The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-15 00:00:00

paid by all except the landlords. The probate duty
for 1841 was 197,0001., and legacy duty, 1,200,0001.,
not one shilling of which was levied on real. property.-
(Hear' hear.) The sale of lands, tso, was only occa-
sional, but the transfer of other property was perpetual,
and personal property was always taxed in its transmission.
On the transfer of landed. property of the value of
seven hundred pounds, and not exceeding one thousand
pounds, there was a stamp duty levied of 9/., but on a
transfer of personal-property, in consequence of death,
of the value of 8001., and not exceeding 1,000/., then:
was a probate -duty of 22/., in addition to the
legacy duty. On a transfer of landed pro-
perty of the value of 8,000 i., and not exceed-
ing tO,OOO/., there was a stamp duty of 851., which on a
transfer of personal property of the same amount there
was a probate duty levied of 240/. in addition to
the legacy duty. If they took the stamp duty
at 2?000,000/., the utmost that the landed
interest contributed to the stamp duty was half a mil-
lion, leaving one million and a half to be set
against what the landed interest were pleased
to call their peculiar burdens. When they came to consi-
der the exemptions of the landed interest from taxations,
they were really infinite. They paid no probate duty,
they paid no legacy duty ; and since 1797 upwards of
81,000,000/. had been paid for probate duty and legacy
duty on personal property ; and the House ought
not to forget, that when the probate duty and the
legacy duty: were first proposed by Mr. Pitt, he in-
tended that both kinds of property should be equally
subject to it. The Bill to that effect had been brought
in, and had been carried through that House
after immense opposition. It had been carried
on the third reading by the casting vote of the Speaker,
and had afterwards been dropped as a peace-offering to
the country gentlemen, and since that time no Minister
had brought it forward. He (Mr.' Ward) was sorry to
find that even the Right Hon. Baronet did not consider
himself powerful enough to propose it. He (Mr. Ward)
had heard nothing of a proposal for the extension of the
probate duty and the legacy duty to real property
in the. Right Hon. Gentleman's statement of Friday.
Their exemptions from smaller duties were innumerable.
The farmer paid no duty on the insurance of his stock ;
every other species of propertypaid a duty on insurace.
There was no window tax paid on farms under
200/., and there were none upon dairy win-
dows. Upon a recent decision of the Judges he found
the houses occupied by bailiffs were exempt. He (Mr.
Ward) had paid window duty for the house occupied
by his bailiff last year, but ho should do so no
more ; so that he should gain something from his re-
searches on this question, whether the country did or no.
(The Hon. Gentleman here read the decision of the
Judges in the case of Lord Middleton's bailiff; to the effect
that houses occupied by farm bailiffs were exempt from win-
dow duty. Then there was an exemption from tolls, for
lime, manure, and agricultural implements ; there were no
drainage tolls, and, there was no duty on shepherd dogs.
There were, in short, a thousand things in which the
fact of a man being a farmer exempted him from duties
which lie would otherwise have to pay. From
examining the cases of dispute respecting as-
sessed taxes which had come before the Judges,
he found that not only had the house of a bailiff been
ruled to be exempt, but a house occupied by a brick-
maker, who was also a farmer, paid no duty. As a brick-
maker he paid duty, but as a farmer he was exempt,
and his exemption as a farmer covered his
liability as a brickmaker. The same decision was given
in the case of a wheelwright, a land-surveyor, and a cattle-
jobber, who, being also farmers, were exempted. Amongst
a number of letters which he had received on
the subject of his motion was one from a person in busi-
ness near Edinburgh. He said he 'was living at a little
distance from Edinburgh. He occupied a house to which
there were tan windows, and these were assessed at I/. lOs.
His neighbour, who had a house with fifteen windows,
for which, together with land, he paid a rent of 190/.,
paid no duty. Again, for every 100/. he insured on
his stock in trade, he paid a duty of three shillings to
the Government. His neighbour being a farmer,
was a privileged man ; he paid no duty. Again, lie was
assessed for his saddle horse 11. l ls. 6d. His fortunate
neighbour paidno duty. If his friend wished to have a
public sale of his stock, he could do so without a license ;
whilst he himself must employ an auctioneer, or take out a
license, and upon every article sold he was liable to pay a
duty of 5 per cent. He did not make these remarks for the
purpose of instituting an invidious comparison between
the farmers and the other classes of society; who were a
meritorious class of persons, and deserved every
encouragement ; but ho could not see why there
should be this distinction, why, if the principle were a
good one, it should not be extended to the various
branches of trade and manufactures.-(Hear.) At all
events, those who enjoyed these exemptions had no
right to complain of peculiar burdens. It was very
easy to call everything a peculiar burden.-(Hear,
hear, hear.) He had no doubt that before another
year had expired, they would hear that the income-
tax was a very peculiar burden on the farming interest.
-(Laughter.) Now he would call the attention of the
House to the amount of taxes upon the farming interest.
The local taxation was 4,336,0001. ; the general tax-
ation was 1,812,0001. ; making a total of upwards
of 6,000,000/. Deduct 2,000,0001., at least, for pro-
bate duty and legacy duty, and 500,0001. for all
minor exemptions, and 4,149,0001., was the total local
and general taxation payable upon land with a rental of
130,500,000/.-4Hear, hear.) He had taken some
pains' to obtain an account of some assessments
paid in London, and at a short distance
frotia it. He found a farm which paid a rent of 323/.
The poor rates upon that farm were 69/. ; the sur-
veyor's rate was 17/. 3s. ; the Church-rates, 41. ss. ;
making a total of §5/:, without the land-tax, which was 23/.
NoW with respect to property in London. In the parish
of St. James's a house, for which 200/. rent was paid, was
subject to a yearly charge 'of 17/. Bs. for local taxa-
tion. In Piccadilly, in the same parish, where
the rent of a house amounted to 1301., the
whole of' the taxes came to 111. 17s. 9d.
He took a house in the City, the locality was Bishops..
gate-street, and the rent was 1201. The poor rate
was 121.. 10s. ; Church-rates, 71. 10s. although
the occupiers were Dissenters ; Police-rates, 8/. 10s. ;
Assessed taxes, 12/. 10s. ; Consolidated rate and
clearing rates, 2/. 10s.; Sewer rates, 31., making a total
of 42/. 10s. upon a house in London, while the
rental was 1201. Now, with this fact, how could
they " talk of the peculiar burdens which are
felt on land, and ask for more compensation than Bs. of
duty a quarter on foreign corn ? He did not see that
there was a difference between these various
species of property ; and he did not see how claims
could arise upon one species of property that was
not equally applicable to other species of property. He
could not see on what grounds they were to compen-
sate one class at the expense of another, and
that compensation to be given by a tax upon food.
This was the simple ground brought forward in that
speech, from which he had so largely quoted, entitling
the land of this country to a large-the Word used was
more-protection than would be-given at an Bs. duty, as
proposed by the Noble Lord, the' Member for London.
The effect of a duty was not to be calculated from the
price raised upon foreign wheat imported; but what
was the price of the whole amount of corn
consumed in this country. It was in point of fact the
rise in prices on all food. If twenty millions of quarters
of wheat were consumed at a duty of Bs., that duty would
produce eight millions, and if at 4s. four millions.
which was enough to cover the whole of the burdens
which he could discover affected the landed interest.
Fourteen or fifteen shillings duty, which was
what the Right Hononourable Baronet contein.
plated to be the . average, supposing the corn
came in at 12s. to 165., that would add 15 millions to
the price of corn consumed. This, too, was a tax for
the benefit of the landlords ; for the public re-
ceived but a fraction of it. This had
been denounced by many of our public servants. lie
could not quote better names than Hume, M'Gregor,
and others, who were all unanimous in opinion, as to
the effect of any duty being imposed on foreign corn.
A Committee was but a preliminary step to any legis-
lation upon the subject of the Corn-laws. He
might be ' told that the present was a matter
of mere political economy-of mere opinion-and :has it
did not admit of being sifted by a Committee of
that House.-(Hear.) But they had Committees
upon subjects very analagous in their nature ;
they had Committees upon the Import Duties last year ;
he hail found a very high authority for the motion which
he had submitted to the House ; and which showed that it
Would be likely to be attended with the most useful
practical effects, The authority in qnestion was that
of the Right Hon. Baronet himself (Sir Robert Peel.)
He found that in-the year 1839, upon the motion of
Lord Chandos, the Right Hon. Baronet recommended
a Committee very similar to that which he (Mr Ward)
then proposed to the House. The Right Hon.
; Baronet on that occasion complimented Lord
'lAltherp on his determination to discontinne
the charges upon the horses of farmers, and other bur-
dens which pressed upon agricultuists. The Right
Honourable Baronet added that " he wished the Noble
Lord would consent to appoint a Committee of intelligent
Members of the House to consider the whole question
of those taxes which bore directly or indirectly upon agri-
culi,7lsts ; and to inquire whether the whole system of
local taxation, including the costs of criminal pro-
secutions, county rates, &c. were fairly appropriated." That
was a passage -which very much confirmed him (Mr.
Ward) in the belief that the Committee he now pro-
posed . might produce great benefit to the country.
-(hear, hear.) The Right Honourable Baronet
had there asked for an Inquiry in favour of the
agriculturists ; and he (Mr. Ward) now asked for an
inquiry in favour of the other classes 'of the community.
The agriculturists were then distressed-the other
classes were now suffering. Ile only wanted to arrive
at the truth ; he wanted something tangible-something
which could form a safe basis for legislation. He did
not like to see a suspicion spring up in the country ;
that one class, owing to its preponderance in that House,
was favoured at the expense of every other. Let them
appoint a Committee of intelligent Members of that
House, and they would thus, in any future discussion, be
enabled to point out the pusullar burdens which pressed
upon agriculture, while the country, nu discovering their
claims to protection, would be ready to acifnowlafige
their justice. With these views, he had certainly felt
justified in moving for a Committee before any further
progress was made in the discussion on the Corn-laws.
He felt his own ineility to deal with it, its if involved
many matters of detail which were always nnpalatable
to the House. But he did most earnestly beg HIP Right
Honourable Baronet to promise to grant them this
committee, for, if he did, he was perfectly satisfied,
41,0,e1d is; hp fairly and impartially appointed, that it
would Lead to Yen' R*44 Arid satisfactory results. His
own opittioft id At t fatOteF.q :,;Tee pp peculiar burdens on
land-(Hear, hear)-Psseept WOW WNW if 6)IS-Wsi in
proportion to its value as property ly nen tt was re-
membered that it had been stated frequently that the
land exceeded the
beo theri)
expectedrtpitroo ft
there
kbe
sh
naturally a
l to
it
was n
some charges on it more than on other pro- m,