The Sun.
London, England, 1853-06-11 00:00:00

NEWSPAPER STAMPS.

Mr. GIBeON wished to ask the right hon. gentleman
the Chancellor pf the Exchequer whether he could really
let the public knc, w what his intentions were with respect
a
to the advertiseme-ut duty and the stamp upon supple-
ments. Resolutiors h.. d been placed on the paper which
were still in the hands of hon. members, but it was
generally understood that they had been withdrawn, and
the public were naturally ain,:ious to have the new plan
before them, that it might be well considered previous to
its being submitted to Parliament. Leave had been
obtained to bring in a bill to define what a newspaper
was, in order to put an end to the vexatious litigation
which had existed on the subject, net less than six
months ago ; and repeated assurances Lad since been
given that the bill would be laid before the house. He
did not ask not ask the Government to carry that bill a
sta,,re at present, knowing the important business before
the house ; 'but he asked them, inasmuch as he knew it
was ready, to lay it on the table.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied,
that with regard to the question of the right honour-
able member respecting the resolutions on the adver-
tisement duty and the supplement duty, he hardly
knew whether the right honourable gentleman was cor-
rect in stating that it was generally understood they
had been withdrawn, but this he could say, that he
at least had given no authority whatever for such a
rumour. He had, indeed, intimated from the very first,
that they were open to reconsideration, and that the
Government would take ample time to inform them-
selres respecting them from all quarters, and to inquire
what were the views of those best informed on the sub-
ject. He quite concurred with the right hon. member,
that the time was come, for the convenience of all
parties, when he ought to acquaint the house with the
intentions of Government on the subject, and he might
say also that he proposed, even if the right hon. gen-
tleman had not put this question, to lay the definitive
resolutions in an amended form on the table next Mon-
day. With respect to the bill for the definition of what
was a newspaper, he must tabserve that, though the
right hon. member might be quite correct in stating that
six months had elapsed since leave had been given to
introduce it, he must do the Government the justice to
remember that it was not their measure, but that it
had been prepared by the law officers of the late
Government. The delay alluded to had arisen from
the fact that the bill in question had considerable re-
lation to the duty on advertiscunpnts, and that in the
present state of public business it was entirely
out of the power of the Governins.^nt to assign
any time for the discussion upon such a bill. He was
afraid that some days—perhaps one or two weeks—
might still elapse before the state of public business
would allow the Government to lay the bill upon the
table of the house, but he would take care that due
notice should be given with respect to it, and he did
not think a longer time would elapse before he was
enabled to put the right hon. gentleman and the house
in possession of the measure. (Hear.)
Mr. BRIGHT said, it had been understood that the
bill proposed by the late Government was one which
the present Ministry would be likely to introduce. If
i they did intend to introduce it it would be a great conve-
-1 nience to a large class of persons to lay that bill upon the
table of the house, so that something definite might be
known as to what was proposed. (Hear.)
The motion for the adjournment of the how was then
agreed to.

CUSTOM, &c., ACTS.
The resolutions on these acts were then brought UP
and agreed to.

SUCCESSION TAX BILL.

On the motion for the second reading of the hill,
Sir J. PAKINGTON said it had been his intention
to move that this bill be read a second time this day six
months ; but in the absence of the schedules it would
not be convenient to take the discussion on the prin-
ciple of the bill now. He should, therefore, reserve hio
opposition until the motion for going into committee.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Then they
could take the discussion on Monday. (Hear, hear.) The
schedules were printed ; but, to comply with the general
wish, he would circulate them at once as an amendment,
to the bill. Before going farther, however, he would dis-
charge a pledge he had given, and state at once, not at all
with a view to discussion, the intentions of the Govern-
ment with respect to taxing corporate property. The
Government had been, it was known, of opinion that in
proposing this extended succession duty on private pro-
perty it would not be just to leave exemptions on corporate
property, which enjoyed the privileges of protection under
the law. The question arose, in what way could a tax be
levied? Corporations never died, and if it had been pro-
posed to establish an equivalent system whereby corpora.
tions should be taxed every 25 or 30 years, there would
have been the difficulty of determining when these cycles
should begin. The proposal, therefore, was to effect a,
commutation whereby corporations should pay in a certain'
proportion annually. Then they had to consider in what
way the amount was to be framed. Should they go on
the assumption that the transmission ofrttheir r 6porti
line or as analagous to the transmission fr(Tinict:
o eithert her?
ofo thesen the
ewxthroecolme,estli.
was analogous to the transmission of pro
and the proposal
!eit co/
sshtroaunlgde rnsthey thought they
not take
they should make was that on
speaking generally, there should nit' corporation property,
annual tax of 6d. in the pound imately be levied an
equivalent to the succession duty,on the net revenue as
seven years from the present
time, but that for a period of
not be fair to make the tax inasmuch as it would
for the period of seven accrue at the first moment,
the tax would only b years from the sth of last April
but after the k .: at the rate of 3d. in the pound,
the rate of 6d. in th April, 1860, the tax would be at
e pound. Then, with regard to the
question of the v • arious descriptions of corporations and
how far the tax ought
how far
to apply to them universally,
any of them ought to be exempt, or how
far other bodies ought to be considered as corporations
for the purposes of the succession tax, it was quite obvious
that with regard to municipal corporations they would act
safely in adopting a rule correspondent with that which
had been adopted in the acts imposing the income tax,
namely, a rule which regarded as liable to the tax
the realised property of corporations, but which ex-
empted from tax such of the revenues of corporations as
were derived from rates and taxes laid on-the community.
As respected trading corporations, they did not, he thought
fall in purview of the plan, and for this plain reason, that
although they were corporations for the purpose of carry-
ing on business, yet the whole property invested in them
was divided into shares, and was therefore represented in
the investment of iudividtwa property, and the ihnatuleat

Sir J. WALSH wished it to be distinctly understood
that in acquiescing in the arrangement which had been
come to, it was on the distinct understanding that they
assented to the second reading of the bill, as it were pro
forma ; that they were not to be understood in any way
as assenting to the bill, but that they would come to the
discussion on Monday as completely free as if they had
come to it this-evening.
Mr. HUME asked whether it was intended that the
property of the country should be registered, in order
that Government might know when a change took place
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
was no doubt an important question, and one that ought
to be well discussed in the debates on this bill ; but when
a question was put to him on a former night, whether it
was intended that the Registration of Assurances Bill
should be pressed, in order that it might become the basis
of this measure, he answered in the negative, and ho had
now to repeat that Government did not think it necessary
that there should be any registration of property for the
purposes of this bill. Their belief was that the tax might
be collected without any general registration of property ;
anti, therefore, whatever course parties might think fit to
take with reference to the registration of assurances, it
would not be proposed in the bill before the house.
Mr. WALPOLE said in the bill before the house there
was blank left for the sum below which parties were to be
exempt from paying the succession tax. He asked
whether a similar provision would be made in refereace to
the property of the smaller charities.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER must con-
fess that the point of exemption, the minimum point at
which the tax was to be laid, had not occupied his atten-
tioh. It was a matter of detail, and he was not sure that
in the case of corporations any exemption would be right.
He would rather take time to answer.
Mr. HEADL AM asked whether any charge was to be
imposed on the property of the ecclesiastical commission.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
thought they fell under the description of the revenues of
corporations sole. These revenues were distributed by the
commissioners in aid of official provisions, and would not
be liable to the tax.
Mr. HUME asked whether in cases where the dissenters
had established funds for the payment of their ministers in
part, they would come under the same provisions, because
it would appear that these funds were for the payment of
services exactly in the same manner as the revenues of the
Church of England wore'
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied
that wherever there was an endowment for the purposes of
any religious community other than the Established
Church, which was assimilated by a legal provision to the
case of the corporation sole, the same benefit precisely
would be extended to that endowment, quite irrespective
of the question what was the religious denomination to
which it was attached. With regard to funds held by
trustees, he was afraid there would be difficulty in work-
ing it out, but they should attempt to come as nearly as
they conic! to the establishment of the principle he had
described, namely, that where the provision was bona fide
for the diecharge of certain official duties, there they would
be exempt.
Mr. HUME said in some cases fund were provided for
the purposes of education, the payment of schoolmasters
and others.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said there
was no general provision for exempting funds for the
purpose of education; he would explain 'why another
time.

EXCISE DUTIES OF SPIRITS BILL.
The house then went into committee on this bill.
On clause 1,
Captain JONES moved the rejection of so much of the
clause as imposes an addition of Sd. per gallon to the duty
now payable on spirits taken out of warehouse for consump-
tion in Ireland. He said that two gallons of spirits were
made out of a bushel oats, which at the present price
would cost is. 10d., and they proposed to put on the spirits
a tax of ss. 4d., which he thought would inevitably cause
a great increase in illicit distillation. On former occasions
when they had imposed higher duties on spirits in Ireland
there had not been a corresponding increase in revenue,
but when the duty had been lowered, the quantity on
which duty had been paid had considerably increased. In
1834 the duty was reduced from 3s. 6d. to 2s. 4d. a gallon,
and the consumption rose from 9 to 10, and 12 millions of
gallons in succeeding years. The increase of duty had in-
variably been followed by a corresponding increase of
crime. In 1830 the duty was raised to 2s. 10d. per gallon,
but they had no exact statistics of crime in that year. In
1834, however, when the duty was augmented to 3s. 4d.,
there were no fewer than 5,434 persons accused of offences
against the revenue laws, and there were 648 in prison. In
1834 the duty was diminished to 2s. 4d., and the number
of persons charged fell at once from 8,192 to 4,904, and
the number of persons in gaol from 1,296 to 842. The
duty remained at 2s. 4d. for a considerable period, and the
number of persons charged gradually fell until in 1842
there were only 881, and 171 in gaol. (Hear, hear.) In
that year Sir R. Peel increased the duties once more, and
the number of persons charged instantly rose to 1,895, and
the persons in gaol to 911. The number charged had risen
as high as 3,400; and even last year the number was
2,904, and the number in gaol 557. From the statistics of
the years of low duty, he had a right to assume that the
consumption of spirits in Ireland was as much as 11 million
gallons a year. But the quantity brought to charge was
now only 8 millions odd gallons, and therefore he might
fairly conclude that the remainder was the product of
illicit distillation. (Hear, hear.) He would admit that it
was quite legitimate to raise as large a revenue from spirits
as possible but the fact was that the greatest sums had
accrued to the exchequer while the low duties were in
(21._ricreii -UP to 1834 the average annual receipts from all the
tL_ sue.: rsurned in Ireland was about 1,400,0001. • but in
spirlitsathan 1,434,5731. was raised from the home-
only going
to
rnone.t (Hear, hear.) The Government were
and the
same
results
the experiment of Sir R. Peel in 1842 ;
tillation increased
ts woulif follow, namely, that illicit dis-
obliged to abandon
.1111,seuch an extent, that Sir R. Peel was
The Chancellor of the F.extila duty before the end of a year.
arrangements were such xtehaet"el: might say that the police
b ilulticsitirdnisotbilelrattiponeersaaidlatrghee
scale would be impossblo ;
same thing, and yet the result b.
lowed. On these grounds he (thee had mentioned had fol-
to propose his amendment. gallant member) begged
Mr. J. 31`GREGOR, on the other hand, should have
supported the proposition of Governmenteven if it
anti
been to increase the doty 2s. per in Scotland, nd
ss. in Ireland. It surely could. not be for the advantage of
the public morals that spirits should be had at so low a
price, either in Ireland or any other country ' • and ho
ridiculed the idea that the proposed increase would lead to
any serious increase in illicit distillation.
Mr. 11. J. BAILLIE thought the hoidn.agtteenntlteimon to theanwho
had just sat down could hardly have pa
statistics of the case, or he would have..lzo.ntht,_the ireci
ogition of a duty of ply Odt per NA 14044 41141

of individual property was liable to the succession tax.
Then they came to a large class of miscellaneous corpora-
tions, charitable or eleemosynary, academical and ecclesi-
astical corporations aggregate. These would all be dealt
with in the same manner, that was to say, under the rule
he had already described. They would be subject to the
tax of 3d. in the pound on their realised revenues for seven
years, and of 6d. in the pound thereafter. He thought he
had now named, although briefly, all the important classes
of corporations aggregate, with the exception of one, which
was not very important in a fiscal point of view, but which
interested the feelings of so many persons, that perhaps he
had better refer to them. He referred to the case of reli-
gious corporations strictly so called, namely, religions and
benevolent societies which were supported in the main by
annual subscriptions or donations. With regard to these
it was not proposed that they should be subject to the tax
at all, except in reference to such portions of their property
as they might have derived from bequests or as they might
have been in possession of anterior to the commencement
of the present century, because ho thought that nothing
could be more antagonistic to sound policy, and he was
sure nothing could be more repugnant to the feelings of the
house and the country, than to lay on the donations
and contributions of living persons which really, repre-
sented the principle of charity in its full and fsreeeemaecd-
tion, anything in the nature of a
to him just to draw a distinction between that which was
given by men as an act of self-denial out of their own
means, which they would otherwise enjoy, and that of
which they were permanently the givers by law which was
not in fact a gift at all, but was so much taken from their
heirs. He had now done with corporations aggregate, but
a most important question, and one of considerable diffi-
culty arose in consequence of a principle of our law by
which persons under the denomination of corporations sole
held property. These corporations sole he believed con-
sisted generally, for though there were exceptions, they
were of an insignificant character, of the clergy of the
country, bishops, and the incumbents of parishes. The
question arose, ought the property possessed by these cor-
porations sole to be regarded as corporation property, and
on that account made liable to the tax, or it ought to be
regarded as a provision made for the discharge of certain
official duties. These two views of the corporate character
and of the official character, met at this particular point,
and the whole question turned on this, would they hold
that they were corporations according to law and say, be-
cause they were corporations they were subject to the tax,
or would they, on the other hand, say the revenues were
merely payments for official duties, and that, therefore, a
clergyman on accession to his rectory should no more be
charged with the tax than a judge on his entrance into
Westminster Hall was charged ? The view of the Govern-
ment was that the property of ecclesiastical officers,
though they were in law corporations sole, ought to be
regarded as a provision for the discharge of certain
duties, and that, therefore, the acquisitions of these
offices ought not to be taxed as a succession. But
there was another and a good reason, and one he was
afraid rather in the nature of a grievance, for arriving
at this conclusion, and that was the present provision
of the law, which entailed a heavy expense on the ac-
quisition of these offices. Whether on that ground or
on the other ground, he had very little doubt the house
would be of opinion that this large portion of ecclesiastical
property, which was vested in clergymen as corporations
sole, ought not to be regarded as corporation property,
and ought not to be subject to a tax on successions any
more than they would tax the succession to the office of
Lord Chancellor, or of any of the judges. There was only
one other point he had to name. There were certain other
classes of men, who, although not corporations in the
view of the law, yet they should view as corporations for
the purposes of this act, namely, bodies of trustees, under
whatever name, who were actual holders and adminis-
trators of property for the use of individuals through
whose hands property was continually transmitted without
any charge on death. The bill would be so framed that
bodies cf that kind would be regarded as being virtually
corporations, and property in their bands would be treated
as if it were the property of corporations. He did not
know that he need detain the committee any further. It
would be obviously more convenient that the details should
be reserved ; but, as respected the principle, it was mate-
rial that the house should know what was the plan of the
government as regarded corporations, and therefore he had
thought it right to offer this explanation.
Sir F. KELLY asked whether the bill with regard to
corporations would forts part of the bill before the house,
or would be treated in a separate bill, whether the corpo-
rations to be liable to the tax included municipal corpora.
tions, and whether the measure would affect the property
of the corporation of the city of London ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
bill would not make any distinction between the corpora-
tion of the city of London and other municipal corporations.
He thought he had stated that municipal corporations
would be brought under the action of this plan in the
same manner as under the income tax—that was, they
would be liable to pay the tax on their realised property,
but not on the revenue which they derived from the rates.
With regard to the other question, the view of the govern-
ment wag, that it would be decidedly more convenient
that they should deal with this subject in a separate bill,
because the wholo of the present bill was founded on the
idea of succession as the consequence of death. He hoped
to be in a condition to lay the bill on the table of the
house in a few days.
Mr. MALINS suggested that it would have been a
more simple plan to have made the property tax 5, per
cent. instead of 3.