The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-28 00:00:00

THE SUCCESSION DUTIES.

The Earl of MALIIESBURY then rose, in pursuance of
notice to move for a select committee to inquire into the
probable effect of extending to the case of successions to
real property, and property under settlement, the stamp
duties now payable in respect of legacies. He said, in
making this motion, he could state with the utmost sin-
cerity and frankness that he did so without the slightest
portion of party or political spirit ; and he promised their
lordships that so far as ho was concerned no atom of that
element should be introduced into the question. He must
commence by observing that he thought that house was the
most fitting place for a preparatory inquiry on this im-
portant subject, because it was composed of persons who
were not personally interested in the matter, and who
could not therefore be actuated by selfish feelings. When
the last Government retired, in consequence of their finan-
cial policy being disproved of by the House of Commons,
it was to be expected that their successors would take up
the subject of finance, especially as the public had for seve-
ral years taken more interest in that branch of public ques-
tions than in any other. But he (the Earl of Malmesbury)
did not expect that Mr. Gladstone would have dealt with
the subject of a succession tax upon real and settled pro-
perty, inasmuch as he thought the difficulties of that
subject were not exaggerated when painted in such vivid
colours by almost every statesman who had lived during
the last half century. But the right hon. gentleman had
boldly met the difficulties face to face, and in a bill which
was now printed he proposed that a succession tax
on real property should become part of the law of the
land. Ho would at once admit the abstract justice of
such a tax. The question was first one of necessity, and
.secondly one of possibility, and it was for the Legisla-
ture to decide ou both points. It appeared to him
that the question of succession to realty, considered
per se, was ono on which both the country and
the Houses of Parliament was profoundly igno-
rant; at least they were ignorant on that subject as
compared with ninny others which had of late years occu-
pied public attention. The question had not been brought
before the houses of Parliament since the year 1796, a
lapse of time including two generations, and, without
wishing to cast the slightest imputation on those who had
taken part in the debates in another place, he must say
that he thought much comparative ignorance had been
exhibited. It appeared to him that under such circum-

stances no time should be lost in securing in some manner
the utmost information that could be obtained as to the

probable working of the proposition of Mr. Gladstone, —lt
was a very great advantage in investigations of this kind
that their lordships could examine witnesses before the
committee on oath ; and it was for this reason that he

asked their lordships to grant a committee, before which
they might examine the first solicitors and conveyancers
in the country—men of great experience in such matters—
who would give such information as might be useful both
to that and to the other House of Parliament. Though
he was not prepared to offer any opposition to the mea-
sure without inquiry, yet he must say that there were ex-
tant opinions which should at least warn their lordships
against rashly supporting it. The last time that the ques-
tion was brought before Parliament was the 21st of April,
1796, when Mr. Pitt proposed that a succession tax should
be imposed on real property. Now, let their lordships
mark what events were taking place at that period. Buo-
naparte was at that moment crossing the Alps into Italy ;
Nelson had not gained those great victories which were to
sweep the French nation into the sea; an invasion seemed
not unlikely to take place. Under such circumstances it
was impossible not to feel that almost any tax was justi-
fied by the emergency. When Mr. Pitt brought forward
his proposition, he was opposed by whom ? By Mr. She-
ridan, Mr. Grey, and Mr. Fox. It had been asserted in
the other house that Mr. Pitt was beaten by the country
party; but that was not the fact. The first person
who opposed the motion was Mr. Alderman New-
man who made a joke upon the occasion, by say-
ing that, if it were carried, though England might be
the best country to live in, it would be the worst
to die in. (Laughter.) Mr. Sheridan said it was the most
execrable measure of finance that had ever come before
Parliament. He (the Earl of Malmesbury) considered it a
war tax, and thought that nothing but the most urgent
necessity could justify it; and it was, in fact, on such a
necessity that Mr. Pitt rested his defence. His first im-
pression on hearing of a succession tax was that it would
entirely change the nature of a real estate. (Hear, hear.)
Their lordships did not hold now, as they formerly did,
directly under the crown. In former days the crown could
send a commission (indeed this was the condition of tenure)
to value the rental and take a succession tax from the
estate ; but many of their lordships, and many small free-
holders, had inherited their estates with an absolute right
to sell, to give a way, or to mortgage ; and the entire nature
of their property would be changed f a succession tax had
to be paid before the heir came into possession. In that
case an estate in fee would be nothing more than an estate
renewable on the payment of a fine. It was but justice to
the right hon. gentleman to say that he had not overlooked
the difficulties of the question, and that he had already met
some of them. There was one point on which the right
hon. gentleman was entirely mistaken. He stated that ho
wrongoffices
considered the term of a generation to be 30 years. That
fhaec tw ths
at in thatr n
c assumption
at
the ass
the
es
assured was taken at about 7 years, and their lordships
knew from the records of their own families that it was
quite a mistake to calculate on a generation of 30 years.
(Hearr.) One of the principal argume4rts of the ri •
ght hon.
gentleman was that great frauds were committed under the
present system, and that a new and much more • extensive
machinery was required. On that point he (the Earl of
Malmesbury) had examined several solicitors, and they all
told him that there was great exaggeration on the subject
of frauds. It was not likely, they said, that an
men would seek to evade the succession tax man
deed of gift during their own lives. Of five a
tors whops lie consulted, one only had had two sosuiccih-
cases ; and in that instance the cases occurred in thecourse
of a thirty-four years' practice. With their lordships' per-
mission, he would point out some of the most evident diffi-
culties of carrying out the Government scheme. If the bill
passed, what would be the position of properties heavily
mortgaged—mortgaged to the extent of three-fourths of the
rental f (Hear, hear.) The heir of such an estate would
be placed between two fires—the mortgagee on the one side
and the Government on the other. At first it was proposed
that the assessment should be restricted to four years.
It was true that a year of grace had been added; but, as
had been well observed by a nobleman on the cross
benches, if the period were five years, why should it not
be ten, and if ten why should it not be twenty or thirty ?
The object of the Chancellor of the Exchequer being to get
as much as posvible during the life of the owner, the best
thing for the right hon. gentleman would be for every
owner to die after he had held the property for four years.
(Laughter.) There was ono point which had struck him
very forcibly. He saw no special provision in the bill for
the case of an officer falling in action. He could men-
tion instance rl in which two or three brothers had each
fallen on the field of battle within a short period, each,
too, leaving children almost wholly dependent on them
for support. Such cases were, during the last war, espe-
cially frequent in the highlands of Scotland ; and, in such
cases, when an officer who died in the service of his
country left a croft, producing perhaps 1001. a-year, would
it be just or decent for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to
put his hands in the pockets of the orphan ? (Hear, hear.)
What had staggered him, and he believed the public
also, most, was the attack made on settlements. In the
eye of the law such property amounted to a purchase.
Many men who had been married for thirty years or more
had not yet obtained the property of the wife settled at the
time of the marriage. Upon such persons the operation of
this tax would be retrospective and retroactive; the law

would, in fact, be cx post facto, and every one of their
lordships who had not yet obtained the fortune of his wife
would have to pay the succession tax after they had made
what was in the eye of the law a purchase of the property.
(Hear, hear.) In the case of corporations the tax was not
to be retrospective ; a corporation was only to pay upon
what it might get after the passing of the bill. He did not
understand how the right hon. gentleman meant to deal
with the property of the Church. If the Church were not
exempted, a prelate on succeeding, as he did not stand in
the position of a blood relation, would have to pay 10 per
cent. ; and, though he might be reminded that the bishops
were now paid a fixed salary, and be told that the tax
must, therefore, be paid by the Ecclesiastical Commis-
sioners, that remark was not applicable to the working
clergy. There was another class of property which was
not mentioned in the bill; he referred to heirlooms. By
" heirlooms" he meant books, pictures, plate, and so on,
left to a man who held for life an estate entailed on a son
or a brother. If the bill was carried out consistently,
there must be a valuation of such objects; and thus the
party would have to pay a tax on property which he could
neither sell nor mortgage. - He perceived that the timber
was to be valued and taxed on succession. He appealed to
any of their lordships who had ever purchased or sold an
estate, whether the trouble and expense of timber valua-
tions were not enormous? (Hear.) In this case there
might be a valuation of the timber cut down every two or
three years ; and if the Government were not satisfied with
the assessment, they would have a right to send a valuer
of their own ; and ho warned their lordships to beware,
lest under a constitutional form of Government they should
become subject to laws as severe as any ever propounded
by the most despotic monarch. (Hear, hear.) Again, the
valvation of mines could not easily be ascertained, because
of the uncertainty of the extent of ore existing underground.
Then, when a man purchased a reversion, and it fell in, the
succession tax was to be paid upon it. (Hear.) So also
with respect to jointures and legacies. If a man left a
legacy of 1001. a-year to his butler, a succession tax of 10
per cent. was paid upon it, and when it reverted back, 10
per cent. was also to be paid. Where was the justice in
that ? (Hear.) It, was very customary in this country for
a man to leave 5,0001., 10,0001., 15,0001., or 20,0001., to his
younger children. He eiould like to know how the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer proposed to treat the person com-
ing into the property in these cases. The difficulties ap-
peared to him to be endless, and under these circumstances
it was absolutely necessary that the subject should be in-
vestigated by a committee before the bill proceeded fur-
ther in either house of Parliament. The bill set up a
machinery for carrying the system into operation which
was in the nature of a tremendous inquisition. A man
was made liable to heavy penalties if he did not give a
full and true account to commissioners of his liability to
the duty, and the amount for which he was liable, and ad-
ditional penalties were imposed for every month after the
first moth if he did not give such information. (Hoar.)
He had no hesitation in saying that it was the most tre-
mendously inquisitorial bill that ever was proposed.
(Hear.) If it passed, who in God's name, would accept
the situation of trustee or guardian ? (Hear.) He be-
lieved that it would operate most injuriously on the landed
property, and consequently on the constitution of the
country. Take the case of a family whose name would be
immortal in the annals of this country. After the battle
of Trafalgar the nation settled an estate on Lord Nelson,
and it so happened that since 1805 there had been three
collateral successions in that family. If this act had been
in operation during that period this property which had
been bestowed for services rendered the country would
have been taxed three several times to the extent of 3 per
cent. (Hear.) He looked with apprehension to this tax
also because it was to be a permanent tax, and because it
offered no security that it would not be increased when-
ever the Chancellor of the Exchequer wanted money. It
was because he was convinced a great deal of ignorance
prevailed on this subject that he asked for a committee

If their lordships granted him a committee he would go
into that committee with a mind open to conviction ; and
if he found that the tax was one for which good reasons
could be alleged, he would join with those who felt ad-
miration for Mr. Gladstone, and would give him credit for
finding the means of adding to the revenue of the country
without deing injustice to any class. (Hear, hear.)
The Earl of ABERDEEN said that the motion of the
noble earl commended itself by a certain degree of plausi-
bili at first sight it did not seem unreasonable that a
meaße[re so important, so difficult, so complicated, and so
personally interesting to their lordships, should undergo
such an inquiry as that for which the noble earl asked.
Yet there were reasons which should, he thought, induce
their lordships not to support the motion of the noble earl.
They were such, at all events, as should prevent him from
giving the slightest encouragement to such a proposition.
First he begged to call attention to the time at which the
motion was made. If this had been quite a new system of
financial policy, upon which the Legislatore had to make up
their minds before coming to a decision, there might be
some reason for the motion. But the proposition of the
Government had been stated in great detail by his right
hon. friend five or six weeks ago in the House of Commons,
and the resolutions proposed on the subject had been car-
ried a fortnight ago without any division. (" Hear," from
the Earl of Derby.) That being so, it would be impossible
to accede to the proposition for inquiry now made by the
noble earl, without also joining in the doubt, and the more
than doubt, which the noble earl expressed of the wisdom
and justice of the measure. Now, happen what might, their
lordships might appoint a committee if they thought fit; but
nothing should induce him to express any doubt of the
wisdom and justice and equity of the proposal of his right
hou friend. (Hear.) That proposal was now before the
House of Commons in the form of a bill, and the speech of
the noble earl was made as if that measure had been before
their lordships' house, and stood for a second reading,
(Hear, hear.) The house must be aware that whether the
committee was appointed or not, and whatever the result
at which it might arrive, they could not alter one tittle of
the measure without infringing on the privileges of the
other house. (Hear.) No doubt it was perfectly com-
petent for their lordships to throw the bill out on the
second reading—(hear; hear)--but he need not say how
deeply he should regret the risk to their lordships'
house, as well as to the country, from tho adop-
tion of so rash and impolitic a course. (Hear, hear.) Tho
noblo earl had fairly told them that he asked for a com-
mittee with a view of disproving the contents of the bill,
but even the noble earl did not deny the justice of the
proposition. The noble earl only referred to the di!ficul-

ties of execution in the way of the measure, and he re-
ferred, in support of his view, to the authority of Mr. Fox
and Mr. Sheridan. Now, with all due respect to the
authority of Mr. Fox and Mr. Sheridan, he believed they
had made great progress, especially in nancial principles,
since their days ; and he thought it was generally admitted
that Mr. Pitt was right in the proposition he made. (Hear.)
The country has for a long time felt the injustice of the
exemption of land from the tax on successions. (Hear.)
That feeling was gaining ground daily, and he would ask
auy one of their lordships if he could candidly say that this
exemption could possibly be maintained much longer ?
(Hear. hear.) It was true there was no riot, no violence,
no outcry at the present moment, but there existed a
strong feeling of the injustice and inconsistency of exempt.
ing land from a tax which was imposed on all other pro-
perty. Moreover, this measure was indispensable for the

carrying into effect the financial scheme proposed by his
right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. With-
out this measure it would not be possible to carry into
effect that scheme. The renewal of the income tax for seven

years would never have been proposed or thought of unless
it was accompanied with the means and obvious facilities

for dispensing with that tax at the end of the period if
Parliament should think so fit. (Hear, hear.) Neither would
it be possible to effect those great and important remissions
of duties which would, he hoped, greatly increase the
prosperity and comforts of the great body of the people of
this country—(hear, hear)—and which secured for the pro-
position of his right hon. friend a degree of acceptance and
popularity which he did (not see attended any budget in
his day. (Cheers.) The noble earl admitted the ability
displayed by his right hon. friend, but he ought to have
gone farther, and admitted.the singular success with which
it was attended—(hear)—so far as the opinions pronounced
by men of all parties was an evidence of success. The
noble earl said that the measure was conceived in a spirit
of hostility to ;the landed interest of the country, and
would be most injurious to that interest. (Hear, hear,
from the Opposition.) The very same language had been
made use of in reference to the measures proposed by Sir
R. Peel. (Hear, hear, from the same quarter.) He be-
lieved that so far from their being injurious or hostile to
the landed interest, those measures contributed very much
to the safety and freedom with which they were debating
at that moment on these benches—(hear, hear)—and he
believed that the measure now proposed would be followed
by results of a similar kind. It was said of this measure,
" here is a Conservative Government who are going to raise
2,000,000/. from the land." Now according to the most
accurate calculations that could be made the tax would not
produce more than one-fourth of that amount. The noble
earl wished to have this inquiry before the measure pro-
ceeded any further. Did the noble earl think that this was
a practical course to adopt ? Did the noble earl suppose
that after the resolutions had been so triumphantly carried
in the other house he would be able to resist the progress
of the measure by this inquiry, which he now proposed.
Now, if the measure came to their lordships' house, as un-
questionably it would, even though a committee were
appointed, he should feel it to be his duty to press the bill
through their lordships' house. (Hear, hear.) But he
trusted their lordships would not agree to the proposition
of the noble earl. At all events, he, on the part of the
Government, assured their lordships and the country that
they had not the slightest intention of wavering or hesi-
tating an instant with regard to the wisdom, the justice,
or the policy of this tax. (Cheers.)
The Earl of DERBY said that he had no desire to enter
on that occasion upon the subject which had been so ably
brought before their lordships by his noble friend. But
there were some observations of the noble earl opposite
which he could not allow to pass without remark. The
course pursued by the noble earl reminded him of what
Lord Althorp, then a member of Earl Grey's Government,
said on one occasion in reference to a measure then under
discussion. When Lord Althorp was pressed on the sub-
ject he said he would abide by the decision of the Cabinet,
that he knew good reasons for the measure, but he was
unable to state them, and upon that he asked for the sup-
port of the House of Commons. (Hear, hear, and a
laugh.) Whether their lordships had So much confidence
in the noble earl as the noble lord demanded in the
House of Commons, he did not know, but his speech was
of the same kind, for the noble earl did not attempt to
grapple with the manifest injustice and impracticability of
the measure as exposed by his noble friend, but contented
himself by saying that the Government were satisfied of
the justice of the measure, that they would not waver a
single instant, that they would not allow inquiry or con-
sultation, but that it must be passed right or wrong.
(Hear, hear.) The noble earl said that they might inquire
if they pleased, but that he could not wait for the result
of that inquiry, and that both houses of Parliament might
Tp thoughthriemneoMinister
eteheiaas that this tr h is
sesifd
blindly pass the measure. Ho (the Earl of Derby) hardly
)
Ewteahgsaltatehtdehiselhinweehlasdofaadaer.ment which a
lhßi
oauurtlsyeh
ebwe(elL
enrgbdeodan to subject which(Hear, hpeeacru.
Derby)d tt
oh
rheaadi
s province
yteert tt
haoef learn
dt
decrees
cer
etliehsoa
theirutosfe theof Commons.
Houselordships'o
f
Commons, even in financial matters, or that the House of
,Lords were bound to comply blindly' with their requests,
be or wrong,
abhele they or unjust, be they
pbeaerraletthsihook his head whewnaheeted;aidte( But
er thet h e
very thing which they just or
The noble
proposition of the Governrineenatrwasjustwunoajrauuswntjhuestth, prac-
ticablethe proposition, they did not .) They did not condemn
object to it, but they
or impracticable.
desired to have the means of inquiring
the proposition. He trusted thenroilliiinto the merits of
of theire concurrent
shouldps would consider
ia
advise
duevise toi their'
n theown
independentposition that
exertheysoconsult and
legislative authority. (Hear.) The noble
to the time at which the motion was made, air)ut )iiiew(tthe
reason
Earl of Derby) did not know whether he objected to it,
because it was made too early or too late. The noble earl
said that if this was a new Legislative proposition e ith
which they were unfamiliar, there might be some
for an inquiry. But, said the noble earl, this measure had
been fully explained five or six weeks ago in the House of
Commons, and the resolutions had been agreed to without