The Sun.
London, England, 1853-04-26 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, APRIL 26, 1853.

this might have been done consistently with maintaining
the other poi dons of the budget. (Hear.)
Mr. IL DRUMMOND assured his hon. friend the
member for Pontefract that he never rose to address the
hcitito Ina mood less humorous in all his life. There
seemed to lie nothing particularly lively in the income
tax. And although the powers of his honourable
friend (Mr. Milnes) might have produced a poetic bud-
got, yet neither the right honourable gentleman who
was last Chancellor of the Exchequer, nor the right hon.
gentleman who now filled the office, had ever been able
to lay before the house really more than that the common
sum of twenty pence made is. Bd. • and he was sadly afraid
they would not be able to get beyond the matter of fact
dullness of pounds, shillings, and pence. (Hear.) But he
had risen principally to make an observation in conse-
quence of the observations of the hon. baronet the member
for Hertfordshire respecting the succession:of real property.
It was said that the tax was a total dismemberment of the
aristocracy, and a breaking up of all landed property. The
fact was it was a tax not upon property, but upon elder
brothers and nothing more. The elder brother he had no
doubt was generally the best and most distinguished of the
family—he was willing to believe so, but he must remind
the house that ever since he could remember the exemption
had been felt as a very serious evil by the younger brothers.
The hon. baronet talked of the subject being likely to
break up the aristocracy. Now he paid very little atten-
tion to the honourable baronet's expectations, but lie did
pay some respect to historical facts. What was it, and
who were the persons, that broke up the whole of the
lauded aristocracy in France ? It was the younger
brothers in the National Convention ; it was the jealousy
they felt that when their fathe-s made a will, they left
the land to their elder brothers, who paid no tax, while if
they left 2,0e31. to the younger brothers they had all to
pay the tax. (Hear, hear.) Then it was said this was a
new thing in the country. He did not know where those
who made this assertion could have derived their historical
knowledge, for everybody must know it was the oldest tax
in the country. It lasted from the Conquest down to the
reign Henry VIII. It was, therefore, anything but a new
tax. But it had been said, "If you go to a dissolution,
you will present this budget in contrast to the last." Now,
what was the thing that beat the last budget ? A most un-
fair rest upon the house tax—a most unfair advantage taken
to excite clamour in the towns. It was by that the former
budget was known ; and if they went before the country, it
world ;_,3 to save the elder cons from being taxed on succes-
sions to land and putting it upon the house tax. This was
the way in which it would bs presented at the hustings.
The laded interest might rest assured that the enormous
influx of gold was t ending immensely to their interest, and
i-nmeusely to the detiiment of the stockholder. (Hear.)
He wa3 aware there were gentlemen who expected to see
ne income tax taken off'. When he first read the speech
of Sir Robert Peel in intro lucing the property tax, when
be talked about its being for three years he thought it a
gross pine of imposture. He never believedithat Sir Ro-
bert Peel had the melt dis'-not intantion of so passing it ;
and when the prc-ent Foire p,-3ed it, whether it was for
one year or not, no wan row alive within its walls would
ever see it regaled. (He: r, he:.r.) It was all very well
'to talk o seven or five ye:,-s. It would go on to everlast-
ing. But the bon. b;.ronet opposite said, and the right
honourable gentleman did not deny it, that the income tax
was a very immoral tax, and that it was the tendency of
the law to make men immoral. He denied it. Did our
law allow men to adulterate bread, butter, wine, and
milk? Only the other day be passed the shop of a manu-
facturer of pickled cabbage' and in the window, under-
neath a number of bottles, be .aw several carboys of oil
of vitriol. (Hear, hear.) This was not [through the law.
The law did not make men immoral. The cry was all very
well for the hustings, but it wal not true that the shop-
keepers of London avere made irrnoral by the law. Now,
with regard to the income tax, ;I-, was not fair to object
that the budget might be retained with the income tax as
it was, for the income t x bad b'en declared to be the sub-
stratum by which the nation:J debt might ultimately be
paid of; and it was the first time that any such machi-
nery had ever been propo-ed for each a purpox. It was
not fair either b object to the 'Lae because it was unpopu-
lar, unless some other means of raisirg the neceasary funds
could be obtained. Under all the circumstances, his belief
was that the landed interest would do wisely not to object
to the tax. It was perfectly clear, by the fate of the last
budget, it was in the power of pasties in that house, who
choce to make a run against any budget, so to adapt their
policy as to overthrow every budget 'dirt could be drawn.
Well, if they were determined that we never again should
have a budget, then he would say, let the house be ad-

journed sin 3 die.
Mr. MUNTZ roro with great regret to oppose the budget
of the right hor. gentieman—(Opposition cheers)—for there
wa^ a great deal in V..7e budge:: of which ho approved, and
which would be o; go eat —2—vice to the coup ay at large.
(Hear, hear.) If ho could have salved over his conscience
as easily as the hon. member :or Poatecroot had don: —(a
laugh)—he should have e.;,t still and made ro remark ; but
halving originally votal for Vie ircome tax only on the
ground of expediency, he row felt quite at liberty to fol-
low up the opinions which he had at that time held, and
had held ever since. He considered the continuation of

the income tax a foil blot in the budget of the right
gentlema”, and did not see why be could not withdraw
the bude:, and averd it, as so many other Chancellors of
the Exchequez done. If the Light hon. gentleman
world do so, he (Mr. )Mentz) would give him his supper's,.
but if he declined ticing that advice, and nersisted in re-
t-lining his measure in its perfection, t'ien .re must give it
his oppolition. (Hear,
Mr. B. STANHOPE Laid if the income tax was to be
permanent, as be believed it world be, it was most impor-
tant that it-, inequalities should ha at once removed. It
pressed much more be7,vily upon the owner of hour e pro-
per .:y than rpgatt,e nmeLgagea ; and as rega-Aled la Id, ho-
could declale th..t he had himself for several ye„l-s scent 30
per cent, in improv:r3 an estate which bed -n_,-.,-vioasly
mana,sed, which be had been assessed upon be had re-
ceived. As reva-Alr,d the case or to-‘ant farmers, the con-
verKtio—s which 1-e had hal with some of the beet mem-
bers of the class convinced him that farmers required that
they should be assessed upon one-third of their rental i 1-
stead a one-half. (Oh.) They ought, like merchants, to
be t pimpor Lion t J their receipt-. (He .r.)
. . BALL said several members who had spoken 01
r (. linistarial) side of the house having decin rc. 1 that
they s r'-e iu the name and cn behalf of their constituents,
he mu-:: 2rotest against that modo 0' paAing the question.
as into ,sistent ulth the gravity and extent of the interests
stoke. He could not help suspecting that the new
ove 2.i at for the abolit'on of the income tax originated
:'•) ads- -:e to prevent the imposition of the legacy duty.
(Hear. hear.) Repreienthr; no he did an Irish constitu-
ency, he had fel:en the trouble to compare the effects of
the piopored changes upon Ireland. The relief arifing fro n
the measure ho cot mat -d r c 412,C30!., the new taxation at
3'..).1,00/. The app. ~:tent a lvant,_•ge to this country wr s
t 'fling, but they mus 3 not s.:biget, t"e benefit of the may!
of consumers.. (Peer, hear.) It did. not much surpri:3
him that the hon. member Co: Cork (Mr. Fagan), repre-
senting a rich inercau",,"e community, should object to his
constituents being ca' led upon fo - their fair share of bur-
dens ; but that an ho i. gentleman, who knew how the
poor cultivator had been ground down by local taxation.
should object to the inetnediato relie.7 row proffered, did
inde-l. fill him with ast mishment. If Irish members, op-
posed to the budget, hal a del rite o”cy, let them -,te
it. (Hear, hear.) It was rumoured in public prints that
magnificent promises had bcc,a irede to them ; and, if the
case were so, representing as be did a poor country, he did
not know how far be might 1 r. .nni -.11 by such consider-
ations. (Irorical ctieers.) As an Irish member he scorned
to appear there as a mendica He did not want an?
favour for his constituency, but ; 'mply justice.
Mr. GROGAN fe't bound to o?-133 e the re-:olutions, and
denied that Ireland would delive benefits from the budget
sufficient to comp(' sate for the ineponition of the income
tax. The new t:-.,xes, income tax, and spirit duties, would
amount to 65:3,000/.' and the remission of the annuities to
245,C? 1., leaving a balance as against Ireland of 413,C.?)/.
He could not therefore accept the mcasuta as a fair adjust-
ment of taxation.

Mr. COBDEN and Mr. MAC GREGOR rose tDgether, the for •
mer moving the adjomumeat of the debate.
Mr. HUME hoped the a? join ament would be to this
day, as they all knew the f. to of deb..' ?.s that were allowed
to lie over.'

The CHAIRMAN said tl•at cors;s:;entlyw:th the stand-
ing order, the debate must be adjorrwi to Wednesday or
Friday.
Mr. W. S. KNOX protczt7:l veherently against an ad-
jonnime-it to Weduclday, end aga'ns:; the proc?-dings of
the Government generally with re-p-c, to this debate. He
had been a member of the house for seven years, and had
never seen such proc:::.•el;mgs before. (Laughter.)
A short conNeisiXon ensued between Lord J. RUSSELL
and Mr. DISRAELI on the point of order, and it was ulti-
mately arranged that the noble lord should move the liTtE -
pension of the stand'rg 0.-der this day, in order that the
adjourned debate might be taken on Tnrrsday.
TIPPERARY ELECTION.
The SPEAKER announced the receipt of a letter, stat-
ing that the peLi' ...)11 against the retu,,n. of Mr. S. Sadleir
would not be pro eded with.
CARLOW BOROUGH.

The SPEAKER also announced that the intition agains
e ra:;urn of Mr. Alexander hid been abandoned.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.

Mr. M‘GREGOR moved the adjournment of the hou- 3,
at the same time expressing his opinion that liberal mem-
bers had not had sufficient opporkunity of speaking on the
financial resolutions. The hon. member made one or two
further observations, which were lost in the noise of mem-
bers leaving the horse.
LONDON AND EDINBURGH GAZETTE BILL.
The second revllng of this bill was, after a conversation
between Messrs. Wrson and Cowan, postponed to Thursday
next.

MRCIIANT SHIPPING (ADVANCES) BILL.
Thil bill went through committee pro forma.
BOROUGH OF TAUNTON.

Mr. 7 7 )FFATT postponed until Monday next his mo-
tion for ',7.e issue of a new writ for the bcrongh of Taun-
ton, pro nising at the same time that the evidence should
be in tae hands of members this day.
COAL DUTIES COMMITTEE.

---- -
On the motion of Sir J. SHELLEY, Mr. Deedes was
-scharged from flu her attendance on the Coal Duties
(Metropolis) Committee ; and Sir Joshua Walmsley was
added.