The Sun.
London, England, 1848-02-25 00:00:00

TBE SUN, LONDON,

seven windows. [So the Noble Lord, doubtless from
Inadvertence, said ; but the copy of the Asses,or's
Warrant with which he favoured the reporters of this
journal Mates (p. 14) that exemptions under pare-
_ No. 10 (the one in question) "do not ex-
en` to any chamber or apartment in any of the
inns of court or of Chancery, or to any college
or hall of the Universities of Oxford or Cam-
bridge."l That was not the case with houses of a
poorer class, and therefore in Scotland, to which
country he himself belonged, if a man inhabited a
floor of a house, the floor was taken as part of the
house, and the occupier paid window duty. A great
grievance was, that no window could be blocked up
except with the kind of materials of which the walls
of the house were built. For example, no window in
IA brick house could be stopped up with wood, and
some of his unfortunate countrymen, in ignorance of
any such prohibition had sustained much lose. Mr.
John Bold, of Frome, was obliged to pay for a win-
dow which he had etoppted up with mortar, because
tbe walls were of stone. Mr. H. Evans had closed
up a window with lath and plaister instead of atone,
and after he had done so he was charged for it as a
Window, and had also to pay. Indeed cases of this sort
were innumerable. Another great grievance was, that
the Act of Parliament did not specify what a window
was. Every hole through which light catne seemed to be
regarded as a window. Mr. Scholefield, of Cam •
bridge, had to pay for a hole which he made in his
coel-eellar.— (Hear, hear.) If a person had eight, or
nine windows in his house, and made a hole through
`'hick air and the smallest portion of light might
'Penetrate, he hail to pay for it as an additional
window. The Noble Lord here instanced several
cases in which parties had been called on to pay for
malcing such holes; one of which was that of a person
who had to pay for two holes made in the roof of a
washhouee. Indeed, if a brick should fall out of the
gall of a house, so that the light came through, the
esvner might he put down for an additional window.
(Hear, hear.) This tax was collected in a very
different manner from the other assessed taxes. In
other cases a person set down how many servants, or
carriages, or horses, he had, and for these he was
charged ; but with regard to windows, he was not
asked how many he had ; and if he had the misfortune
to live at a time when a Chancellor of the Exchequer
like Mr. Baring took it into his head to renew the
assessment, he might find that he was called upon to
Pay for more windows than he had even admitted he
Possessed.—(llear.) Another grievance was, that all
skylights, however constructed, were liable for pay-
ment ; and thus all sorts of things, double or triple
windows, and openings of half an inch wide to those
Of. any size, were included. He had heard of much
'stress in this country, and he had a communication
in his hand from the glass trade, complaining of the
injury they sustained from the infliction of this duty,
and the evils which it caused to the community. His
friend, Mr. Swinbourne, had informed him that he
wished to put a glass top to a house, but was forced
to give up the experiment on account of this odious
and obnoxious tax.—(Hear, hear.) Then another
complaint was, that all windows did not pay equally.
It was pretended that, by the scale now adopted, the
Poor were exempted from the tax, and, no
doubt, all were exempted who had below eight
windows in their houses; but from the number of eight
windows till they reached 40 the payment gradually
increased; while at 40 windows the scale began to
descend, and descended regularly till it came to 180,
when the tax was Is. 6d. a window; whereas a house
with eight windows paid 2s. 31—(Hear, hear.) Yet
they were told that, by the present sliding scale, the
Poor were exempted, and the rich were compelled to
Pay. He never was in favour of sliding scales, and
he must say he thought they had gone out of fashion
with the corn-laws ; but he did not, at all events,
expect to hear a scale defended by which the pay-
ment increased till the number of 40 was reached,
and then lessened till it came to 180. He now came
to a part of his plan—if so he might call it —to which
he asked the serious attention of the House, because
it was that which he meant to propose as a substitute
for this odious and obnoxious tax .on light and air.
The House would recollect that the army, navy, and
ordnance estimates, in 1825, amounted to 15,310,0001.;
in 1835, to 11,600,000/. ; in 1845, 15,664,000/.; in
1846,16,864,0001.; and thebtlierkveniag they were told
that these estimates for the coming year amounted to
18,957,000/. Now, if his Right Hon. Friend the
Chancellor of the Exchequer were to bring in, the
amount of his estimates this year the same as in 1846,
he would thereby save not less than 2,000,0001.,
Which would enable him to repeal the window-tax.
But that was not the plan he proposed; and he only
mentioned it to show that by such a course the win-
dow duties might be got rid of. He had listened the
other evening most attentively to the statement of
the Noble Lord, and he heard from him that he
estitnated the whole amount of the revenue for the
following year at 54,730,000/. The increase in the
service estimates was—for the navy, 164,0001.;
army, 43,0001. ; ordnance, 245,0001.; while for
militia there was a sum of 150,0001. ; making in
all an increase of 600,000/. Now, he should propose
that his Right lion. Friend should take the
tame estimates as last year, and thus there would
fall to be deducted a sum of 600,000/. Next
be would cut off the squadron employed on
the African coast for the suppression of
of the slave trade, and he found this expenditure
amounted to 300,0001. ; so that with these two sums
they had 900,000/. The next proposal he would
Make was, that in place of the 5,000 additional
Soldiers coming home from India, the Government
Should furnish the metropolitan police force with
muskets. He did not wish to make them soldiers,
but he thought that in the event of the French
coming over, it would be of great use to have such a
large armed force in the metropolis, while the troops
from India, on their arrival in their own country,
should be allowed to repose on their laurels. In this
Case, then, there would be a reduction of 100,0001.,
altogether making one million.—(Hear, hear.) He
Would now come to an important part of the plan
Which he recommended. lle had shown how they
could raise 1,000,000/. by various modes of economy,
and he would now point out how they could raise an
additional 600,0001. his attention had lately been
called to a report of the Commissioners of Woods and
Forests, and he must say that that documenthad struck
him with uniningled astonishment.—(Hear, hear.)
In what he was to propose to the House he felt it his
duty at once to say that he would not include the
royal palaces ; for, considering the gracious bearing
of her Majesty on all occasions of public distress, and
the readiness with which her Majesty took her share
of the public burdens, he would be the last man to
make any proposition for interfering with the royal
palaces.—(Hear, hear:) He would, however, direct
their attention to that portion of the property under
the charge of the Commissioners of Woods and
Forests called the outlying property, and the greater
Part of that he would dispose of. The property he
was prepared to dispose of was the following :—New
Forest, New Park, and Parkhurst Forest ; Dean
Forest and High Meadow Woods ; Bere Forest, De-
lamer() Forest, Whittlewood Forest, Salcey Forest;
Whychwood Forest ; Hainault or Waltham Forest ;
Alice Holt and Woolmer Forests ; Eltham Woods ;
• and Chopwell Woods—the last being a somewhat
ominous name. When he came to see how these
forests were managed, he must say he was struck
with astonishment.—(Hear, hear.) He had in his
hand a return relative to the New Forest, which
might be taken as a specimen of all the others.
These lands were all lying waste—complete deserts
--without a single plough burning up an acre of
land. There was a return ordered of the amount of
timber supplied for the navy ; but from the year
1840 down to 1847 the return was uniformly nil.—
(Hear, hear.) Then, when he looked at the income
and expenditure, he found that the income in 1821
was 17,562/. 10s. 61, but that it had diminished in
1847 to 9,0261. In 1821 the expenditure was 8,1631.,
and in 1847 it had increased to 10,495/., being
1,0001. more than the income in that year.—(Hear,
hear.) Then there was such a number of people
to manage these forests--these luxuries so carefully
preserved. There were for the New Forest one lord
warden, 13 master keepers, including several Members
of Parliament ; 4 verderers, 2 rangers, 1 bow-
hearer, 1 lord warden's steward, 1 deputy surveyor,
1 assistant-deputy, 11 regarded, 14 groomkeepers,
&n•—(Hear.) Among other expenses, he found that
a dinner, at the public expense, was provided for the
verderers and other officers on the 14th of September
of each year ; and that another dinner was given to
about fifty other people connected with the forest.—
(Hear.) Now, he asked if it was not contemptible
to keep up such a state of things as this ?—("Hear,"
from Colonel Sibthorp.) He was glad to hear that
cheer from his Gallant Friend, and he knew that he
Would be prepared to do his duty, and to speak out
Manfully, as he always did on this question. He
hoped that there would be a searching inquiry into
this matter ; but, for God's sake let them have no
uoremissioners to discharge such a duty.—(Hear.)
lie had no hesitation in saying that if a portion of
these lands were brought into the market they would
realise a sum not less than 500,000/., and if that were
added to the sum of 1,000,0001., which he had already
ehown could be saved, they had a round sum of nearly
l;600,000/., the exact amount of the window-tax.—
lle would call the attention of the Noble Lord
(Lord Morpeth) to the miasma which prevailed in
this great uncultivate l waste of land, which stretched
like a cloaca maxima over the country, spreading
disease and death among the people; and he thought
that even in this point of view the subject was not
unworthy the attention of the Noble Lord.—(Rear,
bar.) he recollected that when he first brought
forward this subject he was met by the then Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Goulburn) with the
clue'llon,.whether he was able to produce any sani-
tary report bearing upon the point. He had sanitary
reports in his possession which bore strongly upon
the question. In a report from North Shields, he
found it stated that the number of windows was
greatly diminished by the window-tax, -and that ar-

rangements for ventilation were thereby interfered
with. From Sunderland, also, it was reported that
there had been a blocking up of numerous windows
to escape the tax, and that this was a primary cause
of sickness and mortality.—(Hear, hear.) Dr.
Reid had given a strong opinion as to the
effect of the tax in limiting the number of windows
among the dwellings of the poor; and Mr. Mar-
tin, of North Shields, had also pointed out how
much it interfered to keep out light and air from the
houses of all classes by the blocking up of windows
in that town. He, for one, could not be indifferent
to the blocking up of windows that was going on in
this manner in the northern parts of the kingdom,
because he trusted he never should forget that it was
an inhabitant of this very town (North Shields) who,
when an ancestor of his had his colours shot away,
mounted, and once more nailed them to the mast.
In conclusion, he would exhort the Noble Lord at
the head of the Government to recollect that retrench-
ment and economy had ever been the battle cry of
the party to which he belonged, and ‘N hieh had placed
him in power. He would appeal to all the Members
of that House to relieve the working people of this
country from an impost which was accompanied with
many grievances and evils ; and, last of all, he would
make his appeal to that Divine Providence which, by
giving to man light and air, showed how necessary
that blessing was to the maintenance of the human
constitution.—(Hear.)
" Ohl Lord of light and air,
Oh, King! oh, Father! hear my humble prayer:
Dispel this cloud; the light of heaven restore;
Grant us to see, and England asks no more.
If we must perish we'll thy will obey;
But let us perish in the face of day."
(Cheers.) The Noble Lord concluded by moving
the total repeal of the window duties.
Mr. lIUME seconded the motion. There was a
rule laid down by all political economists, that that
tax which was subject to the greatest amount of ex-
ceptions was the worst that could be imposed.—
(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir R.
Peel), two sessions ago, proposed the abolition of the
auction duties ; and he gave it as an admirable speci-
men of a law existing where the amount received was
the exception to the amount collected. Only 201. out
of every 1001. collected, he believed, reached the Ex-
chequer. Besides, lie showed that there were 18 dif-
ferent kinds of property exempted from this tax.
What was the case of the window-tax? In the first
place, Ireland paid no part of it.--(Hear, hear.) It
was a tax upon England and Scotland alone, and
whilst we had to pay additional taxes for the sup-
port of Ireland, was that country alone to be
exempted from this one? That of itself ought to be
a strong reason for its repeal. It appeared also
that houses below a certain rate were exempted.
He believed that about three-fourths of the
houses were thus free from it. Did not that show
that it must be a grievous tax to call for all these ex-
emptions? When the House interfered by their
taxation with the health and comfort of the people,
the result must necessarily be most disastrous. The
time was come when there must be a reform in our
system of taxation.—(Hear, hear.) He considered
this to be one of the most mischievous of the number;
and one of the grounds for his seconding the motion
of the Noble Lord was that he might show the coun-
try, by the division which would take place upon it,
who were, and who were not, friends of the poor. He
wanted to see how those Hon. Members would vote
who were usually loud in their desire for the im-
provement of the moral and religious character of
the country, for he held that until you could place
the mass of the people in an adequate state of phy-
sical comfort, a large portion of the expenditure
for moral and religious purposes would be utterly
lost.—(llear, hear.) lie agreed with the Noble
Lord that the royal forests were a burden to this
country, and ought to be sold. It was the duty of
the House, when the trappings of royalty became
expensive and pressed upon the wants of the
community to take measures for abridging them. He
felt very serious on this point, and he assured the
House that these were not the times for trifling on
such subjects. The House ought to look at the situation
of the mass of the people, and try to reduce their
burdens to art extent which would afford them real
relief.—(Hear, hear.) Taking, off a trifle here and
a trifle there would not answer the purpose. -The
public expected greater relief and they looked to the
Government to give it to them. It was the duty of
the Government to originate such reforms. The
House could only aid them in carrying them out.
He hoped the division to-night would show that a
large portion of the House was favourable to the re-
peal of the tax then under consideration.
Colonel SIBTHORP had sincere gratification in
supporting the motion of the Noble Lord, and he cor-
dially thanked him -for the manly course lie had
taken in opposition to the Ministry. He fully agreed
with the Noble Lord, that if they were to institute a
searching inquiry into the abuses of their expenditure,
retrenchment might be effected to an extent that
would enable them to get rid cf this and many
other taxes. But this would be attended with con-
siderable trouble and inconvenience, and the Govern-
ment would of course resist it. There was a total
indifference on the part of Government as to what
became of the people, so long as they filled their own
pockets and enjoyed their own comfort.—(Laughter.)
With respect to the window-tax, if it was to be main-
tained, it ought not to be put upon the dwellings of
the poor, but upon the mansions; of the rich. The
Government offices ought to he made pay. The gen-
tlemen who were revelling in Downing-street, whose
houses were furnished, for aught he knew, out of the
secret service fund—(Renewed laughter)—and who
gave dinner after dinner to each other, ought to be
made to pay. He would have this secret service
fund examined into also. The very word " secret"
carried with it a suspicion that something was going
on that ought not to go on. He would not be sur-
prised to hear that some of it had gone to the case of
Dr. Hampden.—(Continued laughter.) He repeated
that he would cordially support the Noble Lord in
his present motion, for he considered it as at present
levied to be a disgraceful, dirty, shabby, and uncon-
stitutional mode of raising money.
Sir DE LACY EVANS wished to say a few
words in support of the present motion, for he felt it
was unnecessary to do more after the able speech of
the Noble Lord, not only then but on former occa-
sions; and more especially as the unjust and oppres-
sive nature of the tax was so self-evident. To this
moment the justice of the tax remained unvindicated.
IThe Chancellor of the Exchequer had not yet risen,
but he (Sir De Lacy Evans) had listened to his pre-
decessors on former occasions, and he had never
heard from them anything approaching to vindication
of the justice of this tax. He knew very well that
it was often alleged, in a vague and general way, that
there was no tax whatsoever but some particular
grievance or objection might be brought against it.
But he took leave to say that this did not apply to
the present case—for whether they looked at it in-
dividually or generally it was absolutely indefeasible.
The humbler classes wore made to pay at the rate of
20 or 30 per can?, while the opulent classes paid only
1, lk, 2k, or per 'cent. Could such a tax as that be
defended ?—(Heir, hear.) He agreed with the Noble
Lord regarding the royal forests. The country de-
rived no sort of advantage from them whatsoever.
Some 800 or 500 years ago they were a luxury to the
monarch ; but for some hundreds of years past they
had been merely deserts, as the Noble Lord had said,
except in regard to furnishing some snug berths for
members of the aristocracy and the humbler sup-
porters of the Governments which had succeeded each
other from time to time in this country.—(Hear,
hear.) He did think that they might be very well
disposed of. Among the items of expenditure brought
forward by the Noble Lord to show the necessity of
increased taxation were the expenses of the Kafir
war; but it ought to be remembered that this item
appeared only fur the present year, and was not likely
to be repeated.—(Hear, hear.) He firmly believed
that the people of this country, notwithstanding the
temporary distress—for temporary he believed it to
be—which pressed upon the community, and which
at present threw a gloom urn the operations of com-
merce as well as other matters—he believed that not-
withstanding these circumstances the great body
of the people were perfectly willing to contri-
bute to the necessary expenses of Government;
and that they ware also capable of supplying the
means for those expenses. It was not the amount of
those expenses which created the annoyance and
irritation on the mind of the public, so much as the
unjust and unequal distribution of the taxes —(llear,
hear.) Nothing had so much tended to produce the
French revolution—he spoke of the first revolution,
not of the present one---(Hear, hear)—as the convic-
tion on the part of the people that their fiscal burdens
were unjustly and unequally distributed. He would
suggest a small addition to the budget for the consi-
deration of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor
of the Exchequer—he meant the probate duty on real
property.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") There
was scarcely any item of taxation the omission of
which had had ?. stronger effect on the feelings of the
people than this. It was felt to be unjust that the
hardly-earned produce of industry should repeatedly
and constantly, and in the small amounts in which it
was realised, be subjected to a heavy probate duty,
while the transmission of the property of the great
and wealthy had no tax of a similar nature whatever.
He trusted that this snbject would receive the early
aid serious attention of Government.—(Hear.)
The CHANCELLOR. of the EXCHEQUER—I
do not know that the office which I have the honour
—however unworthily—to fiil is at any time remark-
ably agreeable. It is certainly, however, as disagree-
able an office as any one can possibly occupy when
the country is suffering distress, and when it is my
painful duty—however reluctantly—to increase taxa•
tion. On the present occasion I have another painful
duty to discharge in resisting the remission of a tax
which has been described to-night in no very mea-
sured terms as odious and vexatious. I confess that
I think that the proposition to repeal the window-tax,

or, indeed, any tax at present, was sufficiently
answered by the speech of my Noble Friend (Lord
John Russell) the ther night—(Hear, hear)—when
my Noble Friend was called upon unwillingly to
propose to the House additional taxation to the
amount of 3,000,0001. I think it would be
unwise if we were to part with the window-
tax. There is an old fable, that we can bear the bur-
dens we have been accustomed to more easily than we
can bear the imposition of new burdens ; and surely
those who are anxious to avoid fresh taxation can
hardly ask us, in our present cipcumstances, to give
up a tax which yields about 1,600,0001. or 1,700,000/.
a year.—(Hear, hear.) When I look at the notice
paper, I find various Hon. Members struggling for
the revision of taxation ; but they are not all of them
quite so kind as my Noble Friend in proposing a sub-
stitute. Bat I must say, when my Noble Friend
accuses us of being spendthrifts, that his proposal of
disposing of our capital (by the sale of the royal
forests) is by no means the most thrifty mode of
dealing with our property. I think it right also to
state, that the offices in connexion with the royal
forests, to which the Noble Lord referred, are mere
honorary appointments. The House would naturally
suppose, from the statement of the Noble Lord, that
these great personages were a heavy charge upon the
public revenue, whereas he might have told the House
that the emolument, like the timber to which he
referred, was—nil.—(Hear, hear.) With regard
to timber for the royal navy, the Noble
Lord supposes these forests are of no use whatever ;
but the fact is, that at the present time, when the
whole world is open to us, timber is imported from
abroad. The chief expense incurred is in enclosing
and protecting those plantations, which will hereafter,
as in former days, insure a good supply for the navy
when foreign timber may not be so accessible. This
is the object for which the forests are kept up, not as
the useless appendages of royalty, as the Noble Lord
described them. The Noble Lord now proposes to
repeal the window duties ; and the third motion,
lower on the notice paper, to be brought forward to-
night by an Hon. Friend of mine (Mr. Evart), con-
templates the abolition of the Excise duties on paper,
soap, and bricks, the duties on butter and cheese, and
the reduction of the duties on tea, tobacco, and wine.
Now, really, Sir, in the present state of our finances,
these propositions are not a little serious. I have taken
the trouble to ascertain what is the produce of these
various duties. The window duties and the excise on
paper soap, and bricks, yield to the revenue in round
numbers 4,000,000/, a year. The usual proposition for
reducing the duty on tea is from 2s. 11d. to ls., on wine
to 2s. 6d. per gallon, and on tobacco from 3s. to ls.
per lb. The produce of these duties is upwards of
11,000,0001., and taking the proposed reduction to
be about one-half, it would occasion a loss of revenue
of more than 5,000,0001.; to which we must add the
4,000,000/. of loss from the repeal of the first-named
duties, making in all a sacrifice of no less than
9,000,0001. I appeal to the common sense of Hon.
Members whether, in the present state of our finances,
the proposal now submitted, and that other about to
be submitted by: my Hon. Friend, are practicable,
or such as any Government could think of acceding
to. My Honourable Friend the Member for Dum-
fries has, to be sure, a proposition to substitute for
the duties he would reduce and repeal, a system of
direct taxation on realised property; that is, on all
property under schedules A and C, now producing
about 3,000,000/.; the Honourable Gentleman would
quadruple the present amount of taxation, a propo-
sition which even those most enamoured of a tax on
realized property may well view with alarm.—
(Hear, hear.) Objections have been urged to
the mode in which the window duties are
levied. Sir, when it is said that this is one of
those taxes which exclusively press on the poor, I
must take the liberty of altogether denying the state-
ment. We have been constantly told during the last
four or five years by those who seek the repeal of
duties most onerous to the humbler classes, and
admit there is considerable truth in the argument,
that the most advantageous mode of benefiting the
poor is to take off the taxes on corn and the necessa-
ries of life, imposing instead direct taxation; and yet we
have heard to-night Gentlemen who always advocated
this course insist that the window duty, which comes
nearer to a property-;ax than any other now existing
'in the country, should be remitted for the benefit of
the poorer classes of the' community.--(Hear, hear.)
The Hon. Member for Montrose objects to the tax,
because there are so many exemptions. What are
those exemptions ? They are invariably in favour
of the lower orders. Speaking generally, of
3,500,000 houses, only 500,000 are subject to this
window duty, 8,000,000 being exempt. What
houses are exempt ? Not those of the nobility and
gentry, but the smallest description of houses, occu-
pied from one end of the country to the 'other by
the poorest classes. I don't mean to say there are
not houses with fewer than eight windows inhabited
by persons of property S it is impossible to deal with
two or three exceptional cases. The lower class of
houses, in which the poor reside, are exempt from
this tax ; therefore, to call it a tax imposed by the
wealthy on the poor is a most extraordinary perver-
sion of the real facts of the case. The exceptions are
almost invariably in favour of persons who do not
beneficially occupy the houses. My Honourable
and Gallant Relative (Colonel Sibthorp) would put a
tax on public offices ; but what would the public gain
by that ? I should have to propose in the miscel-
laneous estimates a sum of money to !pay a tax on
the windows of the Treasury, where the clerks sit at
their duty ; we should thus be paying from one
hand into another ; nothing could result from such a
ceremony but inconvenience, and possibly some loss
in the transfer. To suppose that the public would
gain by the process is the most preposterous idea
ever propounded by my Honourable and Gallant
Relative.—(A laugh.) The Noble Lord talked of the
exemption of agricultural housee ; but all buildings
occupied for the purposes of trade and manufacture
are also exempt from the window-tax. That, again,
is an exemption in favour of the industrious classes.
Those only pay who inhabit dwelling-houses. The
Noble Lord also spoke of the extraordinary amount
raised on the lower description and the small amount
raised on the higher class of houses. Why is it so ?
Because the lower class is greatly more numerous.—
.(Hear, hear.) Of the 500,000 houses in the king-
dom subject to the tax there are 314,000 with 15
windows and under. If you mean to tax only the
large houses of the: rich you will hare. no produce
from your taxation. If it be necessary to raise a large
amount of taxation, you may take it as an indisput-
able fact that you must render it payable by a large
number of persons. If you confine your tax to a small
number at the top of the tree the produce of it will be
very small, even if you increase your impost to confis-
cation. The Noble Lord, speaking on the subject of the
window duties, referred to the arguments urged in 1833
in favour of the repeal of the house tax, as if that pressed
most heavily on the richer portion of the community.
There cannot be the slightest doubt that the window-
tax, taking town and country together, bears most
severely on the higher classes. Referring to-day to the
returns connected with the inhabited house duty, I
found that the houses of the !nobility and gentry paid
much less than the window-duty. I myself paid 821.
for window duty, whereas I used to pay to the
house-tax 141. I should, therefore, have benefited
twice as much if the window-tax had been removed
as I now do by the remission of the house-tax. There
is no doubt considerable objection to this tax, and if
there were any other mode of raising the same amount
of duty, I should be exceeding glad. I have been
in communication with the Chairman of Stamps and
Taxes and the officers of that Board, and we have had
under consideration various schemes for improving
the mode of rating to the window duty, and removing
the objections which I admit there are to it; but
my Noble Friend and the deputation that waited
upon me some time ago said that to amend the
scale, and to put an end to the inequalities that existed,
would be of no use ; end although I did venture to
ask whether they preferred the tax levied in. another
way, I could not discover that they had any such
proposition to make. Their only proposition, and the
only one made in this House is the absolute repeal
of the tax ; but that is one which, in the present state
of the finances of the country, however painfrd it may
be not to take off a tax to which so strong an ob-
jection is made, I feel it to be my duty to oppose.
After a few words in explanation from Ear D. L.
EVANS,
Mr. R. PALMER felt it impossible, in the present
state of the finances of the country, to give a vote in
favour of this motion, though he looked upon the
tax itself as the most objectionable of those which
remained unrepealed.—(llear, hear.) lie was an
advocate of direct taxation; but of such direct
taxation as should interfere least with the industry
of the country. The window-tax was one, which
interfered directly with the employment of capital
and labour, and he saw no reason why the same
amount could not be raised in the way of an :tddition
to the income-tax rather than by a windo w duty,
which interfered with the manufacture of glass, and
consequently the employment of labour. If the tax
was to be supported on the principle of an income-
tax why not snake it one ?—(Hear, hear.) As show-
ing the gross inequality of the tax, he four.d, taking
the twelve towns which contributed the gretatest pro-
portion of the tax, that Plymouth (which he repre-
sented) paid 11,3261. a year to the window-tax, while
Leeds paid only 7,789/., though he would vunture to
say that Leeds represented more than ten times the
wealth of Plymouth. Another objection to the
tax was that it interfered with the health of ilat class
of people whom they ought most to consider—
of mechanics and others who now dtislt in cellars
and herded together in dark, confined, and us shealthy
rooms, and for whom the Noble Lord (Ashlkay) and
other benevolent persons, were endeavouring to pro-
vide more healthy habitations.—(Hear, hear.) The
House, he thought, ought to make a determined stand
against a tax which operated so unequally art a in a
manner so injurious to the industrious classes.
Mr. WAKLEY—The Hon. Member for Ply! pouth