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

INCOME TAX.

deficiency as it now stands, and as it has been stated by the
Government itself, that this great effort is to be made. Now,
Sir, in order to enable nit to consider, and in order to place in
a elsarer view the necessity which now exists, so far as oar
finances are concerned, to take the course proposed, I mutt
ask leave to refer to former occasions on which income taxes
have seen proposed and have been enacted, and to occasions on
which the House did not confirm, but negatived the proposi-
tion by large majorities. The difficulty which yeu had to en-
counter when the income tax was first proposed, was of this
nature. For several years you had been engaged in war, and
you were adding every year to the amount of your debt, raising
money on very disadvantageous terms, and increasing every
year, therefore, the interest• of the public debt. In the
year 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 be 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 a very great effort should be made, and the Mi-
nister of that day having the House and the country with him,
in favour 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:nearly equal to the expenditure of the war. As
soon as 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 of the war. lam 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 that 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 rent. Lord Lansdowne, who was
Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time, stated that the loan
which had for some years been ten millions a-year, had in the
previous year increased to twenty millions. It 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-
ereesieg at the rate of twenty millions a-year—that the Go •
vernment 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 House—it was
resisted generally by the independent Members of the House
who then supported the Government. - After several nights
discussion the proposition was defeated, and I think 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 wa • and for I hat alone.
Many years aft rwards 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 1834 it was proposed to reduce the malt tax to the
amount of ten millions, at the same time that there was a
proposition for a reduction of the window tax. On that
occasion Lord Althorp proposed a resolution to tie 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 tax, which at the present
is not expedient." Lord Althorp then declared that "he
confined his reso!ution to the time at which be
moved it." But he also made several statements
as to the general proposition of an income tax. He said that
he " thosght it was not prudent to have a small property tax."
He thought " that ten or twelve million should be made by it
if it was imposed at all." But he went on to say, that "he i
never knew a tax so unpopular as an income tax when •
was in operation."—( Hear, he tr.) He said "it was de-
tested," and he asked " what more inquisitorial powers could be
employed than noes required fur the collection of such a tax?
—( Hear, hear)—and' it was impossible that it could be made
to bear on all pat ties of the community." Now, Sir, at that
time what was proposed was to propose a tax on property, and
not on income—( Hear, bear)—and I must say that the Rigtit
Hen. Bart. opposite said on that occasion nothing which was at
all inconsistent with the course which he is now pursuing. He
said that he would not refuse the tax in time of war, nor in
some circumstances even in time of peace. But lie 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 persury."—( Hear, hear.)
But, Sir, it seems to be the opinion of some that it is possible
to get rid of the inquiry into men's affairs, and yet to have a
tax on income which would supply the deficiency. But I
think the Right Hon. Gentleman himself in the debate, to
which I refer, said that there must be inquisitorial powers, atid
he has on the present occash n admitted that necessity, or else
encouragement would be given to fraud and perjury—as
tie 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 appeals 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)—
we en you were paying 46 per cent. on all the money you bor-
! owed.—( Hear, hear.) L, tme ask if there is any resemblance
between that situation and the present situation of the country.
—( ) Your deficiency does not amount to one-twentieth
of your annual income ; an although that deficiency has
existed for some. 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 other nations,
which have had to borrow money during the same p
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 affairs to require this extraordinary effort ;
that there is n atteng in the present state of affairs, that
should make you 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 under oircumrtances of
great difficulty—of difficulty equal to life difficulty under
which a country must labour in time of war--(Cheers)—and
that it ought not to be had recourse to merely to get rid of
ordinary difficulties.—(Loud cheers.) Sir, let me state again
what appears to me to he the general objections to this tax—objec-
tion: 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 tax
on the funds unless you were labouring under such difficulties
that you can hardly find resources for your Exchequer without
it.--( Hear, hear from the Ministerial benches.) lam aware
that Lord Althorp proposed a tax on the transfer of stock—
( Ministerial cheers)—but I am aware likewise that his own
friends Pointed out 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 on 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 put is, 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 expedient, if it can be possibly avoided, to lay a tax ou
those funds. It is of great advantage that London should be
the chief money market of the world.—( Hear, hear.) It not
only increases the riches of London as a capital, but 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 hauls should be free from taxation on that ac-
count.—( Hear, hear.) Is it not likely, if you 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 •
enae 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, be denied.—( Hear.) It is obvious that with respect
to three or four persons who possess 3001. a year, that one may
have that 3001. 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 exercising
a dangerous and unhealthy profession ; as, for instance, a sur-
geon in the country, who exposes himself in aq weathers,
and who has laid up a portion of his small income to make a
provision for his family. 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 500/.
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 lion. Gentleman pointed out,
and pointed out not only with great ingenuity, but with suc-
cess, that there were other inequalities. That though there
were some inequalities there were others, five 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 not 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,
as ould not be resorted to without great and overbearing necessity.
Another and odious objection to this tax is that it was stated
an inquisitorial examination must form part and parcel of the
tax. It is quite impossible that you should avoid it. It is
impossible that- you should take the declaration of persons
without further inquiry as to the amount of their incomes. I
may be told, anti I have heard it said in the House, that it
should be a matter of indifference—that persons should not he
afraid of telling the amount of their incomes. I must say, that
for a commercial country, that is a very extraordinary doctrine.
—( (-Tear, 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 eery injurious to his credit, and inconvenient to his
future prospects • and are you now to lay down
as a maxim that there is something criminal or
guilty in such a man saying, " I do not like
my affairs, my accounts current, to be proclaimed at Charing-
cross and over the world ?" Let me observe, in respect of this
objection, there is a peculiar unfitness in the time at which this
tax is proposed.—( year, bear.) During the latter part of the
war, and indeed from the year 1797, the currency was gra-
dually more and more depreciating. The consequence of that
depreciation of the currency was somewhat similar to the effects
remarked by the historian to have been produced by the dis-
covery of the precious metals in America, which was accom-
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
"aloe. Thus trade and currency were in a flourishing condi-
tine, but is that your position 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 strong symptoms of any recovery. Wily,"at such
a moment it is peculiarly injurious to individuals that their
affairs should be known and promulgated—( Hear, 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 cipital,
and who are struggling with present difficulties. You cannot
impose upon them additional embarrassments, without acting
injurious:} towards the trade of the country. Hiving stated
that the proposal of the flight Hon. Gentleman is to obtain, by
taxation, a much largersum than that which the:deficiency alone
calls for, I come to the second part, which relates to the duties
proposed according to the new tariff, anti the deficiency thereby
occeeioned for this ',consider is the principal difficulty of the coup-
try ; it appears that it has been predie,ed for many years by per-
sens well competent to judge, that having an enormous debt,
that having necessarily a very large amount of taxes, and hay-

On the motion of Sir R. PEEL, that the Order of the
Day, for bringing up the Report of the Committee of
Ways and Means, be read,
Lord J. RUSSELL rose. He said—Sir, being al-
ready informed that the proposition for an income tax
has been agreed to by a Committee of Ways and Means,
and being aware that the House has already de-
cided that no petition can be received on the question,
on the'ground that this House has this tax under its
consideration, I conceive that 'before bringing up the
Report, I am fully justified in moving a resolution which
shall convey my sense of the present state. of our
financial and commercial affairs, and of the
remedy that should be applied to them.—(clear.)lf it has ever been the misfortune of any Member of
this Committee to take a gloomy view of the present
state of public affairs and to picture to the House our
wretched situation with respect to the future prospects
of the ceattry, I am happy to say this is not my position.
On the contrary, I am disposed to think that, with re-
spect to the financial part of the question, the Govern-
ment have talcen too serious a view of the difficulties
of that situation—(Hear, hear)—that they have mis-
calculated as to the nature of the evils which now
afflict us ; and that their remedy, although not totally
inapplicable, is beyond and beside the occasion.—(Hear.)
The view which the Government takes, as I un-
derstand it, is, that the financial difficulty, the
enormous deficiency as it was called one
evening, is the great evil N hid' we ought to
remedy ; and that, as a subsidiary measure,
we should make those amendments in our laws
with respect to corn—with respect to raw produce—
with respect to manufactures which the interests
of the country may require. Now, Sir, my
view, generally speaking, of the situation of
the country is that our financial difficulties call
for no such extraordinary effbrts as have been
proposed ; but that there are serious difficul-
ties affecting the conreercial and manufacturing
portion of our people—affecting our situation as regards
our trade, and the future stability of our manufactures.
It is to that second portion, rather than to the first,
that our deep attention should be directed, and
it is in that quarter that the ehi.f remedy should be ssaight..
(Hear, hear.) Let me obst eve, Sir, that the deficiency for the
year, for which W e are now to provide, is stated by the Right
Hon. Gentleman at about 2,570,0001. ; but that the proposal
made first, of an income tax, and secondly, of taxes with re-
spect to Ireland, in order that Ireland may bear at least some
portion of the public burden; and lastly, the amount of
200,0001. to be raised at h' me from other sources, will give
us, as the total sum which the Right Hon. Gentleman pro-
poses should be levied on . the country, 4,381,000/. It is no',
then, for our immediate financial deficiency ; it is not for the

ing likewise to compete with foreign countries in the corn- I sensible of the evil of a continued inadequacy of the pus
merce of the world, we should thereby be subjected in time to come to meet the public charges, and will take effectut
very great embarrassments. ea 1821 Lord Ashburton, then , sores for averting the same in future years." With reMr. Raring, stated in the House of Commons that hitherto ' the mode which should be adopted for this purpose,
-their manufactures and commerce had flourished, because they taking upon me the office of Chancellor of the Excht
had flourished without-diffieulty ; because they had not met think that most of the necessary measures which have
with any competition in the markets of the world ; but the war suggested have been better than the propositions
being concluded other nations would have the opportunity of Government. - (Cries of " Hear, hear," and a
turning their attention to commerce and manufactures, and it There is one proposition which has been mooted in this
was necessary they should take legislative means to enable and which perhaps is a tax not desirable to adopt if th-- -
this country to meet the difficulties it would have to no necessity for it-still I think it would be preferable toy
encounter._( Hear, hear.) He made this statement income tax-I mean a tax upon the succession of real e.7:g
in presenting a petition from the City of London, a petition perry equal to the probate and legacy duty on personal FL(' 4
which was generally in favour of measures that might be called perry. I know the Chancellors of the Exchequer,
measures of free trade, in favour generally of the repeal and I amongst them my Hon. Friend near me, and Lord Althol;i
relaxation of prohibitions and restrictions. In 1830, Mr. have said, that there was a duty on the conveyance of 7: i
Huskisson made a somewhat similar statement ; he said, as property equal to the amount of the probate and legacy
was referred to last night, that this country could not go on But, Sir, although that may be true, yet I contend that it s'of )
under their existing Corn-laws and their existing taxes, hay- leaves untouched a great proportion of that species •Lit,;,,,t
ing to meet that competition in the markets of the world. He property, because a great portion of the landed propeal,
stated also, and I think it cannot be denied, that it was impose has gone on descending in succession from father to 'leg ~ sible for the English manufacturer to raise his prices in foreign or to some near relative, for the last 150 yes'
markets beyond what the foreign manufacturer would ask. His and to not one particle of this description of property dotetn:
only resource was to reduce those prices, and in order to reduce duty on conveyances attach. Now, Sir, Ido not see any vee,: those prices it was necessary to reduce the cost of pro- why, if it be a great object to impose a new tax, a tax of 1.7;
duction, and for this purpose he must lower the wages- nature should not be adopted in preference to an income tax'te
of the persons employed in that production. Now this is a Then, Sir, there have been various taxes repealed, some 2
process which has been going on, with a few interruptions, for which might be reimposed, not taxes on articles of consetrerigg
a series of years ;we have now to encounter the competition ! tion, or articles of necessity ; but there had been taxes takesl de with foreign manufactures carried to a much greater perfection on four-wheeled carriages, on male servants, and other taxesa ''
than they were thirty years ago. We have to meet them in : a like nature, paid by the rich; and I etrn see no reason Ir;
the markets of the world, and we have to meet them not only ' we should not reimpose such taxes, rather than i_npese, ce
loaded with taxes, but loaded with burdens, which make the income tax.- From 1821 to 1e23 there were 6,000,0°)eg
price of subsistence and the price of all articles of necessity, taxes reducei, and of this amount a sum amounting to rt°,,„et
greater in this country than in any other country in Europe.- than 2,300 0001. was taken off the assessed taxes. The Rill,
(Hear, hear.) What are those burdens ? Mr. Hume, in Hon. Gentleman, before he brought forward his propel`
duties
giving evidence before the Import Duties' Committee-a Com- made an allusion to what had been the result of increesb' it
mittee which tins year I may venture to quote, although last the assessed taxes. The Right Hon. Gentleman stated td
1 year that Committee was the subject of general sneers and in 1840 the assessed taxes had been increased 10 per cent", 0.,
taunts by those who were then sitting on this side of the House, the result of that measure had been to produce an actual .
but with whom in 15342 its Report is a needs of authority, ! crease of 11 per cent. in the assessed taxes. This, therefl4
since even her Majesty's Government is not ashamed showed that the produce of the assessed taxes has not 'user
to act on the principles it lays down. Sir, Mr. Hume, any ditniutition in consequence of the imposition of an adds'
,
before that Committee stated, that, if he could buy ! tional 10 per cent., and I thought when the Right Hon. Gene
an article for Is., and that by the effect of law and pro- tleman made the statement, that he was about et
tection, that article was raised to Is. 6d., he called that ad- ' propose an increase in the assessed taxes, as the former
ditional 6d. a tax.-( Hear, hear.) This is a principle which I experiment had already so completely succeeded. I niss, cannot be controverted; whether or no,eit is paid into the lin my hand a return moved for by Mr. Herrtbs
Exchequer, that amount is a tax, and is levied at the expense 1 which shows what had been the effect of a reduction or
of the great body of the community.-( Hear, hear.) Sir, we i assessed taxes. A considerable reduction was made in the 0, proceeded on those principles last year-p: inciples not so much I sessed taxes from 1821 to 1831, and the effect of that redlgoir
oes admitted then as they are now-we proceeded on that princi- I was to bring a greater change to account. The return
~..,
idi
Pie to say, that there should be moderate duties on the great i that at the time of the reduction it was estimated that it w°4o
articles of consumption, which were effected by taxes of this 1 realise -3,623,000 e, whereas it had actually realised no 'tic
kind, and we took corn, sugar, and timber, as the three great 1 than 4,271,000/., showing an excess over the estimated
artic'es on which we proposed first to proceed.-( Hear, hear.) 1 of 648,0001., showing that the operation both of an inergg
I do not wish to avoid, far from it, any odium that may i and of a diminution had been to increase the amount realieo
s";
attach to the Government of the present day of ! thus showing the buoyat.cy of this source of revenuege,
taking away protection from other articles.- ( Hear, hear.) (Cheera.) An increase in the assessed taxes has this ad"-tg, I3eeause the principle we stated as a general one, and though tage over the proposal for an income tax. If ye° Pop; ,
we thought those were the main articles which first required . pose an income tax, you must set all your
so ;
I
the attention of Parliament, we never meant that the same chinery in motion for a perioJ of five Ye tot -.,
principle should not apply to all those articles to which the if afterwards you find that your revenue has increased, or d e
e tariff of the Right Hon. Gentlemen refers -( Hear, hear.) your establishments can be diminished so as to enable vout°o,-.g.
On the- present occasion, therefore, I shall act en the same away
vvith the tax at the end of that period, you willla e
,1 , principle as last year. 1 declared last year that you was acting curred all the unnecessary difficulty, and all the unneeefferi t
r
on a vicious circle of protection ; that your manufacturers are odium of the charge. You may lay on taxes en articles
"_,,
to take articles from the colonies at a dearer price than would are generally used. You mac lay them on windows andee'g
(temper-late them, and that the colonies were to take oar manu- riages, which are obviously used, and you may easily take ";00
factures at a dearer price than they could get them at other off; but if you impose an income tax which is to prodoloss
ports, and that, in that way, you were acting in a vicious circle millions a year, because I think the Right Hon. Gentietbst ''
of protection, instead of giving every body an opportunity of under-estimated the produce of the tax-you may be sure, it I'
getting every article he wanted at a moderate price. Sir. the the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be in no hurry to ts"°, is
,e
first article to which I shall refer on which the budget of last off.-( Hear, hear.) The tax is certain for three years----"tee . s
year was proposed, and I must refer to it now, because the probable for five years-and it is probable for five years or the
Right Hon. Gentleman in his speech made what seemed to are years after that: therefore, Sir, what I should urge 00 -0 a very unfounded argument against the proposition-that ar- House is, first, that this tax has been hitherto imposed
011 i; title is sugar. An argument used by the Right Hon. Gentle- times of extreme necessity-that it has been only imposed i
man, and often repeated by others, to the effect, that if you re- Mg perilous wars with powerful enemies, and has been takenet
duce a duty, you cannot be sure that by increased consumption on the return of peace-that hitherto Parliament'wit 0 you will have any increase in the amount of that duty, or even -thought fit to adopt an income tax in time of peace-tint-0a
the same amount for many years to come. He supported that pro- accompanied with inequalities, and with an ineu.:oo, .
position by instances of wine, rum, tobacco, and other articles. into private affairs which renders it peculiarly °woe That principle may be very true, but that is not the principle which was the reason that Lord Althorp declared that it go
on which my Right I-lon. 'Friend proposed his reduction of the more unpopular, and more di stestable than any other tax,
tot •
sugar duties.._.( Hear, hear.) It was indeed quite a different in going to men's means to obtain an increase of revenue, eg
one. My Right Hon. Friend said, last year, that foreign sugar increase may be assisted and made so complete as to suOI"LeY was subject to a duty of 635. per cwt. Now this is not a duty deficiency you require by taxes,
much more just to the 7040
which gives a certain revenue to the State which might be di- on whom they are imposed, and which can be taken off, _ gist '
minished by a reduction ; but it is a prohibitory duty, and one the necessity ceases. -( Hear, hear.) I should not despair ites, '
which prevents, except in one or two extraordinary years, sugar a proposition which appears to me so reasonable would be g.
from corning in from foreign colonies. Ai), Right Hon. Friend cepted by the House, but that I observe it is declareucio
proposed to reduce this euty to 365., and very justly argued avowed thrtt the matter to be considered now, is not to Pr°gess; that we might from this obtain a perfectly new revenue. Sup- for the necessities of the revenue, not to provide for deficie"gbket,
pesing, as has been said, that this encouragement should but that the business to be considered is to contrive Vtbe
cause foreign sugar to displace a million cwts. of West India manner Hon. Gentlemen can best give their support eallS,s,
production, you might say', deed that this was an unfair dimi- Administration of the Right Hon. Gentleman. With re44,,e•
notion and hard treatment of the \Veit India interests, but to another measure, an Hon. Gentleman, the Member for A,. j,, ,
to
..s';!
~ I
still, as a question of finance,' it cannot be denied that the lingford, had asked many Members if they would agree
change would be gr. ally in favour of the revenue, for we a Corn Bill as they supported, if it had peen proposed by h". f sla
should then have one million hundred weight from foreign and they all answered that they would not.-( Hear, hear 1
colonies, paying thirty -six shillings instead of the same quantity have at en it stated, over and over again, by Hon. Gent"' sof !! 1
from our own colonies paying '24s. dety..-( Hear, hear.) It is to their constituents, that they were opposed to the Corrt-ogg to i
clear that the principle on which Hon. Gentlemen opposite which they passed-( Laughter)-which they had eotediiiteo,gr i
rely, is wholly inapplicable when they assert th .t this arid which they voted for contrary to their convictions.--(' 04 t
e
e chane in the tariff would yield no increase to the revenue. In hear, and laughter.) I have observed that they
to, t;
truth 'the Right Hon. Gentleman never touched my Right still more so against Ole proposed tariff-(Hear) oeeS ill
Hon. Friend's proposition at all.-(Cheers.) I shall now they viewed it with great alarm ; that the consequegese 'l t
take the items in succession. My Right Hon. Friend said the of the tariff would be injurious to the farming interest 117se es'
other day that if you toil the average consumption of sugar rally ; but the question with him was not whether it eras g6,:k, s ,
for eleven years, there ought to bean increase of 312,000 cwis., or useful-(1 aughter)-but that they must support the. .f.,,,..' ,
and that by the duty he proposed, there would be an increase vernment of the Right Hon. Baronet.- (Cheers.) lge‘g t
brought to the revenue of 587,0001. I think that was a very must say that that declaration makes me despair of thioC, e
fair estimate, and I do not see why the incontrovertible prin- successful in the proposition that I have to make. I tott
cipl.e en which my Right Hon. Friend calculated should not be it, however, my du yto make it, and to offer that pro Pee o
cso e, r ,
admitted as part of the financial resources of her Majastv's to the House of Commons as a means by which I think rloef , 4
Government.-( Hear, hear.) With nspect to timber, the avoid the infliction of the tax More you. Those Gentle ' get 1
Right Hon. Gentleman opposite proposes to throw away who have so ill-used the constituencies who trusted then' t of,- 1
600,0001. altogether on the timber duties.-(Cheers.) I agree their interests, tell me that if they opposed the Government
of`
that if the Exchequer were oserflowing, and if you had with the Right Hon. Baronet they would be aiding the eneen,'„ of i 1
perfect ease reduced some other duties, you might also make the Corn-law. I ask, what right have these Gentlemen
_wed, ; 1
a great reduction on the duties on Canadian timber ; that lam the bitter enemy of the farmer? I wish to P`"v i
-
but, in the present state of the finances, I think the original that which is en advantage to the agricultural interest. kid; , o
proposition, to add 10s. to the duty on Canadian timber, and belief is, that you would have a more abundant stiPtPol:per . 1
to take ss. off that on Baltic, would add considerably to the corn, aid' in the first place, that those who would gain e ,;io ' 1
revenue, without being a hardship to the consumer.-( Hear, food would have the means of purchasin'g more manufactur,etost t
hear.) That proposition, according to the calculation of Lord the second place, the manufacture r would give fresh empl°l the it
Althorp, would have given 750,0e0/. ;my Right Honourable in order to send goods in return for that corn; and 1,,,e0( s 1
Friend only took it at 600.000/. Now, the other remain- third place that general prosperity would thereby ensue
3-1 soo 4
ing article is the article of wheat, and my Right Honour- the labouring classes, agricultural and manufaCturinflegoe 1 able Friend has stated, that if the proposition of an that the agriculture of this country, stimulated by comPetle be -' 1
Bs. duty had been applied to all the wheat that had been would improve and advance ; its
means of production We° eet• els
admitted last year, an additional duty of 530,000/. would have augmented, fresh demands would arise for this productiontersae :-• 1
been received. An argument was opposed to that of my flight hops ultimately the price would not be greatly less than °ote ' 1
Hon. Friend, by the Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Ex- it at the present moment, but that price would be concoratrinet. I,
chequer. The Right Hon. Gentleman had said, that there was with the general well-being and welfare of all the indel.heefeS Q
no proof that so great an amount of wheat would have pail classes of the community. if that is my belief, what rig"- per a V
the duty, and that it would have been a hardship to the con- they to rail at me as the enemy of the farmer, because, s '' 1
sumer to have had that additional duty to pay, instead of 3s. ported that opinion-because I proposed •Sig
6d., or some such amount, which was the average of thought was a measure by which the ' farmer
the duty. Why, so far from its being a hard- this country would obtain an advantage over the forettrdliffee-
ship to the consumer, the consumer would have had (hitter ? But if I went further towards abolishing the atii '' 4
the corn on better terms than he had it according to the law altogether, are there not men as friendly to the fernier... or 11
which existed last year.-1 Hear, hear.) We have it on record Hon. Gentlemen opposite who are in favour of such le Wet!
that the wheat in bond from the month of June to the month sition ? Who has shown himself more devoted to arcestere ' lof September, increased, I think, 225. in price. But if at that in the course of a long life than the present Lord Leirogire• - 1
period an 8s duty only had been paid, it is evident that, with Who in the present day has been more devoted to agrico 100 . it
an addition of Bs. only, and toot an addition of 225., wheat more fond of its pursuits, than Lord Spencer ? But theegett°_, - ,1
would have been brought into the market, not, I will allow, do not think that even the protection which I propose °I; at"' 'I that the seller would have sold it merely with an addition of Bs., be permanent ; they think that agriculture may frureilen he would have got his profit by it, but his profit would have unaided by protection, and without difficulty, against allywere" . t
been somewhat diminished ; that of the fon ign importer would competition. Are these Noble Lords enemies of the fargo the ' 1
have been somewhat diminished, but the whole of the Bs. duty that account? By no means. But those Gentlemen In' to be II
would have been given to the benefit of the revenue, and not taunt me with being the enemy of the farmer, seemed
.40
at the expense of the consumer, but at the expense of the composed of the same heavy clay as are the acres
-01 1
foreign importer, of the foreign grower, and of the merchant they possess. They rail at me as the bitter
oreges% 1
in this country, who made those enormous profits owing to of the farmers, because I am proposing a e° g thatV
yourabsurd law which, happily, you have now tried to repeal, al- diminished protection as compared with that which dr
though you have not placed a much better law in its place. have hitherto enjoyed. Have I been the bedmeanSi re 1
Sir, an observation was made last night, to which I must beg ceiving the farmer?--( Loud cheers.) In 1839 I rub 4 e tece V
pardon for referring, as to the change which I was supposed to the world, and I declared in this House, that I thougorigul I
have made in the proposition of a fixed duty. My proposition derate fixed duty was the best system on which the Cicoot
last year was, that there should be a fixed duty of Bs. ; but I could be established. In 1840 I declared my-self in '1! f the Il
stated to the House that I did not calculate that that duty a similar alteration in the law. Most of the Memberefloosh 1
would be enforced in times when there was a prospect of a se- late Government in this House, and some in the other _ err 1
n et rO. I
were scarcity in the country, and when wheat naturally rose to declared in favour of the same system, and was is
f ntbe °the
an inordinately high price ; and I proposed that the Queen in babe that his Noble Friend, who was at the head 0- id the II
Council should have the power in such cases of remitting that vernment, and who entertained a contrary opinion, beigg so; 1
duty. Now, that proposal was not founded upon any notion opinions of his colleagues, would have conceded the P°oorer 11
that it would be a real and actual benefit to the consumer it might thus have become a united measure of the Goveethis .1
t.
that the duty should he lowered. If the importer can send Was there any deception towards the farmers ,i" teete,,
corn with a profit, as it is supposed he can, under the new law, (Hear, hear.) Was there not due preparation °fence? ,
I
when wheat is at 625. or 645., how much more could he sell it Have they had due preparation in the present inf;',o Ole-
i
with a profit when wheat inthis country is at 745. or 755. ? But (Loud cheers.) I was not the man who said that be wou-'
1
I confess it appears to me, after the strong opinions fident, if his party was in power, the present protecti„°°, Or;
that were stated by the opponents of a fixed duty be continued ; I was not the rnan who said that if spligluld ,17, ,
in this House aid in the country, that if different parties ration were made in the Corn-laws the Government igi tr" . 11
na so 1
should combine in order to force up the price of wheat in the faithless in making the proposition. I was not the
gg or
,o
ii
prospect of a scarcity, that it was necessary to have some means said that he had no doubt but the present Corn-ler t if I
or another by which the prospect of a real scarcity, and when equivalent protection, would be continued, and that a'4,
prices rose very high, public discontent should not be excited, equivalent protection was not continued, he would fr pleac.
rely view was that the law might on certain occasions be kept yet afterwards, in defiance of that romise, and thog oot tg - 1
t
back, so that it might be restored whenever an immediate ne- voted for the change.-(Loud cheers.) I, then, ewt 101
ti
cessity is required-and I certainly had some fear upon eon. one who is the bitter enemy of the farmers ;it was "°fis thee.
1
sidering how many would cry out against the operation of the led them into this mistake, who induced them to eller oetete
I
law in such a case-I had some fear that if the law was capital in resorting to expensive processes, under Via there
1
then kept down by a clamour against the Executive there might that an injurious and vicious law would be maintained sr;
1
be a difficulty in maintaining the law till after that necessity sole purpose and benefit, so that thereby they couldh bid t
had ceased. With that view, therefore, I stated ti-at when to give rents for land which it ought not to yield. it, Ancrio
%.
prices rose very high, and there was a great scarcity, you been misled and deceived, and if they are angry these ‘‘.
to
might then provide by law for that necessity. Now others them so misled, let that anger be directed against t trYng
o
have differed from me in that respect. Ido not say that I was had justly incurred it.-(Loud cheers.) Let them n°_ 00 the
e
right in that opinion; but still I must say it appears to me that, throw off on Gentlemen on this side of the House,
gr""vcrgiehl;
1
with a fixed duty, you must look in some way or other to its Members of the late Administration, the indignation the jet
being:taken off at periods when there is a great scarcity. But that been justly excited by the cii,,envery which, d '.11,g Betels
I
does not prevent, nor I think would prevent, the usual operation election, was an carefully concealed.-( Loud cheers
...)
cilia
I
of the law being such, that there would be a regular and constant those who have so acted, thinking, I supPiest sre
supply of corn in this country; the price world be kept mode- the plans now proposed are the beetepoise/eeo0: I
rate; merchants would import corn as regularly as they would be obtained, let them manfully avow and make tn_ °n these have
°' t the
cotton or any other article for which there was a demand ; and sponsible for any change of opinion they mayeenre,,
....rof.)
~,,i,
that the necessity would seldom exist for making any alters- or, if they do not, they will justly excite the distrusttro of.„„
tion. The amount calculated by my Right Hon. Frier(' as who have confided in them, and incur the
that which would be 'derived from his proposed alteration, was, country, whose interests they have neglected.-(‘-'""of nelell, 1
for sugar, 578,000 e ; for wheat, 530,0001. ; for timber, Sir, is it right after all, to impose an income, t,31 •la er".•
tons' - is' I
630,0001. This. would give an increased revenue of 1 four millions stet-ling, a tax which is of so inetnel arose., ) 1
1,717,000 L, and this without imposing any burden on the I racier, so partial, and so unequal, fur the
_g chee''t I
people ; on the contrary, diminishing the taxes paid by parti- 1 suppoi title an administration ?-( Hear, hear, and C
that a
esli.,' haw 1
cular classes to particular individuals-an increase of the pub- llf they can say that it is justified by public nee _ say I ~. I
lie revenue, and at the same time an increase of the public 1 public necessity cells for this infliction, lam ready _te°, rigb" I
comfort and the public, happiness-an increase accompanied ! they are right in facing the difficulty-that they a.titai oil , i
by no inquisition into private affairs, accompanied by ne ins- 1 imposing on the country a tax, even unjust and P.asloned uric 1
15 I
quality in its operation-an increaie from the most legitimate lit ma be, because public necessity cannot be reasoned
thi'l,o% I
sources, and becoming a Parliament which was anxious to pro- I But if, on the contrary, they are not convinced '
stioperges
-1
vide for the general welfare.-_( cheers.) But, Sir, I must case of public necessity if it be only for the sake. of are ad"si
1
admit that if you proceeded to legislate upon other articles, the tariff and the Administration of which theyyoo' Ph'ef 1
though and took them into consideration at the same time, there would I rents, that they- impose this tax, I then say, that
es, wet,
the
.. i
l' be a diminution of revenue. The Right Honourable Ibe successful in its imposition at the present more"!
sits of '5
Gentleman has taken the alterations in his tariff as 1 may depend on it, that such a sacrifice of the interests
na . ,
' causing a diminution of 270,000/. He has frankly I country to party views-( Hear, hear)-and IdleggYtavritr, si,„ ' i
stated that he anticipates a diminution of 170,0001. on the ! avowed as it is with respect to the Corn-laws and
to thereati article of coffee, Now, I thitrle that on the article of coffee he which seems I.kely to iufluence them which regard.._ inte
..,
1
has made an unnecessary saeritice.-( Hear, hear.) He has ' come tax-I say, if they make such sacrifices Mu' er later
made a difference of no less than 100 per cent. between colonialcountry, then indeed the country witir,ouS
I
produce and foreign produce- a m uch greater difference, I and I think it wi I not be long, say that the
think, than it is at all necessary to make. My Noble Friend ' which they have elected whir other hopes, andwith , eo
near me stated that he thought, for the purposes of revenue, ' tations, have betrayed the trust which
Lord e tared
which might keep 6d. and 9d. as the duty. The proposition in them.- ( Loud cheers. ) The Noble,
Tlrat it has been ~ iii,
which was made by the G.) vernment last year was an altera. ! moving the f01i0.% ing resolutions :-
the deficiency (eel,
tion without much loss. It was a duty of 54. on colonial 'to this House, on official authority, thatt
ro___ be estans-.(g ,:
eofftse, arid of Bd. on foreign• Now, that was still a differential ' come to meet the expenditure of theAcourrill,ry,427)
je at 2,3's°'t is
duty of no less than 75 per cent. But I think fur the year ending the sth day of p
_,_69,000/. lbs.
~ of
that from that reduction you might calculate on and on the sth day of April, 1e43, at 2 5
continued inadequii:el et,
an increase of ten per cent. on the consumption, and on a loss . House is fully sensible of the evil of a t
charges, and will ta Tote -
of no more than 70,010/., which with the other reductions, ' the public income to meet the public
ernogfi:rt°';'elde stegi
would amount to 360,0001. And I think it would be better, fectual measures for averting rite samse
n corn, bY a re`7l,:t 0
was gen.eroounsicyluTiend
,bedi
with respect to the 1,717,0001., to leave a large portion of it, by a judicious alteration of the. dutien,ar,
andan
ad Justin . der
in future
in the present situation of the country, for the purpose of a of the prolebitory duty on foreigntsi,uee
further reduction of duties here&
be combined
Iwith an incere- . 1 earl
i .e
which the State may require. I should not propose, there- Price to the community may.
'ter, and for the contingeneies the duties on timber and coffee,
fore, after taking away this 360,0001., to take the whole of the
sts of trade will be veromo:,
surplus, as there it. a deficiency of
_2,570,000/. But I general consumption, the nacre
venue to the State.
wohibitery and differse
_I:14,
think also that you might calculate upon having pro. the repeal or reduction be various
I will improve the ree ntuos
bably some t welve or thirteen thousand pounds, in duties, and that extended commerce
That the anic'ellast,
the way of surplus, on these duties. You might at least while it gives employment tof in
That.' m atldit'ion• at'olvathnettsaeg
they.terminseion of ,ifeoole.,
take it at 570,000/., and you would only have to provide for taxes taken off, or reduced, o
the 2,000,000/. in the way of taxa' ion. You would have two
atex 23.873,000/. That
i...,,,ne
may be stated in round numbers.period d
eej;i 00
millions of deficit ncy to strike off by the imposition of new
imposed in a
war to the end of the year 11336,m clu,iyeof the tax "wthe ion
taxes. But, Sir, we are in a different situation now from that of come tax, having been first .
iwar, oyes reP . sed'
last year. You did not adopt the plans which we proposed to
having been again ~ ter
1816 n tee e(
you last year, and by which I consider a considerable portion the re-establishment of peace, and
repealed
1,,, n gs
emergency, and during a most perilous
of the deficiency would have been aupplied, and I therefore on the. renewalfbosofi.weasr, was againThanconsitlering the various lilt rice
think that it is necessary to take some step ; therefore it is urination
that I shall move the resolution; 11 That this House is pretty i
ostifltU'innnet oetsl
the present
of life, or embarrassing trade, ts the "Y
tiiti
deficiency, without enhancing tnerefilion

Lthii79? Lod that t
fix t 1
belief,os Why
'll.l, Governr.
:„.,'ne.uttnost
mug interest
(4. 'eQul at ed th 4
44.4;lit(it:e.Prr°tit
Piked that

ti',l,..ighnt'abr.e")tti,
:ti.:,vik•thi:44,l4tititizillasbetthihtenaiteijge()uanrssiit,iii
L e_c eatowed
;itta,ery tax w.
kttiltl which she
~im 'inergency
it 67. Pitt foui":d
tut react the
Itilt, -le found
t,il4 was enffa
D.. 1.-1 to '' '
.-,,ed mail
iI4C to large
iik,;;_i, in the first
IC"o4tion of th 4
it'''f• ' I
~. t was n
it, '-'1 for a s ure4
i'rnsut in ti
ihe . 0 far w:
tik Income tat
~t 1:, nf war, tit
,Iti `,., ;might be
!'44il„-rl'e remic
11,11 i --'4IR the p

4119ittU,!..tr)::

at t
is
in it
iiaaT •
wb:
jui:ct t
teh t
ttt
el.o Hansa
su
ase
ettlh
pot „4"1„, for by
ve bee° CHANCEL
of the,- ll_ to hear I
i.ttgb.l -79er ellor of
s 1100. tir 4 with
01' if -10ing th
Are , in,thin (

tb.•
to
°
!PI
10-
t
thy"

;tif
heY

that the renewal of a tax, inquisitorial in its clia-
-lin its pressure, and which has hitherto been
the financial reserve of the nation in time of war,
for by public necessity, and is therefore not advise
Noble Lord resumed his seat amidst loud and
Oheers.)
IsiCh.LLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was
bear the Noble Lord speak without pleasure. He
sr of the Exchequer) had always listened to the
with interest and admiration, but never more
the delivery of the speech he had just concluded ;
, were wanted to ccnfirm him (the Chancellor
tier) in approbation of the course pursued by the
if which he was a member, he could find it in
id the resolution of the Noble Lord.—( Hear,
ing now heard all that could be urged against the
Government, or in support of the alternative
them, he (the Right Hon. Gentleman) was
. that the House and the country would be more
satisfied with the measure which the Noble Lord hid
ekres,ted by his resolution. The Noble Lord said the Go.
(I),` tnok too gloomy a view of the situation of the country.
ikgite Tett lion. Gentleman) begged not to be included
Its ofeu°se gloomy speculators. He never uttered senti-
ttes `"sliorrdency or alarm, or of distrust of the capabilities
4 ttrgtes of the country ; but he maintained that it was
ttt at we should precisely know our difficulties in order
kite, 'night properly endeavour to surmouhem. Nu
.however abun :ant its resources, could ho free from
tauatat periods of difficulty, and that with which we had
.ike Nee, though furnishing much cause for anxiety,
ineeltito grounds f r the highest consolation. The Noble
t,,4'"u our emergencies did not justify the measure of the
tegelintelat. Whatever might he the Noble Lord's idea of an
N 4, his speech fully justified the course he condemned.
keel- 'e Lord alluded to two successive years of deficient
!btke2;,,the deficiency in the first being 2,400,00 W., in the
")°0•000/. Though the Noble Lord went no further,
eic...°ll,olatory to hear him attaching a grave importance to
is envy which he would not in 1839, when there being a
1,800,C00L, he (the Right HonouNble Gentle-
eter°Jatsed ased resolution that it was imprudent to reduce
h
of revenue, and the Noble Lord voted against it.
'liertd it therefore, as a step in the way of improvement on
414 of those with whom the Noble Lord is connected, to find
~leadmitted the existence of a continued deficiency to a
tie;°'nits and that circumstance called for an energetic
't of nitre measure to equalise the reeenne and the expernii-
'o4 Lti tountry.—( Hear, hear.) The deficiency in the
i:,tiktei:ntti not arisen in the present. year, or in the year pre-
Oa Sat Was the result of eoatinued deficiencies during the
'tvira,,., without any effort, having been made to meet
t He believed th.t if the present state of things were
ete, ° continue it would finally paralyse the energies of the
qt The The contemplated deficiency for the present year
Nos," hY the Noble Lord at 2,500,000/. ; but he would ask
,r 4 Lord, as a great statesman, and as one who looked
for t° rule the destinies of this country, to look a little to
,u'rei and to consider what the sacrifices were which
'llitleVtry might hereafter be called upon to make.
,
the Lord Lad admitted that the-presett Government,
'ale,f came into' office, had 'found a deficienety,•and that
.t'Letie still continued, but he forgot to add that, inde-
lad„ktptf this actual evil, they had a prospect of incurring
'atonal expenses in future. The Government had to
e`' tile state of our affairs in China, and they could not
kat : •
oer reiateans with that country might involve us
et' great additional outlay, however sincerely they
iseeh°Pe to •be enabled to avoid it. But, su-
, to this evil, the Noble Lord stated that the
manufactures of the country were in a most depressed
1.4°, end that they were called upon to adopt every means ,
4111,Yt,v,er for the purpose of affording to those interests of
et of ti;tef- Why, what was the principle on which the mese
7i14 ve Government had proceeded? Had it not been to
teos Lie utmost of their power relief to the trading and ma•
,6,,,n1 interests of the country ; ,to amending those laws
loff9rlolated the importation of foreign earn and other arti-
takielgn produce ; and in deing this to p:ovideahe means
'ng the necessity of incurring a fresh deficiency, whilst
il,kraltelieo that which had hitherto existed?—(Cries of
hear.") The Noble Lord stated, that what- s.
Xi'lLght be the necessities of the country, they were
,th has to justify the imposition of an income tax, upon
beatowed all those usual epithets Of opprobrium to
It4erY tax was 'more or less subject. He stated that it
tee which should be imposed only in time of war, or of
:,4:ll4,,ergency, and reminded the house that in the year
‘tot.':tritt found it necessary to resort to it, in order to pro
td6ad`ae increasing necessities of the country. If the Noble
tryreao the speech of Mr. Pitt on that occasion, he
ate found that it was not. merely because the
e'a'r was engaged in war, but also because it was
1,1 to maintain the public credit that he had
:Oa e so large an income tax for the public.—( Hear. )
otot°,4 that ground that Mr. Fitt urged. in the House the
irOit,l in the first place, of the triple assessment which was
lies%eatiou of the income tax, and ultimately of the income
tetil• It was useless to say
.that Mr. Pitt intended the in-
for a, source of revenue to be had recourse to in time of
tt the contrary, Mr. Pitt pledged the property tax for
r6,..."`Stnerat in times of peace of the loans created in time
t.lli.So far was Mr. Pitt from expressing any opinion
tteteiticome tax ought never to be had recourse to except
i~t°l* war, that he expressly stated that it was a
.t 'night be had recourse to elicnever any emergency
at,44arise rendering it necessary for the purpose co
stlte the public credit end sustaining the revenue
• kiii.tinintry, It was perfectly true that in 1803
I,,'lttletrin had thought it expedient to repeal the tax ;
ittallington did not leave the loans which had been
tinprovided for. 111 r.. Addington did not incur
• out making any provision for their ultimate redemp-
szt,r e repealed the ye operty tax, it was true, but he
im-
;lt4 of other taxes in lieu of it. He imposed a
°I. two millions—he imposed additional import duties.
,-`n°l-Int of one million—and one million additional of as-
Rtte-", and thus he iealised the fo it millions of property tax.
Atee-Pedless now to examine whether the conduct of Mr Ad.
akt"oin doing was expedis nt or not. %V hen the Noble Lord
ePokes` 55 in
in the assessed taxs, as net pressing geed
mit" alasses of the community, it shoul I be recollected
rQethi.
• amount collected from the the assessed taxes, by far
~,S,°,r part 'was' collected from those very classes. Mr.
• "se,°ti stated in proposing the assessed taxes at the time he
the property" tax, that he proposed . them for
vhf rose of taxing the. journeymen who were em-
)titt by shopkeepers, and who acted as ser-
e 4 to2r the respective proprietors of those shops.
t;!tsea- brolte.out aeain the next year, and the tax was re-
Oottilancl ott the pease it was again repealed. He (the
or of the Exchequer) was one of those who at the
erNente''i against the repeal, being convincul that if it had
11-°tinued for a short time, other imposts which pressed
% trade and inanufactures would have h en relaxed ;
red if that sacrifice had been ma,le, it would have pro-
;',l( tn'iMensuree prosperity.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble ,
v'ti:4luo. had just addressed the House called in him (the
jia'e'r of the Exclecieer ) to give authority to the opinion.
N awe's
Ilrougham who took a leading part in-procuring the
the tax,' The Noble Lord (John Russell) called on
Rive that authority to the opinion of Lard Brougham,
glue That •
toe Noble and Learned Lord had stated in an intro-
s °di ou some which he published, that it was a tax
!Iceljeglt. to be reserved for a time of war. But he (the
tea
the of the Exchequer) thought that, ;n arguing
dha
reel of the tax at the time referred to, Lord
of %Ina, 'aid a great stress upon this point, that the Govern-
ae."44,eday was keeping up a wresta.blis.hment in time of
attle t, this-tax was kept up to maintain them ; and so
Goveaj this opinion in the House and in the country, that
It:terett "'tient was obliged to refer the estimates to a Select
411) Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord (So rd John
kt't alto referred to Lord Althorp's declaration in 1834,
Oske-„ was unwilling to propose an income tax in time
and called on them (the Ministers) to be governed
ittr,declarration. But he (the Chancellor of the Ex-
).had a right to claim the support of Lord
Ole", and if his conduct was to be introduced
• c,"edent, it was a
.precedent in favour of the measure
(ittoeileideration. What was the state of things on that cm-
-114 44, he repeal of the malt tax was proposed, and it was on
111 tope e, of the malt duty that the debate with respect to
ereoa' of the property tax took place. —( Hear, hear.)—
tltaes rnnt was 2,500,0001., and what did Lord A:thorp say?
kjoe of the Exchequer at a time when it was the
'4(74 have a surplus in the coffers of the Treasury. He
telvito,t of 1,500,000/. at the close of the financial year,
trettetti. that sum it was proposed to do away with 2,500,0001.
at'4,4l, • The whole sum Government would lose would be
th 414, I' to meet which they• bad 1,500,0001., so that had
g!tteae-4re been effected, the consequence would be that at
ei,4 edit year there would be a deficiency of 2,500,000/.
Q‘,4 orls found himself in a situation in which the pre-
timtfisie ernment were left by their predecessors—tbat is, with
neY of 0 500 000/ and.what was the language of Lord
tM~isitith!ni" lie said if the measure were carried,
tk,Posea risible for him to effect the reduction of taxation
tette n the House unless by the imposition of a property
V 4, e" ae the House may now adopt. lie said that with
1111iloiency as 2,500,000/., he must resort to a property
eaer.) And he had the alternative of those sources of
.I,‘Twoich were pointed out to the attention of the House
t': Olt °hie Lord ; and he said that at a time when there
setol hag growing deficiency of six or•
seven years. He
:itnself in such a position with 2,500,000/. deti-
lt"al et a.t he must either abandon the propcsition of a
nlltiee2,l2 tax, or impose a property tax.—( Hear, hear.)
Nit ere could be any strong precedent derived front the
kq,ltil ill of the individual, it war that in a profound peace, in
!ere was not, as the Noble Lord admitted, such a pre.-
"4, the present occasion, Lord Althorp, in his capacity
"144 Z the Exchequer, thought it his duty to propose a
te; -"'" as the means of keeping up the revenue. It was
.tl7ter:'°rtatice to maintain the credit of the country. It is
Y tto watch carefully a system of loans during peace.
Its„tlipei necessary instruments in war, because then trade
"i and there are additional burdens on the ,
t'kkktc'e'thbnt in war loans are contracted with a moral certainty
net at return of peace the resources of the country would
ie°, ofL'iberty to meet them. But when loins were taken in
Vl,,ate, they must look forward to war with the certainty
tteY leietneans would be crippled when that time arrived.
.cm/r„ " been taut t-d with taking this plan out of the
Of the State, this precious weapon in time of peace.
el7.r,nng to take this weapon out of the armoury of the
111 was most effective in time of war, what should
likYiters the Government that reset ted in a time ot peace to
IQs of":! loans, which of all others was best adapted to a
tk 'to th'r• But what were the objections of the Noble
14t ou kher' income tax ? lie first says that by it we impose a
4let t.te" inode. He thought that they owed this objection
iltion in which the last election placed him as the
!otte'NeVir the City of London. He perfectly agreed with
ItittiN I.ord that to impose a tax on the funds
toe t' extremely injurious.--( Hear, hear.) But the
tle`ttofp al bore upon funded, as well as on every other
"tr:')Per, y end was not, therefore, liable tothe objections
iseetr te-e urged' in 1831, when a tax on stock was proposed
'hsTi t"narne of a transfer duty, and which was even sup-
tits etref.;_ne Noble Lord, now so tenderly anxious on behalf of
aril seer nolder. The Noble Lord said, if we taxed the funds
I\'teteleintrits would fly from the Exchange of London,
d.Ohkest4. and tithe: towns, whose credit was unfettered
11, -:°‘''s one fact was better than a thousand arguments.
te,‘theti
~twoome tax was proposed, the funds were atot--the
%%tile `ite asure had been discussed, and scrutinized all
kekeies.) %,°Qntry, :hey were above 90.—( Hear,and
it, ,ak ;6;4 Noble Lord said the tax was miequal —shots
ee° coe„"‘ y;as not. He said, you might raise the money by
tYirilre—ri't but would that tax press equally on all classes ?
Qtelcoe,"° him that no tax would operate more equally that
t'itt kerAined ta; the inequality of which had been so much
slOslittiOte ofs But the Noble Lord said that the tax was o!
',fe teat', character. Now he ( Air. Goulburn ) did not
`ti, :!in order to ascertasn the amount which different in-
Nebktres°,llld nay, it would be necessary to make inquiries o:
I,:,tieLeas to 'lng nature, which it would be impossible upon all
tptiee'l to elv°itt- Rut he hoped he should take every pre.
,tsitieij'teaent the affairs of men engaged in trade from
ie'lreelect wsett to their detriment to persons in their vieinity.
ke'estitseri,°,ted be to give every facility to parties to make
114; etli 'flout having recourse to anyundue disclosure of thee
It Wit
Tvistt. hey Without en' ering into the details of the measure he
tiestotis °.uld be enabled so to frame it as to obviate many of the
thj'es, e upon that head to former income taxes. Tht
e e:na.leeenad stated that the late Government would have
111,?lit equalise the expenditure and the revenue of
fi‘eie tht tit their ficancial measures had been adopted; ann
4etr he tn. Gentleman the late Chancellor of the Ex-
etsti ollee tet'mated the increase of revenue which ironic
,rft °lttie"ed at t 1
'OO OM What would have been the result
thei%.,th o'f the Right Hon. Coot:tertian opposite?
` the end of the year they would have found them.

R
onse ti
nublie Le '"ed as ti
etualutiegual
l wes(. lel,eklied for
roP"t .-(The
„, wit/0
cheer
t'Lhever, 'te CHAN(
have bee:
se
to hi
f ll
th Ch kneeor
a Dns a)
laac Ito 'Ara 'yr
this 110.0 7r) kris
g
there 0 klything
rable to '" eEzeheliu
f real Pr! ;_eNzent, of
1 Pr" Teeth
7sona a Anc
, quer, e..,° liavinE
Althot:j , tire of the
nce '‘'i before
v cony'
;acv
it stll 'ee„,_