subject of the income
tax, but to confine himself to making the few observations
that were necessary in support of his own proposition.
Considering that they were now called upon to sanction an
income tax for a much longer period than was ever pro-
posed before, it was necessary they should endeavour to
mitigate its inequalities. With respect to the permanency
of the tax, he entertained considerable doubts whether
when the year 1860 arrived they would find it likely to
terminate. He must be a bold man who would venture to
prophecy that the tax would cease in 1860. It appeared to
him that in the budget there was one class to whom very
little relief was afforded—he alluded to the class in sche-
dule A. It was to that class that his amendment applied.
He thought his proposal was but an act of justice to the
persons included in schedule A ; and he assured the Chan.
caller of the Exchequer that he would not have proposed
it unless he believed that it was a proposition that could
be borne out in argument. He need not waste time in at-
tempting to prove that the nominal value of an estate or of
houses was any criterion of the income which the proprie-
tor received. Very considerable reductions must be made
from the gross receipts. It was the income of the indivi-
dual they ought to tax, and his proposal was, that in order
to arrive at that income they should deduct certain charges
such as repairs, insurance, and cost of management. The
Chancellor of the Exchequer had shown that real property
was now paying 9d. in the pound instead of 7d., a fact
which he had adduced as an argument why the taxpayers
under schedule D ought not to complain, but which was
also an argument why the taxpayers under schedule A
should be considered in the manner now proposed. (Hear.)
Previously to this admission of the right hon. gentleman,
the landed interest had innocently supposed they were
under the operation of an act of Parliament requiring them
to pay 7d. in the pound and no more. (Hear, hear.) The
tradesman, under schedule D, was allowed a deduction of
income tax in respect of repairs of his premises occupied for
the purposes of his trade on an average of three years. If
the right hon. gentleman would make the same allowance'
in favour of the landowner and land occupier, whose claim
to that allowance was precisely analogous in this respect
to that of the trader, he should be quite satisfied. (Hear,
hear.) He was not prepared with any clause to carry out
the principle for which he contended ; if the right hon.
gentleman would admit the principle, there was no man
more competent than he to carry it into effect. He did
not conceive there could be any difficulty as to the mode
of effecting it. There might be an objection on the ground
of practical inequalities to the allowance of a uniform
percentage of deduction, but he thought it would be quite
practicable—the Chancellor of the Exchequer having con-
sented to make an allowance to landowners and occupiers
under the heads which he had himself specified—to permit
all such persons to go before the commissioners, claim such
deductions as they could fairly demand under those heads,
and have those claims allowed. (Hear, hear.) If it were
suggested that be had no precedent for this proposition, he
would refer to the Parochial Assessment Act as affording
a precedent perfectly in point ; under that act, the assess-
ment to the poor-rate was made on the net annual value
that the land or house assessed might be reasonably ex-
pected to let for, deducting the cost of repairs, of insurance,
' and—an expression, certainly, of very wide and somewhat
vague import—of other expenses necessary to maintain the
property in a state to command a rent. The way, how-
ever, in which this provision was practically carried into
practice was, that there were two columns in every paro-
chial ratebook, the one exhibiting the gross, the other the
rateable value of each property to be assessed, and the rate
was made upon the rateable value so set forth. (Hear,
hear.) It appeared to him that precisely the same prin-
ciple might be carried into effect with regard to the assess-
ment of the income-tax under schedule A. In making
this proposition, he was actuated not so much by a desire
to relieve the larger landowners, though the largeness of a
man's property afforded no .reason why he should be un-
fairly taxed—(hear, hear,)—as with a view to relieve the
small owners of land, and the owners of houses on a small
scale. He had been informed that as to the latter class,
one-third of their rental was swallowed up by repairs,
insurance, bad debts.—
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER.—The de-
falcations of absconding tenants are allowed for.
"Pin PAT.III HR was glad to hear that, but he hoped the
number of absconding tenants was limited. Still, there
was no doubt that the inevitable deductions from the gross
rental of those persons were very material, and he trusted
the right hon. gentleman would take those deductions into
his favourable consideration. The noble lord opposite had
the other night, be believed, expressed an opinion that the
amendment which he (Mr. Palmer) had announced, and
which he was now submitting to the committee, was at
direct variance with the proposition of the late Chancellor
of the Exchequer, and had expressed thereupon his wonder
that such an amendment should proceed from any gentle-
man on that side of the house. He did not propose to
discuss the alleged direct variance—the right honourable
gentleman the late Chancellor of the Exchequer could, no
doubt, settle that point with the noble lord—but at the
same time he would beg the noble lord to bear in mind
that at the period to which he referred there was no such
thing in existence or in proposal as the legacy duty on land
now before the house, and which the Chancellor of the
Exchequer had brought forward as a kind of compensation
to schedule D. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman
would hardly contend that schedule A could, in fairness,
be called upon still to pay 9d. in the pound instead of 7d.,
having in addition the legacy duty imposed upon it by
way' of a satisfaction to schedule A. He trusted the right
hon. gentleman would give his proposition a serious and
favourable consideration. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. ALCOCK, though he had voted generally in favour
of the budget, was not prepared to say that. he was quite
satisfied with the income tax portion of it. Not that he
complained of it, so far as it went ; his objection was that
it did not go far enough. He had, before the Christmas
recess, given notice of a motion to extend the income tax,
at 7d. in the pound, to all incomes in Great Britain and
Ireland, wages—even the wages of the labouring classes—
being included. At present but lin6s of the population
of the country contributed to its taxation, that 65th man
paying on an average 13/. ; whereas, carry his principle
down to the labourer at 12s. a week, and 5,000,000 of per-
sons would. contribute to the taxation beyond those who
now contributed, each of those 5,000,000 contributing,
as his data taught him, 30s. per annum on the average.
In other words, whereas of the 440,000,0001., which
were the estimated property of the country, 250,000,0001.
now escapW. taxation, his proposal was to make those
250,000,0 M. contribute their fair share. (Hear.) Effect
this object, and instead of the present income tax of
5,500,0001., you would realise 13,000,0001., per annum, and
the 7,500,001. beyond the present amount would at once
enable the Chancellor of the Exchequer to repeal the en-
tire duty on malt and hops, to repeal the soap duties, to
reduce the tea duties, as now proposed, and to reduce the
tobacco duty to ls. It was said sometimes that this would
be all very well if the money could be raised from the
labouring classes. He believed that there would be no
difficulty in this, because—first, it would be a just mea-
sure, and one to which he was convinced, therefore, they
would not object ; and because, secondly, it would prove
of the greatest benefit to those classos, inasmuch as they
contributed at present an infinitely greater amount to the
revenue, in proportion to their incomes, than any other
class. To show by one instance the amount to which they
would be benefitted. by the measures which he proposed,
he would take the case of an ordinary labouring man, with
a wife and three or four children, receiving, say, 12s. a-
week. Supposing, then, such a person to consume 101 b.
of tea in a year, he would save upon that article 12s. ;
upon soap he would save 4s. a-year ; on beer, supposing he
only expended 455. at present upon that beverage, he
would save 15s. ; and if he consumed 51b. of tobacco he
would save upon that lls., making altogether 21. 2s. saved.
His income tax, supposing him to be charged at the pre-
sent rate, would be 18s., and he would therefore have a
clear annual money gain of 1/. 45., in addition to getting
his articles infinitely purer and less adulterated than at
opfretsehentE. Hexchequer certainlyhad wasnet astonishedsthoaptptohretuCuhttaynocefllroer.
never would .arry until they made a
fpooralimenrg
tthhee
pdeztpilese upon malt, hops, and tobacco. The
to to-
t
bs tarcoellog,
idteNnivaasnndotoforir b
ous tuhtatthtehne theyhigh wdouultyd ; and
occasionedas
it to
dirty and unwholesome
wbeasthsaetsdtatphlaetosfmothketugcownatras
aband trade of the country. . It
that house and in all their clubs ? (A 1 g
prac-
tice. Was it Then why had they o,tuh.
) smoking-room
V h in
‘atisfied that the
re-
spect to the question at issue, he
thiant favour
which
o f tgeneralhe feeling
budget,
and
dthoef pnez,laer
to of this
f iit
IsVo:08
much
lyi wasas
tnhoewbsiouliglgehtt otof mthoedGifyo; ern-
mr
the hon.
MmlLe nEt
r forthought Be r k stlhliaite
admitted by the right hon. gentleman opposite in
meat dealt hardly with the owners of real property. It
%Vas
1849 that real property was burdened with local taxes to
the amount of 12,000,0001., not one farthing of which had
been taken off since thou. The proposition of his hon.
friend the member for Berkshire was a fair and moderate
proposition, and he trusted that it would meet with the
support of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It was sup-
posed that the owners of real property were possessed of
groat wealth and large estates, but according to the autho.
,
city of Mr. M`Cullagh, the 34,003,0001. of real
this country was divided amongst 200,000
proprietors The
which gave an average of only 170/, to each. propert in
now to subjected to the legacy duty in addition to
were
local
and other burdens, and under such circumstances he
thought they were fairly entitled to ask the Chancellor of
the Exchequer to assent to the proposition of his hon.
thaCtapthtaeintinaSoCuOußt EofLLPooorbsreartveetal,nain
friend. (Hear.)
land had considerably diminished siotrnheceperlyl chargesB
4t .°0
, la nr dot tl Itch: the
was every prospect that the landed interest would con-
tinue to prosper. He came into the house disposed to
make difference between
fixed
incomes—
between the
w-eehresdear and precarious arm
(Hear,_ hear, from the Oecdomes and the working-by-hand
incomes as they
why he had changed Opposition.)
ibtui
ot
nhes wHa se owf
oa u
dl a
telly b l min.
his mind and voted for the proposi-