The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-22 00:00:00

THE-riStTN, LONDON, TUESDAY MORNING, MARCH 22, 1842

or vexatious opposition ; but he did think that, as a question
of the greatest importance that could be discussed in the House of
Commons, time should be given to the 'House to determine
upon its merits, before it was brought before before the con.
sideration of the House, and to give an opportunity to their con-
stituents—for that was the greatest importance of petitioning the
House on the subject—and he thought they aught to take their
stand according to the forms of the House, so that they could pre-
vent the carrying of this vote, to give the country an opportunity
to judge of these propo.itions.
Sir ROBERT PEEL was surprised to hear the charge brought
against him by Hon. Gentlemen on the opposite
.side of the House
for acting uncourteously—it was difficult for him to know how to
act—sometimes lie was charged with speaking too much, and some-
times he was charged with want of courtesy for not speaking at all.
He had spoken for three hours and a half the other night, and en-
deavoured to develope the plan of her Majesty's Government as
well as he could. Objections were made, and ably made,
by the Right Hon. Gentleman the late Chancellor of the Exchequer ;
objections were also made by several other Hon. Gentlemen on the
opposite side of the House, but he must own, as far as he was con-
cerned, he had entirely exhausted all he had to say upon the ge-
neral question and the development of the plan.—(Hear, hear.)
He really thought that it was more consistent with true courtesy and
respect, under such circumstances, to ma;ntain silence (meaning at
the same time no personal discourtesy) rather than make a speech
for an hour and a half or two hours, repeating what he had already
said.—(Cheers and laughter.) The Hon. Gentleman said he (Sir
Robert Peel) bad not vindicated the machinery of the measure—he
had only explained the general machinery, and he embraced those
principles in the resolutions he submitted to the House. However,
he had strong reasons now to believe that what the country wished
to see was, that the measure might be reduced to a tangible form.
It was impossible for him, at any rate, to vindicate the machinery
till it was put in a proper train. He hoped, however, that the
country would recollect that the question upon which the House
had just divided was put soon after half.past eleven o'clock,
when there was no disposition on that side of the
House to speak further upon the question. His Right
Hon. Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and himself (Sir
Robert Peel) had exhausted what they had to say. Other Gen-
tlemen had manifested no disposition to rise ;—the people of the
country were watching their proceedings in that House with in.
tense interest, and there should be no unnecessary delay.—(Hear,
hear.) He could only say, that at half.past seven o'clock this
evening he counted the Members on that (the Opposition) side of
the House, and then there were only 23 Members on them—(Beer,
hear)—and he should also say there were not many mote upon his
side of the House.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.)
Sir GEORGE GREY said it appeared a remarkable coincidence
that the Right Hon. Baronet should have taken the trouble to
count the House when there were so few Members on bath
sides.—(Laughter.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that after what had fallen
from the Right Hon. Baronet, he should say that so long as it ap-
peared there were representatives of constituencies anxious to ad.
dress the House, he (Lord John Russell) would not join
in putting an end to the discussion ; but when the Honourable
Gentlemen proposed an adjournment at half-past eleven o'clock,
at a time when the debate could have gone on conveniently, he
(Lord .1. Russell) felt it his duty to oppose it. He thought there
had not been enough said upon the subjedt yet. The purpose and
object of going into a Committee of the whole House was to con-
skier the matter for discussion more maturely. It was only when
they began with the ordinary forms of a Bill—when they were
about to impose burdens open the people—that the Howse of Com.
mons resolved itself into a Committee of the whole House, in order
that it should have an opportunity to deliberate seriously upon the
question, and ascertain the opinions of their constituencies. For
that reason he should feel it his duty to take the sense of the
House upon those preliminary points; therefore, without any in-
tention of giving unnecessary delay, whenever a question was put,
Other with the Chairman (Mr. Greene), or the Speaker in the
Chair, when he (Lord J Russell) was called on to pronounce " Aye"
or " No," to the proposition, he should feel himself fully at liberty
to take the sense of the House upon the question.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. BROTHERTON said the motion of the Hon. Member (Mr.
Blewitt) was made without any consultation with the Meinhers
upon that side of the House.
Lord WORSLEY disavowed any intention to give a factious
or unnecessary opposition to the Ministerial mea%tire, but bethought
it was due to the constituencies of the country to give them moretime

to consider the question. He thought he should not be considered
guilty of factious opposition if he expressed his opinion that the

Government should consent to put off the measure till after Easter_
so that the country might have time to examine it thoroughly, and
form a judgment upon it. He could assure the House that this
was a subject of great importance to the agricultural districts, and
he hoped her Majesty's Government would consent to adjourn the
consideration of it till some future period.—(Divide.)
Mr. BLEWITT said the Hon. Member for Salford had aecused

him of bringing forward a measure without the concert of his
party; he begged to say that he stood there as an independent
Member of Parliament—(Oh, oh. and ironical cheers from the
Ministerial benches) -and every motion which he brought forward
was without reference to one party or the other —( Divide, divide.)
Mr. DUNCOMBE said he thought the Right Hon. Baronet at
the head of her Majesty's Government would save himself and the
country a good deal of trouble if he would at once adjourn. As
for the word "factious" as it had been applied, he (Mr. Du ncombe)
(lid not know what it meant, but in every case, when they op.
posed her Majesty's Government, they were called factious.—
(Hear, hear.) He highly deprecated the precipitancy of the Go-
vernment, and the country considered it most indecent. He had
been called on by his constituents to endeavour to defeat this mea.
bure by every constitutional means, and such he was sure was the
desire of many other constituencies, and this would be manifested
after Easter, as soon as the people understood the matter.—(" No,
no ") He was sure that the more the question was understood,

tile more it would be opposed. It was for this reason that her
Majesty's Government wished to press this measure through the
House ; and so long as an adjournment was moved, he should vote
in favour of it,
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, atsd the Committee
dig Wed, when there appeared—
For the motion 9l
Against it 241
Majority against the motion — 150
On the gallery being re-opened,
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE was on his legs. He said that the number
for the adjournment on the ft rmer division was 51, on this division
it was 01 ; the number had, therefme, consequently increased, and
he hoped that the Right Hon. Baronet would now consent to give
the House and the country the time they required ; they required it
that themeasure might be fully discussed. There were four or five
Gentlemen near him who were anxious to address the Committee
on this resolution, but he did not ask for the delay on that account;
it was that the subject might receive a full deliberation.
If the country then should be in favour of the principle
of an, income tax, it would give its consent to it, with its
eyes open— (Hear, hear)—if not, the people would have at least an
opportunity of making up their minds on the question. He would
say again that Hon. Gentlemen opposite would make a great mistake
if they should ask the House to agree to this resolution this evening.
He thereforebeggecl leave to move that the Chairman do report
progress and ask leave to sit again.—(Cries of" Divide, divide.")
Sir R. PEEL said—l will not voluntarily be a party to the post,.
ponement of this resolution—(Hear, hear;—any longer.—( Cheers.)
I may not be able to resist the obstructions which may be thrown
in the way of the Mimic, but I will not voluntarily be a party to
a postponement of the resolution, because I think the House is in
a position to pronounce an opinion upon this preliminary step. If
the sense of the country should be against the measure proposed,
that settee may be effectually manifested against it in future stages
of the measure. The Noble Lotd opposite has given notice of his
intention to take the sense of the House on several stages of the
Bill— on the first, second, and third readings. The first of these
stages cannot possibly be proceeded with till after Easter, and the
Bill itself cannot be produced till after this preliminary resolution is
agreed
,to. I confidently believe that the sense of the country
will be in favour of the Bill.—(Cheers.) There may be some
difficulty attending the proposition of the resolution and the
passing the Bill, but I believe that the country will be willing to
bear those burdens which I believe are necessary to the mainte.
Lanee of public credit and the national honour. I have a confident
trust, also, that the proceedings of this night will not disincline
them to that feeling.—(Cheers.) I place full reliance on the sense
of the country, and I believe 1 do not mistake it, when I say that
I think it will deprecate the course now taken. It is my inten-
tion, therefore, if I am prevented from proceeding now with this
resolution, to fix the very earliest day which I can fix, which is
the first day of Supply, Wednesday next, when I shall he in my
place ready to discharge what I think my duty to the country, in
proposing to the House the further discussion of this measure.
I am desirous as soon as possible to make known to the country
what are the exemptions, what are the nature of the regulations'
and what the machinery for collecting the tax. I cannot have an
opportunity of doing this until the House has assented to the third
resolution, and, I believe, it is fitting that this resolution should be
discussed at a time of the session when there is a certainty of a full
attendance. Therefore, lam anxious to proceed with the preli.
minary stage now. But, from long experience in public affhirs, I
know what will be the result of contests of this kind. I voted with
the utmost pleasure with the first majority when the motion was
merely to put eff the present proceeding. The second was on the
substantive point, whether or not the resolution was sufficiently 04.
cussed, and whether the House was content that the proccedlWg
should go on now. On the first division, the Members of the late
Government voted with the majority, on the last they retired from
the House.—(Hear, hear.) Ido not complain of their retirement,
for, I take it as an indication that, in the opinion of the late Ad.
ministration, we were perfectly justified in the vote and as far as
the subject had passed competent to take the sense of the Howse.—
(Loud cheers) But knowing the result of contests of this
kind when persevered in, I will beg of my Hon. Friend
not to press his motion, the sense of the House has
been already manifested, and I am sure that if we show a little
patience we ?hall reap our reward.—(Cheers.) Therefore I will,
not oppose the motion of the Hon. Gentleman, although I protest
against it; but I shall at a subsequent period of the evening move
that these proceedings be resumed at the earliest possible period,
that is, Wednesday next.—(Cheers.)
Mr. FOX MAULE said that the flight Hon. Baronet observed
with a sort of self-sufficient complacency, that the opinion of the
country was on his side. What grounds had he for saying so ?
Did he see the opinions of the newspapers, which were the exposi-
tors of the opinions of the country ?—(Henr, hear.) For his part,
so far as he could collect public opinion he (Mr. Fox Maule) knew
it was decidedly against the Right Hon. Baronet.—(Hear, hear, and
great interruption, which was renewed amidst laughter and cries of
Question," at every new attempt the Right Hon. Gentleman made
to speak.) He would content himself with saying that he did not
fear to meet the Right Hon. Baronet on the area of public opinion.
Sir T. ACLAND said that it appeared from the speech of
the Right Hon. Gentleman that the object of these motions was
delay and not discussion. The Hon. Gentlemen opposite wished
for delay without discussion, in order to give their friends out of
doors the advantage of determining on the measure before they
knew its details.—(Ministerial cheers.) He had divided with the
majority on the last divisions, believing, that by so doing, he
was showing to the country the nature of the opposition
which had sprung up within the last few days. It was
his (Sir Thomas Acland's) wish that the measure should
go before the public for their decision in a complete state. It
could not do so unless the resolution was passed before the recess.
He hoped this kind of warfare with which old Members were
but too familiar would not be continued, but as Hott. Members
opposite could not exercise their invaluable privileges of obstruct-
ing public measures without paying for it the penalty they had to pay
for it this night was the waste of an hour and a half of public time.
Mr. C. BULLER. wished to say a few words on what had fallen
from the Right Hon. Baronet and the Hon. Gentleman who had
just sat down,. He (Mr. Buller) admitted the impropriety of the
attempt at adjourning at half-past eleven, and had voted against it.
It had appeared to him afterwards, as twelve o'clock arrived, that
it would have been in conformity with the usual coulee for the
House to adjourn.—(Cries of " Oh, oh," from the Ministerial
benches, and loud cheers from the Opposition). Why the Right
Honourable Baronet had said before that be did not wish to place
any obstruction in the way of Hon. Members who wished to ad.
dress the He:use ; and it should be recollected that they were in
Committee for discussion only one night. There was another ar-
gument which would justify him in his opposition to the attempt of
the Government to push this question forward to an immediate
vote, and that was the ground taken by the Right Hon. Baronet
that he had further revelations to make respecting the machinery.
Why it was the most preposterous thing ever known to propose an
income tax one Friday, to develope the plan of machinery another
at.d then to say that he bad further revelations to make
and unless they would give bins a further stage of the Bill, to say h,
would not make them, and would hold them (the Opposition) up to
the country as preventing him from doing so. He (51r.13.)w0u1d appea
to the country on that point, and ask who it was that withheld in.'
formation from the pcople ? He who refused to give all his in-
formation at once, or those who said they would refuse to give a
vote in the dark.—(Loud cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet
was acting contrary to the precedent of all his predecessors. He
(the Right Hon. Baronet) might have followed the precedent of
Mr. pot, who when he first proposed the income tax
had detailed all the machinery so clearly that he had no further
explanation to make.—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet had
not been able to make it out at twelve deliveries. It was hard to
call on the House to vote without this explanation.—(Cheers.)

Sir R. PEEL said he had not said he had any further revelation
to make, The charge was that he had not vindicated his machinery,
and he protested against being called upon to vindicate it without
the Bill being before the House. There were fifty or sixty clauses
relating to the machinery, and it would be preposterous to enter
into details in a speech. He had stated fully quite sufficient for
every and any purpose, what the machinery of the Bill wa,, and
respecting the details, no speech could give half such satisfactory
information regarding them as the reading the Bill itself. If he
were to begin now a speech explanatory of those details, it would
be a much more effectual method of thinning the House than any
other that could be adopted.—(Laughter.)
The CHAIRMAN then put the question, that he do report
progress, which was agreed to, and the House resumed.

the backs of the middle-class constituency. This is
as it should be. Peel would deserve thanks for the
direction he has given the pressure, if he had had any
choice. But choice he had none. The back of the
cart-horse was broken by former loads, the high-
mettled hunter would bear no burden, and since more
must be carried somehow, there wa* nothing for it
but, to snake a hack of the sleek old coach horse.
Surely we shall see some kicking now, if the beast has
any spirit."

(From the Glasgow Post.)
" Much is said, and by the Liberal pressiin particu-
lar, against the income tax. A direct levy on the
scarcely definable precarious profits of the man in
business, who scarcely knows what is his own. We
are quite aware of the evils of such a tax. We are
aware of its disgusting, scrutinizing, inquisitorial
nature. We are aware how much it can be evaded,
and that for one man who will conscientiously pay his
just proportion, twenty will cheat the Government.
We are also aware how injurious it must be; nay, the
utter ruin that must follow persons with a declining
business. If they proclaim such a thing to the tax
gatherer, they are at once overset—they are down for
life—and, therefore, hundreds struggling with un-
known poverty will have to defraud themselves to save
appearances. This is most undoubtedly an obnoxious
system, but the more obnoxious the better. All taxes
are obnoxious—the fewer taxes the more prosperous
will be the people ; therefore, whatever taxes we have,
let them be as obnoxious as possible, we say; and that
the more particularly when they are made to fall with
double force on those who have the means put into
their hands for abolishing or reducing them."

THE INCOME TAX.
EXTRACTS FROM THE TIMES, 1816.
"It was with great grief that we heard of the intention to
continue the income tax during a time of peace, and our dis-
like to the proposition was
.rather increased than abated by the
intimation that it was to be reduced to five per cent. The
notion may, perhaps, seem paradoxical, but it is, nevertheless,
true, that an impost so odious in its principle is only tolerable
because it is seve.e in its application. We shall explain our
meaning more fully. In times of great danger, such as we have
lately encountered, taxation may be allowed to assume a more
rigoraus aspect, because the mischiefs to be provided against
are more alarming, and the preparations for defence, and the
funds necessary for the support of them, must be upon an
equally extensive scale. But the evil in that case reme-
dies itself, or rather it points out its own limits
and duration. It ceases, or ought to ceaFe, with the threatened
danger which produeed it. No one, for example, would object
to part with 10 or even 20 per cent. of his annual income to
preserve his country from the tyranny of a Bonaparte, during
the existence of that tyrant, provided the danger was clear
and the impost could he impartially levied. We put in these
conditions iii order to account for the opposition raised against
the income tax, even when it was most allowable to have re.
course to so harassing a financial measure. , But now, when
Bonaparte is no longer formidable, and France ceases to hold a
threatening attitude, what can justify this deviation from the
ordinary rules of taxation—this inroad upon the rights of Eng-
lishmen ? • • • * • • * • * There is nothing
that men in a state of society hold sacred pinto which it
does not obtrude itself, or thrust its odious agents. It pries
into the marriage settlements and claims of consanguinity
among the living; it ransacks the wills of the dead; it hunts
deeds and bonds in the deepest recesses of the bureau, and
drags them to light. Rushing into the counting-house, it
spreads wide the ledger, and thereby blasts commercial con-
fidence, and chills mercantile speculation. It stands at the door
of the shopkeeper and counts his customers ; it mounts the
chariot of the physician, and numbers his fees. It adjusts the
claim between debtor and creditor, whue relation to each
other should only be known to themselves. It com-
putes the feelings of filial piety, of gratitude and hu-
manity, by items of pounds, shillings, and pence; for
it estimates the support allowed to decrepit old age,
to decayed services, perhaps to penitent or discarded guilt.
In short, if any man would know whether the income tax ought
t.s apply in this or that imaginary case, let him be assured that
if its application can render his home comfortless, or his closet
suspected to him, there will the myrmidons of income tax have
a right to be. Nor is this the termination of the mischief, for
like every other tyrannical measure, its manifold oppressions
have the effect of driving those who are the objects of it to a
corresponding degree of baseness, falsehood, treachery, and per-
jury, in order to elude its grasp.
" And all tnis misery and corruption is now to be fastened
upon the country for ever, and for what? Not, as before, for
s:, important a gain as 10 per cent., and in order to preserve
the independence of the nation ; but for so small a result as
even half 10 per cent. ; so much have our comforts and our
virtues sunk in value, and at a time, too, when we have nothing
to dread from foreign enemies, nor from any thing but our
own want of economy at home.
" Clear, therefOre, if is that an income tax now of 5 per
cent. is much more unjustifiable than one of 10, or even 50 per
cent. under farmer circumstances. A man, perhaps, might
not object th the admission of a whole company of soldiers into
his house, while a foreign enemy or a gang of marauders were
in the neighbourhood ; but is that a reason why the Com-
mander-in Chief of his Majesty's forces should billet a file of
musketeers upon him all the rest of his life ? Be well aware
then, countrymen, that if you do not at once state your feelings
now that the foreign enemy is no longer at your doors, you will
have the file of musketeers in your homes as long as you are
housekeepers ; that is, you will have the 5 per cent. income
tax saddled upon you henceforth and for ever.
"We know very well when the country has once shown
itself alhe, as it soon will do, upon this aggravating topic,
that then attempts will be made to soothe it by promises that
even the 5 per cent. shall only be a temporary impost. And
this brings us retrospectively to a painful subject indeed,
namely, the violation of the solemn engagements already en-
tered into with the country, that the tax in question should be
who:ly and finally abolished at the end of the war. No future
promises can now weigh much, if those which have been
already made are to be so grossly violated. No pledge
can equal in sacredness those which have been already
given, because they were given while the faith of Go-
vernment - its this respect was yet unbroken, its honour
untainted. What claim to future credit have those
who are already bankrupt in fidelity to their past
engagement ? It is the curse of this tax to produce
treachery on all sides—on those who would impose, and on
those who would elude it. No income tax will always be
wanted on the one hand, while it is conceded on the other ; re-
fuse it manfully, and it will soon be found that there is no oc-
casion for it; and Ministers, however pained at first, will ulti-
mately, as Englishmen, have cause to thank the country for its
firmness. At all events, we have long been pledged to resist
it in every shape and form which it rnay assume, and shall not
be found wanting to our engagement."—The Times, Feb. 6,
1816.

" We are glad to perceive anything said, even in behalf of
the British inquisition, the income tax, both because whatso-
ever is said in support of so odious a process can only serve to
betray the cause it would maintain by the weakness of the de-
fence, and because we are sure that injustice and oppression
succeed best in obscurity, andare overthrown by free discussion.
" An evening paper, in the shape of queries, deduces the
following inference : That a case of necessity being made out
by the King's Ministers, the tax in question is one to which
they may legally have recourse. This savours a little, by the
way, of the opinions held by the unjust judges in Charles I.'s
reign, that the King might have recourse to ship-money, in a
case of necessity ; and that his Majesty—that is, his Ministers
—are the judges of that necessity. The truth is, that no one
doubts the logic by which the necessity may be urged ; but
common sense and common reason declare, at first sight, that
it is all false.

'I here can honestly be no want of the money ; for if in
p. ace, and after victory, we are to be subjected to the inquisition-
tax, to what unheard-of tortures must we ,have submitted in
the case of defeat, or the continuance of war? France,
the conquered country, hag, even at present, no impost
more odiously scrutinizing or oppressive. But, to put the
matter differently ; this tax has been called a war-tax, and
we have been promised that with the war it should cease.
What state of affairs, then, we demand, did they who made us
these promises suppose would justify the extinction of the tax
at the end of the war, if the present will not? Let them tell
us how it is that the present condition'of Europe is not so satis-
factory as they expected it would be when they made us the
promises; or else let them confess that they meant to deceive
us, and never intended to relinquish the tax at all. It is most
obvious that no possible good can result from its continuance in
any shape whatever, because there is no possible good which,
as a nation, we have not obtained. The farmers are said to be
distressed ; but that is not now the matter in dispute ; the pro-
duce of the tax is not to be applied to their relief. In our
foreign relations what do we want ? Absolutely nothing. And
what in our internal concerns? Nothing but the immediate
removal of those burdens, of which only the magnitude of the
danger from abroad, now past, could justify the imposition.
However, our purpose is in a great measure answered; for we
see and hear that the nation is ready to rise as one man against
this breach_ of faith which it is now attempted to put in prac-
tice: That which is wrung from its necessities can only be ap-
plied to its ruin."—The Times, Feb. 8, 1816.