The Sun.
London, England, 1850-04-25 00:00:00

THE STAMP DUTIES.

The following is the report of the Board of Inland
R!venue to the Chancellor of 014: Exchequer, on the pro-
bable effect on the stamp revenue, by the Bill now
before the House of Commons :

Inland Revenue, Somerset House, April 18, 1850.
Sir,—ln pursuance of our instructions, we beg to
lay before you our opinion of the probable effects on
the stamp revenue which will be produced by the Bill
now before the House of Commons.

It will be in your recollection that when, towards
the close of last year we received directions to prepare
a new Stamp Bill, so far as regards the duties on
bonds, conveyances, mortgages, leases, and settle-
ments, we stated that it would be very difficult to
calculate the amount of revenue which would be lost
or gained by an alteration in the present scale of
stamp duties ; because a stamp for a given amount
will serve for several descriptions of deeds liable to
duty ; and when a party purchases a stamp he is not
required to state for what description of instrument
it is intended. For example, a 1/. stamp may be used
on an appraisement, apprentice indenture, bargain
and sale, money bond, annuity bond, conveyance,
lease, mortgage, power of attorney, warrant of attor-
ney, or progressive duty ; and so with the other
ad valorem stamp duties up to 251., beyond which
amount almost all ad valorem stamps are used for
conveyance.
The total produce of duty paid for stamps of
amounts which might he used for bonds, mortgages,
and conveyances, as well as for some other instru-
ments in last year, was 1,380,0001. From the best
estimate that can be made by the most exp,rieneed
officers of the stamp department, 1,000,0001. of this
amount may be taken as the produce of ad valorem
duties, of which it is supposed that about two-thirds
arise from conveyances and transfers of property.
Assuming this estimate to be correct, it will be seen
by the annexed table, which was submitted to you in
December last, that by the then proposed reduction
of duty on conveyances, from the present rates to a
rate of 10s. per cent, up to 5001., of 15s. per cent. be-
tween 5001. and 1,0001., and of a fixed rate of 1 per
cent. above that amount, the loss on the conveyance
duty alone will not be less than 260,0001. per annum.
This loss was estimated, irrespectively of that which
would arise from the total repeal of the bargain
and sale duty, from the reduced duty on leases,
and from the relief which is afforded by a si
miler reduction of such stamp duties in Ireland,
the whole of which cannot be estimated at less
than 40,0001., making with the 260,000/ above-men-
tioned, a loss of 300,0001. There will, however, be
some gain on conveyances above 100,000/ , but these
are of such rare occurrence that the gain must be in-
considerable. The loss on small bonds and mort-
gages would, it was supposed, be counterbalanced by
some gain on large bonds, &T. There was also reason
to expect that to some extent an increase of revenue
might be derived from an increased number of stamps
used in documents hitherto not stamped, but no very
large increase could be calculated on from this
source, because, although, on reducing duties on
articles of consumption, the consumption may be in-
creased, yet it cannot be supposed that more bonds
and mortgages will be made, merely on account of the
stamp duty being lower. All that can be expected to
Occur is, that more stamps may be used for documents
on which hitherto the stamp duty has been evaded.
Any such evasion must, for obvious reasons, generally
occur on bonds, &c., for small amounts, an as on
these the duty is much reduced by the Bill, no very
great increase of revenue can be expected from this
source.

In consequence of the opinion thus expressed, you
estimated the loss in your speech on the budget at
somewhat less than 300,0001. per annum. In Commit •
tee on the Bill, you proposed to reduce the stamp on
bonds, &c., from 103. to ss. per cent., but an amend-
ment was carried reducing the rate from ss. to 25.,
for one tenth per cent on bonds under 501.; and it is
presumed that this decrease in the duties on bonds
under 501. will be also extended to all bonds, mort-
gages, and warrants of attorney of any amount ; thus
reducing the duty on this description of instrument,
throughout the scale, up to 25,000/.
It is well known to all parties conversant with
business of this description, that by far the largest
number of transactions must be on sumo under this
amount, and that nearly the whole revenue is de-
rived, not from the higher amount of duty on the few
large transactions, but from the duty paid on the
much greater number of moderate amoun's.
It is also to be recollected that, since the introduc-

tion of the Bill, relief has been extended to various
descriptions of instruments beyond what was
originally intended; such as transfers of mortgages,
memorials of registration, admittances to copyholds,
duplicates of conveyances of fee-farm rents, and
leases under 201. a year rent. Taking all these cir-
cumstances into consideration, we think that the loss
arising from the proposed reduction of duty on bonds,
mortgaged and warrants of attorney, from the present
rates to 2,. per cent., will am )unt to at least
150,000/. ; which, with the estimated loss by the
great reduction of the duty on conveyances, transfers
of property, and other instruments above alluded to,
cannot safely be taken at less than from 450,000/. to
500,000/.

We have, &c.,

(Signed)

JOHN WOOD.

JOIIN THORNTON.
CHARLE3 PRESSLEY.
To the Right Hon. the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, &c.

OBSTRUCTIONS to KNOWLEDGE.
Knowledge has fared ill this week in the House of
Commons. Such of it a 3 a portion of the people
already have access to, crippled by taxation, is not to
be relieved ; and we are threatened with the loss of
such means of extending it to the rest of the people,
as we had lately some hope of seeing tried. Et large
majority has declared against the repeal of taxes af-
fecting books and newspapers, moved by Mr. Milner
Gibson, in a speech of very great ability ; and the
same fate is preparing for Mr. Fox's Education Bill.
To the result of the former motion we submit as a
present necessity; but (the matter less admitting of
delay) we cannot so calmly regard a decision aban-
doning great numbers of the English population to
hopeless and incurable ignorance.
The peculiarity of Mr. Fox's proposal was, that it
meddled with no existing plan by which any modicum
of education was already extended to any portion of
the people. All that it claimed permission to do was
to educate such waifs and strays as neither Church-
men nor Dissenters could draw within their several
folds. Where your efforts stop, was the petition, let
mine commence. The reply is that of the dog in the
manger. What I cannot do you shall not do.
We are grieved to see the religious pretence put
forward by statesmen. We call it a pretence, because
no man in his senses believes that what at present passes
for religious education at Sunday-schools and the like,
is deserving of the name of education at all. Does
any one think that to put a boy to spell at the Bible or
catechism, helps him half as much forward in spelling
as it drives him back in religion ? The wearisome
substitution of words for realities at that early age is
the greatest mistake we commit. We talk of secular
education as if it excluded religion, when in fact it
is the only discipline that prepares the mind rightly,
for religious truth. We speak of it as opposed to re-
ligion, when it is absolutely the only means of giving
practical force and direction to religious principles
and duties.
But the Church stops the way. At a time when
episcopal authority cannot impose or even explain its
creed, it is to be allowed to withhold or sanction at
its pleasure the multiplication table. We are coming
to a dead lock. Judicial authority has just told us
that we must tolerate differences of doctrine to save
the Church, and legislative authority is about to tell
us that we must get rid of all such differences if we
would save ourselves. Practically the vote on Mr.
Fox's Bill will be a vote for the spiritual destitution
of large masses of the people. The amendment will
declare substantially that differences of creed must
amount to a prohibition against knowledge, and a
member of the Roman Catholic Church is not ill-
chosen to take charge of such an amendment. But
Lord Arundel's argument .was rather odd, even as a
display of bigotry. He quoted a number of infidel
writings in prasenti to give effect to his warning