The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-08 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 7.

EXCISE ACTS. vseise
The House then went into Committee on the ---

Acts.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER "'leer,' of
after the able exposition made by the First eeeeee
the Treasury in his financial statement of the grounesefter
which he intended to remit certain texes,--oese
the detailed explanation he had given of the 04' otoe
quences of these taxes on the commerce of the eol:Ie it
he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not the to
would have been considered necessary for hle'efe
trouble the House treenin on the same subject' erelt
should have thought that it would have been the gen that
he might say the unanimous feeling of the house' sot
it would be expedient to remit them, but he founde bee
the Hon. Member for Dorsets.hire (Mr. 8enk",,,1 oe
determined to take the sense of the 0°11;70,01(1
the remission of the auction duty. lie hear'
have wished that the Honourable Meraberte
_Deer;
plating his notice upon the paper, had read th
furnished be the Commissioners on this sehieeeele
to
might then have been prepared perhaps to cousties to
their recommendation. that the very first dlireetea
which the attention of Parliament should be id be
with the view of repealing them,. ehelit,
the auction duties, because their character, io
ll wog
mercial country, was most obnoxious, ea ref be
upon the transfer of property must neeessa were
Not only did this general objection exist, bat th
also objectionable as being partial, as they did n aged
e f Deee
eYt
all species of property. Only one particular cle,e by
perty was liable to these duties, that which eras is:: ths°
auction. They were liable to another ohjecseee oite
applied to the transfer of property, which above
ought to be entitled to indulgence. The partfreoo, is
had no option as to the course he should P 40°11
selling. He need cede refer to what was not au uoir eetler
instance, a case of recent occurrence which fell d lee°
his own particular notice. Two estates had eels:
lately sold equally redeemable. They were 110
sold for 100,000/. The proprietor of 10001,
contracted an amount of debt, and it became It cure';
for him to submit it to sale by auction ; the etenut,el.
was, that when the property was sold, 90,0eeoieee
paid by that individual, and out of the reotieo-
10,000/., he had to pay 3,000/. the amount °to to Sr
The other person, whose property was subject t „ere,
r
cumbrance, for he was not liable to debt, sold' et
perty by private contract, and thereby avoided Plot si
The whole of the property last year which ass o'''
for sale by auction was of the value of 45,0ee'e eur
while the amount of it which was subjected to I:„tioss
tion duty was short of a million. The elcreeteele
from the auctioe-duty had been canted to a Ole- hahl''
Generally speaking, Parliament lied been S° 'eeeetiest"
when particular interests pressed upon theill'll;_ersewwbeicree
ing those interests from the auction duty.
selcirses.atlrtougti;etllo:ln
no less than forty-five different classes of ralrebeeselli
were exempted from auction duty by Act therefore,.
The duty did not press upon those classe''rity on lie'rd
pressed as a hardship with very great sereo stiplen
who were subjected to it. But it was not t
that those who were exempt from duty
exempt from charge. Far from it. It
tne 3 • 0
e_estr_i.spetir°,is,
they were exempt from the payment of
duty, but they were still subject to all those
on sales which applied to every other sort a fbrcecee_
The auctioneer had the same notice to eive,e ree iewe
catalogues to draw up, the same
with the Excise, and, as he had to collect the uu.eees
bond' t°
had to pay hitneelf by making additional charFe:0;11,01:
, those parties had to pay, althoueh they paid of (:ene
tional auction duty to the State. The expeoseeeee
letting that duty was also great. It wag met the Poi
state exactly the amount of the charges 13P°11 00,0`"
cise for the collection of that duty, but of the Sat, eit°
annually collected, the whole by no means we well
the coffers of the State; and he thought he vlO4 tiee
the mark in estimating the expense of the cone tbe
20,0001. The House would see, th'erefbre's
the
among the other evils of this duty, w-besir;,,
immense expense of its collection, (gear' etlk,
But in consequence of the amount of the duty' ereee
pressure upon particular kinds of propertert nil*
resorted to all sorts of devices to swicie Bile
by auction. And sometimes, to eVnee-nertl:
payment of the duty, the seller bought in the Presets'
and disposed of it by private centrist. In !needle
majority of cases, the intention of the law we• sd')
defeated. The anomalies of the tax were e' ple e
'
burthensome upon trade, manufactures and otigries
perty. In the case of the importers of some '''''-"eof
foreign goods, the first importer had no duty to (fops
he sold within a limited period, but the purchaseer eta
him would have the whole burthen of the a Ucte,i()e-g the
to pay, when he was obliged to sell. Nor "eerice';
auction duty less offensive with regard to the %e'en'
tural interest, with regard to which his Ha- 401
(Mr. Bankes) had a motion upon which he proPe" eto:
take the sense of the House. It was pod'. city truev of
the larger farmers who had such a entaytitqe'
stock to dispose of, to the sale of which it would be pot
sirable to attract a great number of persons, reighrtasei
feel the hardship of the present system, but it orc:osi'
most oppressively upon the farmers who had onlY 'leder
stock to dispose of, to the sale of which a large teed te
of persons was not expected. Bur, even with reeareest
the large farmers, he knew instances where Peer.,
having a large stuck to dispose of, and wishiug for tee;erts
vantage of as great a number of buyers as pi ssiblet eve
their cattle to the neighbourhood of a large town, svestll`
they were viewed. They were afterwards drieene: tee
and sold. In many cases of this kind, also, tii*4rielitill
arose as to the bond fide nature of the sale. Thett'es et°
regard to timber, when it was sold standing there wose
duty, but when it was cut down, and the persol:itref
to
'sell the bark or other parts of ',el..— paid'
by auction, the whole duty had to ee,tieur"
There were some general instances of the c 0 ere
wers
fraudulent evasion of the law on this subjects wP'ee morel
continually being practised. He might slate reallere OW,
but he feared he would be wearying the House it xll/,
iessie
so. The great objection to the tax was, that "'ertals/,
tax upon the transfer of property, operating Neer
and unequally, and particularly upon these on vg-who'
should not be inflicted at all ; and even upon those a eir
duty it was to collect it, an amount of labour t/a ts°,
pence more than they could afford ; in short it wtieseupsr
that had operated so unequally, that it was resole be re,
that it should be the very first tax proposed met
pealed. Some modification of it bad been reeelni-elere"
wits" if
f it
tbn
by the Commissioners, but then it had been cossi_eoela
therefore
justea(Hear.)
. )a s
There
hue much
e wouldaa
that the expense of collecting it in a reduced fornic7 teat
to a
wished to call attention, namely the pre position that. p9eid
tioneers should pay a licenceof present ti'•,_neYr
only 51. , but then they had to pay in addition Woee It
separatel
i might,,,t
individual,
id they
iwdo neraarnlebiid,ceceienainrol
el
addition
drlodn
aoasui
putpeiisoortiinnntbsstet
tooosrhnsseacpeldeillasli
selling
a:redde
sitxioht
ordinary
aalbpprt .tiperhyoeeeposreet LActchyli
cages
seroo,:i
iatseornaett otphaoeibnfoutlli 3;1 !Tile tto' ,v(rmetilltihe ebici
n
e
cou -se
them. There were cases in which an auctioneer "og OS
the whole of that additional duty, thereby incil/lieulaf
annual charge of sOl., the arnotent of all those pa-4, gin
duties. in fixing
peered to him that it was net an unfair cotolortillleerti
extreme rights. As the Bill would stand, ,rerf
There would be a great
having a licence for 15/. would be at liberty to fee elsc;
the duty tit half that amount, ise
species of prop..rte • e es. • • PSI
without an a (atm° p
up to sale and actual!- s' • increase • de of 0,50
isposed of by tins mode
'lsere •
The aucti ones r, then would have a very large of big
of bueine • •
ss, arising from the simple circumstance 4,000
being- released • - 6 from heavy restrictions.
to of proferty reseeeeeen
to pee ing the present teal the auctioneers had to `,orlog
an annual bond to the Excise for the purpose 0f seeti.ouell
the payment of the duty which might Pess tte; suc.'
thee taint's. 'those wsre annual expenses on 11,
tioneer. Ile had various other burdens to Ise"`"etereg
had to provide two sureties, with a view of Prtl.e .4
fraud. atid he was also compel', dto keep e c')"11 Mt iP
set of boeks for the satisfaction of the Excise Comosej
settlers. These were the grounds on which be Pere ,P, be
to :ho iene,e to reisit the duty on auctions, an
urged
did net knee what • -*
- 1 i
oop•ermee eeee, p, sable
against it, as he had not been able to form else ebet
in his own tend, he could not anticipate what utg the
urged by Hon. Members. He had only, therefore,

pewer of answering any objections that might be raised
by Hon. Members.
Mr:HAWES said that the Right Hon. the Chancellor
of the Exchequer had said that he intended to levy a
duty of 151. upon auctioneers, in lieu of several duties to
which they were at the -present liable. Perhaps the
Right Hon. Gentleman was not aware that, in several
Parts of the country, it was the custom for one of the
anners to take out an auction licence. He wished to
know whether, by this arrangement, it would be impe-
rative upon three partners in a firm to take out the 11-
eence,• which, in such a case, would be a gain to Go-
vernment of 45/. instead of 151.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that i member of a firm, on behalf of the firm, would
not be obliged to take out more than one licence for a
particular sale. Every individual who sold by auction
was liable to pay auction duty.
In answer to a question from Mr. ROSS,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated
that there would be some exception to the Bill—excep-
tions which at present existed, such as auctions at the
Court of Requests in Scotland for small sums—auction
duty would not, of course in such cases be enforced.
The House then went into Committtee, whereupon
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved
the repeal of the auction duty.
Ms. G. BANKES, in accordance with hie motion, said
he would take the sense of the House on the subject.
Re did not think he was called upon to show that
tOhat
good wou!d be effected by the removal of the tax—
would ensue from the remission of that tax ; but
what he was called upon to prove was that greater good
would result from the application of the surplus revenue
to other purposes then those proposed by the Govern-
ment. There were other burdens which would affect the
agricultural interest, and which were in the contempla-
tion of the Government. For instance, the new pees-
sure for the regulation of Justices Clerks, and the Paro-
chial Settlement Bill, both of which would be thrown on
the county rates. It was not denied that great distress
existed in the agricultural districts, and yet those addi-
tional burdens were about to be thrown upon it. With
respect to the first measure, he would not deny that
mere was
a great deal of injustice in the present.
SYstern of fees to Justices clerks, and he would further
say that he thought the great easure was based on a
sZlenndtad useful principle, butwhat lie did say was that
alreadhere fresh burdens were about to be thrown on anld
uch depressed class of share thebenefitofofthe reliefwhich the financial
some
st of the country allowed the Government to propose.
state..tr measure was the Parochial Settlement Bill—
taida.t, he could not but consider, as a' most unwise
ncl inapolitie measure, and one which would
have the effect of materially increasing the al-
readyo enormous amount of the county rates.
ate would give it all the opposition in his power.
Another great burden on the i
ate-payers would be the
establishment of lunatic asylums. Even the "smoke"
Measure of the Hon. Member for Leamington, and the
Peerobpeoriseed museums,
ii stae-thewould entail expense on the agri-
fall 'Von tha payment of inspectors and officers would
a _ rate-payers. The
.Hon. Member then read
letter from the board of guardians at Dorchester, in
Which the burden of poor-rates was complained of, as
pressing with gretia severity on persons of the humbler
nire, some of whom, though proprietors of small patches
e
o
ta ground, were not eareling more than ss. a•-week. H
ought the charges of gaolers, and expenses after con-
tvinti°n,
bear were burdens - of ;which the public ought
eo
H. a fair proportion. liee thought, also, that
tirilfslis question he might reasona;alar expect to have
e support of the Gentlemen in the House who
,avowed themselves to be connected with the linti-
Al, r Cot n-
-4"eafrue. Those Gentlemen declared, and he believed
with truth, that they were not disposed to injure t'
agriculturists • and they were aware that with the in-
terests of the latter class, their own were to a great ex-
hent woven up.—(Hear.) They admitted that they were
dependant to a great extent upon the prosperity of the
home market. To show this, he (Mr. G. Bankes) would
read an extrect from the last trade circular of Manches-
ter, which ran- to the effect, that in the beginning of the
Previous month, the trade of that town had been in a
Prosperousses condition, but that there bad since been a
eon
• erable falling off, in consequence of the depressed
State of the agricultural districts. He trusted, therefore,
that for their own interest, if not from a higher
motive, the manufacturing gentlemen in the House
beard
give him their assistant, (Hear.) He bad
with regret his Right Hon. Friend the Secretary
:If State say, that the county accounts were kept very
aanaccurately. But he would call the attention of the
'1")11. Member for Montrose—(A laugh)—to those a .-
counts, and he woud be happy to receive any sugges-
!ton from him howl to improve the mode of keeping
le...lieut. He had now offered to the consideration of the
eiouse a proposition for suspending the remission of a
he other
which yielded about 300,0001. But there would
'ue other funds at -the disposal of the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and if his
Right Hon. Friend kept this money in his pocket for
the present, the next time he put his hands there he
Would find some more in it, which could be applied to a
further relief of the county-rates. He did not ask fur
the relief upon the ground of distress or destitution, but
hee claimed it on the ground that the agriculturists
were fully entitled to it, after so many bonuses had
been given to other classes who were less in want of it.
-out the repeal of the auction-duties
says no boon to any
one, He had received letters from t number_ of
auctioneers,,,, in all parts of the country, stating that they
-"Id be—some said almost—others entirely—ruined,
as their bnsiness would not enable them to pay the
1/riereaeed duty of 151. for their licenses. His Right
d,t(P• Friend said that the remission of the auction-
esel; be
e boon to the agriculturists, because they
ibis: ue allowed to sell stock by auction off their pre-
off th •
.., And vies it a boon to the agriculturists to take
The report of Sir henry Parnell, recommending the
scheme ition Of the auction Auties, was
~ea which that financia: only part of a grand
had in his head to abolish
the altogether. He woold show, however, that
,t;',
etthe opinion of that great saetesman Lord North,
tau° I roduced this impost in the tint instance, that
:tons were
storis 0 6 reasons more important than mere
considera-
tion dui finance' which induced him to propose the auc-
re Y
; amongst le e of e • imp. Were, that wince some the most imp. rear
-t
great Increase of auctions led to great intC:-
cheating the
trade, and gave rise to much fraud and I
tract from.- he Hon.
the s Gentleman then read an !x-
-the importance of
of Lord North, recommending
'l'l6 Right ales. thfa auction duties on those grounds.)—
Fri
end will see that when there was
'wit ho made great fortuees. There were then auctioneers
icried this measure were
ms.enTelifehiaguhcteihonereeeertserweehdo
di des-
1 nction, but if their humble brethren had no right to
consideration on their part, they had a right to the con-
sideration of her Majesty's
Ministersa 30000 ersons
Were a portion of her Majesty'ssubjects who were worth
considering. They wouldfind
mgainst the measure, would every
one of these
of 30/. This would be thegr arteisfult otfhtehnatpma
yealssulreinwshteicand
erhens of considerable
'would as he had stated
means and of high rank andysPtation in life, but who
would not require their pecuniaerfy aid, and would injure
a large and inestimable body
.any benefit to the agriculttuist
in his arguments said that taxes a
I!
ii•Ti l'anßiand
obnoxiousht R.
wouldin .
be Friend
notd oe
there were so many objections.seemeeeddierllsneot
force of that argument. teseeurthgee
that it was objectionable one
account of the amount
?..f trouble which it
; he would ask his
.4e on. Friend to read the regoarvteover again. It was quite
Sltsear that if those duties bPelonged to the Customs, in-
!o ad of the Excise, all these: evils
h which were objected
would be remedied. Wrespect to the sale of
landeder estates. they were notitsoldregs'enerally in this man-
ene t
.thongh auction was sometimes made use of, to as-
'endedt son the prices of them. It would be easy to exempt
se.. es from the duty, and to
estat
‘"aa a stamp duty,which substitute in its
anent ot• the
duty, without any complaint or any ciffi
tliity Th
1.
were • ere were remedies ' •
f. not acted upon, there pointed out which
eise should bePon, because it was desirable that the
at a done away with altogether. He thought
vthitit great many would be • •
110 . ‘`'`.3 made any
injured by the propo.al
a. 1, • •ee would venture to hope that his
of The Good would think it worth the re-consideration
time to "nment ; and for the purpose of giving them
HO use • use Imo . 1 er it, he would take the sense of the
Mr, al, 11 It
the • it'
c, realarks of said that lie differed from some of
41eule Genders his Honotrrable Friend. The Honour •
'"e agrietti an came forward asking for relief to
celled
the tnral interests of the country. He
ltriest one. What
phroPosal a small one, and also a
e interest of at was the agricultural interest? Was it
roprietoo
if the labourer, the farmer, or the landed
t't 4 IoSS to he
unde meant the agricultural labourer, he was
I°lt can benefit rhs.tand how any remission of local taxa-
ftnd if anythi him. His distress is a chronic distress,
_erica other ease.'e is shade better than he would be in
I he
a.) , in copsequence of the cheapness of food.
Pota, Ind relieve the agricultural labourers from the
with h•ent oppression they laboured under, he would go
Is MI most cordially, C auction duties but to tell him that by leaving
labour bY it, and as they were, the country would
%le Was that it would better the agricultural
Gentler'rsan, • urging.
him to have a doubt of the Hon.
he hituself
,:‘,lsnfiellibility. With regard to the farmers,
and
lithQ °llglii toalltln
aegwrictust and ajustice of the peace,
something about the county-rates.
Of thisliew 'ben bodies were asked for the representation
often r interest for the
th tip Paid that th levying of these rates that it was
tl: rate ey did not pay the county-rates, that
ti kat
took
the came
t out of the rent. If the Hon. Gen-
htlella he would findrouble to read the report on local taxa-
me Foga-rates that the Commissioners told them that
tepees
these burden°antY-rates, and rates for lunatic asylums,
7_Pted her_ h were merely portions of the rent inter-
enent to t"st_e it found its way from the pocket of the
It''. fit eaui,,'! hocket of the owner of land. What be-
ass, the the Isencieb; to him ? With regard to the third
mkee. When theph!?prietor, he would make it his own
wasd them to and a Hon. Gentleman came forward and
ets of tile
ecolif a tax. which put money into the
'when not a modest proprietors, he must say that it
theen this propos l proposal. He would tell them that
lerents, w s a to benefit the farmer, by adding to
!, heads
ore..
eun_derstood, it would throw discredit on
ittlijrnStif hoZ4edl.anTded proprietor., to which class he
th:se count Y rates hey imposed a larger portion of
.s,:v did on the landed" the. town populations than
ettaus,er into that matter proprietors. But he would not
tlesi"' Ile attributed,
as it did not form part of the dis-
. adman „_,
athat movement of the Hon.
"' pressure iplistead The
b from without that he could not
,4'noltrable GentLenadall heard the other day of
,I)Ping throe h th ' owing the " grease and lard"
1 to t,,_ t g eir fingers. He supeosed nom ,liaY
I"zt.
Theov 0 recovEl. some of what they had alrceth;
les. that ill would not C:titl that the farmers would 'he'
3 vo,o, a e Hon. Gehtleman at the he d f I .
tto.v,.. e.overernent was . - a o ier Ma-
to, In"t• Ile belie not also at the heed of this
cess,suffering from a-ve.d that the Hon. Gentlemen were
us eltueneres, ~ having tampered with their country
wied ea ear "' promised wh t th , •
rY Out. lie read a e never in-
passages in a speech of

the Hon. Gentleman to whom he alluded, in which he
proposed this free trade which he now opposed. He
would advise those gentlemen to endeavour to lead their
constituencies to think that the corn-laws should not
last, instead of making them believe that Ministers would
adhere to this or to that policy, that they may profess to
pursue for party purposes. They told them of the na-
tional debt, but they never told them that they were
the persons who had all the benefit of contracting that
debt. The debt was contracted in the time of war, when the
articles necessary for war purposes were high, and now
they wanted to continue those high prices. The profits
went into the pockets of the landed proprietors, and Mr.
D. Hume told them, that when a man was said to be in
the possession of an estate worth 50,0004, he was also sup
posed to possess 50,000/. consols ; but instead of that
they lived up to their incomes, mortgaged their proper-
ties, and now they must try measures to keep up the
prices of corn, the same as they were in the time of war.
It was most ridiculous fur landed proprietors to come
into that house and say that they ought to be exempted
from taxation. They paid no rents at all ; they received
their lands subject to those burthens, and they ought to
pay them. They had the corn-laws, and were sheltered
by Court patronage and place. They bad all the pick-
ings of the Court, and had the whole patronage of the
Ministers. Their acres not only produced corn, but also
pensions end sinecures.— (Cheers and laughter.) Acres
were a great security, a sort of certificate by which
they obtained places and pensions ; he would ask them
if they thought that the time was not approaching when
the mercantile portion of the community would not ask
to be placed in the same position as that in which they
were. lie would call on them no longer to interrupt the
public business by claims which could not be supported ;
he saw no grounds on this occasion for resisting the pro-
posal of her Majesty's Government.
Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN said that the Corn-law
League had been unsuccessful for some years, and
now they were trying what they could do by
taking up the Church and the Court. Wishing
them success—(Hear," and laughter)—their " Hear,
hear," commenced too soon. Wishing them success
equal to their past success, he would observe, that al-
though the Hon. Gentleman was a prophet, be could
not declare himself the prophet of a fulfi.led prediction.
He said that the agricultural portion of the community
were displeased with their Members, but he had merely
made an allusion to an article which appeared in the
newspapers. Let him show them how these constituen-
cies were inclining to the principles of the Corn-law-
League.—(Hear, hear.) He came down to the House
for the purpose of opposing the proposition, and it would
seem that the speech of the Hon. Gentleman did not
induce him to alter his intention. He recommended that
the proceeds of certain taxes should defray the expenses
of the Bill, not one expense of which he could account
fur These were the same principles as those brought
before the House by the Member for Somersetshire. He
did not think when a propositien had once been brought
before the House, and bad been decided upon by a
large majority, that it was forwarding the public busi-
ness again to bring it before the House. Was the question
of local taxation to be discussed or not? If it were not
to be fully discussed, then he should say that it was in-
terrupting the business of this House, and keeping the
country in suspense, but if they only entered upon its
discussion without going through it, then he should say
that they would prejudice the question in the opinion of
the country, and it would not be doing justice to its
merits. He should decline to support the proposition of
his Hon. Friend. He had listened very attentively to
the Hon. Member in the hope of hearing him urge some
argument in support of his proposition, but he had lis-
tened in vain, for he had heard none. But even sup-
posing that he (Mr. O'Brien) did acquiesce in this
proposition, the Hon. Member had not stated by what
means he intended to carry it out; so that, in fact, even
if it we:re Affirmed by the House, all they would get by
it was a mere :imposition fur a general scramble.— (Hear,
hear.) He saw te"'-alonourable Member for Montrose
laughing; but he (Mr. `'Brien) knew very well that
that Hon. Member would not flow this proposition to
be carried out without making a very hard scramble.
Therefore, even if the House should give the ,1;1",n-
Member all that he asked, not the least use woue;
the result of the proposition ; and for these reasons he
(Mr. O'Brien) felt compelled to vote against his propo-
sition.—(Hear. heir.) He did think the Hon. Member
was rather unwise in persevering in his proposition, end
he would get but few to vote with him ; but even if ha
did get a .ew more than he expected, the result would
illy prejudice his case. For these reasons he (Mr.
O'Brien) would give the proposition his most hearty op-
position.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. F. T. BARING did not think that the remission
of this tax would at all result in the beneficial effects
anticipated by the Government. Recently he, and
others at this side of the House, agreed, from the
financial difficulties of the country, to the imposi-
tion of a tax, but which they, at the same time,
could not but feel was a harsh, unequal, and
heavy-tax.—(Hear, hear.) But then the result of this
was the creation of a surplus, which was alleged as a
reason for the remission of the present tax ; and now the
House was called on to say that this was a fit and proper
mode of applying this surplus. If the House agreed to
this resolution, to take off this tax, it would be impossi-
ble to remove other and more oppressive ones.—(Hear,
hear.) People out of doors expressed their surprise at
this proceeding, and asked, " What the Government
meant by throwing away 250,0001. by the reduction of
the auction duties ?"—(Bear, hear.) The Chancellor cf
the Exchequer spoke of the inconvenience of the tax ;
but he (Mr. Baring) was surprised that that Right Hon.
Gentleman had not made out a better case against it than
he had ; und, indeed, he knew no tax against which a
good speech could not very easily be made.—(Laughter.)
But in the present case he should say that before this
proposition was made, inquiry should have been insti-
tuted in order to ascertain if there was no other
tax the removal of which would tend to confer
more general benefit to the public at large
than thise—(Hear, hear.) lie would ask why nut
propose a reduction of the duty upon butter or
tallow, or many other articles of general consump-
tion amongst the poorer classes ?—(Hear, bear)—Hon.
Members cheered but he would ask them would they do
it ?--(Hear, hear.)i He would vote against the remis-
sion of this tax, n order that he might afterwards have
an opportunity of voting in favour of the remission of
others, the removal of which would be more beneficial
to the country, while the remission of that now under
discussion ;night have been left for a future day.—
(Hear.) If a tax was to be imposed and that it was
deemed to be just, the best proof of its justice would be
the fact that there were no exemptions ; but on the
other hand the great proof of the hardships of some
taxes imposed was the number of cases of exemption.—
(Hear.) Now he would ask was the tax proposed to be
removed one that had been falling ' off? He could
show that it bad not, for he had before
him documents by which it appeared that
in the year 1831 this tax amounted to 233,000 ,while
the average amount for the last three years was
294,0001., which proved it to be a gradually increasing
mthuecrhe thwaats tnhoe
t s s. (
Committeei I e a r
would)
other tax, the remission of which would not do more ge-
neral wouconsiderld
w sli
whether very
übratetnhattheiyf twhoeulqduevaetriyonewaseilrye
er egdo good. He
find such a tax ; for instance there was the duty upon tHweelvheadhnoonedsot
solp.—(flear.) In fact there was no article so much
used amongst the poor as soap—there was no article so
necessary to their comfort, but the duty upon it was so
Surely, then, the poor would be
high that frauds were continually practiced in its menu-
facture.—(Henn-)
more benefited by the removal of this duty than that
on auctions. He had before him a report from
theseveral
counties in England, by which it appeared two-
thirds of the income of the labouring classes
was spent in the article of soap; and bow much
of that sum went into the pockets of the Government in
the shape of duty?—(Hear, hear.) The duty upon soap
was about 14/. 14s. per ton, or at the rate of thirty per
cent. profit to the revenue.—(Hear.) Now the anction
duties did not in any wey affect manufactures or trades-
men, while the duty upon soap had a very serious effect
in keeping up the price of very many other articles of
general consumption. There were many other taxes of
a nature equally oppres.ive which he could mention, and
each of. which it would be much more useful to remove
than this duty on auctions.—(Hear, hear.) The con-
sumption of soap was equal to about 71b. per head of
the entire population, while that of sugar was about
151bs , even in the worst times ; and surely, then, would
it not be a great public benefit to let the poorer classes
have these articles at the lowest possible price. Indeed he
could quote a very high authority to bear him out in his
assertion with regard to soap. In the year 1837, when
it was proposed to reduce the duty on newspapers, and
thereby remove a tax on knowledge, the present Chan-
cellor
of the Exchequer made a most argumentative
speech in favour of the remission of the duty on soap,
and showed how much the poor would benefit by it.—
(Cheers.) On the whole, he (Mr. Baring) did think,
and he believed the country would agree with him, that
a much better use could be very easily made of 250,0001.
than by applying it to the remission of the auction duty;
and he would give the proposition his negative.
Sir. J. GRAHAM said he rose for the purpose of re-
plying to the observations of his Hon. Friend opposite,
relative to certain measures which had originated with
him. One measure which he had proposed would ulti-
mately, he was convinced, cause a material saving to the
ratepayers. There was another and most important
measure which he bad proposed. He alluded to the
proposed alteration of the law of settlement. This was
not the time to discuss that measure; but he would say
that it would tend very materially to the improvement
of the labouring classes. But if that measure should be
found not to be conducive to that end, and if those who
had had experience in these matters should not be pre-
pared to give it their assent, he certainly would not press
it. It was a matter quite open to discussion. It was a
question of the greatest importance, and ought not to be
treated in the least as a party question. He was quite
prepared to enter into the discussion of the measure
but he would not advise the Government pertinaciously
to adhere to it. His Noble Friend the Member for Dor-
setsbire intended to call the attention of the House to
the subject of lunatic asylums ; but, on this account the
Government could not be called upon to postpone the
consideration of the subject now under discussion, seeing
that the measure of his Noble Friend was not yet
matured. His lion. Friend had commented upon an
observation which he (Sir J. Graham) had made with
respect to the coonty-rate. What he (Sir J. Graham)
had said was that with Freater care and greater supervi-
sion a very material saving might be effected. With re-
ference to the remission of the cotton duty his Hon.
Friend had committed an error which he (Sir
James Graham) had heard others fall into—namely,
tbee of endeavouring to show the extent of relief to the
"
labuurC (,f the country, whether manufacturieg or porn-
-1
mercial, by
the 1-2. ‘
amount of the duty remitted as
tourer. Now • sseest7
that was not the artune g C3' uscd
eff,.cting the artic.. by thg la-
ee either .
mr nt was, that the remission of the duty on the ru..
material would so operate upon the demand for that
article and the cost of the manufacture, as to materially
ncrease the general prosperity of the snanufacture

itself, and incidentally a hundred fold to improve the
position of the working classes, by increasing the de-
mand for their labour. He might be permitted to state
some of the principal objections to this tax. If he
mistook not, the amount of property annually
charged under this tax was 45,000,0001., while
the actual amount submitted to bear any share
of the impost, was only 8,000,000/. annually,
or not more than 20 per cent. on the whole. The cost
of the collection of this duty amounted to as much as
50,0001., or about 20 per cent. of the whole duty. It
appeared to him that the greatest objection to this tax
was that it was a tax upon property, and upon the sub-
ject of its remission he would read the opinion of Sir
Henry Parnell, and Mr. Wickham the present Com-
missioner of Stamps and Taxes. The Right Hon.
Gentleman then read from a published report upon the
subject, in which the total abolition of the tax was advo-
cated. The first tax recommended by Sir Henry Parnell
to be remitted was that now under consideration. A
similar motion to that which had been made by his Hon.
Friend the Member for Somersetshire was made in the
year 1836, by the Noble Lord then the Member for
Buckinghamshire (the Marquis of Chandos), and on
that occasion he (Sir James Graham) held the same
opinion which he had that evening expressed with
respect to the tax now under discussion. He resisted
the motion of the Marquis of Chandos on precisely the
same grounds as those upon which he now resisted the
motion of his Hon. Friend ; and he should now have the
greatest pleasure in supporting the motion of his Hon.
Friend the Chancellor of the exchequer.
Mr. DARBY was understood to support the motion
of the Hon. Member for Somersetshire, but the observa-
tions which he made were delivered in such a very low
tone of voice as to be quite inaudible in the gallery.
Mr. HUME said the question they had that evening
to decide was, whether they should repeal the auction-
duty, or whether they should apply the surplus revenue
to the reduction of the county-rates. He would ask
whether there was any tax which pressed more un-
equally than the auction-duty ? Was there any more
expensive of collection, more difficult to collect, or one
that could be more easily evaded ? He would defy any
one to point out a more objectionable tax. The great
advantage by the remission of the duty was, that they
would thereby get rid of one branch of the excise. They
had already got rid of two branches and only two re-
mained—that with respect to soap and bricks. He
hoped that these would be done away with next year.
A late Chancellor of the Exchequer, Lord Monteagle,
had proposed a reduction in the duty on glass, but al-
though the reduction took place, the establishment at
the Excise had to be kept up and the public in conse-
quence derived no benefit from the reduction. If the
whole of ,the duty had been taken off, as was now the
case, the people would have been largely benefited. He
would vote with great pleasure for the motion of the
Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Mr. M. GORE would support the motion of the Right
Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, be
cause he thought there was no tax which pressed so
mischievously on the public as the auction duty. That
was not only his own opinion, but it was the opinion of
Dr. Adam Smith and Mr. Ricardo. And not only was the
principle supported by great writers, but it was sup-
ported by many of the ablest statesmen that this coun-
try ever produced. It was supported by the late Lord
Lansdowne who was such an able supporter of the
principles of free-trade, by Mr. Pitt, Mr. Huskisson,
Lord Liverpool, and the late Mr. Horner, whose name
ought never to be pronounced in that House but with re-
spect. He also thought that great advantage would arise
from an equalisation of the cost of auctioneers licences.
Lord J. RUSSELL said it appeared to him that the
Hon. Member for Mo'ntrose had mistaken the objeet of
the vote to which they were about to come. His Hon.
Friend thought he was about to give a vote with regard
to county-rates, but there was nothing in the question
which regarded county-rates, even if the Committee did
not agree to the proposition of the Right Hon. Gentle-
men the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The question,
as he understood it, was this:—There were various re-
missions cf duty proposed; the House agreed to the re-
mission of the cotton duties, to the excise duty on glass,
and various remissions of the Customs' duties, and now
tiler was a proposition made for the remission of the
auction duty, which, according to the statement of the
Right Hon, Baronet the First Lord of the Treasury,
would reduce the surplus to about 90,000/. Now, if that
were the case, it was suite evident, as stated by his Right
Hon. Friend ( Mr. Baring), that there could be no remission
of other duties during the present session, if the Com-
mittee agreed to the proposition in the hands of the
Chairman.—(Hear, hear.) The question then was,
whether the Government proposed the very best re-
mission of duty, or whether there might not be any-
thing else more worthy the consideration of the House.
The House showed no want of Resent to the propo-
sition of the Government, because the great mass of
the House had already agreed to it. But he owned a
proposition had been toede to which he would wish
to give his assent on another Qco4slon, JJe meant the
proposition made by his Hon. Friend, the Member for
Dumfries, to take off the duty on butter and cheese.—
(Hear, hear.) He thought that a reduction of the
duty on butter would be a most advisable reduction, and
he did not think that butter being fit for human food,
would be a fatal or decided objection against it.—
(Laaghter.) With regard to the duty on cheese like-
wise, it might be remitted with great advantage. He un-
derstood that his Hon Friend proposed a reduction of 50
per cent. on that article. The amount of duty on
those two articles was about 260,0001, and they might,
therefore, reckon a loss of not leas than 120,0001. to the
revenue, if the proposition of his Hon. Vrieud was car-
ried. But if the proposition of the Government were
carried he would hardly feel justified in voting for such
a reduction with only a surplus of 90,0001. The Right
Hon. Gentleman the late President of the Board of ,
Trade said that the state of the revenue was the only
reason against the reduction of those duties, lie said
the duties were excessive and absurd—at least he said
they were not reasonable and could not be defended.—
(Hear, hear.) When, therefore, the revenue was able
to afford a reduction on those duties, they might calcu-
late upon the concurrence of the Right Hon. Gentleman,
and his (Lord J. Russell's) wish was, that the revenue
might be in such a state as to enable the Right Hon.
Gentleman to vote for such a reduction. After
the surplus was reduced by the amount of the
auction duty the surplus remaining would be
too small to allow of any further reduction,
and he confessed, for one, though it might be
an unpopular doctrine in that House, that he would
rather see a greater surplus of revenue than the Right
Hon. Baronet opposite proposed to leave, especially now
that they had that disagreeable tax—the property and
income-tax. He admitted that the surplus of 90,0001.
might be sufficient if the state of the country prospered,
supposing the trade advanced—(Hear, hear) —but, in
adverse circumstances, he would like to have more of a
margin than the Right Hon. Baronet proposed to leave ;
therefore, if the Right Hon. Gentleman proposed a re-
duction of the soap duty he (Lord J. Russell) could not
vote for the reduction, because he would hardly like to
reduce the surplus more than it was already reduced.
If, then, the present motion was carried, he owned he
could not give his vote for the proposition of his Hon.
Friend, the Member for Dumfries, or support any further
reduction of taxation during the present session. He
had thus stated the grounds upon which he would
give his vote, though he did not zuppose they
would be agreeable to the Hon. Member for Dorset,
whose views were so very different from his (Lord John
Russell's.) He would not say a word with respect to the
auction duty ; but even if the Hon. Member for Dorset-
shire succeeded in his proposition, he did not think he
would make much by it, as he thought the Chancellor of
the Exchequer would be much more likely to keep the
amount of the auction duty than apply it in the manner
in which the Hon. Member for Dorsetshire would wish
to have it applied.—(Laughter.)
Sir R. PEEL said he agreed in some of the propo-
sitions of the Noble Lord. He agreed with him in thinking
that not a word was to be said in favour of the auction
duty.—(Lsughter.) The Noble Lord resisted the repeal
of it, but he had the candeur to admit, that not a word
was to be said in favour of it.—(Laughter.) He hoped
that Hon. Gentlemen would bear that in mind when they
were going to give their votes, because the Noble Lord
who was so high an authority, admitted that not a word
could be said in favour of it. The Noble Lord also said
that 90,000/. was too small a surplus, and when the
House affirmed the present proposition of the Govern-
ment with respect to the auction duty, he would
most cordially concur with the Noble Lord in the
opinion that it would be quite impossible to
agree to any other reduction.—(Loud laughter.)
Ile rejoiced to hear the Noble Lord had taken up that
position, because he could count on his cordial support.
—(A laugh.) He rejoiced that he could cordially unite
with the Noble Lord in resisting any other propositions
for the reduction of taxation which might come before
them. He hoped that gentlemen on his (Sir Robert
Peel's) side of the House would recollect whet were the
objects of the Noble Lord.---(Hear.) His Hon. Friend
(Mr. Bankes) might see that he would get nothing by
his motion, for if his Hon. Friend succeeded in prevent-
ing a reduction of the auction duty, he (Sir R. Peel)
would certainly be disposed to agree with the Noble
Lord, thinking it better to keep the 395,000/. auction
duty in the Exchequer. His Hon. Friend, therefore,
would not be likely to derive that advantage
from his proposal which he supposed. He advised
those who were interested in the protection of other
duties to recollect if the Noble Lord succeeded in resist-
ing the repeal of the auction duty that he proclaimed he
would then vote for a reduction of the duty on butter
and cheese.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) Now he would
beg of the House to consider what the auction tax was.
It was a tax decidedly. in favour of persons possessed of
large property who wished to sell it, as compared with
the poorer class.—(Hear, hear.) In point of fact the
auction tax, as far as large populations were concerned,
etas a device for enabling the rich man to ascertain the
real value of his property.—(Hear, hear.) They only
got a tax on 8,000,000!, though 45,000,0001. of property
were sold, and yet they,had an immense establishment.
—(Hear, hear.) What was the course pursued ? A
person who had an estate worth 100,0001. and wishing
to dispose of it, put it up for sale by auc-
tion, but did not sell it. He thus as-
certained what was the full value of the
estate, after competition, not a perny of the tax was
paid, though lie bad all the advantages of the law and
the Excise establishment for the purpose of ascertaining
the value of his estate ; but the man whose property
was sold through distress had no such advantage.—
(Hear, hear.) And when they considered the number of
exceptions to the tax, and to the principle upon which it
eras made, he would say that not only a word could not
he spoken in favour of it, but a velume might be written
against it. His Right Hon. Friend hpd stated the case
of an incumbered proprietor of a, property, worth
100,0Q01., which was exposed to auction. The ineum-
brances were y0?000/---the demand for payment was
preseing—the Wale was 4old by auction. 14000/. was
rnised from the sale; the vendor hq,d to give 1P,14601. to pu
g-smneeti he received the reottlieing MOO/
' - -"u ti,oool, to Oie

off the
cut of which he was to
(Hear, hear.) Now, take the case o a