The Sun.
London, England, 1833-05-01 00:00:00

"thinly very ingeniously, and, admitting his premises,
very conclusively, that an income tax might be made
an equal tor—for, supposing a man to have an an-
nuity of 1001. for ten years, he could, if an income
tax was imposed, pay it only for ten year.; whilst the
man who had a perpetual annuity of 100/., would ply
it in perpetuity. But does my Hon. Friend propose that
this tax should be a perpetual tax, or does he suppose
that it should be a perpetual one? To say nothing of
putting on a tax, which, for many years at least, would
be an unjust tax, on the ground that length of time
would finally make it equal." We do not think his
Lordship has correctly understood the Hon. Member for
Bridport. What the Hon. Member meant was, that all
persons should pay in proportion to the property they
possessed ; that income of various kinds is of various
values, and that the tax should be imposed on each pro-
perty according to its value. A door, however, might be
opened to fraud in the case of persona possessing estates
in fee. Supposing the rent of an estate 2,0001., an an-
nuity to that amount might be granted to a relation of an
advanced age. The value of this annuity might be small.
while the proprietor might dur:ng its existence escape the
prop-rty tax. But with regard to professional incomes, it
is true that a lawyer who receives 1,0001. a year, and
lives up to his income, may pay as much in indirect taxes
as a squire with 1,0001. a year, who also lives up to his
income ; and it has been inferred from this that an in-
come tax, treating all incomes alike, no matter how de-
rived, would not be unjust, as the lawyer would be re-
lieved from the same amount of indirect taxes as the
squire. But a professional man with 1,000/. a year is not
justified in spending, and seldom does spend, the whole of
his income, while the squire seldom saves any thing, and
generally exceeds his income ; and the reason is obvious
—the professional man considers his life and income pre-
carious, and, as an honest man, endeavours to save
something, that his family may not be left destitute. His
indirect taxes, therefore, do not equal the squire's. And
any income tax which shall not estimate the value of his
income on correct principles, and impose the tax on such
an annuity as that value would purchase, would be ex-
ceedingly unjust. But experience teaches us not to anti-
cipate much from any other sources of income than those
derived from lands, tithes, mines, annuities, interest on
mortgages, and other property of a similar description.
No man would hesitate any more now than in 1816 to
have recourse to fraud to evade the tax, whenever practi-
cable. No extent of inquisitorial powers, however severely
they might press on individuals, could possibly extort a
c ansiderab'e proportion of an income tax, from any but
those who might be unable to evade it. But Lord Althorp
plainly told the House that they might if they chose nega•
tive his proposition, but that he should consider such a
vote in the light of a notice to quit. As a good deal of
stress was laid on his declaration in the course of the
discussion, w© shall here give it. After admitting the
doctrine that l'ilinisters ought to follow the directions
of a reformed Parliament, he proceeded to observe—
" I admit that I have united against me all who
are in favour of a property tax,—l have united
against me all who are in favour of a repeal of the
malt tax—and all who are in favour of the motion of the
Hon. Baronet—with some of those who are of opinion
that there might be larger reductions of taxation without
any substitute whatever. Perhaps it may be thought that
I have acted improperly in pursuing a plan which has
united so many parties against n-.e ; hut it is clear that all
those who will so unite in voting against me, must disap-
prove of the policy which I have adopted with regard to
the finances of the country ; and if it should appear, by
the result of this evening's discussion, that a majority of
the House agreed on voting against my proposition, that
majoriiy will have expressed its disapprobation of my
tinaneiftl plans ; anal I should certainly not, in such a case,
consider myself fit to remain Chancellor of the Exche-
quer." Of course, if there had been any wish in the
House to get rid of Ministers, this declaration of his Lord-
ship would only have strengthened it ; but such a wish
does not exist, and his Lordship's declaration put the
House on their guard. We have already observed that
Lord Althorp proposes to give a boon to the small shop-
/co'epets. It is this. " Two objections (said his Lordship)
have Leen made to the proposed relief to shopkeepers. The
first is, that the relief will be but trifling ; the second is,
that it will operate as a relief only to the larger shop.
keepers, and will be of no benefit whatever to the
smaller. I have considered these objections, and I think
the latter has considerable force. I think that the objec-
tion may be obviata d, with respect to the windows, by not
deifuetiog three, or any particular number of windows
which the shop may have; but by enacting that in all
houses having shops attached to them, one half of the
duty should he taken off. That is simpler than nay aari•
ainal plan, and will be less difficult to carry into affect;
anal it will relieve the large and the email shopkeepers in
equal prop(); tions, without a much greater sacrifice of
revenue than I at first estimated." We have assumed,
what has all along been taken for granted by the House, that
ravines to the exo-nt of the rep, ala could not possibly be
made. Mr. Hume endeavoured, at considerable length,
to show that savings to the extent of the taxes reduced
might be made. "He hoped (he said) that the
goose would act upon the same principle as Ministers
had acted at the India House, when the Directors
said they could not carry on the Governmeut of
India without money. Ah ! (said the President
of the Board of Control,) we will cut off the
ionney, anal then you will be forced to be econo-
oliaal," This is no doubt a good maxim to a certain
extent, It is for the House to say what the people
can afford, and the scale of expenditure must be
framed accordingly. But Mr. Hume will final that his
difficulty is here with the House, reformed though it he.
Toe getting rid of the malt tax is a very different affair
from lopping off five millions from the expenditure. Mr.
Hume concluded with announcing an amendment in the
event of the loss of Lord Althorp's, purporting that the
.repeal ought, if possible, to be made good by a corre-
epsuoling reduction in the exprndi ore of the country;
arid if tOis,a could not be effected, by the imposition of new
taxes on the oeoperty of the country. Sir Robert Peel
ciwelt much on the necessity of taxing income as well as
property, anal on the inamcrality to which an income tax
avoulal necessarily lead. A good deal of skill is displayed
in the mode of are,uing the iteople out of their partiality
for a property tax, which the Members know would fall
almost exclusively on the rich. The middling classes
would ha come great sinners; but the pockets of the rich
would be emptied. Upon the whole, the result of last
night will prove satisfactory to the country. Economy
joust be forced on the Government ; far all governments
natural'y dislike the unpleasant t.,sk of depriving men of
offices and incomes. By degrees we shall obtain consi-
derable reductions. But the Home were taking a mortal
igap, which filled the country with alarm. The tonal-
toaio,as began to look about them. But ail will now go
Grp
811300.4,1;/.-,Norning Chronicle.

Sir 4. Key int night brought forward his resolution
for the repeal'of the house and window taxes. The Hon.
Baronet, in an I ffec,ive speech, urged the various objec-
tions to which he conaiderrd those taxes liable, and
dwelt strongly on the unjust and partial manner in which
they bad been made to hear upon the productive industry
cf _the country. The circumstance that London alone
pays more than half the amount of the tax, and, combined
with: Yorkshire, Somersetshire, and Lancashire, more
than three-fourths, was insisted on to show how partially
the impost operates, and how heavily it presses on trade.
The comparative exemption of the great mansions, as
contrasted with the charges on shops and on houses of a
mLl,ll,ng size, formed another topic of animadversion, as
will as I.;:it general tendency of the system to abridge the
eon:forts of ti,et people, by cutting off, or materially di.
cninishing, lhe advantages of light and air. As for the
relief intended by ti Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sir
John Key copsideted it a delu.ion, which would affect
but few even of the shopkeepers thtmselves. For these
and other reasons, amongst which we 'shall only notice the
opportunity that would be afforded by the repeal of
these taxes, to gat rid of the expensive establishments
necessary to their collection, he concluded by moving
for the repeal of the house and window t.ixes. It fur-
nishes a curious proof of the turn which public opinion
has taken when we find Sir John Key, one of the most
ardent supporters of Government, driven by the force (1
circumstances to propose a motion which involves their
political existence. Lord Althorn moved the resolution
of which he had given notice, as an amendment to that of
I'e Hon. Baronet. The amendment went to recognise
tee substitution of a property tax in case the malt duty
grid asseved taxes should be repealed, but at the same
;time pledged the House to the inexpediency of such a
tax. His-Lordship reminded them how unpopular and
inquisitorial the former property tax had been, and
asked what reason there was for supposing that it would
be less so now than in 1816, when it was relinquished in
obedience to the wishes of the people? In the eourse of
his speech, after admitting fully the difficulty in which the
House was placed by his amendment, and the inconsis-
tency of rejecting one night the opinion whieh they had
adopted on another, the Chancellor of the Exchequer in-
timated his intention of retiring from office in case his
proposition should be lost. Thus was the same threat
which had 'sired the same Ministry before, resorted to in
the present instance also.—Morning Herald.
Lord Althorp brought forward in his Rouse of
Com-
mons last night the motion of which he had given notice
on Mond.y. He proposed that his House of Commons
ebuuld vote, in the brit place, that the malt tax ousht nAt