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

'see.
tare i
ienfw e. is„aiPee.,„,_
.akt.te greund.—( Hear, hear.) He t Mr. Hawes)
Iwiolic7l7.te jitjuiraodudghtet
the
ee
rßeivgehntueHeofnthGe eenetulnemtr;.n's
TChoretrie-
* hi, si"• s 4considerable
jet sq would
n e
lanaverag uty imposed on con,
___y bring in a ger revenue. (Head)
lietliti4eof...llrigh_
common. Baronet enter upon a comprehensive re-
cont ercial tariff, and he might rely upon it that
Cs elect of su amendments which would be pointed out would have
o,,,;settite„, _ IVIYIng all the revenue he wanted. The late
tiled -b"„`vs_retild have done this if they had not been
hi
_refdre, ;ii_u_nsewhe now succeeded them.—( Hear, hear.)
tiliot. (tit. ;the present Government had no right to taunt
4:44d in ) for threatening to give them all the o osi-
% ast- seen°°Yance he could. Te reduction proposed byPP
the
dip obAd.hitve naent nt the duties on cern, sugar, and timber
4a But ,IttliPpit.ed the deficiency, as he' (Mr. Hawes) could
Le 11414, y, instead of corning to an income tax, did not
s.: tight s'lnn• Gentleman draw upon landed property,'
which
r,hied .2113, by an anaendnsent of the stamp dirtirsis which now
!,tto 47' u4equally on society ? From this source he would
Ned -revenue if he tr",ed. The Right Hon. Baronet
it-iNvalf,,t_h_e eoxperne of war in China and Affghanistan, but
it,l withar,t, t contrast the necessities arising from those petty
i of !nose in which the country was placed at the break-
-144 0 tee Fre h P
ti., would neve 'le .evolution ? But the people of Eng-
, f'att t system r'_pbriiit to be taxed for the purpose of carry-
i st„eliies.
~- °, retaliatory bloodshed against the people tk"auet itio
j'tr
haveAffg however atrocious their
bit '5°0,0 Jo/ been. Mr. Humphrey's book stated
lid P dttt - might be raised from a modification of the
14111%4er etshs so as that lauded property should pay mare;
l'lsise wr ssid ran put up with the odious vexation of an income
_,ltki rather see the stamp duty on the succession of
,4,l,...litts,.from.P„serty raised to ten times its present amount. The
.44.. hrpioss entletnan had quoted only three
.things, by no
I's 2 the:, fltant articles, except that of tobacco ; upon two of wllet. ' e bad jumped at the conclusion that there was
"Tt4st!. the ins'souce of taxation than 'that of on,
incomes.
treeny oti°rne tax in itself, he (Mr. Hawes) held to be es-
t,9 ettatst in its operation, and that nothing short of
tot, `roatht;;" necessity, or an overwhelming emergency, aleaost
:sell it el!ut,s a foreign invasion, could justify any resort
it 3Pdiet.titd-0_1;te• They ec,uld riot levy the tax with justice—
)l s ersole!oY collect by a most odious system. It was levied
t iir_staitit...,_ mantler urns different descriptions of property ;41 id ~',l4lll;Z:2_' , the
,peofessional man who was in one sense
thsLuttl,,te7.t, anst the man with an estate in fee simple, 14 76 sitte:if.ertnt kinds of property were to be charged at
titltt tfeltas, aw Ise would say that was perfectly monstrous
tile diffsbits, kit svor'e almost amounting to an official work,
ache *teas Yer•—was attempted to be shown the ratio of
suotSpe'ol•l-Vs of property. He took as an example 1002.
Pitted „ tri int: rent of land, and compared that to the same
Ittsise:oes :' rest on mortgages and other incomes. He coin.
141.1;„"tei tc annuity of 1001. was worth about 901. in corn-
kite,' ttiek t' 100/. on land. The interest on permanent and
?rteisttite he computed at 85/. to the 1001. In commerce,
&ad 1'4.4 es, and trade, the profits of which were derived from
rtsdilltsit
__,l° estimated 75/. to the 100/. The occupier of
14,ttatkif isol,°_,o one child he computed at 70/. The profit de-
leittlsestd Lio servants 601. to the 100/. But when he came
t .‘l4' sA, ‘ecupation, and principal wholly derived from in •
,Ilit Sit„eTttPared it as 501. to the 1001. of rent on land.
"lit, -44`„,,._i500k Mr. Sayer stated that the estimated income
o.l4'444llsiruil
~,000/,
.there were 49 millions, or about 30 per
Ithe ~,,ssii wle commissioners with all their. power were not
t.ses' ossese,ts The tax held out a temptation to perjury of
'so I set ' kind ; and just in proportion as they gave ade-
tiAsste%lAto the collecters, would that temptation be likely
I: et • to 41 the tax inflict misery upon the country. If he
1; tY air see the country agitated and disturbed
s eetion, he knew nothing more likely to produce
ttilh Istslt than the mposition of an income tax,
ti•lif!, t!et:_s_till have agitation and discontent—they would
Ns, :to 'Anne down to that House to obtain another mea-
Nia 1 ahould be just and comprehensive, but the Right
41.11t,ti apsen: hadtaken another course. 'rho Right Hon. Ba-
tt% Test say that the income tax was an imposition upon
lk It st 3' °f the country, and not upon the principal article Ni t Ptite,n, and whilete Right Kon. Baronet proposed to
tsttt, he „ wee per cent. upon income, the duty upon corn,
Itai of irl°Posed was equivalent to 20/per cent. upon the in-
kJ'skits
„esPoorest classes of the people.—(Hear, hear, and
t betsheut dissent from the Hon. Members on the Tree-
-01 it bat hk) The Chancellor of the Exchequer shook his
1174, Ron,„ ",„e (Mr. Hawes) would say though groat that
,tsN.Ct:l?etitleman's authority was upon matters of that
tNl,ol9os 41. he (Mr. Hawes) stated would be borne out by
ittliett '3f various other persons. There is, for instance,
6 I,„e, (.1 Mr. Jones Lloyd, who was entitled to the
'isle 4 'gilt with that House, as well as with the public.—
Lillie:tia'Z?... In reference to the Corr.-laws, Mr. Jones
't v, the 'I we estimate the average income of each fa-
Nth.,Poorerfitt classes to be 10s. a week, the average punt-
il'ta, 4les is four, and if the price of corn be 60s.
I/
the we cannot estimate the outlay of each fa-
t:t Sif tslnirchase of corn at less than ss. per week.
ttittlPes,:d:LCorn-laws raised the price of corn 20 per cent.,
pkt,4l s-s( If all income tax upon the poorest families in the '
s ssoapti ear
washear.) The taxation of the great article
slll lelass44l a direct taxation upon the income of the
',it'‘lf like;',49n certainly, that being the case, the great .
Iptit
Ltsf Itet,e; "I made by Hoe. Gentlemen on the opposite
o,o,:llit.fs_nle• with a very good grace from them as advo-
ct,.."•;w7 'Flaws.—( Cheers from the Opposition.) He I
itrss. s", before the House the various points which were
lit,iti (Itt..4n addition, he would only say that the Noble hs,ssinn itussell) should have his most cordial and
1(
4,`lset—ort to his opposition to the Ministerial measur3,
h:,}rswe Lad not say he would " obstruct" the measure, as
IL :Nti:°Pposite had said upon a former oZscasion.—
I. etifrh of dissent from Lord Stanley. `, He (Mr. '
ti: Oft; ,t_gliote the lan. guage of the Noble Lord, the
lit'tsZolijetorth Lancashire, w” hen the Noble Lord stated
I, tes3stekt wag to " obstruct the measure of the late
..,---(`` No, no," from Lord Stanley.) He (Mr.
'es srs "'sure he
t. N rota . had herd the Noble Lord distinctly ex-
s etp,, *tot 41inn to " obstruct" the measure of the late
SZtis Ntst (near, hear)—and he (Mr. Hawes) believed
lit s'.lsa Hof the Noble Lord were to be found in every
)st'ess tsi7, record of Parliament—at all evens if there
Ili, i ' Otte, there were other ears than t
his (Mr.
it 4 Stu. ° had heard the words and recorded them.
"41 ;rtts47,tittk_
Government,the length of saying that it was his intention to
4I
14i0t eZe Present measure of the. he meant
$ 4,04;Y Possible opposition, as being an odtous and un-
;',:io sits %%der the circumstances of the ease, the necessity
4,' ' tOin ~f 'HA proved, and as being calculated to lay the
Niti,SsistZ_national vice and misery. Therefore it was that '
1 \i,741,-.84 bound, on every ground, to give the Bill his
Ah. 4 liktiesand determined opposition. —( Opposition cheers. )
.., ~
7vtetN.lnatt THOMPSON said that the Hon. Member
~lioiyte.Z(rMr. Hawes) had begun by stating that he would
,I:sti,ll.4t.e e
other sources of taxation without the necessity
olkssoc. seolt_u._,rse. to an income tax, and Mr. Alderman
its,s% Noon's appeal to the House whether
. the Hon, Gui-
lt a,ss
~4 ‘.signally faded in his declaration. It was true
t,'„l4ofaa;l4l,tig the duties on some commodities, a certain
s4LVeitt-4 Gyltri'titlt., might be raised; but with respect to what
r 4 sugar, 7_lall had suggested as to the reduction in
sttlis:lbseeot,:t.use had not told the House whether he meant
s'c.rsating to the scale proposed by the late Chancellor
,s„„Stis„ the Tor- In his (Mr. Alderman Thompson's)
.04,stist, . deg
would have acted most injudiciously in
tie t° d; P!°Position. This country had made great sa-
)sttistdats:nt.lnish slavery, and they ought to encourage
tOith, 1y,,,i1e3 to adopt a similar laudable course. t„ti us +Noe ell those countries were following our examples
I;‘si,'lsars,bets, and endeavouring to bring about the aboli-
iN only i• The Hon. Gentleman stated that an income
_t:tq Itapb,stiflable in a state of war. Did the Hon. Gen-
.,71,,
,‘.,.1%1`a0-7%that the war was merely confined to Atighan-
taT ifs, "i their Indian provinces. were shaken to their
1,-st , sit 44 dissatisfaction prevailed in them, and it was
ttke
Ole astry. strortg measures. to retrieve their position in
Ole 144 . 11
li, N., 11i,„,f ere was scarcely a family connected with
Net th°nnei6a7ures, but had profited directly or indirectly
ihesssree t, a with India; he thought, therefore, that this Vl's od sv'". r cent, ought to be cheerfully paid by the
tat 44 '4lt a lssitt) ,onfacturing interests of the country. The Hon.
lt`eti/.3,444 stated, that nothing but the greatest emergency
'itsttti se itadari income tax ; and the other night, the Member
IN? 4/4ittC said, that among other reasons for his opposing
14, isstattionis. that it would lower England in the estimation
'OtS' *ere
,I, tfid that it would be thought that the sources of
' e tsf eried
Ssk‘ss the up. But would not this be more manifest in
,iises:sin to w9rld, if they were not able to take a decided
dlsl.tillN:tlse such a sum within the year, as they sup-
lostits% ay'a 'or the suppurt of the State. The condition of
itt slit;?of &t es of North America, of many of these of South
~‘osZter Cl°, and of Portugal, ought to act as a warning
t‘ii,4l7 it Puse before he proposed measures for borrow-
'ss,,,'4l4,,tl Le'lrtke of peace. The dilapidated state of our
tot:, TheliSed by the mismanagement of the late
IV, , t•re'tn_ present nintstry had consequently felt
(st .et etce a strong measure in order to main the honour
!,'ilit';_listttee 1 I,:' A tax to which the country might
.4eit'li tole wale objection, but the machinery for
N°ssdetto which was less onerous, less inquisitorial
`3to utile:4le than it had been under the old system.
titt'it s,'S o„easnre would be carried into operasion on the
bsa.tlt`erehsretriment in a spirit of confidence towards the
A104144' t,...►,gt; that the Government would not imagine
1,1,051,,11.,1141, tait'`ge ing interests of the country would take any
Oil `-) 4ter ' The honour of the British merchant bad
: v,Lttlitle:tinbeen untarnishe, and he trusted. the Right
itt* 1‘4,1t111,,,, wollia not suffer it to be called in question
ss'lloTes,74 r Fer- The Right Hon. Gentleman had said
ZNlcrtit:4 in the least in any part of his plan. There
TY' hill L'fit, howeve'r, with which he (Mr. Alderman
f,''e,tilltids;t tieZl the Right Hon. Gentleman would not per-
ss, si,,..tittt ,nt imposing the same tax on permanent and
!410htelaii:Ities- The Act of George IV. had been passed
:ii NV.. 0.
1 1-., tAh„- inducing persons to convert their permanent
iCh.ltast,N .-"lties and stock into terminable Government
kitisTst7osasit',,a,p,Person receiving 3,0001. a year from the
s Its't q had ,' the income tax 871. 10s., or 262/.lOisn.,tebur..t
e.''' llttlt:4tseso,,,,'°'ested the same amount of capital
fittt did 10`4R,ent annuities, he would receive for ten years
.! ~D,t`s -4 '„-,,',21- 10swhich the income tax
se",er'„ QtaltlS-,`ei arnou.nt to 309/. 10s. or 24/. Oid. per
heed sate ti7a ;)I•1 the proper income from his capital.
is` tiss•ttis4tti that that subject had not been fully con-
iivo iithi_ kiE4.lßht Hon. BarOnet, or he would not hav sub •
Lt thtsia, IS sso„,,annuities to the same tax as incomes. and
nts ' 0,,,,,055e-"•°' Yet alter his decision upon the matter.
etitte,tesole:er, su
rt the principle of the tax proposed
Ithlailtrtifls 'l, t,andProping its-details would be corrected in
st°se rii,beslyo.kli .
,:tta ~ Newssssatil that the country was no doubt in finan-
Z,k tff,3r* VeCt the Right Hon Baronet, in order to meet
,s7os-rttes he is;,4l proposed a tax on the income of the
h.pti dir,,e4t,g_et Hon. Baronet had, however, told them
t..,'ititi;elh.-',IY et'', , that the raising of a revenue by taking
sr,',tiihleet t,Lt spa: 1. the pockets of the people was a vulgar
il'ighlY is-itt' ; °is (Sir W Clan's) belief that the process
sr 1,7'4 iClt,::,,s was decidedly the more convenient; and
8 'A4I4)-71417, of indirect taxation was preferable to a tax
rtti,' tio,t't the-14,'1,at preposed by the Right Hon. Baronet.
'11,5114 testeterergin Hon Gentleman was one which would
w`l4istAilie, oLieeo'en•Yecie.the industry of the country, The ob •
10 it, set tim not de:_s?t were so numerous and inevitable that
0 he hi t 411- Ge ``un the Committee long on that subject.
NI • 4.sse tft 4tlernan might
iltt ;11, 41421*W, ernsinable annuities, he must in other cases,
perhaps say that if he gave
Ltlstit:l•llt:::eithe aY) thought the argument of his Hon.
17Pitki.that i_t 110,,r br"r Westmoreland, was very strong, and
„tit h a„,oule *; •-•areinet ought net to persevere in an in-
,e'tet ~get '," if aim a tax first on interest, and then on
;',441,4t t, Baronet filar cases should be made out, surely the
toe iiikts,..._r'estied ".et would not lungsrese exemption. ht
in-
fli\cetiNet to 41 the most gai manner in 1816 : there
04,44° he Nect it would be less so now. Why was
ft".c-eil lissree:td from inquisition ? His profits would be
hßlittlES LIP prtte—` Against this favour to the farmer he
%Ps `sat, %a th 'test on the artof his constituents. But
k, t,r6
.1,, ere
,„,..._ pa .
to the
tet,hs,latZonet i:'", an adequate necessity justify
a-
ret,Nites'`!. ttZlea of ~:2roPosing an income tax. fis me _
I, tou 4, terrteeting one interest at the expense of
is oe ,er ocriee es 01monopoly. His opinion was that
'°,7oas ttlla Yas the •
pt, , ~ttit.
4, tias, int, , price c.f. subsistenee.rose. The
tto't•tt 'af....; 1819 w +lining the income tax, /5,450,000/.
e.,,tikuisnlieti., has 54,257,000/. ; the difference being
Yf:art fYS t_, t 4 th ear. ) But there had been re-
stoke jfek:lBll44 oeff amount of 14,300,000.1., so that
re-
so "eels?, d to 1812 n the revenue, in the four
44: y41%1'144440 shoselvfa: 6,4,00,000/. Now what was the
v,, %.,._ .
rent
.._ lir years? It was the highest al-
t ' yt,:e resitas7as Ells. 6d. the quarter. The next tt laisas ts,f7s was sixably lower. The mean price of the
IP4S6T stateudas: 1°,1.--in 1820-21-22-23. The re-
,46o,oodzin 1819 was 54,257,000/. The revenue
'' being an inertase of 290,000/. But

there had been taxes taken off to the amount of 600,000/.
From 1831 to 1836 inclusive, the price of corn was 495. The
increase in the revenue during those years was 730,0001. The
following four years was a perod of comp trativelyhigh prices;
the mean price was 635. Now what vrss the effect upon the
revenue? Why that the nicotine fell off to the amount et
1,860,000/. From all this it was evident that the income of the
country depended in a great degree von the cost' f subsistence
From the figures he had stated, some ii-innarkable deductions
were to be drawn. In the five yatra to which he had referred,
the price of corn was 49 es Id. per quarter, and he had the au-
thority of the Right Hon. Baronet, that, under the Corn-lace
proposed by the late Government, the price of corn, ranging at
40s. a quarteraif added to the fixed duty of Bs., would give a
price of 48s. a quarter, or Is. a quarter less than the price
when the revenue manifested the increase. There was, there-
fore, every reason to suppose that instead of a deficiency under
that plan, there would have been a very large inereass. But
he was aware that this reasoning, however just, might
not apply to the present emergency, and that though
the income of the country might gradua ly improve.
yet it would not be early enough for the occasion. In the
Budget of last year the deficiency was estimated at 2400,000/.
and had that Budget been carried, his Right Hon. Friend,cal-
culated that there would have been an increase of between
1,600,0001., and 1,700,000/, which would have to be deducted
from the deficiency, and it was doub ful whether for the approach-
ing year there would have been any deficiency at all. He was sure
the House must see that there were other means short of an in-
come tax which would be quite sufficient to producethe deficiency
which it was necessary to raise ; the Right Hon. Baronet
made propositions which would have a serious effect upon the
country in general ; the Right Hon. Baronet appeared cer,
taitily to great advantage in the character of a Reformer.
To refer to details, the new tariff would destroy the manufac.
ture of starch, tas regarded the support of the measure out of
doors, he believed that the Right Hon. Baronet would find it
not arnesigst the middle classes, but among the Chartists, for
the iormer dreaded it as the suicide of our commerce—it would
also cause a reduction of wages. The time might come when
that class by whom the Right Hon. Bart. was now supported,
seeing the ruin of the other classes fall on themselve, would rue
their present conduct. He would oppose the tax both because
of its base and inquisitorial character, and because he believed it
was not required by the exigences of the State. Believing
that the required sum might be provided by adopting the
system of taxation proposed in the Budget of last year, he would
give the measure every opposition in his power.
Sir G. CLERK said that on a subject so extensive in its
nature as that under consideration, he would consider it his
duty to condense the few remarks which he had to make as
much as possible; and he rejoiced that there were some
points upon which the House agreed, and which it was not ne-
cessary therefore to discuss at all. There was no person, with
the exception of the Hon. Baronet who had just sat down,
who contended that it was possible to allow the discrepancy
between our income and our expenditure to continue with-
out some means being taken to equalise them. It
seemed to be universally admitted that it would be unwise
to meet the deficiency by a fresh issue of Exchequer bills
a vote of credit, or by making any addition to the debt, which
would be onlys putting off the evil day, when they must impose
additional taxes to make tio the deficiency in the revenue. No
one could imagine that there could be any reduction made in
our expenditure at the present moment. From the events
which had recently happened in India, it must be evident
that there could be no prospect of any reduction in
our establishments. On the contrary, it would be the duty of
the Government to propose supplemental military estimates in
order to retrieve our disasters in that country. Hon. Gentle-
men opposite admitted that if the necessity for the imposition
of the income tax could be made out, they would not object to
it ; but they urged that it was so oppressive and so inquisito-
rial, that every effort should be made to use other means to
make up the deficiency before recourse was had to a direct tax
upon property and income. The Right Hon. Gentleman, the
Member for Portsmouth, had said that twenty-two millions a
taxation had been taken off since the war, and had suggested
the re-imposition of some of those taxes rather than the impo-
sition of an income tax. It should be recollected, however, that the
taxes thus reduced were taxes on articles of consumption used
by the poorer classes, and that the re-imposition of them would
be inflicting a burden on the lower orders from which the
wealthy were permitted to escape. The great object of Hon.
Gentlemen opposite seemed to be to re-introduce the Budget
of last year.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman, the
late Chancellor of the Exchequer, had given it as his opinion
that by an alteration in the duties on sugar and timber, and by
the imposition of a fixed duty on corn :they might make
up, if not the whole deficiency, at least a large portion of it.
He differed from them upon that point ; and he found that in
doing so he was borne out by the authority of the late Presi-
dent of the Board of Trade, who stated on Friday night last
that no modification of existing taxation would, in his belief,
enable the Government to meet the difficulties of our financial
situation. With regard to the question of sugar, which had
been so much alluded to in the course of these discussions, the
justification of the course the Government had pursued upon
that subject was to be found in the fact that a reduction of that
duty would lead to an encouragement of the slave trade ; but
he hoped that measures would yet be taken by the slave-hold-
ing states, which would enable the Government to relax their
policy upon that point. The Right Honourable Gen-
tleman who last sat down had his remedy also, and
he said that a repeal of the Corn-laws was that remedy.
But he thought that the subject of corn had been fully dis-
cussed already, anti he believed the more the measure of the
Government was known, the more it will be appreciated, and
the more satisfactory it would appear to the people every day.
—( Cries of " Oh, oh," and " Hear, hear.") The N. ble Lord,
the Member for Sunderland, said that if they had a fixed duty
they would have a large revenue, but he believed the large ma-
jority who opposed the scheme of a fixed duty would consider
they had a good bargain in the income tax. The Right Hon.
Gentleman, the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, ha bringinra
forward his Budget, had stated that he expected only 400,000/.
Mr. BA RING in addition to the revenue already received.
Sir G. CLERK—He certainly did not so understand the
Right Hon. Gentleman when he brought forward his Budget.
Anti it was now, for the first time, that he was lead to be-
lieve that the Right Hon. Gentleman expected 900,0001.
The Hon. Member for Lambeth seemed to think the tax was
imposed merely for the war in Affghanistan, whereas it was to
cover the whole general deficiency of the revenue. It was not
advisable to supply that deficiency from taxes on consumption.
With regard to the duty on foreign timber, if they doubled
the duty on Colonial timber they might receive an increase,
but it could not be made available for the present year. There-
fore it was impossible to look at any alteration of the timber
duties as a means of supplying the deficiency. Having re-
moved all prohibitions, and made great reductions in the
duties en raw materials fur manufactures, what was
there inconsistent in extending the benefit of a reduction of
duty to their fellow-countrymen in the Colonies ?—( )
The Hon. Gentleman strongly adverted to the question of to-
bacco ; but he (Sir G. C.) did not think that. there was any
thing wrong in endCavouring to induce India and Australia
to break up the mon ipoly of the United States, by a reduction
of 3d. in the pound in the duty. lie had heard with some sun
prise the declaration against direct taxation, from the Hon.
Baronet, the Member for the Tower Hamlets, that it was ena-
bling a tyrannical Government to lay hold of the property
of the people, and was entirely opposed to the principles of a
free Government.—( Hear.) He (Sir G. Clerk) regretted
that the Honourable Member for Bolton had not
been in his place when the Honourable Baronet.
laid down that principle, because, he would have heard from
him a comparison of the proposition of direct taxation this
country bore to the direct taxation of France, and other coun-
tries of Europe. That Hon. Member had been most anxious
to lay on the table of the House a statement of the finances of
all the countries of Europe, in order to show the proportion the
direct taxation bore, and the proportion the indirect taxation
bore to the total revenue of the country. It was perfectly true
that life annuities and life interests would feel this tax severely.
The Hon. Member for Lambeth had read an extract from a
work, by Mr. Sayer, to show that various classes of the
country would feel the tax with different degrees of se-
verity, on occount of t he nature of the property ; but this ob-
jection would apply to every other tax, and he did not think it
applied to the property tax in a greater degree than to other
taxes. It did not apply in a greater degree than to the window
tax, or ,the house tax. A man with immense wealth would
perhaps occupy lodgings, and pay no rate or window tax, whilst
the poor tenant was obliged to occupy a house, and have a
greater amount of window taxes to pay than his rich neigh-
bour, who had an income above him of a hundred-
fold. But he (Sir George Clerk) believed that
the great objection to the income tax was that
it would press heavily on the profits in trade, and the great
objection urged was that it was inquisitorial. An objection to
this kind of tax had been taken by no less an authority than
Mr. Fox, and his objection was, not that it pressed too heavily
on the trading interest of the country, but that the landed in-
terest of the country was that which felt it most severely, be-
cause they had no means of escaping from the operation of the
tax. Now the principal objection urged to this tax was the
disclosure which it required the merchant or the trader to
make from time to time of their affairs, and that, perhaps, at
a moment when it would be extremely inconvenient, and
perhaps ruinous to him to make that disclosure of
his affairs. Now, he thought that the modification proposed
by the Right Hon. Baronet would go far to remove that ob-
jection. In the first place, those disclosures would not be
made but at the option of the parties, and then not before per-
sons of a similar calling, and who might be expected to deal
with partiality, actuated by political motives, or otherwise.
Those disclosures would be made before special commissioners,
sworn to secresy. The sum to be raised by this tax, and the
other measures to be proposed, would amount to more than the
sum required, but he thought it was much better to raise an
smalleram ou ut
abinyoan
nproperty-tax 1 ofp e
r 3 cent., p er
acnedn
the thansuro
surplus
so raise a
amount
would be applied to a reduction in duty of those articles
es
which pressed heavily on commerce. One of the principal of
these would be timber, and he was very much surprised at the
objection of tte Hun. Gentleman opposite to this proposition,
because what he proposed was that recommended by Sir Henry
Parnell, that a reduction should be made in the duty on Baltic
timber of 30s. Now he (Sir G. Clerk) believed that the pro-
posed plan would be of much more benefit to
to
econsaudme of
'consumer.
Looking to the advantage to agriculture and the trade
this country—!coking to the shipping interest, he believed
that there was no duty, the modification of which would be
attended with more advantageous results than that upon timber.
He believed that the increased consumption would in three
or four years make up the deficiency, and give a great
stimulus to trade. He believed that this reduction would give
general satisfaction. It was perfectly true there there were
objections to the details, but he believed that when they were
explained to the House, the House and the country would as-
sent to the principle upon which that reduction was framed,
and they might look forward, in the course of a few years, to a
great improvement in the trade and industry of the country.
He could believe that that class of society in this country upon
whom the burden of the property tax would prtncipally fall,
die., the landed proprietor, and the great capitalist, would wil-
lingly bear their part when they felt that they were giving re-
lief to commerce, for by so doing they would look forward to in-
creased happiness and comfort through all classes ofthecommu-
nity. He would say that the adoption of this measure
would lead foreign nations to consider the extent of our re-
sources, and it would show to them that when the service of
the country required it the country was ever ready to come
forward. There was no doubt that this tax would press
heavily on certain classes, but he trusted they would look to
the ultimate good, and trusted that that House would adopt the
measure by a large majority.
Lord DA L AIENY said he was anxious to take that oppor-
tunity of stating, its a very few words, his opinion of this mea-
sure. He was more anxious to do so, because he confessed
that he did not participate in the extreme hostility expressed
by many on that side of the House to the abstract princtple of
the tax, because on one occasion, in 1e3;.-1, he was found in the
minority on a motion for substituting direct for indirect taxa-
tion,but it appeared to him that that the question was not so much
the abstract principle of an income tax, but as to the
necessity of its imposition—as to the present necessity for its
imposition. All those who had preceded him in their oppo-
sition tolthe measure, all had acknowledged that an emer-
gency might arise which would render the imposition not only
necessary but expedient. The question then was, had such
an emergency now arisen, and were we placed in the midst
of such a crisis? He believed that very considerable praise
was due to the Right Hon. Baronet for the manner in which
(Lord Dal-
bienitiresadveducetbdathissinficenatreiadlasytsatnefmpeeittt,
mh ee
nhya )d nolisetatement was
made in a more statesman-like manner, and with more felici-
tous language, and the manner in whicb he conducted them
through the obscure labyrinth of financial details, imparting
that interest which was only derived from a most
volumnious development of the silbject ( Hear, hear)—
and with regard to the proposition made he would say that it

was much better than applying a fictitious remedy to the
embarassment of the finances of the country. But there were
two causes only on which he should be disposed to support
a measure similar to that proposed by, the Right Hon.
Baronet. The first would be suptiOsing that country was
fighting for empire and existence against some foreign foe,
desirous of destroying her power and blotting her from the
nations of the earth ; in that case he should submit to any
sacrifice, for that sacrifice would be nothing compared to the
evil it would ward off. Or if the Right Hon. Gentleman
had come down that night and stated to the House the ex-
istence of alarming deficiencies in the revenue, and stating
that deficiency was more likely to accumulate than diminish,
and with that deficiency existed a previous depression
of trade, and that universal distress prevailed, when whole
classes could find no work, when there were whole 'cities,
like Paisley, in ruin—if to remedy this frightful calamity there
had been attempts to repeal restrictions on trade in order to
open new channels for industry, by giving a stimulus to enter-
prise, and if to do this he had stated that it was necessary to
make an immediate appeal to the property of the country,
he would, in that case, have been willing to have offered his
support to the Right Honourable Baronet, and should have
given the measure his cordial assent, as now he
opposed it with an uncompromising resistance.—( Hear. )
The Right Hon. Baronet's measure was one of partial legis-
lation ; it was brought forward in order to enable the Right
Hon. Baronet. to preserve the existence of a monopoly—to
enable the Right Hon. Baronet to favour the interests of a
particular class. Those were the objects for which the Right
Hon. Gentleman had brought forward a measure which had
never been resorted to except in times of war. Those were the
objects for which the Right Hon. Gentleman introd iced that
measure which would have the effect of sending over the land a
whole army of tax-gatherers and commissioners, invested with
the most obnoxious and inquisitorial powers.—( Hear, hear. )
A more glorious opportunity than the present never was given
to any Minister of the Crown to hand down his name to a
grateful posterity by the introduction of such a measure as
would revive British interests tend rescuscitate British com-
merce.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman neglected
that opportunity. No one could doubt that the Right Hon.
Gentleman had sufficient power to carry such a mea•ure, but
he had exerted that power for particular classes, instead of
legislating for the interests and advantages of the country at
large. For these reasons, he (Lord Dalmeny) would strenu-
ously oppose the proposition of the Right Hon. &Joliet.
Mr. C. WOOD said he did not know what reason the
Right Hon. Baronet had to say that he anticipated opposition
from that (the Opposition) side of the House, whatever
might be the financial measure proposed. If that
was the first time he (Mr. C. Wood) had takers up the
opinion he entertained against the income tax, he might be
subjected to such a censure; but when it was recollected that
in 18,15 he had vo:ed with the Right Hon. Baronet against
such a tax—last year he had supported the proposition of the
Hon. Member for Portsmouth, and after that he (Mr. Wood )
knew not upon what grounds he was to be charged with giving
a factious and vexatious opposition in doing that now which he
had already done—when he had acted in perfect accordance
with the opinions of the Right Hon. Baronet himself ; for if
there was any one gentleman in that House who had depicted
in mere forcible language than another the evils of the income
tax, it was the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) himself.—
(Hear'
hear.) He (Mr. Wood) made no charge against the
Right Hon. Baronet for changing the opinions lie had then
entertained—circumstances were undoubtedly changed since—
( Cheers from the Ministerial benches)— but the deficiency at
present was not greater than it was when the Right Hon.
Baronet expressed his opinions against the income tax ; and
upon those grounds he (Mr. Wood) said, for himself and
his friends on that (the Opposition) side of the House,
that at least they should not be accused of a factious
and vexatious opposition, merely because they retained the
opinions they had already expressed, not deeming those
circumstances sufficient to change their opinions, though
the Right Hon. Baronet had thought proper to change his.—
( Hear, hear.) In common with his Noble Friend who had
just sat down, and the other Hon. Gentlemen who had ad-
dressed the House, he concurred in the necessity of raising
such sums of money as were necessary to sustain the honour of
the country. The estimates were not voted ; but he (Mr.
Wood) would answer for himself and for those around him,
that they would give no opposition whatever to a vote of that
House to raise such sums of money as were necessary to maintain
the independence and honour of the country—no disposition
had been shown upon that side of the House to give any oppo-
sition to the raising of just and necessary taxes. For his own
part he was prepared to vote for any taxes that might be really
required, but he could not see that that declaration (which he
made with the utmost sincerity) was in any way inconsistent
with his intention and determination to offer a most determi-
nate opposition to the measure which the present Government
brought forward. That a tax was necessary he (Mr. Wood) was
not disposed to deny.—(" Hear, hear," from the Ministerial
benches ) 1 hat additional taxes might be necessary, he would
not deny.—(Cheers from the Ministerial benches.) He would
go the length of saying even further, that, objectionable as was
the income tax, if there was an urgent necessity shown for it,
he would not be disposed to give any opposition even to an in-
come tax ; but he thought the necessity for it should be
clearly shown—it should be shown by most conclusive proof.
But the Right Hon. Gentleman had altogether failed in
adducing those proofs.—( Hear, hear.) Was it not necessary
that the. Government should demonstrate the necessity for the
tax beyond all doubt ? The Right Hon. Gentleman had
attempted to show that no alternative had been left to the
country, except the adoption of an income tax. If that had been
shown, as he (Mr. Wood) thought and firmly believed it had
not, some grounds might be given for imposing that tax upon
the country.--( Hear, hear.) He did not want to use any
exaggerated expressions in showing the House the objection-
able nature of that tax. He would merely refer to the
language of the petition of the citizens of London in 1816,
stating that an income tax was arbitrary in principle and at
variance with the interests of the country.' The necessity for
the tax at that time was greater than it was at present. No
body could look back at the financial state of the country at
that time and say that for two years an income tax was not
more necessary then to wind up the heavy expenses of the
war than the present tax was necessary for three years.—
( Hear, hear.) It was then stated that an income tax
was necessary to place the finances of the country upon
a solid basis and such was the opposition given to the tax,
that Lord Liverpool's Government was obliged to give way,
and leave the country in a large deficiency. The objection to
the tax was not its amount, but its obnoxious principle, and its
arbitrary inquisition into the private affairs of the people. That
was the universal ground of complaint. Was it likely that the
objections to it would he less now than they were at that time?
Were they to be told that, in the present state of the manufac-
tures of the country, the inquisitorial process sanctioned by the
present measure WAS likely to be more palatable than
it was in I816?—( Hear, hear.) On the contrary, the measure
now recommended was likely to cause paying to no end, or a
disclosure of affairs which might lead to immediate ruin.' He
did not think that any modification could be introduced that
could mitigate the pressure of that measure; he believed they
should take the tax as the Right Hon. Gentlemen had pro-
poses! it, but the unfairness with which it pressed upon incomes
derived from professions, or from temporary means,
was beyond all doubt a fatal objection to the im-
position of such a tax at all.—(Cries of " Hear, hear ")
There was an argument used by Hon. Gentlemen on the op-
posite side to which he (Mr. Wood) wished to refer; he
meant the argument which went to show that those who
brought forward that measure were the friends of the people—
that they proposed a tax which would in no degree piess upoe
the poorer classes—that it would bear exclusively upon the rich
—(Cheers and counter cheers)—and that it would not in the
least bear upon that class of people who depended upon their
personal labour and exertion to maintain themselves and
their families.—( Hear, hear.) If he thought that was
a true description of the measure, it would remove
one of the greatest objections it had in his (Mr.
Wood's) opinion. In 1833, the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R.
Peel) said that the effect of a tax like that would be to induce
persons to seek investment in foreign countries for their capi-
tal.--( Hear, hear.) Did the Right Hon. Baronet consider
how much of the employment of the working classes -of this
country entirely depended upon the supply,' not of the necessa-
ries, but of the luxuries of the rich. No doubt one of the greatest
objections to the tax was the effect which it would necessarily
have, in forcing capital abroad to other conntries. There was
already too great a tendency to produce that effect—( Hear,
hear)—and what was still more, it was well known how
large a portion of the produce of the foreign manufacturers'
establishments —the rivals of this country—were every day im-
ported by English capitalists.—( Hear, hear.) Hon. Members
of that House were heard to say that they had themselves
invested large sums in manufactures on the Continent, where
articles and commodities were produced cheaper in rival markets.
It was well known that machinery was exported from this
country to the Continent—that our artisans were every day
leaving this country, and it could not be prevented. In various
articles of our manufactures, the Grecian and even the Swiss
manufactured articles were as good as ours, and much cheaper ;
however, there was hitherto one advantage retained in this
country—that was, its greater amount of capital —( Hear,
hear.) That single advantage—the accumulation of its capital—
the proposition of the Right Hon. Baronet was calculated to
annihilate that advantage.—( Hear, hear.) If the effect of
the measure proposed by the Right Hon. Gentleman was
merely to drive capital abroad (and ne one could deny
that it would have that effect), it was certainly a
most objectionable measure, and the Right Honourable
Gentleman would find that he would derive but very
little from the tax which he proposes to impose upon the pro-
ducts of foreign capital embarked in this country, and so Far
from the working classes not being interested in this measure,
he (Mr. Wood) believed there was no part of the country upon
whom it would more severely press. Those were the reasons
which induced him always to believe that an income tax
should be reserved for time of war. On those occasions, when
the honour and independence of the country are concerned,
the feelings of the people would induce them to submit to
taxes even.as obnoxious as an income tax, because then they
see and feel that the interests of the country depend upon them.
The objection which had been taken against direct taxes in
time of peace he believed to be perfectly valid and correct.
If we looked at the history of our taxation we should find that
direct taxes had always been taken off in preference to others ;
the property tax had been taken off for that reason, and other
taxes on the same ground. The assessed tax was the only
direct tax that now remained, and that would ere this have been
removed, were it not that people could easily relieve
themselves from it, and for that reason alone were the people
reconciled to its maintenance. If there were now such a time
of warfare, as happily was not now the case, if we had now such
a war as the time when the property tax was formerly imposed,
then, he would say, as the country had willingly submitted to
it before, he doubted not it would again, if similar circumstances
occurred— ( Hear)—he doubted not but they would submit to a
tax so vexatious and so odious as this. But his firm conviction
was, that under existing circumstances it would be impossible,
and he did say, therefore, that it was an unnecessary ,and a
mischievous proceeding to make the country depend upon a
tax which could not be maintained.—( Hear, hear.) He must
say that, in his opinion, the arguments which had been urged
for the necessity of this tax had altogether failed,—(Hear,)
They were called on to support it, first, because there was a
deficiency in the revenue of 2,800,0004 , which, with a fair
margin of 500,0001., made the total 3,000,0001. to be
raised for the exigencies of the country. Was it, indeed,
true, that we were to have recourse to such a tax 33
this to raise a revenue of 3,000,0004 ? He (lid not wish to
enter into any of the disputations which had occupied their
time last year, but he could not help saying that, in his opinion,
the Right Hon. Member for Portsmouth demonstrated, as a
matter of fact, that if his propositions had been adopted, a
considerable increase of revenue would have resulted.—( Hear. )
There could be no doubt whatever that 500,090/. more would
have arisen from corn if the Bs. duty bad been imposed upon all
corn im'iorted last year. Of that there could be no doubt ;
it was net a matter of estimate. but of fact.—( Hear.) He
certainly was surprised to hear the Chancellor of the Eieche-
quer saying that the same quantity of corn would have been
admitted.—( Hear.) He (lid not believe that anybody in or
out of the House would credit such an assertion, but they
would believe with him (Mr. C. Wood) that the contrary
would be the fact.—( Hear, hear.) The same thing was argued
last year with regard to the sugar duties ; and then the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer said that it was unnecessary to go into
the proof of that statement, for he admitted it would be the
case,—( Hear.) He (Mr. C. Wood) believed that the result of
a reduction of the duty would have been attended with an in-
crease in the revenue of 1,500,0001. He was quite ready
to admit that the income to be derived from corn was impos-
sible to be calculated, so long as the sliding scale was main-
tained.— (Hear, hear.) But if anything like 1,500,000/. was
to be produced from that measure, and 400,0001. was to be raised
from Ireland. would any one believe that it was 'impossible to
derive irons Great Britain 1,000,0001. or 2,000,0004 without

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING

resorting to an income tax ? After the good-natured rebuke
which had been given to provincial Chancellors of the Ex-
chequer, it would be doubtleta called itripettinent for him to
propose any new taxes.._( Hear.) But it had been stated, the
other this a number of taxes had been taken off
without being of tha slight benefit to any one—such was the
leather tax, by vt hich the edentq had tort four hundred thou-
sand pounds, and the consumer had gained nothint: They all
knew that 25,000,00 W, of taxes had been taken off tint'
the war. .Would any one say then, after that, that it was not
possible to raise two or three millions without raising the price
of necessary articles of consumption, and with far less pressure
on the country than must result from the income tax?—(Hear,
hear.) The second ground urged why they should assent to this
tax was the commutation of the taxes which the Right Hon.
Gentleman had mentioned. The Right Hon. Gentleman pro=
posed a general revision of the import duties of this country ;
he (Mr. C. Wood) would not now revert to the imputations cast
on those unfortunate duties last year—(Hear)—when, if any
Hon. Member attempted to revert to them, a universal titter
was their only reception from the other side, a d a broad laugh
al ways met them.—( Hear.) Now, he was gaite ready to ad-
mit that a revision of the import duties was a good measure-se
good in itself, as it might be made subservient to the good of
the many. With this view he gave his hearty support to that
measure last year ; but he apprehended there could be no
doubt, even although the Right Hon. Gentleman might seem
to doubt it, that a revision of those, duties might be made sub-
servient to an immediate increase of the revenue of the country.
gdhuttiHeso,na.n
iGmemnet,lieimataeninstenreualt reomf
roxientuhee
ketir eenatria)l delcfretahsen Right
would ensue. In the list of duties proposed by the Right Hon.
G. entleman the other day, there was only one which was a
differential duty ; in many articles where the duty was
decreased one-half no increase of consumption would follow.
If the Right Hon, Gentleman had called on them, and had
told them that there was a defficiency of revenue which re-
quired to be made up, and had asked them to take measures to
that end, he (Mr. C. Wood) was sure there would have
been no objection made to it by Hon. Members on his side
of the House. But how were the main articles dealt with by
the Right Hon. Baronet? He remembered, that in the con-
sideration of the import duties, a table was given in by Mr.
Pater, in which it was mentioned that there were 17 articles,
from which resulted 94/ per cent, of the whole revenue de-
rived from the Customs, and which were wholly untouched ex-
cept in some very trifling degree. Only three of the articles
were differential. The article of corn was differential. He
would not say more on corn now, than that the mode in which
it had been dealt with was utterly insufficient for the exigen-
cies of the country.—( Hear. ) The next was the article of
coffee, and he did think that in his charge the Right
Honourable Gentleman had unnecessarily made a sacrifice of
duty. The next article was that of timber, and he
(Mr. C. Wood) would say that on that article the Government
had made a large, a needless, and a wanton reduction of reve-
nue.—( Cheers.) With regard to timber he must confess
that he was at a loss to understand on what grounds such an
enormous and such a needless sacrifice of revenue had been in-
curred ; and certainly the Right lion. Gent, would forgive
him for saying that he was very unlucky in his reference to
Sir Henry Parnell. The Right lion. Member for Portsmouth
stated that in 1821 the course pursued was to approximate
the foreign and colonial duties, by raising one and lowering
the other. The Right Hon. Gent, had quoted Sir H. Parnell
as an authority for the course which he was pursuing for impo-
sing a nominal duty on colonial timber, and maintaining so
great a difference between the duty on colouial and foreign tim-
ber, that the duty on foreign timber should be 25 times higher
than that on colonial timber. The plan which Sir Henry Par-
nell purposed, however, was, that there should be an uniform
duty of 355. on all timber whatever, making no distinction
between the two, but at the same time imposing a duty which
would give a great increase to the revenue derivable from timber.
If they had reduced the duty to 7s. or Bs. upon colonial tim-
ber, and continued the duty of 30s. upon foreign timber, he
believed a large increase of revenue would be obtained. These
were the three articles of the great articles of consumption
with which the tariff p -oposed to deal, which were differential
duties. With sugar they refuse to deal at all, and he could not
but express his surprise that the Chancellor of the Exchequer
should say that so long as an adequate supply could come from
the colonies, there was no reason to deal with it at all.—
( Hear.) He should liketo know what the Right Hon. Gentle-
man considered an adequate supply. They had been told that
the quantity introduced last •year was the largest ever brought
into this country; he (Mr. Wood) was rather inclined to *ink
that that was not the case, and if they would refer to the Hon.
Gentleman the Vice-President of the Board of Trade, he (Mr.
Wood) had no doubt that he would bear him out in that opi-
nion. He remembered last year having a return prepared by
the Board of Trade, which showed the actual quantity
which had been brought in for home consumption during
the year 1831, and it appeared that instead of 3,780,900 cwt.
being the quantity introduced, it was 4,360,000 cwt., and he
believed that a much larger quantity had been introdueed
last
year, without reference to population ; but he (Mr. Wood)
thought that the best way to consider this question was to deal
with it in reference to population, and he thought from that
that it would be found that if the supply had been allowed to
come in so as to benefit the consumer, the revenue would have
been increased some hundreds of thousands of pounds. With
wine and fruit also the Right Hon. Gen,leman did not
propose to deal. If in the present position of the French Cham-
bers we were to wait for their reduction of the tariff, he (Mr.
C. Wood) thought they should have to wait a long time; heap..
prehended the sound principle was not to wait for that.—
( Hear.) If the duty was taken off here, they might de-
pend upon it that, by some way or other, our goods would be
taken into that country. On this subject no better au-
thority could be quoted than the name of him who had been
so often mentioned in the course of this debate, and
always with respect and reverence—he alluded to Mr.
Deacon Huine.—(Hear, hear.) His opinion was that they
should always give the freest admission of other goods into
this country, and leave other countries to take advantage of it
as they thought fit, and the result would be a general mutual
interchange of goods. He would not go over the general
principle on which the proposed tariff. seemed to be founded,
but he could not help referring to the =policy of establishing
differential duties. He had certainly been much surprised on
running his eye over the tariff to see these duties introduced to
such an extent. He would admit the clearness with which
the Right Hon. Gentleman had entered into many questions ;
he admired the soundness and clearness displayed by the
Right Hon. Gentleman in enlarging upon the Cern-laws,
and his only wonder was, that with such principles, the
Right Hon. Baronet could stop where he did. •-( Hear,
hear.)" He could not help thinking that the tariff ptoposed
by the Right lion. Baronet had been laid on the table of
the House without due consideration. With respect, indeed,
to the import of foreign cattle, he quite agreed with the
Right Hon. Gentleman that the alarms on that score were un-
foueded. But with that exception, and he would add the ar •
tick of coffee, he knew of none from which the du y war re-
duced so as to lessen the price to the consumer.—( Hear. )
The income tax was proposed to maintain monopoly. So far
as the revenue of the country was concerned, he was of opinion
that it could be made up from other sources far less odious and
unjust than income. So far as the commutation of teases went,
he saw nothing in the mode in which the impost duties were
dealt with which should induce tile House to submit to such a
tax as the one now proposed. He knew not that anything
which had been said could tend to remove the odious and in-
quisitorial nature of this tax. He would conclude with a pas •
sage fre
m Mr. Fox, delivered in 1798, against this tax. That
eminent statesman said—" The moment the State required a
i great supply, I will grant t ; but let me ask, if it is necessary
that the State should require so great an injustice?'
An HON. Meareele observed across the table that that
was in 1806.

Mr. C. WOOD said it was not so. He had already alluded
to the circumstances of )806, when there was a great conti-
nental war, and when the feelings and opinions of the country
went with that tax, in order that the honour, nay, the existence
of the country might be maintained.

Mr. SCA RLETT thought that those who paid an income
tax would contribute a much less amount than if they were
taxed in a more indirect manner. He denied that no necessity
had arisen to justify the imposition of such a tax. There was
such a necessity, but it had not arisen through any fault of the
present Government, but through the mismanagement of the
party who had been in power for the last ten years.
Mr. POULETT SCROPE wanted a definition of the term
income tax"—what the incomes were, and on which this tax
was to he levied. He would take the instance of an individual
in a town who kept a number of cows for the purpose of sup-
plying the inhabitants with milk. Was such an individual, he
wanted to know, to be taxed on the gross amount of the profits
thus derived, or did the Right Hon. Baronet propose to make
allowance for the annual loss arising from the necessity of re-
placing stock ? He wished to be informed on this matter by
the Right Hon. Baronet.
Sir R. PEEL said he meant to adopt the general principle
of the Bill introduced on this subject by Lord Henry Petty,
now Marquis of Lansdowne, when Chancellor of the Exchequer
in the administration of Lords Grey and Grenville in 1806.
If the Hon. Gentleman would refer to that Act he would find
provisions of the most minute nature on all the matters to
which he referred. The information contained in that Ac.,
the Hon. Gentleman would find to be much more satisfactory
than it was in his ( Sir R. Peel's) power to give him.
Mr. P. SCROPE was apprehensive that, if he referred to
the Act, he might not be able to comprehend its provisions as
laid down. He had referred to the case of annual loss incurred
in keeping up stock. He wished to know if a person engaged
in the trade he had referred to would have any allowance made
him for the expenses incurred in other respects in his business?
Sir ROBERT PEEL said the Honourable Gentleman
would find all those cases provided for in the Act already re-
ferred to.
Mr. P. SCROPE went on to say that if they applied the
principle of compensation in the case of other perishable
commodities, why not apply it in that of manufactures, inas-
much as expense uas annually incurred in the repair of ma-
chinery. In the case of ship-owners, would the revenue de-
rived from all the ships possessed by any
.one owner, or would
they make allowance for the expense arising from the necessity
of keeping up a stock of vessels to meet any .urgency in the
trade,? In like manner, in the case of income derived from
houses, would not some deduction be made for the expense
arising from repairs? If such were the case, he asked would
they not apply the same rule in the case of incomes derived
from professions, which were by no means incomes of a per-
manent character ? To a property tax, as distinguished from
an income, he had no objection, if occasion required the im-
position of such a tax. A tax on real property was a just im-
post, in his mind, and from stating that opinion he would not
shrink.—( Hear, hear.) He would not enter now into
the question as to whether the present occasion called
for the imposition of an income tax or not. To
tax a perishable income to the same amount as permanent
property was to prevent outlay in the pursuits of industry, to
divert it into unproductive channels, or to drive capital out of
the country. He, therefore, asked, whether the Right Hon.
Baronet intended to draw any distinction between perishable
and permanent incomes ?
Mr. WILLIAMS said, though he disapproved of the tax
generally, yet he must say, that in preparing it the Government
had taken a bold and manly mode of meeting the difficulties of
the country. Looking at the mismanagement of the finances
of the country for a great number of years, it ought to fill any
man with alarm. During the last seven years and a half, from
the 10th of October, 1834. to the 21st of January, 1842, there
had been no less than 169,000,0001. of deficiency bills bor-
rowed of the Bank of England, the interest of which was
24,000,0001., or nearly half of the whole revenue. On the
sth of January in the present year, he found that there
was only 3,600,000/., in the Exchequer to meet the amount
of the interest on the debt, 8,900,0001., due on that day.
This was a circumstance of fearful importance, that there
should not have been in the Exchequer more than one-
third of the amount required for the interest of the debt, inde-
pendent of the other dersands for the support of the army and
navy. He was prepared to say that whatever sacrifice was re-
quired to be made to relieve the country from its dangerous
position, ought to be made.—( Hear, hear.) The question
was, how the deficiency was to be made up. Ho found that
from 1834 to 1840 there was a permanent addition to the debt
of 33,900,0001., the interest on which was 1,650,0001.
• they had
a year, and during this period been holding
out inducements to convert the debt of the country
into permanent annuities. During the short session of
last year he had intimated to the Government
that if they compelled the collectors of the taxes to pay into
the Exchequer the gross amount of the revenue, they would
find that a sum of 4,200,000/. was required to pay the col-
lectors. He then pointed out that the present cost of the
collection of the revenue was a vast deal too great ; he found
that it was constantly increasing ; he pointed out that in
1806 the cost of the collection of the revenue, which then
amounted to 58,000,0001., was only 2,790.000/., or 43. per cent.
en the gross amount collected. In 1840 the amount of the {eve