The Sun.
London, England, 1833-08-08 00:00:00

SUPPLY.-HOUSE AND WINDOW TAXES.

Lord ALT HORP moved the order of the day for the
House resolving itself into a Comia►itt,e of Supply. Upon
which

Mr. HUME had been urged to bring this question
under the consideration of the House by a large propor-
tion of his constituents. It would he recollected by n.
Members, that in the early part of the year the Noble
Lord opposite, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, had given
the country reason to hope that these taxes would be re-
mitted ; and indeed the Noble Lord had expressed himself
decidedly in favour of relief from those burdens as soon as
the financial circumstances of the country would permit ;
and it would, he had no doubt, be further recollected,
that the Not-le Lord in laying his Budget before the
House, stated, that he entertained the expectation of
making a remittance of the house and window tax, to the
extent at least of 300,000/. He was perfectly aware of
the difficulty of doing anything effectual at that period of
the session but the force of a sincere and strong will
could accomplish much. There was not one tax imposed
since the conclusion of the peace which proved in every
way as vexatious as did the house and window tax. He
held in his hand returns of the several amounts derived
from that tax, at various times, in London, Brighton,
Bristol, Bath, and a variety of the towns of England,
and also, returns made up from ten counties in
England. He would take Derbyshire as one—there
Chatsworth, the celebrated residence of the Duke of
Devonshire, was rated at only 1001. a year, and paid
the tax only to the extent of 14/. 3s. 4d. The resi-
dence of Lord Scarsdale was rated to the same amount ;
that of Lord Chesterfield only at 60/. ; that of Sir Robert
Bouthby at only 50/. His own house in Bryenston-
square, which was but a very moderate sized house, was
rated at :3501. ; thus he paid more house tax than those
three Noble Lords put together. Then there was the
magnificent mansion of Sir F. Baring, which was rated at
only 1501., while the houses in the adjoining towns were
rated at their full value. The Hon. Member then pro-
ceeded to contend that the rate of payment was much
higher at present than during the war, considering the tax
in comparison with the other burdens of the country at
that period ; and what was more to be complained of was
this, that it had grievously increased since the peace. In
1815 it was 1,088,0001., in 1822 it was advanced to
1,556,0001., and in 1832 it was still further advanced In
Scotland it amounted in 1820 to 86,720/., and in 1832
to 94,7201. In the year 1808 it (the house tax) had
been imposed in Ireland, but it was taken off in 1817, and
the window tax was subsequently removed ; thus Eng-
land and Scotland were paying the whole of that odious
impost, and Ireland escaped from that tax, leaving it on
the English and Scotch, by whom it was now proposed
that the Irish tithes should he paid. Could the people of
England be sittisfiAl with such a state of things ? In
London, at the present time, the value of all property
was decreasing, especially in the eastern part of the '
metropolis; and the taxes, which might there be borne
in a time of prosperity, would now have the effect of
depoulating the whole of that portion of the town ; po-
licy then, as well as justice, demanded that such
a tax should not be pressed at the present moment.
The business of a large proportion of the retail shop-
keepers, by whom the tax was in a great measure paid,
was now gradually decaying, or rather becoming absorbed
by those larger establishments, which, with hss expense in
proportion, turned a much larger capital, and wire en-
abled to sell at reduced profits, to the manifest injury of
the lesser dealer, and to the total incapacitating of hire for
paying the taxes in question. With reference to the total
amount of rental of the courery, only something like an
approximating amount of value would be given, but it ap-
peared, that taking the whole amount of rental at eleven
millions, Middlesex and Surrey alone paid 6,107,000/.
being more than one-half of the gross amount. It the
Noble Lord would look at the amount which was paid by
the Tower Hamlets, he would he surprised at the sum
which that great district contributed, and if any part of
the metropolis peculiarly called for the consideration of the
Noble Lord, it was that of the Tower Hamlets. He
would there see a practical illustration of the inequality of
this tax. No less a sum than 3,637/. had been paid to
surveyors for surcharges in 1830, and looking to the
ag-
gregate amount so paid in all the counties in the same
year, it amounted to 27,33 W. ; and this was paid as a
premium to those surveyors, who received 25/. for every
100/. assessment which th-y established. In 1832,
25,000/. was thus paid to the surveyors. He did blame
the surveyors, whilst the Duke of Devonshire's palace at
Chatsworth was valued at 100/., and small shops were
compelled to pay more. He would only observe that tile
surveyors had no criterion given them by which they could
judge of the value of the houses. Where a system existed
in which one man might think a house worth 50/., while
another would estimate it at 25/. or at 70/., as the case
might be, it was the duty of the Government to interfere to
remedy Such an abuse. He had moved for a return of the sur
charges made in the eight years ending 1829; that return
was before the House, and it stated that 677,000 persons
had teen surcharged in that period. Looking at that
document, the average for 1821 was more than 81,000
If they took the number of surer arges made since the
Reform Bill was passed, they would he found to have been
doubled. He knew that, in m ,ny case., people chose
rather to soh mit to an imposition in the shape of a privi-
lege, than attend to resist it. In the parish of Covent-
garden he believed that out of 550 houses, seventy-five
were unoccupied, and 440 had been surcharged ; and it
ad been determined not to force. He thought that all
these ~ere good reasons why his Majesty's Government
should not continue a tax which had excited so much Gel
ing on the part of the community at large ; and he was
of opinion that in this case, as in the case of tithes i n
Ireland, they ran the risk of losing all by not yielding in
time. It might be said that this was a late period of the
session to bring forward this measure—(Hear, hear)—
but was it, then, too late to economise—was it too late to
reduce that taxation which oppressed the people? Was i•
too late to do this, when they had on the table a proposi-
tion for raising one million to pay the arrears of Irish
tithes, and a Bill for granting 20,000,000/. to the West
India Proprietors had not left the House—
Several HON. Alrmevas—" It has gone."

Mr. HUME—" Well, it was in the House to day."
The Hon. Gentl man then entered at great length into
the number of men in the various branches of the Army
and Navy at the present moment, as compared with the
forces of 1822, and con,ended that, by carrying into tffec
the reductions which ought to be made in these grev
branches of the expenditure of the country, these taxes
might with safety be repealed. All, therefore, that he
asked the Noble Lord to do was, to take off the tax from
the sth of October next, and to leave a sum from the in-
come of next year to meet the deficiency. Atter some
further observations, the Hon. Gentleman concluded by
moving a re,olution to the effect that the House should
resolve itself into a Committee to consider the assessed
taxes, with a view to the repeal of the whole of those taxes.
Lord ALTHORP said there could be no novelty in the
arguments either for or against this motion, for it had
already been brought before the House no less than lout
times—first by the Hon. Member for Worcester (Mr.
Robinson); next by the Hon. Baronet the Member for
London (Sir J-hn Key); then by the ll‘n. Member for
Maryl. bone (Sir Samuel Whaliey), and now by the Hon.
Member for Middlesex (Mr. Hume). The subject had
also hen frequently before the House on the occasion of
the presentation of petitions—so that it could not be stiff
that there had been any lack of discussion upon it. Hi,
Hon. Friend had laid great stress on the circumstance of
the great increase of surcharges. Now it appeared tha
from 1822 to 1825 alone, there had been no less than
23,340 houses left out of the assessment, which fact might
perhaps have some weight in the consideration of the
circumstances of the present case. But he would ~sk, had
not the metropolis been equally benetitte least with

ether places, in any diminution of taxes which hid—fit-feu
place during late years? He would allude to the Coif
Tax in proof of what he said—a tax, the chief portion of
which was levied on the metropolis, and front which it
j lia'7 been completely relieved. Now he begged leave to
say that the objections which applied to a property tax
were wholly different to those which applied to this tax.
Then, as to the complaint of the severity of the law, he
was afraid as long as taxation was necessary, severe revenue
laws would be required. Could any laws be more severe,
—and be must say necessarily so-than the excise laws
of this country? He was aware of the system of sur-
charges which had latterly been acted upon, and, as far as
he could go, should certainly do everything to discourage
its continuance.—(Hear, hear.) Still the House would
see in what a delicate situation he was placed, as it would
be impossible for him, filling the office which he did, to
throw out anything which might make the officers of the
revenue remiss in their duty.—(Hear, hear.) He freely
admitted that the mode of paying the surveyors was open
to objection—that his remuneration depended too much
on surcharges—(Hear, hear)—and he hoped it would soon
be arranged so as to expend less on that, and more
on annual income.—(Loud cheers.) Now as to this
I particular tax, he could not deny,—lre, indeed, would
at once admit—that it was one which could not be
defended—(Loud cheera)—except on the ground of
necessity as to the amount which through it was contri-
euted to tie revenue. The revenue, so far as it had gone
in the present quarter—considering the reductions made—
was certainly in a satisfactory state ; hut still Le could not
consiser it safe at the present time to attempt to calculate
what its amount might be, and vote a reduction for a
year which had not arrived. His lion. Friend hail ar-
gued that considerable reductions might by a more de-
termined economy be effected in the supplies. Looking
to the present state of things—to the prospect before tie
country—he was glad to indulge the hope that conside-
rable reductions might shortly he made in the military
establishments of the country—(Loud cheers)—and these,
joined to savings which, in pursuance of measures then
going forward, would be effected in the collection of the
1 revenue, would enable his Majesty's Government to take this
1 particular tax into their serious consideration.—(Cheers.)
He had on two or three occasions stated to the House
his own views on the subject of taxation—that national
burdens should interfere as little as possible with the
industry of the country—but he had also stated his opi-
nion, that a Legislature should in all cases look to the po-
pularity or unpopularity of any particular tax.—(Lour}
cheers.) lie would admit that this tax was unpopular
in the extreme—a Hear, bear)—and be would th.,refore
say, that though they could not, on purely financial prin-
ciples, give it up, yet, looking to other circumstances, it
was the duty of the Government, by some new arrange-
ment of the assessed taxes, or by other means, to do away
with an impost which was so obnoxious.—(Loud cheers.)
He believed he had said more than he ever said before;
and he should conclude by expressing his disapprobation
of any plan which might run the risk of reducing the
revenue of the country below the expenditure.—(lleac,
hear.) For this reason be must, though reluctantly, op.
pose the motion of his Hon. Friend.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. Alderman WOOD deprecated the gross inequality
shown in the levying of the tax, and urged the necessity
of the repeal. II .uses in London were now letting at
two-thirds less than ten years ago, and in Fleet-street he
believed that one in every four houses was ttnlet. Sorely
this would prove the absolute necessity of relief.
Sir S. WHALLEY trusted, after what he had heard,
there would be no necessity for him to persevere in the
motion of which Fe had given notice for next session.
Such a course would be rendered unnecessary by the course
which, in the interval, the Noble Lord would adopt. He
hoped the Noble Lord would repeal this tax ; by so doing,
he was sure he would restore mach confidence to the
Government, which was at present alienated from it—and
would confer au essential benefit on the metropolis and
towns of the kingdom, without inflicting any injury upon
!the revenue.
Mr. HUME said, as be had understood that the Noble
Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer agreed with lion in
the impolicy of this tax, and in the vexatious manner ia
which it was collected, and had promised to embrace the
first opportunity of repealing the tax, whilst the Noble
Lord hoped to be able to make up the deficiency in the
revenue by further reductions, be felt himself bound tet
express his satisfaction in the statement, and would not
press his motion to a division.—(Loud role, rs.)
Colonel EVANS then rose to submit the first of his
resolutions, " That the house duty in particular, and the
window duty in a less degree, are at present assessed and
levied, as regards individuals, towns, and districts, with
grievous inequality anal injustice."
Lord ALTHORP could not consent to such a resolution;
if it were agreed to, it would certainly be necessary im-
mediately to repeal the tax.
Mr. HUMPHERY addressed a few words to the House,
the purport of which did not reach the gallery.
Mr. COBBETT recommended the Hon. Gentleman,
after what had fallen from the Noble Lord, not to press his
motion.—(Cheers.)
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON said the Bank had been
selected as one of the instances of inequality in the mode
of levying the tax. The Bank, however, paid as much as
it was legally liable to pay ; it contained only about seven
or eieht dwellinehonses, and for those only, and not for
its offices, was it liable to house duty. He, however, fully
agreed in the general observations which hail been made
as to the partial manner in which property had been rated
to this tax.
Colonel EVANS was understood to inquire whether the
Right Hon. Gentleman had any objection to extend the
relief contemplated by the Bill just passed to persons in
trade not keeping shops?
Mr. SPRING RICE said that no amendment could
be made to the Bill which hail passtd ; nor (lid he
very clearly understand the relief which the Hon. and
Gallant Member sought. The relief given by the present
Bill amounted to nearly half a million per annum, and it
was given exclusively to the class of the community on
whom it was said the tax pressed the heaviest. Wfore
the Bill was brought in, petition after petition was poured
into that House, complaining of the distress of the shop-
keepers, and the great burden which this tax inflicted
upon them. Now, then, his Majesty's Government
brought in a Bill to give relief to the very classes who were
thus stated to be the most oppressed class, and that very
instant did the gentlemen opposite turn round, and tell
them they were wrong, for the tradesmen were not op-
pressed at all, and that the relief should be given to others.
—(Hear, hear.) He would not detain the House by a
!nog speech, but as he thought a very small and unjust
degree 431 credit was given to his Neble Friend for the
reductions made by him since he took office, he would fur
a 'ew moments entreat their attention to the items. They
were as Mimes : —Taxes on printed cottons, coals, slates,
and candl 's, repealed ; in hemp and drugs, reduced ; on
tiles, repealed ; on marine insurances, reduced ; on adver-
tisements, reduced one-half ; fire insurances on farming
stock, small receipt stamps, arid land tax on personal
estates, repealed; soap duty reduced one half ; cotton
wool reduced ; pamphlets repealed ; house-tax on shop,
reduced one-half; on cotnmercial travelers or riders,
clerks, bookkeepers, office men, overseers, managers, shmli-
men, warehousemen, cellarmen, taxed carts, market
gardeners' carts, repealed ; house tax payable by licensed
victuallers reduced one-half; house tax on houses of ten
pounds value, reduced one-third ; and on houses from ten
to eighteen pounds value, reduced progressively.—
(Cheers.) These were the taxes which had been repealed
or reduced by the present Administration, and with regard
to every one of them, he could point the attention of the
House to petitions on petitions from the people, praying for
their repeal.—(Cheers.) He had promised the House he
would not make a speech, but he trusted that a stater-tit nt
such as he had made would be more satisfactory to the
House and to the country than the longest speech in
which he could have indulged.—(Loud cheers.)
C done! EVANS complained, that when the Bill tray
passed last flier.% it was said that no advantage was to he
taken of that fact, and yet now the Right Hon. Cantle-
man told him that no amendment could be made. There
sere many industrious tradesmen, tailors, working
jewellers, &c. &c., who kept uo shops, to whom the same
a eltef ought to be extended.
Lord ALTHORP said, that all that was promised last
night was, that no advantage should be taken of the pas-
sing of the Bill, in opposition to the motion of the Hon,
Member for Middlesex.—(Hear.)
Alrt
tinidr ih, presentlltNelErnq,iireat
illtßbe amount? of the expected re-
duction Mr. SPRING RICE said, according to present cake-
ation, from 480,0001. to 500 0001. But probably it
could be a little more than their present calculation,
,s no doubt some of the persons to whom the Gallant
Colonel had alluded would filod it more convenient to keep
Aalrd.iv
shops.
renct'laurtsoe
lieTihie,ttin,oetuio,enntwials,
t(t)haleinici
mnoere:na ..iittvt,e,,did withouttshia,
ptp 1
y. iii4ohnb,aagneti
On the motion of Alr. SPRING RICE, the aura Of
lo(i)s,oAo,o4i/e.s,yw
to delta}'
fetzya,.idv-isi ocl,t,trry
hit7e..r.'7:7.l:".",°lnn' h ,
question fr,un
5-Ir. Lod I., 000/ •
• .I,ulatiog mac,,meMr. Spiro, Rex, in reply 10 a
cos! ~ , and was not yet
The Chaim-ran reported th- resoluti a , to the House.
on the motion or Mr, P. THO.d.. ON,
ofmtphiert:aii.nversation,
the British

Possessions Tide Regulatio❑ Bill was read a third time
and passed.
REGISTRATION OF VESSELS BILL.
Mr. P. THOMSON moved the third reading of this
Bill.
Mr. RUTHVEN rose to move a clause, the object of
which was to alter the present mode of measuring vessels,
with a view to their registration. He complained of the
law upon the subject as it now stood, and said that the
effect, w hether it was evaded or complied with, was almost
equally bad. Vessels were, in consequence of the provi-
sions of the present Act, built in such a manner, that they
were inferior to the vessels of other nations in their ra-
pidity of sailing, and in safety. It was for the advantage
of British commerce that laws, producing such an effect,
should be altered. English ships were no more capable of
competing with American vessels than English cart-horses
would be able to contest the palm of speed with English
race• horses.—(A laugh.) This did not arise from want
of skill in the ship builders, hut from the difficulties im-
posed on them by the existing law. Commissioners bad
been appointed to investigate this subject, but as yet they
bad made no report. On a subject so important as this,
this delay was unjustifiable. The Hon. Member moved a
clause to the effect already stated.
Mr. YOUNG said that it was from no indifference to
the subject that he had net anticipated the [Lou. Member
in this motion. As a shipowner, he practically knew the
evils of the present system, but he had understood from
those who were better acquainted than he was with the
business of that House, that it would be highly inconve-
nient to propose the introduction of a clause like the pre-
sent in a Consolidation Bill. He bad for that reason ab-
stained from attempting it. He recommended the Hon.
Member near him, on the same ground, to withdraw the
motion at this moment, and he might advantageously bring
it forward next session, and should then have his (Mr.
Young's) cordial support.
Mr. P. THOMSON bad stated in strong terms his
opinion on the present system of admeasurement of ves•
sels, and his conviction that that system required altera-
tion. Commissioners had been appointed to inquire into
the subject, and their report was not yet made, but it
would he before the next session, and then they should be
able most conveniently to revise the law on this matter.
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
The following Bills were severally read a third time and
passed ;—The Customs' Bounties, Customs' Management,
Customs' Regulations, Warehousing, Smuggling and Na-
vigation.

DUTY ON CURRANTS.
On the motion that the Customs Duties Bill be read a

third time,
Mr. GROTE, after pointing out the effects of the enor
mous duty levied on currants, moved that the duty on
them be reduced from 445. 4d. to 28s.
Mr. P. THOMSON begged his Hon. Friend to with-
draw his motion, because the revenue could not spare the
reduction. He should himself be willing to propose the
reduction if the duty could be spared, and he should be
happy next year to take the whole of the class of fruits
into his consideration, with a view to reduce the duties
on them all.
',lr. M. ATTWOOD recommended, after what the
Right Hon. Gentleman had said, the Hon. Member fur
the City of London to withdraw his motion.
Mr. HUME contended that the increased consumption
of currants would prevent all loss to the revenue.
Mr. HAWES thought that a reduction of duty would
be advantageous to the shipping interest.
Lord SANDON took the same view of the subject.
Lord ALTHORP, with a small sot plus revenue only,
could not feel justified in risking the loss of so large a sum.
He could not consent to any greater diminution of the
national income.
Mr. EWART supported the clause.
Mr. GROTE persevered in dividing the House.
The numbers were—
For the clause 52
Againstit 67
Majority —ls
Mr. RUT LIVEN proposed a clause to reduce the duties
on cloves, lucern, and other seeds of the same description,
front one pound to one shilling per cwt.
Mr. P. THOMSON opposed the changes, chiefly on
the ground of the sacrifice of revenue.
Mr. YOUNG complained that the shipping interest
had been neglected by Government, for the sake of pro-
tecting agriculture.
Mr. BARING maintained that the high duty on seeds
was of no benefit to agriculture.
After some further discussion, the amendment was ne-
gatived without a division, and the Bill was then passed.
LONDON SCAVAGE AND PACKAGE.
On the order of the day being read for the House
going into Committee on this Bill.
Mr. YOUNG strongly protested against going into
such an important measure as this at so late an hour (a
quarter-past one); and if it were pressed, be should move
the adjournment of the House.
Mr. GROTE wished to go into Committee.
Mr. BARING was net in favour of entering into the
digestion at all at present, for there was no information on
the subject before the House. He was not prepared to
give so large a snm to the city of London, without having
a good title shown for it, which was, by no means, the
ease at present.
Mr. POULETT THOMSON said that the object of
the measure was to benefit trade and the country in
general. He denied altogether that any benefit could re-
sult from the appointment of any Committee or Com•
mission, and be felt likewise assured that the right and
title of the City of London, to those dues was indisputable.
He thought it was quite a mistake to imagine that the
effect of the present measure would Ise to remove any pro•
section now enjoyed by British shipping ; on the contrary,
he would contend that it not only must have the effect of
increasing protection to British shipping, but supply
vessels of this country with increased sources of employ-
ment. It was also important that the House should
bear in mind the pressing necessity which there existed
for all possible assistance from Parliament to the port of
London. They ought to do all in their power to render
London a great bonding emporium, and the Bill now on
the table was eminently calculated to forward that object.
He trusted, then, that no more time would be lost, and
that the House would consent to going into Committee.
Mr. GEORGE YOUNG objected to going further
that and moved that the debate be then adjourned.
Lord ALTHORP urged the necessity of not arresting
the progress of the measure. There were no reasons why
it shou'd not then be proceeded with, and the present
stage of the measure decided. He undertook to assure
the Hon. Member for Teignmouth that he should receive
a frill and patient hearing.
After a few words from Mr. M. Arrwoon and Mr.
goTE, the House divided—
For the Adjournment
For the original Motion
. .

, 6
. 69
-6:3

- _
Majority
On our re-admission, we found
Mr. A. BARING observing that Parliament should h'
perfectly assured of the clear and ervitahle nature of the
claims of the City Of London, before 160,000/. of the
public money were voted away. He should, therefore,
move that this Bill he committed to a Select Committee.
llr. P. THOMSON contended, that the course adopted
in reference to this Bill was perfectly in accordance with
the practice of that House in all similar cases, as, for in-
stance, in the ease of the butlerage and prize ige, in a Cus-
toms Bill relating to the county palatine of Lancaster. He
i4laould have no objection to a Select Committee, provided
its inquiries were limiled to the real question upon which
such e Committee could, with advantage, be expected to
decide, and not extended to every topic that had been
br.,ncl,ed in the course of the present discussion. He should
deeidedy object to an extended inquiry into all the ancient
rights and charters of the city of London.
After a few words, in opposition to the Bill, from Mr.
II A LCOM B,
Mr. A. BARING, finding that his Right Hon. Friend
had no objection to the Committee, should then submit his
motion to the House. He was anxious to forward the
progress of the measure, but he should certainly wish that
the document or title-deed under which the city of London
claimed those dues, should be submitted to a Committee,
and the question raised, whether the possession and enjoy-
ment of those dues were connected with the performance
of any duties?
The motion was then agreed to, and the Committee
appointed ; after which the other orders of the day were
disposed of, and the House adjourned at three o'clock.

110 USE OF LORDS, AUGUST 7. '
Lord KINNOULL presented a petition from the Lord
Provost and other inhabitants of Perth in favour of the
Scotch Burgh Reform Bill, as amended, and praying their
Lordships to pass it.
A Bid for the more speedy recovery of small debts in
the township of Hythe, was read a third time and passed.
On the third reading
being moved of a Bill for dimly -
ing a certain Union in the Royal florte e
Guardulds,
certainly
The Duke of CUMBERLAND s3id b sho
Zeititiis consent to the passing of the Bill, neither
91•,.e it, contenting himself merely with pro.
t.
'NAL
Jamie,-°s.4:lo6'n)
The LoAti_:r

ken read a third time.
4 Irish Vagrants Bill was read a third

.W AMENDMENT BILL.
IANCELLOR wished to say a fr