The Sun.
London, England, 1851-05-03 00:00:00

from the Government every pretext to act ill. Force
it by the prudence of your conduct to respect the public
peace, as we will force it for cur part, by the firmness
of our acts to respect the Constitution. Salutation and
fraternity.
iS j3audin, Bonne, Boysset, A. Brays, Cholat,
Colfavro, Combier, Dussoubs• Gaston, Du-
putz, Faure (R. o .e), Gatstier, Gindriez,
Gropp,, Laboulaye, Lafo. Lamarque,
Madier de Mon jau, MatEd (Felix), Michel
(de B,)urges), Nadaud, Rscouchot,Richsr-
det, Saint- Fero e .1, Viginer."

THE LONDON GAZETTE, May 2.
LORD CHAMBERLAIN'S OFFICE, APRIL 4. 18 I.
Notice is hereby given, that her Majesty will hold a
Drawing-room at St. James's Palace, on Tuesday, May 6, at
two o'clock.

BANKRUPTS.
William Burrows, surgeon, Park-street, Islington, to sur-
render May 14, at two, and Jane 13, st twelve, at the Court
of Bankruptcy. Graham, official assignee; Cooper, Old
Cavendish-street.

John Woodin, upholsterer, Matilda-street, Islington, Nay
9, at half-past one, and June 13, at twelve, at the Court of
Bankruptcy. Cannan, official assignee, Birchin- lane, Corn-
hill ; Tucker and Jones, Sun Chambers, Threadneedle-
street.

Robert Sheppard, commission agent, Norwich, May 10,
and June 16, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Pen-
nell, official assignee, Guildhall-chambers, Basinghall-street ;
Jay, 13ucklersbury ; Jay and Pilgrim, Norwich.
William Jackson, painter, Orchard-street, Portman-
square, May 13, at one, and June 10, at eleven, at the Court
of Bankruptcy. Edwards, official assignee; Letts, Bartlett's-
buildings.
William Artley, miller, North Burton, Yorkshire, May 14,
and June 11, at half-past twelve, at the Leeds District Court,
Kingston-upon-Hull. Carrickofficial assignee, Hull; Tweed,
Hull ; Bell, Hull ; Hodgson, Driflield.
William Bown Harrison, bleacher, Lancashire, May 13,
and June 4, at twelve, at the Manchester District Court.
Pott, official assignee, Manchester; Cobbett, Manchester.
Thomas Clifton and Richard Easby Rawle, spirit mer-
chants, Bristol, May 16 and June 16, at eleven, at the Bristol
District Court. Acranian, official assignee, Bristol; Abbot
and Lucas, Bristol.

Joseph M•Murray, merchant, Liverpool, May 9, and June
6, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court. Tufner, official
assignee, Liverpool; Bretherton, Liverpool.
FOREIGN OFFICE, APRIL 29.
The Queen has been pleased to approve of Mr. Nicolas
Malls as Consul at Liverpool for his Majesty the Emperor
of all the Russias.

The Queen has also been pleased to approve of Mr. Oliver
John Williams as Vice-Consul at llarwich—of Mr. David
Barclay Niven as Vice-Consul at Dundee—and o. Mr. John
Hind, junior, as V ice-Consul at Belfast, for his Majesty the
King of the Belgians.__

—WHITEHALL, APRIL 23.
The Lord Chancellor has appointed Edward Augustus
Smith, of Blandtord. iu the county of Dorset, Gent., to be a
Master ExtraordlivnagruiinthAeLlti, High Court
25.0 t Chancery.
The Lord Chancellor has appointed William Pollock, of
Ayr, Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary of the High Court
of Chancery in that part of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland called Scotland.

LNDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 3, 1851.

Iterbury, it was well known that that Most Rev. Prelate ; occasion he bad urged when Sir R. Peel introduced the tax,
was a wan of peculiar mildness, and of truly Christian and a great many mere besides. His object was not toget.
forbearance—(Hear, hear)—and it was precisely be- : rid of the tax, but to make it. permanent, and at the same
cause he was a man of such mildness and forbearance time equitable and just. The Hon. and Learned Member op-
thatpas-ed by Schedule A, with respect to which those who
this language had been used against him. i P"site
came under its oper'tion had, perhaps, as much cause to cons-
But there was no doubt but that without
any interposition of the Government or of Parliament, I plain as o:hers, the tax being levied on the gross nominal
i
when
p latti,r.
ew repairs.as
tpfleor
tifetcNtml,y,
cp),well. a u
e liknownt renewalt h e that a largeot ihn I -
tax- ro-
te Primate of all England would so conduct himself as 1 luocr°t iol'ne.
to meet with that general veneration which he had al- 1 could wentk that.—( P.roteetionist
ways obtained; and that nothing that could be said cheers.) The Chancellor of the Lucghequer of Sir le. peel's
against him by the Bishop of Exeter could weaken Government told them at the time teat' it would be imps.
his adherence to the doctrines which he be- sibl- to remove the inconveniences and is justice of the tax,'
)ieves to be the true doctrines of his own
and his successor under the present Government, by his con-
Church, conformable to the letter and spirit of Scrip- duct, seemed to be of the same opinion. The tax had been
ture, at least he would never depart from his venerable conceded to serve a temporary purpose, and afford an oppor-
tunity to try a great experiment. In 1848, when he made a
character by using opprobrious language and epithets, at
all to diminish the purity and holiness which belonged similar motion to the present for limiting its duration to one
year, the Chancello - of the Exchequer held out hopes that
to his exalted rank.—(Loud cheers.)
before the time for its renewal arrived her Majesty's Go-
Mr. HORSMAN said there was no need to defend
yernment would have taken the trouble to inquire how the
the character of the Archbishop of Canterbury from the injustice might be remedied.
attacks of a man like the Bishop of Exeter. He thought, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I did not so
however, that the consequences of the act proposed by understand ire
the Bishop of Exeter would extend farther than the Mr. HUME continued to observe that he had no desire to
Noble Lord anticipated, and he would like to know from interfere with the arrangements already made or to paralyse
the Attorney- General whether it was not directly for- the operations of the Government. He could not understand
bidden by the 73d canon. why the Government should refuse to examine the tax in
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that canon ap- all its bearings, when the injustice of the present plan had
been so univereally admitted, especially as an inquiry could
plied more particularly to provincial synods. The beh conducted with so much greater effect by a G ,vernment
Act which it was thought the Bishop bad offended
taxt anf by any individual. He proposed to continue the
against was the 24th and 25th Henry Vlll.year, and then .to appoint a .Comm ttee to
The canon was either invalid or insufficient. Ile should inquireor ono
operationt u
nt
ihte taxi e upon
was
nott h e say the latter, for it was clearly evident that unless an various classes of hecomonat
Act wee passed for enforcing it more strongly it would one who wished to see the income-tax removed,
be quite incapable tor effectieg any alteration in the because he was against the system of indirect taxation, upon
Bishop of Exeter's movements.—(Cheers.) two grounds—first, because it increased the charge of every
PROPERTY-TAX BILL. article on which a dcty was paid, in some cases to the
amount of 30 per cent.; and next because he desired to have
On the motion for gcing into Committee on the Pro-
perty-tax Bill, p
excise duties remove ; on such articles as paper, soap, hops,
and even malt—and upon the latter article
especially,'
Mr. WILLIAM WILLIAMS moved that the
visions of the said Bill, as far as regarded pro- because he desired to put down babas of intoxication 1
t lalerdutsone
the this country, as those habits were to be attributed to
imposition of that tax on the interest of the pub- of ardent spirits. He said that particularly with reg
lie debt, salaries, and emoluments of public offi his own country, where the people, instead of being remark.
cers, pensions, and sinecures be extended to Ireland.
able, as they had been formerly, for their sobriety, had be-
The Hon. Member said nothing tended more come drunkards. - (Laughter.) Now he believed that the
general use of a wholesome beverage, such as might be pro-
to sever the union which ought to exist between
duced from malt, would tend to correct those habits. He
Eeeland and Ireland than the adoption of a wished them to put an end to a system of indirect taxation,
different system of law and taxation in he which promoted such an evil, and to have in place of it a.
two countries. On all the occasions when the in-
dies
is, a tax which would include every spe-
come-tax was discussed in the House he bad never heard ies of pr perty. • (Hear, hear.) He would make 110 excep-
one ellicient reason given why it should not be ex- tion—he would go down to the lowest fraction, because the
tended to Ireland as well as England. The only making exceptions was inducing large classes in the com-
reason of any value assigned was that Ireland was too mustily to be indiffet eat to taxation and it was giving to
poor, but ho considered that a man in Ireland in the whomsoever might be Chancellor of :he Exchequr for the
receipt of 1501. a year was as capable of paying the tax day an undue advantage. Now he did not wish any vote
as a man receiving the same sum annually in England. to be given under the idea that he wished to get rid of the
Ho consequently ought to be made to pay the tax. property and income-tax. He had no such desire; but he
The interest of the debt paid in Ireland amounted to said that their taxation was enormous, because 'heir expen-
-1,417,000- a year, which was wholly exempted from the diture in a great degree was very useless and very unne-
income-tax. The debt owing by the Government to the cessary, and the large masses of the working classes were
Bank of Ireland was 2,630,0001., upon which they paid 3
taxi;
compelled to pay a great deal more than they ought to pay.
(Hear.) Some said that England was better able now to
per cent. This was also exempted from the income-tax;
while the debt due to the Bank of England, 11,000,000/., pay taxes than she had ever been ; that her capital had trebled
e
upon which they paid 3 per cent., was subject to the income.
since 1793. Let them look to taxation in 1793. It
ffi amounted
1,00( was 15,000,0004
l ,000/. was appropriated by Mr. Pitt as a sinking
to 16,000,000/. ; the expenditureth
tax. This was a most unjust and anomalous state of things.mounte
There was altogether paid to public ocers in Ireland sara-
and
ries amounting to 300,0001 a year, including those of the fund to pay off the national debt, which was then only
93.000,000/. Their military proceedings against France
Lord-Lieutenant and Chief Secretary, which were wholly free
had led to an addition of 610 00 ~000/. to the national debt.
from deductions on aceount of the income-tax. If they
New he wantec: no such Heim" ass a robbery of tee public
added to this amount the salaries paid to the officers of
creditor, although their debt amounted at present to between
Customs, Excise, Stamp-office, Post-office, and other public
700,060,00 W. and 800,C00,900/ Their capital had increased
establishments, he had not the least d ,übt but that the
in a large ratio ; it had increased from 60,000,000/. to
amount paid on the whole fell very little short of 2,000 000/.
105,000,000/. His belief was that it had increased twofold
annually, which was entirely exempted from the inCome-
during that period. But did that capital pay more than it
tax. And yet a poor half-pay officer was compelled to pay
did before? He believed that it did not with the exception
out of his wretched allowance the income-tax. Since the
imposition of this tax the people of Engl nd had paid about of that, which was produced by the income-tax. They raised
now in taxes from 34,000, 001. to 35,001,000 e from the work-
thing. ~ while the people of Ireland had nut paid afar- ing classes. That, he said, was a gross injustice to those
thing. According to the return for which he had moved tee
class et. They ought to apply a propert, tax to the capital
people of Great Britain were paying 13.500,0001. in the shape
of the country—that which would make cepita) pay fbr the
of taxes from which Ireland was exempt. Although the re-
protection it received in proportion to the amount et property
presentatives from Ireland were in the habit of complaining
of the heavy pressure of taxation upon that country, the fact that was to be protected.—( Hear, !Isar.) The poor m n who
was that they bad only paid on an average one-thirteenth received Bs. a week in wages—what capital had he? And
yet that man paid five times in proportion to his means as
part of the taxation of the United Kingdom. He did not
compared with the person who had a large property.—
think, therefore, that the gentlemen from Ireland had a right
(Hear, hear ) Let them look to their taxation at the present
to complain of any injustice being done to them on this head.
moment. He had their revenue returns from 1762 to lesl,
He hoped that the Right lion. Gentleman the Chancellor ot
and be found that by their system of tax hion 67 per cent.
the Exchequer, as a matter of justice towards England, would
of the whole of the revenue was raised upon the necessaries
propose the extension of the tax to Ireland. Having called
the attentie nof the House to this subject he felt that he hal cf life which were used by every working man. The stamps
discharged his duty. made 11 per cent. of the revenue, the ssessed taxes only 8
the Post-office 1i per
per cent., the property tax 10 per cent.,
Sir.
F. FRENCH said that he had no objection to enter
upon this subject if it were proposed at a proper time. He, cent., whilst 3 per cent. upon pensions and other small
however, trusted that the House would not discuss a subject articles made up the rest. Such was the division of taxa-
which did not properly arise at that moment. tion which thus pressed so heavily upon the working
The House then went into Committee upon the Bill. classes, a d that tended at the same time to raise the price
of the articles they consumed. Then of the 15 000 000/
On Clause 1 being proposed, , , .
Mr. FRESHFIELD rose to bring forward the amendment raised by direct taxation, including the income-tax, he found
of which he had given notice. His main propositions were that these were the proportions in which it was paid : the
in reference to the Schedules B, C, D ; but, in order to render land-tax, 11 per cent. ; windows, 17 per cent.; servants, le
them effective, it was necessary to alter the language of the per cent. ;carriages, 3 per cent. ;horses, 2 per cent. Let them
first clause. He would first propose to insert aster the word see, then, how paltry these con•ributions were as compared
"granted," in page s. line 7, the following words:—" So with the amount of indirect taxation. One would suppose,
far as the same are expressed in the sche, ules to this Act an-
from the complaints they had heard on the other side, that
flexed and subject to the provisions therein contained." The the land paid the income-tax altogether, whereas it paid
' question to which he wished to draw the attention of the only 40 per cent. A very large proportion was paid by fac-
tories and messuages. This tax paid by farmers was gra-
Schedule Committee would not be really raised until they came to
dually decreasing—(" Hear, hear, from the Protectionist
C, which was the most material clause. His pro-
position was—" The same as in Schedule Cof said Act, ex- Members)—whilet the assessment on factories and mes-
cept that the duty shall be assessed in cases of annuities con- surtges were every year increasing. The income-tax bore
tingent upon life upon the annual amount of such annuity at first as much as 64 per cent. on land, and now it was only
after deducting one-third of such amount as the premium 40 per cent.— (Hear.) He-was anxious to keep taxes below
of insurance payable to provide for the contingency; and as their present rate, and he thought. that House was not aware
to annuities for terms of years, the assessment to be made of the injury it was doing by the large portion of money it
upon the dividend which would be payable upon the amount took out of the pockets of the people for unnecessary expen-
of Three per Cent. Consolidated Bank Annuities which diture. This, he believed would not occur if they had direct
might be purchased with the produce of such annuity for instead of indirect taxation. He maintained that the whole
terms of years. if sold, such value to be ascertained on the of the income-tax might have been saved if the whole of
sth of April in each year, according to the Government• their useless military establishments, had been 'dispensed
tables." It was obvious that they taxed the whote with. Tee amount paid for their military establishments,
of an annuity contingent upon life. A prudent man, trom 833 to 1837, was 60,000,00(1.—that was an average of
12,163,000/.: whilst in the three years In m 1848 the aver-
hishowever, would reserve a portion of that for the support (1
age of the expenditure .was 21,000,0110/., and, deducting
family after his death, either in the shape of a life
assurance, or in some other mode. The annuity would be from that the expenses of the Kafir war, and
thus considerably lessened in its amount, for calculating tie 80 ,0,10/. to relieve Irish distress, there was 8 956,00(11
amount it would cost him for the life assurance from the more paid in each of the three last years than
period at which he counneaced the payment of it, together at the fo-mer pi rind. For ten years before the
with other expenses incidental to the attainment of that income-tax had been levied the whole of their
object, be thought that the annuity actually received Ly him miliury expenditure was 131,000,00. 1., and the average was
did not amount to much more than the one-half of weat 13,116,000/. ;in the eight years since the income-tax had
been paid the military expenditure was 144,86e,0e0/ —that
it nominally was. He should therefore be taxed only upon
the amount which he actually received. This kind of pro- is, the average was 18,001,0001. instead of 1e,000,000/. The
perty differed widely from that which was realized, and total amount Of the income-tax fiom 1842 to January last
should be taxed differently. The next part of his propo- was e9,;09,000/, and the extravagant expenditure upon
their military eats lishmects during the same 'period was
sition referred to annuities for terms of years. Nothing
could be more unjust than to say that the "hole of that 39,90 ',0001.—( Hear, hear.) Thns the whole of the income-
tax went to the maintenance of unne,.essary establishments.
annuity should be taxed. He had taken the price of Long
Annuities, -s they were stated in 1842, and tee prices of —(Cheers.) He hoped, then, that the House would support
Consols at that time. If a man had no/ a year in April, him in the proposition he made for f estricting the collection
;842, and sold it then, it would produce him 1,30/. If he of the income-tax to one year—(Hear, bear)--so that when
invested that sum in the purchase of Three per it was next proposed taxation might be made palatable to
Cents. at that period, it would be equal t, a sum of the people, by showing that it was just, and that it was
1,4401. The value of this, converted into money, as shown necessary.—(Hear, hear) He objected altogether to the
afterwards, by investing it in Consols, would give him presen• mode of collecting the tax. 'l' e Commissioners were
an income of 43/. —and yet they took from him a tax appointed on political grounds, and the collectors were not
upon 100 s. It was clear that he had only this income for a responsible to the Government. He had a plan which would
period, and the effect produced by lapse of time upon the remove all diffieulties of that kind. By his plan he would
value of his property was very serious. In respect to Sche- employ the officers of the Excise, who were tried teen ;
300,000.000/. were collected by them without any defalce-
dule I), he would propose the same as in Schedule D of the
time The Customs appointments were filled up in a dif-
said Act, except that the duty should be 3id. for each 20x,
(e ant mariner from that pursued in the Excise, and hence
This related to trades and professional incomes. He knew
how difficult it was to deal with that subject. He was, how-
the misfortunes that had occurred. The collectors in the
ever, of opinion that it was unjust and impolitic to tax those Excise were paid very moderate salaries. Some with no
incomes in the way they had hitherto dune. It was most more than eCOL a year collected millions. He, then, had
unjust to compare incomes from such sources with those re- perfeet confi,htnce that in that department he oould find the
materials tor carrying out the plan that he had in view. He
suiting frem well-ascertained property. The profits in trade
now moved that the w, rds " one year" be inserted in the
were obtained with Mfficulty and risk. They were generally
usefully employed in tha education of children and the en-
clause in place of "three years."
courageme. tof labour. He would also attempt to extend Mr. Alderman THOMPS 'N seconded the amendment;
hut, in doine so. he could not ; upport the argument of the
posed to introduce would enable them to make the schedules
the seine justice to Schedule B. The words which he pro-
Hun. Member for Montrose. He did not agree in the policy
of' his Hon Friend; for he was one of those who thought what they pleased. It therefore appeared to him that he
ought to have the 'sots of every Hon. Gentleman who de- that it was most convenient to raise a proportion of the re-
sired in any way to amend the Bill. He did nut ask that
venue of this country by a moderate duty upon foreign pro-
the whole of the tax should be given up, but, considering ductions.—( Cheers.) He supported the amen merit of the
the hardship of the tax and the period in which they were Hon. Gentleman because ho did not think that House had
living, he thought it would be just if halt the tax were given kept faith with the public with respect to the income tax.
up in the case of professional incomes, as well as on the profits They had renewed it twice, and were now asked to renew it
of trade, a third time; each time upon different grounds. He did not
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER protested wish to enter into say detailed account of the partial and ti -
against the course adopted by the Hon. and Learned Gentle- just way in which the tax operated; but he must say that
man as very inconvenient. It would be Jar more desirable he did not approve generally of the Budged of the present
to discuss a matter involving a question of principle, in the Ministers. He thought the Budget was capable of very
shape of a substantive motion, than on the proposition on the great improvement, for he bad the same objection to a
insertion of a few words. The Hon. and Learned Menber house .tax as to an income-tax. He had been long enough a
sought to leave Schedule Aat its present rate of 7d. in the member of that House to know what pressure bad been
pound, and Schedule B also at its present rate, which Placed upon Ministers to repeal a house tax on account of
was equivalent to 7d. in the pound, while he proposed ex- its injustice.—(Hear.) The Right Hon. the Chancellor of
emptiens in the case of site annuities, which he did not pro- the Exchequer on the first night of his Budget gave them to
pose to give to annuities charged on land or on life estates ; understand that be bad something good in reserve for them
and on Schedule 1), which included profits made in trade, fur the year 1854. He told them that he would then be
which certainly at this moment was nut suffering under much: enabled to repeal a considerable amount of taxation. Now,
depression, he proposed a reduction of one-half. It would be though the Right Honourable Gentleman did not tell them
fir more convenient to discuss the whole question in a sub.. what he meant, he could guess that he alluded to the
stantive form. terminable annuities. In the year ;822, the Chancellor of the
Mr. SPOONER reminded the Committee that the Hon. Exchequer—the late Lord Bexley—bed raised a considerable
and Learned Gentleman only asked them to consent to such sum by terminable annuities. The object was to relieve the
an alteration as would enable them to alter the schedules heavy pressure then felt, occasioned by taxation for the
hereafter. military and navy half-pay list. Lord Bexley then raised
Mr. HENLEY, without pronouncing any opinion as to the the sum by annuities for forty-five years, and thus diminished
schedules themselves, thought that soul, such words ought the then existing burden. Experience' has since proved that
to be introduced, in order to enable them to raise the question was a wise course adopted by her Majesty's Government.—
as to the duties. If they passed the clause without them (H an) If it were true, and he was not disposed-to deny the
they would deprive themselves of- the power to alter the du- truth of the allegation, that this country was year by year
ties. This the Chancellor of the Exchequer was qbite aware better able to bear the burden of taxation, he would ask,
of, and he would tell them afterwards that they had voted would it not be sound policy to give the present generation
the tax and could not help going on with it. some relief, and not to refuse doing so for the benefit of those
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thanked the who might be living in the year 1867? He would now
Hon. Member for the estimate he had formed of his cha- call the atten:ioa of the House to the amount of terminable
rester, but he should be unworthy of the position he held if annuities :
he could be guilty of the conduct of which the Hon. Member
suppssed him capable.
Mr. HENLEY disclaimed any intention to give offence to
the Right Hon. Gentleman, but he thought they might be
precluded from altering the schedule, unless some such ge-
neral words were introduced.
'the CHAIRMAN said the instruction already moved was
general to amend the Bill in case of necessity.
Mr. TRELAWNY protested against the 'amendment as
calculated to endanger the whole measure.
Mr. SPOONER asked whether, by passing
Clause 1, with-
out the insertion of the words proposed by theHor
Learned Member for Boston (Mr. Freshfield), they would not
be precluded Com making any alteration except those con-
tained in the motion of his Hon. and Gallant Friend the
Member for Lincoln?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER assured the
Hon- Gentleman that he would not turn round upon him, or
recede in auy way from any understanding into which he
had
entered.
Mr. FRESIIFIELD asked if they would be able to go
back and amend the first clause, Halley passed it now withouto
introducing the words he had proposed ?
The CHAIRMAN said it was quite clear that if they had
passed any clause repugnant to it iu meaning ening or spirit, they
could not go back, but they might strike out theclause. '
Mr. AGLIONBY hoped the amendment
not le
would
pressed, as it would cause great inconvenience. The whole
merits of the case would be raised on the amendment of the
Hon. Member for Montrose, and for that he would reserve
himself.
The_r amendments were then negatived without a division.
M • HUME then moved
eo limit the duration of the tax
to one year, with the view of instituting an inquiry by a Se-
lect Committee into the mode of assessing and collecting the
tax 1 and whether the injustice of levying the same rate of
(
etarge upon terminable as upon perpetual annuities, and
upon fluctuating and varying iecomes from trades and pro-
fessions as upon fixed incomes from real property, cannot be
greatly modified or altogether removed. He was not pre-
pared to support any alteration of the Bill for the present
year, because it would be impossible to do so without inter-
fering with the measures before Parliament, and his propo-
sition, therefore, was to limit its duration to one year, but
to leave it untouched. The whole question required deli-
berate consideration, and it would be impolitic to legielaei
with refeienai to one elate, leaving oat the others. All the
91liqW=1712Wil bad bova tusvci m4.1:4 it oil thv pa:l-tat

Present Decrease When
per Annum. Ending.
Diminished rate of interest £ •
on Three-and-a Quarter per 510,000
Cents. ..... . .••-„••••••• ......
Terms ( f years 295,118 ...... Oct. 10, 1859
Ditto . , .... .. `g91.960 ...... Jan. 5, 1860
Long Annuities
Irish Ditto 51,000 ...... Ditto
26 years' Annuity ..
Dead weight ditto

£3,206,598
In 1860 the reduction will be ...... £i.781,740 per annum.
The conversion of permanent in'o terminable annuities is
at the rate of from 700,000/. to 800,0001. per annum,
Unredeemed debt .. ... ..... ... .. £769,272,562
Annual charge thereof ...
276 Per Annum.
Present annual decrease by treating these :n2-
0,447
unities as if they were expired, is... . ......... ... £3,206,598
But by borrowing in Consuls at 96 to pay the
dividends as they become due on the above
annuities so cancelled, the permanent annuale
charges on Consols will be... . ......
...... . .....
.....

consequence of that, be able to bear more burdens? -And
now it appeared to him that the argument, if it did not bold
in the case of the House, was equally unsound as regarded
the community al large. In every point of view he was
favourable to indirect taxation rather than to direct burdens,

169,108

So that the above immediate decrease per annum
of 3,206,598!. will be gradually
lessened year by
year, until sth of April, 1817, when it will re-
main permanent at . .......
. .£ ',337,490
The prese t annual decrease, by treating these annuities
as if they were expired, was 3,206,5981. per annum.
If capitalised it would amount to one•eighth of the
whole of the national debt. He had made a cal-
culation at that time, that if the,- were to convert
these payments into permanent annuities—that was to
say, capitalised them—the amount of charge per annum,
with Consols at 96, would be 869, 0.1. ; so that the before-
mentioned decrease of 3,906, 981. per annum would be gra-
dually lessened year by year, until the sth of April, 1867,
when it would remain at 2,337,4901. Had the Chancellor ot
the Exchequer taktn these 'natters into consideration, he
(Alderman Thompson) thought the Right Hon. Gentleman
would have found that his position was such that it was
not abaelately necerl.tary for him to continue an income-tan,
which W. bubject to ail those objections and -burning„
- of whin 'they had heard so much, both in and out ofth e
1,2L15 Qpiz!Qa it na jinpeaible fas frsue any LI-

and he should, therefore, support the amendment. Before
he sat down. he could not help noticing that the Noble Lord
opposite had abserved that he fel somewhat disheartened at
the speeches made in that House respecting the colonies, but
the Noble Lord should remember that if he destroyed the
tre, the fruit must necessarily decay.

--
Mr. COBDEN said he regretted that his Hon. Friend the
Member for Montrose bad not so shaped his motion as to
enable him to obtain the decision of the Howe upon the mat-
ter which was really at issue; but he thought that the pro-
ceedings of that evening must have convinced his lion.
Friend that the terms of his motion had much better have
been different from that which he had adopted. His Hon.
Friend wished the House to modify the income-tax and give
such satisfaction to the professional and trading part of the
country as would enable Parliament to retain the tax per-
manently. If his Hon. Friend had brought forward his
motion in a form declaring that it was expedient, on renew-
ing the income.tax, to impose a smaller charge upon pre-
carious incomea than upon thaa derived from permanent pro-
perty, then th 3 Home might have lath a di rision which would
have fairly brought to iolue the question that he desired to
tes deQICICt!; but the Elvi§ler wev.ld have been &plot him,

come-tax which would be free from objFction ; and with the
views he had expressed he should give his vote for the
amendment el the Hon. Member ter Montrose.
Hon. Member alontrose should make him pause before
ha O
Hon. Gentlemen "r‘T s i i
1 T
opposite that
tthoosutigti h
.ip otrt et
the alacrityex
proposal hoitb' ittled
the
ha did anything which was calculite i to aff.ct such a large
amount. f taxatien as was involved in that proposal,
never-
tholes, lie had no alternative. after the fullest consideratioe
he had been able to give to the question, but to vote or.
amendment.—( Herr,) And he thought he wfs a greatsr
_.
friend to the property tax by taking that course than was
ar Majesty' Government in oppeeing it; and if it were not
a solecism he might say that he was a better friend to them
than they were to themselves. (Hear, and a laugh.) The
Government appeared to have determined
wh-
ing imn a
dteh e stepsup
hisofmtiohde lateto a o
hSai
tri t
ote Robertth e Posn3e.eeltf,eumllWrisne.:
direct ter indirect taxation with as much rapidity as
,ible; but he (Mr. Mewatts believed that if that departed
statesman were now alive end in power,
&eyed this question; or if he had not, that he would have seen
cause to retrace his steps in this direction.—(Hear, bear.)
It was absurd, on the face of it, to say, that, because they
opera-
tion on all classes, therefore it would be augether chimerical
could not make the income-tax perfectly equal in its .
to attempt to imp? owe or modify ifs. He pounddened that 10
he would paeove no-
and
t (loon, adne (di eperooupledr
ts;a:atillida
halfthat
6 d or
that in tamounthe on
i)r.
fits arising
front trade and industry, would be a fair arrangement
compared with the existieg system. At all events the nlvidnals who would suffer front the unjust pressure of a_those
modi-
fication like that would be much less numerous than than!
who complained of the pressure now. It was a manifest.
_s_
palpable injustice to take from the professional man and the
tradesman the same amount of taxation as was levied upon
real and funded property.—(Hear.) When he observedelll.
course which the Government had taken with reterenceer.
their Budget in the present year, be was driven to thoe_
elusion that they had no confidence in the soundness f
the
principles of direct taxation. It was impossible to reconcile
the inconsistencies of their conduct by any other supposition.
unless their aim was to tide it over some time longer• l'sftr
his part he believed it would be impossible to raise the
exist-
ing amount of revenue, and spend it as they did none if l'll
resorted ro the system of direct taxation.
riol-
Mr. BUCK said that as a representative of an tig
e dealt
tural conty, he did not think that that class was
fairly with, particularly as that class, more especially, are net
labouring under the greatest distress, and for that reason ,
he thought that the present measure of the Government
was as unjust as it was unequal against the sgr Flstnlal
class; and also that it was invested with an inquisitorial
characeer towards the same class who, as many of them as
grow hops, are subject to at least 100 per cent., pre
at
while the foreigner is exempted from any such tax, and
therefore defeat them in their own market. The Bon.4
Gentleman then entered into a detail of the suffering
the agriculturist of Exeter through this tax, and
isip that0,t714...e.
con-
tendedretailerethinatamitalwlatsownnost, opiasrlytiecuolanrfil3n,eAd
ptpoietdhoerme:
to
ouht
ledge, had also suffered materially by it ; through
able-bodied labourers were obliged either to apply t
workhouse, or to emigrate to a foreign land, which vine:.
he feared, would one day be the ruin of this country. Jae:
assured the Government that the long suffering those people
were labouring under would sooner or later arouse their
tier indignation, and hoped that they would adopt sekiiels't ,
line of policy as would revive their former happiness, vweed
it would also tend to increase the prosperity of trade and
commerce. (Hear, hear.) whicon
the
Mr. MtGREGOR thought it would have been wise on the
eart of the Government either to have at once propsed
renewal of the income-tax for only one year, or, before theb
meeting of Parliament, to have made some arrangement n 4,
which the schedules should have been placed upon 6%
equitab e princip e. He knew it was said that it vres.9.
im-
possible to arrange those schedules on a principle of justice.
He believed it would be very difficult to impose any
which would carry along wi,h it an equal measure of justice
towards all her Majesty's tax-paying subjecs; but be
main-
tained that the schedules might be easily arranged oas at
least to approximate to justice. He did net say that tn!
amendments of which be had given notice contained that
degree of equality which was to be desired—(Hear, hear)--
but he beieved that the ra es he li d put down in his amend-.
meats were such as Sir R. Peel would have approved of.'
(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) It had frequently been saw
that both Mr. Pitt reed Sir R. Peel considered it utterly
im-
possible to snake any difference between the rates on pe'lnse
rent and temporary income. He disputed the truth of thil
statement. Both of those isters saw the inequality an
injustice of taxing temporary and permanent incomes at the
same rate; but they were placed in circumstances which
rendered it impossible for them to impose the tax in ant
other form than that which they adopted... (Hear, bear)
According to his (Mr. M'Gregor's) view, temporary incomes
should be charged, not upon their gross sum, but upon the
amount of profit which they were supposed to yield. For
example, a gentleman had a professional income of 1,0 01.
a year. Now, that was exactly the same value as I,Wl'
invested on land, or in the funds. But the 1,000/. invested
in land or in the funds was at present taxed upon what it
yielded in the shape of interest, viz., 301., whereas the other
1,0004 earned by the professional gentleman was charged
upon the whole amount, which was evidently unjust.—(Hear,
hear.) If there were no taxes on articles of necessary con-
sumption, he would deal in s different manner with the pro-
perty and income-tax. He would levy exactly the same
per tentage in the pound for every 20s. above incomes Of
50/. per annum from real and permanent sources; but, hook"
ing to the high taxation which was still imposed on articles
of consumption, he would be dealing very unfairly with in-
comes under 3001. per annum, and he would be acting still
more unfairly if he imposed the same rates on temporary in-
comes. After illuettating this point by reference to figures!,
the Hon. Member concluded by saying that the injustice of
the tax as at present levied was felt everywhere except in
that House, and that, if the tax were imposed for more than
one year, the discontent which it excited would rapidly
increase.—( Hear, hear.)
The Marquis of GRANBY said, that the question which
the House was now called upon to decide was whether or not
they would contit.ue the present income-tax, with all its ano-
malies, injustice, and in consisttncies for one or for three
years; in other words, whether they should pay a greater
amount of deference to the convenience of Government or
to the interests of the people? The main argument against
the imposition of the tax in 1842, 1845. and 1848 might be
classed under two heads—first, the difficulty of discovering
the magnitude of people's incomes; and, second, the diffie
etrty of taxing them equally when discovered. With re-
spect to the first difficulty, ne one would say the .in thee pree
sent year it was in the least diiiiinished He was af opinion
.that it had greatly increased, while, it' they looked at Schee
dale Lof the income-tax, what did they find? They found
that since 1842 the assessment under that head had decreased
no less than 8,000,0 ('1 Now, he wished to know the
opinion of the Government on that point. He wished to
know which horn of the dilemma they would take; whether
they would say that the incomes of the manufacturing and
treeing classes had diminished since the year of free trade to
that extent, or whether, on the other hand, the diminution
was owing to fraud and evasion? Perhaps the Right Hon.
Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer would sit upon
one horn f the dilemma and the Noble Lord the First Mi-
nister upon another, arid make a political seesaw between
them.—(A laugh.) His (the Marquis of Granby's) opinion.
from all he had heard, was that the incomes from trades and
professions lied materially decreased under tree trade, and
that there bad also been many instances of concealment
and fraud. (Hex , hear.) With respect to Schedule A, he
believed it would be g.nerally admitted that there had been
at least a diminution of 20 per cent. upon the rental of the
lard, taking the average throughout the kingdom. Now,
he would ask his Right on. Friend the Chancellor of the
Exchequer whether he or the Commissioners of the income-
tax in:ended to make a proportionate reduction in the as-
sessmentunder Schedule A ? For, if not, it would be a case of
gross injustice. And it a 'eduction was to be made, had the
Right Hen Gentleman calculated the diflc renee it would make
in his receipts? According to his (the Marquis of Granby's)
calculation a reduction of 20 per cent. upon 48,000,0001.
would amount to 9,500,000/, and this would consequently
make a reduction in the tax of .50a,000/. (Hear, bear )
tnextio
d ;and, from
difficultywasal he had h
in fairlyt ta x ienagdin h
the t income c( i
in
ascertained;
adebatese
on
this subject, he did not think that difficulty had decreased
either.—(Hear, hear.) His Right Hon. Friend near him
( Mr. Hurries) had insisted will] great force that under
when
Schedule B it was a gross injustice to tax the farmer upon
profits which he was not making. Now, no one could deny
that fact; but there was no remedy for it. Omitting that
class, however, there was the case of professions. Many
Hon Members maintai ed, with equal justice, that it was
very unfair that a man with an income depending upon his
health and activity should be taxed upon the same amount
iftthtehyn owners of ships, cot.ora mills,
as a man who possessed real property. But, if they exempted
this class, what would they withatthe u
lhi fee; a nAn uoid, s'
tan
made all these remissions, what would become of the
Right Hon. Gentleman's tax ? (" Hear, hear," from the
Chancellor of the Exchequer.) He perfectly agreed
with the Right Hon. Gentleman hat it was impossible those
remissions could be made. Such was the opinion of Mr.
Pitt and Sir R. Peel. It was also the opinion of Mr.
'Culloch. (Hera the Noble Lord quoted the opinion of Mr.
erPCulioch, to the effect that an equal income-tax was an
impossibility ) In holding that opinion, he believed that
Mr. Me'ulloch Wits right, and, upon the strength of that
opinion, he called upon the Right Hon Gentleman opposite
an indirect to support the amendment and pass the tax only for one
prucees, inasmuch as vear. He believed that that talc, though not directly taking
money out of the pockets of the labouring classes, did so
tak-
ing
it from p gave the poor man employment:
was practically taxing him ; and as to indirect taxes, he -
as effectuallytheea capital
be-
liev that they were less felt than any other by those who •
P d them. From another passage .which he held, in his
hand, derived from the sameeminent writer whom he had just
quite.
quoted, it appeared to be his oPillion that indirect taxation
though unequal, was neither impolitic nor unjust, for it did
not fall on any persons unless they indulged in taxed articles.
tie
was their d when they were taxed it
own fault. The in-
come-tax, he said, was paid by all alike. but, notwithstand-
ing that, he thought that the worst species of indirect taxa-
tion was better than the best
oar were adjusted income-tax. On a
former night the Right Hon
60,000 000/ •Gentleman attributed to him that'
a) taken from the farmers, and then said
that, if so, the
country was so much the better able to bear
taxation. [The Chancellor of the Exchequer, was under-
stood to say-se" The r • est of the country.") If the Right
lion. Gentleman's observation referred only to the rest of
the country, then he should have expected him to come for-
' ward with a measure of relief for the suffering portion who
had lost these 60,000,0001. a year, totally eclipsing any pre-
position brought forward by the Hon. Member for Bucking-
hamshire; therefore the Right. Hon. Gentleman must have
meant the whole country. He would put this case—suppose
the whole of that House were called upon to pay a certain
sum, and that by some maeagement or. shuffling a certain
amount of money was transferred from the pockets of 'the
Meineers who sat at one side to those who sat on the other,
would that render the whole House better able than before
to pay the amount demanded of them? Would they, in