The Sun.
London, England, 1850-02-07 00:00:00

EXEMPTION OF HOUSES OF SMALL RENTAL

FROM TAXATION.
Mr. POULETT SCROPE rose, amidst much turmoil,
to move for the introduction of a Bill for the exemption
of srrall houses from taxation; but said, that in the
present temper cf the House, he did not expect to get a
Leering. Those persons who had read the reports which
had been presented to Parliament for the last few 3 ears
would agree—he would appeal to the reports cf the
Poor-law Commissioners, of the Board of Health, and
above all, those able letters which had appeared in
the columns of the Times under the sigeature of
" S. G. 0 ," would agree with him that there was a great
deficiency in the cottage and house accommodation in
this country. The consequences of this were not only
physical sufferingin the masses,but also moral degradation
Legisla'ion had hitherto been confined to drair ago and
the supply of water, but though he did not undervalue
these advantageg, they would be insufficient unless more
accommodation and space were provided for the dwellings
of the poor. Ile did not ask the Legislature to provide
better sites for these dwellings; but he thought it
might with propriety be taken into considera-
tion, whether or not the restrictions which
preisechtrupon them could not be done away with
The mode which he would adopt for removing the evil
would not be so much by any specific legislation as by
removing restrictions which were imposed by the build-
ing
of houses, for then the principle of supply and demand
would be sufficient to remedy the evil. The law of
Settlement, for instance, was one of the main causes of
the evil which he was now bringing under the considera-
tion of the House; and he, theta fore, pvoposed that a
certain class of homes should be exempt from local
taxation, believing that the poor would be relieved
thereby in the same manner as the abolition
or removal cf any other tax upon articles of
consumption would relieve them.— (Hear, hear.)
He knew it would be said that, to a certain extant, the
poor at present were relieved from paying rate upon their
houses. In Lancashire, for example, out of 340,000
rate-payers, 50,000 were excused, and out of the total
annual property rated for the relief of the poor amounting
tJ six millions and a-half, 369,0001. was excused.
The lion, Member then proceeded to read a quantity of
returns of the number of houses excused from taxation
from rates in the several counties, showing that about
one-third were relieved from fiscal impositions, and
then proceeded to say: Now those houses
were excused under an Act of the 54th George
111., c. 170, on Act which, while it contem-
plated a relief to the lower classes, had, in fa-it been
instrumental in occasioning many cases of de-
licacy and much distress.—(Hear, -,hear.) Every

person who desired to be excused, was obliged
to come before the oveaseers, and prove his poverty.
The poor man who happened to have some money in the
savings'-bank never WRS excused; there was no pre-
mium for prudence and providence. He thought that
the attempt to pass such a measure as that proposed by
the Honourable Member for Hertford would be

•
pernicious in the extrem. He would prove the fal-
lacy cf the principle of that measure in a
v.ry short time if the House would listen to him.
The ratepayer as well as the landowner had prejudices
on this subject, they both looked upon the owner of
cottages as an enemy instead of looking upon him
as he really was a public benefactor. He
it was who conduced to the promotion of
morality, by providing :for the poor labourer a de-
tached dwelling for his family. If a gentleman should
build a house for poor labourers, it would be very unjust
to impose upon him a tax fJr that house, whether he ob-
tained a rent or not. In many parishes there were comfort-
able and very pretty cottages built for labourers, but the
supply of cottage dwellings was deficient. The
greater portion cf these cottages were built by
eculetive persons, and the effect of imposing a
tax on the owners, would he to discourage these
persons and to diminish the supply cf dwellings for the
poor. He would not now enter into the question as to
whether the tax upon land was ultimately paid by the
owner or the occupier, ho believed it was paid by
she owner ; but this was evident that the pos-
session of land was a monopoly, but act
so with regard to houses, because as the supply
increa e I the rent decreased, and if by taxing theLe
houses they interfered with the enterpr;ze cf the sp-cu'a-
dve builder, the supply of houses would diminish, and it
appeared that even at present the supply of houses was
horeinishing rather than increasing, and the poor
were consequently driven to immoral and crowded
lodgings, therefore it was desirable by re-
lieving small houses of taxation to induce specu-
lative builders to increase the supply of small
houses. He knew the same persons were opposed to in-
ert a e the number of small houses, because such increase
tended to increase the population, he had thought that
notion had been exploded, but he would ask the sup-
porters of that doctrine whether pauperism was not
Increased by crowding the poor into bad houses,
and whether the supply of good houses would not tend
'o diminish it. In a sanitary, in a moral, in an econo-
mical poiet of view, he was convinced that an increased
supply of small houses was desirable.
(LEFT SPEAKING.)