The Sun.
London, England, 1842-04-09 00:00:00

INCOME TAX.

On the motion of Sir IL PEEL, that the Order of the
Day, for bringing up the Raport of the Committee of
‘`/?Lys and Means, be read,
Lerd • J. RUSSELL ruse. He said—Sir, being al-
wadi, informed that the proposition for an income tax
been agreed to by a Committee of Ways and Means,
being aware that the House has already de-
Cded that no petition can be received on the question,
nti the,greand that this House has this tax under its
eouitideration, I conceive that before bringing up the
nerfore, I arafully justified in moving a resolution which
shall convoy my souse of the present state of our
financiftl, and. commercial afiltirs, and of the
romedy, that should ba applied to them.—(Hear.)
It' it has ever been the misfortune of any Member of
this Committee- to take a gloomy view of the ,present
state of public .atfairs,and to picture to the House our
r% retched situation with respect to the future prospects
,I)t.„,xhe
etrm try, I ant halo, to say this is not my position.
osed to think that, with re-
the' tontrarY, at:,disp
Qf the question, the Govern-
'•,pect. to too financial Pail
I:lent-have taken too Serious a view of the difficulties
4,f that situation—(Hear, licar)—that they have raiz-
. earculatcd as to the nature of. the evils which now
us ; auti that their remedy, although not totally
.tapplicablt., is. beyond and beside the occasion.--(Hear.)
he view which
the Government, takes, as I un-
it, that the financial difficulty, the
to; am deficiency as it was cml!ed one
ening, is the •
great evil Z hich we ought to
; and that,
we should make those
w ya
ros anentbelsilrin our measure,laws
with respect to corn reSnent to raw produce—
with respect to manuFacitue7ustir:-which the interests
m
.. of the country a.:
the ow'
Sir'
my
generally speiiking, N
view,
d/ country that our financial
calif
r
f.fr` 'no such extraordinary of at
propel:4d. ; but. that there are • have
serious dill
Fitts ofiocting commers-,ial . and nianufa !turi
ng
oortiou of our people—atfceting our situation as regards
)u_•
trade, and the future stability of our manufactfrregs
is!to that .second portion, ratl;.l- than to the first.,
that our deep attentien s.iould be directed, and
in that quarter that the chi;( remedy shollcl be s,
( Hear, hear.) Le me Sir, that the deficiency fur the
ear, for which we are now to provide, is stated by the flight
lion. Gentleman .at about 2,570.00 but that the pronosalol. ;
'.,:dit'agqt4,,.of an ,income tax, and secondly, of taxes with re-
itPN.chtAVe4ind, is order th.,..t Ireland may bear at least some
p ,rtion- Or ti public burden; arid lastly, the amount of
=!i?,9001. to be raised at home from other sources,' Kill giVe
as • tile :!1 which the flight iron. Centerr'D'i -
doses' should be levied on the country, 4,361,0004 It is not,
then, for our immediate financial deficiency; it is not for the

deficiency as it now stands, and as it has been
Government itself, that this great effort is to be mad e. ,
stated lels.thve
Sir, in order to-euable us to consider, andin
so far a
order to place
duce
in
a elearer view the necessity which now exists,t
reeofenrcetroned,
formert(s aokeecatshideneso
i:snka s - e atroe
have been piooosed and have been enacted, an. - o occasions on.
"or: ew
proposed,dclit incom taxes must
The difficulty which you had to enll
tion by large majorities. _
Which the Loose did not confirm, but negatived the proposes
you had been engaged in war, and •
counter when the income tax was first proposed, was of this
nature. Tor several years
terms, and increasing every
you were adding every year to the amount of your debt, raisin,
money on very disadvantageous
year, therefore. the. interest of the public debt. Inevthye
vear before the income tax was imposed, a loan of
'fifteen millions was raised for the service of the year.
In that year the assessed taxes, I think, were trebled, but
there was a provision with respect to those assessed, that every
person who would be obliged by those assessed taxes to pay
more than a tenth of his income, should declare that such was
the fact. and thereby should he exempted from any overplus
beyond that amount. In the following year, notwithstanding
the imposition of those assessed taxes, which then produced
more than four millions, it was found that there was a defi-
ciency of ten millions for the year. The pressure of the war
required that& very great effort should be made, and the Mi-
nister of that day having the Hoeise and the country with him,
in favonr of the prosecution of the war, thought it necessary,
and, I think, rightly, thought it necessary not to go on increas-
ing the debt in such an immense ratio, but to ask for a still
further effort from the country, in order to make the
revenue near:y equal to the expenditure of the war. As
seam an that war was over, the succeeding Minister
(Mr: Addington) came to the House of Commons,
and proposed at once that the income tax should be discon-
tinued. It is fair to say—l do not remember what provision
was made by Parliament in that respect—but it is fair to say
that'the original tax was made liable to the charge of the debt
for several years to come in respect el the war. I am not
quite aware of the manner in which the provisions were made.
Mr. Addington then thought it necessary to abolish the tax
upon the declaration • of peace. When the country was
again engaged in war filet tax was renewed, in
order' again to prevent an immense accumulation of debt,
In 1806 by that Act, which has often been referred to, a tax
was proposed of ten per tent. Lord Lansdowne, who was•
Cha.neeller of the Exchequer at the time, stated that the loan
which had for some years been ten millions aevear, had in the
previous year increased to twenty millions. 'lt was in order
to avoid if possible such a growing accumulation of debt—the
imposition upon the posterity of that generation of a debt in-
creasiog at the rate or twenty millions a-year—that the Go•
vernmeut of the day proposed the imposition of the tax.
When . the peace arrived, it was proposed, indeed,
to continue the tax for two years, I think for the
purpose of• paying off the debt, but the proposition
was resisted by Members on both sides of the Home—it was
resisted generally by the independent Metnbers of the House
who then supported the Government. After several nights
discussion the proposition was defeated, and I thick it is
stated by .Lord Brougham, in the introduction to one of his
speeches, that it was considered as thereby established that the in-
come tax should be reserved for a period of sear and for that alone.
Many years afterwards such was the case with this tax when
there was a very great pressure on our finances. But, Sir,
it may be asked, has this tax ever been under discussion in
this House in. times of peace? It has. In the course of the
year 18.34 it was proposed to reduce the malt tax to the
amount of ten millions, at thd same time that there was a
nroposifion for a reduction of the window tax. Orr that
occasion Lard Althorp proposed a reso'ntion to the effect,
" That a reduction of the malt tax to the amount of tee
millions, and of the window tax at the same time, could
only be supplied by an income tar. which at the present
is not expedient." Lord Althorp then declared that " he
confined his resohition to the time at which he
moved it." But he also made • several statements
as to the general proposition of an income lax. Ile said that
he " thought it was not prudent to have a small property tax."
He thought " that ten or twelve millions should he made by it
if it was imposed at all." But he went on to say, that " he
never knew a tax so unpopular as an income tax when it
was ,in operation."—( Hear, hear.) He said " it was de-
tested," and lie asked " what more inquisitorial powers could be
employed than were required for the collection of such a tax?
—( Hear, hear)—end it was impossible that it could be made
to bear on all parties of the community." Now, Sir, at that
time what was proposed was to propose a taxon property. and
not on income—( heir, hear)—and I must see, that the Right
Hon. Bart. opposite said on that occasion nothing which was at
all inconsistent with the course which he is now pursuing. Ile
said that, he would not refuse the tax in time of war, nor in
sonic circumstances even in time of peace. liut he said at the
the same time that "it was a tax which required inquisitorial
powers—which required a rigid scrutiny into private affairs,
and which would lead to fraud and perjury."—( Hear, hear.)
But, Sir, it seems to be the opinion of some that it i.; possible
to get rid of the inquiry into men's. affairs, and yet to have a
tax on income which would supply the deffciency. But I
think the • Right Hon. Gentleman himself in the debate, to
which I refer, said that there must be inquisitorel powers, and
he has on the present occasion admitted that necessity, or else
encouragement would be given to fraud and perjury—as
the men only who were 'not disposed to give a faithful account
of their property would pay the tax, and those who chose to
give false and evasive returns would escape the impost. I
think, Sir, from the whole that I have said, that it appears that
whenever an income tax has been proposed, that income tax
has been proposed fur the sake of supplying a deficiency of not
less than from 10 to 20 millions in the current year in the ex-
penditure of the country.—( Hear, hear.) It was imposed in
1798, when you were borrowing money at 47—( Hear, hear)—
when you were paying 46 per cent. on all the money you bor-
rowed.a-( Hear, hear.) Let me ask if there is any resemblance
between that situation and the present situation of the country.
--(Hear.) Your deficiency does not amount to ore-twentieth
of your annual income ; ansl althcugh that deficiency has
existed for Seale years, yet the credit of the country continues
unimpaired.—(Cheers.) During that period, your Three per
. Cents. have been at 89 and 90, and you have been able to bor-
row money at less than 31. 10s. per cent., while otber nations,
whiCh have had to borrow money during the same period--I
may mention Austria, Russia and Holland, as examples—have
had to pay 5 per cent. for the money advanced to them,—
(Cheers.) I state this, to show that there is nothing in the
present state of uffairs to require this extraordinary effort ;
that there is nathlng in the present state of affairs, that
should. make y,ou contradict the assertion of former Parlia-
ments, an assertion supported by the generality of politi-
cians, that an income tax ought to be reserved for a
time of war, or, when imposed in -a time of peace;
it should only be imposed tinder oircumstances of
great difficulty—of dicuflilty equal to the difficulty under
which a country must labour in time of war--(Cheers)—and
that it ought not to be bad recourse to merely to get rid of
ordinary difficulties.—(Loud cheers.) Sir, let me state again
what appears tome to be the general objections to this tax—objec-
tions which made the country so eager to get rid of this tax as
soon as peace was declared, and which have hitherto made
Chancellors of the Exchequer refrain from proposing the
adoption of it, when by so doing they might have re-
lieved articles of consumption from many of the duties
levied on them. In the first place, I think it a great objec-
tion to this tax, that it proposes to tax the funds. It
appears to me, that you ought not to impose any tea
on the funds unless you were labouring under such dilleelties
that you can hardly find resources for your Exchequer without
it.---( Hear, hear from the Ministerial benches,) I am aware
that Lord Althorp proposed a tax on the transfer of stock—
( Ministerial cheers)—but I am aware likewise that his own
friends pointed oat to him the impolicy of such a tax—
(Cheers)—and that he was most vehemently opposed
by the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite.—(Opposition cheers. )
Now, I am not saying that a tax on the funds, accompanied
with a tax on landed property and Lon the profits of trades and
professions, may not be expedient. That is not what I said, and
it is not the nature of the argument I wish to put. The nature
of the,' argument I wish to putis, that the funds being the gene-
ral deposit of the savings of the country, that being the deposit
of the savings of many persons engaged in merchandise abroad,
it is not expedi-mt, if it can be possiblysevoided, to lay a tax en
those funds. It is of great advantage: that I.ondon should be
the chief money market of the world.—( Hear, hear.) It not
only increases the riches of London as a capital, bat also the
wealth of this country, that merchants look to London as the
great money market of the world. It is advantageous, there-
fore, that the funds should be frets from taxation on that ac-
count.—(Hear, hear.) Is it not likely, if 3ou place a tax on
the funds, that either Amsterdam or Paris will be-
come the chief money markets of Europe and the world ;
that whatever capital may succeed London as the chief
money market, that country will engross much of the
wealth that falls into this country in consequence of the prefer •
cove now given to it.—( Hear.) That is one general objec-
tion to an income tax. Another is the admitted inequality of
the tax.—( Hear.) It is an inequality that has not, and indeed
cannot, he denied.—( Hear.) It is obvi,its that with respect
to three or four persons who possess 3001. a year, that ono may
have that 30eld a year, which belongs to himself and his heirs,
without any exertion whatever on his own part. The second
person may have it in terminable annuities, which partly re-
present capital; and the third person may have it by exercistug
a dangerous and unhealthy profession ; as, for instance, a sur-
geon in the country, who exposes himself in all weathers,
and who bas laid up a portion of his small income to make a
provision for his tainily. In that instance you tax capital as
well as income. Those engaged in trade were likewise sub-
ject to the same disadvantage, and was it right to place such
persons in the same situation with those who had 4001. or 5001.
a"year secured to them without any exertion of their own ?
What is.the answer? Is it denied that this inequality existed ?
By no means. But the Right Hon. Gentleman pointed out,
,and pointed out not only with great ingenuity, but with sue-
vess, that there were other inequalities. That though there
were some inequalities there were others, fire or six, or ten or
twenty, for which we could find no remedy. Others may say
that they could find a remedy, but the Right Hon. Gentleman
did nut profess to provide one. He pointed out that there was
not only one, but many inequalities; but is not this a reason
why a tax, so confessedly unequal in its operation, and so
different in its pressure on the different classes of the community,
should not be resorted to without great and overbearing necessity.
Another and odious objection to this tax is that it was stated
an inquisitorial examination mutt form part end parcel of the
tax. It is quite impossible that you should avoid it. It is
impossible that you should take the declaration of lersons
withoutfurther inquiry as to the amount of their incomes. I
may be told, and I have heard it said in the House, that it
should be a matter of indifference—that persons should not be
afraid of telling the amount of their incomes. I must say, that
for a commercial country, that. is a very extraordinary doctrine.
—( Hear, hear.) Who does not know that, however firmly
commercial affairs may be conducted by an individual, there
may be occasions in which the publication of his accounts
would be very injurious to his crediteand inconvenient to his
future prospects ' • and are you now to lay down
as a maxim that there is something cominal or
guilty in such a man saying, '• I do riot like
my affairs, my accounts current, to he
.preelaimed at Charing..
cross and over the world ?" Let me observe, in respect of this
objection, there is a peculiar unfitness in theiiine at which this
tax is proposed.—( Hear, hear.) Duririr, the latter part of the
war, and indeed from the year 1797, the currency was gra-
dually more and more depreciating. he consequence of that
depreciation of the currency was somewhat similar tithe effects
remarked by the historian to have been produced by the dis-
covery of the precious metals in America, which was aecoin-
panied by their depreciation. The consequence was
the increase of trade, and the wealth of the
country, whilst capital and fixed incomes were lowered in
value. Thus trade and currency were in a flourishing condi-
tion, but is that your positien at present. You are now deal-
ing with trade in a state of great difficulty and embarrassment
and at a moment when you hope it may recover, but you do
not see any strung symptoms of any recovery. Why,-a.. such
a moment it is peculiarly injurious to individuals that their
affairs should he known anal promulgated___( vicar, hear
and I do not speak merely for individuals, but that which is
inconvenient and injurious to individuals .generally, is
inconvenient and injurious to the country at large.
You cannot do that which is hurtful to men
engaged in trade generally, especially to men of small capital,
and who are struggling with present difficulties. You cannot
impose upon them additional embarrassments, without acting
injuriousey towards the trade of the country. Having stated
that the proposal of the flight Hon. Gentleman is to obtain, by
taxation, a much larger sum than that which thedeficiency alone
culls for, I come to the second part. which relates to the duties
occasioned for this I:eon • • • the ty.of the eoun—
ii.:esiteitil,ria,teic:::doi:gt tiot
:new tariff,.,, and the deticienc,y,
thereby
bat
Ptr su el IS twine difficul
Lens well competent to jut' *0 that o ~.orniuus
that having
necessarily a verye'' large amount of taxes, and hay- I 1

ing likewise to compete with foreign countries in the corn- 1
merce of the world, we should thereby be sulsjected in time to
Mr. Baring,verygreat statedetnharr itast the sments. In 1821 Lord Ashburton, then ,
House of Commons that hitherto
their manufactures and commerce hasl flourished, becaMe they
had flourished without difficulty ; because they had not met'
with any competition in the markets of the world ; but the war
being concluded other nations would have the opportunity of
turning their attention to commerce and manufactures, and'it
was necessary they should take legislative means to enable
this country to meet the difficulties it would have to
encounter.—( Hear, hear.) He made this statement
in presenting a petition from the City of London, a petition
which was generally in favour of measures that might be called
measures of free trade, in favour generally of the repeal and
relaxation of prohibitions and restrictions. In 1830, Mr.
Huskisson made a somewhat similar statement ; he said, as
was referred to last night, that this country could not go on
under their existing Corn-laws and their existing taxes, hav-
ing to meet that competition in the markets of the world. He
stated also, and I think it cannot be denied, that it was impos-
sible for the English manufacturer to raise his prices in foreign
markets beyond what the foreign manufacturer would ask. His
only resource was to reduce those prices, and in order to reduce
those prices it was necessary to reduce the cost of pro-
duction, and for this purpose be must lower the wages
of the persons employed in that production. Now this is a
process which has been going on, with a few interruptions, for
a series of years; we have now to encounter the competition
with foreign manufactures carried to a much greater perfection
than they were thirty years ago. We have to meet them in
the markets of the world, and we have to meet them not only
loaded with taxes, but loaded with burdens, which make the
price of subsistence and the ptice of all articles of necessity,
greater in this country than in any other country in Europe.
Hear, hear.) What are those burdens ? Mr. flume, in
giving evidence before the Import Duties' Committee—a Com-
mittee which th s year I msy venture to quote, although last
year that Committee was the subject of general sneers and
taunts by those who were then s thing on Vais tide of the House,
butes ith whom in 1842 its Report is a book of autherity,
since even her Majesty's Government is not ashamed
to act on the principles it lays down. Sir, Mr. Hume,
before that Committee stated, that, if he could buy
an article for Is:. and that by the effect of law and pro-
tection, that article was raised to Is. 6d., he called that ad-
ditional 6d. a tax.—( Hear, hear ) This is a principle which
cannot be controverted; whether or no, it is paid into the
Exchequer, that amount is a tax, and is levied at the expense
of the great body of the community.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, we
proceeded onthose.principles last sear—p: ineiples not so much
admitted then as they are now —vie proceeded on that princi-
ple to say, that there should be moderate duties on the great
articles of consumption, which were effeetul by taxes of this
kind, and we took corn, sugar, and timber, as the three great
articles on. which we proposed first to preceed.—( Hear, hear.)
I do not wish to avoid, far from ic, any odium that may
attach to the Government of the present day of
taking away protection from other articles.—( Hear, hear. )
Because the principle we stated as a general one, and though
we thought those were the inaln articles which first required
the attention of Parliament, we never meant that the same
principle should not apply to all those articles to which the
tariff of the Right lion. Gentlemen refers —( licar, hear.)
On the present occasion, therefore, I shall act on the same
principle as last year. I declared last year that you was acting
on a vicious circle of protection ; that your manufacturers are
to take articles from 'the colonies at a dearer price than would
eompensote them, and that the colonies were to take our manu-
factures at a dearer price than they could get them at other
ports, and that, in that way, you were acting in a vicious circle
of protection, instead of giving every body an opportunity of
getting every article he wanted at amo terate price. Sir, the
first article to which I shall refer on which the letelget of last
year was ptoposed, and I must refer to it now, because the
Right Hon. Gentleman in his speech made what seemed to me
a very unfounded argument against the proposition—that ar-
ticle is sugar. Au argument used by the Right lion. Gentle-
man, and often repeated by others, to the effect, that if you re-
dude a duty, you cannot he sure that by increased consumption
you will have any increase in the amount of that duty. er even
the same amount for many years to come. lie supported that pro-
pesition. by instances of wine, rum, tobacco, turd other articles.
hat principle may be very true, but that is not the principle
n which my Right Hon. friend proposed his reduction of the
sugar duties.—( Hear, hear.) It was indeed quite a different
one. My Right Hon. Friend said, last year, that foreign sugar
was subject to a duty of 635. per cwt. Now this i 3 not a duty
which gives a certain revenue to the State which might be di-
minished by a reduction ; but it is a prohibitory duty, and one
which prevents, except in one or two extraordinary years, sugar
from coming in from foreign colonies. my Right Hon. Friend
proposed to reduce this onty to 365., and very justly argued
that we might from this obtain a perfectly new revenue. Sup-
posing, as has been said, that this encouragement should
cause foreign sugar to displace a million cwts. of West India
production, you might say it deed that this was an unfair dimi-
nution and hard treatment of the West India interests, but
still, as a question of finance, it cannot be dented that the
change would be greatly in fav,cur of the revenue, for we
should then have one million hundred weight from foreign
colonies, paying thirty-sit shillings instead of the same quantity
from our own colonies paying 245. daty.--e Hear, hear.) It is
clear that the principle on which Hon 'Gentlemen opposite
rely, is wholly inapplicable when they assert th t this
change in the tariff would yield no increase to the t evenue. In
truth the Right Hon. Gentleman never touched my Bight
Hon. Friend's preposition at all.—(Cheers.) 1 shall now
take the items in succession. My Right Hon. Friend said the
other day that if you took the average consumption of seger
for eleven years, there ought to be an increase of 31'2,600 cwts.,
and that by the duty he proposed, there Would be an increase
brought to the revenue of fs-67',000/. I think that was a very
fair estimate, and I do not see why the incontrovertible prin-
ciple en which my Right Hon. Friend calculated should not be
admitted as part of the financial resources of her Majesty's
Government.—(Hear, hear.) With respect to timbers the
Right Hon. Gentleman opposite proposes to throw , away
600,000/. altogether on the timber duties.—(Cheers ) I agree
that if the Exchequer were overflowing, and if you had with
perfect ease reduced some other duties, you might also make
a greet reduction on the duties on Canadian timber
lion in the present state of the finances, I think the Original
proposition, to add 10e. to the duty en Cettaditn limber, and
to take ss. off that on Bailie, weulti add considerably to the
revenue, without being hardship to the consumer.—( Hear,
hear.) That preposition, according to the calculation of Lord
Althorp, would have given 750,0'0. !_rny Right Honourable
Friend only took it at 600,000/. Now, the oilier
tClanhill-
ing article is the article of wheat, anti my night Honour-
able Friend has stated, that if the proposition of an
r Bs. duty' had been applied to all the wheat that had been
admitted last year, an additional duty of 530,000 e world Haste
I been received. An argument was opposed to that ei my ;'light
Hon. Friend, by the Right Hose tire Caneellor of the Ex-
chequer. The Right How, Mhtlernan had said, that +here was
no proof that se fetal an amount of wheat would hare paid
the duty,
'feet! filet it would have been a hardship tg the emte
sumer to have had that additional duty to pall, ittettiel of 3s.
tics., or some such amount, which Was the average of
the duty. Why, so ftet trom its being a hard-
ship to the eensorner, the consumer would have had
the corn ott better terms.than he had it according to the law
which existed last year.—t Hear, hear.) We have it on record
that the wheat in bond from the month of June to the month
of September, increased, I think, 225. in price. Nit if at that
period an Its duty only had been paid, it is evident that, with
an addition of his. only, and Rot an addition of 225., wheat
would have been brought into the market, not, I will allow,
that the seller would have sold it merely with an addition of 65.,
he would have got his profit by it, but his profit would have
been somewhat diminiihed ; that of the fort ign importer would
have been somewhat diminished, hut the whole of the 81. duty
would have been given to the benefit of the revenue, and not
at the expense of the consumer, but at the expense of the
foreign importers of the foreign grower, axed of the merchant
in this country, who made those enormous profits owing to
your absurd law which, happily, you have now tried to repeal, al-
though you have not placed a much better law in its place.
Sir, an observation was made last night, to which I must beg
pardon for referring, as to the change which I was supposed to
have made in the proposition of a fixed duty. My proposition
last year was, that there should he a fixed duty of its. ; but 1
stated to the House that I did net calculate that that duty
would be enforced in times when there was a prospect of a se-
vere scarcity in the country, and when wheat naturally rose to
an inordinately high price ; and I proposed that the Queen in
Council should luive the power in such cases of remitting that
duty. Now, that proposal wrs not founded upon any notion
that it would be a real and actual benefit to the consumer
that the duty should he lowered. If the importer can send
corn with a profit, as it is supposed he can, under the new law,
when wheat is at 6es. or 645., how much more could he sell it
with a profit when wheat in this country is at 745. or 755, ? Rut
I confess it appears to MC, after the strong opinions
that were stated by the opponents of a fixed duty
, in this House and in the country, that if different parties
should combine in order to force up the price of wheat in the
prospect of a scarcity, that it was necessary to hare some means
I or another by which the prospect of a real scarcity, anti when
prices rose very high, public discontent should not be excited.
illy view was that the law might on certain occasions be kept
back, so that it might be restored whenever an immediate ne-
, cessity is required—and I certainly had some fear upon con •
. sidering how many would cry out against the operation el the
law in such a case--I had some fear that if the law was
then kept down by a clamour against the Executive there might
he a difficulty in maintaining the Les till after that necessity
had ceased. With that view, therefore, I stated that when
prices rose very high, and there was a great scarcity, you
might then provide by law for that necessity. Now others
have differed from me in that respect. Ido not say that J was
right in that opinion; but still I must say it appears to-me that,
with a fixed duty, you must look in some way or otter to its
beingtaken off at periods when there is a great scarcity. But that
does not prevent, nor I think would prevent, the usual operation
of the law being such, that there would be a regular and constant
supply of corn in this country; the price would be kept mode-
rate; merchants would import corn as repoilarly as they would
cotton or any other article for which there was a demand s and
that the necessity would seldom exist for making any altera-
tion. The amount calculated by my Right Hon. Friend as
that which would be :del iced from his proposed alteration, was,
for sugar, 578,0001.; for wheat, 53 t,OOO/. ; for timber,
630,000/. This would give an increased revenue of
1,717,000/., and this without imposing any burden on the
people ; on the contrary. diminishing the taxes paid by parti-
cular classes to particular individuals—en increase of the pub-
lic revenue, and at the same time an increase of the public
comfort and the public, happiness—an increase accompanied-
by no inquisition into private affairs, accompanied by ne ine-
quality in its operation—an increase from the most legitimate
sources, and becoming a Parliament which was apxious to .pro- •
vide for the general welfare.—( Cheers.) But, Sir, I must
admit that if you proceeded to legislate upon other articles,
and weir them into consideration at the same time, there would
be a diminution of revenue. The Right Honourable
Gentleman has taken the alterations in his tariff as
causing a diminution of 270,00 W. lie has frankly
stated that he anticipates a diminution of 170,0001. en the
article of coffee. Now, I think that on the article of coffee he
has made an unnecessary sac. ifice.—( Hear, hear.) He h
made a difference of no less than 100 per cent, between colonial
produce and foreign produce— a iu tub greater difference, I
think, than it is at all necessary to make. My Noble Friend
near ale stated that he thought, for the purposes of revenue,
you might keep rid. and Oil. as the duty. The proposition
which was made by the Government last year was an altera•
tion without much loss. it was a duty of sd. on colonial
coffee, and of Bd. on foreign. Now, that was still a differential
duty of no less than 75 per cent. Hut I think
that from that reduction you might calculate on
an increase of ten per cent. 00 the consumption, and on a loss
of no more than 70,0001., which with the other reductions,
would amount to 360,0001. .And I think it would be better,
with respect to the 1,717;000/., to leave a large portion of it,
in the present eituatien of the country, for the purpose of a
further reduction of duties hereafter, and for the contingenvies
which the State may require. I should not propose, there-
ttthlai
keine .ta ayail
ts,o,os77eot,htiatt
there-
fore, after taking away this 360,0001.. to take the whole of the
surplus, as there is a deficiency of 2,570,000/. But I
surplus,eYivoeno nomrtihgehstt calculate upon having pro-
bablyobit-Lee:es. thousand pounds,
igphotunadts,loaisnt
and you would only have to provide for
the 2,000.000/. in the way of taxa ion. You would have two
naßs of
r .ut , deficityS tr cY
u,
dea
notrteo inadstrike
fft ei:ro) tf‘lnptbl
plates
the
ri
itsu imposition of new
from
proposedt at
toof
lasttmrtxi l
year.
•
you last yeir, and by which I consider a coa,iderable partial'
of tier deficit^icy Vt. 01.1 i 1 „ r
think that it is neeessary toaee ; it, is
that r shall move the resolution, " That this House is pretty

sensible of the evil of a continued inadequacy,of the public in-
come to meet the public charges, and will take effectual imea•
stares for averting the same in future years." With respect to
the mode which should he adopted for this purpose, without
taking upon me the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer, I
think thst Most of the receseary measures which have been
suggested have been better than the proposit ens of the
Government. (Cries of " Hear, hear,'' and a laugh.)
There is one proposition which has been mooted in this House,
and which perhaps is a tax not desirable to adopt if there was
no necessity for it—still I think it would be preferable to an
income tax—l mean a tax upon the succession of real pro-
perty equal to the probate and legacy duty on persone.l pro-
perty. I know the Chancellors of the Exchequer, and
amongst them my Hon. Friend near me, and Lord Althorp,
have said, that there was a duty on the conveyance of real
property equal to the amount of the probate and legacy duties.
But, Sir, although that may be hue, yet I contend that it still
leaves untouched a great proportion of that species
property, because a great portion of the landed property
has gone on descending in succession from. father to son,
or to some near relative, for the lest 150 years,
and to not one particle of this description of propel ty does the
duty on conveyances attach. Now, Sir, I do nut see any reas n,
why, if it he a great object to impose a new tax, a tax of this
nature should not be adapted in preference to an income tax.
Then, Sir, there have been various taxes repealed, some of
which might be reimposed, not taxes on articles of consump-
tion, on articles of necessity ; but there had been taxes taken off
cei tour-wheeled carriages, on male servants, and other taxes of
a like nature, paid by the rich; and I can see no reason why
we should not reimpose such taxes, rather than impese an
income tax. From 1821. to 1823 there were 6,000,000/. of
taxes reduce t, and of this amount a turn amounting to no less
than 2,300 000/. was taken eff the assessed taxes. The Right
Hon. Gentleman, before he brought forward his proposal,
made an allcsion to what had been the result of increasing
the assessed taxes. The Bight lion. Gentleman stated that
in 1810 the assessed taxes had been increased 10 per cent., and
the result of that measure had been to produce an actual in-
crease of I per cent. in the assessed taxes. This, therefore,
showed that the produce at the ass issed taxes has not sufihred
any diminution in consequence of the impnsiticsn of an addl.
timed 0 per cent., and I thought when the thght lion. Gen-
tleman made the • statement, that he was about to
propose an increase in the assessed taxes, es the former
in my hand a return mom d for by Mr. Hostiles,
experiment hail already so completely succeeded. I have
which shows what had been the effect of a reduction of the
assessed taxes. A consist-rabic reduction was made in the as-
sewed taxes from 1821 to 18:31, and the effect of that reduction
was to bring a greater change to account. The return shows
that at the time of the reductim it was estimated that it would
realise 3,623,000/., whereas it had actually realised no less
than 4,271,0001., showing an excess over the estimated amount
of 648,000/e, showing that the operation both of an increase
and of a diminution hail been to increase the amount realised,
thus showing the buoyar cy e f this source of reeenue,_
( ) An increase in the assessed taxes has this advan-
tage over the proposal for an income tax. If you pro-
pose an income tax, you must set all your ma-
chinery in motion for a periol of five years ;
if afterwards you find that your revenue has increased, or that
your establishments can be diminished so as to enable you to do
away with the tax at the end of that period, you will have in-
curred all the unnecessary difficulty, and all the unnecessary
odium Of the charge. You may lay on taxes on articles which
arc generally teed. You may lay ihern en windows and car-
riages, Which are obviously used, and you may easily take them
off; but if you impose an iiicome tax which is to produce four
millions a year, because I thank the Right Hon. Gentleman
under-estimated the produce of the tax—you may be sure that
the Chancellor of thi Exchequer will be in no hurry to take it
oaa—( Hear, hear.) 'I he lax is certain for three years—it is
probable for five years—and it is probable for five years or ten
years after that therefore, Sir, what I should urge en the
House is, first, that this tax has been hitherto imposed only in
times of extreme necessity—that it has been only imposed due-
ieg perilous wars with powerful enemies, and has been taken off
on the return of peace—that hitherto Parliament has not
thought fit to adopt an income tax in time of peace—that it is
accompanied with inequalities, awl w.th an inquisition
into private • affairs which renders it peculiarly odious,
which was the reason that Lord Althorp d. eared that it was
more unpopular, and more destestable than any other tax, that
in going to men's means to obtain an increase of revenue, that
increase may be assisted and made so complete as to supply any
deficiency you re quire by taxes, much more just to the people
on whom they are imposed. and which • can be taken off when
the necessity ceases. -e Hear, hears) I should not despair that
a proerisitii n which appears to me so reasonable would be ac-
cepted by the House, but that I observe it is declared and
avowed thiet the matter to be considered now, isnot to provide
for the necessities of the revenue, not to provide for deficiencies,
but that the business to be considered is to contrive in what
manner Hon. Gentlemen can best give their support to the
Administration of the Right Hon. Gentleman. With respect
to another mefoure, an Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Wal-
lingford, had askci many Members if they would agree to such
a Cern 8.11 as they suppoi ted, if it had been proposed by me ?
and they all answered that they Would not.— ( Hear, hear.) I
have seen it stated, over and rivet' egaih, by H6n. Gentlemen
to their OonfitittlehtS, that they were opposed to the Corn-law
which they passed—(Laughter)—which they had voted for—
and which they voted for contrary to their convictions.—( Hear,
hear, and laughter.) I have observed • that they are
still more so against the proposed tariff —( Hear)asthat
they viewed it with ettat elartii i that the totaleqttchces
of the Wirt: Wad bb injliriblis to the farming interest-gene-
t-ally ; but the question with him was not whether it was good
or useful—(haughter)—but that they must support the Go-
vernment of the Right Hon. Baronet.—(Cheers.) Sir, I
must say that that declaration makes the despair of being
successful in the proposition that I heme to make. I think
it, however, my dill to make. it; atid to eltet tlifst proptisitigh
to the Beam of bristiioni as a means by which I think you can
atasid the infimtion of the tax b. fore you. Those Gentlemen
who have So ill-used the constituences who trusted them with
their interests, tell me that if they opposed the Government of
the Right Hon. Baronet they would he aiding the enemies of
the Corn-law. I ti,k, *hat fight h,i.ire'thet Gentlemen to
that I stir the bitter eheiley fif the farilier? t Wish to WO e
that Which is a n advantage to the agricultural interest. My
belief is, that you would have a more abundant supply of
corn, and in the first place, that those who would gain cheaper
food would have the Means of purchasing, more mapufattures ; in
the second place, else mentitietkirt giCh Mesh efepltiyment
in meter tO send goods in hessian for that corn; and in. the
third place that general prosperity would thereby enstie among
the labouring' classes, agriculteral mehefactheinge and
that the ageiculture ef this 'ailtintbi, stimulated by aOrimetit len,
would iniprov(i) and adlienee ; its means of production would be
B.Vigniented, fresh demsnds would arise for this production, per-
haps ultimately the price would not be greatly less than we•see
it at the present moment, but that price would be concomitant
with the general well-being etrel welikre of, itHelllakt
classes of the essnittelintqa if ilaliTS my belief, wiles right have
they at use as the enemy of the farmer, because I sup-
ported that opinion—because I proposed what I
thought was a measure by which the farmer of
this country would obtain an advantage Meet' the feifilign
find-
ducer ? But if I went further tbnialais aboliehinte the duties
altogether, are there hiet tqh as ffiehttly tb the farmer es any
Hone Gentleelets tipliate who are in faibar of s icll a 070:
I sitieh ? Who has shown himself more devoted to agriculture
in the course of a long life than the resent Lord Leicester ?
Who in the present day has been more devoted to agriculture.
more fond of its pursuits, that, Lord Spence's.? Butglendo not think that even the proteetloa which I pl'opie Slight 4:.ti
be permanent ; they think that agrieulttire mak faine' etCrt
unaided by protection, and afithehtdilifiehlty; ateitist hillureigh
competatintt. Ate these Nhble Lards enefrlies of the fartilgrn
that account? no means. But those gentlemen who thus
taunt me with being the enemy of the farmer, seemed to be
composed of the same heavy clay as are the acres which
they possess. They• rail at me as the bitter enemy
am proposine a totnewhat
diminished
tompitred With that tallith they
hofavethehithaerr pmtroeortinclojobetne7 audae:e' I
Hese I baeat the ijsettiAliii Ile-
ceiving the farfiterieet Loud cheers.) In- 1839 I etiblehed to
the world, and I declared in this House, that I thought a mn
derate fixed duty was-the best system on will Is the Corn.laws
could be established. In 1840 1 declared myself in favour of
a similar alteration in the law. Most of the laleinhers of the
late Government in this house, and smile hi the tither House,
declared in favour of the seine sestem, add itats it, feet pen-
olio was at the head ot thb Gile
,a contrary opinion, being the
obT
upa
irbnna tthstatot,
of
ahhiiiieds
cow lohl hoe
al age
nultelesii.,etl vaivioini,
ue,
l
have conceded the point, and
it might thus have become a united measure of the Government?
Was there any deception towards the farmers in this?—
(Hear, hear.) Was there not due preparation for thorn ?
Have they had due preparation in the prestnt insttnee ?
( Loud cheers.) I was not the Man who seill that be was bah-,
fident, if his party wets its PoWtsis, tile preSent pPetecliein would
be continued ; 1 was rot the man who said that if any alte-
ration were made in the Corn-laws the Government would be
faithless in making the proposition. I was not the man who
said that he had no doubt but the present Corn-laws, or an
equivalent protection, would be continued, and that if an
equivalent protection was not continued, he would oppose it,,
yet afterwards, in defiance of that promises anti that pledge,
voted for the change.—(Loud cheers.) 1, theta am not the
one who is the bitter enemy of the farmers ; it was not I who
led them into this mistake, who induced them to expend their-
capital in resorting to expensive processes, under the notion
that an injurious and vicious law would be maintained far their
sole purpose and benefit, so that thereby they could afford
to give rents for land which it ought not tO yield. They have
been misled and deceived, and if they are angry in finding
them so misled, let that anger be directed against these who
bad justly incurred it.—(Loud cheers.) Let them not try to
throw off on Gentlemen en this side of the House, nor on the
Members of the late Administration, the indignation which had
been justly excited by the ni,envery which, during the last
election, was so carefully concealed.—( Loud cheers.) But let
those who have so acted, thinking, I Suppose, that
the plans now proposed are the best that can
be obtained, let them manfully avow and make them-elves re-
sponsible for any change of opinion they may have undergone;
or, if they do not, they will justly excite the distrust of those
who have confided in them, and incur the contempt of the
country, whose interests they have neglected.—(Cheers.) fur,
Sir, is it right after all, to impose an income tax of nearly
four millions sterling, a tax which is of so inquisitorial a cha-
racter, so partial, and so unequal, far tho purpose of supporting
an administration?—(Cheers. ) •
If they can say that it is justified by public necessity, that
public necessity (mils f..r this infliction, 1 am ready to ray that
they are right in facing the difficulty—that they are right in
imposing on the countr•
a tax, even unjust and partial though
it may be, because pub necessity cannot be reasoned with.
Rut if, on the contrary, they are not convinced that, this is a
case of public necessity, if it be only for the sake of supporting
the tariff, and -the Administration of which they are adhe-
rents, that they impose this tax, I then say, that though they may
be successful in its imposition at the present moment, yet, they
may depend on it,•that such a sacrifice of the interests of the
country to party views—( Hear, hear)—and party purposes,
avowed as it is with respect to the Corn-laws and the tariff, anti
which seems Miele' to influence them which regard to the in-
come tax—l say, if they make such sacrifices of the interests
aonfd I thetchoirtivirty‘i
~i then
not
besil l
de%dgt,hseaythat the Liouse of Commons,
country sooner or later,
which they have elected with other hopes, and wjth ie her expec-
tations, have betrayed the trust %silica was ga nerously confided
I in them.—(Loud cheers.) be Noble Losd concluded by
moving the follosinss resolutions : That it has been stated
to this House, on official authority, that the deficiency of
gin-
come to meet the expenditure of the country, may be estimated,
for the year endin the bth day of April, 1842, at 2,350,0001 ,
and on the sth day of April, 1843, at 2,569,000/. 'I hat this
House is fully sensible of the evil of a continued inadequacy of
the public income to meet the public charges, and will take ea.
fectual measures for averting the same in future years. That,
by a judicious alteration of the' duties on corn, by a reduction
of the prohibitory duty on foreign sugar, and an adjustment of •
the duties en timber and coffee, the advantage of a modera e
price to the community may be combined with an increased re-
venue to the State. That, in addition to these main articles of
general consumption, the interests of trade will be promoted by
the repeal or reduction of various prohibitory and differen lel
while it
duties, and that extended commerce will improve the revenue,
gives employment to industry. That the amount of
taxes taken off, or reduced, from the termination of the last
war to the end of the year 1836, exclu-iveof the tax on income,
maybe stated in round numbers at 23,873,000/. That the in-
come tax, having been first imposed in' a period of extreme
iiarsihidn:triontgi.,aea•
erroo,sat„jciteirlialNoinnegesiarioe„nwpastienpeiamlepdosoe,n)
theen e rj. eg -eenset Ya
tin flit, „ „t
Of
supplying the present deficiency, viiihout c.luincLog the price
of the necessaries of life, or embarrassing trade, it is the opinion

of this House that the renewal of a tax, inquisitorial in its cha-
racter unequal in its tressure, and whichl has hitherto been
cbtisielefed as the financial reserve of the nation in tithe tif war,
is net called for by public necessity; and is therefore not advis-
able."— (The Noble Lord resumed his scat amidst loud and
continued cheere.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was
impossible to hear the Noble Lord etteak without pleasure. Ile
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had always listened to the
Noble Lord with intet est and admiration, but never more
so than during the delivery of thee.peech he had just concluded ;
for if anything were wanted to cenfirm him (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) in approbation of the course Iserseeel by the
Government, of which he was a member, he could find it in
the speech, ',and the reaolution of the Noble Lord.--(Hear,
hear.) Having now hatted all that could be urged against the
measure of the Government, or in support of the alternative
that was before them, he (the Right Hon. Gentleman) was
now convinced that the House and the country would be mere
than ever satisfied with the Measure which the Noble Lord had
now arrested by his resolution. The Noble Lord said the Go-
vernment took too gloomy a view of the situation of the country.
He (the Right Hon. Gentleman) begged not to be included
amongst those gleotny speculators. lie never uttered senti-
ments of d. spoteleney or alarm, or of distrust of the capabilities
and energies of the country; but he maintained that it was
right that we should preiasely know our difficulties in order
that we might prpeerly endeavour to surmount them. No
country, however abundant its resources, cceld he free from
oveasional periods of difficulty, and that. with which we had
now to struggle, though furnishing much cause far anxiety,
suppled also grounds f r the highest consolation. The Noble
Lord said our emergencies did not justify the measure of she
Goveineaent. Whatever might be the Noble Lord's ideaof an
emergency, his speech fully justified the course he condentred.
'1 he Noble Lord alluded to two successive years of deficient
revenue ; the deficiency in the first being 2,400,0001., in the
second 2,60000/. Though the Noble Lord went no further,
it was consolatory to hear him attaching a grave importance to
a deficiency whiell'he would not in 1639, when there being a
deficiency of 1,800,C00/., he (the Right Honourable Gentle-
man) proposed a resolution that it was imprudent to reduce
1,600,0001. of revenue, and the Noble Lord voted against it.
He hailed it, therefore. as a step in the way of improvement on
the part of those with n horn the Noble Lord is connected, to find
That they admitted the existence of a continued deficiency to a
large amount, and that circumstance called for au energetic
and effective measure to equalise the revenue arid the expendi-
ture of the country.—( Hear, hear.) The deficiency in the
revenue had riot arisen in the p:eeent. year, or in the year pre-
.ceding, but was the result of continued deficiencies dining the
last six years, without any efforts having been made to meet
the evil. He believed th.t if the present state of things were
allowed to continue it would finally paralyse the energies the
country. The contemplated deficiency for the present year
was stated by the Noble Lord at 2,500,000/. ; but he would ask
the Noble Lord, as a gi-eat statesman, and as one who looked
fere and to rule the (lest Mies of this weary, to leek a.lii tae to
the future, arid to, consider what the sacrifices were which
this country might hereafitr be called upon to -make.
The Noble Lord fad admitted that the preser t Government,
when they came into office, had found a deficiency, and that
that deficiency still continued, but he forgot to add that, inde-
pendent of this actual evil, they had a prospect of incurring
large additional expenses in future. The Government had to
consider the state of our affairs in China, and they could not
forget that our relatiene with that country might involve us
in a great additional outlay, however sincerely they
might hole to •be enabled to • avoid it. But, so-
'wadded to this evil, the Noble Lord stated that the
trade and manufactures of the country were in a most depressed
condition, anti that they were called upon to adopt every means
iletheir power fee the purpose of affording to those interests ef
fectual relief. Why, what was the principle on which the mea•
sure of the Government had proceeded ? Had it not been to
afford to the utmost of their power relief to the trading and ma-
nnfacturing interests of the country ; to amending those laws
which regulated the importation of foreign earn and other arti-
cles of foreign produce; and in doing this to provide the means.
of avoiding the necessity of incurring a fresh deficiency, whilst
they misfiled that which hid hitherto existed?—(Cries' of
" Hear, . hear.") Ti a Noble Lord stated, that what-
ever might be the necessities of the country, they were .
nest such as to justify the imposition of an income tax, upon
which he bestowed all those usual epithets of opprobrium to
which every tax was more or le:s subject. He stated that it
was a tax which should be imposed only in time of wars or of
of great emergency, and reminded the house that in -the year
1797 Mr. Pitt, found it necessary to resort to it, in order to pro.
vide for the increasing necessities of the country. If the Noble
Lord had read the speech of Mr. Pitt on that occasion, he
must have found that it was not merely because the
country was engaged in war, but also because. -it was
necessary to maintain the public credit that ho had
proposed so large an income tax for the public.-L( Hear.)
It was on that ground that Mr. Fitt urged an the Reuse the
adoption, in the first place,' of the triple assessment which was
the foundation of the income tax, and ultimately of the income
tax itself. It was useless to say that Mr. Pitt intended the in-
come tax fur a source of revenue to be had recourse to in time of.
war. On the contrary, Mr. Pitt pledged the property tax for
the repayment in times of peace of the loans created in time
of war. So far was Ali. Pitt from expressing any opinion
thet the income tax ought never to be had recourse to except
in time of war, that he expressly stated that it was a
tax that might be had recotuse to whenever any emergency
might arise rendering it necessary for the purpose of
tuaintstinitig the public credit and sustaining ;he revenue
of the country. It was perfectly true that in 1603
Mr. Addington had thought it expedient to repeal the tax ;
but Mr. Addington did not leave the loans which had been
contracted unprovided for. Mr. Addington -did not incur
debts without making any provi• ion for their ultimate redemp-
tion. He'repealed the p operty tax, it. was true, but he im--
potted four rathions of oilier taxes in lieu of it. He imposed a
malt tap of tete millions—he imposed additional import duties,
to the amount of one Million—and one million additional cf as-
sessed taxes, and thus he realised the frier millions of property tax.
It was needless now treexamine hethi r the cominct of Mr Ad-
dington in so doing was expediaht or net. When the Noble Lord
suggested an inert ase in the_aesessed taxes, as not pressing on
thq poorer classe,s of the community, it. shoule be recollected
that of the atautit Collected from the the assessed taxes, by far
the greater part was colleCted from those very classes. • Mr.
Addington stated, in proposing the assessed taxes at the time he
took off the property tax, -that he proposed them for
the vette/le Of Hying the journeymen who were em-
ployed by shoekeepees, ,end who acted as ser-
vants for the respective proprietors of those shops.
The war broke out aeaau the next year, and the tax was re-
atid at, the plate •it was again repealed.. He (the
Chancellor of the Flichequea) was one of those -who at the
• time voted against the rope al, being toneinei.d that if it had
been continued for a short time, other imposts Which pressed

•
heavily on trade and matiufactures would have la en re-lazed ;
?Ind that; if that sacrifice hid been made, it would have pro-
(laced ctbilimensiifiti pthapfrityi—(Rear, hear.) The Noble
Lord who had just addresed the lieot Called cn bins (the
Chancellor of the Exclegeer) to give authority to the opinion
of Lord Brougham, who took a leading part in.proeuring the
ikapetil.-cf the tax, The Noble Lord (John Russell) ca,lect on
him to give that authority to the opinion of Lord .Brougham,
because that Noble and Learned Lord had stated in an intro-
diletipn to some book which he published, that it was a tax
hiigtit to ,be irerved for a time of war. But he (the
( hancellor of the IrAtitte!) thought that, •11 a-guing
for the repeal of the tax at the
,tithe referred to, Lard
Brougham la:.d a great strews upon this point, thst the 4jovern-
H4ttt kit tljat, day was keeping up a war establishment in timed
peate, aim flat tale w as kept up to maintain them ; and so
ettorig Was this opinfofi in 48 14.ase and in the country, that
OcertimNit wttS oViged to frier the eitimates to a Select
MearseatY the. gable Lord ( Sord John
Russell) alto referred to ! id Ahtibipit deelerarson in 1834,
that he was unwilling to propose inettint tttx in time
of peace, and called on them (the Ministers) to. be governed
by that declarration, But he (tn 6 chencellor of the Ex-
tiftetinerl had a fight to claim theslippy.: of Lord
Althtifp; hhd If tt• at. to 118 OCUt,.* „
Preteerat, 4 ai.4 fre6iidhit itt tgvedf of the trteAsure
under consideration. What was the staig thifilgl the t/tztt cit:
easion ? The repeal of the malt tax was proposed, and
the debate of the malt duty that the debate with respect to
the repeal of the property tax took place. —( Hear, hear. )
The imotint *eel 2:600;000/., and what did Lord A thorp say}?
ids ChaiießllJr of t ItF2 Ei',ththiti4 at a, time when it was the
fahildn eilrelP.elii theahffell of tip Tpasery, lie
could boast of 1,500,0001. at the elo.ie finahßt
-nd with that sum it was proposed to do away with 2,500,000..
of taxation. The whole sum. Government would lose would be
4,000,000/.. to meet which they had 1,500,0001., so that had
the measure been effected, the consequence would be that et
the coil of a yar there *ad be a Ileffeieney of 2,500,0001.
Llifd .Althofti fehnd. ItitiaMf ti •giftiatidn Ivhigh the pro.
Sea o'v't-nttst-iftt ere tett hi iirede&seciee=illi isi With
a deficiency of 2,500,000/., and sthat ibis fhb LtitO
Althorp then? He said if the measure were eseeiBdi
it was impossible for him to effect the reduction of taxation
proposed to the House unless by the imposition of a property
tax, such as the House may now ad. pt. lle said that with
such a deficiency as 2,500,000/.3 he must resort to a property
tak.—(l-16ar.) And ht had the ilternetiet d those sonreee of
taatiun, *hititi *ere piditted otit to the attention df the
by the Noble Lord 1 and bk said thia at a titnks tithed 640
was not a growing deficiency of six Of leitsti iei4tl. He
found himself in such a position With 2.500,000/. defi-
ciency, that he must either. abandon the proposition of a
a
repeal of.tho tax, br impose preperty tax. —( Hear, bear. )
theti, theo:entild be tiny itFbftg rrecedent derived front the
authority of the individual, it was that in a prottltiit pttee,'in
which there was not, as the Noble Lord admitted, such a pr6sa!
sure as on the present octeeion, Lord Althorp, in his caVacity
of head of. the Exchequer, thought it his duty to propose a
property tax as the means of keeping up the revenue. It was
of all importance to Maintlin the credit of the country. It is
necessary to Watch eerefelly is system of loans during peace.
• They ate necessary instruments in real, b!leatil!e thijti • trade
is crippled; and there are additional burdens tit tht
people ; but in war loons are contracted with a moral certainty.
that on the return of peace the resources of the country would
he set a. liberty to meet them. .But When loans were taken in
time of peace, they must look forward 'o war with the certainty
that their means would he crippled when that time arrived.
They had been taur.trd with taking this plan otit of the
armoury of the State, this precious weapon in time of pence.
If it was wrong to take this weapon out of the armoury of the
State, which was most effective in time of war, what should
be said of the Government that resorted in a time of peace to
a system of loans, which of all others was best adapted to a
time of war. But what were the objections of the Noble
Lord to the income tax ? He first says that by it we impose a
tax on the funds. He thought that they owed this objection •
to the situation in which the last election placed him as the
Member for the City of, London: He perfectly agreed with
the Noble Lord that to impose a tax on the 'funds
would be extremely injurious.—( Hear, hear.) But the
income tax bore upon funded, as well as on every other
kind ofproperty, and was not, therefore, liable to the objections
that were urged in 1831, when a tax on stock was proposed
under the name of a transfer duty, and which was even sup-
ported by the Noble Lord, nre.veo tenderly. anxious on behalf of
the fund-holder, The Noble Lord said, if we taxed the funds
the merchants would fly from the Exchange of London,
Amsterdam, and mile: towns, whose credit was unfettered
by taxes. Now, one fact was baiter than a thousand arguments.
When the income tax was proposed, the funds were eB4—the
day when the measure had been discussed, and scrutinized all
over the country, they were above 90.—(Hear, Lear, and
cheers.) The Noble Lord said the tax was unequal—slices-
us a tax that was, not. Ile said, you might raise the money by a
tax on corn ; but would that tax press equally on all classes ? •
It. appeared to him that no tax would operate more equally than
the income tax, the inequality of which had been so much
complained of. But the Noble Lord said that the tax was of
an inquisitorial ebaraeicr. Now he (Sir. Goulburn) did not
deny that, in order to aseertasn the amount which different in-
dividuals should pay, it. would be necessary to make inquiries.of
au embarrassing nature, which it could he impossible upon all
occasions to avoid. But he lisped be should take every pre-.
caution to prevent the affairs of men engaged in trade from
being disclosed to their detriment to persons in their vie:nity.
His object would be to give every facility to parties to make
payments without having recourse to anyundue disclosure of their
affairs ; and without entering into the details of the measure he
hoped he should he enabled so to frame it as to obviate many of the
objections made upon that head to, former income taxes. The
Noble Lord had stated that the late Government would have
been enabled to equalise the expenditure and the revenue of
the country if their financial measures had been adopted; end
the Right Hon. Gentleman the late Chancellor of the Ex-
el'eVer IVtd.f!Stitna.t.ed thf, of which woulu
‘couhthaeo'been the result
of adopting the plan of the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite?
Why, that at the end of the year they would have found them.

selves with a deficiency of 800,0001., with a prospect of an
increased deficiency et the end of the ensuing year from those
causes to which he had alluded. The Noble Lord had stated
several means of -supplyieg this deficiency. The first resource
to which he referred was a tax upon the succession to real pro-
p. rty.. Ile (the Chancel.or of the Exchequer) had often seen
reference to that subject, but he could not help thinking that
those persons who spoke upon it were greatly mistaken in their
views. There appeared to be a very general opinion that no-
thing but personal property paid legacy duty. There could
not be a 'greater fellacy. Legacy outy was paid to a large
amount in the shape of charges upon real property.—( Hear. )
A very large } roparticn of the legacy duty at present received
%tee in tact derived irom charges upon land. Another error
was the suppoeitiort that all personal property paid legacy duty.
There were many UFrB Ise which personal property might be
settled in the same way as landed property itself. If, for
instance, a man who had 500,1)001. in the funds, married, and
had his marriage settleMent Made in the ordinary way in which
settlements were made of landed property, that property
devolved upon the person who succeeded to it as exempt from
legacy duty as any real estate whatever. The property which
would be affected by the contemplated alteration was chiefly
personal property of the value of 501., 1001.. or 2001. a-year ;
and be asked the House whether in a time of general difficulty
and emberrasseneet that was a desirable object.—( Hear, hear. )
Ile might state with a view to show by approximation, which
was all thst could be done, what was the proportion of real
and personal property which at present paid the legacy duty ;
he had i'ata in his possession by which he could show that a
large proportion of the legacy duty . had arisen from
charges upon real property as contradistinguished from personal.
He was afraid he had tired the House.—( Hear, hear.) It
would he in the recollection cf the Ilcrinse that, in 12-95, Mr.
Pitt intreduced too mcasurt s one of which waste make landed
erceretty, passing by devise, subject to a out). ; and the other
was to imps se a similar taxation upon the legacy of personal
pr operty. In that Act, it was proposed to except settled pro-
perty, That Act. was rejected, but the. Act for imposing legacy
duty on personal property was passed. In 1805, Mr. Pitt,
not deterred by this reject.on, zgain proposed a legate duty On
charges upon tend ; and the proportion of the burden of this
tax; borne by charges on land to that borne by personal pro-
perty might be omettlated front the het, that in the six years
preesding ItiO3, the duty paid on personal property alone was
5,100,0001. ; but, in the six years following, the amount th-
rived f om the duty on both personal . and landed, was
8,860,0001. Now, dednctieg the former from the litter sum
would leave 3,760,00(1. as the • amount paid by
the land
lie thought it right to shOW, inthe first instance, that those
who declared that the pissent•legaey duty dal not apply to land
were in error, and.he hoped that he had satisfectorily
that there was good reason for not resorting to these meant
of -deriving an amount of revenue. But, if not, he ceuldfortify
himself with the opinien of the Hon_ Member for Pols-mouth,
who stated in explicit language that it would nothe expedient.
—f Hear, hear.) A proposition was made on the subject in
1810 by the lion. Member for Teignmouth, expressly to the
-same effect as that made by the Noble Lord ; and what. did the
lion. Alernber for Portsmouth say on that occasion ? He said
that “Nothing was so delusive as to suppesse that because a
legacy duty attached to personal property, nothing was
paid on the descent of real property." And lie went
on to say that a great part of it was paid by per-
sons considered free from all liability to the duty. He
was glad that these oeiniwis fortified hit own, though he
migh?t, atleuce others, but so far from property not paying,
the charges on estates by tamps and other means was consicere
able. 'I he last point noiiced by the Noble Lord, was a recom-
mendation to increase the assessed taxes. Those gentlemen
who supported this I canon-c, spoke as if the assested taxes fell
oily on the higher classes. if any gentleman had been
Chancellor of the Exchequer he would be aware that commu-
nications were constantly received, showirg that those taxes
pressed severely on the less wealthy. It the Noble. Lerd
tbeught they could raise two millions by the assessed taxes,
he was in error, or he must lay it on the light ants windows of
the poor. Then, with respect to the house tax, a large portion
of the houses of fins country was exempted from the tax;
about two-thirds of the houses were exempted altogether. The
house tax, too, was only a species of property tax, operating on
one kind of property atone, and they might, by placing a heavy
charge on a msn's house, attack his means through his habit a ion.
The great weight of the tax, however, must fall upon the
poorer classes of the community. He would . read to the
House the words made use of by Sir'John Key, when Lord
May-or of London, in relation to the house and window tax.
That was an authority to which the Noble Lord ought nt bow.
--(Cheers and laughter.) Surely the reprei•entative of the
City would aloe- some weight in the authority of the Lord
Mayor.—(A laugh.) It was, moreover, the opinion of a man.
not opposed to the Noble Lord, but one who had been con-
nected with Noble Lord, both in City and in general politics,
and who was as mueh entitled to admiration in the one
situation as he Was in the other.—(Cheers and laughter.)
Sir John Key said that the City of London objected to the
house and window tax as a tax unjust in principle.--(Cheers
from the Ministerial benches)—as a tax that in its operation
was oppreesive and inquisitorial—(Ministerial cheers)—and
vexatietis in its imposition and collection—( renewed Minis-
terial cheers)—aura that no modification could make it a fair
and equitable tax. Having told the House what it was not,
Sir John Key proceeded to inform them what it was, aud he
described the house tax to he a property tax, but net an equal
property tax; a .propertf tax pressing upon one description of
property only ; an unfair tax, a tax press eg unjustly upon
the industry of the 'country.—(Cheers.) It seas an income
tax in its most odious form—( Continued cheers.)—
because it touched net the great masses of wealth, but pressed
solely opon industry. 'I he old income tax, said Sir John
Key, which hati been so execrated, was a heavenly tax in
comparison to Loud cheering And laughter from the
I Ministerial benches.) '1 lie Noble Lord surely could not have
consulted his constituents before making his speech this even-
ing, or rather he had consulted his constituents' vocabulary,
and applied to the property tar, which they called a heavenly
tax, those terms which they had applied to the very tax which
the Noble Lord would propose to substitute for it.—
(Cheers and laughter.) He was ashamed of himself for
having so long tresrpas,,eel upon
.the' time of the House.
but atter the speech of. the Noble Levi, he had felt it would he
impossible for him to abstain from addressing them in vindica-
tion of the financial treasures of the Government. He hoped
he had satisfied •he House that the occasion este one which
called for exertion to orerceme the finaneialelifficulties of the
country—that there tves nothing in the present crisis calculated
' to produce feelings of gloom if they met itlike men, but thet they
were called upon to snake an energetic exertion to repair the
hnances of the country, sorts to place them once more on a just and
proper fating, lie would trust to their readiness to make good
the want of income of the county when they found that. the
country requited it. Time had been allotted for
.ascertainine
the opinion of the country, amid he hoped to.tind that the feel-
ing which was entertained upon that measure, •when it was first
proposed to the 1-louse, had been confirmed ; and although they
would not, like the Lord Mayor of London, sty that it is a
heavenly tax, they would, he wansure, be ready to submit to
it, as the best means of repairing :he finances, and enabling
them •to give rel,ef to the trade, the manact ures,. and corn
merest of the country ; and however he might differ in politics
with the Noble -Lord, the Noble Lord hail no less admitted it to
be one of the many evils existing it, the country.
Air. WILLIAMS said that he had listened with great atten-
tion to the Right Hon Gentleman, and he regretted to say.
that he bad not succeed in convincing him that the proposition
of the Government was the best means cf making up the pre-
sent deficiency ih the revenue. Although the Right lion.
Gentleman was confirmedin his opinion by that expressed by a
, Lord Mayor of London some 15 years ago, he (Mr. Williams)
must say that that confirmation was not at all to his (Mr. Wil-
liams's) satisfaction.
The 'CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER intimated
across the table that the opinion•he had. referred to was ex-
pressed not more than ten yeaes ago.
Mr. WILLIAAIS said it had not at all removed his objec-
tion to the Right lion. Gentleman's proposition. He (Mr.
Williams) was exceedingly pleased to find that the Noble
lord. the Member for London, in his resolution, had
adopted .one proposition which he (Mr. W.) had expiessed
Isla' lr._Fnfion
Ithich was now not. liable to the legacy
of priposing the House, viz., to subject all
tleserll;Pftiacmieofatiity,
as
oi.,..htr, property. The Noble Lord had.
awn with respect to as eased
eoilliane.,\ considered the window
serefe ant wrldit/on to his propos'.
income tax,
crag much better
1 La:ea% nainodstticliitlijeloPftlflaetlies still he thought
than that most unjust. unequal', anal inqnieisortat
as it was proposed by her Majesty's Government. - No:tvithe
standing the opinion expressed by the Right Honoterahle Gene
trijuet and most unequal. It was true, the
rtigmnni, (ale. Williams) must say, that the tax, as it Wee re-
posed, mat ill
Right Hon. Gehilerhilli hex/ justified that inequality, by the
equality existing in levying ether tastes, But he (Mr. Wile
. hams) had' often emeplained in that Hottest. of that inequality,
arid of its great irjustiee. He had often shown in that House
how this inequality existed. Ile was glad that the Right lion.
Oenttefitan h&,.1 made that admission, and he had lisped the
ilfert hens: Genfienien'e attention would be called to what
he hitfisiat miiiiitted• to ate an injustice, and thence to a general
revision of the taxation of the country. There were
one or two eases which gift great dissatisfaction to the
country. With r geld to the prontwition of the Noble
Lord, lie must say, that he did not think the Noble Lord had
tileds out a very good case. In the first place, he (i%lr. Wile
liems) winch preferred the timber duties proposed by her Ma-
jetty's Obvt,,tr 'tent to those suggested by the Noble Lord.
Her !Majesty's Govetoment had dealt fairly with respect to that
very important attiele. Ho knew of no article in that country
more important than tlffiliet j not only was it a very useful article
in building, but, if the ditty was lower, it would enable them to
bull l tlseirand thus enable them better to come
jt ;: iv kh the shipsforeignteap'hsheiprOwner. If they increased their ship-
s ing, Ivey fe.sy greatly added to the employment of capital. :It
else greatl oath! tad ifet grit ployment of seamen. He believed
y
that nothing was so well calettitttfA as a protection against
foreign countries as the manning of ships In the mercantile ser-
vice. He must say that, with regard to the artiehref coffee,
which wae the next item in the Nible Lord's resolution, that
thotight the Unvernmeot had dealt most liberally ivith it,
but to thmight they hid made too great a difference between_
• colsnial aria ft:Weigh eoPto He thought their proposal would
have been much better If the difference which existed now be-
tween colonial and foreign ecfteo-4ii., 6tl. or 9d., and Is. 3d.,
had been continued. He thought that a differential duty of
.fifty per cent. was an ample and more than sufficient protection
to the colonies. He did think that every encouragement
should be given to the consumption of entiess. considering the
present position a Chinni He thought that a.duty pf sixpence
a pound on foreign coffee would greatly increase the conaatoln-
tion, and not at all diminish the revenue. With regard to the
proposition with respect to sugar, he had already Men expressed
his. opinion. He could hope to see the treaty entered into•with
foreign countries cohere sugar was grown for the abolition of
slavery. Utility could accomplish this with the Brazils Spain
would soon adopt the same course. With regard to - he other I
proposition of the Noble Lord, he had said often before in that
House, that he was decidedly in favour of a free trade in corn.
But if any duty was proposed, he thought that a fixed duty, I
such as the Noble Lord had before proposed, or Otte will leas,
would be infinitely better thanwhe measurnof her Majesty',
Government, which had yesterday passed that Horne. Buf
with regard to the reduc: ion proposed, he had before stated that
he considered theerresetit renegers a itorisiderable amendment
on the old law; but still he thought that as much income would
have been produced by antis. duty, and th it in the course of
a year more, .while at the same time the price would Le leas to
the consumer. With regard to the taxes which had been abo-
lished .since the war, he must say that any tax that would fall on
persons poss. ssiog prcperty would be much more preferatOe
than to have the assessed taxes restored. He consi-
dered that the industrious classes were already most
unjustly burdened, and he, therefore, said th et any
taxes that mould again affect them le a peculiar manner ought
to be certainly avoided. After reading the resolution of the
Noble Lord, he must ray that he was not at all prepossessed in
favour of the proposi ion, as set forth in. these resolutions.
But the Noble Lord had made considerable addit ons to his
views in his speech, which hal altered his (Mr. Williams's)
opinion altogether with regard to the proferwed Mode
of making up the deficiency in the revenue cf
the country. lii consequence of this he had given no-
tice cf his (Mr. Williaws s) propositions, which he still con-
sidered better than those of the Noble Lord. —( Hear, hear.)
The .first propesition was with respect to real property, or pro-
perty of every description, not liable to the payment of the
same amount of *duty as was then paid upon personal property
to the legacy and probate duty. The Noele Lord had not
named what he (M.
•Williams)W- considered a most unjust ohs-
tinctioa. Take, for instance, a man who left his children 301.
If that property consisted of furniture, that furniture has! to
be valued, and • if that furnitute w;t_- valued wt SOl,
rheaschin fcti bad to pay the 10;acy tol4 pr'- bate 'duty
---I Cries • of `ilea:, hear" I—if .a rich , Netilernstn 'w ",th
100,0001. a year, he paid neither taxes nor duty. The Right
Hon, Baronet shook his head; now he would ask hint if the

Duke of Cleveland, the Duke of Norfolk,
or Alarquis o eiee
Herifird, who had just come into such immense estates, tv
these Noblemen aid any duty whatever wen
their estat.
tlaixe
;( iti')Jur.t titif .t)t.teveya,sz,o,t,j r
he c:ta thats
sure: the
were enreigaitita,ll:o%a.ble to a 10";
he nos right, thew, in asking if such a state of thine."
would readily furnish the House with the informs'tinn•
au
motahrnogel syuti
:I„,u).(aanilj.nputlrisita:?iclai
inilreplia,esrroodt do
proportion
utioshihteheanr,i,ichunintaorfi ticiiispapyro;:wr.,eals.
any argument foundie:deslft-o°7l‘b.
them. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had referred to Ow'
self-evident, he
oenueler thought
ibeenoatdvaaintntcsi acesdi anticipate Beat:ger:l,
1.?":
j 611;;•
eas, n
amount of taxies in the year 1825. He (Air. W.) wished the - •
Right Honourable Gentleman had come to a later pell'd,
for there was a vast difference in the value of property
then and now. If he calculated tIM amount of proe •
perty as in 1825, and what it was now, he would -;
have a much larger revenue than he would have had in 18•25•
lie hal heard persons who were well acquainted with this sub-
j ject, and they had estimated the increase of property at from
two millions to two millions and a half. Tee next part of Ilia
proposition referred to all annuities, pensions, dividends, and
salaries, and provided that they should be hableto-a certain ire-
position of taxation. For all salaries up to 2501. or 300/. r.-
year, he proposed a tax of 6d. in the pound, or two and a bait
per cent. Several gentlereeer had stated to him that there was
great ohjiction to this proposal. If he did not consider that the
proposal was founded in justice, be would never have proposed
it. He would state shortly to the House his reason for im-
posing this tax. When they looked to the present state of the
country, with the exception of those two great interests, the
landowners and the West India . Proprietors, sall°
were protected by menepoly created by legislattoa ;
in that liouse -- with the exception of those 1-'0 1
classes, every class in this country was thi-n . in
a state of suffering. The merchant, the manufacturer, the j,
shipowner, and the labourer, all were in a state oe.great depret-
sion.mid suffering. That he believed no one could guest on. If
they compared these classes- to the same classes ef six jeers
ago, they would find that six years ago they were aleie to pay
twice as much taxes as they could now. Seeing then ,'hat this -
cease was in this state of suffering and distress, it we old be
unjust to add a greater weight to taxation to that which alheanY
pressed them down, not only so heavily, but so unjuetpa
Another reason why he made this proposition ors the v'a-tSe
of money now and same years ago. During the war tt'f.
salaries of public men were very much increased. They Ines •
also consider the fall in wages, and yet out of these wages the, •
taxes principally came. lie referred to a most able worh -
• written by the Right Hon. the S.ecretery Sir the Home Denaart—
ment on this subject, who was a very high authority. rie
(Mr. Williams) had read a great many works, and he es
nevi read any in which the view of the writer were ex-
heih more ability, i.e would say, with more justice'
The Right ;lion. Gentleman ;Anted that the difference in
value of mand in 1813, which was the last year e;
the war, was at 30 per cent. Now there was not an
:-,reased an opieion on the subject, "°
virtual ho had ever ea
'`re. .;
.•
et
did nut hear- out the Right aier'n. Baronet in this. But if '
(Mr.Williarns) were to expreseaaa °pluton, he should think ill'
the Right Hen. Gentleman hats eother unaer-stated the
than otherwise. The. amount of taxes :'ss 1813 was 81,000,000
• and the value of gold wes Si. 6s. 2d, the o.‘erce. At the preset:l
time the taxes were about 58 millions, whelh: the value of g,'`
was 3/. 17s. Mid. In 18/2 the price of whet.- was 1225. 6e,';
-now the price was 625., sa that they hed to s-
amount of taxes upon salaries, while they could gea two nah-13
way the saw-
tees of weeat when they could have but one in 1812. fn la • . ,
according to Alm contracts at Greenwich Hospital, the, Ft':
of • beef was 9d. a pound; he did not know what the con:ta.t
was at the present time, but a very large quantity Was c6°.,
~
stoned, and he thought he should not be far from the trut''. '
when. he maid it w s not more than 6d. per pound, so that they
had a pound and a half of beef now to one pound in 1813:
'The- present condition of every one who would have to paY
tax would make the burden upon him a great deal heavier
th
in 1834. He ( Mr. Williams). never knew a man pay 'O'')°,
hail not the means to do so. Hume in his " Essay on a3rethere ,
said, that under the eircunniteneet of heavy debt in which tn'
country was placed, the revenue must -be raised from a cop'
tinned' tax on annuities, or -what was the same thing, from 9!
mortgage of those annuities. They must come to this in "le
end ; the Right Hon. Gentleman said that a long time ag".*
and he (Mr. W.) must say that it did the Right Hon. Ger
tleinan great credit, that he had foreseen it. He agreed with t er
Right Hon. Gentleman in one point, and that was that a hates-fo
amount of expenditure this House might vote, it was bound
place the means of raring it in the hands of Government,
that in a manner very differently from all that had been done
late.—( Hear; hear. 'I Now if his (Mr. Williams's) plans wee;
carried oat, it would secure to the Government a sum of fr' •
4,000,0001. to 4,500,0001., which would be amply sufficient fi "r •
the exigencies -Of the country. He would make one o'l
observation only .befoie he sat down, and that was thaa'
much dependence-should not. be placed upon the Bank of
land. lie knew 'that the Bank was very willing to aceman'be
date the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but still it rniglit.te
unable to afford, the required accommodation. On the re
of January of this year, the Government had not ab°,e, •
aalthe,ooo/. to pay a debt of 9,000,000/. ; and if, when al 100
cation was made for more advances, thirteen Direct tee
had said, " No," • •in what state would the Goveran'o.
have been ? He .would press this Matter on the atoell
tion of the Right Hon. Baronet, as being a subject , the
worthy of his consideration. And again he would remilatee
Right f lon. P.aronet, that in the comer of a few years the xl
would apply for a new. 'charter, and then it would be we'
,iee
the Right tion. Baronet to be able to meet them, withoot h'
under any apprehension, or any dread, but on a fair footirilete
independence. Ile thanked the House for the attention eat
which lie ;had been heard, and he begged to give notice, I"ta,e
after the Noble Lord's motion was disposed of, he shouldn'ree
the following resolution—•" That it. is the opinion of this c°s;/,.
mittee, that, towards raising the supply.granteei to her 31014,0t5
anti for the reducing, as much as May be practicable, the
new payable on malt, sugar, and tea, there shall be chargc`a;
nually the several rates and duties following, that is to.,eedi
fir audio respect of every annuity, pension, stipond, dicl2:log.
or sa!ary, pryabie out of the public revenue of the United the 4
dornof the annual amount of 1501. to 3001., for every !i"ior
shillings, sixpence ; of 3001 to'soo/., for every twenty
one shilling of 500/. to 7501. for every twenty sl'" ger"
on shilling and sixpence ; of 7501. to 1,0001., foe for
twenty shillings, two shillhtgs •• of 1,0001. to I,so°Le es I
every twenty shillings, three shillings ; of 1,500/. ar
,wards, for every twenty shillings, four shillings, on the
~te•
thereof. For. and in respect of all lands, tenements, here':
meats, heritages, and real property of every description, tj'i 7n 1
shall be charged to every person on coming into pbesel
thereof, by ieheritance or bequest, a duty equal in arooeartr, ;
theyrobate and legaeyduty now payable on personal preli`f Ili',
j Sir- R. INGLIS.; said that after the excellent speech ° did •
Right lion.• Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, heeeell
not rise for the purpose of following the Hon. Member thr.t,g to
his speech ; but he rose simply for the purpose of submit°. el°
his Right Hon. Friend, the First Lord of the Treeenr';
alteration which he took the opportunity of suggesting ti,.°`c
his avproval.. The Right Hon. Baronet had pledged "e':
istenee of his Government upon the success of this prep t
cid measure, but though he stated that, he expreseed'rese;
same time, his willingness to listen toeany co i•municat' -beg e
lating to the details of the measure. The Right Hon. Bart' tlO4
by stating that lie could expect no sacrifices on the part °oaf; 4
whose incomes did not exceed 150 e. per annum.• v7f o t
therefore, that those whose incomes were below that sure-tede
not in a position to bear the tax, which ought to he Itva.oll,J; ;1
others, he begged to submit to the. Right Hon. Gen nc% Dce
that an equal advantage should be given to those whose l!l_ce
should exceed 1501., that was to say, that; those whore Vl'
was 2001. ehould pay the tax only on the surplus 50/- 4J
lieved there as as no modification of the Right lion. Beton' ;
which would so much tend to make his measure generaffeerr `,
ceived, as this—the alteration would make very lit tie 04 tit it
in the amount expected to he received by his Riel!'oe., !'
Friend. but to the peon whose . income was only.'er
ie
would be a great and thankfully received boon. 11' -hes e
I another suggestion which he begged to make befer,erees.,
down ; he believed that the country generally wounit. til
with more satisfaction a property tax. of 4 or 5 per an nit
to be compel:eel to submit to all the machinery of theee r
tax. 'He begged to rccommed these suggestions to '"ojerrer,
I sideration of the Right non. Baronet, because he
they would greatly tend to lighten the burdens of the te•
toit
je
they would press heas7eat-
J tonne(e.-;
Mr. P. M. STEeezaRT said he considered .
uel le"
threatened tax was a most. inquisitorial. odious:, a ot
less.
nary imposition ueon the
1 ;ere to be subjected to it,peesple this country, b teealsiee.
he igreed. with the en t°
:r,
the grinher for Oxford, that they should endea.voy ,tx
It as little burdensome as possible,
S.) apt-roved of the suggestion of his Hon. Frienna,oo,l.
150/. ought to be made the unit in calenalaiing thee/ his Jo De
; the tax.—( Bear, hear.) To the last s.
land. in that spiel that ct
ehegestiol,l.-,ebewejt tee
j Friend he (Mr. Stewart) would make no' remark' -roe' or'
the fseteo-d5-i
was going now to make desperate war agaheet theP
The Right Hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor ehf the tiope-.6 thl
said that he, as a financier, helped in 1816 in " he 01 'O,
derteking to continue for two years that tax, and ,totte,
he less quite sure if the property tax had been cotejele,treeic.,
two years, after the close of the war, our finroces et
been in a much more flourishing state storythanVesecs .
lie (Mr. Stewart) said that in looking back in flit
e
the.ploposition of Mr. Vansittart to continue a
,ithdrafe'
it was the duty of the Government in honour to " see(
one could look but with sympathy on those who cautiejatier 011:1.1
feet of the revenue, lie would just make one q by a ea.
show the opinion that Was entertained of that '3; eiew ect:
who might be called a highs authority. Mr. flari‘a,r,./et
Ashburton, thus spoke, after an eloquent and
showing the impoirey of continuing that tax afteluetle e
" Since there is a debt of 820,000,G001., it. is of tee
quence whether twelve more be added ; hut it lastetire.,o s§;
eat importance that the people should be Illic",00, se-tee:/a
meat unjust, unnecessary, and odious impo",lje, it ja:
were the words of; Mr. Baring in 1816, and he s ` tee r(
cifpretshuem
athhta
It
lbw(
mutant
.4eTioinw,optpho:itiiioign 10:
a
tleman said, and lie (Mr. Stewart) agrecele.7e'unie.ta thi I
;the/
they. did right in boldly looking theie .. Pie;
j the face; but the Right honourable Gentlen'aer elite,"er
was not merely the deficiency of 2,500,000/., ra. ieh, 0 .itfj.
bad to provide ; but they had to cure the evil, °' seewacbte/ Ise ,
ficiensies for five or six years past. He (3-IrL, [r_'l4
say that lie agreed with this Noble Lord. ty talco.fled ;cy
London, that there had been a
,g!oonly rie`„ olagritiaeh • tlai
matters, and that these deficieriehee had b"eleueY •,
mystified, because he did assert that the defic_ higti 4to
had to deal with now, as a financial coy ntry
viriJiat en exi; reti'
siseply time detieiency of 2,4500,000 e. :ro,2ht Oen, ieterTe
it meguified in the first instance ! touol7e
the first night of the financial measure. rnansts..e, and t oy
reletive to• our affairs in Affghan .t)
mixed uiewith the question—he (Mr. -`isterstatichaili,ro.o.
thought very is properly—the difficulties
c°,_iesoi.;(lo toe
He had no access toerial doeutnentsa 11. el, "bur I. thf
light upon his knowledge of Indian ill,
,r;lactri' e eowil iii th, ;,0
account, written by Mr. Ponce, %chic, surplus teen
1840, it appeared that there was a sarge_e
ok it,
venue of the four Presidencies of India. 11.e:Lt tsettt`'d fifty;
iete.
titete was a considerable surplus at
but in the accounts of the revenue,.
bundredthousasouu.
these was a Souri,hiug surplus of six
c,
.ed thou
.quartito.. With reseeet to China, airraiteila'•
of three loin 1r
It 0
of which certainly upwards
Jig
for the ransoi el
out of the eie media:it, of dollars, pese
who.were net
It wow impossible! to convince tthaot.
was a°3thus'"rhan tj;
the history of the ioneme tax h
and nothing ite
tax to all interne and perposhs, the
aehit j° e
• .tiOi
,; had ten 014
could justify a tax to i
vel i6(.0
Toe jecoe .
which it was levied.
)o.el declared tu e ,übje
Bill which Air. Ponsonby
I liberty of ad.
ile of the pole ,h tas. w t,
with the prihsae t.,„ohal ter eat- .„ Lee ect et es
sedetiVsuel
was in 1793 that the first t
the 31srqui, ,ste. i•
But whe't th the pra.
again introduced the subject.
eriods,ow.
oars nvee's9t
and in 1806 Henry Petty, hoc' es, he (ere cfp
of tile country at Loth of t1111.6:Pa;,.
said that if it
I‘l,-. Pitt ~in iott-cdoeitig I t
contest which they were then yid rlir•
1 iattheiliate test
sudden tax
must be obtained ly a
on that eccasien re.11,,,h0
d by Mr. Pea
the clefioicacY (
to ()Leah' supply requisitle'ltl.ei.nsg'i,g,;erd°,u'rris.;s
The sum require
toollte'_;etee
to be made upon the present. occasion
el to ra'se these
tethei &thee!
1798, when air. Pitt required
r' to 13,642,00" •
or -se"
Estimates arnoun
money, the Navy
lions of money withiu the year, u,here,acsas
0-1,4 Nue"
income tax,
i.eates- tr.
made his proposition for an f
„rime),
at, ,
the
j.i
r
--eighteen and twenty millhihs o
~ere
Army Estimatet to 8,840,000/. hi 160te wits: !Seal n l'ofDhct
the Estimatee for the. .Nevy ao
eessetti,ooo/.- Svcs" it e
per, 03 front ,t 0: • ,
•
proposed by the Right ou. Baronet,
the. -i-orttrb`'.o`'ile;:;lll'''le-il

18''5•

s sub-
; from
of his
and
in it'l-
a halt

re ties
tat the
reused
ur 3U
of the
it!, the

who

two
n.
in
tr, Old
?wpro-
m..

x }ears
to pay
iat this
114 be
LL-eadY
ja•tly-
! va!tte

it t"
mot
•
the-
e wori;