The Sun.
London, England, 1851-05-20 00:00:00

LO N DON, T OESDA

lopeoaent of the present commercial system, they were
to have an indefinite reduction of indirect taxation and
direct taxation, for the purpose of increasing theimporta-
tion of foreign corn.—(Hear.) By such a course they
were sacrificing a large amount of revenue annually,
which would enable them to relieve the pressure of the
income-tax, and while they were losing revenue, they
were not gaining in the price of the article which would
compeesete fur the loss of revenue. As to the reduction
in the duty on coffee, he thought it was inflicting injury
on the colonial grower, while the consumer did not re-
ceive compensating advantage. He knew it could be
said that the reduction in the consumption of
coffee was to be ascribed to the adulteration of that
article. That would be raising another question
which made the conduct of the Government incompre-
hensible, by refusing to bring in a measure to prevent
the adulteration, and to protect the consumer. He could
not understand the conduct of Government in not re-
medying that evil. He did not know that the country
would derive the advantage anticipated from the reduc-
tion of the duties on coffee and timber. He thought
the country would lose by the latter reduction.—(Hear
hear.) There had been no fall in prices commensurate
with the reduction of the duty, and the consequence was
that the foreign producer was the gainer.--(Bear, hear.)
As regarded the measure now before them, the question
was between the adoption of the Bill ae it stood, or its
rejection altogether. Their Lordships had not the power
to make any alteration. The Noble Marquis had taken
great credit for one redaction which had been effected
in direct taxation, and he (Lord Stenley) was not going
to say that the abolition of the tax in question was not
an advantage. But in doing away with the window-tax
they had imposed on the same class of that community
a house-tax. Tina window-tem eltogether was le ried
upon 500,000 houses, but the house-tax would fall upon
400,000. The tax was so charged as to exempt a certain
pottion of that class who claimed the exerch,e of the
elective franchise.—(Hear.) Now he did not know why
there should be th'tt sacrifice of revenue.--(Hear, hear.)
It might be very convenient to increase the influence of
certain metropolitan Members ; but he could not see
why the owner of a 10/. house should be exempted from
all taxation.--(Hear, hear.) He thought they might
have obtained all the sanitary advantages by doing
away with the window-tax, and laying a house-tax to
the same extent; or they might have retained the win-
dow-tax, and enabled the parties to compound for it, and
permitted them to open as many windows afterwards as
they might think proper. Ho regretted her Majesty's
Government bad proceeded on so objectionable a prin-
ciple, that while the income-tax was admitted to be a
temporary measure, taxes were being taken off, and they
were continuing to bring down the revenue so nearly to
balance the expenditure, that it was impossible they
could any year have a sufficient surplus to enable them
to do away with the income-tax.—(Hear, hear.) How-
ever the Government might make professions on the sub-
ject, the country would come to the conclusion that
whatever they might say in theory, in practice it was
their intention to continue the income-tax. He (Lord
Stanley) was, however, of opinion that it was their duty
to take measures for doing away with the income-tax as
soon as possible.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord
concluded by saying, that it was not his intention to offer
any opposition to the second reading of the Bill.
The Earl of MALMESBURY wished to ask, upon
what assessment the house-tax was intended to be taken?
If upon the poor-rate assessment, that varied in different
parts of the country; and if upon the income-tax assess-
ment, which was supposed to be more fair and more ge-
nerally equal, slew commissioners would have to be ap-
pointed when the income-tax should cease—and we were
surely not to assume it to be perpetual.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE observed, that the
House-tax Bill had not yet passed, and the subject was
under consideration in the other House. The Noble
Marquis added a few words which were inaudible in the
gallery, but we believe they referred to there being
means of having the poor.law valuations equalized.
The Earl of MALMESBURY repeated, that these
local assessments varied 20 or 30, if not 50 per cent.,
from the real value in some cases; and nothing could be
more unfair than to base the house-tax upon them.
Lord BEAUMONT apprehended that there were
always two columns, one stating the rack-rent, the other
the rateable value. The Noble Lord seemed to ima-
gine that the second column would be taken ; that
would be monstrous, for one part of the country would
then be paying much more than another. But, if the
law had been complied with, there was a fair and com-
plete account of the gross value; and upon that the house-
tax might be based.
The Earl of MALMESBURY did not think the law
was observed in that point ; he thought the Noble Lord
(Beaumont) was mistaken as to the practice.
Lord BERNERS considered it a duty to endeavour
to make the law as little objectionable as possible, and
would, therefore, inquire whether the Government con-
templated any check upon frivolous and vexatious sur-
charges ?' The way in which the tax was assessed in
some parts, in Leicestershire for,one, excited general in-
dignation. There might be one check by allowing the
appellant his expenses. The Noble Lord also suggested
an alteration in. regard to the number of commissioners
who had to decide on such cases.
Lord MONTEAGLE agreed that it was desirable to
diminish any oppressive incidents of the tax, but must
say that, considering the circumstances of its introduc-
tion, there being but one gentleman remaining in office
who hal been acquainted with the previous tax, nothing
could be more praiseworthy than the moderation and
good sense with which this law had been generally ad-
ministered.—(Hear.) It would hardly be politic to
diminish the powers for enforcing a tax so easily evaded.
—(Hear.) But he should be sorry to be considered as
approving of such a tax as this, except upon the ground
of necessity. In great exigencies it was to be regarded
as our great resource; and when the safety and inde-
pendence of the country were concerned, objections
vanished. In fact, it was almost analogous to the press-
gang. But it ought to be reserved for a great occasion,
and especially we ought not to get blindfold into a sys-
tem of perpetuation under cover of a periodical renewal,
without a revision to see how it could be made just and
equitable.—(Hoar.) It was even more dangerous when
renewed for only a short period, because at every re-
newal the Government must make sacrifices of other
taxes, not because they disapproved them, but
because they warp unpopular.—(Hear, hear.) Like
other leases, there was a fine to pay on renewal.—
(Hear.) It was proposed for three years, and we had
had it for nine; it was to prologs less than 4,000,000/.
a year, and it had produced above 5,000,0001.; tho Go-
vernment asked fur 11,000,0001,5nd had got 49,000,0001.
—(Hear, hear)—and yet it was to be renewed again.—
(Hear.) And why? Because we had been repealing
various indirect taxes. No doubt 1842 presented a case
of emergency; but, saying nothing of 1842 or 1845, it
was impossible to deny that if we wont on after the
fashion of 1848 no one could: see any end to the conti-
nuance of the income-tax.—( sr, hear.) It was pro-
posed now to commute the window-tax for a house-tax.
The repeal of the former bottle-tax was forced upon a
most reluctant Government; -and when the new house-
tax got into play, we should have the same agency
brought into action, and probably with the same success,
as in the case of the former, house-tax. The small as-
sessment of great houses would be produced as a griev-
ance. Great mansions paid heavily to the window-tax,
but, taking the only just testa the test of value, and not
of cost, the King's Arms or the White Hart in the
county town would seem to pay in a greater proportion
than the country gentleman's house.—(Hear, hear.)
It WB3 quite right to give 'relief from the window-tax
with a view to purposes of health; but in this commu-
tation the new tax would—be placed in a position of
greater danger than the oldoand we should have a larger
amount of the public revenue in a position of danger.
He was satisfied that if,-they wished to maintain the
public credit, and the means of supporting the public
establishments, they coulel not let the property-tax re-
main on its present footing, at the risk of an adverse
vote of the other House, or of an adverse pressure out of
doors. Last year the Government, with the prospect of
the discontinuance of the-property-tax before them, gave
up 1,100,0001. of public revenue, including some 500,000/.
or 600,0001. of stamp duties, for which he had never
heard any one out of doors express the least thankfulness.
He considered that it would be most dangerous to place
the credit of the country to a great or an increasing ex-
tent upon the foundation of direct taxation. In 1842
his Noble Friend the Secretary for the Colonies (Earl
Grey) expressed his Sense of thisthe dinactiogmere,..taamndsChaoluleldd
Init to its continuance,
upon Parliament to consider what would be their situa-
tionand how much embarrassment and how much danger to
reiusneattouresuot
the national credit such a state of things would occasion.
it the oppressive
ht when they found the proposition by Govern-
mentHe thought
of an incoreiptax for three years met by a resolu-
tionk the countra'
of the other House that it should be continued for
only one, that the results contemplated by his Noble
Friend might be actually approaching, and that next
year Parliament might determine that this tax should be
altogether discontinued. He wished before he sat down
to call their Lordship's attention to a singular fact.
They bad heard it said, and it was not denied on either
side of the House, that the agricultural interest was at
present suffering the greatest depression, while they had
been told to-night that the interests of productive in-
dustry, as represented by trade and manufactures, were,
on the contrary, flourishing. Now it was in some mea-
sure a demonstration of the evils incident to the pro-
perty-tax, that that tax upon agricultural
property, even in a time of distress, had gone on Bug•
menting, while the amount of the same tax derived from
other descriptions of property, trades, professions, and
commercial profits, had diminished, although they were
told those interests were most prosperous.—(Hear,
bear.) He would take the comparison of two years. In
1843 the amount of property assessed to the income-tax
under schedule A, which, he admitted, comprehended
mills, buildings, and other things besides land, was
85,000,0004, and in 1850 it had risen to 94,000,0001.
He found that the property assessed under Schedule D,
which included,all the interests admitted to be the most
prosperous, had fallen off from 63,000,0001. in 1843, to
54,000,0001. in 1850 —(" Hear, hear," from Lord Stan-
ley.) This had taken place concurrently with an in-
crease in the official value of exports from 131,000,000/.
in 1843, to 190,000,000/. in 1849, and an increase in the
value of imports from 70,000,000/. in 1843 to 105,000,0001.
in 1849. He considered that the general financial con-
dition of the country was satisfactory, but ho thought
they ought carefully to consider whether a tax of the
nature of the- property-tax should be continued upon
light grounds,: and especially upon a principle which
extended to its perpetuation, or whether they should
not reserve such resources for great and important exi-
gencies.
Earl GREY said he would first answer the question
of the Noble' Lord opposite with regard to the mode of
assessing the income-tax. The Noble Lord had stated
that he'thought the same remedy ought to be given in
cases of surcharge under the income and property-tax as
in cases of surcharge in the land and assessed taxes,
and that the general body of Commissioners should have
a voice in the matter. In the case of the income-tax
the difficulty had arisen from the secrecy which it had