The Sun.
London, England, 1850-04-16 00:00:00

k;eaneellor of the Exchequer) stated as to relief from
tassoion was this, that he proposed a measure svi,h re-
gasd to stamps, the loss upon which would be somewhere
under 300,0001.; and another ne aqui/ with regard to
the duty on bricks, the loss upon which would be some-
of ov,r 450,0001. • or, taking the two together, a loss
C)f7(} 0001. The non. Gentleman said, now that he
(they Chancellor cf the Exchequer) had, somehow or
tethe, a surplus of 300 0001. But he Witi at a loss to
'now whence it Was to come. When he stated that tho
kassure he propelled with regard to stamps would in-
volve loss of somewhere under 300,0001., he at the
genie time stated that he proposed to relieve transactions
°f a small amount, as he had done, and increase those
loaf larger amount; and that upon a balance he should
300,0004—(Hear, bear.)
Mr. DISRAELI said the Right Honourable Gentle-
%en had spoken of an ad valorem duty as well as of the
of a lower duty. which was to be accepted as
did"neensation in relief of small proprietors. But what
e he Honourable Gentleman mean to do with the
40,0004 Volt case ? To t of a balance was a very
iconvenient fiction, but there was nothing said of a ba-
ilie ce w hen there was talk of a compensation. The
Ldetatnittee Rai now told that the loss on the balance
theof. b_tellg.et.. In fact, it now turned out that, instead
of It.r sots:ion of taxation, there would be an increase
diti,he CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER state:!t
he,th envFtlyertinhat there was to be an ad valorem duty, and
th lesser dut w increasing
tgliles wouldg he ae equivalent to a lossithout of 300,0004 the
the °MILBURN wished t) know on what principle
Ito ,• in question had been calculated. The Right
114; Gentlema said that if the duties on large and small
aseeg.l!ele: were uced one-half, the loss would not be
Theta 0001.
them, CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER saidr
re-
duction be a great loss on conveyances—the est
200-,;,1„,°n that branch alone was Calculated a
t'cPse-d7.Wou'rldhehienicpreauspe in small transactions, it was
the revenue ; and it was
efted that parties would get instruments stamped here-
e2l. who had never got them stamped before. He cal-
.:44d tat. soinethin would be gained on this as well
ee on mortgages g
eolettr• MACKENZIE asked how it was. proposed to
Trethe!latePing a large transaction? It might be evaded
he-Ak'saing of this Act as it was before.
ires 'I4ANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it
unot worth while.
Iti2hr;RNLEY said the sum of 60,0001. fixed by the
thel;must Gentleman was so precise, that it was cleare
ee„ be materials in the possession of theG
th;l/1111.ent Whereon to base it. He, therefore, thought-
,e,celorrnation should not be withheld from the House.
hlAthne ATTORNEY-GENERAL said it would be seen
Would comparative estimate of conveyances. that there
1,0001 be a considerable saving in transactions upt_ to
t
sate "eYhe common stamp of 9/. would suffice to h
tete,
1-3001 that to 100,0001. the scale was nearly the
Were e„ the present. Conveyances beyond 100,0004
47,54gil rare. The proceeds of the present scale were
04,249
1 lkOs s which was equivalent in stamps to
would S. 61- The loss on conveyances, therefore,
of trans be 266,2994 45. 61, assuming the same number
the actions after the Passing of the Bill as before. If
Were °,74 from leases for years and following stamps
howhoweiel"deds it would amount to 300,0001, All that,
ever
cf course a matter of estimate.
to c.o. '-",NLEY considered that the House had cause
Treuttlelsin in the matter. The Hon. Secretary for the
con, ~urY said he could obtain no return of the stamps on
illoe244cest___but the Attorney-General, nevertheless,
ee„-end the House exactly what the amount of the trans-
Ithte.ia! were. Re was, therefore, in possession of data
The had not been communicated to the House.
Pro, e CRANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER conlid
atairepa loss, but he could not prove a gain in this in-
k the The Government knew the number of stamps
be re r!tathet, but they could not tell how many would
40_8(1. uired for mortgages, or how many far convey-
etch,
They could only calculate a certain amount for
, r,
e
Nets' ihttiLLINGS said the 15/, stamps were not ap-
teße to
e conveyances; they were only used in mort-
that' anti settlements. He had it from good authority
of the
uiproceeds of the stamp duty on the conveyance
meatsko rftgages
of from 10,000/. to 15,0001., and on settle-
roni 12,000 L to 15,000 Z, were 4,500/. or 4,6001.
et. 12 thens as all for mortgages, it would give an average
third' °°/- but taking two-thirds as mortgages and one-
hoe settlements, and taking off 4,5001., it would
it ef,„11,4,2504 Reducing this by omissions to 12,0001.,
to 4-E,O
o`,l, /. give the stamps 300,0001., a number equivalent
Sir
ViTILLOUGHBY said the Bill imposed new
)30'4 which ought to have a full discussion. Under the
lilltgreernents fir leases would be taxed for instance.
there c CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
ttieuillsas no absolutely new tax in the Bill; but he
the g t it Weald be more convenient to call attention to
lipoints in question as the clauses were proceeded with.
°Pinion that tiT said there was an almost universal_
the Bill would increase taxation, in place of
living any relief. As few lion. besursgg
'sat with the nature of-tießlliehine
shewesetreed ctohnevteri-t
uld be sent to a Select Committee,l to whom the whole
tltjtteitss.tioti of stamps could be referred. He was favourable
ad valorem duty; but he wished one of a lower per
weaullge than that fixed by the Bill, which in his opinion
t;„ be a henry tax as it stood upon
lin landed property. all large transae-
seat ,c SOLICITOR-GENERAL said if the Bill was
lone': Select Committee there would be a number of
u4titeittealents in evidence, and a big blue book; but the
sides
pittkcitaelf would be absolutely where it was. Be
net ad 'chi be believed the forms f the House would
ths' 'flit of such a course of proceeding. He believed
deetthe country would be greatly benefited by the Js
es-
qe'"; but he also believed that there would be a o
4ralent to 300,000/. on the whole transaction.ble _
teICHELL backed the suggestion of the Hon(
be 1131. fur Manchester. He also thought the Bill slhdou d
he,c'e.asid.erea in a Select Committee. The Bill
cw,osureplraey.
aentedvY 'II upon land, inasmuch as conveyan
his ,Pr°Perty, while mortgages represented debt. In
tatteePinioes an ad valorem duty of 8 per cent, would_rabe.
Dote:ants and as much as there was any ground to i
teItrSADLEIR said that the more the Bill came to
ilerstood, the more general would be the objections
vetienst° it. At present few comprehended its bearing;
agree "e members of the Government itself were not of
tell Merit with one another on the subject—the Charl-
ie,: of the Exchequer stating one thing, and the At-
the ,7-General stating another. As regarded Ireland,
tee.,`leVernment, in his opinion, had taken a most unfor-
iso e Moment to apply the provisions of the Bill to that
of t,trYs seeing that it was almost impossible to dispose
eetZ large estates which existed there under the en-
sate 1
e iered Estates Commission. The purchaser would
a.te the ad valorem duty upon the stamp, and de-
04_0 i
l'lt from the purchase money. But there was.another
the! deserving the consideration of the House—namely,
servege class of proprietors who might be able to pre-
elite a portion of their property by effecting voluntary
of the remainder, without coming within the opera-
e":of the Nneunabered Estates Act. The proposed
_eration would operate very severely upon them. The
classes in Belfastsad lards, Dublin, Cork, Limerick,
Waterford hal beenunable to communicate their
It„ites to the Government, and the bankers and the
cid interest were in the same position. Under these
pr ;aces, he hoped the Government would not
e,e,ced with the Bill at the present moment, or, at all
sidiu.teas that ample time would be allowed for its con-
tition before taking the next stage.
rfoj'r,llUME could not understand the objection of the
tlerh, kzentleman opposite, because if any class would
be the benefit from the passing of this measure it would
hell Proprietors
and purchasers of Irish proerty, who
1,004 be enabled to sell portions of property under
ere at. a reduced duty.—(lslear, hear.) When they
teketiaasured by the Government that the amount of
prase °n under this Bill woald be less than under the
the drat system the sum of 300,0004 ,ho considered it
Itia thq el the House to suport the red. It was
by 4 at the decrease on the smaller sumsuction would be met
the increase on the larger ones; but he considered
trio:-P,°Bed distribution more equal than the former,
theZ`;ich a large mass of property had been exempted
lira
Co 134rY of the community at large. He trusted
4tlortt tbtaittee would proceed with the Bill, in order. to
l'aeh gete,..hcf to the smaller proprietors who had hitherto
u kr, /,`",ach oppressed.
are s'ubZOLLY said that as many. Hon. Members
thoeciatepared to go into the discussion, and as most
tr "Te answers had been given by the Government-,
tad 'ett the
s!ratiati „e., Committee would defer the further con
trot
"tte Bill to a future time.—(Hear.)
trat of s;_ RUSSELL could not see how the postpone-
elotaoh-' 'we Bill for a week or a fortnight would assist
et which Hon. Members had in view.
ITtehre.
!title
071 thher for Carlow objected to the proposTehd
at
ob-
tetatioa diacrount of the condition of Ireland.
thtthe not apply merely to the present considerationa
, teal. but to its consideration at any period during._
ftlett eptkus and
Would, if successful, defeat the consider-
tea, the Stamp Acts altoether. The subject had.
lliali,-„Y Years attractedpublic observation. The in-
tte:betof_th.ye stamp duty on land had been remarked
„,.‘;eta,agru
_in writing and at pudblic meetings,
totingbu b
el'cre ie. tee el the House of Lor s, appointed
raat h thelnequality of the Stamp Acts and the
:(43, tlrtsdebip inflicted on the smaller proprietors by theh
Palittorteularge Placed upon them. Last year the
e?.3tef .of the Chancellor of the Exchequebrrouwght
br',cr then the subject, which was
Lallent e notice of the House early in the
'Pe. !aesion, and about a month ago his Riht
ItiihiehVlend pointed out the nature of the measurethe
small
0°,.0 intended to propose—namely, to diminishteeeof
„ttttll4i smaller conveyances, and the transactions
las proPrietors, and at the same time to make
details
hid be transactions more equal. After the
, vett see
vinteetiealeren, and the resolution proposed, many corn-
% h ne were received by his Right Hon. Friend,
ah' 141 end
k Jaetio.. eavoured, tar as possible, to obviate the
Wettille Which had been raised.—(Hear, hear.) But,
4the 4me "k+ would no inconvenince arise from delay-
aerite„lnessure for a month, and keeping the public in
tetsiet je" of the intentions of the House?—(Elear, hear.)
it
Pt of inconvenience always resulted from the postpone-
racasures of this kind, many transactions being
,e the „,,a; bYance. If there was a general agreement
the rociple cf the measure let the Committee at
g()
rttlei pp into a consideration of the details, in order that
4._actiati-cgress ruight be made.—(Hear, hear.) The ob-
'eeh.,the etli,aide, by the Hon. Member for Bridport applied
think Act as much as to the measure now
ignit ePloiration. The Hon. Gentleman seemed to
man with an estate of 50,000/.. mortgaged
would be ia a worse position tbau
t°,ooo/. ',an estate worth 20,000/., mortgaged for
f') 41(1440'1ot this was not a matter for Parliament
hEusy h• itito- If however, the object was good
e tMg • ' .
itqd tiMutua, .4 applied equally to the present Act.
12'e_not „," ot duty on property exceeding 5,000/,
N°ol, tie °l_6 than 10,000 L, was 12/ ; but exceeding
414112 P Was 251. The objection, therefore,