The Sun.
London, England, 1833-07-03 00:00:00

ASSESSED TA "ES.

Colonel EVANS rose to present a petition signed by
100 inhabitants, residing in the Strand, complaining of
the decay of trade, and the general distress of the commu-
nity. The prayer of the petition was that the House
would be pleased to relieve them from some portion of the
heavy taxes under which they laboured. There were
probably some Members of the Committee on trade
present, and he would particularly recommend this petition
to their consideration. He would make a few observations
in support of it. He bad stated the other day the great
failing off of the profits of retail dealers. There were seve-
ral retail trailers who hail been in the habit, a few years
back, of receiving from 601. to 1001. a week who did not
receive so much as 10/. to 151. a week at the present time;
this fact he had ascertained frieo a v.iriety of persons. There
was another fact he would advert to, which was, the vast
number of unoccupied houses, in the most advan-
tageous thoroughfares in the city.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
In former years, it vas scarcely known for a
House to remain for a month untenanted ; now there were
hundreds of tenants could not be procured, for be had
ascertained that there were 10,000 houses in the
metropolis at the present time untenanted, and if
this fact could be borne out, he eonsidered it was
a very serious matter for the consideration of the Go-
vernment, with a view to relieve the people from
the taxes that st present pressed so heavily upon them.
The metropolis had suffered particularly by the transfer
of the East India trade to the out ports, as well as by that
of the silk manufacture to Manchester. Triele was an-
other point to which the petitioners had called l.ia atten-
tion, via.-it appeared that many great capitalists were
in the habit of lending their money to the small trader,
who was thereby enabled to get credit to five or
six times the amount by its means, and so he got
into business, but the capitalist had in the meantime
taken a lien on the goods and house of the trader,
and by aad by he comes down with it and sweeps
away all the goods in the shop, at much under their
original cost. Of course, not only was the trader ruined,
but he dragged others along with him. Now, the peti•
tioners stated that many of these capitalists hail been
before the Committee on Trade, and had given very fl-t-
-tering accounts of the state of trade. They might
well state that they were flourishing, but that was
the way in which it was done—it was by the total
ruin of many.—(Hear, hear.) He had another petition
to ;:resent also against the assessed taxes. It was from
the parish of St. James, and from the vestry of that parish,
people in a respectable sphere of life. That parish alone
paid more taxes than the three greatest towns in England,
namely, Manchester, Birmingham, and Leeds, put together.
The petitioners pointed out the great disparity that existed
in the manner of rating ; they instanced Burlington House
and tle humble shop next doer,—that one which bad only
a frontage of fourteen feet, and had chambers above,
wiiiela were separately rated, was assess -el at 105/. per
annum, which was more than forty times in proportion
to Burlington 11.tuse. He n as told that au income tax
would lead to great inquisitiveness ; but what was the
plan pursued lately in regard to the surcharges? Why. the
surveyor of taxes, if he suppos, d that the house was given
in below its value, summoned the occupier before
the Commissioners, and there he was asked the amount
of his rent ; then what sum he had given for the lease
and what sum he had laid out in repairs; they put the
two last sums together, and added six per cent. upon
them to the rent. Now, if it was proper to follow that
plan with the shopkeepers, surely it should also be fol-
lowed with the nobleman. Why should not six per cent.
be added to the estimated rental of Northumber-
land , House, upon the half a million spent upon
it two years ago—(Haar, hear)—or why should not
the same plan be followed with Eaton Hall, up,ti
which so much had lately been laid out in improve:netrt.
In St. James's parish the parochial officers had, within
these few days, made a fresh assessment, and they had
raised Burlington-house from 1,300/. so 2,941/., so that
there was great injustice done in some way. He would lease
it to the House to say whether it was now or before they had
riot confined themselves to that place, for they had raised
one tradesman from 75/. to 110/., and others in the sane
way. Then again it was surely unfair that when the
parish officers raised any rental, the tax-gatherer fol-
lowed as a matter of course, but when the parish
lowered, the King's tax collector refused to hillow
that example—where was the justice of that ?—( Hear.)
He believed it to be quite impracticable to effect perfect
equality in the assessments ; but it was a question whether
those Noblemen and others, who it was seen had been
rated four hundred per cent. too low, ought not now to
pay up the arrear, and so relieve those who had been so
long praying for them. The Bank of England had been
rated at only 2,500/. a year, anti yet, as had been excel-
lently put by the Times newspaper of yesterday, that same
Bank in its account of assets sent into Government, states
the value of their premises at 40,0001. per annum, and
debits the Government with 28,000/. per annum for the
portion occupied in the transaction of the Government bu:
siness ; and yet is only rated at 2,500/. ! The East In-
dia House, which was occupying much the same ground
as the Bank, was rated at 2,500/ , whilst, no dousits it
was worth much more than 48,000/. a year. Pt ivate
hanks in the neighbourhood of the Bank of England,
which did not respectively occupy more than a twentieth,
of the ground, were rated each at about 500/,, one-fiftir
that of the Bank of England. It was quite out of the
question that, wit's all these inconsistencies, the tax could
be continued, or be submitted to any longer. In the
country the four highest assessments were for persons in
trade, anti it was assumed that they could afford to be
so rated from the amount of their profits.—( Hear, hear,
from the Treasury benches.) But what would those
Gentlemen who supported that opini n say when he told

them that the Ligheit of the four, parties
mentione had since the return ben Gazetted in the list
of bankrupts? In Piceadil'y there was a tradesman's
house of tw,) floor,, wi,h a frontage of only fourteen feet,
which was rated at 1401., higher rate than could be
found in any of five counties which he (Colonel Evans)
could name, having. among their inhabitants Dukes, Mar-

quires, Bishops, and other noblemen and dignitaries. The
authority of Atlam Smith had been quoted by the Right
Hon. Gentleman opposite, as of opinion that taxation on
houses and windows did not fall on the occupiers,
but on the proprietors; but Adam Smith's opi-
nion had not been fairly stated. Adam Smith says—
" Neither would such a tax (upon house rent) fall alto-
gether upon ground rent, but it would divide itself in
such a manner as to fall partly upon the inhabitant of
the house, and partly upon the owner of the ground.
The final payment of this tax, therefore, would fall partly
upon the inhabitant of the house, who, in order to pay
his share, would be obliged to give up a part of his con-
venieney, and partly upon the owner of the ground, who,
in order to pay his share, would he obliged to give up a
part of his revenue. In what proportion this final pay-
ment would be divided between them, it is not perhaps
very easy to ascertain. The division would probably be very
different in different circumstances, and a tax of this kind
might, according to those different circumstances, affect very
unequally both the inhabitant of the house and the owner of
the ground. Houses not inhabitated ought to pay no tax."
On window taxes he says, " The principal objection to all
such taxes is their inequality ; an inequality of the worst
kind, as they must frequently fall much heavier upon the
poor than upon the rich." And finally, upon the House
tax he says, " The rent of houses, though it in some
respects resembles the rent of land, is in one respect essen-
tially different from it. The rent of land is paid for a
productive subject; the 'land which pays it produces it.
The rent of houses is wad for an unproductive subject.
Neither the house nor the ground it stands on produces
anything. Ttie person who pays the rent, therefore, must
draw it from some other source of revenue, distinct from,
and independent of, this subject. It must, in short, be
paid from the wages of labour, profits of stock, or
trom capital or other property."—( Hear, hear.)
Another eminent writer on this subject (Mr. Ricardo)
says--" A tax on the rent of houses may either fall on
the occupier, on the ground landlord, or on the building
landlord. In ordinary cases, it may be presumed that the
whole tax would he paid both immediately and finally by
the occupier." And, commenting upon Adam Smith, he
says, first quoting from the latter:—" Ground rent and
the ordinary rent of land are therefore, perhaps, the spe-
cies of revenue which can best bear to have a peculiar tax
imposed epon them." Ricardo observes, "It must be
admitted that the effects of these taxes would be such as
Adam Smith described ; but it would surely be very un-
just to tax exclusively the revenue of any particular class
of a community. The burdens of the state should be
borne by all in proportion to their means ; this is one of
the four maxims mentioned by Adam Smith, which
should govern all taxation." The valued rents
of the houses, buildings, and ground-rent in Great
Britain was eleven million' ; and the probable
lent was not less than thirty-live millions, so that
an equalitatiou of taxation would, as it ought to do, go
far to lighten the burden that now pressed upon the
firmer. The Gallant Colonel apologised to the House
for having trespassed so long upon its attention, but be
believed the different matters to which he had been advert-
ing bore more hard upon the inhabitants of the metropolis,
than any part of the country. Adam Smith stated, in
his observations on a house rent tax, that—" It is not
very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to
the public expense, not only in proportion to their
revenue, but something more than in that proportion."
Now, when it was proved that the rich of the metropolis
did not contribute in proportion to their revenues to the
public expense, but in an inverse proportion, he thought
it was high time such inequitable proceedings were done
away with. The Gallant Colonel regretted that Ministers,
instead of doing all they could to relieve the national
burthens, bad increased them by bringing forward mea-
sures that would have the effect of increasing the National
Debt. In his opinion, such facts as he hail stated, must create
feelings of strong indignation and dissatisfaction. It was
his opinion, and lie would express it in that House, out of
it, and every where, that unless Cie Government made out
that the circumstances he had stated, with respect to the
injustice and inequality of the tax, did not exist, in that
case he conceived the people might not to pay such taxes.
'Jr. S. RICE said, that having received intimation from
the lion. and Gallant Member of his intention to present
the petitioners at the same time expressing a wish that he
(Mr. S. R.) should be present upon the discussion.
Agreeably to that request tie Lad made it his duty to be
so, at the same time he trusted that the Gallant end Hon.
Member would not feel it any disrespect to him, the sub
ject, or the House, if he did not enter fully into the
subject of the petition, especially when it was considered
that the subject ban I itely been many times before
the House, and that there was at the present mo-
ment a motion on the hooks on that ver:,- subject
by tin Hon. Member. He should, however, be ready to
meet the statements of the Gallant and Hon. :Member
when the subject teone on for practical discussion. The
reason fee hie refraining from entering fully into the dis-
cussioa now was, that he disliked entering into discus-
sions that would lead to nothing. He must, how-
ever, he permitted to make a few observations, in
reply to some of those that had fallen from the
Gallant and Honourable Member.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
He (Mr. S. Rice) thought he had shown, if there was an
ineluality in the present mode of taxation—which lie ad-
mitted—that the parishes themselves, if they would only
look into the matter, had the means of doing
justice to the parishioners in the respective parishes. The
parish officers of St. James's above all, deserved infinite
credit for the manner in which they had applied themselves
to the correction of the abuses of inequality of taxation.
—(Hear, hear.) He had never denied inequality or
defended it--(Hear)—he was an advocate for correcting
inequality of taxation where it had been found to exist.
The officer of the Crown had no option, but to take ac-
e siding to the parochial assessment. If the house was
rated parochially, at a given sum, the officers of
the Crown were not empowered to take less. It would
therefore he evident to the House and to every one, that
if any inequaity existed, the parochial authorities had
only to rate the House at its proper value, and if that rate
steed goo, the amount of the King's taxes must follow it.
The Hon. and Gallant Member had concluded by stating
that Government had made no reductions, nor afforded
any relict to the people. Now, in answer to that,
he would state that upon an active expenditure
of more than seventeen millions, there had been a
reduction of three millions, which in his opinion ten led
to relieve taxation. The Hon. and Gallant Member
had also thrown out an opinion, that unless the evils
complained of were relieved, the people would be jus-
tified in refusing to pay taxes. He (Mr, S. Rice)
could never hear that doctrine breached without depre-
ceting it, and was sorry that it should have found an
advocate in any Member of the Legislature. He thought the
Hon. and Gallant Member would have done better to have
exhorted his constituents to use their best energies to have
the taxes repealed, at the same time telling them that it
`vas the int,cest of the humblest among them more to
support the law than to violate it. No man could doubt
that it was violating the principles of the law to adopt
:hat course which the Hun. Member had stated.

Colonel EVANS thought with respect to parochial
officers correcting the evils complained of, that unse:•n in-
fluence which had hitherto operated upon them, would
will infinence them in not equalizing their mode of rati.e.
With respect to the reduction of three millions by Go-
vernment, the late Government, of which the Right Hon.
Baronet to his right was a Member, had made similar
eductions.

Mr. S. RlCE—Greater, to the extent of six millions.
Colonel EVANS—But that had not satisfied the country
any more than the reduction by the present Ministry ; nor
wouiti it, as long as a much greater standing army was
kept up, and no alteration made in pensions and
sinecures. The petition w is then laid on the table.
Mr. WILLIAM :BROUGHAM presented a peti-
tion, which was signed by 40,000 operative gun-makers,
of London and Birmingh im, praying for a revision of the
game-laws. In his opinion it was well worthy
of the attention of the House, anti there was nothing th it
could be more conducive to the prosperity of agriculture
,ban a well regulated system of game laws. Torre was
no reason why game should not be protected to the same
extent as chickens and other poultry. He cordially
supported the prayer of the petition, and trusted
that, in the course of the neat year, there would he
ample opportunity afforded of enquiring into the operation
of the present Act, and of suggesting some other measure
which would he more satisfactory in its operation.
Mr. COBBETT WoJerved that the country Gentlemen
would undoubtedly feel very much obliged to the gun-
makers for their opposition to the present game laws.
An Hon. MEMBER, wi,ose panic we could not learn,
had been requested to support the prayer of this petition,
which he did most cordially. He could not agree with
the Hon. Member for Oldham that the gunmakers had
come forward in support of the country gentlemen. The
gunmakers had found their trade so much depreciated,
owing to the present game laws, that they could not
sell any new guns whatever ; and if no other Hon. Gen-
tleman brought forward any measure upon, the subject,

he hiassolf Amid ful it his duty, next session, to brie
the subject of the game !awe under the eonsi feration
toe House.

Mr. ATTWOOD said, that if the Government suc-
reed,d in carrying the Bank resolutionQ, he would
his life that, in less than a year, the gun-makers woul
find an abundant demand for all their guns.
After some further ol).ervafons from Mr. HEATHCOTT.
Sir R. PEEL, and Mr. WATSON, the petition was ordere'
to lie on the table.

The Earl of DARLINGTON presented a petition from
the iron masters and miners in the neighbourhood o'
Wembridge, Wellington, sic., for the repeal of the Ne,
Beer Act. He thought that the Act, 1/40 far from an-
swering the expectations which had been formed of it, hio!
been productive of the greatest injury to society.
Mr. B. CARTER presented a petition from the no-
taries public of Portsmouth and Cowes, against the No.
taries Public Bil!.

Mr. GASKILL presented a petition from the borough
of Wemlock, against any alteration in the law of electing
Nlagistrates for that borough.
Mr. J. FIELDER presented a petition from th,
weavers of Tilderily and Shackerly, in favour of the Ten
Hours Labour Bill ; and a similar petition from the Na-
tional Poli'ical Union.

Mr. THOMAS ATTWOOD presented a petition
from the Northern Political Union, agreed to at
a public meeting, complaining of the distress of trade,
and particularly of the ►abouring classes, which they at-
tributed to excessive taxation, and praying for the repeal
of all tiles on the necessaries of life, particularly the
Corn Law•; it also prayed for annual Parliaments.
The Hon. Member said, for his part he was content with,
the present House of Commons if they would but take
the people happy, and again make the countr
what it was before—" Merry England."—(Hear.)
He had also similar petitions from a parish in Fifeshire.
and from Warwick. He placed implicit confidence in the
present house of Commons, feeling convinced that either
under the " patronage" of the present Ministry, or some
either (looking towards Sir R. Peel's seat), which it wa'
not difficult to imagine, that some change would be made
in the policy of the country, that would bring back hap-
piness and contentment to the large mass of the p-op'e.
After several other petitions were presented the Speaker
left the chair.

KING'S BENCH-(THIS DAY.)

:sittings at Guildhall. before the LORD Cum JUSTICE and a

Common Jury.)
mum V. PETTIT ♦ND OTHERS.

The plaintiff' in this action sought to recover the amount of
three promissory notes.
Mr. F. POLLOCK and Mr. HUTCHINSON conducted the plain-
tiff's case, and Mr. D. POLLOCK that of the defendants.
It appeared from the evidence that a Mr. Newton, whose
representative the plaintiff was, had, in the year 1613, lent the
parish of Chingford, in Essex, the sum of 2.001., the defendants,
who were at that time the churchwardens and overseers, giving
Mr. Newton the promissory notes in question as a security.
Interest had been paid down to the year IE6O, and the present
action was brought to recover the amount of the notes, and
subsequent interest.
Mr. D. POLLOCK, for the defendants, submitted that the
action should not have been bi ought against the defendants as
parish officers, but as individuals.
His LORDSHIP was of opinion that the action was good in its
present form. The defendants were liable upon their notes to
the plaintiff, and they must look to the parish to be reimbursed.
The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, his Lordship
giving the defendants leave to move hereafter to enter a
nonsuit.

THE MARKETS.-(THIS DAY.)