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

THE WINDOW DUTIES.

Lord DUNCAN presented a petition from lir,
wards of 5,000 persons, inhabitants of Bath, inclov
ing the mayor, most of the magistrates, and member
of the town council, praying for the immediate sod
total repeal of the window-tax ; also, similar petitions
from owners and occupiers of houses inhabited by the
working and middle classes in Sunderland, and in 06
borough of Bury, in Lancashire.
Sir B. HALL presented a petition from Ilaryly
bone to the same effect.
Lord DUNCAN said that, in rising to propose al,
motion of which he had given notice, he was well
aware of the objections and difficulties which rule'
be made to this or to any other motion for a reductie
of taxation, more especially at the present crisis. op
would own that he was in hopes that he should bare
been anticipated by the Noble Lord (J. Russell), or
by his Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Er
chequer in the motion, because when he considered thst,
in a time of peace the budget, of which they had heard
so much, proposed an augmentation of the property'
tax, he should have expected that it would have bee°
put forward as a substitute for one which pressed
most grievously on ,the labouring classes of this
country. He had been told that this was not the
time to bring forward the present motion, but he had
always observed that the unsuitable character of the
time was always made the pretext for opposition hi:
those who did not wish it to be brought forward ,s'
any time whatever. On the last occasion when. the
question was mooted he had moved for a Committee
of inquiry, but that motion was defeated, and he nos
therefore moved for a total repeal of the window-0%;
On looking over the taxation of the country, ;
thought he had found a substitute for this tax, and t
was on this account that he had been induced to cot
forward as speedily as possible and lay the who
question before the Chancellor of the Exchequer
for his consideration. It was made a great host
that out of 3,500,000 houses in Great Brit
w
less thou 500,000 paid the window-tax.
_,_ll.
reason why so many houses were exempt
that the windows of a great number were reduced
seven windows only. He had received a letter from
a very great authority, which he recommended to
consideration of his Noble Friend the Chief Comnol,
s'oner of Woods and Forests, and in which the
writer said that no plan of sanitary reform would,
complete till the window-tax was abolished, He
also received a similar letter from Mr. Byers,
chairman of the Carpenters' Society in London, 10!
a very extensive builder. Mr. Byers stated that 0,
the poorer description of houses the washhouses soe
privies were entirely without ventilation, from o"
operation of the window-tax, and that in Compton
street he had been employed to stop up no less than
five windows in almost every house in the street. The
,
history of the house duty and window tax was wort
attention of the House. In 1695, in the reign
William the Third, the first Act was passed s,'
levying duties on inhabited houses in Great Britso
The /duty on each house was only 2s. but there
was a duty of 4s. on houses having 10 windoil
and a duty of Bs. on houses with 20 windows. Oht
tax was considerably increased in the time of Qtll.
Anne and in the time of George 11. In 1747, o,-
:
Pelham got an Act passed by which houses and sra_li
dows were taxed separately. In 1784 Mr. Pitt past
his famous Commutation Act, which greatly increased
the window duty, and in 1797 he found it necess
to increase the tax upon houses. In 1802 and 18Ø9,
two more Acts were passed, which augmented the
duties on windows, and in 1822 Sir John Hobhouset
then Member for Westminster, brought forward !
motion very similar to that which he (Lord Dunes°,)
had now laid on the table. Sir Juin. Hobhouse
told that it was absolutely impossible to repeal the
window-tax, but so strong was the opinion of_
people on the subject that in the year following inr:
Robinson, at that time Chancellor of the Exchequei
found it necessary to reduce the window-tax one-hAT
In 1834, when Lord Althorp repealed the house-t.
he passed also another Act, to which he should P'
leave to call the attention of the House. In that A__Ci
Lord Althorp inserted a clause, in which it w""
stated that persons then duly assessed should 1111
power to open as ninny windows as tb ey pleased.
great number of persons took advantage of that p..fry
vision, and accordingly opened a very great numb"
of windows. Unfortunately, in 1840, there Wo'
what was found to be the case at present, a deficiens
in the revenue, and Mr. Baring, the Chancellory
the Exchequer, passed another Act, laying an ad
di
10 per cent. on the assessed taxes; and, at tits
same time he had recourse to what is called s „sr°
assessment. It would be found, on comparing
‘,.ew"
year ending April, 1840, which was previous to tt
B' aring's Act, with the year ending April, 1841, tual-
in 1841 there were 450,913 houses paying 1,613,308;
to be set against 394,036 houses in 1840, paiirj,rit
1,350,9301. ; thus showing an increase of 56,81,
houses, and of 262,3781. additional taxation. 14°',4,
withstanding, however, the increase of populatt
which was going on, the window-tax immediately
afterwards fell off, as the people had recourse to the
expedient of blockading their windows. The numb%
of houses assessed gradually decreased from 450,91"
in 1841 to 447,383 in 1844. But the most strilsiogi
feature in this part of the case was the diminution
which had taken place within the same period in t 0
number of houses having eight or nine windows. ,`
1841 the total number of houses having eight $1112:1
dows was 62,898, while in 1844 they had dwindle
nt
down to 55,692. Again, in 1841, the numher-,
houses with nine windows was 54,241 ; and, in 187.1
this number had decreased to 53,781, showing s
decrease in the lowest class of houses assessed to the
window-tax of 7,296 houses. The mistake made
financiers was that windows were taken to be a criterion
of the value of a man's house ; though they might d
well take the number of buttons on his coat as a el;
tenon of the value of what was in his p boocket. There
was another point to which he wished to call the
attention of the House, and that was, the inequsl7,
of the assessment. In Berwick-street and in Fols°',
street, Soho, no one house was rated at 2001. aye
and most of houses in them at 301., 401., and t.is
yet these two streets paid 8981. window-duty, svi".,,
in St. James's. square, where there was no liolsTo
rated under 100/. a year, and many houses l'isest
rated at 500/., and even 1,0001., only contributed 6vn'il
to the window-duty. Berkeley-square paid but 71'd
and Grosvenor-square 983/. it would be foo°,„1
therefore, that houses with a rental of 30/. or 4"-
a year, paid 30 or 40 per cent. in addition in the sill;
of window-duty, while many houses, occupied "5
richer people, only paid in the proportion of 4 ore
l
per cent. upon the rental. Mr. Porter's table sh,‘„ni,,
that the houses under 15 windows paid 544,T0is
one-third of the total amount of the duty; tP„:
under 20 windows 854,0001., one-half of the sl'L's
those under 24 windows 1,028,0001.; and or,
under 35 windows 1,500,0001., two-thirds of the du'
leaving 147,0001. to be contributed by large hooriti
Now, upon looking at a little book which he held e,
his hand, called the Assessor's Warrant and 1001,4
Lions, the first thing that struck one was the wora,
of exemptions from the duty. In the first place, To
land was exempted altogether—(Hear, hear)---110uhs
the Right Hon. Gentleman would allow hiohssi
would tell him why. Mr. Robinson stated in
that:the impoverished inhabitants of Ireland, in order
to avoid the window-tax, had resorted ,to the alis'
able expedient of stopping up the apertures in their
houses, and had thus made their houses dark and tw
o
wholesome ; but he added that such was not the 'di
t
in this country. He (Lord Duncan) had illres,,
shown, however, that this process was going on %-xs
considerable extent even in England. Well, the 137,0
exemption was for all public offices, and therefore.srio
gentlemen who enjoyed themselves in Pl°o
offices might open as many windows of
they pleased. The next exemption was in favousr, s,
all occupying tenants of farms at a rent under 2(.cts
year ; an exemption confined to country
only. Then, Lord Althorp, an agricultural Chance
for of the Exchequer, brought in an Act whic,lLA
empted windows in dairies and cheese-rooms. d,
windows windows in shops and factories were exempted,2*
tho
of course there was also an exemption in favour on
law and the church. He found that chambers id
the
Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, en,_9ll.
Lincoln's Inn, were to be charged as separate a
ing houses, and consequently they would not
L
liable to window-duty, unless they had more ;1'
distrcie.,