The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-30 00:00:00

PROPERTY-TAX,

Mr. .1. FIELDEN wished to call the attention of the House
to the treatment which he and others had received under the
Property-tax Act. The firm to which he belonged had been
assessed at too great an amount. They had made application
to the Commissioners, and, after a great deal of trouble, they
at last agreed to revise the assessment, and it was reduced from
24,000/. to 12,000/. This, however, was not a just assess-
ment, for it was notorious that the trade had not been in a
flourishing condition ; and he was willing to produce the books
of the firm, and to certify to their correctness on oath, to show
that the profits of the business were not sufficient to warrant
the assessment he had allot ed to. He had tried almost
every practicable meatis to get redress without success—as a
hat resource lie brought the matter before the House. It ap-
peared to him that the Commissioners acted in direct opposition
to the common law maxim, that every wrong had its remedy.
The Board could assess at whatever amount they pleased, and
this amount must be paid without the possibility of an appeal,
except to the Board itself. He had sworn that the amount at
which he had been assessed was unjust, and, in consequence, he
was now threatened with a process to be levied on his goods.
The Hon. Member then moved for the returns of the Property-
tax Act, together with all correspondence on the subject.
Mr. WILLIAMS complained that the assessment was
unduly and unfairly levied, and lie was glad that his Hon.
Friend (Mr. Fielder]) had brought forward the motion, and
that he was in a position, without any discredit to himself or
the powerful firm to which he belonged, to do that which hun-
dreds and thousands of others dare hot attempt, lest their most
material interests should suffer by exposing an injustice which,
nevertheless, deeply affected them.
On the motion being put by the SPEAKER,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that he
wished to make a few observations, and, in the first place,
to state that, from his experience, he was satisfied that there
was none of that indisposition to complain which the Hon.
Gentleman had stated, nor did he believe that there was that
degree of injustice which was alleged against it. The mode of
operation of the income-tax was this :—The Commissioners
levied what, from the return made to them by the individuals in
question, appeared to them to be just. Should the individuals
feel oppressed by the amount charged upon them, they might
appeal either to the General Commissioners or to the Special
Commissioners appointed for the purpose, and with whom
every secresy respecting the private transactions of individuals
was safe. Now, the Hon. Gentleman complained that under
the final court of appeal his goods had been levied upon. Such,
doubtless, had been the case, but it should be remembered that
it was the absolute and defined duty of the Court of Exchequer
to act upon the results which had been placed before them. In
their public capacity they had no alternative, and were bound
to follow out the rules laid down for their conduct. He was
aware that it was a very delicate matter to inquire into the
profits resulting from trade. It should be remembered that the
very fact of trade being carried on was a prima facie evidence
that profits were obtained. He was the last man in
the world to throw anything like discredit on the representa-
tions or veracity of the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Fielden); but
he could not help thinking that this unpleasantry had arisen in
consequence of the refusal of the firm to give such explanations
as the court of appeal had required. The main cause, no doubt,
was the different way in which the stock had been valued.
This resulted, so far as he could understand from extensive
inquiries, from a large stock of cotton which had been pur-
chased some years before being valued at a loss. Had that cot.
ton been valued at the end of 1841, instead of 1642, a very
different figure would have been put upon it. If, there-
fore, gentlemen appointed to make this investigation saw before
them the far ;that the stock, which bore a large intrinsic value,
had been put at a very low rate, he did nut see how they could
do otherwise than decide against the party making the appeal,
and he really thought that if the Hon. Gentleman had shown
a little less of that British feeling which resists with more than
usual pertinacity the inquiry into his private affairs, none of
this would have occurred.
Mr. J. FIELDEN said, that so far from having refused to
give explanation, he had given every explanation, and had even
offered his books for investigation. But, on the imposition of
the tax the second year, he had applied to the Government Com-
missioner, and then it was that, for the first time, he harried
that he had been returned into the Exchequer, and that the
sheriff would levy on his goods. The other five local Commis-
sioners were all in the same business as himself, and all of whom
well knew what the circumstancess of that business were,
had been parties to this levy, and he had obtained no relief.
Mr. HAWES said that he thought this a fair case for In-
quiry. He had always opposed this tax ; and here was an in-
stance of the flagrant unfairness of the Act under which
this levy was made. The Hon. Gentleman bad gone before the
Commissioners and made his appeal, and what was the result?
Why, without any reason whatever, without any further
information, although the Hon. Gentleman had offered his
books for investigation, they had voluntarily, witi‘out any