The Sun.
London, England, 1853-06-21 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, JUNE 21, 1853.

coed with some of the other orders on the paper, and ought
they to go on with this question ?
The CHAIRMAN put the proviso.
'Lord MARCH hoped the noble lord would not refuse to
allow the chairman to report progress.
Mr. LABOUCHERE suggested that Sir J. Trollope
should withdraw his proviso for the present, and if it was
placed on the books it would enable the Government to
take it into consideration.
Sir J. TROLLOPE thought the course proposed by the
right hon. gentleman (Mr. Labouchere) was so clear and so
proper that he would withdraw his motion ; but he wished
it to be understood that he only moved the proviso because
it was thought necessary to make the clause clear.
On the motion that the motion be withdrawn,
Mr. COBDEN (who spoke amidst cries of oh, and in-
terruption from the opposition) said the proposition of the
right hon. gentleman the member for Taunton to withdraw
the proviso, is intended to leave it open to the Government
to make an alteration in the clause. Nothinc, has been
said as yet for those who are not owners of timber, and I
wish to say a few words on their behalf. I have listened
to this debate, and I cannot understand the mysterious
process or reasoning by which it is sought to remove tim-
ber out of the category of all other taxes on succession.
(Hear, hear.) I caution the right hon. gentleman not to
attempt to conciliate his opponents by any compromise of
this measure, and I think the course taken by the gentle-
man opposite must have satisfied him that he has nothing
to gain by that policy. I say if copse-wood and timber are
to be taxed, I do not see why ornamental timber should
not be taxed also. If it is kept up for the purpose of
luxury and enjoyment, there can be no difference between
it and other articles of luxury. Does not the timber in a
park add to the dignity of its owner as much as a noble
mansion? If you advocate this exemption on ornamental
timber, why should it not be extended to your pictures ?
and I cannot see any difference in that respect between it
and the plateaux on your dining tables. I say, the rule is
that anything which is brought into the Encumbered
Estates Court that would sell for money, is liable to the
tax under this bill. It may be said that ornamental tim-
ber is often cut for sale, but that is because it is the sub-
ject of enjoyment as a luxury rather than as the subject
of sale. It argues a great reserve of wealth, if you
are able to keep such an article for enjoyment alone.
Having agreed that everything else shall be subject
to the tax, is it desirable to make a stand on timber ?
Fewer of your countrymen possess the article of timber
than any other that is subject to the tax, and you are iso-
lating yourselves more by claiming this exemption than if
you had asked for exemption for your plate or your dia-
monds. Having agreed to everything, is it worth your
while to make a stand on this article of ornamental tim-
ber ? You say it is entailed property, but you forget that
the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer
has dealt very lightly with entailed property, by allowing
four years and a-half for paying for it. The thirst of this
act is to sustain the feudal principle, and in no other
country in the world is that so, but the tendency is to
force the sale of landed property, and compel its sub-
division ; therefore, when you find that the spirit of the
bill is favourable to established property, it is not wise to
raise a question on this miserable article of timber. (Hear.)
I will only repeat to the right hon. gentleman, in the
name of those who have no timber, my advice that he
should take his stand on the bill as it is, and he may de-
pend upon that if he wishes to have his supporters here,
and to fight his battle, to be hero late at night and early
in the morning to meet the tactics of gentlemen opposite,
he must adhere to the principle of the bill, and I have no
doubt that we shall carry him triumphantly through
with it. (Hear.)
Mr. AGLIONBY regretted they should have been kept
there discussing the question for eight hours, and the bon.
gentleman should not have said one word upon the sub-
ject till one o'clock in the morning. The hon. gentleman's
arguments were against the recommendation he made to
the Chancellor of the Exchequer. But if he wished to re-
vive a question which he (Mr. Aglionby) hoped had been
set at rest, let him give notice "that all timber be taxed,"
and bring it forward at a proper time. (Hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL—If he understood aright, the pro-
position of the other side now was, that the committee
would be ready to entertain and consider any proposition
his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer
might bring forward, to carry out the object of the latter
part of the clause, that object—viz., the imposing the tax
on timber being conceded. (No, no.) If that was not
conceded he must call for a decision.
Sir J. PAKINGTON said the committee could not give
any opinion until the alternative to be proposed was before
them. (Cheers.)
After a few words from Col. SIBTHORP,
Mr. SPOONER moved that the committee report pro-
gress, to which Lord J. Russell consented, and the house
resumed.
Lord J. RUSSELL intimated that, for the convenience
of the Speaker, the house would not sit till five o'clock to-
morrow (this day). He also stated that the India Bill
would be taken on Thursday.

Jilttion

County of Durham.—John Salmon, Gent., to be Lieu-
tenant, June 14.

Royal 'Westmoreland Light Infantry Corps of Militia.—
Captain Joseph Spencer, from the Royal Cumberland
Militia, to be Captain; Ensign Robert Wilson, junr., to
be Lieutenant.

SUN OFFICE, Seven o' Clock.