The Sun.
London, England, 1836-03-25 00:00:00

TAXATION.

Mr. ROBINSON rose to bring forward his motion re-
lative to the present system of taxation. In submitting
this motion to the House, lie should, as the most convenient
course, read each resolution in succession, and offer upon
each the observations which occurred to him in support of
it. tie meant to take the sense of the House upon the
first resolution. It was to this effect—that the existing
taxes, .having been imposed at different times, and under
circumstances quite different to the present, a review of
the whole system was desirable. He believed it. would be
difficult to find any one who would deny the proposition.
In 1830 the subject was brought forward by the President of
tee Board of Trade. The opinions then expressed by him
were the same as he (Mr. Robinson) now advanced. Upon
the division which took place on that occasion 380
Members voted, independently of all party considera-
tion. (hear, hear.) Of these 157 supported the mo-
tion, and 243 voted against it. The majority, therefore,
was only 66. This he might consider as being virtually
an opinion expressed by the House against the present
system of taxation. The Right Hon-. Gentleman the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer might, perhaps, say that lie was
now employed in trying how far the system might be im-
proved ; and he was bound to admit that many improve-
ments had been made, The Right Hon. Gentleman would
naturally say, "-I cannot reduce taxes until such time as I
have a surplus." When he (Mr. Robinson) brought for-
waird• the subject before, the President of the Board of
Trade said it was not the actual amount of the revenue, or
the extent of taxation, that was so much to be complained
of, as the manner in which the taxes were laid on, so as to
check the industry of the country and to press upon the
labouring classes. They had heard much about reform in
various branches of the public service. He (Mr. Robinson)
maintained that in nothing was reform more required than
in this department of the revenue. The revenue of the
country was improving every year, their resources were
extending, and hopes of relief were held out. The mo-
ment, however, that the Government became possessed
of a surplus, they found it impossible to apply that sur-
plus to the best purpose for the general interests of the
country. They were not left to their own judgment.—
(Hear, hear.) They were forced onwards by the pressure
from without.—(Hear.) Lord Althorp, when Chancellor
of the Exchequer, admitted that he gave up the window tax,
at least the part of it which was remitted, in consequence
of this pressure. He did not mean to say that it was to
this sort of pressure the Chancellor of the Exchequer
yielded lately, when he brought forward his proposition
relative to the stamp duty on newspapers. He should not,
however, be at all surprised to find him again coming down
to the House and yielding up the whole of that duty. His
present proposal, for reviewing the system of taxation
imposed during a war, and under circumstances quite
different from the present, involved neither a property nor
any new tax whatever, and, therefore, he saw no reason
why the House should refuse to concur in it. His second
resolution was this, that taxes levied on articles of neces-
sary consumption, which increased the burdens of the
people, and added to those burdens they had otherwise to
sustain, were impolitic. It might be said that the people
were not aware of burdens of this kind ; that, being im-
posed upon articles of consumption, they were thus ren-
dered light, and, not being felt, were paid without repining.
That this indirect mode of raising a tax was an easy one he
would admit. For instance,the tax upon soap, beer, sugar,
tea, and other such taxes ; but they did not, on that ac-
count, press the less heavily in the end. It was calcu-
lated that not a less sum than 11/. 7s. 6d. was drawn by
these indirect taxes out of the labourers' 221. or 23/. a
year. He fully admitted that a large portion of these
taxes must necessarily be levied on the great mass of
the people. What he now complained of was that they
paid much too large a proportion. Suppose a man to possess
10,000/. a year, and that he spends only 500/. a year :
he is taxed only to the amount of that 500/., though the
whole of his property be under the protection of the State.
Se may let the rest safely accumulate, and if he be an ab-
sentee the whole of his property is protected at the ex-
pense of the people, he himself not contributing a single
farthing towards the expenses of the State. He did not
mean to deny that since the peace taxes to the amount of
thirty-two millions had been repealed, of which twenty-
eight millions affected the landed interest. He would ad-
mit also that during the last four years Parliament, in deal-
ing with taxes, had been proceeding upon a more just prin-
ciple by repealing taxes which affected the labouring and
industrious classes, such as the tax on calico, on soap, and
other articles, but they ought to look to the pressure from
other sources. The 'Chancellor of the Exchequer must

himself see clearly how necessary it was to get rid of the
odious excise laws. A tax upon articles of necessary con-
sumption was far more injurious than a property tax. The
third resolution he sbould propose referred to the excise
laws, and was declaratory of the injustice and the impolicy
of those laws. He would mention a few of the most ob-
noxious. The duty on paper was one. It should not be
allowed to exist an hour beyond the demands of an absolute
necessity. The Chancellor of the Exchequer might say that
to repeal this or any other duty he must have a surplus.
This he admitted, and he was prepared to wait till there was
some prospect of a surplus. The duty on glass was equally
liable to objection. Nothing could be more impolitic. The
.duty on bricks was another instance of the same kind. The
Commissioners in their report stated that fifty years back
Mr. Pitt said the duty on bricks pressed so unequally it
should not be allowed to continue in existence a moment
longer, and yet it was retained up to the present time.
The next resolution had reference to the aggravation of
inequality and injury occasioned by there being a rated duty
on articles of the customs instead of an ad valorem duty.
He (Mr. Robinson) thought that it was most unfair to
add to the necessary inequality caused by the present ope-
ration of these duties by the additional burthen of a rated
duty which caused articles differing widely in value to be
charged with the same tax. The operation of this rated
duty was most unfair. In sugar, for instance, the article
priced at 30s. per cwt. and that valued at 60s. bore
the same proportion of duty, so that no distinction was
made between inferior sugars and the finest. The same
thing was the case in teas, in coffee, in tobacco, and
in wines. In the alteration made in the tea duties the
promoters of that alteration had, in his opinion, gone from a
bad principle to a worse. It was too much the practice to
reduce or augment taxes not upon grounds of advantage
to the community generally to be derived from the alte-
ration, but in obedience to pressure from without. In the
case of the house duty this had been done. The fifth
resolution which he should submit to the House had re-
ference to the stamp duties ; and on this subject his obser-
vations had materially been forestalled by What had fallen
from the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, on a former
evening. He was in the recollection of a debate which
occurred on a former occasion, when the late Mr. Cobbett
brought forward a motion almost precisely similar to that
brought forward the other evening by the Right Hon.
Gentleman : and he also bore in mind the language used
by the Right Hon. Gentleman_ in answering him, and in

opposing his motion. He (Mr. Robinson) could not but
say that he was surprised at the manner in which the Right
Hon. Gentleman, in the present session, came forward and
proposed the very measure which he had formerly opposed,
at least, if he could be surprised at any thing which took
place ih that House.—( Hear, hear.) With respect to the
stamp duties, he would only say that no alteration would
satisfy him that did not include a provision to affix the
same proportion of probate, legacy, or administration duty
on all real property devised by will or inherited as
should be fixed upon personal property under the same
circumstances. He knew of cases where legacies had
been left, where no less than three or four years' income
had been absorbed in order to pay the estimated legacy
duty, the legatees being of course deprived of the benefits
of the bequest during that period. The sixth resolution
referred to the expense of collecting the revenue. It ap-
peared that the amount of charge for collecting the revenue
was no less than 3,582,635/., besides an additional pay-
ment of 738,7791., making in all 4,321,4141.—m0re than
the whole revenue of the United States Government, and
within a million and a half of the revenue of this country
in the reign of George 111. The seventh resolution had
reference to the state of the currency. The effect of the
alteration of the standard of value had been nominally to
raise the value of money, and if an argument for a reduc-
tion of taxation were wanted one could be drawn from the
result of the alteration of the standard of value. He
found that in ISI2, when the taxation amounted to seventy-
one millions, that amount of money was represented by
seventeen millions of quarters of wheat and fifty-one
millions of various sorts of merchandize. But now, when
the taxation amounted to 48,000,0001., it was represented

by twenty-four millions of quarters of wheat, and ninety-two
millions of various sorts of merchandize—showing that there
had been an increase in the proportion of seven millions
as regarded the agricultural interest, and of forty-one
millions, as regarded the manufacturing interest. These
were the resolutions which he should place upon record,
and it now became unnecessary for him to add more than a
very few observations to those which be had already 'offered
to the House. A main feature in any remodelling of the
system of taxation must be the imposition of a 'property tax.
He held a property tax to be as just as it was necessary ; for,
if the State pledged itself (as it did) to the preservation of
property, surely the holders of property were bound to pay
their fair proportion of taxation. Such a tax as that which
he now proposed had been designated as a confiscation of pro-
perty ; but it appeared to him that the present system of
taxation was a confiscation—a confiscation of the worst
kind. The great objection to a property tax was, the reluct-
ance which the rich showed to putting their hands in their
own pockets. It might be said that it had virtually been
tried, and had failed ; but what was the fact ? Why,
that when it was done away with the feeling of the public
was by no means universal against it ; that a compara-
tively small proportion of the towns and counties in the
kingdom were opposed to it, and that the majority which
carried the abolition in the House was one of 39 only
out of 480 Members.—(Hear.) The principles he had
advocated were by no means new to Hon. Gentlemen
opposite. They had been supported by them when out of
office, for those Hon. Gentlemen had virtually supported a
motion similar in principle to the resolutions he now pro-
posed. In 1828 the Right Hon. President of the Board of
Trade, and Mr. Huskisson, for whose integrity and sound-
ness of principle no man had a greater respect than be (Mr.
Robinson) had. had both expressed themselves favourable
to a direct tax on property—a declaration in which the
Right Hon. Gentleman opposite joined. He should take
the sense of the House in the first resolution, and allow
the others to be taken seriatim, his object being to place
on record his sentiments upon this question, and thus to
give the House the means of addressing itself to this impor-
tant question, should it think proper. The Hon. Member
then placed his resolutions in the hands of the Speaker, by
whom they were put.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said,
the Hon. Member had left it to be inferred that the whole
of the present public income was raised through the me-
dium of taxes imposed during war, from which would natu-

rally follow the supposition that the public were being called
upon to vote war taxes to support a peace establishment.
But this fallacy excluded the fact that, while many of the
war taxes bad been repealed, a great portion of the ex-
penses of the war had been defrayed by debts con-
tracted during its continuance; the interest of which
debts was now paid out of the taxes levied. To the
present peace expenditure, therefore must be added the
amount of interest paid on the debts thus contracted,
when the national existence was threatened, and when
it became necessary to defend the liberties of the
country. Since the war, every attempt had been made
to reduce the national expenditure. Almost every budget
of late years had contained a proposition to reduce some
portion of it ; and the question now was, whether it was
better to continue that course, and to apply the residue in
the best manner possible for the relief of the country, or
at once to act upon the conclusion that the whole system
of taxation required revision. That was the real question
raised by the motion of the Hon. Gentleman. Now he
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had on a former occa-
sion objected to the views of the Hon. Gentleman when
he moved for a Committee, as he still more did to the pro-
position
he now made, although the Hon. Gentleman
seemed to think that the Government were bound to sup-
port his motion and accede to his views, because his Right
Hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade and
himself had in 1830 supported a proposition for an in-
quiry into the taxation of the country. The argument of
the Hon. Gentleman might have been a very good one had
the circumstances continued the same ; but they were now
very different. The Hon. Gentleman, in referring to
the speech of the Right Honourable President of the
Board of Trade, had taken great pains to refer to the
general proposition there laid down, but had alto-
gether excluded from his enumeration the practical
recommendations contained in that speech, and on
which the Right Honourable Gentleman's argument pro-
ceeded. The recommendations of his (the Chancellor of
the Exchequer's) Right Hon. Friend in March 1830, were
that there should be a reduction in the following articles,
as the first class :—Hemp, barilla, coals, glass, paper, and
printed cottons. Now on every one of these distinct arti-
cles of taxation a reduction had already been carried into
effect.—(Hear.) The second class of articles to which the
Right Hon. Gentleman then proposed reductions com-
prised the following :—Soap, sugar, French wines, marine
policies, fire insurances, newspapers, and advertisements.
Now in all these articles, with the exception of newspapers,
reductions had since been effected, and, as regarded news-
papers, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer had already
intimated his intention of laying a proposition before the
House. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) remem-
bered that the Hon. Member opposed the principles laid
down by the Right Hon. President of the Board of Trade
on the occasion referred to ; yet he now came down and
supported the arguments which he then opposed, and which
an alteration of circumstances now rendered no longer
available. If it was to be said that they had not gone to
the full extent of their former professions, he would say,
let them be allowed to go on—to mature and follow out
their plans ; and it would be found that they would em-
ploy every surplus they could possibly produce in the
reduction of taxation and the reliefofthepeople.
This was the system proposed by the Government ; but
it seemed it did not suit the Honourable Member.
The Honourable Member was for a total disturbing of the

system of taxation—a measure not rashly to be resorted to,
because prejudicial to the internal prosperity of then on
try. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) hopet.l,
the Hon. Member, and those who might be preparedbtaot
vote with him, had read a paper which had been onrt e ,
during_ a given number of •years. From this paper it ape-
day circulated, showing the amount of taxation retnitt n
peared that the gross amount of taxation remitted since thit
beginning of 1831 had been 8,092,0001. less a small amour
(600,0001.) which had been imposed. Was any Hon.
Gentleman prepared to say that any disturbing of the sys-
tem of taxation could lead to better results than this 1----
(Hear, hear.) He should state in passing that he Me',
tioned the period from 1831, because it was since then thlat
the relief to which he alluded had been afforded ; but ie,
was bound also say, that they had done no more than haul.
been done by former Governments. It was only the Ye,a._
before Lord Grey's Government came into office that lu,
Hon. Friend the Member for the University of Cambridge,
who then held the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer,'
effected a reduciiou of taxation to the extent of 3,000,0
The Hon. Gentleman contended that the articles chiefly
taxed were those which might be considered necessaries of
life.—( Hear, hear.) Had the Honourable Gentleman_
been in the House the other night, he would have learne
that the tax on spirits was not regarded as a tax on a:
articles of necessary consumption. Neither could the ta .
on malt be so considered ; but for argument sake he would,
admit malt to be a necessary of life. Tobacco, silk, licenses,
post office, stamp duties, timber duties,
articles of necessary consumption. The total amount ,
those taxes was 31,000,000/. sterling per annum, and cleans
it could not be thought, he said, that these were and
which affected only the industrious classes. With respect
to the bonded system, the Hon. Gentleman was also la-
bouring under an error. That system had been so arrange:
indeee__
as that the duty was not required in advance, nor,
until the article was actually about to be brought into gen,u:
80. &c., were nor
ral consumption. The third resolution proceeded to the
question of the Excise Laws. No one could deny that the
Excise Laws required revision ; but had not the overn'
they
ment taken steps for effecting that purpose ? Had
ar'
not appointed a Commission, with a view of giving clethe
ness and certainty to those laws ? The first Report of its
Commissioners recommended the abolition of wine Per;d
and surveys, and that recommendation had been earrLt
into effect. The Commissioners had also recommended tnovila
the establishment of the Board of Excise she in
be reduced.--(Hear.) A reduction had taken place. „..
that establishment, as the Government acted in antielyt7t
tion of the recommendation of the Commissioners; li
.„
until the final Report had been received it would be inI,P,,TO
Bible to say how far other reductions could be carried. -I_.".
T.:gee:. tefs611:111: co°
fourth resolution applied to the question of the Customs '
was
but no man could read it without supposing that there
Gentleman ought to know was not the case,
one uniform duty applicable to each class. This the Ho a
because 0
as
great mass of articles the duties varied ; some Pa);:ieteat
ad valorem duty, while others were rated in a ""-- at
manner. As a general proposition, therefore, the staternde it
contained in this resolution was contrary to the filet' a,..n wa
was literally good for nothing, unless.• it could be scow,
that an ad valorem duty was applicable in all cases. duty
the Hon. Gentleman must know that an ad valorem
could not be rendered applicable to wine, for instance.-7
distinctive rate of dat3t
(Hear, hear.) They had made a
with respect to three classes of the article of tea, buti`:ltli:t
had been the result of that experiment ? Why' bath
turned out a complete failure, and that they bad beer' would
ni aid
to retrace their steps. Perhaps the Hon. Gentleman sy-
n.. ROBINSON—N lonly doubt that
doubt the failure of that experiment it
ryas ever
o ;
tried. nu' it
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHE-'&- ;t-
If the Honourable Gentleman had the slightest acnna'ac,..
a.nce with the tea trade he must have known that the eye
riment had been tried--that it had not only been tried
'O-1.)
of the Sonta.mGpendtulteimesa,nbuh
hconvicted,H after a trial of two years.—(Hear, and a laetiloo
Hon. Gentleman had misrepresented,
him (the Chancellor of the
ta d h
ip l
vs sheadt llil e h a t
nal yoi
dt .
be
o' f r c t
hadol i .
Exchequer) quite jus .e
"vg inten-
tionally, what had fallen from him on the occasion o v,,
motion brought forward by the late Mr. Cobbett in 18 l-
on the subject of the Stamp laws' •r• i 1 Chance
...ut as he kt le that
for the Exchequer), stated then what he asserted now' 1 's-
these laws did require amendment, there was no incea-0 e
tency between the vote which he thengave and tbee°„so-
which he had now taken.—( Hear, ln the 6 col'
ration the
•at
letting the revenue ; but. he altogether excluded from ;f,at
the savings which had been effected in this respeet•moi. a
saving amounted between 1820 and 1835 to 677,v' -total
year, and, taking the period from 1817 to 1833, the4l;o- s'..
reduction was I,l3o,oool.—(Hear, hear.) It was no'le'e-
e.ver, so easy to effect reductions in the charge for c°-,lsly
toifonas it was in individual taxes, because of the nee the
keeping up custom-houses and apthmachinery for ,
er .
purpose, and his great doubt I chat,
purpose, was whether, in t le ~,t
tions made in t.
He
been carried too far.the salaries of
must say that
of the
the officers, who had cha of the collection
revenue, had, if anything bene reduced too low---Olear;
0,
ht it better that
hear, hear)—and, therefore, he thought .
the
Government
should keep the power which they
.110:5
sessed in their own hands than that resolutions slic;i„,,.
these should be ado ted. B his next resolution the nu .
y
Gentleman called P upon them to discuss the w id,
tion r • elative to the currency—to affirm the question criras
respectf to the standard and one-pound notes. Tiler.% he
aallacy in the argument of the Hon. Gentleman wn'
stated
could not pass unnoticed. The .Gentleman e
Hon. titag
that the change '
'.n the standard was a great disadvaroceto
to. theh working classes ; but whatever weight his erg'' oc°
tmigt have with respect to other points, it was in refertr'tb,
o this not only unfounded, but the contrary of the lasses
as from the restoration of the standard the worlcing c' 00
received nothing but benefit.—(Hear, hear, hear.), eon-
now came to the Bth resolution and, unless they `ver-must
tent to go the whole length of! the property tax, 'le that
say that nothing could be more futile than
eseat
which it proposed—namely, • • of tbn V. of
y, a revision
ositten
system of taxation, with a view to the inn. b tote.
adirect taxation on property, by way of sta 5 ope Of
those
For his own part he was ready to confess that he was owe
ose who was by no means anxious to make such an tian,
riment.—( Hear, hear.) He thought that, on reflee osi-
.,
the Hon. Gentleman would be convinced that the in:I:lo-
tion of a tax on either income or property would be baot in-
gerous as it could not fail to be prejudicial to the 01
terests of the country. Now what would be the nag the
effect of it ? Why, that it would operate to discount the
employment of capital in this country, and encourag pro,
exportation. of money out of it.—(Hear, hear.) , lai
portion to the limitation of capital there would nie. a Or
nutria of employment for the working classes, annflrna 1"9
nufacturer who was receivin 10,0001. year l— j the
g a at on •
business were
to be obliged to pay 10 Per ce losln''
amount of his income, would "
not his means of et" de-
co ,
workmen be to that extent reduced? The Hon. Gtaxe"
man had drawn corn a • between and Peace ever
p mons war ,
__. what
_.
but surely Ire
must be aware that no analogy , at win
existed,h between England at peace and Euglana did ant
1 e circumstances were totally different. He an'°
G that .
know whatthe "1 •
division on the Hon. - e 116
motion would be, but this he would says , wilt)
should pity the Chancellor of the Excheque;apertl
brought forward a motion for imposing a„P spell'''.
tax.—( Hear, hear.) Indirect taxes were generale., tllef
ing paid voluntarily, but that was not the case wi,,,ectly of
tax gatherer was employed to collect the taxes ('l'
et to-
the people. As a general, principle, therefore, chreN,thig
ation was to be avoided -a much as possible. _ which
could be more fallacious than the equality of tax` a pro-
the Hon. Gentleman imagined would be obtained I'd aris,e
perty tax. But, even, supposing such a result w• e „„se I,t,
from its imposition, did the Hon. Gentleman sufgoaer I
would be palatable to either the landowner or tlft, Pay it
Would it be any boon to the farmer to be oblige°
paid, 0
per cent in addition to the rates which he new wito o'er°
could it be supposed that the people of Ireland,
as a boon
looking for relief, would consider a property t„.,3% r.) rho
conferred upon them ? He thought not.--(“etn3te of t.,a,
Hon. Gentleman had spoken of the present s"-rosperoor
country. He had said that although it sva.aul:. so for
now they should not rely too much on its continsoan6bccauso.
ever. That was perfectly true, for it was no recertainly
ate
the country was now prosperous that it was erpeta ,
He did not, however, think that the best way- to Fetoatioli
that prosperity was by turning the whole systole' laste.to
upside down, as the Hon. Gentleman proposct 'let use
0-
of adopting such visionary projects he should seem t our
relief wherever we can—wherever occasion inaY
scorne a" the
der it expedient. Let us apply the surplus of inar to be vela
disposal in the repeal of those taxes which aPP%
_t oy snit
most burthensome, but do not call upon us to an Phear.)
b°
principles as these resolutions embrace.--(Hear', couldbey
was mere delusion to suppose that a propertY 7,o„cd t of
introduced in time of peace ; and, therefore, 1, ft ro-steal, 0
would not be required to tamper with the prese"ty tax
0:1..
taxation. They should not forget that a PrePe left
Is uld be ax
a war tax—a tax consequently which should
of
of thato.l..
touched in time of peace. It was by meanits of 00 re,
that the honour of this country—that the '
rig '
while itie of
tion—were to be maintained ; and thereforet,o w'
the wil°are'l
mained unresorted to, it would be appareut
__vas preP tia
Europe that the army of England was readyy
ars. bear.) ;et
whenever the hour for hostility arrived. t 1(
e' of Negro
in the tnn cs
protested against imposing a war tax ,,
lot pa, ,iect
and he therefore trusted that the House v!,o,,tftuieintta's
be010,„1.1
resolutions. As, however, the Hon. u hoped be
fbe 000., lle
would be answered by this discussion, 11e , id
not press his motion to a division ; but i . becaus%aa-
ose it,
Chancellor of the Exchequer) must opp ,of tbe C the
est§ wider
considered it to be detrimental to the inter
because,
try, prejudicial to its prosperity ; and

I
.;

--
existing system, relief to the extent of 8,000,000/. had al-
ready been given to the people. He should also oppose it,
because it would derange the whole of the present system of
taxation, and operate in a double sense injuriously upon tl:e
employment of capital ; but he trusted that the Hon. Gen-
tleman would not feel it necessary to take the sense of the
ti use upon it.---(Hear, hear.)
the •
hieli
Mr. B. HOY concurred in much that had fallen from
Light Hon. Gentleman. There was only one part on
e 1 •
he mit It necessary to make any observation, and that
dust the application of the principle of probate and legacy
_;erY, with the Right Hon. Gentleman that agreeing to
the resolutions before the House would be highly preju-
to:till:jell: capita], and therefore he concured in hoping that
n. Member for Worcester would notpress his mo-
tion to a division' p
mMr' HUME could not agree with those Hon. Gentle-
en who thought that direct taxation was the very worst
little e in which taxes could be levied. He had thought that
difference of opinion existed on that subject. With
regard to what the Hon. Member had said respecting the
Itvearlyenience which any portion of the labouring classes
uid,feel at the loss of employment for. fifteen. days toge-
therlou.ne considered that nothing more distressing to the la-
u floe classes could take place. If amen who had no other
for Mean. _ .
ot subsistence than his daily labour was to be kept_
u 'meet) days out of employment, the consequences to him
Itbe most grievous. But what was the best way
It Promoting the employment of the working classes ?
Pocketsas in his mind, by not taking money out of the
could
of those who afforded them employment. He
with rep ould call the attention of the House to what occurred
iu pect to the repeal of the duty on salt. It would be
their recollection that at the time that they repealed
bat the
at tiduty
On salt, that amounted to 15s. per bushel, whilst
the d me the price of salt per bushel was 20s. Well,
dui
having been taken off, the price of salt was re-
al due to 2s, a bushel. There then was a loss of 3s. to the
froanufacturer on the full rate ; that was in the reduction
eatio.6ss• to. 2s. In the same
.proportion, if they looked to
that a articles which paid an excise duty, they would
_find
tin
the fall on each article was proportioned to the reduc-
e of taxation. He differed in the opinion which the
itil• Gentleman had expressed respecting a properitietdaixd.
aotthe principle of such a tax he fully concurred.
said agree in what the Chancellor of the Exchequer had
pert' , that luckless would be the man who proposed.
.a pro
eoirat3'.dtax. In that opinion he by no means was willing to
sub;eeljen• Ile was pleased to hear what had fallen on this
lion from the Hon. Gentleman who introduced the mo-
vie The Chancellor of the Exchequer had said thatr if
tervresorted to a property tax at all, it should be e-
lia ecl for a time of war.—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr.
(lime) hoped that they never would have a time of war.—
ear.) 8.,,
Perty t ..t were they to be kept off from adopting a pro-
of apar,x• If it should be thought expedient, until the. time
in w-n•‘: He found there was a great objection existing
greatquarters to the adoption of a property tax. A
liewiroPortion of capital of the country, be admitted, was
Nobi,,nig to bear its proper share of taxation. When the
the .1,;" "rd, who had given notice of a motion respecting
ate („,erieultural distress, should bring that motion forward,
oxake'tusrt'utHome) should e prepared to show what was the
to 8110 e of agricultural taxation. He would be prepared
aristw that there was no country iu which the landed
(01,-colaeY bore so little taxation as in this country.—_
it a, ".) He held in his hand a copy of a return by which
laidril_eared that since the legacy and probate duty ivefraer
was BuQn, the amount of personal property administered
senal r,6'°00,000/. It appeared from this return that per-
;Lae 43"7„ertY had paid into the Exchequer no less a sum.
ad not", 000/., whilst landed property during that time
Propo,l),aid one farthing. He now came to the course
Core °Y the Hon. Gentleman who bad made the mo-
°f 4%114 confessed that he had little confidence in the plan
could vro which the Hon. Gentleman had proposed. He
laid not agree in any of the principles which he had
Ile bad rn, though he agreed in many of the statements
and made. With respect to the reduction of taxation,
jag
ePiaarsticularly as regardedp the manufacturing and work-
torn noses he was surprised to find that the Hon. Mem-
torn 12'Is Proposed reductions had made no mention of the
injni,jogivs• The corn laws, he would be able to prove, were
extentutsh to the productive industry of the country to an
were branches of industry so circumstanced that it required
thelurst
trifling difference to influence them, and make
/nano? °sPerous or otherwise. When he was last in the
clifFereact ring parts of England he was informed that the
extens?e,e °I -4-d. or id. had been the means of removing an
alto,et‘e branch of manufacturing industry from the place
salt afer• It was a principle of monopoly which was the
tallers our taxation. When they spoke of the con-
settlers the
should endeavour to extend the class of con-f
tazati_ as much as possible by a fair and proper system of
Cass system that would not press exclusively on one
treed. 11 one point that had been propOsed he fully
of
the E Ile meant an ad valorem duty. The Chancellor
kitte, lehecluer was fully aware that, both in the COM-
teen
an IT stairs hind in the House below, he had always
odt,,vor advocate for trying what they could do with an
thom, e'",duty.
catda• ?erne.. Now, with respect to tea for instance,
Cps, that was one of the most unfavourable they
werab, selectcane had always been of opinion that it was most
the irif I. en the poor man to pay as much duty for
te,a
t: ior article he consumed as they required the rich
Now,
.P.aY for the superior article which be consumed.
eatie,,e!ith
respect to the management of our customs
for in` he would refer to the article of wines. There were,
purchase sta.,uoe, Moselle and other wines which might be
that l\,/ulmi the Continent at 4d. a bottle. He believed
4. a e°osie,le might be imported into this country at about
subject ; and was it not, then, an absurd system to
ditty wine of this description to the same amount of
°leo, the more expensive wines, which were sold at a
trefer"dilier price ? There were few men that would not
uetig, a 'll6llg these milder and lighter wines, instead of
strenzers under the present system, compelled to drink the
alight 11 aV and More potent wines. He did not know but this
bad
Y ana
country e
greater effect upon the character of the
thh they were at all prepared to think. People
htle. e was sure, preferred weak wines to the stronger.
he avie, speak from experience—(a laugh)—for after
ft°,,,u,Sed light
svfoines on the Continent for three months,
slittliFlonte
s.O r n
em:d time
itadmitted
datfht cartreturned relish the
hehe was a mere mortal,
ilaph sue was his opinion, why was it not reasonable to
for P:seitat others felt similarl ? He was an advocate
was
henarlge in the system.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He
up,lios'ortiehttbat there was noChancellor of the Exchequer
cent. not to be satisfied with a duty of 100
u'ere °o the wine drank in this country, and if they
tE,°l4 ieriot4it,:e_ot with this duty, they could have excellent wine
me was co
country at Is. a bottle. He hoped that the
N as eon,.
t ethmg, h ;IV when they would be able to effect that.
_PY thao t put t, would be more satisfactory to the coun-
7,,ourit, ° the excise out of every manufactory in the
hid voThe Chancellor of the Exchequer would always
chequer'lv n natever taxes he reduced returned to the Ex-
ere not so other way. It appeared to him that they
t:'eir unjust in their system of taxation, but in
flans tact 01(,)n as well. Now, with respect to the alters.-
I:atichise, '..an from time to time taken place in the elective
,se_en rosiseiat extension to the working classes had always
kiorrtien
0f,2'1 On the ground that they did not possess any
o.,Perty ..eaßital- It was, therefore, determined -that a
geuld bquanfication for the possession of the franchise.
!0111(1 bestablished. Now he considered that nothing
'trl
eulnore fallacious than this. All the landed capital
haPital p°o,lltrY Was not equal in amount to the amount of
de err, bee by the working classes. This class had,
tcluived of
to severely taxed. They had not merely been
i;eY Wer_ their rights as the possessors of capital, but
Geenc,ubjected to an undue share of taxation. . The
irn'ehur°rltieleTan proceeded to contend that the capital o
I,heortano: asses, consisting of labour, was of as much
nnt'oll it to
nas any other description of capital, and that
roll frgiriel at extent the prosperity of the country de-
ity ptile attend Hon. Hon. Gentleman was content merely to
es r ntion of the House to the principle contained.
st, nssist_nesolution, he would be willing to give him his
%e; otherwise he could not support him.
J. V.. id a few words in explanation.
hliedi_vi`XWELL contended that the Hon. Member
eot roLe.X Was mistaken in what be had stated respe_
oueourrod !we taxation of the agricultural classes. He
" quer In the view which the Chancellor of the Ex-
had
taken res •
eif4•respecting a property tax.
.34 the LER felt that a property tax must eventually
are of
Ipfoor elan ;
and, in instance that the poor were
ttlavul.bler othtstsfaot, he stated a case in which one of the
tatt as his
_7B expressed himself opposed to the tax, and
ly f• 011
uPee r asonthe, that any tax on the landlord must even-
Cal tenant.
Of h %el Stip,
krrellett., tHoltp was also of opinion that taxation
r must of nee • fall -labour.
of i, • essayupon
14? in.quisi"t_L__.6, was opposed to a property tax, because.
a tattorial chaurr.lat nature. A direct tax, divested. of an in-
. .x eo„,, acter, nature'
certainly desirable ; but, as such
IltaieeaCeituanot he freed from its inquisitorial and uneonsti-
-4' Nieutubr•ereter, he should oppose the proposition of the
to • BLN, fel' Worcester.
of is opini„ was favourable to a property tax, which,
colleecn, Was the simplest, the best, and the cheapest
Cnio uu•
Qar t°
have tl NIPSON Wished that be had 10,000/. a
hor would experiment of a property tax tried upon
oti't%ved that"
pay his equivalent portion, and be
4.41e1,
111_0, should never have " merry England" again
i Rot/1;e of taxation was adopted.
of a'• T. ,49N replied.
I‘, 41(41011 D protested against the withdrawal
t•I
le neli had been so requently did.
ROBINSON said thatf as there was notscusse a sufficient

feeling in the House with him he would allow his proposi-
tion to be outvoted without a division.
HEIRS OF ENTAIL (SCOTLAND).
Mr. CHALMERS brought in a Bill to alter, amend,
and make effectual so much of the Ist and 2d of William
IV., c. 48, as relates to the powers given to heirs of entail
in possession in Scotland to burthen their estates for the
purpose of making turnpike roads.
Mr. A. TREVOR moved for a statement of the num-
ber of endowed Roman Catholic Colleges in England and
Wales, the nature of their several endowments, the num-
ber of professors annexed to each, and their respective
salaries.