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

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY ENENING, JVNE 21, 1853.

would not impose the tax in the form proposed in the bill,
and that he would adopt the suggmtion of the hon. baronet
(Sir T. Aclaud), which, he thought, met the justice of the
case. (Hear.) When the right han. gentleman said that
timber was a sign of wealth, and !uxury, and grandeur, he
forgot that the tax was not imposed on ornamental timber.
Mr. V. SMITH said, though they adopted the amend-
ment of the right hon. baronet (Sir J. 'Trollope), timber
would, under the early part of the clause, be still subject
to the duty. (Hear, hear.) His right hon. friend the
Chancellor of the Exchequer nAlmitted that the tax, if
strictly levied, would be a harsh tax. He wished, there-
fore, that his right hon. friend would introduce words
which would ensure its being lightly dealt with. His
right hon. friend was introducing into taxation by this
proposition property which was not subject to rate—(hear,
hear)—and was thereby opening a new door to local taxa-
tion. (Hear, hear.) They could not exempt timber, he
admitted ; but at the same time this tax would be one of
the most difficult to be levied, and great frauds would be
practised on the Exchequer. :Hear, hear.) He would
suggest that they should go through with the clause and
the amendments proposed, aft& which it, would be com-
petent to the right hon. baronet (Sir J. Trollope) to move
that timber be altogether exempted. (Hear, hear.)
Sir J. WALSH said that the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer admitted so many additions and modifications on the
clause, that it was difficult to understand what the propo-
sition of the Government really was now.
Mr. HENLEY did not think that the question the com-
mittee had to decide was whether timber vas to be subject
t, taxation or not, but] whether it was to be taxed in the
manner and form proposed by the Chancellor of the
Exchequer.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the question which the committee had to decide certainly,
was whether timber should be taxed or not. Ho had al-
ready stated that he was not unfriendly to the proposition
of his hon. friend (Sir T. Adana), and during the discus-
sion his hon. and learned friend the Solicitor-General had
turned his attention to the subject, and he was prepared to
introduce words which would give effect to that proposi-
tion, at the same time giving power to the individual to
adopt the mode provided in the bill—that is to say, giving
him the option of paying on the annual value.
After a few words from Sir T. ACLAND,
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL then proposed the addi-
tion of certain words, the object of which was to subject to
the tax the money actually received for timber awl trees
felled and sold during the enjoyment of the succession.
Sir J. TROLLOPE said that these words would not meet
his objection, for how were those persons to be dealt with
who had only periodical and not annual sales of timber ?
By what machinery did the right hon. gentleman propose
to levy the tax on them ? He should be willing to aid a
proviso to this amendment, which would meet the objec-
tions of the noble lord (Seymour) and the right hon. gentle-
man (Mr. V. Smith).

teed 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 au alteration in the clause. Nothing 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.) 1." 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
tut is to sustain the feudal principle, and in no other
wintry 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
bit 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 here late at night and early
in tie morning to meet the tactics of gentlemen opposite,
he must adhere to the principle of the bill, and I have no
doult 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 hon.
gentleman should not have said one word upon the sub-
ject tit one o'clock in the morning. The hon. gentleman's
argummts 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 rist, 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 ha ready to entertain and consider any proposition
his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer
might brino•. 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.)
ittee report MAfterr. a
s p of few
oN
Ewordsa
in forvoemd Col.tha tSt rhnem
cHoOmRmP
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.
NOTICE OF MOTION.

Lord J. RUSSELL said it was very desirable that the
committee should know what it was they were going to
vote upon. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman (sir
J. Trollope) said it was not enough to leave out certain
words, but that there should be words introduced for the
purpose of excluding timber from the tax, whilst the right
hon. gentleman the member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley)
understood it differently, and admitted that it might be
very proper to subject timber to taxation. Tho right hon.
baronet proposed that timber should be excluded from the
tax. Was that a reasonable proposition? The hon. baronet
(Sir J. Shelley) said that the timber as well as underwood
on his property was cut down every year, and that it
formed part of the annual income of the estate. (Hear,
hear.) Now, suppose a man with 2,000 acres, of which
1,003 was arable and pasture land, from which he derived
a certain income every year, and the other 1,000 acres of
underwood, from which he derived also a certain income,
he could not understand why the income arising from the
latter should be exempted from the tax, and the income
arising from the former subject to it. If the successor
came into possession of the property, he would have in-
come from the one source as well as the other ; if he sold
the estate, he would receive value for the part containing
the timber as well as from the rest. That was a simple
case ; and in that case he owned he could not see the justice
of excluding timber altogether from the tax. There were
other cases of infinitely more difficulty. With regard to
one class of cases he had no doubt that the proposition of
his hon. friend the member for Devon would be found to
answer—that if there were a sale of timber, and in that
case only, should the tax be paid. He could not, how-
ever, but gather from the debate which had taken place
that evening, that there were other cases of more difficulty
The position of the matter reminded him of something
which occurred some years ago, when he had the conduct
of a bill with respect to the commutation of tithes. On
that occasion, it was found that the question of tithes for
hops was infinitely more complicated than all the rest of
the bill, and accordingly he agreed to have separate clauses
with regard to hops, of course not taking away from the
tithe-owner his property, but making special provision for
the case. So with regard to this tax on timber, he
thought his right hon. friend would be obliged to have
more clauses or more words in order to lay down the man-
ner in which the tax should apply in particular cases ; but
he could not see the justice of the committee coming to a
peremptory decision that in no case whatever should tim-
ber be taxed. (Hear.)
Mr. ROBT. PALMER ventured to say that if the clause
remained in its present form there was no case in which a
valuation would not take place. The successor to an
estate, whan called upon to make a return, would be able
to form a good idea of the value of the land from the rent-
roll, but the value of the timber was almost sure to be
disputed by the officer employed to collect the tax ; and
nothing could be more obtrusive than such a valuation.
The only way which he saw out of the difficulty was to
exclude the thing altogether. (Hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON said as the hour was late he
would not enter into the main question, whether timber
should be taxed, further than to say that the noble lord
(Lord J. Russell) had fallen into the mistake of mixing
together timber and underwood. Underwood was very
commonly a source of income ; timber very rarely. (Hear.)
He considered the division which was about to be taken
to have reference to the latter part of the clause; and in
the event of that being negatived, it would be open to his
right hon. friend (Sir J. Trollope) to move his proviso, and
to the Chancellor of the Exchequer to make any proposal
he pleased.
Sir J. V. SHELLEY said the noble lord appeared to
have entirely misunderstood what fell from him. He had
alluded particularly to his own case as one in which there
could be no difficulty, as his successor would clearly be
liable to pay duty for the timber ; but he also put the case
of those who had an annual sale, and remarked that timber
standing in the middle of grass lands was part and parcel
of the farm. As regarded the question whether timber
should be liable to the tax or not, he had no hesitation in
saying that he should vote in the affirmative, because he
held that what produced income ought to be taxed. (Hear.)
Believing that the difficulty could be got over, he should
propose hereafter to make timber standing in woods liable
to the tax and to exempt other timber.

After a few words from Lord J. RUSSELL, in explana
tion, the committee divided on the amendment (Sir J
Trollope's) :
For the amendment
Against

.. 153
.. 150

Mr. OLIVEIRA—To ask the Noble Lord the Secretary
for the Home Department whether the recent opening of
the passage in the north side of St. Paul's Cathedral did
not establish the necessity of adopting it permanently
when Cannon-street be accomplished, as a means of dimi-
nishing the pressure of traffic from Ludgate-hill going
eastward.

Majority 3
The announcement of the numbers was received with
uproarious cheers by the country gentlemen.
On our return to the gallery we found
Lord J. RUSSELL urging Sir J. Trollope to move now
such a resolution as would carry out the intention implied
in the amendment which had just been carried. (Loud
cries of Move, move.)
Sir J. TROLLOPE then moved " That the following
proviso be added to the clause—provided always that the
value of any timber growing or standing on such land
shall not be included in such estimate. (Loud cheers.)
Sir J. SHELLEY here said that he would move an
amendment (which he stated) on the proviso, but being
informed that he was out of order, he withdrew it.
Mr. MULLINGS thought that they could not go into
the question to-night ; he therefore moved that the chair-
man report progress. (Hear, hear, from the Opposition.)
Lord J. RUSSELL thought that as the committee had
been discussing the point all night, it ought not to adjourn
without coming to some real decision. (Hear, hear, from
the ministerial benches.) The proposition now made by
the right bon. baronet (Sir J. Trollope) was a very fair and
distinct one ; and if that was agreed to, then there would
be an end of the question as regarded whether the tax was
to be imposed on timber. (Hear, hear.) On the other
hand, if that proposition should not be acceded to by the
committee, then progress would properly be reported, and
it would remain for the Goverment—it might be by means
of the resolution of the hon. baronet (Sir J. Shelley)—to
arrange the manner in which it might be necessary to alter
the plan of the tax. (Hear, hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON, amid the cheers of his side of the
house, urged the Government to agree to report progress
at once.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed
that the last vote had placed the Government in this diffi-
culty—that they could not make a proposal as to plan until
they knew the general view of the house as to principle.
It had been distinctly stated by numbers of those who
had subsequently voted for the right hon. baronet's amend-
ment, that it was not their intention to vote against a tax
on timber, but that their intention was merely confined
to a partial condemnation of the plan of the tax ; and,
that being so, this fruit ought at least to be reaped from
the prolonged discussion—that it should be known what
was the view of the house on the principle. If the propo-
sition now made by the right hon. baronet was agreed to,
then the Government would know that the meaning of the
committee was to put tv negative on the tax on timber. If
the committee rejected this proviso, the Government would
know what form to give to the proposition. Certainly if
progress was now reported, the whole evening would have
been lost. (Cheers.)
After a few words from Mr. HENLEY, who supported
Mr. Mullings's motion,
Mr. AGLIONBY had spoken and voted that evening
against his party. and all he could say was that if the com-
mittee was golly' to make their final decision a party ques-
tion they would be acting very unworthily and improperly.
(Cheers.) He had no doubt that his side bf the house had
been somewhat galled by the triumphant cheers just then
of the other side. (Great laughter.) But he begged the
other side to remark that they had not gained the triumph;
they had their majority made up by the assistance of gen-
tlemen like himself (n the ministerial side. (Ministerial
cheers and laughter.) And he and his friends on that (the
ministerial) side had not voted against the tax on timber ;
they had voted simply against the plan as it at present
stood in the bill. (Cheers.) Under the circumstances,
therefore, he did not see that there could be a doubt as to
what the last vote meant ; and he asked the Government to
see if they could not hit upon a form of words which would
settle the difficulty. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. MULLINGS, amid much uproar, gave his reasons
for asking the house to report progress. One, we under-
stood, was that it would have to be considered what would
be the position of executors and trustees, trying to keep
accounts of the timber cut from time to time under the
bill ?
Lord J. RUSSELL thought that the statement of his
hon. friend (Mr. Aglionby) supplied the precise reason why
the committee should not report progress without coming
to a vote which would be explanatory of the preceding
vote. (Cheers.) The Government, without the slightest
irritation on the subject, humbly entreated the committee
to say whether the tax was to be applied to timber; and
when that question was answered the Government would
know what to do.
After some further remarks the committee divided--

For reporting progress
Against it

IGENUE.

Majority 3B
Lord J. RUSSELL was then understood to urge the
right hon. gentleman to put the words which.ho had pro-
posed, and allow the committee to divide on the motion.
Mr. FREWEN—It was then ten minutes to one o'clock,
and it was understood that the Governmerit meant to pro-