The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-19 00:00:00

WINDOW-TAX.

Lord DUNCAN said, that in rising to address
the House upon this subject, he felt no small
degree of embarrassment when he looked around
and saw so many others who were much better
qualified than he was to deal with the question,
and under those circumstances he begged to
say he would occupy the House but a very short time.
Nor would he now intrude this question upon the notice
of the House, but that he felt bound to do so, for this
reason, that he was the representative of a constituency
who, except the cities of London and Liverpool, paid the
largest amount of window-tax of any town in the kingdom.
and therefore he felt hound to bring the hardships under
which they laboured, by reason of the levy of
this tax, before the notice of this Heine, to
the best of his ability. He begged to assure
the House that he did not bring it forward
with any view to the embarrassment of the
Government, for it was no party or political question, but
he did bring it forward because of the injustice end
impoliey of the tax ; and if no other result should
atterd it, it would at all events have been brought
before the public, and public attention would have been
called to it, and then it wolfd be seen whether or not
the people had just cause of complaint —(Cries
of " Hear, hear.") The Alight Honourable Baronet
opposite had said, in his financial stet.. went, that there
were three millions of houses in the metropolis that did
not pay this tax, and that, therefore, if these house's re-
quired glass, great benefit would be o inferred by the
removal of the glass duty. But he (Lord D.)
would ask why had these houses been exempted 1 He
would explain it. They had been exempted because
many of them were the property of wealthy persons,
who had tenants who paid them 200/ a year,
others were exempted because they were
the offices and stores of wealthy merchants ; and oth. rs
again had evaded the tax because the houses were old, and
occupied by poor people, who filled up the wind ,ws.
The Noble Lord then produced letters which he had
received from various persons, complaining that the report
of the Committee on the Health of Towns bad omitted to
mention the state in which many houses in large towns were
owing to the number of families crowded into them,
and who yet could not have sufficient light,
owing to the great amount of the window-tax.
He could not s. e how the removal of the duty on glass
would benefit houses already built ; it might serve those
now building or about to be built. The tax which he
was most anxious to remove was of much older date
than that upon glass, and was as old as the days of " the
hearth money " itself. The duty on hearths had been
taken away. Fourteen different Chancellors of the Ex-
chequer had passed 14 different Acts on the subject.
In 1808 Mr. Percival, the then Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, introduced a measure, which was passed into a
law, under which the assessed taxes were collected.
Since the passing of the Act of 1812 the window duty
had been consented to. The result of all these Acts
was that a sliding-scale was established--(Hear, hear)—
by which houses which had eight windows, and
from eight windows to 500 were exactly taxed in the
inverse ratio of the means of payment. To show
the inequality in the working of the tax, he would take
the house of Sir Robert Peel in Whitehall-gardens, St.
Margaret's parish, in which the number of windows was 72,
and the tax was 6s. 9/d. per window, being about 31 per
cent. on the valuation of the house, as rated for the
property-tax, which was 700/. per year. He
would contrast that with the case of a person
named Coombes, a cabinet-maker, residing at
the corner of Abbey-street, in Bath. There were
thirty-three windows in his house, and he paid 7s. 4d.
per window, being upwards of 30 per cent. as rated to the
property-tax. Apsley House, in St. George's parish,
had 129 windows, which paid ss. 11d. per window, or
2 and 3-Bths per cent. under the rating to the pro-
perty-tax, which was 2,0001. a-year. Montague
house which, had 132 windows, paid but ss. 10id. per
window, being about 31. per cent. to the rating of the
House under the property-tax, about 1,320/. Whilst
those great houses pay so small an amount of window-
tax, the smaller houses were taxed at 9s. 4d. per window.
So much with regard to the inequality of the tax. Now,
with regard to its injustice, he would state the result of
some returns which were made that morning. One of
those returns moved for by the Hon. Member for Mon-
trose stated that the amount of window duty, in 1841,
was 1,830,4571., and it was stated in the same return that
in 1844 the amount of window duty was 1,743,400/.,
being a decrease of 87,2001. In the other return to which
he begged to call the attention of the Honourable and
Gallant Member for Brighton (Captain Pechell), it was
stated that in 1841 the amount of duty was 1,774,638/.,
whereas in 1844 it was 1,786,514/., being an increass in
1844, as compared with 1841, of 11,8761. Now, the one
return made a decrease in 1841, as compared with 184
of 87,0001., and the other return made an increase in
the year 1844, as compared with the year 1841, of
11,8761. Now, • when he found such a difference in the
two returns, he thought that circumstance alone ought to
induce the House to grant him a Committee. On look-
ing to the bottom of the return he found the amount of
duty paid by twelve of the large towns in England. Ie
the town of Bath, he found the window duty had di'ui
rushed to from 22,408/. in 1841, down to 21,551/ in 1844,
and he found the same thing had happened in the towns
of Bristol, Leeds, Liverpool, and Norwich. Having
found this discrepancy between the two reports, he ap-
plied to Mr. Porter, and, on referring to his tables he
found a different account. He found that in 1839,
before the now survey, the window- tax was
1,298,629/ In the second year of the new survey he
found that it rose 365,0001, bitt that ever since, in 1342
and 1843, it was said to be annually diminishing, not-
withstanding thet the population had increased from
18,000,000 in 1839, to 20,000.000 in 1843. In one point,
however, all the returns agreed, and that was, that in
the year of the re-survey, a large addition was made to
the tax. In 1834 there was an Act brought forward by
Lord Althorp, which was stated to be for the relief of
such persons as were duly assessed at the passing of the
Act. It was stated that all persons assessed would be
entitled to keep open, free of duty, as many windows as
they pleased. That Act lay dormant for six y( are, till
1840, and at that time, when it was found that the ex-
penditure of the country exceeded the income, very great
activity prevailed amongst the Commissioners of Stamps
and Taxes. Communications sass d between them and Mr.
Baring, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, and it
was determined that they should have a re-survey made
of all the windows in the kingdom. The consequence
was this, that a number of persons who had opened their
windows on the faith of this Act of Parliament, sud-
denly found themselves in the arms of a hungry Chan.
cellar of the Exchequer.—(Laughter.; The very first
person who was attacked was William Cotton, a solici-
tor, who ought to have known the laws of England. It
appeared that Mr. Cotton had, between the years 1834
and 1841, opened a few windows. He stated that he be-
lieved himself to have been duly assessed. The sur-
veyor required that Mr. Cotton should prove that
he was duly assessed, and Mr. Cotton, though
a solicitor, could not do any such thing. The
judges declared he was liable for every window he
had opened under the Act of Parliament. Another case
was that of Mr. Edwards, of Wigan, who was sur-
charged for every window, though he thought he had
been assessed in 1834. In this case there was an aggra-
vating feature ; Mr. Edwards had used, to seal some of
his letters, the device of a thistle, with the motto
" Diuna forget "—(Laughter)—and for using this seal
he was charged 9/. Bs. in addition to the sum of 5/. which
he had been surcharged on the windows.—(Hear, hear.)
He was charged 2/. Bs. because he sealed his letters with
a pencil-case. It might appear ridiculous to the House,
but it was an instance of great legal oppression. Were
he not afraid of wearying the House, he could adduce
two thousand similar cases. A Mr. Lewis, who had
opened two holes in his warehouse, was declared to be
liable for a window. The case of Mr. Richard Jones was
ofa similar kind, and Professor Scholefield, of Cambridge,
was declared to have been properly surcharged for a
window, because he had opened a hole in his coal-cellar
for shooting the coals through. These cases might
atinear trivial and ridiculous ; but there was a strong
feeling on the subject out of doors, which was increasing
every day. The people were determined to be no
longer treated in this ridiculous manner. In
another case, that of Mr. Boone of Prows,
it was declared he had been legally surcharged
although he had stopped up the aperture, be-
cause he had not used any mortar with the stones em-
ployed for that purpose, and the Commissioners raid
light was admitted between them. The reason whe he
wished to call the attention of the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer particularly to this point, was diet at one time
he seemed to have thought that perforated plates of
zinc placed in walls would not be charged. Many par-
ties had applied to Mr. Pressley, the Chairmen of
Stamps and Taxes, on the subject, and he had stated
that they might put up as many plates of zinc as they
liked, but they would be charged for every hole in that
zinc, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer had borne
that gentleman out by a letter he bad written to some of
these parties. He thought people ought to be allowed
to vertilate their houses.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. Cubitt
had given it as his opinion that darkness in their abides
was prejudicial to the working classes, and Mr.
Bradshaw had stated that the sun's light and
air was necessary to the sustaining of life.

Dr. Southwcord Smith b-a
Lee 0 (.;e
should they in that House, the representatives of the
English people, suffer such a state of things to exist for
a longer period ? They, the representatives of the most
useful and the most enlightened people on the face of the
globe, would they forget what. it was that depressed the
manly spirit of the working classes of England ? That
people enabled the Government to wage a great com-
mercial war with all parts of the glebe, for its this hos-
tile tariff England maintained her wonted spirit. France
might borrow their machinery, she might borrow their
capital, but in order to' compete with them she must
also borrow the menly spirit of their workmen.—(hear,
hear.) Would they, the representatives of that people,
retain a tax of 9s. 4d. and of 9s. ld. upon every aper-
ture that gave ventilation to their dwellings. He ap-
Relied to the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the
Government—he appealed to him in behalf of the work-
ing classes of the town he reprepresented—he besought
him not to be indifferent to their health and to their
comfort. He appealed to the Right Honouruble
Gentleman who had issued the Sanatcry Commission
to attend to the report of that Commission. He had
granted a charter to a society fir the purpose of im-
proving the dwellings of the working classes in this me-
tropolis. Let him carry that principle yet a little fur-
ther. He appealed also to the Right lion. Gentleman
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who seemed to tell
the people of England by a sort of side-wind to ventilate
their dwellings. All he wished of him was to grant a
Committee to inquire why it was, that the houses in
Englend which had less than twenty windows, paid
836,0001. out of the one million and a half of which the
window duty consisted ? Why it was, that the houses
which had less that forty windows paid 1,340,0004 leaving
the insignificant sum of 250,0001. as the amount paid by
the houses which had v.-lore than that number ? lie
knew that a million and a half was a large sum, and he
only asked the Right Hon. Gentleman to consent to an
inquiry whether there might not be some less vexatious
mode of collecting this tax. The people of England had
never shrunk from paying necessary taxes; but they
desired to see every man paying taxes in proportion to
his means. In conclusion, he begged to assure
the Right Honourable Gentleman that this tax, in
its present shape, would never be paid willingly
by the constituents whom he had the honour
to represent; while they saw so many towns which had
trebled their wealth and doubled their population, pay-
ing in a much less proportion. The Hon. Member cen-
eluded by moving a Select Committee, to inquire into
the present mode of assessing. levying, and collecting
the window duties in Great Britain, and to report their
opinion thereupon to the House.
Captain BOLTS said, in rising to s=econd the motion,
he could assure the Right Hon. Baronet the First Lord
of the Treasury that he had no wish to embarrass her
Majesty's Government in their plans with respect to the
financial condition of the esuntry. He was aware that
a tax of 1,700,000/. could not very easily be remitted ;
but at the same time, when so many thousand artisans
in the metropolis and the large towns of the country
were suffering from this cause, he thought it was the
bounden duty of their representatives to make known
their grievances, in order that, if possible, thee might
be redressed. And he had the satisfaction of g
that when he appealed to his Right Hon. Friend, he
appealed to a statesman whose public life was
a guarantee that he should not plead in vain
provided a case were made out. This tax
was imposed by Mr. Pitt as a war-tax, with
the assurance that it e ould not be continued in a time
of peace. Froei tin, year 1815, lip to the present.
time, almost every Chancellor of the Exchequer had
promised to revise this tax, and the o tly revision that
had taken place Was—a revision with a vengeance, for it
was an addition of ten per cent. imposed by the late Ad.
ministration. This tax was peculiarly oppressive to
persons residing in the lewer parts of Westminster.
It appeared, that holes made for admiling light into
cel'ars and dark staircases, .were taxed as windows, and
those persons who had but six or seven windows be-
came rated to the tax, although the Act of Parliament
never contemplated that they should be subjected to it.
The parish of St. Anne's was formerly the place of tare
residences of the arisn cracy, but now no person of in-
dependent means lived there. In that pariah the tax
was most oppressive. In that parish the tax was 161
per cent. upon the rental, while in Regent-street, and
the neighbourhood of the Reform Club, it was not more
than 21- per cert.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER raid it
was a painful and disagreeable task to have to defend
taxes which Hon. Gentlemen might consider odious and
(epressive. It was impossible to deny that any tax,
however wisely conceived, or however ably car-
ried into effect, was necessarily in itself an evil.
Those feelings were necessarily stronger in cases of
direct taxation when, in addition to the evil and incon-
venience produced by the operation of the tax itself,
there was the irritating circumstance of an open and
direct demand for money from the person who was called
upon to pay it. And therefore he felt that, in stating to
the House the reasons why he declined acceding to the
proposition of the Noble Lord, he must request the House
to consider that taxes were in themselves evils, but they
were necessary evils. The House should not suffer itself
to be carried away by every mere detail of the hardship
arising from one particular case, but ought to consider
the general necessities of the country, and that it aas
requisite that a certain amount should be raised for the
maintenance of the public revenue. The Noble Lord
opposite had detailed to them many evils resulting from
the operation of this particular tax. He did not doubt
but there were cases in which the tax subjected the
payer to considerable inconvenience ; and other cases in
which the law was not, understood, and hardships sus-
tained, the infliction of which was never contemplated
by the Legislature. He could only say the Government
was most willing to interpose and prevent the recurrence
of these evils. When inconveniences and oppressions
were stated to the House, it dil nut follow that these
statements were not either untrue or exaggerated ; for
although he would by no means impeach the veracity of
the Noble Mover, or the Hon. and Gallant Officer who
seconded him, still he thought they might have been mis-
led by erroneous information. In consequence of what
had passed on a former occasion, he had felt it his duty
to inquire into some statements made regarding parti-
cular houses in Bath, to which the Noble Lord
had adverted. The Noble Lord then said that in
the house. 10, Galway•street, Bath, twenty win-
dows had been shut up recently, in consequence of
this tax, and that a large number of windoe's had been
shut up in the adjoining houses from the same cause.
That statement was not correct. In 1843 the window-
tax was assessed on a person, named Fisher, for thirty-
four windows, and in 1814 the tax was assessed on the
same house, on a person named Fisher, for thirty-
five windows, showing an increase rather than a diminu-
tion. With respect to No. 9, he had ascertained that there
were reasons why the windows should be stopped, be-
side the inconvenience of paying the windewetax, for he
believed it was pretty well ascertained that No. 9 was a
house of ill fame. le other cas sto which the N.e,le
Lord had referred, he felt compelled to refer to the state-
ment of a Noble Lord, his predecessor in the office
which he had the ho--out' to fill, and he would follow
that Noble L in the as rth n. that these houses.
which were unfurnished and unoccupied, and which
were only opened for the sake of ventilation, were net
liable to taxation. The character of that Nob!s Lord
was too well established to suppose that he was at all
likely to commit a breach of faith.—(Hear, hear.)
He did not wish to impute to the Noble Lord the
Member for the City of London, or to his Honourable
Friend near him, any error in the statement which
those Gentlemen had made. The Noble Lord his
predecessor had stated, in 1834, that it was not tsseint is-
tion of Government to prevent any person from enjoying
the benefit of additional windows in their houses, if they
opened an additional window beyond the number at which
they were assessed. In 1834, when the proposition was
made to impose the assessed taxes for five years; there
was this express reservation, that the window-tax should
be levied according to the previous assessment, and per
sons who were desirous of entering into a composition
of five per cent. , were enabled, by the act of 1834, to do so on
the whole amount. of their assessment. But the Noble Lord
asked, " Why put additional taxes on houses once rated to the
occupier at a certain number of windows, when new windows
should have been made in them ? " Why, surely, it was never
intended that those occupiers should have a perpetuity of those
houses if they should improve them by additional windows.—
(Hear, hear.) If that were so, it would be a manifest injus-
tice to others who should build pew houses.—(T-dear, hear.)
With respect to the motion of the Noble Lord, lie (the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer) could not feel it would be cons•stent
in him to consent to this Committee, for he knew what the
feeling was with respect to those Committees ; it was, in fact,
nothing more nor less than to call upon the House to ex-
press an opinion, to the effect that the window-tax should be
removed. This tax amounted to a million and a half—and he
would ask, was the Noble Lord in a position to state what he
propoaed to substitute for it ? or to say it could be removed
without a substitute in the present state of the finances of the
country ?—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for Alontrose,
however, intended to suggest that it should be left for the con-
sideration of the Committee, whether it would not be better
that a house-tax should be substituted for the window-tax.
Now the House had already had this question before them ; and
the House, ten years ago, having before them the two taxes,
did, upon deliberate consideration, determine that the house-
tax should be abolished, and the window-tax preserved. Whe-
ther right or wrong, was foreign to the present question to de-
termine that; if they were to raise a million and a half upon a
tax derived from windows, it was not desirable to encourage an
opinion that they were about to make a change in the mode in
which they at present levied it. The Noble Lord had stated
that the number of houses was 4,00',000, but that only 450,000
of them were subject to the tax. The residences of
the labouring classes, and buildings used for manufac-
turing or agricultural purposes, were mostly exempted.
In fact, the tax in its present state was placed only upon one-
eleventh of the whole number of house-occupiers in the coun•
try. When, however, the house tax was in force, it operated
upon one-seventh of the house-occupiers of the country. If
they substituted one tax for the other, it would naturally bring
under assessment a large body of persons —he believed no less
than '270,000 in number, who at the present time were subject
to the income-tax. He should be surprised if the remission
of one-half of the window-tax on these houses occasioned any
reduction of the rent to the tenants. That rent did not so much
depend on the ,axes on these particular houses as on the demand
for them for dwellings of the poor. Labouring men, rather
than reside at a distance from their employment, and encounter
the toil of walking to and from it at the beginning and end of
their work, would pay an enhanced rent for a dwelling in the
neighbourhood of their avocations. Ile did not see any par-
ticular advantage to be gained by going into this Committee.
He fully admitted to the Noble Lord it was the duty of the
Government to inquire into these branches of taxation, and to
see whether the abuses in them could not be remedied.
—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) But to grant a Committee on
this subject would only excite expectations that could not be
realised, and would lead people to believe that the window-duty
was about to be abolished, without any other tax being im-
posed instead of it. He therefore felt bound to resist the in-
quiry moved for by the Noble Lord. It hail been said, that
the tax prevented healthy ventilation ; but he believed what
the poor man most looked for in his dwelling was warmth. He
was sure, if the Noble Lord entered into toe dwellings of the
poor, he would see so far from their being anxious to allow the
air into their dwellings, there was not a single hole that was
not filled up for the purpose of securing warmth, and what they
cousidered comfort. As to the window-tax being the cause of
ill health, he was not prepared to admit it, and there was not a

Oft
s:eel" lire in the rot-we 4,1' 1,•:1 lesen alteeed
It 0
•te_ • e se; i A; sva tv Oa Irvlo 1
tbe .
health was attributable to the state of the sewers, and
it
in which houses were built. He admitted, that if 14, foe'
m beovala
desirable
htlhee
that there
health couldshoul,i be
hes ecsuermeidAe, I,:itteret;
in it. Ile tru t«1 that the Ileu3e won" • pot
of
upon itself that which was the duty of the Exeent'rto'
into a Committee for the pureose of discussing the role°
a tax which they could not , ffecs. To rei eal the 'cid etiel.;
ender the present circumstances, of the eeuntry a°ll..Res t"
posable,_. end although, therefore, be admitted that I._ooe
duty of Government to take the subject into their 'P.! must
dere., ion, he must resist the motion for a Committee te
into the subject. —( Hear.)
Captain ROUS explained. ~ehtbo
Captain PECHELL said a more convincing R71011:11
that of the Noble Lord who introduced this mot' der
never heard, arid the Chancellor of the Frebeilattteest;
wholly abstained from g-appling with thetr bor. ►
which that speech eontained.—(Cries of 'et'sr'of
He would just show the House the number of eat- odeilitt
against the window duty since the imposition of theses
ten per cent. in 1839 or rather, the number of
,be to;s1
had been decided by the judges, for it was in3rniapd
certain the number of cases of appeal. In '',„,,iTneotitii
Wales, the number of cases with respect to the -titpherevt-
deciaed by the judges was 5C6. In Scotland the nheateielf
232, making together 738. In one ease in Wales, to§
was made to apply to'forty-seven others, so that it,,ed bet
impossible to know even the number of cases dart, r/
judges. Ile thought this was sufficient gro Ind ,°ieesselg
mittee of inquiry. From 1831 to 1844, out of 1,1
_OlO
appeals from the decisions of the Commission et: 11;00'4
assessed taxes, 412 related to window-du Y. ridaberila
Bristol there was a considerable falling off in t";Chssee'teo
windows, which must either result from cheating th..tiso
of the Ex c h
Agoer,nd theor fromvery a
same decline
thing in the condi
aid of
inhabitants. tit
might be 5 pelt,
condition of most of the 'principal towns 100,0ebsr'el
—Liverpool, Leeds, and Hull among the tistr,
with window duty,(Hear,inetar.)ln and the Scotland, lllodging-housesd vrs
lodging-houses vre.r`ed to Ps'a;
obbfl the $l.,
it, as in the case of Mr. Dunlop, of Ayr, quoted !!.....444,f,
book, who was brought under the 43th of 'George 1114,, sad yet
persons were assessed with window duty leeedieg.lo
increased charges of this description over the Pr the jee'' ere
was 7,087. Several appeals had been made from ji
of the Commissioners, but, in most cases, these elleops'es
wholly unsuccessfnl. Two hundred and sixteen Pe, theo Jo
been imprisoned last year for assessed taxes, sonlefooptete,
an amount of tax not exceeding 4s. 4d. Many of "0,0 1.4
were imprisoned fifteen months for this small stunt otepttslo
still worse than the game-laws while the imp risoi; under t,
not exeeed three months, unless he was punishel
_.,,sea
161;
Stamp Act. In nine cases nut of ten he thought wreaths,
not. fairly assessed. He called upon the " fanner
to support the motion. In one case a farmer was
window of an out-house, because his wife washed her hit dilf„'
it. In 1844 a farmer was charged for a window' beer far_,
because he now and then used it as a larder. An°,.t rely .01
whose rent and tithe and land-tax amounted to usioteeen
was taxed under this Act ; and there was a further Prete!
a farmer being charged for a servant bean° ,tt po trvn4
found cleaning his mast, r's boots. This tax eon' (lit 00,
be continued—the writing was upon the wall, ansoest
share the fate of those odious burdens which were a
:Firs
verge of abolition. bi 11.. acre
Sir CHARLES NAPIER would not. 117,,,stits,ei0
in the debate, but that he represented a large,'" pre the
who felt strongly on the subject. The Noilesereeaaases
made out a strum case, and one which nee- eerr:eeter
fullest consideration, and he showed that the riltato-the
were oppressed by it. He had got a few figuresii roe tfoeel
which might he relied on, and which he wen' with
see tits
House. In Budd-street, Marylebone, a heustnt! anoire
windows paid 4s. Bd. a window, being ten Per ten 'lletbe
rental. In Henrietta-street, a house with eV' pt. ureter
paidrent a5l! aßwuilns tdr7dten
sion °f odll
of
Duke of Newcastle, which had sixty- 'two
eighths per cent. upon the rental, while's the 04 t
_bmeienwgste
an ainmclusaehalf rer ee sod ts; the
two and seven-eighths per cent, neon the rentalsoo4. (Peet
se-inflows:od tbsof
Hertford House, rented at 2,00174 a year, I'l,ooe/40e ;hit
a half per cent. on the rental. The buildings*, h ste•t"negol:
affected by this tax were precisely those whle.t. 06 nets
ought to te most especially exempted from 'red to toe
take the case of the window-tax as asp sae ig hties°
dwellings, and he found that houses with less tbote
r. Of
down were free from this tax, but if they had e ,eoo.teod
if the occupiers were desirous of increasing ht str• o' tbiS
their habitations by the admission of more likbt eaustd Dr'
were to add another window to their houses, t"enleioal-asitlf(
at an expense of I6s. 6d. per annum. The es;'„est'i
Arnett, Dr. Guy. and Mr. Dalby, had all been elheslth'net°'
given in favour of some measure by which the Thew
‘im
the habitations of the poor might be increase' „este that
those necessaries of life, as he might call theme
mense mass of disease and suffering, and he sheuthst tlOO.
the Chancellor of the Exchequer would conceive
sweet nes
a point far above any fiscal considerations. Thos Poor poer ork
men had stated that the habitations of .„ War" Aesire
particularly unhealthy from the crevice-These' to
mitted both the cold and rain• elie sr
il
inconveniences which care might remedy, but qv for eter
done in the time of summer, when the Wes° "iheess
light was largely increased, and still more, ache the P°9;B
took them, when that worst of all calamities, ft°
broken health, rendered their close and contneo tbs. the
more insalubrious, when it was absolutely necessart't old
air should pass as freely through their dwellingsese, add
open air. He was anxious to provide for futuritY r bow
not understand how the subject could be lightly° to
left. esiel%h
Mr. E. ELLICE said that he felt the serious set; 010 is,
which the poor were exposed, but one of the c'is
the fills°l
particularly wished to bring under the notice of _or;
that of the hand-loom linen-weavers of Scottalit einird
these individuals occupied houses which had eit tbel dot
if not less. At the end of their dwelling
room or shop, which, like their dwelling-bons"' the • g",
from duty. These shops were almost always n,n .eoue`i;iser'
floor, and had a communication with their dwell atres!th the
order to render these shops or warehouses n3;°rtion °lie°
they had generally made in them a conomon.e!sopve nert
highway ; but the dust from the road and other tbeirools r
of a similar kind almost obliged them to destre4terstl eoed.,
munication with the dwelling-houses ; but this Kali Peel,
the effect of bringing them under the tax. It t there
for this business, which required much light, tnee,sere I`. s• r
be a window for every loom; and he trusted the.',ll, esseird
Chancellor of the Exchequer would consider b"ole live'
grant a remission of this tax to men whose II lie ';olec
depended on the light of their dwelling- h"sest.bat the 'feel
turgid to say these few words, because he felt _lost
was one of importance, and that it affected a 0001
little able to help themselves.—( Hear, bear.) the °let"'
Mr. HUME said that he was sorry to see,itnit pros le
with which the House treated this question. Te
for
ude wes
most important, arid he f It that a debt of grateitt
forsoel.osone:
the Hen. Gentleman for bringing this saki'. t most rr`
him, it appeared, it had been brought forward le ettinflees
tune p tried. The time, indsed, was particularla_;entoste:itiss
Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Governon vs jot
traducing a change in the system of taxatiol!.,..oneol!:;pet
roe are that there must be a certain amount 011;.0%, °f piece
and the Right Hon. Baronet appeared to be de.% the' ;-iieer.,
ling those great sources of national wealth, win), he We.it Ord
turers of the country provided. Yet. the the Ifego'eti h,:e
that this amount must be raised, yet he tlLooegsohie :ores).
elicited information which had
the better. The question mooted by the the -v.•Of
and unequal nature of this tax. In the admire
~e roc.
the Right Hon. Baronet had brought before L';,6sePtit,
relieving the trade f the country from many be:doe. to,
latices, there was much for which gratitude wee fergetoect tiles
linked in those alterations that it would not b $ 0 cle'
show" ble d°4l age _
it was in the purity of the air in his dwelling-144
the consequent state of his health, that the re;t
• dllj
Fended. He (Mr. Hume) had been instrunarel'oe Fres, ests,
one part of the tax, and he should be glad oor ms Steil tot
cussion led to any arrangement whereby theo truotterhs
means were saved from still further reducti ;we perionta..
Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary for the o be
0f flonii;o/550tbot,
would take this matter into account woe t
forward his measure tor he health
founded upon the leport of tithe gentlemen t inquirYeo,thsi,
make that inquire. It appeared from theedieal peroseie
many eases, according to the evidence of '2t ot, the ;01 "sf
many families lived together in sine arartmen_otonTA,
floor.tit
The cons..quence was that, in the tto Ptitt
they wen do'.
which they were obliged to inhale after t er, esti"
rose in the morning weaker rather than strengeoi. recil gate'
aspects of ghosts. 'There was no opportunity .
thereto t filee
no chance of an alleviation of toil, aed he wagetenttee.t
nished at the quietude and patience and e's".,o eloP.o4b;
which these evils were borne. He thought that
had introduced this question at a most opportn eel...rill et
nied
trusted that her Majesty's Government wan was eSeu,essee
grant the inquiry who hhe requested. ; here
lessay elope
dence of the necessity for the inquiry. They e.O give inoff/re
large information, and there were others reariPevideeeeit ar,
tine if the House required it. They had tr
Arnott, Dr. Guy, and Mr. Dolby, ant , were
peered that the artisans of Englano
of the "ohj"
feeble and emaciated beings, hardly worth._ ioquitt thoe;
Englishmen He, therefore, thought that Stil"saseisnedierr
largely affected all the inhabitants of towns, b Er: fine o_ br3 ib
termed artizans, was of singular importance..
_it'oeferrpier,
for them not only for the sake of enjoyment, their esootli
that they should have as much light and air in ego obe
place; as possible. Money would go a long se Ye,nita enri ths_
would not provide for the poor man those_eT
were absolutely necessary. He (Mr. flume) nriv to
..; of?,
last ten or twelve years, endeavoured ant givng ell°, fligsst
country of this unfair and iniquitous tax.
."'y
fled that in the alterations which were antimPatesd. betlibebe,
lion. Baronet at the head of the Government,
.:to from ,ten
articles which were of the least value, and to pr_e'aive
a wise portion of his plan to remove the Ina vide retn'eesS
ple with food and clothing. Ile was willing
_I,"
of the unequal nature of this tax. In his ow:el yew eoptcy
lebone, there was one house with 'thirty-nv'ssn atnutteets
to 164 per cent. There was another house y;
Poland-street, on the rent of which the windo_rrille•gepot!,
on which the window-tax amounted only to I.,te isred
0%0
on the Reform and Carlton Club-houses 11 uviss a
,riti
centage was much lower than this. Ttrie. oefesetr
Cross-street, the rental of which wee :N....a ecisps felt'
window-tax upon it amounted to la en on" ef
dente of the oppressive and uneqttaea,
of the( joairr;4
which was so glaringly unjust, that it alone r.
nature oofer,
tax. The Right Hon. Baronet at the whit °
ofe,he
e
merit had a complete apparatus for the
ortunity
taxation, and he thought that a good opP , enerret,, ptrirein
for the remission of this tax. He had bac"; ''eneees!.;lsotientioe
late Chancellor of the Exchequer, and II!' noo. (iv sorroa
for the removal of this tax ; but that Right all
nded - the
had had no money to spare. He had exPec„rig on e reest re
p'fjor his d• :a Flea
cash in Syria—be had thrown it away in
shells, so that perhaps there was good reaso
the asses
opesid
the removal of the window-tax. Y
13elac, it well
No. 102, dated the 7th of is the t° etleri'ors
that the whole amount of rental on whieend
in sehieb the,.
amounted in England to 35,500,000 L, .on fled it pro'
• 8 500 o°o • belief
3,000,0001., making a total of 3 ,
__ ~700,t
was raised adu of 1,950,0001. Last Year
_west reds'
And he thought that if the Right Hon. ia't
Goe _ aOOO po
duced 1,600,0001., and this year it was est_urie.tean totiief (u:sid
this duty, and impose a tax on property t wt., !/.
also to s- tie•
not only enable him to remit this duty,
sonsue 00090.10.
in the pound, which was equal to abovebtPte' tre"..,joiee,
deficiency in the surplus in which he seemed
builder' t°
By this tax a premium was offered to peg, ner
houses with as little means of comfort and health of thell beBs
munity from taxation was to be the rewaor; ned ,ieht Pro
Now the whole of that evidence went to that "heeinwa.,
the Right Hon. Gentleman to bear it in mt intn..,ort ti.toeortnee;
air produced the most beneficial effee.' 'hot ;. •e
f in
classes, and it was, therefore, a matter of the 0
dto them noon dotes
that both should be liberally supplie
this
octantr do
now living in a time of change, and o es
ttisnrlh
window-tax would be a change of the most she heap reeisston
It would produce a most salutary effect o
lieved the f of
lions—an effect which he (Mr. Hume) be. wee not.
of no other tax would bestow. The COntin__ceottn
eihit
was opposed te all the pledges of the late coor'Aithe.tre
(Mr. Hume) remembered, and the laL'Lord
,flame Poi the
the Exchequer might also remember' _ „ny
stating in that House that he was as sensible e'lat it eite 9',
unequal pressure of this tax, and he conceived_nua it. 4;neiSfs
intention of Government to considerably amen for Pet IVA'
not blame the Right Hon. Gentleman opPolhij
these 'pledges, but he did certa blame "

();,1
4, "I
Itt,i •
Dort.
°lvt
'the k.,ati
Itr.

& 4