The Sun.
London, England, 1851-07-01 00:00:00

EVENING

that tax; but though he made a long speech no result could
be drawn from it until another Hon. Gentleman helped him
out, and then, it appeared that what he meant was, " Don't
repeal the window-tax." He (the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer) thought that by the proposition he had made with
respect to the window-tax great relief would be given to the
towns, but that that given to the country would be even
greater. The Hon. Gentleman, however, now thought that
the public credit was in danger. If so, how did it happen
that he had voted for the motion of the Hon. Member for
Montrose?—(Hear, hear.) If he was of the same opinion then
as he was now, it was rather strange he should have sup-
ported that proposition, the effect of which would have been
to prevent a repeal of the window tax, and to endanger the
public credit. —(Elear, hear.) A motion had been made not
long ago, which wouldendanger no less than 5,000,0001. of
the public revenue derived from taxation. The motion of
the Hen. Member for Montrose was made on the 2d of May,
and on the Bth the Hon. Member for the West Riding of
Yorkshire introduced a motion for the repeal of the malt-
tax. Now, the danger to the revenue was as great on
.the
30th of June as it was on the Bth of May. Oa the motion,
however, which on the Bth May endangered 5,000,0001. of
revenue, he found the name of Benjamin 'I
'lsraeli in its
favour--(Hear, and laughter) and new, on the 30th of
June, the Hon. Gentleman opposite considered that the
public credit would be endangered by a sacrifice of 1,500,000/.
of revenue. But perhaps there might be two Benjamin
Disraelie—(Laughter)—and the Honourable Gentleman op-
po,ite was not the Honourable Member who had so voted
on the former occaeion.— ( Hear, and laughter.) But, after
all, the real question then before them was, whether or not
the window-tax was to be repealed?—(Hear, hear.) If the
Hon. Gentleman's amendments were carried it would be
impossible to repeal that tax. Yet the Hon. Gentleman
himself had said that he considered the window-tax was
to be blotted out of the Exchequer. Ho (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) had not changed his opinion since he
had proposed the repeal of that tax, and the substitution
for it of a house-tax. He believed that its repeal would be a
great boon, and afford great relief to all classes in the country,
the agricultural classes as well as those in towns. He was
as anxious as any one could be to retain a surplus in the Ex-
chequer; and he thought enough would be left, after carry-
ing out his proposition for all the purposes which he con-
templated. The question, therefore, which they had to de-
cide to-night was the repeal of the window-tax; and he
trusted the House would decide at once upon that question
aye or no.—(Cheers and cries of "Divide.")
Mr. NEWDEGATE said the subject brought forward by
the Hon. Member for Bucks was one of the deepest import-
ance, considered with a view to the prospective condition of
the public interests ; and he wished briefly to state his sin-
cere concurrence with the Hon. Gontleman in his belief that
it was highly inexpedient to sacrifice a large amount of
public reveuueat the present moment, and particularly when
there was a large amount of an unsettled claim with the
East India Company. But at the same time he wished to
guard himself from being concluded, by voting in the mi-
nority on that occasion against voting for any remission of
taxation which might hereafter be proposed, either by the
Government or any Hon. Gentleman opposite. He con-
sidered the Hon. Member for Bucks was right in his views
with respect to all the most important interests of the coun-
try, and, therefore, he would vote for his present motion.
Mr. GLADSTONE confessed it did occur to him, while
listening to portions of the speech of the Hon. Member for
Buckinghamshire, that he would have wished that parts of
that speech had received a fuller development at his hands.
He referred particularly to the course which the Honourable
Member might wish the House to pursue in the event of the
adoption of the motion then before it. In considering the
objections which he (Mr. Gladstone) had stated on a former
occasion to the financial plans of the Government, he could
not refuse to support a motion which asserted a sound prin-
ciple in opposition to those plans—(Hear)—but he would
state with as much brevity and plainness as he could the
reasons which influenced his vote, and the course which he
thought the House was bound to pursue under present cir-
cumstances.—(Hear, hear.) When the Chancellor of the
Exchequer proposed the repeal of the window-tax he had
also proposed the renewal of the income-tax for three years ;
and even under these circumstances he (Mr. Gladstone)
should confess it appeared to him to be a most unwise and
most hazardous proposition, as respected the maintenance of
the public credit, in parting with so important a source of
revenue as the window-tax, by substituting for it a tax in
the shape of a house tax, to place the latter on so narrow,
and, as he thought, so illegitimate a basis as the Govern-
ment had selected for its foundation.—( Hear, hear.) He
had objected to the house tax for these two reasons:—
In the first place, they introduced it without the slightest
calculation that the great anomaly in the tax which had
caused its abolition in le34—he meant the inequality of its
incidence to the mansions of the great as compared with
those of the middle classes and those dwellings used for busi-
ness—was not removed.—( Hear, hear.) It was that in-
equality in the tax which had led to its abolition in 1834.
But they had heard little of that objection on the present
occasion, probably on the principle of not looking a gift
horse in the mouth; that flaw in its structure having been
passed over in silence. However, he could not think that
it was good to introduce into our laws that which was
objectionable. He could not consent, moreover, to a
house-tax, which exempted six-sevenths of the whole house
property of the country from its operation. He was not
aware why they should take such an irrational course with
respect to the house-tax. It was something like giving a
charter of future exemption from all taxations to those six-
sevenths of the houses of this country. For his part he
knew no more legitimate subject for taxation on the whole,
and upon general principles, than the house property of the
country.—(Hear, hear.) If it were true that house property
was subjected to certain burdens for local purposes, it was
not so with respect to the Imperial Treasury. He looked
upon house property as the most secure and permanent de-
scription of property as a resource of revenue to the country.
He
could not therefore prevail on himself to give a vote
which would in future preclude any portion of that revenue
from being made available. But what had recently occurred
added tenfold to the considerations he had before entertained.
How different, how much more formidable a character had
that question now assumed! He did trust the House would
seriously and dispassionately consider the position in which
the income-tax now stood. The proceedings of the present
year had inflicted a heavy blow upon that impost.—(llear.)
It was impossible to conceive that it could be again proposed
in that House without serious if not obstinate opposition
from one or niece parties in Parliament. Let them con-
sider the line of conduct taken by one party, and the position
in which the question now stood. There was a large body
of Gentlemen in that House who said it was unjust to levy
a uniform per-tentage under all the schedules of the Act.
These Gentlemen had obtained a Parliamentary Committee
to consider, not exclusively, but mainly whether they ought
not to alter that per-tentage under the Act? Such was the
state of one of the powerful parties of that House. The
Government were not to be looked upon as friends on general
or permanent grounds to the impoetion of the income-tax.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer, indeed, in 184°, had
given in something like his adhesion to the principle of
the income-tax as a portion of the general taxation of the
country. The Noble Lord, too, within the last few weeks
had spoken in terms which might represent his opinions
as showing that the repeal of that tax was not to be ex-
pected. There was another party in that House which
believed that the per-centage under schedule D was so con-
stituted as to demand the renewal of the arrangement under
that schedule. There were many on that (the Opposition)
side of the House, cf whom he was one, who could not con-
sent to the income tax if the per-centage was varied. From
all considerations of policy they were precluded by a solemn
pledge upon the statute-book from anything in the nature of
such a variation. Now in what condition was the income-
tax to come out of that Committee? Was it to come with
a recommendation to vary the per- tentage? If so it would
not receive the sanction of the House.—(Hear, hear.) If
otherwise, it might be met with the hostility of a powerful
party. He could not forecast all the difficulties which might
arise under the circumstances; but this he should say, that
these 5,000,000/. of revenue were placed in a most precarious
position. He would, therefore, ask the House whether it
were wise, whether it were politic, whether it were honest,
to exclude from their view the preparations for a contin-
gency so great as the possible lapse of the income-tax?—
(Hear.) In case of the lapse of that tax, what would main-
tain the public credit? They might talk of public economy ;
and certainly that House had not exceeded its duty in en-
forcing economy and retrenchment ; and ho hoped more
might be effected in that direction. Certainly arrangements
had been entered into which in the course of time would have
the effect of causing a saving in expenditure in connexion
with the debt. But he was not of opinion that the income-
tax could be done away with, and public credit at the same
time maintained, if they withheld their hands from new
taxation. Then he would say, let them have the resource
of a house- tax, not indeed to take the place of an income-
tax, but to fill up some portion of the deficiency caused
by its removal. And there was the connexion between
the two subjects. The position in which they were
placed was this, that while the income-tax was
placed in such a perilous position, they were proposing a
house tax on a basis so narrow, that it could not be made
properly conducive to the public revenue. Such were the
objections which he entertained to the financial policy of the
Government. But if he was asked what would he recom-
mend, his answer would be, that he disclaimed on the part
of those not connected with the Government the duty of
pointing out in detail the nature of the financial measures
connected with the direct taxation of the country. But this
was, he thought, what they ought to do—adopt the principle
laid down by the Hon. Member for Bucks, that the surplus
which they had was not to be dealt with as permanent in-
come, to be given away without reference to future necessi-
ties. But if they wished not to disappoint the expectations
raised with respect to the income-tax, they ought to have so
constructed their house tax as to place it on a basis so broad
as that in case of necessity it might be made available for
yielding a considerable sum to the Exchequer. What was
the precise limit of the basis he did not presume to say;
whether it ought to include 101. houses, or to adopt a gradu-
ated scale ; or whether the tax was to be levied on owners or
occupiers ; or whether they were to make all house property
liable to taxation. These were questions upon which it
would not only be premature but impertinent for him to
express as opinion. The fundamental objection which he
had to the proposed house-tax was, that it cut off from the
House of Commons the most valuable source of revenue.
It cut off that source of revenue, too, at a time when
those measures adopted by the House, and suggested by
the Government, had made it probable that that source
should be had recourse to to maintain the interests of the
country, as well as that public credit which they all had so
much at heart.—(Hear.) He had thus stated all his reasons
for the vote he intended giving. He would only add one
more word of explanation. In voting, as he intended, for a
motion which he conceived asserted a sound financial prin-
ciple, he was far from saying that the Government would be
right in withdrawing the changes they proposed to make in
the Customs Bill. Such a sacrifice of revenue as that which
they proposed to make was what the public had a right to
expect for the renewal of the income-tax. The proposed ,
remission of the duties on timber and coffee had al-
ready taken effect in the votes of the House, and
the estimates had been conducted with a view to those
reductions. The revenue upon those articles was not an
inflexible revenue, but one of that elastic nature as would
go to increase itself. But, with respect to the house-tax, he
could not allow that proposition to pass without the ex-
pression of his honest opinion that that was a revenue which
Parliament ought not to give away, .as it was a revenue
which might be drawn without the slightest objection being
made to it, and this more especially under circumstances
which might be formidable, and which events showed might
be near at hand.—( Hear.)
Mr. LABOUCHERE said the Hon. Member for Bucking-
hamshire said he did not wish the window-tax to be re-
tained, and the Right Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down
admitted that the duties on timber and coffee ought not to
be preserved ; and these were precisely the questions with
which the House had to deal on that occasion. Such were
the practical questions which they had then to determine.
That was what the House had been for some time deliberat-
ing upon—whether the duties on timber and coffee were to
be reduced, and Whether the granting of the income-tax for
only one year was so important as not to justify any further
remission of taxation. He knew that the vote had been
come to by the joining of parties holding the most diverse
opinions ; but though he deeply regretted that vote, he
was not of opinion that by it a fatal blo v was struck to the
credit of the country. He should do deep injustice to those
who may be said to be the authors of that vote, if he im-
puted any ulterior design to them. There never was a
period when public men and particle were more united .

Maj, )rity against the amendment --113
The announce !meat of the numbers was received with con•
siderable cheeri g from the Ministerial side of the House.
The House t, i.en went into Committee on the Bill pro
formal, Mr. BEE :74AL in the chair; and the Chairman imme-
diately reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again.
Sir B. HALL gave notice that lee would move the ex-
tension of the to to Ireland.
GENER AL BOARD OF HEALTH BILL.
The order of 1 he day for the third reading of this Bill
having been read;,
Viscount EBI t.INGTON moved the omission from clause
1, line 11, of th a following words :—" So far as the same
are authorised I'y the Public Health Act." He objected
to those words, ',not only on principle, but also in conse-
quence of the evi is which the adoption of the provision had
already produced . in the towns in which it had been carried
into effect.
Mr. FREWEN c seconded the motion; but he doubted the
prudence of divid ti ng the House upon the subject.
Mr. MULLIN GiS said the object of these words was to
make the Bill co asistent with the measure of last session.
Lord SEYMO .-UR said that those words had been intro-
duced into the B •ill of last year, in conformity with the best
legal advice, and he had thought it advisable to re-insert
them in the prey ent measure.
The ATTORN '.EY-GENERAL ;said that without those
words the Act m ight be completely overturned.
The amendme at was then negatived without a division.
Mr. FULLER , moved that Hastings be inserted in the
schedule.
Sir W. VERN ER seconded the motion.
Lord SEYMO UR opposed the proposition. He was quite
ready to admit t. hat Hastings was one of the dirtiest towns in
England—(Lan „titer)- but the point was, that St. Leo-
nard's, being a clean town, could not be justly laden with
the expense of cl eansing Hastings.
Mr. HOLLAN D supported the motion.
Lord EBRING i'rON reminded the House that under the
Health of Towns Act there was ample power to rate parti-
cular districts acc :,)rding to their especial wants without bur-
dening contiguou ; localities.
The House divi A led. The numbers were
For the m otion .••
Against it ••• 77
Majority •.. —lB
The borough of: Hastings was accordibgly inserted in the
schedule.
The Loan Soci sties Bill; tbo Highway Rates Bill; the
Merchant Seam en's Fund Bill ; and the Burgesses and
Freemen's Ferric anentary Franchise Bill were read a seccnd
time.
The County C( rurts Further Extension (Compensations)
Bill, and the Advances for Public Works, &c., Bill went
trough Committe e.
Mr. LABOUC FIBRE obtained leave to bring in a Bill to
amend the More futile Marine Act; and, the other business
upon the paper h oving been disposed of, the House adjourned
at a Quarter to 0 me o'clock.

THE FIR] AT LONDON-BRIDGE,
OFFICIAL INQUIRY.
An inquest was held at eleven o'clock yesterday, at the
London .bridge I' betel, by Mr. Payne, the coroner for the
city of London, to investigate the cause of the recent exten-
sive fire at Mr. A Merman Humphery's wharf.
The jury havir te,r been sworn,
Mr. PAYNE df escribed to them the situation of the build-
ings, and pointed .out on a rough plan the portions which had
been destroyed.
Ike Coroner an d jury then proceeded to view the pre-
mises, and on the, it return,
Mr. William f3nooks, Tooley-street, surveyor, described
the premises whi ch were burnt, as it has already appeared in
the papers.
James Dimsd ale, Tooley-street, porter—Knew the pre-
mises and had b€l.en employed in them. When the fire broke
out he was in Montague-close, in front of the warehouses.
It was about aye arter to four o'clock. There was a jour-
neyman of the r.ame of Eaton with him. He was coming
from the new building. He saw a gentleman standing at
the bottom of A warehouse. He did not know who he
was. The gentleman sung out " Fire " and " Po-
lice." Witness then went over to give the alarm.
He saw the lire on the first floor of warehouse A.
He went to Mr. Brown, of the Hibernia-wharf, and he sent
Eaton for the engine immediately. He then came back to
the fire, and ren. dared assistance as far as he could. He
was there the whole time to eight o'clock. He went into
letter C, on the third floor, but tie could net tell what W 33
in the warehouse.. He assisted in removing hops from letter
C warehouse. H e saw the fire in letter D from the loophole
of letter C. He did not go on the roof at all, nor did he go
into the warehouse Dat all. He knew nothing of how the
fire commenced, .and could give no opinion with respect to it.
When he saw th o fire first it appeared to him to be on the
staircase. He si ew it through the window. The door near
which the gentleman was standing was open. He didn't
know what bee sme of the gentleman. The gentleman ap-
peared to be alarmed. He was standing still, and was calling
" Police—fire !" ;lie worked in all the warehouses frequently,
ever since they were built. Did not know what was in
the warehouse A., but believed there were rags there—white
linen rags. Deld not know what was burning when he
first saw the fire. At twelve o'clock that night he was in
Mr. Waterman's premises ; witness was then sober ; had not
been in A all day. He (witness) pointed out the gentleman
whom he saw at the door of letter A when the fire broke out.
Thomas Harris Edge, 61, Walcot-place, Kennington-road,
clerk—Had been down in the Borough, and was passing
along the warehouses when a person passed him, running as
fast as he could towards Tooley-street. He was a labouring
man. He came from the direction of the warehouses. He
also saw another man in the direction of the church-yard.
Both had come from the same direction. There was no ap-
pearance of fire outside. That was about a quarter to four.
He saw several risen looking through the first window of the
ground-floor of letter A. That was the staircase-window,
and on looking in he saw the fire. On seeing the fire he
thought the two men had gone for the engines. He called
out fire as loud as he could. He went into the warehouse
occupied in letter Aby Mr. Hewitt, cheese factor. As soon
as the fire reached the first-floor where there were rags, it
blazed out very violently. He had not the slightest know-
ledge of how the fire originated. When he first saw the fire
the rags were not burning.
William Eaton, a Bridge-street labourer, wre in Mr.
Hewitt's warehouse shortly before four, and heard a crack-
ling, and on looking into A warehouse he saw fire on the
staircase. There is a small room by the side of the stairs,
in which lumber is kept, and he was of opinion that the
fire originated there.
Richard Welsh, warehouseman to Mr. Humphery—Mr.
Hewitt occupied the ground floor of letter A, and Mr. Ho-
lingsworth, paper-maker, the second, third, and fourth floors.
The latter's warehouses were filled with calico and linen
rags. Mr. Wigan, hop-factor, occupied the fifth floor, and
Mr. llumphery the top one, which was empty. B was oc-
cupied by Messrs. Hitchen and Thornton, hop factors, on the
first and top floors. Mr. 'Wigan had oors 2,3, 4, and 5,
which contained hops. Letter D was occupied entirely by
Mr. Wigan with hops. He was not on the premises after
half-past seven in the morning. He opened the loopholes
and locked the doors before he left. Everything was then
safe, He returned about half-past five, and the premises were
then on fire. There is a small cupboard under the stairs in
letter A, in which paint-pots and other lumber were kept.
He could not form the least idea as to the origin of the` e,
and heard no one threatening to set the place on fire. nn
'
on the spot when the fire broke out in letter D. He wasln
the roof of C • about seven, and saw no signs of finer
na"t tPe yt
i oonf
about half-an-hour afterwards the fire broke out in
.leria'-'nd
He saw smoke coming out of the winadnoqws_tb_oaaft_pth
hiree could be
sixth floors. It did not appear to him that bf
et Lae fire in De
any connexion between the fire in A and B.anthe emto
Mr. Thomas Stannor said that he was
Mr. Edward Hewitt, a cheese factor,
was called to the fire, and saw the refre,'Uuul it in No. 2
warehouse. There was a cupboard in
cned
warehouse but he
did not believe that the fire commathere, or it would
first have destroyed the Anystaircase.ne c could form person
f could go into
the place, as it is open all day. , orm no notion as
hsr s--e W
a witht
to how the fire began, nor "
an
ha he ever heard threats of
injury.
wasf discovered he was in the counting-
Mr. Charles Brown foreman to Mr. Alderman Humphery,
, and when told of it by Eaton, he
to the Warehouse No. 2 A, thinking he
acrh the fire. He went up three or four
should be able to quench
wag unable to proceed further in consequence of
hiletnihbetehrkne 2;r:41
the immense heat. He saw the rails and tho rags inside the
warehouse on lire. There was no appearance of the fire
stairs, but
coming from a cupboard, but he belied it came from a bale
of rag near to the door.