The Sun.
London, England, 1853-07-06 00:00:00

ATTORNLYS' CERTIFICATE DUTY.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.
SIR,—I have more than once been thinking of con-
veying to the public, and especially the legal profession,
through the medium of your valuable publication, my
sentiments on the question of the Attorneys' Certificate
Duty, but trusting to the resolution and firmness of those

who had' especially taken the matter in hand, and that
they would neither waver in their determination, nor
relax in their exertions, I have hitherto refrained from

so doing.

However, at length observing that those parties (from
whom the profession expected the greatest fidelity in the
execution of the trusts, impliedly at least, universally
committed to them) seem to be relaxing in their exertions
and to give way to the advice of those whom I would say
had never at heart the interest of the profession, I must
beg of you to allow me to state my opinion upon this
subject, and to place before you and the public the
justice, the propriety, and the opportunity of now doing
away with the tax altogether.
And, first, as to the justice thereof.—ln reference to this
point I submit for consideration the very great; loss
which the changes in the law have made in the in-
come of very many attorneys, for which loss there is
nothing new to compensate a loss amounting at least to
50/, per cent, on the previous incomes of manyrwhich, if
disputed, may be easily made to appear by reference to
the amount of business now done in the Superior Courts,
where, if I mistake not, it has become so serious, that
the remuneration for the services of the officers of the

Courts has been transferred into salaries, instead of
payment by fees. It may be affirmed that this has
been done because the payment by salary is a far supe-
rior and a more proper mode than payment by fees ; but
those who understand how the wind blows are not de-
ceived by such an evasive assertion, and make so free as
to insist that the force of the affirmation rests merely in
its being a ready answer and nothing more, vox et prete-
rea nail. At a time when the profits of the profession
far exceeded what they are at present, and when no
income tax was paid, the then Chancellor of the Exche-
quer thought that a certificate duty of 51. on London
attorneys, and 3/. on country attorneys, was quite ample
and sufficient ; but the present Chancellor seems to think
that the present high duty is not high enough, notwith-
standing the immense losses which since that time the
attorneys have sustained by the changes in the law
already effected, and which they will further sustain
from those now in contemplation, for he meditates to
perpetuate the income tax as an addition to it, and.
in some instances to make it fall heavier than it did

before—and to show his generosity and fine feeling he
intends to take off 2/. from the certificate duty, and if
_ _

the attorney's income should amount to 1001. a,-year, to
make him pay another nice little sum, exceeding. the
amount which is remitted in the certificate duty—" The
Lord preserve us from the tender mercies of the wicl
And the manner in which the Chancellor of the E:r.che-

quer has offered to reduce the certificate duty has been
so ungraceful, that it is easy enough to see the 6t his
motives for so doing were not that he felt or ack now-
lodged the injury and injustice of it, but that it was with
the view of defeating the opposition to its reimposiltion.
As an honest man, he ought to have nailed his color era to
the mast, and preferred to have his ship sunk rather than
condescend to gain the victory in a mean and iglaJoble
way. _

It must also be borne in mind, and distinctly under-
stood, that the attorneys have alone been taxed to sty t up
and support the new County Court, for it is e up-
ported by fees derived, from the transacting of law
business which originally and exclusively belonged to
them ; and at the time when the certificate duty v‘ 'as
first imposed—it might in some sense have then be en
said that there was a quid pro quo, but now it may 'in
some instances be literally said that the Governmei it
takes the quid and the quo. Many attorneys rack the it
brains to know what they pay the certificate duty fox '.
It is an undeniable fact that in many country places the e
_profession is reduced to a mere name, and that manly
attorneys would not take out their certificate at all but
for the little conveyancing business they do, and the
respectability attached to the calling. ?Vhen thei
County Courts were established one would have thought 0
that those persons who promoted them did so, in
their own opinion at least, from a keen sense of jus-
tice
to the public. But, 0 mirum, 0 memorabile dictu I ,
how did that keen sense of justice die so quickly ? It F.
did not perceive, or it did not choosp to perceive, that
the good they intended one would injure another. They
had then the opportunity of making a show at least that
they loved virtue for virtue's sake, and not from any
other motive • for a good man, when he medi-
tates good, always takes care to be even-handed,
and looks around him to see that the good he
intends (especially when he tampers with the vest-
ed or purchased rights of others) will work no in-
jury, and that if it does he will do all in his power to
alleviate the injury if he should not be able altogether
to remove it; and these gentlemen might then have with
becoming gracefulness voluntarily remitted the certifi-
cate duty as some consideration for the injury which
the establishment of the County Court was likely to do
to the profession. I have frequently heard it
stated, but I do not know it as a fact, that tb e
fees received by the State from the County Court busi-
ness (that is taken from the pockets of the attorneys), is
by many thousands of pounds more than the sum ex-
pended upon the working of these courts. If so, then
the attorneys are doubly taxed to the same matter, and
the Government is making a profit out of their proper
business. But may be the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer will not understand this, for he is a gen-
tleman of astute ideas, and cannot conceive how
a man is taxed when no money is taken from
him, though he knows that a law has been made
to prevent money coming to him which originally be-
longed to him, and who is still taxed for it as if he con-
tinued to receive it.
The injustice of this tax upon the profession generally
is also very glaring and unjust when considered by
itself ; for it is a tax charged on the exercise of a
profession or means of existence which has been
purchased and paid for at a great price, and nothing
ought to operate to take away or embarrass those
means but the grossest misconduct; for whateier
a man has purchased with his time, service, and money,
ought to be his, absolutely and indefeasibly, to all in-
tents and purposes. No circumstances of poverty ought
to take away, or even to risk to take away, from him the
means purchased so dearly of supporting his wife and
children, and to do his duty in that state of life which
Providence has thought proper to direct his mind
to. The other learned professions are not charged
to this duty, though the chances of a livelihood were
always as good, and are now much better, than that of
the members of the legal profession, upon whom this tax
alone is levied. On these grounds it is also my opinion
that this tax ought not to be charged on proctors and
notaries, or special pleaders or conveyancers, the
two latter callings having, as well as the attorneys,
suffered greatly from the changes in the law.
There should be no class legislation. The tax is not a
licence to exercise a privilege conferred by it alone, but
to use and enjoy what has already been dearly paid for.
If the right to exercise the calling was derived from
the certificate duty, then why not grant that certi-
ficate to a country schoolmaster, or an attorney's or
barrister's clerk out of situation ? Then, and in such
case, a Chancellor of the Exchequer might, with
a semblance of justice, say that he could see no difference
between an attorney and a horse-dealer, as to the pro-
priety of abolishing this abominable tax. I beg to
offer for consideration the following observations :
and first, the want of an adequate reason for its
imposition—that it acts as a double income tax,
and a very heavy one upon those gentlemen whose
income does not exceed 2001. a year. Honourable
members can very well sympathise with that portion of
the public who set up a wailing complaint against an
income tax of two or three pounds per cent. on small
uncertain incomes—then with what greater justice may
those members of the profession whose incomes do not
exceed that sum, complain of the income tax, which, in-
cluding the certificate duty, amounts from seven to nine
pounds per cent., and the less the income is, the higher
is the tax ; and it should never be forgotten,
that the certificate duty is not a tax which, by
the payment thereof, bestows the calling, as the payment
of other licensing taxes does. If the calling had been
bestowed by the mere payment of the certificate duty,
then no cause would exist against the payment of it. In
the next place, it will operate to do even-handed
justice in the matter of taxation ; it will do away with
class legislation, and will be an act of justice towards
those who have hitherto been oppressed by its exaction,
and which they ought not ever to have paid. It will add
very much to the comfort and even the means of' actual
existence of many attorneys with families, to the procure-
menth
te a t
toofr
nwhich w oneere driven to their wits' end to obtain,
. of the public papers lately declared
after the establishment of the County Courts. Here we
have a public admission that a good and valid cause exists
for the abolition of the tax; but a Chancellor of the
one except of his own pet classes.
Ex-
chequer has no compunction of conscience, nor feeling
to alleviate the gripings of hunger of the
of compassion,
wf acnoyme to the consideration of the proper
cf,
jeaernrrl
eybde
aeb nnivieodt uit
Ministry
irhstt
putting
yar net
condition,ahtut
ahestdeao,t
nphffdrienef
ones of
away with this obnoxious tax. I
littletiiiAn timenk
dofwiyre
have, for several years past, been cava-
lierly
oeaohnmsuat
nevernv,
country time
frnoygr was
tbtoaoeui
sesrt
been
admitted
mejs uvueesr; trp
aani hopessn ds surpassed
—law
l timeotdahrewee-
ain cheap. hen, surely, those who profit by
ap
rri present
flourishingegn it.
cheap law and everybody else's loss may very well af-
ford to add a little to their own taxation, or forbear, at
least, a portion of the further general relief intended them
by the ademption of other taxes. In the sum total of the
taxes intended to be done away with the certificate duty is
but as a drop in the ocean, and how then can the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer say that the funds for taxation
and the condition of the country cannot at the present
moment afford to lose this tax. If not now, it never can.
That the country cannot afford to lose this tax is all
nonsense ; it may be true that the Chancellor of the
Exchequer will not give it up unless he must. There-
fore I recommend all parties interested in the de-
struction of this tax, and all those who love justice for
justice' sake, to unite together for its total and imme-
diate abolition.—l am, Sir, your most obedient servant,
A COUNTRY ATTORNEY.
London, June, 1853.

POPULATION OF PRUSSlA.—According to a census re-
cently taken in Prussia, the population of that country
amounts to 16,935,420, making 3,318 inhabitants to
each square mile. The superficial measurement of the
kingdom is reckoned at 5,104 square miles (11,229
French leagues). Since the last census in 1846, the
population hai increased 604,233, or 3.76 per cent.
SCOTTISH LAW OF ARREST.—We are informed through
a private and authentic channel that the Government
has issued a commission to John Hill Burton, Esq., ad-
vocate, to inquire into the law of arrestment in Scotland,
and also into the truck system and imprisonment for
debt,—Nortli Maio.