The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-06 00:00:00

him in his comment upon the state of the revenue and
expenditure; for. from the statement of his Right Hon.
Frie Sir R. Peel), of which the Right Hon. Gentle-
man
*,
'., Baring) made use, it was evident on the face
of it t t the expenditure exceeded the ordinary revenue,
and that if there had not been extraordinary and nnex-
pected receipts, there would have been a deficiency, in-
dependent of the income-tax ; and that was the ground
on which his Right Hon. Friend recommended the con-
tinuance of the income-tax. But they were asked, might
not other means have been found for meeting the defi-
ciency without the income-tax? But that tax had been
paid, during the years it had continued, with cheerful-
ness, and had been collected without expense. It was,
therefore, thought better to continue the surplus to a
larger amount than the exigence of the moment required,
in order to give an immediate incentive to industrial ex-
ertion. The lion. Gentleman had gone into some criti-
cism on the plan submitted to the House on the part of
the Government, as comprised in the Budget of the year,
In the first place, the Right Hon. Gentleman complained
that the surplus calculated on by the Government was
below what, under ordinary circumstances, they would
be justified in allowing it to sink down to. He agreed
with the Right lion. Gentleman that it was not expe-
dient to allow the surplus to be too much diminished,
unless by the reduction a new stimulus would be given to
industry, from which an increase of the revenue might
be calculated on.---(Hear.) But what was the case in
the present instance? They had adopted a measure
which they thought calculated to give additional vigour
to industry, and to promote in time a rapid increase in
the taxation of the country, and they had in the year
that had come, and the one that would succeed it, extra-
ordinary resources to the amount of not less than
600,0001, in each of those years. This arose from the
money paid to this country under the Chinese treaty;
and they had therefore thought themselves justified in re-
ducing taxation with a smaller amount of surplus
than they could have done under ordinary circumstances.
The Right Hon. Gentleman had expressed great doubts
with respect to the general bearing which the reduction
.of taxation proposed by his Right Hon. Friend would
have on the comfort of the lower orders of the people.
If he had not misunderstood the Right Hon. Gentleman
he stated expressly that with the exception of the repeal
of the sugar duties, which he admitted would have a
very material effect on the interest of that class of the

people, the other taxes repealed were not calculated to
afford them any particular benefit. On that point he
begged to differ entirely from the Right lion. Gentleman.
There were two modes of repealing taxes which would
affect the lower classes ; first, that which diminished
the price of the articles they eonsumed ; the other, by
extending the means of employment to the different
classes of the community. and thereby affording them the
means of purchasing articles from which they would
otherwise be debarred. Take the tax on glass as an in-
stance ; it was possible that the effect of the glass tax
on the poor man might for a time be limited, as he would
only replace his stock of glass as be consumed it. But
the mere announcement of the repeal of the tax had had
the effect of bringing fresh capital into the manufacture,
-and caused a great increase of employment by the raising
of new buildings fur the extension of the trade. The
poor man, therefore, did derive most effectual benefit
from the repeal of this tax. It was expressly upon the
goods consumed by the poor the diminution of the cot-
ton tax would operate, for it peculiarly affected domes-
tic consumption. The diminution of the duty would be
but little felt on muslins or those finer fabrics used by
the higher classes, He could not entertain a doubt but
that their diminution would stimulate manufactures, and
make the article cheaper. The Hon. Gentleman said,
take nay tax, and read the report upon it, and you will
find sufficient grounds to reprobate it ; but that did not
prove that taxation ought to be abandoned. Any one
who expected that taxation would not interfere with
industry would be disappointed in that expectation. It
was only by comparing the effects of different taxes, and
considering what benefits would flow from the repeal,
that they could form a judgment which was the most
eligible for abolition. The Right Hon. Gentleman said
he did not feel any great admiration for the repeal of the
auction duty. He begged to correct a misstatement
which he had made in reference to the opinion of
the Right Hon. Gentleman on the subject, and to
retract those expressions altogether. But the Hon.
Gentleman said he thought it would be much more pre-
ferable if the Government had, instead of repealing the
auction duty, repealed the duty on the other great ar-
ticles of consumption. The Right Hon. Gentleman
would give him leave to say, if they had only 250,000/.
worth to bestow, he did not know how it could be be-
stowed in a manner more conducive to the interests of
the community. It was not sufficient for the Right
lion. Gentleman to point out other taxes which ought to
be reduced. He could not repeal half of the duty on
tea, nor two-thirds of the duty on tobacco, nor one-third
of the duty on soap, although he admitted those diminu-
tions would be attended with greater benefit to the com-
munity. The duty raised on tea was between three and
four millions, the duty raised on tobacco was between
three and four millions, and the duty raised on soap
was above a million. Would not the diminution of
250,0001. upon any any of those articles be of
very little benefit to the public?—(Hear, hear.)
If that sum had been applied to the reduction of the duty
on tea, the consumer would not have had the benefit of
it, as it would Not have effected any reduction in the price
of the article. The same might be said with regard to
tobacco. The same might be said with regard to soap.
Any suck limited reduction in the duty on those articles
as could have been effected by the sum of 250,0004 would
have been throwing that sum utterly away, giving nothing
to the consumer, and yet diminishing the revenue.
Viewing the subject in that light, the Government had
to consider—not what tax pressed most heavily upon the
people, but what tax, with the limited means at their
command, they could repeal with the greatest advantage
to the community at large ; and under the circumstances
of the case, he was prepared to contend that if that sum
had been devoted to the reduction of the duty on tea, or
tobacco, or soap, it would have been utterly thrown
away. With respect to the auction-duty, as that
was hereafter to become the subject of a special
discussion, he would not further allude to it ; but
he should be prepared to show that, considering
the amount which the tax produced, and the amount of
the revenue of which they had to dispose, there was not
one tax which more interrupted the course of trade,
which was more unjust in principle, or the repeal of
which was more essential. That repeal was not the less
essential because, the tax being levied by individuals, and
being in consequence of numerous exemptions burden•
some only upon a limited class, its repeal could not be
made the subject of popular clamour. He would then
proceed to the objection which had been made by the
Right Hon. Gentleman, that there was little probability
that the revenue would recover sufficiently to justify the
removal of the income-tax within the limited period for
which that tax was proposed. Thp Right Hon. Gen-
tleman had stated certain arguments which had been used
by him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) which it was
incumbent on him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) to
explain. lie would have to state what arguments he
had used, and hew much of those arguments the Right
Hon. Gentleman had excluded from his calculation.
Now there was no certainty in matters of this kind.
He never had and he never would take upon himself
to say with certainty what might be the state
of the revenue two or three years hence. No
man in his senses would venture to do so ; he had
stated, and he repeated it, that there were good and pro-
bable grounds for supposing that although the revenue
might be diminished by these reductions for the present,
yet that in three years it would be in such a state as to
leave Parliament an unfettered discretion as to any
course which they might deem it expedient to pursue.
He had stated then that his hopes of the future were
founded on the experience of the past; and the first case
that he had instanced was that of the property-tax they
- were now about to renew. He stated that they had im-
posed that property-tax in October, 1842, and that if
they took the amount of ordinary revenue of the country
at the period-when that tax was imposed, and coinci-
dent to the imposition of which they reduced duties to
the amerint of 1,400,000/., they would find that, taking
the amount of the revenue on the 16th October last, the
amount which had been received was precisely that
'which had been withdrawn from the ordinary revenue;
and that revenue in October, 1844, was within a few
pounds the same as it had been before any reductions
whatever had taken place. The Right Hon. Gentleman
would see that during that period a property-tax was in
operation—a fact to which the Right Hon. Gentleman
- had altogether omitted to refer. The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman had said that he (the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer) had referred to antecedent periods. He certainly
had referred to antecedent periods to show that
great benefit was to be derived from a repeal of
taxes affecting the industry of the country.
The-Right Hon. Gentleman then adverted to the aug-
mentation of the estimates; and he took some credit to
himself, and the Government, of which he was a Mem-
her, that while they were in office they did not call on
the country fcr any increased expenditure. But the
Right Hon. Gentleman must know that that increased
estimate did not arise from any measures within the
control of the Government, but from the introduction of
a new element in the warfare of nations. Whoever had
been the Minister, the application of steam, as a new
element of war, rendered it necessary that an increased
-estimate should be made to place the navy of this
country on a footing of equality with that of other
nations. The introduction of this power also made it
necessary that a considerable sum should be applied to
'the making of works in the different ports of the country;
and that for the sake of national protection it was
requisite that an increase of vote should be taken.
He was not aware that it was necessary for him to
enter into any topics other than those which the Right
Hen- Gentleman had referred to. He congratulated
.himself that the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite con-
curred with hint in the necessity for the renewal of the
,property-tax, He vas sure that the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman, although he differed with him upon the reduc-
'tioi proposed, thought the time would come when it
`would be found that those reductions were the proper
ones.— (Hear, hear.)
Mr. EWART felt bound to vote againstt the amend-
ment. Anything that would set free e springs
could
of
therefore
d in-
dustry was a benefit to the community, and
would support it. lie thought, as far
as they
it with propriety, it would be wiser to advert toe direcet
taxation than indirect. He believed that direct taxation
was the only means of relieving the poorer classes of the
country. On referring to the speech of the Right Hon.
Baronet in introducing the income tax, he found that
the Right Hon. Baronet spoke of the justice of the im-
post, and of the classes of men in the country who had
a right to pay it. On the general principle, he (Mr.
Ewart) did not mean to find fault, for though he was
not fn favour of an income-tax, he could not say that a
tax on property was not a fair and just one. But he did
think that the comprehensive system of taxation used in
the time of Walpole was one which would, in many re-
spects, be better suited to the country.
Mr. BERKELEY approved of the property-tax,
which he considered had been administered in a mild
and merciful manner. He thought the returns had been
fairly and honourably made; but, at the same time, he