The Sun.
London, England, 1823-07-09 00:00:00

-147 ND TAX.

Mr. said, he ahould not take up much at their, time
it) making tt few' obsery-Atiort on the present state of the collec-
tion* or hold taX•ln the district.* of London, Westminster, and
Aliddlesex. Though the law was decisive on this head, there
were hos eight divisions of London,.Weitminster, and 'Middle.
sex which had made up their balances. The tax-office nee

*laded to interfere. In fact that Board in Iris mild was totally
useless. As the collection of this tax was liable to defalcation,
.t.fre assessment was :proportionably increased?, so as to cover the
defalcation or deficiency collected in some instances: Now it
was clear, that whatever was collected beyond those deficiencies
in the last yeast should have been pet in "this year to-the credit of
the party assessed in this manner, beyond that sumase which he
wet liable by law. It was the duty of the Treasury to interfere
.son et ago. The assessments were never reduced', or applied to
make up any deficiency of the preceding year. If ad. in the
pound was not enough for the collectors an Act should he
passed to regulate it. So far from the allowance being too
small, when a vacancy took place it was as much canvassed for as
a seat in Parliainent. Paying the collectors for.bonds and
other expences was a practice that ought to be putan end to.
The Kensington division returned a-surplus for 1818 of only
7631., and in 11119 Of 7371., whereas the excess in 181 E was KV.,
and in 1819,900/. The excess was expended in allowances to
collectors and in other ways not authorised by the Act. This
was admitted by the Cormmssionem themselves. ' What naafi_'
dence, then, could be placed in such returns? This was not:
the case in one parish alone, but several: In-various instanto
:the heolte were lost. In such circumstances it was imposeible
that justice could he done. The aggregate surplus in London,.
Weetminster, and Al iddresex, was not less than 162,000/. ,
shotthi do now would be to propose certain Resolutions, the
allegations of which were -drawn from the papers. The next
point to which he should call the attention of the House were
the Accounts-. All the Public Accounts on this subject were
very imperfectly kept. Front all the attention he could give
theme he collected the follovting facts ae-The. amount of
Land Tax made permanent by the measure of Mr. Pitt was
11909,873/.: and dad' was regularly received during the years
ii 97 am) 1798 e In the year, however, ending sth Jan. 1022,
the Land Tax received and accounted for was only 1,234,182/.
shewing a diminution of 755,405/. He moved for returns to
allow how this deficiency arose, but they did not explain it.—
. The totalthatehould hare been received in 1821 was 11,708,277/.
o more,- however, than 10,890,0001. had been accounted fee,
—The' expence of the Establishments, for carrying the Act of
1700 into effect was not less hitherto than 360,0001. He consi-
dered this much more than wire necessary. Of this, 50,0001.
was paid to the Commissioners of Taxes, and 89,0841. to
the. Clerks of Commissioners of Districts, as a poundage on
the tax redeetned. According to Mr. Pitt's plan, the expence
of collection was to be saved to the public.. Three-fourths
of the Commissioners' Clerks did no duty at all. There was a
Mr. Clarke, who acted in that capacity for two districts, and
carried on his own business besides. In his answer he said,
that he never considered it his duty to dispose of the ex.'
•elks of assessment above the quota of the year in the roan-
nor provided by Act of Parliament. lie would now come to the
exonerations, and he was' Surprised at what he saw in the
Returns. Vire expence of this department wee 4,862/. a-year,
though the whole amount exonerated was only 8,0001. In
Am the amount exonerated was best 3/. I'7s.; and hr 1021,
'St. 17z. Lord Glenbervie had a situation in this department
6001. Since his death it was not, he believed, filled up.—
This expence was entirely disproportionate to the object, which
atone was ground for inquiry. Such being his view of the sub-
, eect, ha did not think he could do less- them put the Resolutions
sin the Journals. In the management of the Land Tax for the
next 10 years, no less than 1,500,080/. might be saved to the
public by. proper regulations. The Hon, Member concluded
y proposing the fallowing Resolutions, of which his speech
was only an echo :
" 1. That by various returns presented to this House dosing
'the last and present Seasioa of Parliament, it appears that the
Land Tax of England and Wales, made perpetual by the Act
:hi Geo. 111. c. 60. was fixed at 1,989,673/. ; that that amount
wait received and accounted for, in each of the two years 1707
and 1788; and that' in the, year ending the oth of January,
1622, the amount of Ltmd Tax received and accounted for was
only 1,234,1681. showing a diminution of 755,505/. in the an-
nual receipt.
" 2. 'That from the period of passing the Act of 88 Geo. 111.
c. 60, to the fah of Janaaty 111220 the sum of 692,013/. of Land
.'Tax in England and S-Vales has been redeemed ; and, tinder
the Act 40 Geo. 111. c. 133, and other Acts, Small Livings and
Charitable Institutions have been exonerated from the Land
Tax to the amount of 8,001/. making together the sum of
781,4141, redeemed and exonerated in the 23 years.
" 3. That these returns show an actual reduction between
the amount received-in the years 1821 and 1790, in the email
amount of Land Tax, of 755,6-05/. whilst the sums redeemed
and exonerated amount only to 7t11,4141. making a difference
and deficiency of annual Land Tax of 54,8(111. to be account.
Ld for.
" 4. That out of the 701,414 h of the Land Tax redeemed
and exonerated in the 23 pears ending the bill of January 1822,
CC0,9871. thereof had been so redeemed and exonerated prior to
the Irtit of January 1818, leaving the amount unredeemed and
receiveable in the year 1813 to be, 1,3`20,7661.; and as the
arnount of only 40,5071. wax redetauld anti exonerated in the
nine years from the oth of January 1813 to the btli of January
11122ethere remained of the Land Tax unredeemed, due, and
receivable in England and Wales, in the said nine years, the
aggregate sum of 11,708,2771. ; whilst It appears by the re-
nuts- befbre the House, as well as by time annual Finance ac-
counts, that during,' that period 10,038,0891. only hal been ac-
counted fore shelving a defalcation of no less a sum, in the
aggregate of the nine years, than 728,0881. or an average of
re),91154 per annum.
" 5. That, in addition to the defalcation exhibited in the pre-
ceding Reselutions, it appears that the expellees incurred under
the beforeementioned Acts, for the redemption and exoneration
4'f the Land Tax, have amounted to the enormous sum of
1508,045/. in the proportion of 50,032/. by the Commissionem'a for
the redemption and exoneration of Church and. Corporation
Lends; of '240,399/. by the Tax Office ; and of 89,0041. paid to
the Clerks of die Commissioners of Districts, as allowance for
poondage on Land Tax redeemed.
" That in addition to the expences incurred, as statedin the
preceding Resolution, there further appears, at page 204 of the
Onsace Aceouhts, for the year endingsth of January 1811, the
following Item, viz. "lb the Commissioners for the itedemption
. Land. Tax, by Ecclesiastical and Corporate Bodies,' a
elarge of 12,0001., which does not appear to be entered in any
iaf the returns made to Parliament, which purport to contain an
account of all the expences incurred under the said Acts.
" 7. That, by a Return made to Parliament this Session, it
appears that there has been paid into, the receipt of the Ex-
ehequer, by the Receivers General of Land-Tax, on account of
v tterest on instalment considerations, and other pigments de.
Jetted, sinse the passing of the Act of the 38 Geo. Hi. c. 110.
u) the bth of January 1823, the sum of 221,5471. t whilst only
7:&,8681. appear to have been accounted for in the Finance
r. coun ft ntiAlly laid before Parliament.
"O. That, whilst in the nine years, from the sth of January.
103, to the sth of .lanuary 1822, the total amount ofTax re.
deemed and exonerated has been only 40,507/. the expenses in
the same period have amounted to no less is stun than 1)12,4871.
eifehtsive of 38,949/. paid to the Clerks of districts for poundage
Land-Tax idler it had been redeemed.
"la That although the amount, exonerated under the direce
thin of the Commissioners for the redemption and exoneration
Qi Church and Corporation lands, in the year 1820, was only
it.. 17e. 4d., and in 1821, only 21. 75., and the expences of their
u; cti during those two years (including 600!. per annum each
to two acting o:Minis:miners, and 4001. per annum to a Secre-
tary) amounted to no less a sum than 4,8621. IJa. 2d., yet it
doee not appear that his Majesty's Ministers have taken any
measures to free time public from so great and unnecessary a

ci2a:1;12."
vita CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, he did
net expect that so much of the lion. Gentleman's speech would
have reference merely to the Commissioners of the district of
lt they expended the money as had been stated,
tt.ey douhtaetcd improrriv ; but it .hould be recollected thit
!4•:cy Wu a out under the ctintr•Ailof the 'freasury, it having been
p/oPer that the Land-'12:;"4. and the ssess.hl Taxes should
be hgvigti without the direct totervention of .Govolointott.'l`htt
practice W 43 to employ unsalaried Cormilissioner4. lie did not.
thorefore, how 'dui Tteasory was retpoosiLle. It rovld be
fropwiSible to agree to thu proposed resolutions, as they all Its_
surntid fat:Ls what were not treat. Fr bey proceeded one eom..
piste mistalte. It must be. that the lion. Gentleman had not
!Attheiently studied the Acta of Parliament on this subject, as
t?-:ere wars capital error hi the first resolution. That resolution
stated, that by the returns It appeared that the Land-Tax made
pFrpe,tual was fixed at 1,999,6751. The mistake of the lion.
iyeli,4llltin was this : the Act to which he alluded passed in'
IC,:,vemliia 1797, but in March 1798 another Act Wait passed,
viz. that to make the Land-Tax perpetual, and' to effect a re-
d r:mption of it. This assumed as its basis the Act of 1797 but
thf:, Hon. Gentleman did not look at one clause, 'which exeitipted
from the Tax pensions and offices which bad been included in
the ,Act 31 1797, and amounted to 127,000/. T his. sum, therefore,
trivst In dcducted from the 1,9ii9,0731. The lion. Gent. not hay-
don,J 5.), all his conclusions were erroneous. It would hot
aniwcr the Hon. Gentleman's purpose to say he would deduct
4:is amount in each year, because it was fluctuating; arid the
cur, om was to repay all those who paid land-tax on pnsions and
places. lo one year it ambunted to no Lies than 151,000/. ;
while in 1820 it was reduced to 39,000/. The lion. Gentleman
:,estie,l to confound the tax actually assessed, and the tax paid.
He would find that the surplus of payment over assssnient in
194, or any other year, went either to meet the deficiency of the
previous year, or to re ay such as had been ussemed utpler the
Lead of pensions and offices. He would find, that the money
be suppo ed gone nobody knew where, was disposed of in tins
=inner. The expense of 380,0004 to which the .Hon. Gen-
tleman objected, was not thrown away, for the poblie were
gainers to the amount of 1,500,0001. The other department to
whcli he objected was not so useless as he seemed to think
Their duties were not to be measured by the 31.175. or the
1. 17S. exonerated; in 1820 and 1821. They had already re-
eemed 2090 livings. They had occasion to carry on a very

extensive corre.sponderia, and they Lad matters of much eteli
cacy to manage. ne had no objection, however, to inquire
how say it might be necessary or not to continue the office la
present. - Government sufficiently shelved their disposition to
reduce the expenses by net:filling up the plum of Lord Glen-
- bervie and Lord Ritastork.,- On. these grounds he must oppose
the Resolutions. ..: ~ , - 4 .
Mr. MAIIIMLV said, he would.tetommend to his. iron:
Friend to withdraerthe Resolutiont4.as they were founded, 1.1 a
mistake. 'His Hon. Friend's error arose from not considering
that the Land Tax was not made perpetual on places and pen-
sious. He had, however,, stated nistrong case with regard to.
Assessments,' one which he thouglit
.4nificient ground for iii-'I
quiry. If the Treasury had no corttratil over the Assessments,
lit was time that the Muse. should take the n atter into their'
consideration. The expence of the establishment was very
great. During the first year, it was true, the public gained _
considerably,. ,while the appetite,
,for xedeeming the tax con-
tinned strong:. • But it had since been greatly weakened in con-.
sequence of the hard tonna hilt) out. The tax ought to be
lowered to a fair rate, and then it would soon be. purchased.
He wished. his Majesty's:Ministers would take up the question,
and bring it to a fair conclusion. 'lf they would not early next
Session bring it forward, he . would move for a Committee, fur
the purpose of taking the' whole into consideration.
• Mr. HUM P, - atilt-titled' that the :Pension
,Land Tax had
caused inuelt difficulty in the. ruse; yet theltight Honourable
i Gentleman could not deny that he bud otherwise made out a
strong case, and much could be - saved to.. the country. Rate
first Resolution was founded upon erroneous conclusions, fie
would not press his-Resolutions. He therefore withdrew them.
The Resolutions were then withdrawn. ''

- LLANELLYCHYD SLATE QUARRIES.
Mr. A )(lemma WOOD, after designating the lease of these
qUarries to Mr. Dawkins Pennant as a gross job on the part of
the Government, moved for the appointment of a Select Com-
mittee to examine into the whole of the proceedings, relative
to the grant of the Crown to Lady Penryn 4,tnd Mr. Dawkins
Pennant for the working of the Slate Mines at Llanellychyd,
in the County of Carnarvon.
Mr. HUME seconded the motion. . . . ~
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL opPosed it, contending
that there was not the slightest reason for calling the grant of
these leases a Ministerial job.
..
Mr; HUMP: maintained that the motion ought to be agreed
to, as he belie ved. it.would be advantageous to thepublic.
Mr. lIUSKISSO:',/ -itirreed • that no groundacwere laid for
going into the proposed Lommittee. , ..
Mr. D. PEN IN'ANT opposed the motion;. and -u.
Mr. DENMA M stipported it.
The AWORN E Y-fl F. NERA L opposed the motion ; and
after a few words from Mr. Ault! 'r }ix oT i Alderman Wo op
replied. • . .
The House then divided„when there appeared for the motion--
Ayes, 9 1 Noes, 43 l Majority against the motion, 34.,
, 611IEF BARON O'GRADY:.
Mr. BROGUEN brought up the Report of the Committee on
the following:Restdittions respecting Chief Baron O'Grady :
" l. That in consequence of an Address from the House of
Commons, his. late Majesty was graciously pleased to issue a
Commission under the (heat, Seal for examining the Salaries,
Dudes, and Emoluments, of the several Officers, Clerks, and
Ministers of justic,,, within that part of the United Kingdom
called Ireland t,' and that. the Commissioners so appointed have
laid before Parliament eleven several Reports. founded on the
examination of the parties, as well as on evidence taken on
oath, the Ninth and Eleventh of which Reports relate to the
judicial Fees of the Court of Exchequer in Ireland; that, on
the faith of the Reports of the Commissioners so appointed the
Legislature has acted, regulating some Offices, abolishing
others, and introducing a new system of proceeding in the
Courts of King's Bench, Common Pleas, and the Common
Law-side of the Exchequer.
" 2. That the - Office of Lord Chief Baron of Ireland is an
Office of the highest dignity arid importance, on .the impartial
and uncorriept execution whereof the honour of the Crown and
welfare of the Realm greatly depend.
" 3. That the Right Honourable Standish O'Grady was ap..
pointed Lord-Chief Baron of Ilia Majesty's Court of Exche-
quer in Ireland in the month of October 1805, and became en-
titled by such aPvintment to a salary of 3,6001. per annum,
tend to the lawful Fees incidental to his Office.
"4. That Witt stated in the aforesaid Ninth Report, that by
1 an alteration Of practice introduced by the present Lord Chief
• Baron, Fees are now received for his Lordship's use on Dills of
Costs on the Law-side of the Exchequer, in cases where the
Dills of Costs are not and never were made out ; that a Select
Committee having considered the Statement of the Cont.
• missioners, and the evidence • taken on oath before them as
aforesaid, together with the Reply of the Lord Chief Baron,
and having reported thereon to the house, and the said
Report, together with the Reply of the Lord Chief Baron, having
been referred by his Majesty's Government to the said Commis..
sioners, the said Commissioners, after a further examination of
the Lord Chief Baron and of other witnesses on oath, have
again reported, that by the alteration of practice introduced by-
the present Chief Baron, Pets 11.,tve been received for him on
Bills of Costs in cases- where no Bills of Costs existed; and
that it is thrther stated in the Report from the Select Com-
mittee on the Eleventh Report of the Commissioners. of In-
quiry, that the direction of the Chief Baron, as stated by Mr.
Pollock, to whom it was personally given, that the Feu of 25.2 d.
should be Charged and received for him upon all Bills of any
slrt .that were taxed In the Office, and had it been so con.

fitted in its operation, it does not tippeur to 'your Committee,
froth-any evidence before thew, that tt would have been beer.
sect, except so far as relates to the increase already noticed under
the head of Currency. ; but under this regulation in practice
the Fee is now stated to have been received by the officers of
of the Court on behalf of the Chief Baron in certain 'cases, and
by the Chief Baron himself in others,_ upon all Writs, except
Renewals of Execution in Case, including the Writs specified
in the Eleventh Report of the Commissioners, upon which no
Bills of Costs could ever have arisen. '