The Sun.
London, England, 1842-04-13 00:00:00

FOREST OF DEAN.

The Earl of LINCOLN moved for leave to bring in a Bill
to provide for the relief of the Poor in the Forest of Dean,
and other extra parochial places in and near the Hundred of
St. Briavel's, in the county of Gloucester.—Agreed to.
On the motion of the Earl of LINCOLN, leave was given
to bring in a Bill to divide the Forest of Dean, in the county
of Gloucester, into Ecclesiastical districts.
ST. I3RIAVEL'S SMALL DEBTS BILL.

The Earl of LINCOLN moved for leave to bring in a
Bill to abolish the Court of St. Briavel's, and fur the more
easy and speedy recovery of small debts within the Hundred of
St. Briavel's, in the county of Gloucester.—Agreed to.
INCOME TAX.—PETITIONS TO HER MAJESTY.
Mr. BROTHERTON moved that there be presented to
her Majesty an Address for a return of the number of petitions,
memorials, or addresses presented to her Majesty from public
meetings, town councils, conferences, or other bodies, for
the repeal of the Corn-laws, from the Ist day of January,
1841, to the present time ; specifying the places from which
they were sent, the number of signatures, and the prayer of
each petition.--Agreed to.
Sir J. GRAHAM said he was willing to give the Hon. Gen-
tleman all the information on the subject which his office would
enable him to furnish. There was no record kept, however, of
the number of signatures attached to each memorial ; but he
would make inquiries on the subject, with a view to give the
Hon. Gentleman every information in his power.
INCOME TAX—ADJOURNED DEBATE.
On the Order of the Day being read for resuming the ad-
journed debate on Lord John Russell's resolutions,
Mr. BROTHERTON rose and said, that he had moved the
adjournment before Easter in order to give Hon. Members an
opportunity of consulting their constituents on the subject of
the income tax. The Noble Lord the Member for South Lan-
cashire had thought proper to denounce those who had been
guilty of the presumption of asking for more time
to consider that important subject, and as he (Mr.
Brotherton) was one of those who had been guilty of
such presumption, he hoped the Noble Lord would allow
him to state in a very few words his view of the subject. In
the first place, he would frankly own to the Right Honourable
Baronet and to the House, that when he voted in the minority
for the adjournment till after Easter, that he was fully im-
pressed with the opinion that the country was against the
measure. He would, however, frankly acknowledge that he
did not think that there was that opposition to the measure of
the Right Hon. Baronet in Manchester ashe (Mr. Brotherton)
had anticipated.—(Ministerial cheers.) He certainly did
anticipate a different feeling to that which he met with. Here-
collected being at a large meeting in 1816, at which there was
a most unanimous feeling against the tax, and he could not
account for the present change ; perhaps it was because the
present generation had not felt te effects of the tax, and he
believed they would not be convinced until they felt the
hands of the Government in their pockets. Another reason
might be that they sacrificed their own and their neigh-
bours' interest to party. The Noble Lord (Lord F. Egerton)
had stated that he had a petition, signed by 24,000 persons.
He ( Mr. Brotherton) was ready to admit that a great number
of the names to that petition were of great respectability, but
that petition had emanated frsm no public meeting. There
had been a meeting of the Town Council, and they were una-
nimous in a resolution against the tax. Another reason, per-
haps was, that the persons could not distinguish between a
property and an income tax.—(Hear, hear, from Sir R. Peel.)
But there was, however, a divided feeling on the subject.
Another reason for the want of opposition to the tax was, per-
haps, one which had been expressed by a friend of his, who said
that the Right Hon. Baronet would allow them to compound
for the three years, and if they did so, according to their profits
of the last three years, they would get a good bargain,
for they had gained nothing.—(Laughter.) The Noble
Lord had stated that a great number of clergymen
had signed his petition. He confessed front what be (Mr.
Brotherton) knew of the Manchester clergymen, this circum-
stance had little weight with him. They were almost to a man
for supporting the French war. They justified the procfedings
at Peterloo, and when the case of Queen Caroline was before

the country, there was scarcely a clergyman that was not op-
posed to her. They were always opposed to the Corn-laws too,
and never supported any measure calculated to relieve the poor.
With regard to himself, ha had but one opinion on the subject,
and that was, he believed the tax to be unnecessary, and be-
lieving it to be unnecessary, he should not vote for it. lie
conceived that if monopolising had been removed, the tax would
have been uncalled for ; therefore it was monopoly that ren-
dered the tax necessary. He wished to have seen this expen-
diture reduced, but such was not proposed. With regard' to
the war in India, he thought that it was unjust at the com-
mencement, and that it was unjust to carry it on. He did not
partake of the feeling that the glory of the country consisted
in her triumphs in war ; he considered her glory should be
in the arts of peace. He thought no one could doubt the in-
justice of a man of real property being taxed in the same
amount as the man whose only income was produced by his
industry. His (Mr. Brotherton's) plan would be to tax all
real property, not as a tenant tax in the poor rate.
but as a landlord's tax ; and he would tax the funds
and mortgages. He would exempt the farmer and the
tradesman and the professional man. They might say it would
be unjust to leave a tradesman untaxed, but the House must
recollect that the tradesman and manufacturer paid 1,200,0001.
of taxes on the raw material. In his plan he included all mills
and manufactures as real property. He did not wish to pro-
pose, or volunteer a budget for the Right Honourable Baronet,
but he must say that there was a broad distinction between a
property and an income tax. He considered the proposed tax
would engender great odium from its inquisitorial and vexatious
process, and he had no doubt there would be soon an unani-
mous voice in favour of its repeal; but if the income tax were
repealed he should be disposed to support a tax on real property.
Colonel WOOD said that the Hon. Member who had just
sat down had very good humouredly told them that the inha-
bitants of Manchester were not unfavourable to this tax. He
(Col. Wood) hoped he should be able to show that the whole
kingdom was of the same opinion. He would just
lay a calculation before the House which he had made respect-
ing this tax. He found that the number of occupiers of land
whose incomes were under 501. a year, and who slid not con-
tribute to the tax when last imposed in 1815, amounted to
1,114,778. The occupiers of land from 50/. to 1501. a year,
which the Right Hon. Baronet proposed to exempt, amounted
to no less than 432,534, making a total of no less than 547,312
persons to be exempted from the tax. The nutnber of occu-
piers of land that would be called upon to contribute to the
tax was only 42,062. He found that in trades and professions
there were 100,000 under 501. a year, and 117,306 whose in-
comes were from 501. to 1501., making a total of 218,000 to be
exempt from the operation of the tax. Tho total number
of persons who contributed to the tax in 1815 was 77,682.
That was in a population of 12,000,000 of persons. The po-
pulation was now increased to 18,500900, being an increase
of one-third; was it then a fair calculation to add a third to
each ?—( Hear, hear.) The number of persons, occupiers of
land, of trades and professions, who contributed to the tax in
1815, and whose incomes were above 150/. a year, was 77,682,
to this he added a third, which would make 103,578 souls who
then contributed to this tax ; there then remained to be added
the owners of land and others, and he made out the whole num-
ber of contributors to be 200,000 souls. Was it possible that
out of a population of 18,500,000, the number that contri-
buted to this tax did not exceed 200,)00 souls? He believed
that was the fact ; and it would not appear strange, when
they considered that there were about 3,444,000 inhabited
houses, and the presumption was that there would be about
3,soo,ooofamilies, of whom 2,500,000 were without income; and
he firmly believed that this was a correct calculation, and
that the number of persons called on to contribute to this
tax would not exceed 200,000 souls ; and what a difference
would that exhibit between direct and indirect taxation ? That
return convinced him that an income tax was by far the most
honest and most beneficial tax which could be proposed for
the benefit of the people ; he thought it placed the tax on the
shoulders of those who could bear it—those who had property
—whilst it shifted it from the shoulders of the poor, who were
unable to bear their share in the taxation of the country. The
Noble Lord objected to this tax, because he said it was a war
tax, and should not be resorted to in times of peace. Could it
be said that we were now at peace ? He thought not. It was
impossible to tell what might yet be the result of the war in
India. We could not consider this great country at peace. But
whether at peace or at war, if the tax were a good one, it
was one which, in his opinion, ought to be imposed.—( Hear. )
Gentlemen on the other side had taunted them with the part
they had taken on the Corn-laws, accusing them of having in that
House acted in a manner inconsistent with the speeches which
they had made on the hustings. He must express his astonishment
at such taunts, because he thought that they had acted quite con-
sistently ; he told his constituents that he would never vote
for a tax upon corn fur purposes of revenue.—( Hear, and
laughter.) Gentlemen laughed, but he told them that, and
he argued then, as ho did now, that the duty upon corn was
not for purposes of revenue, but for the sake of protec'ion ;
the fixed duty of Bs., as proposed by the Noble Lord, he
thought would aggravate the evils under which the country at
present laboured, and he should therefore give a decided nega-
tive to the Noble Lord's proposition, and in doing so he consi-
dered that he should be doing his duty to his constituents.
Mr. MANGLES said that he had listened with great at-
tention to the remarks which had fallen from Gentlemen on the
other side, but he had listened without conviction, and perhaps
he might be allowed to express his opinion on the subject.—
( Hear, hear.) Every one must deeply regret the disasters
which had lately occurred in Affghanistan, but still they were
not called on to believe them to be the greatest disasters which
had ever happened to this country ; they, no doubt, all felt
deeply the disasters which had occurred there to our brave
countrymen, and fair countrywomen, but that was no reason
for the imposition of an income tax.—( Hear, hear.) He ad-
mitted that the disaster which had occurred in Affghanistan was
great and grievous, but it did not appear to him that the Right
Hon. Baronet had been borne out in the remarks which he
had made relative to the disaster. The Right Hon. Baronet
said the other night that the disasters which had occurred in
Affghanistan had not been equalled in British history.—( Hear,
hear, from the Ministerial benches.) The disasters surely
were not so 'great as were those which happened in the time of