The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-03 00:00:00

classes. I make no ctsntrasts
Didreitll, and manufaci'aring
time%s too precious--between income derived
from realized pfopetty and incomes the result of intelli-
gence and skill. We have no time for rhetoric now ; but
there is not a man in this house who has not contemplated
the question, and who is not ashamed by the contrast,
whatever his opinion may be on the general financial ques-
tiory-s--and I appeal alike to the brain and to the heart of
every man to come to a Verdict of that kind. But I will
meet the question of the trading and the commercial
classes—those classes connected with terminable annuities.
I shall put before the committee in a brief and succinct
formula a sontrast that brought conviction to my mind,
and it is necessary to my argument, and in vindication of
the course I am now detailing, that I should place before
you briefly and clearly the considerations which led to oar
determination. There is a man with 20,0001. which he in-
vestsis
vests in realised property. Well, I will suppose that he
obtainshr
800auott,haerymeaanho has
year for being at the
armateouonft of e
4p per
pcietantl:
who invests it in property perishable at the end of 20
years—in silks, in machinery, or in annuities terminable at
that time. The one man who receives for his 20,0001. in-
vested
hf
20
years,
eaamr
so, u
on
rt finny
se s
tt
se dr
jr rin p eon
ht r haanbol pt
yr o,
veestsid
le
ead in real property 8001. yearly ; the other receives for
t
p ey
exactlyat tlh,e47e3nld.
tbeweinogtythyeearsintewriellst,
e-6nd7301f.
per cent., that at the
supply the capital which has
perished. (Hear, hear.) Take that case—it takes in all.
But how do you tax the two men ? You tax the man
who
owns the realised property at the rate of 241. a year.and
you tax the 1,4731., which is virtually
also sed
realised pro. at the rate of 441. a year. And this is the system
which you are going to support--(cheers}—which you, who
profess to be the peculiar representatives of
the commercial
body, are now going to establish for a term of seven years,
as you say, but, as I shall presently show you, most pro-
bably for ever. (Hear, hear.) You are taxing the pro-
perty of those classes whom you are sent here to represent
nearly double the amount, and you do this while- at the
same time you continue to tell us that you are doing so in
the interest of the trading and commercial classes. (Cheers.)
With these facts before us, with a conviction that the as-
sessment was unjust, we feel that it was absolutely neces-
sary in order to put the case to the commercial classes when
asking them to agree to the continuance of the income tax
that we might carry out a revision of our financial system,
with the avowed purpose of relieving the land from an un-
due pressure —it was necessary, I say, that we should ac-
knowledge the existence of inequalities in the system of
assessment of the income tax. We never proposed the
difference of 4 and of per cent. as a financial arrange-
ment. We offered it only as the acknowledgment of a
principle. (Hear, hear.) The right honourable gentleman
the Chancellor of the Exchequer says that land is not
taxed more than any other property under the schedule,
in which land and all real property is included ; and the
right hon. gentleman further says, that when you take
into consideration the burdens on land you ought to in-
clude all the local taxation. Strong phrases these from
the Chancellor of the Exchequer ! (Hear, hear, and a
laugh.) Significant acknowledgments from that side of
the house, when I remember the five years during which I '
endeavoured to press upon the house an acknowledgment
that there were burdens peculiar to land. (Hear, hear.)
When I remember;that I was told, night after night, and
by no one more earnestly, more continuously, or more
consistently than by the members of the present Govern-
ment, that the idea of local taxation was a burden upon
land was a mere illusion, I say it is satisfactory to me to
have lived to find on acknowledgment of its being true in
the basis, to a certain degree, of the financial arrangement
before the committee. (heers.) The right hon. gentle-
man the Chancellor of the Exchequer says there is a dif-
ference of 2d. in the pound in the schedules between the
assessment of real property and the assessment of other
kinds of property. Well, sir, I will not stop to analyse
the data upon which the right hon. gentleman has ar-
rived at his conclusion, but he may be sure that he will
be reminded of this conclusion before these debates are
over. (Hear, hear.) But, sir, I say that it was not
as a complete financial arrangement, but as the ac-
knowledgment of a principle made in the spirit of con-
ciliation, that I made that difference in the schedules.
We have now the income tax at a particular rate of assess-
ment, but no certainty that that assessment shall not be
changed. We have a Government that professes to deal
more largely with the income tax than any other Govern-
ment in our experience, and deals with it for a period of
seven years. This is an age of great financial operations.
Suppose next year a Chancellor of the Exchequer proposes
to modify the rate of assessment—suppose that happens,
which happened half a century ago, when we are also
governed by " All the talents"—(laughter)—supposing the
Ministry come down to the house, and propose to extend
the income tax to 10 per cent., what answer would it be to
the artist, the artisan, the merchant, and the tradesman,
that the land was 2s. or 24d. in the pound more than they
were? If our arrangement had been established, they
would at least have felt that if at a future time the impost
assumed a severer and more burdensome character gene-
rally, they, at least, must find considerable relief in the
change in the assessment. And, sir, I still maintain that
in coming forward to ask the commercial classes to grant
us the income tax, in order that we might carry into effect
a complete revision of our taxation, the object of which
was to relieve land from an undue pressure of taxation,
according to our opinions, we were taking a prudent, a
wise, and a comprehensive course, which, carried out to its
full extent, was one which would not have been fruitless.
We were told by those who had a right to speak with au-
thority on such subjects that the plan we proposed would
not diminish the revenue, while it would most certainty
give satisfaction to the commercial classes. We believed
in the inequality of the assessment as respected the com-
mercial, trading, and professional classes, and we deemed
it our duty to endeavour to adjust the inequality, because
we were not asking them to grant the income tax for the
avowed purpose of relieving the undue pressure of taxation
on the land of the united kingdom. (Loud cheers.) Well,
sir, the right hon. gentleman opposits now proposes to
continue the tax, without any difference in the assessment,
for a further period of seven years. I may, perhaps, be
allowed briefly to state the reasons why I do not think
that at the end of seven years the incidence of the tax will
terminate. The first reason why lam incredulous is, be-
cause I see that the spirit of the times in which we live is
hostile to the abrogation of that tax. (Hear, hear.) I beg
the house to recollect the various aspects which the income
tax has assumed since it was first brought under our
notice by the late Sir Robert Peel. It was first brought
forward to supply a deficiency, and in order that it might
assist in the creation of a surplus out of which the indi-
rect taxation of the country might be dealt with. It
was continued again for the same purpose of creating a
surplus, which should allow you still further to deal with
the indirect taxes. Well, what is the case at the present
moment ? It is no longer proposed, in order to create a
surplus, to enable you to deal with the system of direct
taxation ; but you are so far advanced that you must grant
the income tax to support your revemie as at present
established ; and to provide for your neeNsa.ry expendi-
ture ' • and you ask us not only to grant the Income tax,
but to lay on other taxes to the amount of nearly
3,000,0001., for the purpose of dealing with the indirect
taxation—(loud cheers)—and, considering the circum-
stances which have occurred during the last 10 years, a
man must shut his eyes to all that passes around him, and
be incapable of perceiving the temper and the signs of the
times, the thoughts and habits of his fellow-men, if he can
suppose that the income tax, having so well fulfilled the
purposes for which it was established, will be abandoned—
he must be the most credulous of men if ho can believe
that we are standing still or retrograding. How can any
man suppose that the arguments which prevail with re-
spect to taxation will not be generally applied ? What ar-
gument in favour of remitting the tea duty does not apply
to the wine duty ? What argument is there that is
brought forward in favour of a remission of the Excise
duty on soap that does not equally apply to the Excise
duty on paper? (Hear.) Cheap sugar is one of the bless-
ings of the age. Why should you not have cheaper
sugar ? (Cheers.) We have had the article of tobacco
brought under our notice lately, and we have been re-
minded that English smugglers have always made large
fortunes so long as we retained the immense impost on
tobacco. (Hear.) Well, I have also a second reason why
I think the income tax will not terminate at the end of 7
years, and that second reason I find in the whole scope of
the financial policy of the right hon. gentleman—in all his
antecedents—in the whole of his conduct and career. If
the arguments of the right hon. gentleman upon this and
upon former occasions mean anything, they mean that we
should find the means of supplying the whole of the re-
venue raised from the Customs' duties in direct taxes.
That is the natural and inevitable consequence of the right
hon. gentleman's arguments. I am perfectly willing to
concede, that when the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Glad-
stone) held out the prospect, which he did the other night,
that at the end of 7 years the income tax would cease to
exist, he was speaking with perfect conscientiousness. I
have not the slightest doubt that the right hon. gentle-
man is sanguine in his hopes and anxious to effect a suc-
cessful arrangement, and I am ready to admit that, should
the year 1860 find him in the position of Chancellor of the
Exchequer but bring with it circumstances totally adverse
to his commercial policy, the right hon. gentleman
is so conscientious a man that it is quite likely he would
resign the office sooner than propose the continuance of
the tax for a further period. (Hear.) We shall see him,
as we did in the case of the Maynooth—(hear)—resign his
office and retire beneath the gangway, whence the right
hon. gentleman would again rise and recommend the re-
newel of the tax ; he would sacrifice himself to save his
country. (Cheers and laughter.) I have given at least
two reasons, one being the character and feeling of the age,
and the other the character of the right hon. gentleman,
by which I am induced to believe that the income tax will
become a permanent tax if we consent to its retention for
a period of 7 years. If that be so, it appears to me that
we have arrived at this dilemma :—if this is to be a per-
manent tax, we are authorised, with the inequalities, the
injustice, and the odious qualities that it possesses—
are we authorised to extend it to new classes and coun-
tries without any attempt being made to mitigate these
odious qualities and to adjust those inequalities? If
it be, as I believe it avowedly is, the basis of the
Government proposition that this is to be only a tem-
porary tax, for seven years, is it wise—is it politic, I
ask again, to introduce an impost so essentially unjust and
odious to new classes and new countries ? (Hear, hear.)
But that is the dilemma of the right hon. gentleman. My
opinion is, that our proper policy would be to renew it,
and for a very limited time, as was proposed by the late
Government, with as much of a mitigatory character as
we could contrive. That was the proposition of the
.leanl
Government, and it is the proposition of my hon. fri h
thong
the member for Hertfordshire (Sir B. Lytton), al
the adoption of that proposition of my hon. friend does not
bind any gentleman who may support it to the specific.l3
proposal of the late Government. lint if this is not !,
be mitigated, and if its inequalities and its injustice are to
bafflethe best thing to do
both Minister and Legislature,
is to apply your surplus and accruing income as you re-
ceive it to the reduction of an impost which no Minister
can manage and no people can long endure. (Cheers.) In
the whole of this question, in considering this important
arm of our national finance, which the right hon. gentle-
man the Chancellor of the
much power, but which I think ho described in 'a manner
that conveyed an erroneous impression to hon. members
who are not experienced in financial matters—in consider-
ing this tax, we should always endeavour, as accurately as
we can, to ascertain whether tho objects we are to gain b
its perpetuation are worth the cost. (Hear, hear.) The
tax upon soap is a bad tax, the tax upon paper is bas •
't
and, as we obtain a surplus, these taxes, I ad
early command the attention of the Minister of
But, when you are asked to make the income taxFinaance.
manent portion of our finance, you arc asked
per.
the taxes upon soap and tea are impolitic
, not whether
i
they are—but whether it is worth cor not—of course
yourself from the incidence of these Sour while to relieve
the income tax. You must follow the taxes by perpetuating
lin, and see whether the whistle is advice of Dr. Frank-
right hon. gentleman gave us a description its
price. The
tax and its great achievements. The ition of the income
West Riding (Mr. Cobden) said it hon. member for the
was somewhat declamatory, but thatwas declamatory. It
But it appeared to me to be, inaccurate, I do lot quarrel with.
an idea of the results of the or rather to convey
be pardoned if I advert. income tax, to which I may
I happy to say there are This is a new house, and lam
-401 a Y Yourg members in it, some of