The Sun.
London, England, 1848-03-04 00:00:00

SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 4, 1848.

AIA for precarious property, or those incomes charged
limier schedules B, I), and E, one farthing and a half
per p,:und at mei( e 3 cars' purchase is 4id. ofincome,
11. 17s. 6d. per 1001. would be the just proportion. Tile
shgiit discrepancy between these proportions and the
previous one, of from 12 to 25 years' purchase, arose
from one fat thing and a half not Mug the exact sum,
and the decimal multiplied by millions affected, though
not materially, the result. If they compared these
rates of charge with those paid under the present Act,
then as 9d. in schedules A and C was to 7d. and 4id. in
B, I), and E to 7d., so the sums received, under the new
end old charge in each schedule would be to one another;
and they would appear as follows:
Old Scale. New Scale.
Schedule A £2,528,721 .£3,251,179
B 324,339 203,510
744,019 956,600
1,678,595 1,080,700
327,769 210,710

£5,603,443 £5,707,720
There would, therefore, be but little difference between
the new scale and the old. Ile felt, however, that there
were many objections to the imposition of the tax in the
way now proposed. It altered, uni.ucessarily, the
charge on tarniers, and adopted the error in the present
Act of charging alike ail incomes under schedule 1),
whether from trade and manufactures ur prolessons. It
might be assumed that the incomes in schedule A arose
wholly from capital. Those in schedule B arose
from professions which represented skill and labour orly,
and from trades, manufscturas, and commerce, which
represented labour and skill combined with capital—lie
would assume that these latter represented half labour
and half capital. Now it was evident that it could nut
be an equal tax which would impo.e the same rate on
these two classes of income. lie calculated land income
therefore ut 23 years' purchase, professions at 12, and
commerce and nianufactures between the two (inter-
mediate), or at 13 jeirs' purchase, and leave schedule B
as at present. The following would be the result:—
Schedule A, at 9d..
„ B, unchanged 324,339
C, 9 1.
ft ll,take6d.asamean 1,440,933 at id. and 41d.
It E, 4id. .

Total, £6,183,761
Preient income 5,600,000

Surplus
These were the two calculations he had made, but he
feared he had not succeeded in waking them intelligible
to the :louse.—(Hoar, hear.) The latter part of the
plan, however, he thought, if the House would favour
him with its attention, he should be enabled to explain
more clearly .—(llear, bear.) It was the great defect
of the present Act, that under schedule D we
had two different classes of income, viz, those
arising from trade, manufactures, and commerce, and
those upu:i professions. He proposed to retain the
same number of schedules as in the present Act, but to
cast them differently. Incomes arising from professions
he would take from schedule I) and place in schedule E,
which referred to incomes also of a precarious and ter-
minable nature., viz., emoluments arising from public
offices, 1-paving "D" entirely for incomes arising from
trade, commerce, and manufactures. And the scale of
tux he woull then propose would be as fullows:—On
incomes included in schedules A and C he proposed an
addition of one penny to the present rate of tax,
making eightpence in the pound.—(Hear, hoar.) On
incomes which would be included in schedule E, viz.,
professions and emoluments from public offices, he pro-
poced that the tax should be tourpence in the pound—
(Cheers)—and upon incomes included in schedule D,
viz., trade, commerce, &c., he proposed the inter-
mediate rate of sixpence in the pound—(Much cheer-
ing)—leaving B as at present. By this slight increase
on schedule A, they would relieve all the other classes,
and raise a revenue more than equal to that derived
from the tat, and without those vexatious objections
Lions to which the impost as now levied was liable. He
assumed that two-thirds of the present payment under
D was from business, and one-third from professions ;
and taking the proceeds from the present tax as a basis,
the result would be :

Schedule A, at £3 6 8 per cent., would produce ..
£2,894,000 at Bd,
... B, (as now) ••• 324,339
... C, at 3 6 8 ... 841,595 at 8d
... I), at 210 0 959,000 at 6d
... E, at 113 4 ... 235,796 at 4,1

Total £5,581,030
—(Cheers)---instead of 5,600,0001, which had been the
produce of the last year. But Ministers calculated, in
their budget for the ensuing year, the income-tz,x as
product, g only 5,200,0001. His plan would give them a
surplus beyond this amount of 381,030/.—(Much cheer-
ing.) lie was aware that the plug he thus ventured to
submit might be taken to be liable to many objections,
but then what he contended was that it was far less
objectionable than the present Act, which imposed 7d.
in the pound on all incomes, from whatever source
arising.—(Hear, hear.) Ills proposition would at all
crews fall more equally on the several classes of income
than the ?result, and he believed the scale he proposed
was so far just that it made a difference between thus,
incomes which were permanent, and which represented
accutuul ited capital—those which represented capital
and labour, and those which represented labour and
skill only.—(llesr, hear.) It had also this recommen-
dation, that it would relieve those who were most op-
pressd by the tax, as now imposed, while the only
additional burden which would be thrown upon any
class was the extra penny in the pound on permanent
incomes—(hear, hear) —a burden which he believed
would be cheaply purchased by the large amount of
relief it would give to the other classes, the satisfaction
with which the change would be received by the country
generally, and the ease with which the tax would be
collected —(hear, hear.) _ _

The motion having been seconded,
Mr. E. ELLICE rose to explain the grounds on which
he thought it essential under the present circumstances,
even th(ugh ho should be acting against opinions he
had previously expressed in that House, to give a firm
and decided support to Ministers on this occasion.—
((Isar, hear.) While he admitted that there were ine-
qualities and anomalies in the tax as now imposed, the
peculiar circumstances of the time were such as should
induce them to pause before they adopted any new ex-
periments, or even entered into their consideration. He
had supported the imposition of the tax on a former oc-
casion as the only means of placing the finances of the
country in that position in which they ought to stand,
and also as the means of enabling Government to make
certain reforms in our fiscal arrangements—to unfetter
the industry of the country, and give a new impetus to
commerce. The results he had anticipated, both in
giving relief to trade and replenishing the Exche-
quer had been fully realised by the tax.—(Oh, oh.)
I.le had supported the proposition of the Honourable
Member for Bath to tax precarious incomes to only
half the amount of permanent incomes, and had also
supported the motion for an inquiry, with the view
of arriving at some more equitable arrangement in re-
gard to the legacy and probate duties.—(Hear, hear.)
Ile had not altered his opinion upon these points, and he
thought the time had nearly arrived when this House
must review the whole system of taxation, and deter-
mine what portion of it should remain in the shape of
direct taxes, and what portion the industry of this coun-
try might yet be able to bear in the shape of indirect
taxation.—(Hear.) But he contended that this ques-
of the income tax should be left in its present state
until that time arrived. With regard to the numerous
meetings which had been held against the income-tax,
he believed they had been composed, for the most part,
of persons who were affected by it, but who supposed
that Ministere required the money to spend wastefully
and extravagantly.—(Hear.) It should be shown that
the money was required for national purposes—(tlear)
and he knew of no other tax that would as effectually
and less objectionably—whether its present anomalies
and inequalities were removed or not—raise the
money which was absolutely necessary to enable
the Government to maintain the efficiency of the
public service than the income-tax.—(Hear, hear.)
Then it should be remembered that Government bad
already given way to the feeling of the country in having
abandoned the proposed increase—(Hear, hear, and
cheers)—and it would not only be most unwise, but most
unjust, now to refuse them that which was necessary to
place the finances of the country in that state of security
which would alone make it safe for them to continue to
undertake the management of publie affairs.—(Cheers.)
Let them consider what might be the result of weaken-
ing the Government; it mattered not of whom it was
composed at such a time as this.—(Hear, bear.) They
could not mistake the symptoms of the times. Since
the Chancellor of the Exchequer's plan had been pro-
posed great changes had taken place.—(Hear, hear.)
Ile did not allude to them so far as any political cense-
penCe might attach to them. So far as ho could learn
the great revolution which had so recently occurred in
another country was being carried out according to the
will of' the people, by honest and able men acting upon
their own conscientious opinions; and he thought the
cause of humanity and the world were deeply indebted
to them for the manner in which they had maintained
peace and order. He believed, too, however visionary
he might once have looked upon their views, they were
honest in their expressed intentions of maintaining, as
far as they were concerned, the peace of the world, and
to restore peace and order throughout Europe. Apart
from political events, there were, however, circum-
stances which should make us anxious to place the
finances of the country on a sure footing.—(Hear, hear.)
Let them remember that public credit was a plant of
tender growth, and required care in its culture. 1.4,4
them not shut their eyes to events which might happen,
and the possibility of which made it of the highest im-
portance that we should place our national credit on a
firm footing. 'rite finances of almost every nation had
become deranged in consequence of the warlike prepa-
rations which mutual jealousies had Occasioned.—
(Hear, hear.) But so tar as was consistent with the
true interests of this groat country he should, in the
Select Committee on the public expenditure. be willing
to carry out economy. The Non. Member for
the West Riding hid complained of the growing in-
crease in the estimate; since the first establishment of
Lord Grey's Government; but the lion. Member should
remember the enormous debt contracted during the war,
and which we were now called upon to pay, and coin-
ipi aer
woulde it w i tthh
etrhi e
seea 111 (wwhnitt atw
ay ttheerw
rineaatlie nbuorfdtehnetw
hwiscrh,
charge
ed ofit,irthtehespdreibritgswaosf
otnhley cboeutnwtery In 81
on.
twenty-five
14 the
veand
thirty millions, out of a total expenditure of sixty mil-
lions. Now it was thirty-two out of fifty millions,
leaving only eighteen millions as the real expenditure of
the country, which he did not think extraordinary for a
great empire like this.—(Hear.) It might be said why
not take the tax for one year, and in the mean time
remove its inequalities? But the time when they could
best examine the tax, with the view to place it on a more
satisfactory footing, was when the Treasury was

(‘• Hear, hear," from Lord J. Russel.) The burden was
na grester than it had been during tee last six ears;
and he preferred renewing the Bill as propo-ed, and
leaving the subject to he dealt with when the whole
system of tasion should be revisal.—(ilear.)
Mr. NEWDEGATE opposed the amendment, be-
cause he objected to do anything that should give a per-
manent character to this tax.--(llear, hear.) The de-
ficiency in the revenue was the result of the policy in
which this tax had originated. and had been foretold by
him and his friends (the Protectionists) at the time.
They were told that the present condition of the com-
mercial classes was such that they could not bear the
burden of an income, tax; but that was not very consis-
tent with the declaration of Sir R. Peel in proposing it,
and of those free-traders who supported it, that the new
commercial policy which they had introduced would so
improve those classes as fully to compensate them for
this additional burden. The Hon. Gentleman here en
tered into a statement of figures showing that while the
product of this country which formed the elements of
our exports had been depreciated in the five years from
1841 to 1846 17 per cent., our imports had increased
during the same period from 64,377,0001., which they
were in 1841, to 75,953,0001., which they were in 1846,
being an increase of 11,575,0001. So that while our
imports had increased 18 per cent., our exports, with all
our exertions, and after a sacrifice of 17 per cent. of the
value, fell short of our imports, and turned the balance
of trade against us to the extent of 6 per cent. He
maintained, therefore, that if they persisted in fostering
imports they would not only incapacitate the merchants
and ruin the reenufacturere, but risk the credit of the
country, by creating a deficiency in the revenue. The
lion. Gentleman more strongly to illustrate his posi-
tion, referred to timber, spirits, and other articles of
import, on which he had lowered the duty, and on which
there had been, he said, a contemporaneous increase of
prices laid on by the countries from which they came.
So much for the measures of free trade. The lion.
Member for Coekermouth now proposed, as a most
charming system of taxation, as the very foundation of
free trade, that the income tax should be made a perma-
nent impost. Against such a proposal he would assuredly
record his vote. Every class was discontented with the
income-tax; but he could not understand the outcry
which was rained against the owners of real property
as being insuLficent contributors to that tax, seeing that
it was subject, in addition, to a land tax, highway, and
poor rates, which amounted to upwards of 9,000,0001.,
being in direct taxation 15 per cent., or 11 per cent, upon
assessment. The lion. Gentleman was therefore alto-
gether wrong in assuming that real property was un-
taxed in proportion to its value. It was proposed to tax
the fund-holder, but by doing so they would discourage
the investment of capital, and the reproduction of capital,
by cutting off capital at its source. Much had been said
the burden of the income-tax upon the commercial
*lasses. But the principle of the income-tax was to
allow many deductions in commerce, which were not
allowed in the case of real property. The landlord on
the contrary was taxed upon an income of 15 per cent.
more than he received. Then again the farmer was
taxed upon the body of his rent, and though his losses
on the year should equal the amount of his rent, still
was he taxed. Not so with the commercial man, who
was taxed only upon his clear profits or income. Much
had been said about the window-tax, but it should be
recollected that every shop and workhouse and counting-
house was exempted from it, while or.ly those farm
houses were exempted where the rent was under 200/
It would also be found that the poor rate was assessed
upon land at 4.sths its value, and upon house property
at 2-3ds its value. And yet the very party who stripped
the agriculturists of their protection were sow the party
who were the most clamorous for a transfer of taxation
from their own shoulders to those of the agriculturists.
For these reasons he would oppose the motion.
Mr. GOLTLBURN was anxious to say a few words on
the subject of the income-tax, believing that its con-
tinuance was essential to the maintenance of the public
credit, and with that credit the best interests of the
country. He would not enter upon the considerations
suggested by his Hon. Friend who had just spoken, but
confine himself to the question before the House, which
was, whether it was right to modify the tax in the way
proposed should the House be of opinion that such a tax
ought to be imposed. The principal argument of the
Hon. Gentleman against its present form was that it
pressed unequally upon the different classes of the com-
munity. lie did not deny that it did so. That such
would be its effect was admitted when it was introduced,
and again when it was renewed. But he did not admit
the objection to be valid against it as a measure of
revenue, because the same objection applied to every
other tax.—(Bear, hear.) There never yet was devised
the tax which could be made to press equally upon
all classes.—(ilear, hear.) They could only coun-
teract the pressure of one tax by the pressure of
another—(lronical cheers and laughter) and so
balance the whole taxation that it should press equally
on all. The land-tax pressed unequally on one class
as contradistinguished from another. Sa with the
assessed taxes. Taking the favourite example of a
physician who kept his carriage and horses, the tax he
found for that necessary bore heavily upon him, com-
pared with the nobleman to whom it was merely a
luxury, with which he might easily dispense. He
maintained, therefore, that to say that a tax was unequal
in its operation, when discussing the general question
of the revenue of the country, was no conclusive argu-
ment against it. But, unequal as he admitted the opera-
tion of the income-tax to be, he would not admit it to be
so to the extent alleged by those parties who felt pati-
cularly aegrieved by it. The lion. Gentleman said
those in schedule A and C being owners of what he
called realised property, were paying a comparatively
, small proportion of the tax, contrasted with those spe-
cified in schedules B and D. But he should consider

that there were countervailing circumstances of in-
equality, which really did tend to make up the differ
enco between the two species of income. The landed
proprietor, who derived an income of 5,0001. a year from

his property, not only paid the income-tax on that
amount, but had to pay a large sum for repairs, together
with certaia rates and other taxes, which were not paid
by the physician, and which consequently tended to
i,qualise the general burden of taxation on each re-
spectively. Besides, no matter what happened to
the landed proprietor, the assessment was en-
forced, while the physician, if ho found at the close
of the year that bis income was only 4,000/. instead of
5,000 L, had only to go before the Commissioners and
obtain the repayment of the tax on the additional 1,0001.
He was prepared to defend the tax in its prcseut shape,
even after the speech of the lion. Gentleman (Mr.
florsman), whose knowledge of the subject and great at-
tention to it were insufficient to get rid of the accumu-
lated difficulties which must attend any attempt at ren-
dering the tax equal in its operation upon all classes.
The lion. Gentleman proposed a charge of Bd. upon
schedules A and C. and, dividing schedule I) into two
parts—one applicable to professtons—proposed a charge
on them of 40. and 6d. respectively. The first objectio❑
he made to that proposition was, that it was not only a
total deviation from the principle which had ever ac-
tuated those who had proposed a tax of this kind, but
that it was utterly inconsistent with our obligations to
the national creditor. The proposal was, that money
vested in the funds should be charged Sd. in the pound,
while money vested in other ways should only be charged
6d. ; thus directly imposing a charge upon funded
property of one• third more than was imposed upon
other property subject to this tax. This was a direct
violation of the assurance which had been given to those
who had lent their money to the public—namely, that
they should only be subjected to equal taxation with the
rest of the community ; and the Legislature hat no
more right to tax funded property at a higher rate than
property vested in other securities, than it had to sv to
the funded proprietor, " You shall give up a portion of
your property for the benefit of the nation."
Mr. HORSMAN Then the exemption applies
where the amount of stock held produces under 1501. a
year ?

Mr. GOULBURN said, that exemption equally ap-
plied to other property, and, therefore, could not be
urced as an argument for taxing funded property at a
higher rate. This very point had been contested be.
tween Mr. Addington and Mr. Pitt. when Mr. Adding-
ton proposed an income-tax in 1803, and proposed to
withdraw the exemption which funded proprietors had
enjoyed. But Mr. Pitt demolished that part of the plan
in ten minutes, and the House unanimously confirmed
the principle which he (Mr. Goulburn) now contended
for, that funded property must be dealt with the same
as other property, and not charged a higher rate of
taxation.—(Hear, hear.) Next the Hon. Gentleman
had complained of the hardships inflicted on annuitants
and persons whose incomes were only of limited duration
compared with that inflicted on those who had more
durable incomes ; and he had proposed to charge Bd. in
the pound on all incomes derived from landed property,
as in schedule A. But the Hon. Gentleman seemed to
have a very inaccurate idea of the nature of incomes de-
rived from land in this country.—(Hear, hear.) Take
any gentleman's landed estates, or even those of very
small extent, and they would be found saddled with pay-
ments to widows and children, and the interest of money
lent on security of the et tate ; and on every one of those
charges, according to the plan of the Hon. Gentleman,
Bd. in the pound would be levied. The poor widow
with a most limited income ; children deriving from land
scarcely sufficient to defray the expense of their educa-
tion, all would have to pay Bd. in the pound. Such
a regulation would involve cases of greater hard-
ship than any to which it was proposed to apply a
remedy. It would affect clergymen, the whole of
whom, deriving their income from tithes or compositions
of tithes, were charged under the schedule A. Not long
ago the Hon. Member had made a most forcible al:Trill
to the House in behalf of the working clergy,. and had
expressed great sympathies for the inconveniences to
which they were subject. Now he proposed not only to
leave them, as before, excluded from exemption, but to
impose on them an additional charge, in order to relieve
rich bankers, merchants, and others, whose incomes
ought clearly to contribute to the public burdens.—
(Hear, hear.) Then he proposed to subjectrealis9
its d pro-
perty to a higher charge, contending that endurance
and capability of being transmitted to childr-n ought to
regulate the amount of charge thereon. He proposed
that sixpence in the pound should be charged On all
property in schedule 1) not derived Irons professions.
Surely the Honourable Gentleman could nut hare read
the Act. It provided that every man living in England
.ho derived an income from possessions in Ireland
should be assessed under schedule D ; and did the
Honourable Member mean that a gentleman deriving
10,0001. from Irish property should be subject to a
tax of 4d. in the pound, while an English gentleman
deriving the same amount from property in Yorkshire
should be charged Bd.?—(hear, hear.) Was that the
way to remedy the existing inequality? If there was a
ground of complaint it was that Ireland was not subject
to the property-tax in common with England; and the
only hold the House had on Irish property was bycharF-
ing under schedule D those proprietors who resided in
England. The plan proposed would aggravate the
charge on the English proprietors, and reduce by one-
third that on the proprietors of Irish estates. The same

argument would apply in reference to colonial property—
if indeed estates in the colonies could be called property
at the present moment—(Wear, hear)—but perhaps the
lion. Gentleman had not thought that worth considera-
tion in his plan. With characteristic fellow -feebeg the
Hon. Gentleman had shown great tenderness for the
gentlemen of the legal profession, and proposed to tax
them at one-half the rate imposed on those who had
property in the funds. He t Mr, Goulburn) would
suggest whether the payments made to physicians and
lawyers—not small in general—were not made in some
degree with reference to the limited period during which
those profits were enjoyed. When an eminent lawyer,
practising before the Committees of Parliament, could
make in one year, by payments from his clients, 20,0001
to 30,0001., was it not probable that those payments had
some reference to the uncertain duration of such emolu-
ments, and that they were not simply remunerations for
services rendered, but something beyond that, in order
that provision might be made tor a period when those
emoluments must cease?—(Hear, hear.) So that the
Hon. Gentleman's proposition amounted simply to this,
they were to pay the distinguished members of there
distinguished professions a sum calculated to remunerate
them for the short duration of their profits, and then to
turn round upon the public, who paid these large sums,
and ask them to pay a larger amount of income-tax, in
order to lighten the burden on the recipients of those
large remunerations. There was no justice whatever in
such a proposition. It was true, incomes arisiag from
the exercise of professions were uncertain ; but, what
could be more uncertain than the tenure of emoluments
attaching to the high offices of the state?—(hear.)
Not only did a vast amount of labour attach to these
offices, and a great waste of property and health, but
there was the additional uncertainty arising from cons
binations of pat ties, and Lem hostilities found, d on
different views of political questions.—(Hear, hear.)
But, what would have been the feelings of the lien.
Gentleman, or of the Hon. Member for Montrose, or of
the public at large, if a Prime Minister had come down
to the House and said, " Gentlemen, I have to propose
a tax 011 all incomes, which will be perfectly equal, ex
cept that we, the Ministers of the Crown, will only pay
one-half the amount we impose on others."—(L orebter.)
The lion. Member for Cockermouth would, doubtless,
have been the first to exclaim against the atrocity of
such a proceeding.—(hear.) Seeing that his proposal
would leave inequalities as great, it not greater, than
those in the existing law; and seeing that it would press
with a degree of cruelty on some of the most de-
serving and helpless classes of the community, ba
subjecting them to an aggravated rate of taxation,
it ould not remove any of the objections which he
(M . Goulbouru) felt to a property-tax, but would
make him more reluctant to support it.—(l-Tear, hear.)
The fact was a large accession of income was needed to
keep up the credit of the country; that could only be
obtained by a tax imposed without any of those limita-
tions which each class was anxious to bring forward for
its own relief, and which, being founded on theory,
would never stand the test of practice. He did not
believe it possible to remove all inequality. The lion.
Gentleman's plan would be more cried out against than
that now in operation; he must, therefore, resist the
proposition. The continuation of the tax for a limited
period was necessary; and if some little inequality did
exist, it should be remembered how much relief had
been afforded to the humbler classes by the removal of
those taxes in lieu of which the income• tax had been
imposed. This tax of five and a half millions was con-
fined to a very limited portion of society, to those who
were in the enjoyment of comparative prosperity; while
those who had been relieved were persons of limited in-
come, engaged in industrial occupations, who had not
the means of bearing burdens which might otherwise be
justly imposed on them, and for whom all felt a common
sympathy. The lowest individual in the empire was
compelled to eat bread, to use sugar, and other taxable
articles, the taxes on which must have been increased
had not the burden been borne by the higher and more
wealthy classes.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HORSMAN explained that he did not mean to
include Irish landlords resident in England in the class
on whom he proposed to lay a duty of only 4d. in the
pound. It had not escaped his notice that they were
assessed under schedule D ; but lie did not think this
the time for entering into minute details.
Mr. HUME was very sorry the debate had taken this
turn. He would not enter into the question of tree trade
further than to say that it was quite a mietike to suppose
that the tariff of the Right Hon. Baronet opposite had
proved a failure. For ten years previous to 1842
the revenue had averaged 51 millions. Since that
period it had averaged 52 millions, exclusive of the
income-tax.—(Dear, hear.) When the proposition for
increasing the income-tax was made he had protested
against it; and the nation had done so with one voice.
He considered the income•tax bad in itself. It was
ridiculous to say it was anything like just and equal,
but he regretted the Hon. Member for Cockermouth had
now brought forward his proposition; for the question
was simply, whether they would consent to an imcome-
tax or not; and if so, what should be its amount and
duration? He, therefore, hoped the Hon. Gentleman
would withdraw his proposition.—(hear, hear.) He
(Mr. Hume) had recently been in company with a dozen
political economists; they all differed as to the plan of
an ineome-tax; and was it likely that this House could
be brought to agree on such a subject?—(Hear, hear.)
He repeated that he was opposed to all property and
income-tax whatever, if it was not wauted.—(Langhter.)
Why should not the national security and dignity be
kept up with the &Me expenditure for the next ten
years, as it had been in the past? Why should not the
fifty-two millions of taxation, produced independently
of the income•tax, be sufficient for the national expen-
diture, as it had been before? To maintain otherwise
was to encourage Ministers to squander the public
money.—(llear, hear.) It was ail very well to keep up
our establishments ; but let the House look at the otter
side of the question—at the sufferings of those who had
to provide the means.—(Hear, hear.) It had been erro-
neously stated that this tax fell on the rich and middle
classes. To this assertion he would oppose the authority
of the First Lord of the Treasury, who had declared, in
1842, that it was, in fact, a tax on the productive classes
at large.—(Hear, hear.) Nothing but the extravagance
of the Ministry rendered this tax necessary. It was
much better to secure the welfare and stability of our
institutions—ay, of the throne itself—by not burdening
the people beyond their power of endurance.—(Hear,
hear.) Would it not have been better in France if the
i ex-King had striven to gain the affections of the people,
/ instead of destroying their liberties ? Had be dune se
he would not have been left without a friend to
help in the hour of need.—(Cheers.) We had
increased the expense of our establishments from 14 to
18 millions; the country had become more of a military
country in late years than ever.—(Bear.) Let the
House beware of increasing the national dissatisfaction.
This was no Whig and Tory question ; all classes were
united, not so much against the property tax as against
the unnecessary weight of taxation.—(Hear.) The Le-
gislature ought immediately to address itself to this
crisis. Let not Ministers suppose they were to run on
in this course without check or control ; for the feelings
iof the country were not to be trifled with.—(Hear.)
Why should not the seven millions which had been un-
necessarily added to the taxes in the last tea years be
reduced? From 1833 to 1836 the character and honour
of the country were well maintained at a much less cost
than at present. Ministers must have known that it
had now become absolutely necessary to review the
whole system of taxation ; any man of ordinary wis •
dom must have perceived that. The late Chancellor of
the Exchequer had defended the injustice of this tax
because other unjust taxes existed. He (Mr. Hume)
was prepared to prove that not a single tax existed
which was not unjust ; and was this matter of surprise,
after the wisdom which had presided over the Exchequer
of late years ?—(Laughter.) It was now for the House
to declare—first, whether they would have this tax at
all ; and then, what should be its duration. Most im-
portant was it to emancipate our colonies from the taxa-
tion endured by them ; this must be done, if we would
keep them our friends. Let them govern themselves in
the cheapest way they could. He was anxious to see
both the army and ordnance reduced ; and with these
views, he would not consent to the re-imposition of this
tax for more than one year. He would not give greater
power to any set of men, Whigs, Tories, or Radicals ;
for every one, from a king to a porter, required a check.
—(Laughter.) He would only consent to the income-
tax for one year, on condition of Government
undertaking to make a searching inquiry into
the expenditure, and to reduce the cost of
collecting the revenue. It was not for ireli•
vidual Members to come forward with plans for this
object ; it was the duty of Ministers to do it, and it
they could show that they had reduced the burdens to
the lowest possible amount the House would not refuse
what was necessary.—(Hear.) National, like private
credit.. could only be restored and maintained by re-
ducing the expenditure within the income.—(Hear.)
He would depend on no Ministerial promises or pro-
testations—let the House keep the check in its hand by
granting the tax for only one year. Should it be needed
for a longer period, let the Government sedulously ap-
ply themselves to the task of retrenchment. Rather
than lay on additional taxes at present he would call on
Ministers and all public functionaries to give up 25 per
cent. of their incomes.—(Laughter.) Yes—he would
even call on all persons having incomes above 5001.
a year to pay a like per centage, sooner than aggravate
the burdens on the people. He hoped the Hon. Member
for Cockermouth would withdraw his proposition, and
let the House go into Committee. If there were anoma-
lies, let them remain at present ; in Committee he
should be prepared to move as an amendment that the
tax should only continue one year.
After a few words from Mr. GOULBURN, in ex-
planation,

The Marquis of GRANBY said there were two ways
,of making up the existing sJeticiency of throe millions—
! either by reducing the expenditure, or adding to the
taxation. Of the first he feared there was little chance
after what he had heard from the Chancellor of the
Exchequer; on the other hand, it appeared an increase
in the army and other estimates were contemplated.
Much eloquence had been expended in condemnation
of this proposal. It had been said, that foreign nations
would take alarm, and regard this increase as a hostile
demonstration. He could not conceive that an additional
expenditure of some 500,000/. could be so regarded.
He did not believe that Ministers would have proposed
such an increase unless they had been convinced of its
necessity; and he was disposed to confide in the
opinion of Ministers rather than that of the Hon.
Member for the West Riding. He was sensibly
alive to the advantages of peace, and hoped that
the tranquillity which had continued for thirty
years would not now be broken. The announcement of
the Noble Lord at the head of the Government, the other
evening, that this country was determined not to
interfere with respect to the Government of a neigh-
bouring country, left him little doubt on the matter; and
he thought that the good sense and moderation of other
countries would see in that course an example which
they would be capable of appreciating. It there was no
means 9f making the expenditure and the income meet