The Sun.
London, England, 1833-05-01 00:00:00

to say that such a place as Woburn Abbey should be
assessed at 170/., whilst the City of London Tavern,
paid 141/. 13s. 41, although the whole house was so
completely devoted to purposes of business, that the pro-
prietor and his family did not even take up their abode in
it--( Hear.) In Cheapside, the Poultry, and Cornhill,
one hundred houses had been taken indiscrimi-
nately, which were rated at 160/. ; whilst, with the
exception of the metropolis, and the principal manu-
facturing towns, there were not any two counties
in England or Wales, which contained an equal number of
houses so rated.—(Hear.) In the country there might be
found 8,000 houses, such as those of which he had
spoken, which had cost in their erection from 2,0001. to
200,000/. each ; but those houses in Cheapside, &c., cost
in erection from 1,500/. to 2,000/. ; what then was the
cause of this difference, but that it was the trade carried
on in them that was taxed—that it was not in operation a
property tax, but a tax upon trade and industry?—(Cheers.)
Adam Smith seemed to justify the opinion that the value
of a man's house was a criterion of his disposable income ;
but it must also be recollected that he also said that houses
used for purposes of trade were not to be looked upon as mere
dwelling houses. Now the majority of the houses from
which the tax was levied, were what ha properly called
instruments of trade and 'sources of gainful occupation.
Although the modification of the window tax proposed by
the Noble Lord would afford a small relief to a small por-
tion of those who suffered, yet it would not remove
the objectionable principle on which this tax
was founded, for still the highly taxed houses were
the residences of the producers, whilst the low taxed
houses were the residences of the consumers. Trades
men, shopkeepers, and mechanics must live where they
could, but the mere consumers could live where they
pleased. Competition raised the dwellings of tradesmen
to their enormous rent, hut for the mansions of the rich
and great there was but small competition.—(Hear.)
The possessors of wealth were not confined to a particular
pat of a town or to any of the 52 counties of Eng-
land and Wales, but might go to Paris, to Rome,
to Naples, to Florence, and enjoy the wealth in the home
of their adoption which they drew from this over-taxed
county. The Noble Lord might suppose that shops
were the only houses used for the purposes of trade,
but such was not the fact, for it was absolutely neces-
sary for the health of many who resorted during the day
to the crowded parts of the town, to hasten to the country
in the evening, and spend the night in a purer air.
(Hear.) The relief proposed to be given by the Noble
Lord to the shopkeepers was as one to ten; whilst the
injustice done them, compared with the mere consumers,
was as ten to one.—(Hear, hear.) Perhaps the Noble
Lord thought that, by tendering a small relief to the shop-
keepers, he should be probably following up the maxim of
divide and conquer with success; but he was mistaken,
for the housekeepers throughout the country would
unite as one man to oppose this tax, which
was unjust in principle, vexatious in its detail,
and inquisitorial in its imposition and collection.
They were of opinion that no modification of the tax would
remove its objectionable principle. They would never,
therefore, cease complaining of this tax, and he would
never abandon the cause till it was abolished.
Having, as he believed, borne out the two propositions
which he had laid down at his opening, he would now
consider the house tax by itself. It was a moat unjust tax
upon trade—an income tax in its most objectionable
shape. The income tax, in his opinion, was a heavenly
one as compared to that in question, for by it a man
only paid upon his real profits—an allowance was
made for expenses and bad debts ; but the tax in
question was one upon the very house itself in which the
trade was carried on. The collector made no allowances
for anything likely to happen, but dipped deep into the
pockets of the tradesman who was losing by his business,
as if he was making his fortune. The t ffeet it had
was, first to consume his capital, then his credit followed,
and upon its heels ruin and a gaol followed; for a bankruptcy
was no protection to -he esta.e, the essil ctinn of these un-
just and iniquitous) axes having a preference over everything.
Upon the window taxes he had not much to say, as all
he had sail abut toe house duties, applied to those on
windows. He woul.l only further state the injurious effect
of it upon the health and comfort of the people. In many
parts of the metropolis, where old houses t ad been fitted up
for the poor, many of the windows were necessarily shut
up, and it had leen found to have been most injurious to
the health of the people during the late visitation of the
cholera. The etra ct of it had been, that builders, finding
it impossible to eat esil the law, had been obliged to build
their houses so as to meet the law and not the comfort of the
people who were to live in them. The first objection
which he had heard to the repeal of these taxes was, that
the exigencies of the State would not allow of it ; but he
had never heard the repeal of any tax met in any other
way, therefore that reason was not a valid one. The
next was as to the collection ; it appeared that
these taxes cost in the collection 5/. 7s. 6d. per 100/.,
while the indirect taxes were got in at a much less
expense. Get rid of them, and then you may also get rid
of the whole army of commissioners, collectors, sur-
chargere,window-peepers, spies, and informers. —( Cheers.)
Let these two taxes be taken off, then, and the others
might be collected at a much cheaper rate. There could
be no greater inconvenience in a gentleman obtaining a
license for any individual luxury, than in a tradesman
obtaining one to deal in any article, or for
acting as an auctioneer. As to the argument that the
Minister could not do without these taxes, as he said
before, that was the constant cry upon such an occasion ;
but he would call upon the House to try the Minister, and
no doubt he would find some way of getting a substitute.
First of all, the expense of the collection of those taxes
was 280,000/. a year; and next, they were peculiarly
gathered from the working classes, who, by their repeal,
would be greatly relieved, and thereby enabled to expend
so much tee more in purchasing the necessaries of life ;
and the proportion of income thus let loose would cause
a great increase in the consumption of all the necessities
and comforts of life.—(Hear, hear.) The House
could not be ignorant of the great anxiety manifested
by the people for the repeal of these taxes, and he hoped
they would not accuse him of tresp dieing too long on
their attention, in urging hie proposition.—(Hear, hear.)
He thanked them fur the patient hearing they had
given hits, and he begged to express his opinion,
in which he hoped the House would concur,
that these taxes were foijusr, impolitic, and oppressive,
shat they distressed trade, fettered industry, and were li able
to all the objections that other taxes were liable to,
without producing any of the advantages which some
taxes produce I. The Hon. Baronet concluded by moving
as a resolution of the House—" That that part of the
assessed taxes, relating to the house and window taxes, be
repealed."—(Cheers.)
Mr. Alderman WOOD rose to second the resolution,
which a very consida ruble number of his constituents
ihotight necessary. and in doing so he felt great satisfac-
tion. The House would perceive the extraordinary man-
ner in which those taxes operated, from the fact
that he could scarcely pass five houses, in any
of the principal streets, but he found one untenanted.
Indeed it was stated by a very intelligent member of a
deputation that waited on the Noble Lord, that in many
of the large public streets, one in every three of the shop.
keepers had been either bankrupt, or compounded with bis
creditors. It had been said that if the tax were taken off
it would only benefit the landlords of houses, and nut the
tenants; that was not true, for in most of the streets of
business the occupiers in fact were the landlords—
at least for a time, as most of the houses were
leasehold.--(1-1-ar, hear.) As regarded the relief
that the Noble Lord had on a former night proposed
to afford to shopkeepers, he ( 'alderman Wood) had a great
number of Istrers from a large class of persons, complain-
ing that it would he to them no relief at all. It had been
rumoured that the proposition of his Hon. Friend (Sir
John Icy) was placed in a peculiar situation, for it was
to have the support of the landed interest, mixed with the
question of the malt tax, and a threatened property tax ;
also, that upon some of those subjects many gentlemen
had chanced their minds—(Laughter)—if they had, it
would appear very strange, and how they could appear be-
fore their constiluents he could not tell ; but for his
part, if he had so acted he would not face his constituents
again.—( A laugh, and a cry, " You were pledged.")
He bogged to inform the Hon. Member for Yorkshire that
lie was not pledged ; that his constituents had elected him
without r quiring a pledge from }inn—knowing him to be
an old and, as he hoped, a faithful servant. At a recent
meeting in the city of London three propositions were
agreed to—the vote by ballot (which an Han. Colleague
of his had brought forward, though with no SU etTS3)
the present mea-tare which his /ion. Friend (Sir J. Key)
was intrusted with—and the shortening of the duration ut
Parliaments, which was intrusted to him (Mr. Ald, Wood).

f He could conscientiously vote fur ali:Afeitlnee proposition
In round numbers he took the property of the country at
three thousand millions, and he would at only I per cent.
raise as much as would enable the Chancellor of ti e
Exchequer to dispense with all our taxce.—(Hear,
hear.) He would take off all the taxes with tie
WbeexhrTceise;:phetalilsoonspthoiEnafniAtih. e taxes on spirits and tobacco, and he would
have, he was quite sure, a surplus over expenditure. He
was prepared to join the Noble Lord in imposing a tax
geoxrnetaraticr,,obdpjecnerattriyyono,f
feelany is.ort, and a tax on income of any
sort, provided he took off the assessed taxes, and those
which generally pressed heavily on the industrious castes
of society. He begged leave to second the Hon. Mem-
nKh
nature,
eat, heaennhdoput
onue
honour
which
hee mcmhoat oen
admit
ranonni and
te
ofs
linable
to
Lor.l ALTHORP rose and said—As the proposition
s
grounds on which I very
substance of the resolution with •
which I shall conclude, to
explain to the House the circumstances of the and the
it necessary,
plelleedcnatseer,ton
taketl:e
the course whioh I feel it myto duty adept.
Sir, the division which took place
on Friday last lam
not going to call a complete surprise on the House, because
certainly the notice was in the House that the proposi-
tion should be brought forward; but gentlemen must r,-
collect that on that evening four notices were on the
order books, and every gentleman who knows the
forms of the House must know on the question of a
Committee of Supply, only two motions can be mode, one
on the order of the day, and the other on the motion
that the Speaker do leave the chair. Certainly, for my-
self, I did not expect that the motion of the Honourable
Member for Lincolnshire could have been !airtight
forward.—(Hear, hear.) The motion, however, of
the Honourable Member for Oldham and another was
withdrawn, and the consequence was that the Hon.
Member forLincolnehire's motion was brought on. The
question was supported by gentlemen on different ground-.
and I certainly do not think that the decision which took
place on that occasion would justify the Govern-
ment in taking any decided line of policy as
indicated by the decision of the House on that occasion.
—(Hear, bear.) Ido not think it could have justified
Government in changing the whole course of the financial
policy of the country, nor would it have justified them in
thinking that the ultimate decision of the Him.- was de-
cidedly against them, and in retiring to make room for
others who might be inclined to ((anew them.—(Hear.)
On these grounds I certainly feel that the question is placed
in a situation of great embarrassment, because I am per-
fectly ready to admit that it is very objectionable to make
the proposition which I shall conclude with, viz., to rescind
and alter, to a certain degree, the vote which 'the
House came to on that uccasion._(Hear, hear.)
But, Sir, I think, in the choice of evils, it is my duty to
submit to the consideration of the House the course of
proceeding it will be the duty of Government to adopt,
supposing that the House perseveres in the course
it took on that occasion.—(Hear.) The House shou'd
be aware in taking into consideration the alternative; all
the consequences of ir._(Hear, hear.) As I stated in
the course of the debate on the former occasion, and I
did not state it hesitatingly, I really did not think it
of any very great consequence, whether the proposition of
my Hon. Friend should have been fur a reduction of
half or the whole of the malt duty.—(Hear, hear.)
On the contrary, I am also prepared to say,
if the House concurs that a substitution of other taxa-
tion should take place, that it would be a wiser
course for the House to remove the whole tax—(llear)
than to remove the half of the tax on malt. With the
same view I look at the question proposed by the Hon.
Baronet to night. I think it must be evident to all
that it would be utterly impossible in common fairness to
the inhabitants of this country, to give so large a relief
to one claps of inhabitants without giving a large relief
to another class.—(Hear.) Therefore, I do think that
if the House does persevere in its resolution to
reduce the malt duty, it will be their duty to take
into consideration the proposition of the Hon. Barcinet,
favourably for its adoption.—(Hear.) And this must
necessarily produce an alteration in our financial system.
—(Cheers.) Sir, Ido not see bow it is possible for any
Gentleman to adopt these propositions without being pre-
pared to vote for the adoption of a property tax. The
Worthy Alderman who has spoken last has avowed his
perfect readiness to take that course. Now, I think the
House ought to have this fairly placed before them.
They ought to consider what the alternative is—they
ought to consider whether that alternative is one which
in their prudence and discretion they would think it' de-
sirable to adopt. Now Ido not think that we ought to
adopt a very small property tax, if the system is to he
adopted at all—if it is to be adopted, it ought to be
adopted as a system, and then it would be desirable
not to raise less titan ten or eleven millions by a property
tax, as a substitute for the other taxes. In this case I
should say, it is quite clear this would be a property tax ap-
plying generally, as I stated in my resolution for to. night.
Now I am not wishing to argue the question whether it
would be politic or not to adopt such a course. lam pre.
pared to argue, if necessary, that it would be impolitic to
adopt such a proposition. But Ido say, I think it would
be impossible to produce such a proposition to this House,
unless it were proposed to extend it to the United Kingdom.
As I have said before, I am not arguing upon the policy
of the measure, but I must say that I do not think it would
be politic to propose such a tax. Now what is this tax
which at the present moment appears so extremely popu-
lar ? There are many Honourable Members in the
House who I am quite sure will remember the
feeling that existed with respect to the property tax in
1816. I must confess that I never recollect a tax so un
popular as that—(Hear)—and why are we to supuose that
it would be more popular now than it was at that time ?
Gentlemen talk of alterations and changes, but in my opi-
nion if the property tax is to be substituted for any large
portion of taxation, it is utterly impossible to exempt one
class and lay it upon another. I say this would be the
grossest injustice.—(Hear, bear, hear.) I have heard
gentlemen speak of laying taxes upon pro-
perty really invested, rent, interest of money,
mortgages and annuities, and leaving productive capital
entirely exempt. Now I would only ask Hon. Gentlemen
to consider the effect of this. Let them look to the case
of a small fundholder, living near to a large manufacturer.
What would his feelings be to find himself taxed
for his little property, while his neighbour, for
his great property was not?—(Hear, hear.) It is utterly
impossible the House or the Legislature could seriously
adopt such a proposition as this. If it was adopted it
would be necessary, to apply it to all classes of property in
the country.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") How far, I
would ask, does this differ from the property tax
of 1816, from that prop-rty tax, which every gentleman
who recollects it will state to have been a most unpopular
tax ? Inquisitorial power bad been spoken of—what in-
quisitorial power can be greater than that which was
exercised with respect to that tax,? It was open to all
sorts of imposition and fraud, and consequently despised
by the whole country.--(Hear.) The Hon. Member for
Britlport, on a former night, had stated, that seeing ob-
jections to a property tax, he was- prepared to adopt an
income tax, and urge-I, very ingeniously and, admitting his
measures, very conclusively, that an income tax migbt
with great benefi, be made perpetual. How does my
rea ly suppose that it would be possible to make, such 8,
tax perpetual with any degree of justice ?—(Bear, hear.)
I say the effect of such a measure as 'this would be nee
cessarily extremely unpopular, ittiri I am perfectly
satisfied, before this tax hail been in operation one or two
years, the table of the noose would he loaded with
petitions for its repeal. What in such a case as this
would be the situation of this country ? You would have
repealed a large amount of taxation, and invested the re-
venue of the country an a system of taxation you
aonot maintain, and then, I would ask, what weuld
be the situation of the finance, of the country
Now, Sir, I do think that to rest the financial reanuic
of the country upon such a tax, would be exteernely
dangerous. I do not, Sir, know of any proposition for
the establishing of such a tax, that would not be o'iectiane:,
able in one or other of the ways which I have pointe.i out.
If any such should be brought forward. that would he,
worthy of the attention of the Howie, I would
certainly give it my utmost attention, and, it posSible, my
support.—(Hear.) But I repeat that I do not feel any
such expectation.—(Hear.) 1 cannot consent that such
a large reduction as the one contemplated should
take place without the adoption of a property tax,
and this view I have embodied in the first portion
of my motion ; and the second portion of it goes to show,
that the adoption of a property-tax at this time is inex-
pedient.—(Hear.) I do not conceive, Sir, that
in any future
Hon. Gentlemen will find themselves bound,
perry tax, by supporting this resolution.
firstfu nreerro":"lnge,i
discussion of the propriety of putting n.:_ffu,an_pid_roe..;
It has, Sir, been assumed, that, in this the
Parliament,
direction
of
fet e
the .11ni:ursbglo„faethienfluence the opinions of
—(Hear.) Now, Sir, w
I am free to a
of the Ailmin,s
• • tration, I am not bound to abide by
the
House
rnayd have
e 1 reu P;hl na
t e;alPl esn: I:Ygliiinanaiil:fii-tvnriratdnhuetaailraealAblasetmr abet;
ay expression of the opinion of this House. If may be
,aidn
that by the form of my motion I unite ag inst me
contrary opinions. I admit that I have united against me
those who are in favour of a property tax, tl -ose who are
is tavour of the repeal of the malt duty, these who are