The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-11 00:00:00

MAYNOOTH.

Mr. FOX MAULE presented a petition against
any further grant to Maynooth.
Mr. ARKWRIGHT presented a- petition from a
number of landholders, praying that if any parties
were relieved from the income-tax, the claims of
landholders generally might not be forgotten.
Mr. BROTHERTON presented a number of
petitions, praying the House to take steps to prevent
the sale of intoxicating drinks on Sundays.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.

Mr. G. BANKES presented a petition from the
occupiers of land in Dorchester, praying the House
to remove some of the burdens which pressed upon
them.

RAILWAYS.
The following Railway Bills were severally read a
second time, and ordered to be committed :—The
Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway, the Oxford and
Rugby Railway, the Newcastle and Berwick Railway,
the West Cornwall Railway, the Eastern Counties
(Cambridge and Huntingdon) Railway.
Mr. EWART presented a petition in favour of the
Glasgow and Dumfries Railway.
Mr. MAUNSELL presented four petitions from
the county of Northampton, complaining of agricul-
tural distress, and praying for relief.
Lord HARRY VANE presented a petition from
the Anti-Slavery Society of Derby, against the im-
portation of hill-coolies into the West Indian colonies.
Mr. GEO. BANKES presented a petition against
the Southampton and Dorchester Railway, which was
referred to the Committee on standing orders.
IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBTS UNDER 201.

Mr. F. BERKELEY gave notice that he should,
on a future day, move for leave to bring in a Bill to
repeal the Act of last session, for abolishing imprison-
ment for debts under 201., with a view to adopt a
better mode for recovering debts under that amount,
and saving tradesmen from the loss to which they are
liable from the imposition of fraudulent debts.
THE FALKLAND ISLANDS.
Dr. BOWRING gave notice that he should, to-
morrow, move for returns of the amount of the Par-
liamentary grants to the Falkland Islands, and the
amount of the custom-house returns of those islands.
IN COME-TAX.

Lord EBRINGTON said that, seeing the income-
tax was sure to continue for three years, 's ould pro-
bably continue for five years, and might possibly
continue for ever, begged to ask the Hon. Baronet,
the Member for the University of Oxford, whether
he intended to put his motion for levying the income-
tax on those incomes which were not less than 1511. ?

Sir R. INGLIS said that he certainly intended to
bring on the motion of which he had given notice ;
he wished he could say with the hope that it might
be levied on all incomes betweenlso/. and 2001. only,
on the difference between those sums, namely, on 501.

, TUESDAY MORNING, MARCh 11, 1845.

one who was sanguine enough to go with the Govern-
ment in that statement. They must look upon this,
therefore, as the sole experiment which they had to try
with the revenue, they must regard this as the solegain
which they were to have for the surplus. They were
to get the remission which the Right Hon. Baronet
proposed to make, and for that they were to have the
income-tax for ever. The question, therefore, which
the House had to decide was—whether they
would take the income-tax for ever, and receive,
in satisfaction, the reduction of taxes which
the Right Honourable Baroaet proposed to make.
He must confess that he did not think that anything
that had been offered could reconcile him to the con-
tinuance of the income-tax.—(Hear, hear.) It had
been said that this was eminently a poor man's budget.
Now, he ha-I always observed that when the Govern-
ment did not know what to say in support
of any measure which they might have happened to
propose, they invariably said that it was for the benefit
of the poor man, and some Hon. Gentlemen on that
side of the House had been allured by the cry that
this budget was for the benefit of the poor man.
Now he (Mr. C. Buller) could not see how
they could have by any possibility reduced
an equal amount of taxation on any articles which
would have conferred so little benefit on the poor
man.—(Hear, hear.) First there was the sugar tax.
Now, they were all agreed on that (the Opposition)
side of the House, that they could not have reduced
any tax with such little advantage to the in-
terests of everybody except the West India
proprietors. He believed that there was not
anybody on that side of the House, always excepting
the Hon. Member for Dumfries, who was so en-
amoured of the income-tax that he would rather see
the proceeds thrown into the sea than not have it
—with the exception of the Hon. Member for Dum-
fries, there was not one Gentleman on that side of
the House who would consent to the continuance of
the income- tax for the sake of the reduction in the sugar
duty.—(Hear.) Was it the auction duty the reduction of
which was to benefit the poor man ?—(Hear.) Was
he to gain by the removal of the tax upon exports?
—(Hear, hear.) He must confess that it seemed to
him that the export duty was paid by foreigners.
He did not think the poor man could gain much by
its reduction. But then there were the 420
articles of the tariff. Now, he had looked
at them all, and he could not conceive
what the poor man was to gain from the reduction in
them. The Right Hon. Baronet would not give the
poor man corn.—(Cheers.) He would not give him
butter—(Cheers)—but he would give him alum to
adulterate his bread—(Cheers and laughter)—and
lard to adulterate his butter.—(Renewed cheers and
laughter) Now he did not know, unless it was per-
haps upon such articles as Divi Divi and Albanalla,
on what it was the poor man was to gain. It was
true he had never before heard of those articles, and
he had no very longing desire to hear an explanation
as to their qualities.—(A laugh.) Then there was
glass. Now he believed the poor man would
benefit more by the reduction of the
duty on glass than upon that of any other
article ; not that he believed he would get it much
cheaper, but he would have a better article for his
money. Then there was sugar—then there was
cotton. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had burst
forth eloquently on the advantages which the
poor man would derive from cheap fustians ;
and the First Lord of the Treasury had dilated at
length upon the advantages which the poor woman
would derive from a cheap cotton gown. Now he
(Mr. C. Buller) never treated of millions ;
he left those to the First Lord of the
Treasury and the Chancellor of the Exchequer; but
when they came to pence he could calculate. Now,
let them imagine a poor man, dressed from top to
toe in fustian that is to say, with a fustian
coat, a fustian waistcoat, and fustian trousers—
Now let them consider this subject scientiically—let
them come to weights and measures. lie had made
numerous inquiries, and had taken great pains to as-
certain, and he had come to the conclusion that at
the outside the weight of this dress would be four
and a half pounds.—(Roars of laughter, occasioned
by the admirable mode in which the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman imitated the manner in which

the Premier usually makes his statistical statements.)
He had been told that he must make an allowance
of an additional half pound for waste. That would
give five pounds as the quantity of raw cotton em-
ployed in the manufacture of the suit of fustian.
The duty on raw cotton was five-sixteenths of a
penny per pound ; therefore the poor man would
save, on the suit, twenty-five•sixteenths of a
penny, or one penny and nine - sixteenths.
He then took the case of a woman's gown.—(Laugh-
ter.) Into that he had also made inquiry.—(Much
laughter.) He made allowance for waste, and he
found that the reduction in a woman's cotton gown
would be about td. Supposing a woman, there-
fore, to have two gowns a year, her husband would
save lid. a year. The two, the husband and
wife, would have to be grateful to the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer for a saving of
3d. a year. His (Mr. Buller's) own belief was
that they would never get their 3d., for he be-
lieved that the poor consumer would never have
a chance of getting jacket, waistcoat, and trowsers,
which cost altogether 13s. or 145., even though they
reduced the cost of the articles by I kd. W hy, the
poor man, although he might save 3d. a year, vet he
would have to pay 3d. a month, in the shape Of-taxes,
to the West India proprietors. There could be no doubt

that reducing the duty on raw cotton would be useful
to the poor man, as the means of increasing his em-
ployment. In the reduction of the duty on glass, the
most important effect would be the sweeping awisy
of the restrictive system in the excise laws. He was,
however, inclined to think that the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet would have done a great deal of service to
the labouring classes of the country by diminishing
the taxes which raised the cost of the necessaries of

life. And this could not be done without increasing
their employments. He did not believe that they
could serve the cotton trade more effectually by
sweeping away the tax upon raw cotton, than
they would by sweeping away of the taxes
on tea, as that would enable the merchant

o get a return from China. He. could point
0 one or two other duties, as most material for such
an experiment. He was sure that Hon. Gentlemen
would not agree with him in saying that the wine
duties and the spirit duties liter e proper subjects for
reduction ; but every body would agree with him
that it would be well if by reducing those duties they
could largely increase our trade with France, and es-
tablish commercial relations instead of those
of rivalry and hostility.—(Cries of " Hear.") He
thought that by reducing those duties they would
do double good to the poor man, by diminishing the
cost of living, and also increasing his employment by
forwarding trade with foreign markets.--(Hear, hear.)
The Right Hon. Baronet held out the expectation
that the reduction of duties was so great, that they
would make up the income• tax. Now that
was the oddest delusion that so sensible
a gentleman could well fall into.—(Laughter.)
But the very same thing was said when the Right
Hon. Baronet brought forward the budget of 1842.
(Hear.) He (Mr. Buller) asked every person whom
he met what he thought about the reduction. He
said that the Right Hon. Baronet was the greatest
Minister they ever had (of course those to whom he
said this did not know who he was)—that be lowered
everything, but he could never get a single
person to agree with him. For what did any man gain
by the reduction, except, perhaps, in Westphalia
hams.—(Hear, hear, from a Member on the Ministe-
rial side of the House.) He was not surprised that the
Hon. Gentleman expressed his suffering at the dimi-
nished price.—(A laugh.) He fully understood his ex-
clamation.--(Laughter.) He dared say the Honour-
able Member suffered much in that article.—(ln-
creased laughter.) But though that might not be
well for those who lived in the country, it was good
for those who lived in towns. He was about to go
through the article of sugar. He would take an in-
stance of a man having 5001. a year. A person of that
income would have to pay 13/. 14s. 4d. income-tax.
That was positive, and there was no mistake about it;
and'if the same person consumed 401. worth of sugar,
taking it that he would save a penny a pound (though
he did not believe he would), he would save twenty-
five shillings ; so there was twenty-five shillings
as a set-off against 131. 14s. 4d.--(Hear, hear.) But
then there were other articles on which he might
make up the tax. There was physic.—(A laugh.)
He himself once thought he would make it up in
physic.—(Much laughter.) He supposed it was the
reduction on physic that made the Honourable
Gentleman below him (Mr. Wakley) so pleased
with the budget.—(Great laughter.) But even
in this article he believed the druggists
would save everything, and that the consumer
would gain nothing.—(Laughter.) There was
certainly a very good change with regard to furni-
ture, and if all the inhabitants of the country were
composed of new married couples of a 1,0001. a year,
they might make something in the articles
of furniture and glass. (Great laughter.)
But, after all, to think of giving up this tax put him
very much in mind of an incident in the opera of
II Nozzi di Figaro, or " The Marriage of Figaro,"
as it was called, in which the principal character said
he was ready to consent, provided there was no law
against politics, no enactment against certain prin-
ciples, and no prohibition to the full en-
joyment of the inclinations of the law.—(A
laugh.) So it was with the Right Honourable
Baronet at the head of her Majesty's G-overn-
ment.—(Laughter.) He said, " You shall have a
reduction of taxes so and so, provided you do
not ask me to take the duty off tobacco;
to take the duty off coffee ; to take the duty off
sugar"--(Laughter)—in fact, the Right Honour-
able Baronet was quite willing to make any
concession that was asked of him, provided
that he was not called upon to do that which
the people of this country were likely to be most

benefited by.—(Hear, hear.) Oh ! but then the
Right Hon. Baronet took the duty off pigs' bristles
—(A laugh)—and off lard—(A laugh)—and off all
those other twopenny-halfpenny articles—(A laugh)
—but he forgot that, in doing so, he still kept
on the most important restrictions on other articles ;
and he said very coolly to those opposed to him,
that they could not have their loaf and eat it—
(Laughter)—that they could not, in fact, deal in
butter, deal in cheese, deal in corn, and deal in every
other description of foreign previsions, without pay-
ing a certain proportion towards the two millions of
extra taxes.—(Great laughter.) But the Right
Hon. Baronet conceived that by removing the duty
upon glass, and the duty upon cotton, he would be
doing much to abolishing this cause of warfare
against the taxes, and he had hoped it would be re-
garded as a boon by the people of this country.
And what did they gain by bowing so implicitly to
the will of the Right Hon. Baronet ? What did
they gain by it ? Why, their great object was
placed further than ever from them, and, in fact, they
were playing into the hands of the monopolists.
While they talked of free-trade as their first great
object, and while they dealt out their "total and
immediate" anathemas against all those who differed
from them, they were actually playing the game
of the monopolists by voting for an income-tax which
bolstered up the differential duties. Let them look
at this one question —what was the chance of their
ever recovering this surplus ? The Chancellor of the
Exchequer seemed to take this as a matter of course.
Now he had had the pleasure of sitting in that House
with that Right Hon. Gentleman for fifteen years,
and slowly and with difficulty had the very elements
of these truths been forced on his mind. In every
budget he had seen him introduce he had heard him
urge the danger of lowering taxation for the purpose
of increasing the revenue. But when the Right Hon.
Gentleman did go into a good principle he must say
he went, with a plunge, head over heels—(Laughter)
—he was now not only lowering taxes to increase
the revenue, but altogether abolishing them—.
(Great laughter.) He did not deny that a
revenue might thus be increased, if the people
were induced, by the abolition of these duties, to con-
sume more of the articles which still paid taxation. But,
on the other hand, there was a danger of diminishing
the revenue, by the consumption of the people being
withdrawn from the tax-paying articles, by their substi-
tuting articles, that no longer paid duty, for them. Thus
the abolition of the duty on glass might induce the
people to purchase and employ glass in many cases, in-
stead of articles which would still pay duty. But he had
a still greater objection to dealing with the revenue in
this manner, because all their calcalations were based on
favourable years—years in which the Customs and Ex-
cise had been recovering, from an increase in the pros-
perity of the country. NA hen they alluded to the
failures of the Whig Chancellor of the Exchequer, and
had had their taunt and their sneer, let them then talk
of the matter like men of sense, and then would they not
see, that whatever bad been the faults of the Whig
Chancellor of the Exchequer, the great cause of
their deficiency was the three or four bad harvests.
And what was it revived their trade? The tariff or the
other measures of the Government ? Why the revenue
had not revived on the articles the tariff touched. By
the increased consumption of the people, by good har-
vests, and by a revived American trade, the country had
improved. Was the Right Hon. Gentleman prepared
for a different state of circumstances? Good harvests,
he repeated, and an uninterrupted trade, had improved
The condition of the people. But what would be the
core equence if those disasters should occur within the
next three years which had often occurred before, and
which, in the nature of things, must occur again? What
would the Right Hon. Gentleman say in 1848, when
introducing his budget, if there had been some bad har-
vests and a declining trade in the interim? Would he
recommend them to do away with the income-tax? He
would tell them what was much more likely—the Right
Hon. Baronet would come forward in 1848 with a deficit
in spite of the income-•tax—(Hear, hear)—and ask the
House to increase the income-tax or provide some other
way for meeting the deficiency.—(Hear, hear.) It was
fraudulent and delusive to tell the country that the in-
come-tax would be only continued for three years
longer. He would tell them fairly that such a state of
things could not occur. But Honourable Gentlemen
seemed disposed to place great confidence in the Right
Honourable Baronet, so much so, that in con-
sideration of the abolition of the auction duties,
the diminution of the cotton duty, and the alteration in
the sugar duties, they were willing to bear the income-
tax for three years longer. As honest and plain dealing
men, they could have no doubt but the income-tax
would be permanent, and, therefore, they ought to put
it in that shape in which it would be least oppressive.
He was not now going to mention his objections to the
income-tax in detail. He had done so on a former oc-
casion, and he now would say that his objections had
been all verified by the operation of this tax. He thought
they were fully justified in complaining of the operation
of the income-tax. It had pressed with great and un-
equal severity. It did not regard degree, but bore with
the same weight on the man of immense wealth and pa-
trimony as the man of fluctuating and uncertain income.
Besides, it gave great opportunities for fraud, and the
honest man was obliged to pay for the fraudulent eva-
sion of the dishonest one. He admitted that in London
the collection of the income-tax was not attended with
so much severity as in the country; but in some parts of
England—the north, for, instance—he daily heard loud
complaints of the conduct of the Commissioners, who, it
was said, pressed with the greatest stringency on per-
sons of obnoxious politics and rivals in trade. His
amendment did not extend to any specific alteration of
the tax. He put forward a plain practical
principle, and did not wish to embarrass and
confuse it with any unnecessary details. Every
amendment that could be proposed upon the tax,
might fellow when his amendment was carried. He
confessed that he had before shaped that amendment for
the purpose of giving an opportunity for other amend-
ments being proposed.—(Hear, hear.) That was his
object, because he believed the tax required many alter-
ations, and that this rude and primitive alteration could
not be made decently in the nineteenth century without
great care and amendment. The Right Hon. Baronet
had said that if they once began amendments, so many
would be proposed that they would not be able to get
through with them before the sth of April. What, be
would ask, was the sth of April compared with the
placing of a tax of a most oppressive nature on a proper
footing ?—(Hear, hear.) Then the Right Hon. Baronet
said, let them pass the income-tax now, just as it was,
and if they did not like it at the end of three years, then
let them amend it again. Now what he said was this,
that if at the end of three years they must
amend it, why not amend it now ?—(Hear.) Why let
the evil remain for three years longer.—(Hear, hear.)
If a person's shoe pinched him, he thought any one
would say he was a fool if he did not take it off directly,
and not let it remain for three years more. That was just
what he wanted with the income-tax. The Right Hon.
Gentleman said that if his (Mr. Buller's) motion was
carried, he would be obliged to give up a portion of the
reduction he had proposed in taxation ; in answer to
that, he had only to say that there was not any tax the
Right Hon. Gentleman proposed to remit, that operated
so heavily on the people as the present income-tax. The
Hon. Gentleman concluled by moving the amendment of
which he had given notice :—" That the circumstances
under which the renewal of the income-tax is at present
proposed, are such as to render it exceedingly impro-
bable that Parliament will have the power of dispensing
with its continuance at the eud of three years ; and that
it is therefore the duty of this House to take care that
the tax be imposed in a form in which its operation
shall he less unequal and inquisitorial than it now is."
Mr. EWART seconded the amendment, and the ques-
tion having teen put by the Speaker,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
Hon. Gentleman who had just concluded began his
speech by remarking that he had in the discussions on
the income-tax observed a degree of languor which was
unbecoming in the representatives of the people ; and as
if determined to relieve the dullness of which he com-
plained he had indulged in a series of remarks, which, if
not sound in argument, were at least entertaining to
those who had heard them. If there had been general
acquiescence in the proposals of his Right Hon. Friend
it was attributable not to argument or consideration on
the part of Hon. Members, but to a general conviction
that, in the circumstances of the case, the reimposition
of the income-tax was a measure which well deserved

minute detail as to the quantity of cotton conseteellt:a
dress, and the benefit which the p o oor man would ecss,
from the reduction of the duty, but did not the of
Gentleman see that if he pursued that course with, e 4;.
other tax he would find that the amount of belittle
Jived from its reduction by each individual °
community would be but small. Let him nurrehnl
own calculations with regard to the 2s. a pours a would
he proposed to take off tobacco, and calculate what 401
be the saving which would accrue to the poor man-„tes
the tobacco which he was compelled to c°s6o
Then, with regard to the higher orders, the 11°° ofr
tleman complained that they would derive from °lot
ductions no sufficient compensation for the inenno
which they were compelled to pay. But did the 0 to.
Gentleman think that the reduction of the duty °,eti•
bacco would give them that compensation ? to
dent that they could not by any reductions make -,',eto
the higher orders for the contribution which they fist
forced to pay to the income-tax.—(Hear, hear') did
there was one thing certain, that the income-tell/0
not operate directly upon the lower classes ; and 1,10
for the llon. Gentleman to explain whether the luso
orders did not derive benefit from a tax which VitiSrti
imposed as to nine 5,000,000 annually from the kint
of the better class of societ).—(Hear, hear.) 1"° Ott
his Right Hun. Friend had come down to Parliartio
and proposed the reduction of those two duties ou
the Hon. Gentleman seemed so highly to favour--'O.
Mr. C. BULLER had tnentionea five or six liesel.re I
had mentioned tea, coffee, sugar, tobacco, and IPA re.
and what he had meant to say was, that if they °T;ttet
duced any of these, they would have taken a
course than that which they had taken. hid sr
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER woo
derstood the Hon. Gentleman to insist particntotro
the reduction of the duty on tobacco and spirio•
he thought that if his Right Hon. Friend had Pro die
to Parliament no devote the surplus of 3,000,0004 'OOO.
reduction of the duty oh tobacco and spirits, the have
Gentleman would himself have been the first Moon
raised an outcry against such a proposition. Ilesobjelt
have told them that these were not the articles to 001(1
a reduction of duty ought to have been made. vices
have complained that they were pandering to the fort*
of the people, instead of ministering to their coll3base
and the Hon. Gentleman would, in such a case'
more reason for his complaints than he had at Piess
011
He admitted that in selecting the different articiewers
which a reduction of duty was to be made theleoefil
bound to see from which the greatest amount of moss
could be obtained. He would not deny the correc that
of the principle laid down by the Hon. Gentletuall that
they were bound to consider what reduction it Was r•
would produce the greatest amount of benefit to therein
But there were other modes of benefiting the pleo of
as effectual as withdrawing from them the he di
taxation. The Hon. Gentleman had spoken disParartbooe
of the alterations in the tariff; but if the effect octueot
alterations would be to extend the field of erePl°•lol
—to call forth new exertions—to induce the
~001
ment of fresh capital—and to give increased employ
to the industrious classes—he thought they leer.orferiee
ferring on the lower classes relief and assistance' /o the
in no degree to that which they would derive fro me'
abolition of direct taxation on articles of consen3n
,
But, as he had said before, the imposition of an '" re'
tax was pro both—did absolutely, in fact--PTO gel
lief to the lower classes of the community. AVW reeot
to the reduction of the duty on glass, be sou'. soft'
the Hon. Gentleman that, since the announceraen
reduction of the duty had been made, several persenalin
already taken steps for the purpose of investing eaiPon,
bo
the glass manufacture. When, on a former occel its ilk
had spoken of the repeal of the cotton duty l'Aecisotel
vantages, he had not confined himself to the au' cost
to the poorer classes by the diminution of the lochig
their articles of dress. If that repeal of the c°t,eti9jyttee',
did extend t:-.e cotton manufactures, it would larniono'
to the means of employment of the working %sof
and he said that they could not confer a more siLl'e
tial benefit by any other legislative measure. T alai!
Gentleman had spoken of the advantages attelnon I I/
reduction in the duties on tea. Why a eduction f
extent
nO be.l,os
article, to be beneficial, must be to the ° eeo/
millions. A less reduction than that would he; bt
to the consumer. Ho thought no one a ould o'lolo
the reduction of the sugar duties would be bee:,
the labouring classes ;and he believed it I'-teel Aro
rally admitted that it was not inc°- st
give advantages to the consumer, and Colon
same time give protection to our °w'o the Ott
The Hon. Member had said that the removal °' 'fit ;
to which he had alluded would be of great ben e reel
he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) begged tftsseo,rw"
the Hon. Member that the abrogation of those '3leon,
not necessarily involve the others. The 11°11'be CO-6,h
had said that those were new theories of his (oid'',
caller of the Exchequer's), but he begged to ll°, be OD
Hon. Member that, so long ago as the year le ° oed
dertook to repeal the duties on beer and leather" „eOO,
he was told that those remissions would not clerico.o;
for the loss sustained to the revenue by the 111,004
other articles. However, the receipts of the silo! w,ej
years showed that he had not miscalculated, sate
Deo
the repeal of those duties would not have heellirbe
with the losses anticipated.—(Hear, hear.) to Woe
Member opposite had said that his objection ook.„t
come-tax was that it should be continued beid, •°'';
period when the exigencies of the State retiaL to
_ei,jia
he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) begg:, "„g
now, as he had said before, that this 7-001°7)
never be proposed but for the purpose of boo
.4
the exigencies of the State.--(Cries of "
There was a time when the affairs of this col bet
the continent were such, that taxes could inetie
moved, and it was only when peace was resi,ni on"
oe
our manufacturers were met in every Iner'ricleh;:ti
world, that it was felt necessary to relieve t bent
its fetters. With respect to the income-taX, which 0,
assert, that the facility and cheerfulness with peC
had been paid, exceeded the most sangli,illefinfeeloes
tions of those who had imposed it. This '0 pePiison
also proved by the fact that there had been 'lO4 nee,
against the income-tax. If the Hon. and Le,e esitlelite
tleman looked through the records °if of its ton
he did not think he would find any Pre°„gati. ,re 0.0
palatableness, but he would rather see Ong on'
tiwony of the concurrence of the people tbe neo
On all occasions people were unwilling to P- ore °ri of
gatherer, and so direct taxation was always teor o ,
unpopular, but he thought it the least linr!t re
in WI
that had heen imposed. He would not agree be rrtioe.,
spect with the amendment. If the tax Inee'bo ttss't eta
delled, and the minimum of income subject re Otbe
made higher than at present, then sodrolor
be a falling off in the revenue'those otiol2
Government would not be able to make „-onse..r.,°leP
Lions in taxation on articles of genera' eto' pee'
which they had proposed. The only other
thosetos
open to them was to increase the burden eorooleeihs
sessed of greater incomes, which the GOvehod ahe'
not prepared to do. The Hon. Gentleman
oosione tin;
to assume that the income-tax would be e old er
yond three years, but to reduce its amount h, the
period would not be prudent or politic. ieet 'oe
deavoured to make the income-tax subserv•-uncle:00""
inter( sts of the poor man by reducing taxationusopet.,' fief
of those articles which came into general Cod therbt
it
sugar, cotton, &c. The House had thou:4 deg
of the measure by a majority of 238, falai ti-gthelooet`
unnecessary, therefore, to go into any 'euoiljulibiel;
fence of it. With regard to the propriety eon so/
of the selection of the articles, the taxation,
of); oorectei
Government proposed to reduce, he w0u1,%30,0 °job°
one word. If the Hon. and Learned Genti.e.,ooer'i the
to this, he taught do so in a more fitting
notice c_IA
they were brought seriatim under the L'usidereirofite
House. Upon the whole, therefore, he ter to etni'
tile Government could not have made h.e_tt the stn
ment than the present, and he should resist
-J moot
mendment of the Hon. Member for Liskeeruu.•&eft er
flottouptende
Lord HOWICK thought the Right tb
had been singularly unfortunate in his a frier) efilj
saver the speeeh of his Hon. and Learnesel
sn'l",bo
Member f, ,r Liskeard, particularly in tild use d'-
which his Hon. and Learned Friend 11,.1000
ensile
the proposed mode of dealing with the °tier, on; ti
country. It must have been obvious torroulgirino jar
the Chancellor of the Exchequer had is
speeth avoided entering into details and 0., of 1,11
entertitse'a doll one
of in the hopes he professed to
creased financial prosperity, and the Um riuS, of res:
the income-tax. He spoke in general, ter $
uaree6oo4..
that when one tax was taken off anotnbet jjon•hiebilo,
venue generally increased, and the Rig ant Po
man illustrated this position by an argconcuisiv °
(Lord Ilowick) thought peculiarly linjog tbeftireK
adverted to the year 1830, when, bY taita, The.'tfer,.
beer, the revenue on malt greatly increasennirely
stances now and then were, he thought, c eneT,
By removing the tax on beer it was ioeretse ee
suppose the consumption of it would ;floe from,
~
consequently, the malt tax would increas°..`oooriog,ool";
portion. Again, the country was then tee bad not"
state of great depression—there had tonruse un.f°_!oo3T,
and immense distress, which led to tin` pre`,`,. Au;
disturbances that had occurred a short ni;yosts /t!
Following that year were several gen °:":„nreillifelfrotte!
cession, and trade and commerce_ had
a_l7sts, ores'
present they bad had several good 11ry`„tareo.„40 °:
peace, and a revival in trade and_rneenn_rurot c
meal
change for the worse might, in the they t.°
could Se sinr
things, be anticipated. But how
such a chang.e ? He knew not ; nor 000. ,he
Rignb to
consolation in the budget of the
hi supP°4 •ci 0°
b ii~d
He must, however, decline giving work
tion of his Hon. and Learned Frieno
let eoePitt'
wer. he 5,,
roper
ye
the income-tax any better than that A. the _
Gentleman ; but he thought the financese df_wp el
could not afford its abolition or r
cTroK.
come tax were abolished, some newte^_rosoobto
posed ; andlnhe could not see, under nAti 0
stances, how a tax less oppressive :yeti 0)0_0
00;
iD
He admitted that the tax Pr "rinundeP„onlco,
were but be Ftoid
or cis" le"
equally, and that there
fica n Oil tee
stancesperceive
oof hardshipo
w a oal systemde under itsof operation;ra oci it
could- bea% °(:Jeti
tion as regarded incomes and salariesandof the joie op
without excluding from the orertat
who ought to be subjected to.. le,incoruijeten:i:eheirellte:f
who ought to be exempted. The
on the of inn
stances, and no degree of e.nownt degree might deem disposable varied eticecdogreding ne 0°0;4
those emp:oyed by the Governroe
ardifficaltol„ koe,
—could enable them to overcome that
Each %?cletios
the parties could do this themselve. cal
,1` of
what he could afford. If they founded 0,0004,0
upon expenditure and not upon n woulel.
arrive at the object of this tax, they but eifile4 *lwo
what an individual could fairly expend, in design
to tax income and property would epees ditea,
would be found to be equally andunjust. _etr ege
a well-considered system of taxation u:.',.aving,
in view et LI _of
would meet the object they hadfor tiliPure, 'ot
dif
regulated tax; each man would jaug`_xuene►oo Ass
bo
he could afford to spend, and on that toceloat'ito
large or small, the State would require
the cored his fair proportion to the exigencies 0. r
cored,. #.OO 0
the real theory of taxation, and he °P_-_odo of `job
Hon. Gentleman in saying that this werogicfi
ought to be confined to cases of great 0412

the approbation of the House. The question had been
fully debated on former occasions, and the ma-
jority in its favour was larger than that
which usually attended Government measures. But
if the income-tax were calculated to rouse the feelings
of those who took an interest in the subject, how was
it that the lion. Gentk man had withheld his own disap-
probation until so late a period ?—(Hear, hear.) Why
had he waited until the Bill had gone through the
House ? He now came forward with a general resolu-
tion, with a view of drawing within his net those who
were weak enough to suppose that agreement in a ge-
neral resolution would be followed by disagreement with
respect to details.—(Hear, hear.) He (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) did not claim for the property-tax
what no tax ever possessed, the advantage of pressing
equally upon all classes of persons ; but he contended
that the Hon. Gentleman was bound to state what taxes
he proposed to reduce, and how he meant to provide for
the exigencies of the public service.—(Hear, bear.)
There was one admission in the Hon. Gentleman's speech
to which he could not help adverting. He said he could
not go the length of those who preferred generally
direct to indirect taxation.—Hear, hear.) It was not
proposed in this instance to substitute direct for in-
direct taxation, but it was proposed, for a limited period
to substitute direct taxation for indirect, in a system of
which indirect formed the greatest part. The Hon.
Gentleman had admitted, that were be placed in the
situation of the Government, he would retain the income-
tax, for the sake of the advantages which might be de-
rived from it. That being the case, instead of propos-
ing a resolution that the income• tax ought to be aban-
doned, he should have proposed one substituting-other
articles for those upon which the Government proposed
a reduction. He had gone through a list of the articles
to which he should have given a preference. He had
mentioned tea, tobacco, malt, soap, spirits, and wine,
the duties upon which amounted to sixteen or seventeen
millions. He stated distinctly that economical principles
should have led them to appropriate to the reduction of
the duties on tobacco and spirits these three millions of sur-
plus ; setting those articles against sugar, cotton, and glass.
He understood the Hon. Gentleman to say that he had
no objection to the reduction of the duty on glass, but
that he objected to the repeal of the duties on the other
articles. The Hon. Gentleman had pressed for the re:

peal of the duty on tobacco and on spirits as a measure
more in accordance with the general interest of the
community and one from which the poor man would derive
reater benefit. The lion. Gentleman went into a

141/4\

Pk•'"'

weex"