The Sun.
London, England, 1851-04-05 00:00:00

SUN,

in the revenue from what remained was equal to one-
third of the amount of the taxation reduced. So in 11
years from 1830 to 1840 the taxes reduced were
8,600,0001., the falling off in revenue 2,700,000/. only.
The reduction of taxation in the nine years from 1842
amounted to 5,138 0001. The amount of the taxes, after
reduction, was last year 4,700,0001. more than in 1841,
the year previous to the yea: of reductions. He ven-
tured to predict that the actual !ailing off on account of
the window-tax would not equal the amount of the re-
duction. The Noble Lord the Member for Middlesex
was pleased to say the metropolitan Members were out
of their senses on the subject of the window-tax. It
seemed, that in the estimation of the Noble Lord, it was
only those who sat on the Treasury bench that were in
their senses.
Lord R. GROSVENOR begged to state that what
he said was, he hoped the metropolitan Members had
come to their i,enses.—(A laugh.) He did not demur
to the application the Hon. Member had made of his
expression, but it had not been put as the Hon. Member
said. If it were signified that he (Lord R. Grosvenor)
was so tied to the present Ministry that when they
changed their position on a subject he went with them
necessarily, he must tell the Honourable Member that
it was an insult to those constituents who had returned
bim (Lord Robert Grosvenor) to that House, and
who never had returned any man who had sacrificed his
independence.
Lord DUNCAN expressed his gratification in having
to address the House more briefly than on former occa-
sions when the window-tax was brought under notice.
Lie could not concur with the Noble Lord the Member
for Middlesex in sa3ing that the present pro-
position was the same with that made on a
former occasion. It was totally different. In the
first proposition the Chancellor of the Exchequer
proposed to retain two.thirds of the window-tax, and
old houses and new were to be treated very differently
The present plan seemed to show the truth of the adage
" Second thoughts are best." The second plan involved
a total abandonment of the window-tax. Relief to the
extent of 500,000/. a-year snore than by the former plan
was to be given. The country were much indebted to
his Right Hen. Friend and the metropolitan Members
who had been so much censured; and, without pledging
himself to support the plan now proposed, he wished
to express his opinion that it was a great improvement
on the former. _ _ _ _

Sir B. HALL, as one of the metropolitan Members
who had lately been "out of their senses," reminded
his Noble Friend that he might rather have said it was
the Chancellor of the Exchequer who had been out of
his mind, for the metropolitan Members had not changed
theirs. He recollected a remarkable sneech made by
the Hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Admiralty,
when out of office, with reference to the income-tux,
and there was a general impression, when that Hon.
Gentleman took office that it was almost a guarantee
that there would be a different arrangement with regard to
thantax. Before saying anything upon the window-tax
he must allude to what had fallen from the Chancellor of
the Exchequer relative to a certain meeting or meetings
that had taken place in the metropolis. The Right
Hon. Gentleman expressed himself as surpri;ed that any
persons at that meeting should have been, as he said,
favourable to a breach of good faith with the public
creditor. Ile did not know to what particular meeting
the Right Hon. Gentleman referred. There had boon a
number of meetings in the metropolis, but he knew of no
individuals .;ho at any of them had expressed a desire
for a breach of good faith. What was contended for
was, that by means of economy and a proper adminis-
tration of the affairs of the country, a sufficient amount
might be saved to enable them to repeal the income-tax.
—(Hoar.) The Right Hon. Gentleman had also referred
to the statements made to him by various deputations
on the subject of the window-tax, to the eff‘sct that
they advocated its repeal on the ground of sanitary re-
form. But those deputations merely took up the ques-
tion of sanitary reform because that was the position
which had been taken up by gentlemen who were now
members of the Government—many of the Whigs when
oat of office having contended on sanitary grounds that
the window-tax should be repealad.—(Hear.) With re-
gard to the scheme of a house-tax proposed by the Right
Hon. Gentleman, he maintained that, so long as there
was a possibility of reducing the public expenditure, no
such tax should be imposed—(Hear, hear)—and he was
resolved to take the sense of the House on that question
when the proper time came for doing so.—(Hear, hear.)
The sum that would be derived from the imposition of
this tax was 700,0001., and he thought a reduction to that
amount might easily be made in the expenditure of the
country so as to render the tax unnecessary.—(hear.)
Mr. SPOONER asked whether the Chancellor of the
Exchequer meant that tenant-farmers were to continue
to pay the income-tax on an assumed rate of profit,
though they might be farming at a loss ?—whether he
meant to melee any modifications as far as life interests
and professional incomes were concerned—and for what
period he ictended to impose the tax ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER proposed.
a renewal of the income-tax for three years. With re-
gard to the other questions of the Hon. Gentleman, he
thought it would be much better to discuss those topics
separately when they came regularly before the House.
It was a very complicated web the Hon. Gentleman pro-
posed to unravel, and it could not well be entered upon
now; but he should be ready to discuss roll the questions
raised when the proper time came.—(Hear.)
Mr. HENLEY looked upon the financial statement of
the Chancellor of the Exchequer as one tending to the
destruction of the public credit, and subversive of those
principles on which the interests of a great country like
this should be sustained. The Right Hon. Gentleman
spoke of a surplus, and then he announced that there
was a powerful body ready to seize him by the throat
and order him to deliver to an amount nearly equal to
the whole of that surplus. He told them of a probable
claim by the East India Company of 400,0001.; and then
he spoke of the expense of the Kafir war—the last Kafir
war, as they all knew, having cost a sum of 1,100,000/.
—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman next com-
plained that the gentlemen behind him, who had been
made so rich, be said, by our recent policy, would not
let his surplus alone, and insisted on pulling the revenue
down to an extent inconsistent with the public credit.
Having made these statements, he brought forward a
scheme which left the surplus so small that it would be
entirely swallowed up by the Kafir war and the East
India Company's claim, should it be preferred.—(Hear.)
hear.) After this they heard a great deal of clap-
trap about taking off the taxes on articles of con-
sumption, and about the two kinds of direct taxation
which he meant to preserve—the window-tax and the
income-tax. He called upon the Rouse, in the first
place, to take off every tax that pressed upon con-
sumption, and then he proposed to limit the direct
taxation to a comparatively small number of persons.
How long would the public credit be sustained in such
circumstances as these?—(Hear, hear.) Such a state of
things was calculated to create alarm, for with the
taxes paid by a small number of people, instead of by
the great mass of the community, how could they expect
long to maintain the public credit?—(Hear, hear.) He
hoped that the revenue of the country would either be
increased or the expenditure cut down, so that they
might encounter no such risk as would be involved iu en
entire want of surplus.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. MACGREGOR said.there were two questions be-
fore the House. One was whether they were to go back
to protection—(oh; oh I),—and the other was whether
they should follow the course recommended by the
Chancellor of the Exchequer.—(Hear, hear.) 1.13 hoped
the surplus would be increased by means of a reduction
in the public expenditure. The proposal of the Hon.
Member fur Stamford as to the income-tax was the most
dangerous that could be made. Ho (Mr. Macgregor)
was for continuing the income-tax, but not on the prin-
ciple upon which it was now levied. The Chancellor of
the Exchequer, he thought, had acted on sound princi-
ples with regard to the window-tax, but he could not
have supported the first scheme of a house-tax which he
had brought forward. To show the pressure of taxa-
tion on articles of consumption, he might state that an
artizen with a wife and two children, and earning 751.
a-year, paid of taxes on necessary articles of food for
his family 71. Bs., or 10 per cent. of his income.
Mr. Alderman SIDNEY asked whether warehouses,
manufactories, banking-houses, and other places wed for
carrying on trade and commerce, were to be included in
the payment of 6d. in the pound? If that was not the
case great complaint would justly be made against the
measure; and he should like to hear on what principle
that description of property, which did not pay the
window-tax, should be made to pay the new house-tax?
—(Hear, hear.) Then why was a shopkeeper, paying
say, 350 L of rent, of which 501. was for the dwelling-
house, to be called on to pay on the rent of his shop, viz.
on 3001., which at present did not contribute anything?
Why should that class of the community be singled out
as the objects of such injustice?—(Hear, hear.) As to
the coffee duties, he thought the Government should,
when making a reduction, withdraw the order in Council
relative to the admission of chicory. He would support
the income-tax if it was to be renewed on fair principles,
but he could be no party to passing it with its present in-
equalities. He had presented a petition from 91 corn-
meters who were charged for income-tax, though he
could show that many of these men had in reality not
one-half of the sum of 1501. a-year, and yet they had to
pay 7d. in the pound just in the same way as the
wealthiest landed proprietor.—(Hear, hear.) Such a
mode of imposing the income-tax was alike impolitic and
unjust.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. W. BROWN thought the sum calculated upon by
the Chancellor of the Exchequer for contingencies
would be quite sufficient, notwithstanding all that had
fallen from the Hon. Gentleman opposite. As to the
Budget, he thought the reduction of the timber duties
was a boon to which the shipping interest were entitled,
especially since we bad exposed them to competition
with all the world. The reduction of the coffee duties
would be a boon to every class of the community, and he
must say that he regarded the proposed house-tax as a
very proper and just measure.—(Hear.) He hoped all
those Members who had supported progressive measures
would not desert a Ministry at a time when a Protection-
ist system was attempted to be re-introduced.—(Cheers.)
He believed this country was as lightly taxed as any na-
tion in the world, and he appealed to all honest Free-
traders to support the proposition of the Government.
Sir D. L. EVANS said that sixteen yours ago he as-
sisted in the repeal of the house-tax, and he therefore
felt it difficult to acquiesce in the proposal to renew
that impost; at the same time he admitted that the pre-
sent plan of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was a
great improvement on his former scheme. He hoped,
nowever, that attention would be given to the points ad-
verted to by the worthy Alderman. Many thousands of
persons in this town took houses to let them out in lodg-
ings; he was of opinion that those parties had a claim
to be placed in the same situation as the shopkeepers.
While he was willing to support a property-tax, he
wished to see modifications introduced with respect to
the income-tax
Mr. rANFORD said, it appeared to him that some
Boa. Gentlemen seemed to consider not so much the
merit or demerit of the proposition of the Chancellor of
the Exchequer as they did the question whether Minis-