Star.
London, England, 1824-04-10 00:00:00

[Pans SAVAN7PKNOIL

. ,
HUSBANDRY .110113 e TAX:
Mr.'4ENISON rosi to present a Petition from
cOnsideithle body of persons occupying land in the
County of Steak, te weich he wished to call the atten-
:Aida Of the "liaseeellor of the recheqner. Three s •
I since, it *mild remetn'oerecl, it was thought prectele,
to repeal the tax on. horses employed in • agriculture.
The Petitionerr who were chiefly mitiket-gardeezrs
the parish of iattetsea, complained that having horses'
which they employe4 in the tillage of their gardens,•
'occasionally in ploughing, and almost•constantly in the
Carriage of minute, the Surveyor of Taxes in that pa•
rish, or; the ground Of their being in the habit ef em-
ploying the same hotseslo convey the produce of their
gardens-to market, had essesied them to the tax as upon`
florses employed in trade; and that they had been come' ,
pelied to pay that tax upon those horses. This he sub-
mined was a grievance from which the Petitioners
were entitled t', be relieved, and' he trusted the Right
Hon. Gentletrian'Seould hestosi his attention upon the
subject, an endertvour tot emove this.cause of complaint.'
Lord ALTHORP said,aliere dotdd, as it appeared t?
hini , br. no 'question that horses employed in husbandry,
thee is in tilling the tolled, whithet by plbughirig or'
otherwise, though .they mheht, in the 'cantage of the
produte ef the land ttintark'et; he said to be employed
in trade, 'were entitled to iliChenefit of the repeal of the
husbandry horse tat. ' then 'mentioned the case
er a market-gardener; in lite parish c'f 'Fulham, we, be-' •
lieve, who kept Wiwi:es for the conveyance of the produce
of his gardens to market, which he did not employ in
agrictilturat labour, 'and some doubts having arisen a's
to the liability of those bosses to the tax upon horses
employed in trade,the case was submitted to the Judges,
who had -decided that they were liable. He, however,
thought it could not have been the intention of Parlia-
ment to exempt such horses from the operation of the
repeal of the Ilusbandry Horse Tax.
• Tie CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER regret-.
ted that the matter of this Petition had not been brought
specifically `before the Treasury ; for, if the horses in
question had before been charged to the Agricultural'
Hotse 'f ax, and after the repeal of that tax had been
charged ane•v under a different description, he should
,have felt it his duty to inquire how far the case was one
which entitled the parties-to be relieved from the tax.
With respect to the case stated by the Noble Lord,-heie-
memhered perfectly well that on the of the ilia • •
dividual to the Commissioners, they entertained con: •
siderable 'doubts as to the liability of the horses- to be •. •
taxed. Upon the case, 'however, being Valentinad to
the Judges, they decided that the horses not beiirtem-
*.
ployed agriculture, did not come under the-desciip- • •
tion of agricultural horses, nor under that of• horses .
employed partly in agriculture and partly in trade, and
that therefore they were net intitled to exemption eases
by the repeal cf the Agricultural Hotsc Tax,• or by the
Act of last year, exempting horses partly employed is
agriculture and partly in trade. He did riot 'know '
Whether the Hon. Member had intended 'or not to ask
for his opinion as to the law on the suirject.
*Mr. DENISON said, he had certainty intended to
ask whether the oceasibnal employment of agricultural
horses in the conveyance of the produce of theland on
which they wereeemployed to market, took away the
benefit of their exemption front tax by the repeal of the
Agricultural Hneie Tax. •
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said,
he was not before, aware that that was :the precise case
stated by the Hon. Member ; 'but his opinion was cere
Vainly that,- if the hOrsr
es Were so employed they would
come 'trade the exemption of the Act of last year.
Mr.'ELLICE:—Teen I understand the Right Hon.
atentlesalasi to say that 'reuses employed to convey' pro-
,diaeetdnfarket, and to take man'sre hack, are exempt.
The ettaxoattoa of the EICHMULIC did not answer, but made
Apia a 411.3ei1t.

After a few words from Mr. Damn! and Mr. Cuawns,
Mr. DENISON asked whether he.ivis to understand,
from the Chancellor of the gidie9yir, that the peti-
tioners were intitled to the exemption?
The CHANCELLOR d the .10011EQUER said,
he could not undertake to say whether their 11;etitioners
were intitled• to exemption or not.; that must depena
upon the circumstances of their pariiiular case. What
he said was this, that if the horses were partly ,eni-
ployed in agriculture, and partly in taking the produce
to market, they were exempt trom the tax by the Act
of last year.
Mr. HO BIIOUSE said, when the AgriculturatHorsc
fax was first laid on, an additional mambos- of -strx-
veyors was employed. He Wished; therefore, to• lino/
whether, on the repeal of ,thitt tax, Elie ittimbekcif • sui-
veyors bad been reduced ? -
The CEIANC4LLPII of the,lPLC4go4ll..saM,
he did not precisely knOw whether it Was so or' not: Re
could only say, that if it were. the 'fait that anyad-
clitionAl surveyors were employed solely for tbeiturilose
of collecting that tax, they must undoubtedly have
been
reduced after .the tax was repealed.
E' .CHEQVEtt PROSECUTIONS,
Mr. fi. G. BIiMIET. presented a Petition from aper-
stin named William • Harrison, who complained of the
ruinous cousequxisces at an Exile prosecution to Thic*i
he had been subject. • The Ulm. Member stated the,•Pg-
titioner had employed a considerable capital in. the ma-
nufacturing of kid leather for making gloves, after the
method employed in France, whe:e the leather
manUfactUred, asOentlemen must be aware, in a trimmer
that tendered its quality greitty superior to thatgenemity
made inEngi and. The success cf the Petitioner haviutex -
ci led the jealousy of sortie rival manufacturess; en.iefur-
ination was lodgedxglinst him. by the Excise, elisiegisig
hint with insportmg.Prench kid.; and a quantity of Slid
.gloves. %time in consequence seized on his frenrises,.awd
A pro4Ctitioti commenced againit'hiin in-the .€6ltrt
Exchequer; where the qeeition fO tedecided, namely,
`t'ithether" the igonds that hid been' seized were eoutm-
band.or not?...‘ at referrods to his rival .maniilactusers,
.and -daided 'against him. •Tlie-ifonourtible'Mtnitter
'contended; that case, represented:by ttteilte-
tchiiioarinecie'iijoar.s,oEifiethtleavadlticih)irgbieleerit
wdzat.irßi;
aii,ftth et
scone. reelatioris, • by .iebickfbe>rtcitiTchaloiiii stitailar
It` biiaveilded." :4.4; • t t.
•e itls'ttii
vhi CIIANC7I.IPR -pf.'Ottgo4FtlEQUlt • swirl,
VA. r ibieleo-skile#4l e
be wAiittash
arraign' 'Of nhe ?had.
. .1 s Ll't ,• -etc ,tuff.