The Sun.
London, England, 1856-11-25 00:00:00

I REDUCTION OF THE PROPERTY AND
INCOME TAX.

Last right a public meeting, called by the association
recently formed fir the reduction of this lax from 16d. to
7d. in the pound, was held at the London Tavern, Sir
J. Duke, M.P., presiding. The large room was densely
crowded during the proceedings.
On the platform were a large number of the committee
and various influential gentlemen of the city who have
taken a leading part in the movement.
The CHAIRMAN, in opening the proceedings, observed
that the present large attendance showed the deep inte-
rest felt in this important subject. In his place in Parlie-
ruent he had always endeavoured to support a distinction
between a tax upon income and a tax upon property,
and, indeed, bedid not remember ever having heard thet
proposition denied even by her Majesty's Ministers. On
the contrary, they had always simply stated that there
were other circumstances which rendered an alteration
of the tax impossible. He believed, however, that if the
people would call upon their representatives in the House
of Commons to tell the Government that the tax must
be altered the Government would, somehow or other,
find the means of complying with their wishes. The
question was one in which the great constituency of the
city of London was particularly interested, and be was
glad to have the opportunity of rendering any assiitance
in his power in promoting the object which they had in
view. It could not be just that the man who by diligence
and attention to business earned just sufficient to main-
tain his family in comfortable circumstances should be
treated in the same manner as a person who possessed
real property, and could lay his head upon his pillow
every night with the certainty of finding
something at
hand to support his family the next day. He did not
object to the income tax so much on the ground of its
inquisitorial character as upon the broad ground of
its injustice. He trusted that his views would coin-
cide with those of the meeting generally, and he as-
sured them of his readiness to do everything in his power
to give effect to their wishes. (Cheers.)
Mr. Alderman SIDNET then moved the following rem
lution

" That the present enormous charge of 16d. in the pound
evied on income is, from the mode of its assessment, most
oppressive and unjust; and, as the understanding at the
time of passing the acts of Parliament by which the tax
was increased was that they were to continue in force for
one year after the termination of the war, and no longer,
this meeting is of opinion that those acts of Parliament
ought to be repealed from and after the sth April next."
He congratulated the chairman on the position which he
occupied at that meeting. As one of the members for
the city of London he only showed a proper appreciation
of the trust reposed in him by attending large meetings
of his constituency on political matters of this kind, in
order to make himself acquainted with their wishes, so
as to be enabled to advocate their views in his place in
Parliament. He (Mr. Alderman Sidney) hoped that in
taking part in the proceedings he should not be accused
of acting in anything like a querulous or disloyal spirit.
Speaking for himself and for the majority of the meeting
he believed he might safely say that they had never
shown a desire to exhibit disloyalty on the one hand, or
dissatisfaction with those intrusted with the confidence
of the Sovereign on the other. In the City of London
of late years no attempt had been made to perplex her
Majesty's Government unnecessarily, but he was sure
that the people of London and of England felt at the
present moment that they were justified in coming for-
ward to arrest oppression and injustice. The meeting
bad been called together to consider the operation of the
income tax. That tax had now been laid upon the peo-
ple for a period of 14 years. At the termination of the
war in 1816 the income tax was so strongly felt to be op-
pressive that the Government of that day recommended
its entire repeal, and from the year 1816 to the year 1842,
though we tad various Administrations, not one of them
had thought it right or expedient to lay anything upon
the shoulders of the people in the shape of property or
income tax. In 1842 Sir Robert Peel, one of the cleverest
statesmen who had ever wielded the destinies of this
country, was at the head of affairs, and, putting it upon
the ground of expediency, and as a temporary necessity,
he asked the people to submit to a three years' income
tax, so as to enable the revenue to reboun drone the fiscal
alterations which he was then about to submit to Parlia-
ment. In that year, namely, 1842, several hundred ar-
ticles affecting the manufacturing and commercial into-
rests were either totally relieved or greatly modified in
the duty placed upon them, which was thought to be a
great public boon. In the same year the manufacturing
prosperity of the country was at a low ebb, disturbances
had taken place in Manchester and the neighbourhood,
and it was a matter of great anxiety with the Ministry
and Parliament how to prevent a recurrence of disasters
which had been most destructive to the country. It
was therefore proposed to reimpose an income tax. Sir
Robert Peel defended the measure, not upon the ground
' of the justice of the tax, because ho confessed that it was
unequal in its pressure and in its operation ; but he told
Parliament that it was only for a temporary purpose. A
tax of 7d. in the pound wasthen imposed for three year 4,
but in 1845, instead of keeping his word, Sir Robert Peel
found further necessities for continuing the tax. It must
not, however, be forgotten that from 1842 to 1845 Sir
Robert Peel had introduced great and popular measur6s,
and that not only had he relieved the trading and mann-
facterine interests to an amazing extent, but that he
had instructed the tax collectors in the country to re-
spect the returns made by individuals, and not to raise
an objecting voice except in eases where there were good
grounds for believing that the returns given in did not
correspond with the actual incomes enjoyed. In 1845
the tax was continued, but many other duties were
taken off, the tariff was lightened, and the country ap-
peared satisfied with the tax for three years more. In
1818 there was another Ministry in office, and Sir C.
Wood, who was then the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
admired the working of the income tax so much that he
modestly proposed to double it. The consequence was
that meetings were held throughout the country, protests
were made, petitions were seat to Parliament, and in
the end Sir Charles withdrew his proposition, and simply
proposed the continuance of the tax for another year at
7d. In 1849 Parliament consented to swallow the tax
for three more years, and in 1852 Mr. Gladstone endea-
vour to make its working more equal, and showed that
it could be repealed altogether in 1860, when the long
annuities fell in. We had thus had the tax for 14 years,
and we were to have it by statute for four years longer.
In the interim we had had a war with Russia, and he
had no doubt the general feeling was that that war was
eise and necessary. (Cheers.) Indeed that feeling had
been shown by the readiness with which the country had
submitted to an increased taxation amounting to some-
thing like 30,000,0001. per annum fur the last two years.
(Hear, hear.) He thought that the opinion of the people,
when expressed at such meetings as this, ought to be re-
spected, and he believed it was their unanimous opinion
that the income tax wae unjust and oppressive ; nor was
it equal in its operation, inasmuch as it did not affect
the owners of realised property in the same degree as
those whose incomes were derived from trades and pro-
fessions. It affected to an immense extent the middle
classes of society, and if it affected them only in pro-
portion to the actual amount of the income they realised
he thought he should scarcely oppose it. It was, how-
ever, because it operated upon the few that he stood
there to denounce it. He did not speak theoretically,
with a view of catching the popular feeling at a
meeting of that kind, but he was enabled to state of
his own knowledge that just in proportion as a man was
struggling with adverse circumstances, so in proportion
was he oppressed doubly, trebly, and quadruply by the
tax assessor in regard to the income tax. (Hear, hear.)
Sir R. Peel promised that the tax should be levied justly,
with every consideration to the honest and hardworking
ratepayers. But what class was it from which the as-
sessora of income tax were chosen ? Mostly from the class
of retired tradesmen—men, he did not hesitate to say,
most unfitted for the office. They were paid, too, in
proportion to the return made to the assessment, and
men who had only filled obscure positions were all at
once remunerated by an income of 6,0001. or 7,0001.
a-year for carrying out a system of espionage into the
private affairs of the people at large. (Cheers.) Leaving
the question of injustice, he considered that, in a moral
point of view alone, the present system was wrong. When
the people assented without a murmur to the increased
taxation in order to carry on the war, it was promised
by the Government that the double income tax should
cease in April next, and therefore the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, by extending the time to 1858, committed a
gross breach of faith. In conclusion, he said if the ma-
jority of the meeting considered the income tax unjust
and obnoxious, and that the mode of its collection was
by a system of espionage, encouraged by the Govern-
ment, they would declare to their representative their
intention to raise their voices unanimously against its
continuance. As a citizen of London he would not vote
for any member of Parliament who would not endeavour
to procure its remission. (Cheers.)
Mr. T. S. GORING seconded the resolution, observing
that he had been for some time endeavouring to rouse
the public to a proper sense of the grievance under
which they all laboured. No one grudged his share of
the taxation imposed in order to release trade from re-
striction ; and not only that, but when it was increased
on account of the war they did not object to it. But
peace bad returned, and with it they had a right to ex-
pect the blessings of peace ; and one of the principal of
those blessings was a relief from financial burdens.
(Cheers.) He did not object to the principle of direct
taxation, and was opposed to exemptions in the abstract.
The practical grievance under which they laboured was
the war-tax, the removal of which would be a substan-
tial relief, and would not preclude them from considering
any further relief with respect to the original tax, or in-
quiring into the manner in which it was levied. Look-
ing at the position of the country, they could not expect
to obtain relief from the whole tax, but they had a posi-
tive claim on the Government for the remittance of the
additional impost. That was what they must first en-
deavour to obtain. They bad a distinct and positive
pledge from the Ministry that the tax should cease on
the conclusion of war, but they had taken advantage o f
a miserable quibble, for to all intents and purposes the
moment the treaty of Paris was signed it took effect, and
had it not happened that Russia and Turkey had been
so distant the ratifications would have been exchanged
long before they actually were, and in such case the tax
mast have been remitted next April. (Cheers.) Such a
breach of faith as had been committed by Government
would not be tolerated a moment in a private contract.
The Government bad insisted, like Shylock, upon its
bond, its pound of flesh, and it would, he hoped, find
that, like Shylock, it would be put out of court. At
the same time, the country, on its part, had tacitly pro-
mised that the original tax should remain till 1860, and
if they wanted the Government to keep faith with the
people for the remission of the war-tax in 185. 6 they
must keep faith with it as to the remainder. This being
the state of things, what hopes were there that they
would succeed ? At the end of the last peace the G. o-
In 1814 the war-tax was taken off and
position. In
and the nation were in the same relativ
reim-
posed on the escape
t after
a distinct pledge that it should cease the nix y
of Napoleon from Elba inilBls, with