The Sun.
London, England, 1854-05-20 00:00:00

' the Government did not think fit to take any steps to re-
lieve the trade from that hardship, the committee by assent-
ing to the resolution, would not be precluded from agitat-
ing the question again
Mr. MOFFATT thought that as very large contracts were
pendingputan end to th
the decisione o fthe
uncertainty.
question, itH He
otihiledrebfoerfe ,r
trustedbetter
to
that the hon. gentleman would not oppose the alteration
in the date to the sth of July.
Mr. MILES hoped the Secretary to the Treasury would
not give way to the pressure by which it was attempted to
induce him to alter the date fixed by the Government,
namely, the 16th of August.
Mr. H. BAILLIE made a similar remark.
Mr. DIGBY SEYMOUR argued against the injustice
of altering by an ex post facto determination the announce-
ment on the faith of which the trade had acted to a con-
siderable extent.
Mr. GOULBURN thought a question of principle was
involved in this question. If a Chancellor of the Exche-
quer came down to the house and made a statement upon
which it was perfectly impossible that he could have con-
sulted with the parties interested, it would not be right
to oblige him to adhere strictly to the terms of that state-
ment. It was obvious that he might afterwards see the
parties, and have beneficial alterations sulgested to him
before he proposed the formal resolutions. As for the
trade, they ought not to have speculated upon the Chau-
. cel
b:loeesn proposed.tatemn (Hear,t,buthavewhaeaitr.)ed until those resolutions
had
Mr. WILSON, having thanked the right hon. gentle-
man for the constitutional reasons he had given, sail that
his defence was not in the present case required. It was
a mistake to suppose that the Ch •ncellor of the Exchequer
had made the statement which had been attributed to him:
for the right hon. gentleman had in his hand, whea he
I made his financial statement, the very resolutions which
he (Mr. Wilson) had proposed, and taose resolutions would
have been proposed at the time but for the objection raised.
by Mr. T. Baring. (Hear.) 'I he Government would cer-
tainly not con ider its If precluded by the passing of he
resolution from rec )osidering the question.
Mr. J. L. RICARDO was surprised to hea- the statement
that the resolution was in the hands of the Chancellor of
the Exchequer the other night. Certainly the Chancellor
of the Exchequer had mentioned no distinction bets'', en
the time at which the two rates of duty would operate, and
it seemed difficult to account for his omission to do so. He
was surprised to hear Mr. Goulburn arguing that mer-
chants ought not to have speculated on the statement
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer : for during the long
period which Mr. Goulburn had himself held the office he
had never made a statement which he did not fairly and
honestly carry out. (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Ricardo)
thought the trade had been very unfairly treated
Mr. DIGBY SEYMOUR also contended that the faith
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been pledged to
alter both the duties simultaneously on the sth of July.
Mr. ARCHIBALD HASTIE considered that they'must
be very inexperienced and premature men who could have
speculated on the budget of a Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer. (Laughter.) It seldom happened that the finan-
cial statement was correct in every particular, and he cer•
tainly should have thought that the merchants of this
country were men of too much sound sense to have specu-
lated so hastily. . .
Sir C. WOOD thought the course proposed to be adopted
by the government was fair, and he made this remark be-
cause he felt that he had himself acted with a little in-
justice to the sugar refiners some years ago. If the effect of
altering both duties on the same day had been represented
to him before the passing of the alt of 1818 be should, have
been disposed to have made a difference of about 6 weeks ;
but, after the act hail been passed, he did not think it
wcrth while to re-open the question.
Mr. CAIRNS deprecated the discussion of the sal ject
on the merits, upon the present occasion. If the government
did not accede to the wishes of the merchants the question
might be debated on another occasion.
Mr. MOFFATT should have been glad to have left the
matter In the way in which Mr. Cairns had stated it ; but
if he was to understand from the observations of the right
hon. baronet, that the government were not open to con- •
viction, he should divide the committee. Sir C. Wood had
said nothing contrary to what had been stated by Mr.
Wilson, but as reasons had been given for altering the
day, he was anxiuos that it should not be supposed there
were no reasons on the other side.
Mr. T. A. MITCHELL contended that the trade were
perfectly justified in acting upon the statement, of he
Chancellor o. the Exchequer, and that another course
ought not now to be adopted by the hon. gentleman.
Lord J. RUSSELL reiterated the pledge that the Go-
vernment would reconsider the question, and
The resolution was then agreed to.
The third resolution was also passed.
THE INCOME TAX RESOLUTION.

Mr. WILSON moved that, towards raising the supply
granted to her Majesty, there shall be charged and raised
yearly, from and after the sth day of April, 1854, in lieu
of the rates and duties chargeable under the act 16 and 17
Vie., c. 34, and of rates and duties granted in the present
session of Parliament, for and in respect of all property,
profit, and gains, chargeable under the said act, the duty
of one shilling and twopence for every twen,y shillings of
the annual value or amount of all such property, profits,
and gains reap ctively.
Lord J. RUSSELL suggested to Mr. Williams to post-
pone the amendment of whim.: he had given notice.
Mr. WILLIAMS declined, unless another opportunity
to bring it forward were to be given him.
Lord J. RUSSELL explained that .he wished the post-
ponement to be until another session.
Mr. WILLIAMS, however, proceeded to explain his
amendment, which was a resolution to the effect that,
before the country should be subjected to additional taxa-
tion, real property should be made to pay the same pro-
bate duty as is now payable on personal property, and
that corporate, collegiate, and' ecclesiastical property should
pay a duty equivalent in amount to the probate and legacy
duties levied on other kinds of property. He did not wish
to put any obstacle in the way of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, but to make the rich pay what was at present
borne only by the poorer classes, and he declared that
common honesty demanded the alteration. He entered at
some length into the alleged inequality and injustice of
the present system, and he concluded by 'moving his
amendment.
The amendment having been seconded,
Mr. WILSON admitted the great importance of the sub-
ject, but at the same time he did not intend to follow the

hon. member through all the arguments and facts that he
had brought forward. Neither did he dispute the justice
of his propositions, but he asked the hon. member just to
consider for a moment what would be the practical effect
of his amendment. The committee were asked to in:rease
the income tax for the purposes of the war, and the hon.

member seemed to thiiik this a fitting opportunity for
Parliament to settle the nice and knotty questions arising
between real and personal property. If the hon. member
would undertake to suspend the war while they were con-
sidering those questions, the amendment might be a rea-
sonable one, but as the war could not be suspended, and
money must be had without delay for carrying it on, the
proposal of the hon. member was most inopportune.:
(Hear, hear.) He would not go i, to the argument of
whether or no a distinction should be made between real
and personal property; but he must remind the hon. mem-

. . •, ,
ber that the probate duty was nothing more than a stamp
duty, while real property was subjected to certaiu stamp
duties from which personal property was altogether ex-
empt. (Hear.) With regard to the application of the sue-
cession duty to corporate property, he had the satisfaction
of being able to tell the hon. member that a bill was in
course of preparation, for the purpose of accomplishing
that object; and without pledging .the Government to
pass it this session, be thought he might go the length of
saying that should no unforeseen ciifficulty arise to pre-
vent it, the bill would be shortly laid before Parliament.
(Hear, hear.) Under these circumstances, he hoped the
hon. member would not think it necessary to persevere
with his motion. (Hear, hear.)
Sir S.'WALMSLEY would not pretend to say whether
this was an opportune or inopportune moment for bringing
forward this question, but he was satisfied his hon. friend
the member for Lambeth had made out a strong case for
the consideration of the house. (Hear, hear.) He was
pleased with the observation which had just fallen from
the Secretary of the Treasury, in which the hon. gentle.
man admitted all that had been said about,the injustice
and inequality of this tax, and he did hope that ere long
the Government would feel the necessity for bringing in a
bill placing real property upon the same footing as per-
sonal property. (Hear, hear.)
Captain SCOBELL remarked that the injustice of the
tax was admitted, and now was the time to r enedy the
evil when we were raising taxes to carry on a war. If the
war lasted, of which there appeared to be every prospect,
the minister must come again soon for more taxes, and no
more fitting opportunity could be afforded than that for
remedying those inequalities in our fiscal system. (Hear,
hear.) But at all events the ecclesiastics should not object
to pay this tax, because, with the exception of the Quakers,
they were the only class who claimed exemption from going
forth to tight the battles of the country. (Laughter.)
Mr. W. A. WILKINSON hoped his hon. colleague
would withdraw the amendment after the statement of
the Secretary to the Treasury.
Mr. HADFIELD declared that these distinctions made
between one class of property and another were injurious
and inconvenient to the parties who possessed property,
They tended to great vexation in various ways, and led to
interminable confusion of all sorts.

Mr. HENLEY agreed with the hon. member who had
just sat down that all property ought to be taxed alike;
but when they took inso consideration the land tax, the
stamp ,inties, and the various other imposts that real pro-
perty was liable to, he thought the land would not come
badly out of the account.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS then replied, and reminded the
Secretary to the Treasury that personal property was just
as much liable to the stamp duties as real property.
Thinking it more likely that the principle of his amend-
ment would be carried into effect by. leaving it in the

hands of the Chancellor of the Excheguer, he would consent
to its being negatived.
The amendment was then put and negatived. '
Mr. CROSSLEY remarked on the unanimity with
which the votes had been passed in committee of- supply
for the expense of the war, and said he was surprised to
find, when they got into committee of ways and means,
that objections were made to the malt tax and the income
tax. When the proposAl for a loan was brought forward,
he should oppose it by all the means in his power. It was
certainly not a time to borrow money, when the Bank
rate cf discount was N per cent.—three times what it
was a short time ago. (Hear hear.) It would be better to
create terminable annuities, at a period when the rate of
interest was lo s. Of the existingNlebt, 250,000,0001. had
been contracted without the Government receiving a
farthing of the money. If he could get 5 per cent. for
5:000/. in perpetuity, he would undertake, in 252 years,
with compound interest, to pay off the national debt. In
reference to the income tax, it should be remembered that
woftibleelxeaders and professional men were taxed on their
enwholerel income, farmers were only taxed on one half. He
approvede of the selection made by the Chancellor
quer, of subjects of taxation.
The re
solution was then agreed to, as was the following
good the supply granted tfo .—he; 11Mhaa
one, moved by Mr. WILSON •
Majesty, the
making
8,000,0001. be
ft e:10
Greatu t
Britaino
ao consolidated 11;1 ae
Ireland."
fund.h sour theof
United Kingdoraon
The house then resumed.

Mr. WILSON moved rat ACTS.
Mr. should go into
committee on the Stamp Acts.
pmrorp.ovalue,reic.:,Mcommitt
nr. answerWlLSONto a questionsaid
that
f rhoem
move resolutions preliminary to a bill being intro(' committee,
to
establishing an ad valorem, stamp duty on Bills of Exchange.
The proper time to discuss the principle of the measir.
would be on the second reading. By assenting to the reso.
lotions now, the hon. member would not be precluded
fromto them at any subsequent stage. -
objecting R OWN urged the poltponement of the resolu-
tiolkir. W
nsuntil a deputation of merchants, who had considered
the question, bad had an opportunity of laying their views
before the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Mr. MITCHELL subpitted that there was no necessity
for protteditglfith the -relfOlutions immediately, le they