The Sun.
London, England, 1842-05-03 00:00:00

-1

of
w

in.
Is
of

e

J
~~~
t.:

•
satisfriAToii, bv -the eountrv, and one which would be
tezel•-• ee, mece
ree-iciples of iejestice. if i preperteetax was imposed,
based on equity, there would be no difficulty in its col-
lectien, and all inquisitorial powers of the tax might be
laid---aside. It was most important that this tax should
be as palatable as possible, and the Only way to make it
so was toiriake it a tax upon real property. He thought
his iiiiendifient would have the effect of making the tax
palatable; Mid he hoped it would meet-with the sanction,
of the House. '
The amendment having been put from the Chair, -
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
it would be far more difficult to raise the duty on the
principle contained in the amendment of the, Hon.
Member, than the onelaid down as the rule.
Rare 4" a-a,s agreed to: -
Rule 5, relative to particular deductions from
Schedule A, was also agreed to..
On Rule 6 being put, relative, to allowances to be
made'inrespect of "the duties In Schedule A." '
Mr. G. W. WOOD said that he' thought it unfair that
Mechanics' Ifistitutiona and other places for the educa-
tion of the middle and lower classes should be taxed,
while the Colleges and Halls of the Universities, which
were for the education of the aristocracy, were to* ex-
ernited.—(Hear, hear.)
Tlie CHANCELLOR of the. EXCHEQUER did not
think the places adverted to by the Hon. Member could
in a- strict sense be considered as devoted to the purposes
of education.
Mr. GILL thought if any class of schools were to
be ekempted, the exemption ought to be extended to all.
After a few words from the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER, •
Mr. LABOUCHERE said, the question was one of
importance, but if the large Universities were exempted
from the tax, he thought it would be but justice to the
humbler schools that they should likewise be exempted.
—(Heir, hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the CXCHEQUER said, the
exemptions in the present Bill were limited in the same
negtee as the assessed taxes.
Mr. G. W. WOOD said, that as the poorer schools
were not aided by powerful funds like the Universities,
he thought they ought not be subjected to the tax.
Mr- S. O'BRIEN regretted the absence of the Right
'On. Baronet, at the head of her Majesty's Government,
~_' ;Ills occasion. And, as the subject was one of much
unportauce he hoped it would be postponed. He felt so
strongly on the subject, that if any one would support
h„ein'• he should divide the House on the question of the
rytPonment of the Rule. •
Jr. ESCOTT reminded the House that in many of
—"e public schools the children of the'poorer classes
reed a gratuitous education.
Ma la HOWARD said that there should be no ex-
emption except in favour of almshouses and hospitals,
'andd. `lie would take the sense of the House upon the
(question.
Mr. F. MAULE asked whether Harrow, Christ's
hospital, and other schools of Royal foundation were
included ? = •
ThO CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was not
prepared -to answer the question definitively, but he
would; take the earliest_ opportunity of informing the
Huai:
Mi;iIIUME wished,, hefore the question was put, to
brin_ithe attention of the House to the great number of
oattWieqeired to be- taken under this Bill, when for the
last or
ten "twelve years so'much had been done to reduce
the.freq y
uenc of oaths.
The Rule was then agreed to.
Clauses 61 and 62 were then agreed to.
Rules No. 7 and 8 were next agreed to.
After a short discussion, Rules 9 and 10 were agreed
to, without alteration.' -
Clause 63 was also passed without discussion, as. were
daises 64, 65. 66, 67, 68, and '69.
Clauses 70, 71, 72; 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, and
81, were ordered to stand part of the Rill.
On clause 82 tieing put, which provides for the relief
to he granted to occupiers and owners, for any loss that
odiatild be sustained byellood or tempest.
Mr. HAWES moved, as an amendment in the 35th
nes to insert= afterlhe' words "Ibr any year," the fols
loletietemeds, 00 or any property Which shall be liable to
easseastnent' under • thin -Act." That would have the
edfigt of hiingiUg 'any'other species of property with-
in The danse. Ile 'Could not see why one spe-
acid property 'should have this exemption,
-and - another should not. His object in moving
• this amendment was to :give the same exemp-
• tion and allowance, on account of injury done by floods
and-tempests, to other species of property which the
*clause provided for with rega.rd to landed property.
Mr. Boirruwicx objected to the amendment.
Dr.I3OWRING supported the amendment.
Mr. DARBY must, as a matter of strict justice give
`his support to the clause.
Mr.-Fe BULLER supported the amendment.
Mr. HAWES withdrew, his amendment, and the
fuse was agreed to.
After a short conversation clauses 83 to 86 were
'greed to. • • •
Upon clause 87, containing the rules for assessing
tp nd•Charging the duties on the profits arising from an-
nuities, dividends, and shares of annuities, being put,
Mr. HUME proposed an amendment, to the effect
ti iat upon all such annuities, dividends, &c., paid half-
early, the amount chargeable should be only upon so
21 Meti of them' as had accrued after the sth of April,
1842; The Hon: Member also moved that the same rule
honld
apply. to the -rents of lands.
The Committee divided, when there appeared—
' For Mr. Huriee's aMendment B4
Against it , 139
Majority against the amendment —75
OU the reading of R' pie 2,
„,' Mr. F. MAULE moved an amendment to`the effect
ta at all chapels and places of religious worship should
et exempted.
th The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER opposed
s amendment.
Ur.
er a LABOTJCHERE supported it.
• -Aftshort conversation,
The CHA.NCELLOR of the-EXCHEQUER ex-
-1 ire seed his, readiness to postpone the rule.
Mr. F. .
1-,t; had no objection to the postpone-
) tent of the rule, with the understanding that if the
overn
hould did not hereafter consent to amend it, he
meat
The ruiee the sense of the House on the subject.
B 31., was then postponed.
iIING moved the following. addition to the
asse •
ssing and charging the duties under schedule
bee sing
annuities, diiidends, and shares, bona fide
?nPng to any 'person not being' a subject' of her
,1‘ testy; and not being resident in Great Britain, or else-
tittle 701 .re within the dominions of her Majesty, during such
t:34 sas the same shall continue the property of such per-
,:and such person shall not be resident inGreatßritain,
__4!.l dsewhere within the dominions of her Majesty, as
risaid.; provided that such -annuities, dividends, or
ut res shall have been bana fide the property of such
Icl ?: *soils on the 22d day of April 1842, and shall be duly
armed and ascertained in the manner hereinafter men-
d= The Hon. Gentleman stated, that the whole
sc aount which he believed would be raised under this
hednie, 'would 'be 10,000/. a-year. "In 1836, the
6.lett was brought under disscussion, and the
ainount raised' on the charges under ten
cent., wag 50,0001. a-year, and if.they took the
r;ti sent -three per cent., and made allowance for other
fie,;!re urnstances, it would reduce the amount to 10,000/.,
t went into a description of the former occasions in
711 eh the. Income-tax bad been. imposed, and quoted:
'ot n the discussions that then took place, with regard to
..41 le foreign holder of English funds. The foreign holder
w !as exempted by Mr. Pitt on the first introduction
of
'r Income-tax ; the exemption was continued till the 41:4 lace of Amiens, when it was repealed. When the
sti was imposed by Mr': Addington, the ekeroption was
t.. made. In 1806 a farther addition was made to the
and on that- odeatieri there was in express agree-
s; t. on this' point., Mr. Fox termed the imposition of
le4e A ix on the foreign holder as a flagrant injustice, and
is opinion Lord Henry Petty, concurred. The ex -
t 94 ion was. continued down- till 1816,. when the
at ' 1
140
.1 aas repea ed. They had, therefore; the au-
t.y, fur the exemption, of Mr. Pitt on the
rst • introduction Of the tax, of Lord Henry Petty ou
rij newel, of Lord Granville, -of Mr. Percival, and
'`4o Liverpool, down to the
_last incipient of the
jla fence of the tax ; 'and' all these authorities
went : on the ground that - the -exemption was ne-
-11Ssa for the mairitenance of the- public faith.
voNLs,, themfore, well .worth. the_ -consid
the i /ouse, how far they were at liberty tochangeratione that
fit, If they differed from all these authorities, there
ewes yet another party to be considered, the -foreign
ider himself, who had advanced his money, under the
'
yPlied contract that.had arisen from the constant prac-
t.l of twenty years of war, and from the successive de-
ration of Ministers of the Crown:--(Hear. hear.)
th regard to the future foreign holder, they
i7rht change the • practice, but . with regard
those who- had invested their money on , the
sse 4'. of. these, declarations, it, would be most un-
-11.€4 Ifthey were to deal with them as if .the case were
•Y new. Having been so constantly exempted,
tier 07,fair veigner had a right to expeet that if they re-,
till) IZ' to anything' like an income-tax, they would not
41% °f committing that which Fox declared would be
461 a rt,. 9f public faith, without giving the foreigner
.the
t 65 incase
of a full notice of the intention.
1.4. 41, Must have been, extremely strong which made
fie' e.Aoe.uring twenty years of war, abstain from taxing
wrier, and why should they now do in time of
h~ aim era. was not done in time of war ?. The
s",s had a right to- suppose that they would
Llli%,eci on those principles which actuated every
fra of the CrOvin heretofore. How ex-
) e.:llfllye '7 would. it •be now, when we were on
‘tti telations with all the world, to discontinue that
1 evil e°4iie°wards foreigners, of inducing them to inveet
be PY ye, which lead been adopted towards them for
notice
''•ra of ar • rid reover not only would this
bah tilvit4l4l,)ut butt it.would be contrary .to all.
be h r'garelueetnents hitherto held out to foreigners
Ali as det.,:to investmentain our funds. He was afraid
c'w this („:4ed 'the House too long, but he could not
4°ll the 111"4tion to pasaavithOut expressing his opinion
tilher it 4tter ; but he would put it to the House
"tsea,e fee would not be much better railer to let the
ressiote-t°,.4 the side of Oath, if• he might use the ex-
:ere et," . "au to doubt and hesitate upon it, even if they.
eareee . titled to this sum. Who. were the parties con-
*he ;n nthis matter ? On the
cane side they had those
f the sre represented in that House, the. general class
1%, as sznPe7ple of England ; and on the other side there
‘;4 in 'mass altogether unrepreiented, wholly power-
cave ,uat House, and with no means of bringing their'
fe.tei_u_nder themonsideratinn of the House. Would the lundholder be the o I -
la ed some b person who had not re--
.ette enent from this Measure, and would they
eto t',l) e their hands on him, powerless as he was, for a
L. as that, Which' hel'eelieved he might state
-; not larger than 10,000/..?
;ace, I: ethlielsi`JCELLOß of the EXCHEQUER could
tutu, e tiouse, after the exhausting process of del
te the details of the Bill, that it Was not his inten-
k
e anselengthened; reply but his he must say,

that if, he thought there was any breach of . faith in the
question, he T. 101: MVO :I/ 1 1).18' (I'.;
It was only because he thought it was consistent
with-- good faith to 'make a .foreigner pay a tax
for the property he had .• in this country that
he, stood up in its defence. The obligatien
was clearly upon all. He thought the Hon. Gentleman's
motion clearly showed that he had some doubt as to the,
extent of lood faith. He. could agree with the propo-
sition that it would he an injustice to the foreign( r to
charge hirn,mere than the English fundliolder.s But as.
the foreigner derived as much protection for his property
as the Englishman, there could be no injustice in
. .
quiring him to contribute in the same proportion to its
security. , . • ,
Mr. LABOUCHERE said, this was the first time
when annancial Minister of,Great Dtitaits asserted that
there was no injustice in taxing foreigners under such
circumstances as led to this -Bill. Mr. Pitt had: no oc-
casion to . introduce into his speeches an express
declaration • that foreigners- should not be taxed,
because his Bill spoke : for itself. He could`
not fear .:the .resalts of adopting the principle
which Gentlemen opposite advocated. The Right Hon:
Gentleman opposite appeared to mistake the friets, for he
said that foreigners residing in the colonies would be as
much surprised as any others. But the case of foreigners
residing in 'this country was differeet, becansi they en-
joyed all the advantages of the British Government. Be-,
tore he sat doWn, he could not but allude to a petition that
had been presented by one of the Members for. London,
signed by some of the most respectable; houses in the
City and two of its Members. That petition stated that
it would be a violation of the national faith to impose
this tax.--s(Hear, hear.) He would only say that it was
not for the interest of this country that those novel
maxims should be introduced. Recent expeitienee, too; had
shown, that the feeling abroad was not what it (night to be.
Under these circumstances, he. Would press upon the
First Lord of the TreaSury to consider hoW far he would
consult his own honour and reputation, and the interest
of the country, in -persisting in the-coUrse which he
had ado.pted. I.
Sir ROBERT PEEL was ready to take the ad-
vice of the Right Honourable Gentleman,. and
consider maturely :whether he was *consulting
his own character, and the character or the House,
and the interests of the country generally, in proposing
to exempt the foreigner from those burdens Which were
to be imposed upon the subjects of this realms. It was
clear, that he would:i not be justified in the course he had.
adopted, if there was a departure from public faith in it.
Nothing could justify them in a violation of public faith
when so small a sum as 10,000/. or 20,0001 was only to
be gained. The Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Lisbon-
chere) and the Right .Hon. Gentleman the late Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, had relied on the former practice
of Parliament and on the dicta of Mr. Fox,who said though
they could not tax the foreigner, because they could not
grant a benevolence to her Mai esty to be paid by a foreigner.
It a foreigner was a mortgagee in this country, did he
not pay the tax on account of the interest of the mortgage?
If he held shares in Railway Companies, or in any
other mercantile firm, would he not be subject to the tax?
But because, forsooth, he held property in the funds, he
was to be exempt. So far as acts of Parliament were
concerned, the position of the foreigner was recognised
the same as than, of the British subject.. Did not every
man who chose, avail himself of the security, which the
British funds afforded wherein to vest his capital. It
was a fact, that since the Income-tax had been proposed,
the funds had risen four per cent. The foreigner
had thus had an opportunity of relieving kimse fof
property in the funds and that too at an advantage.
It was not consistent with. justice that the foreigner
should benefit by the rise in the funds in this country
which followed a national sacrifice, and should not at
the same time share in the public burdens. He could not
help thinking that the exception made by Mr. Pitt in
favour of the foreigner was grounded more upon pruden-
tial considerations than upon principles of abstract justice,
This country was at the time at war with revolutionary
France ; and Mr. Pitt might be supposed to have been
desirous Of encouraging the wish, on the part of the
'French emigrants, to invest whatever remained to them
of. their fortunes in the English funds. On' the whole,
he saw no reason why the foreigner, who benefited by
the public credit, should not share in the public burdens.
Mr. HUME said, whateVer vote the Committee might.
come to, it was right they should-understand the grounds
of it. He differed from both the Hon. Gentlemen ; no
reason had been shown why the foreigner should be
taxed ; the exemption of, property in the funds, from all
tax in transfers, as an inducement to Invest money
in the funds, this was violated in the time.; of
war, but the fundholders consented to it from the
influence of terror. If the tax were laid on the funds at
all, it ought to be laid both on the Englishman and the
foreigner alike. There was no emergency to call for the
tax '; to impose it on the funds would be a bad example
to foreign nations, and he should certainly vote against it.
Mr. J. A. SNIITH supported the motion as being in
accordance with all past experience.
Mr. MASTERMAN said, as considerable stress had
been laid upon a petition that he had presented from the
City of London, he must state that, though most re-
spectably signed, it was far from representing the
whole- proportion -of opinion in the City. He was
aware of a considerable number of parties who had re-
fused to sign it. When requested to present it, he had
accompanied his consent with a statement that he could
not support it. He did not think there was either fraud
or injustice in taxing the foreign fundholder equally
-with their fellow-subjects.
Mr. HAWES said there was a great distinction be-
tween the foreigner holding shares in a railway and
money in the funds ; in the first case he was a proprietor,
andshared the profits ; in the other he wasapublie creditor.
The foreigner was not in the light of a British subject.
He had lent 'money to the British Government on the
faith of former Acts of Parliament. He himself thought
that this would meet one argument of the :Right Hon.
Gen tfonan's:—(Divide.)
Mr. BARING replied. He said that he was of opi-
_
nion with Mr. Fo)c,, that it was a breach of public faith
to tax the foreign fundholder.—(Cries of " Divide,
divide.") The, Right Hon. Gentleman had asked him,
with regard to evidence ; why he would prove it in the
same way as it had been proved when argued under
former Ards of Parlianient, and it would be just as easy to
prove evidence is this instance as it was in the case of
the Irish-landlords resident in this country. „ •
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
Committee divided, when there appeared--
For the clause
]?or Mr. Baring's amendment 4O
Majority for the clause —l63

The ci.tuse was then agreed to the Chairman
a leaye to sit again. -
re-
ported proz."Te"'
‘ti`
satosmtastemeuntiteo: tihne.
EreßsOElutio6n4sdeff°l-.0
diff:‘eirre. tf4cAesßikelPOCell
tended to be proiNsed by Sir R.. Peel, and -laid ,on the
table of this Housel.o4 the .1 Rh of. March- last •, also re-
solutions on the same subject,' laid on the table on the
th of April -
After.a few wolvls. from Sir R. PEEL,
LABOU:CtrEltraaid, that •he thotight *hat the
Right Hon. Baron 'et "proposed 'would be sufficient, and
withdrew his motiort. . • ' -
ELECTION ,COMMITTEES.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL Moved-for ",A Select
Committee, to inquire into the practice of this Hotise
with regard to the sumnvning of witnesses. to attend
Election Commit tees, and to report whether any and
what alteratiOn in the law upon this aubjectis required :"
—Mr. Solicitor-Ctgnera.l. Lord Granlille Somerset, Mr.
,Thesiger; Mr. Wynn, Mr. Attorney-General, Viscount
Mahon, Sir Robert Peel, -Mr.. Pemberton, Sir George
Grey, Viscount ilia wick, Sir Thoinas Wilde; Mr. David
I)undas, Mr. Jervis, Lord John Russell, and Mr. Roebuck.
—Agreed to.
. Mr. GIBSON- gal -e notice that he should, move that
-the Solicitors be; exompted from the. certificate duty;
while they-were -subjt !ct .to the Income-tax.
The other orelers of the day were then disposed of, and
the House adjoi mod -at'Two o'Clock,

LLOY:O'S SHIPPING.
ADM IRALTY, MAY 1.
The Admirals at i 9evonport and Portsmouth have
been directed.-to send aay vessels under their orders,.that
are fit for dutj -, to cons 'y provisions and water to the
entrance of th e Channel, to afford relief to vessels de-
tained there and in distress owing to the continuance of
the easterly v..ind.
'EAST INDIA SHIPPING. •
Arrivals..--. Greyhound. and Rutchins'on, from China,
off Falmouth, sailed 2d 'October_; Singapore, Ist Nov ;
St. Helena, 6th Feb. , Adams, Mills, from Bengal, off
Falmouth, sailed 30th August ; Penang. 24th Oct. ;
Cape, 2d Ft Dale,Ps trk, Snell, from Bengal, off Pen-
7ance, sailer 131st Oct. „- Cape, 23d January. Paragon,
Cumming, f tom terigat, off Falmouth ; sailed 15th Nov.;
.Cape, 4th F seta. Sivalkw, Biggar, from 'Mauritius, off
Falmouth; F kled .2!jth Dec. ; Cape, 4th Feb. Achilles,
Trivett, fro h. Ceylon, off Penzance, sailed 26th Dec.;
Cape, 19th Fob. 'General Kyd, Jones, from China, off
Dartmouti,s, s 4 ilea. 234 Dec.; St. Helena, ad March..
Eliza, Le Mesu vier, front the Mauritius, off Plymouth,
sailed 22d Janus ry. Stark, Scott, from China, off Tor-
bay ;. sailed. 16th Dec. ; St. Helena, 7th March. Active.
Brooks, from the South Seas, off Torbay, sailed from
St. Helena,' 2d
%arch. Ellen,- Note, from Bengal, at
Liverpool, sailed 2. )d.December; St. Helena, sth March

.. . ..!--- ...,-
MONEY 11A...-'it. ,KET and CITY NEWS.
SUN.—There is - 'o6.a feature to notice in the mercan-
tile affairs of the C ity yiziterday ; the Bank 'and Sttiek-
Exchange being cl,-•• )sed, and, business in the 'Colonial
markets not comae acing until to-day.
The private letter s. by-the last
.arrival fr,:n America
are of a more encau rig description than thoie by the
steamers. It woul( laps pear that a far healthier state of
business is gradual ly a, pproaching, and that the neces-
sity of adopting s, kyle nj easure for the restoration of
,iversal.'y
na-
tional credit is ur admitted. The general feel-
ing appeared _to ' toe that 4'. comprehensive method should
be taken,
'he. teby not only the deficiency now
existing shoulC ! be icet, but .that .it ought to be
such as should]
.cave an nmount sufficient to meet future
claims, and pr( ~ode a. neotingent fund. The cc 1164 of
the States ori iudigna, Illinois. and
,Mississippi, al-
though serio aspy ir,i, ring their creditors, had worked
some gener a
givod, 131 1 croating a jealousy on the part of
the other, and o f the United States, . that they, and the
Federal c.;overni nent, should not be supposed to partici-
pate in Similar m )tions ; hence the -necessity for direct
taxation was admitted; and the loan system denounced
as being bad in pi inCii .le. Business was lyztter, and the
Bank discounted ;bills drawn .for legitimate purposes
more freely ; but thane letters, generally-, discourage the
idea of consig,nni
tints .ui. icier existing circumstances. .

The funeral ( if Don
4 \ntonio Fernandez Espartero,
the brother of the Regent,
/as performed with much pomp on
the 19th. I,
the commune r
The Journr me informs us of a fire in
fifty-on, dde la Sara,
%t department, which consumed
house
4 Herissat, in th
The total loss is estimated at
250,000 f. and four bsrns.