The Sun.
London, England, 1833-05-04 00:00:00

lion. Member was not warranted in comparing the levy-
ing of that duty to proceedings under the Inquisition, nor
in describing it as likely to break the confidence of the
country, on account of the unjust height to which it had
bee❑ carried. Now, how stood this duty? Why, thus :
at 2251. the duty was 17s. 9d ; at 400/. he admitted
that it was diminished to 15e. ; but at 6251. it was 19s• 2d.;
and 1,0751. it was 1/. 6s. 7d. So that on this point, in
• place of the duty increasing in pressure according to the
lowness of the sum, it really increased in amount
ac-
cording to the increased value of the consideration. He
now came to the duty on leases—a duty which the Hon.
Ml•mber said pressed exclusively on the poor. Did the
Honourable Alemb.:r not know that the great mass of the

property held by the lower classes of the people was
held not upon lease, but at will? Did he believe that
the great bulk of the cottages of the peasantry were held
on lease? (Mr. Cobbett was understood to admit that
they were not held on lease.) Then that was all he
wanted, for it formed a sufficient answer to the lion.

Mernl;r's own stat,2rnent as to the unjust pressure on

the lower orders of the people.—( Hear, hear.) But ad-
mitting that some part of the duties which the Hon.
Member bad attacked could not be defended, still the Hon.

Member might have seen, had he thougLt fit to look into

the votes and proceedings of that House, that the inequa-
lity of which he complained was about to be remedied;
for that there were resolutions of that House declaring
this irequality, and which had been passed for the pur-
pose of aff,rding relief. Then he came to the question of
mortgages. The first observation that arose on this point

•vas that mortgages were not common among the poorer
classes of society. But among those mortgages which did
occur among the poorer classes there were many that paid
no duty at all. He alluded to the mortgages upon public
houses, effected by the party merely depositing his title
deeds with the brewer or other creditor.—(Mr. Cobbeq
said something across the table.) The Hon. Gentleman
said that he had never heard of such a thing in the course.
of his life.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear, hear," and
laughter.) The Hon. Gentleman had forgotten many
things in the ardour with which he read the lucubration,
of Mr. Dunn on this subject. But though the publicans
offered the most numerous instances of this sort of mortgage,

it was certainly practised in other cases, and the deposit
of the title deeds formed what was called an equitable
mortgage, sufficient in many cases to satisfy the creditor.
Mortgages to the amount of 251. were not very common,
and yet they were those of the duty on which the Hon.
Member most complained. The fact was, that in these
matters it was the lawyer, the black and cruel-souled law-
yer, as the Edon. Member would perhaps call hitn—( A
laugh)—and not the stamp collector, who checked the fre-
quency of mortgages. It was not the amount of the stamp
duties that affected them. If that was the else, then all

the sympathy of the Hon. Member was wasted.—(Mr.
Cobbett said, that however the law might be evaded, such
was the law on the statute-book.) He knew it was—he
knew that the law was thete—he knew it was in the act,
hut was it in the deed ?—(llear, hear.) Why the Hon.
Member might as well say, that because the writ he
herdic() comhurer do existed in the statute-book, that,
'therefore, he was to call upon the 'lousy, in their horror
of cruelties of such a sort, to say that men were burnt
in the course of the last century.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
If all the sympathy the Hon. Member professed to
feel, and all he attempted to excite in the House referred
to non-exist, nt mortgages alone, it was surely quite wasted,
and then all he had addressed to the people of England on
the subject was misplaced. Indeed it must he taken as a
proof that the Hon. Member thought he had a bad case,
fur if he had a good cas a he would not have committed
the error of attempting to bolster it tip with such misera•
ble anti such unwarranted complaints.—(Hear.) He
should now refer to the subject of annuities. He wished
lie was a lawyer, notwithstanding the heavy denunciations
of the Hon. Member against that body, for then he should
be able most completely to show how much the Hon.
Member was in error on this point. The Hon. Member
had referred to voluntary annuities—to those granted on a
money consideration, and to those granted especially out
of a freehold estate. The latter class surely could not be
said to be contained in the division of duties that chiefly
affected the poor. The Hon. Member had represented
that on annuities granted for a money consideration, but
a small amount of duty was payab'e ; but the Hon. Mem-
ber had not said at the same time, that when an annuity
was granted for a money consideration, the duty on con-
veyances also attached. The Hon. Member had either
intentionally omitted that part of the case or be was ig-
norant of it. In either case, his observations on the effect
of the duty were unwarranted, and the House had a right
to complain if a Member who professed to call for their
judgment on facts, either suppressed some of those facts,
or had omitted to make himself acquainted with them.—
(Hear, hear, hear.) The Hon. Member then alluded to
the subject of promissory notes and bills of exchange, and
said, with regard to that, as with regard to other parts
of the question, that the duty became lower as the
amount of the subject of it became greater. Did not the
Hon. Member know that even at this time there were
but very few bills of exchange or promissory notes to a
large amount, and that even with these few, if the
amount of duty was increased, it would he at once most
readily evaded by cutting up one large bill of exchange
into several small onts.—(Hear, bear.) On this subject,
as well as on that of the receipts, the lion. Member had
fallen into a most glorious absurdity, a most evident fal-
lacy. He conceived that because a person was rich, he,
therefore, dealt itt nothing but large bills of exchange and
promissory notes.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Yet nothing could
be a greater mistake. It was like the argument that had
been advanced a few nights since, that because this was a
rich country, therefore it ought to have a rich standard ;
or like the still more humourous atoertion, that " who
slays fat oxen should himself be fat"—(A laugh)—who is
rich himself, should give no notes or bills of exchange but
for large sums. Why the Hon. Member seemed to forget
that it was the multiplication of transactions, rather than
the consolidation of them, that both created and accompa-
nied riches.—( Hear, Lear.) The same argument was ap-
plicable on the subject of receipt starnps. But then, said
the Hon. Member, the poor tradesman pays the receipt
stamp. Indeed; did not the Hon. Member know, that
whatever might be the amount of the stamp, it formed but
a part of the price of the commodity, and that it was the
consumer of that commodity, and not the seller of it,
who paid the receipt stamp duty ? Instead, therefore,
of the whole duty falling upon one man, it was most
extensively distributed, and its weight, therefore, scarcely
telt.—(Hear.) Then he came to the subject of the
duty on life insurance. Why, instead of this duty being
diminished in proportion to the value of the insurance, the
fact was, that if a man made two insurances of 5,0001., he
would have less duty to pay than on one insurance for
10,0001.—(Hear, hear.) Then, again, with regard to
appraisetnents, on which the Hon. Member bad said that
the middle classes paid two hundred and fifty times as
much as the rich. That statement was one calculated to
produce a most powerful effect upon the people at large,
but it was not justified by the fact. The Hon. Member
compared the appraisement of the estates of the rich with
the sale of the property of the poor ; but that was most
unfair. When a man appraised an estate, be did so not
mere!y to get some knowledge of its value, but with a
view to dispose of it.—(Hear, hear.) If so, then, the duty
on appraisement was not the only duty he had to pay, fur
then came the duty on conveyances, which had been al-
ready noticed, and which amounted to 9501. on 10,0001.
—(The Right Hon. Member was corrected in this state-
ment, whith should have been 951., and not 9501. • The
mistake excited much merriment in the House.) The
result was, that instead of the poor paying two hundred
and fifty times as touch as the rich—the rich paid eight
times as much as the poor.—(Hear, hear, hear ) If he
wished to resolve all the Hon. Member's statements by
one test, lie could hardly do better than apply this to
them ; but he should not do so ; he should still follow the
course of the Hon. Member's observations, and show fur-
ther errors by which they were distinguished. The
next point was the premium on apprenticeships._.
(Hear.) On that point the Hon. Member observed, that
here was one case in which an ad valorem duty was
adopted. But surgit amari aliquid ; the Hun. Member
remarked at the same time, that this ad valorem was only
established because in this particular case the rich had no
interest in being unjust. The Hon. Member did not
search for the plums in the pudding, but greedily seized
hold of the bitters, and exhibited them as specimens of
the whole composition. But even in this he was wrong ;
for though the rich might not have much to do with ap-
prenticeships, they paid stamp duties on something else.
Something analogous to stamp duties on apprenticeships
might be found in the duties paid upon grants of titles of
honour; but of these duties the Hon. Member seemed to be
quite ignorant; yet they were not inconsiderable. A
Baronet paid on the grant of his title 100/., a Baron 1501 ,
a Viscount 2001., an Earl 2501., a Marquis 300/., and
a Duke 3501. The Hon. Gentleman, though he said he
loved to deal with the rich, did not state any thing of this.
—(Hear.) But then the Hon. Member said that be loved
too to deal with the clergy. But in dealing with them,
he did not refer to the duties paid on presentations to liv-
ings, on sales of advowsons, and on other things of the
same nature.—(Hear, hear.) Now, after having dis-
posed of these matters, he came to the subject of the auction
duty. Ile should endeavour to follow huud pussibus equis
the Hon. Member in this manner through all the topics
of his speech. On this point the Hon. Gentleman
had been most vehement, and seemed to imagine that
by reference to the auction duty he could trace the iniquity