The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-05-24 00:00:00

ASSESSED TAXES.

Sir. S. WHALLEY said that the petitions which had just been
presented were sufficient to refute the assertion that the cry for
the repeal of the house and window tax was only the cry of the
metropolitan districts. `Now, he could venture to. assure the
house that the cry was universal, and that the pressure of these
taxes was felt, not only in every town, but in every village
throdghout the country. He was glad that he had now an op-
portunity of bringing forward his motion for the repeal of
these taxes free from admixture. with any other topic. Ile was,
glad that it was not embarrassed by any connection with that
odious tax, the malt-tax, or with the consideration of the neces-
sity of an income or a property. tax, or with the propriety of
supporting the ministry in their intention to retain both tile as-
sessed taxes and the malt-tax, lest they should be induced to re-
sign their offices. He had once had every confidence in minis-
ters, but he was sorry to be compelled to say of late they had
shown great unwillingness to relieve the people from the bur-
dens which pressed most heavily on them. He was not in the
habit of trespassing very largely on the attention of the house;
indeed, he thought that the public business was often impeded
by the unnecessary length at which gentlemen delivered their
sentiments. (Hear, hear.) But on this occasion, he trusted that
the house would excuse him if he abandoned something of his
usual brevity. The noble lord had said on a former occasion that it
was a principle of sound justice that every man should contribute
to the taxes in proportion to the revenue he enjoyed under the
protection of the state. That was a golden legend, which he should
wish to see engraven on the lintels of the doors of that house, and
emblazoned in striking characters above the Speaker's chair.
It had been said that Adam Smith approved of the house tax;
and why? Because in his day it fell heavier on the rich than
on the poor. Fountain of justice! haw different was the case
now! (A laugh.) He had likewise deprecated the window
tax; and why.? Because in his day it fell heavier on the poor
than on the rich. (Hear, hear.) That this tax was must un-
equally and unfairly imposed, might be proved by reference to
a great number of cases. Look to what had recently occurred at
Knowle. That splendid place had been assed at £lOO a-year.
A new assessor was of opinion that it ought at least to be
chargedat the rate of £125 per annum. The oecup;er appealed
against the new assessment, and the commissioners decided
that the old assessment of a £lOO was sufficient. (Hear, hear.)
What reason did they assign for this decision ? Because the
proprietor of Knowle-park had been at considerable expense in
making alterations and improvements ! But who had ever
heard, in London, of alterations and improvements having been
adutitted as a reason for reducing the assessment? (Hear.)
The right hon. member for Tamworth (Sir R. Peel) had de-
clared that the objectionable parts of the tax-office system had
been removed. He was sorry that the right hon. baronet was
not present: if he were he would undertake to show him that
such was not the fact. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer
could not go the whole way with him, why could he not at
least take off one-half of the duty on houses rated under £100?
That would afford considerable relief. But he could assure the
noble lord that discontent was not in the least degree allayed
by the small portion of relief which ministers expressed their
intention of granting. (Hear, hear.) He was then addressing
a British senate, and he would say that he was not demanding
relief for any. particular body, but he was calling for the
redress of a grievance which had become too heavy longer to
be borne by the country. *, It was too oppressive to be endured ;
and he implored the house to wipe out the foulest blot that ever
disgraced the fiscal code of any civilized nation. The motion
which he meant to propose was, " That it is the opinion of this
house that all the taxes upon houses and windows shall cease
on the sth of October, 1833." If this resolution was adopted,
the Chancellor of the Exchequer would still have one-half of
the financial year before him, during which he might make all
neecessary arrangements; and he hoped that the hon. member
for Middlesex would, in the interim, impress on the mind of
the noble lord the necessity of adopting a system of the strictest
and most unsparing economy. (Hear, hear.)
The motion having been read,
Mr. Alderman Wool) rose to second it. He was most anxious
for a repeal of this most oppressive tax ; but he suggested that
if the noble lord would agree to a remission of it in April next,
it would answer every purpose, and be more advantageous with
reference to the financial state of the country. That there was
very great distress in the country could not be denied, and con-
siderable relief would be the result of the removal of this tax.
Since the last debate on this subject he had, in his official
capacity, signed 500 summonses for poor-rates, due by the
occupiers of houses rated at from £4O to £45. Now, it was
clear that if the parties could not pay poor-rates they could not
assessed taxes. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer would lay
Is. per gallon addditional duty on spirits, it would enable him at
once to remove this tax ; and in doing so he was sure he would
receive the support and approbation of all the temperance
societies in the kingdom.
Mr. S. RICE wished to call the attention of the house to what
the exact proposition then before them was. The hon. member
who introduced the question had stated that on a former occasion,
when the repeal of the house and window tax was brought for-
ward, it was mixed up with the malt tax and with a proposed
property tax. The hon. member, however, wished not so to
treat it, but to introduce it as a distinct and separate proposi-
tion. What, then, did that proposition, so distinctively brought
forward, amount to ? Why, the . hon. member called on them
to pledge themselves in the fullest manner to remove taxes,
without any equivalent being provided, to the amount of
£2,500,000. (hear, hear.) This was not to be done on the
instant. No, in the hope of catching a few more votes, it was
to take place at a future, but not a very, distant, day. For his
own part he thought it would be the best and most candid way
to call for the absolute and immediate repeal of the tax. The
hon. alderman had volunteered to do the duty of the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, and had advised that an additional duty
should be laid on spirits—a measure which, he said, would be
greatly applauded by the temperance societies, who, be it ob-
served, were endeavouring to prevent the consumption of spirits
at all. (A laugh.) If the hon. alderman had proposed a duty
on water, then he could have understood his reference to the
temperance societies. (Hear, hear.) In that case there would
have been rather more connexion between cause and conse-
quence. The total number of houses in Great Britain was
2,436,179; of these only 430,607 were charged with the- house
tax. That did not prove the house tax to be good, but the fact
of only one-seventh of the houses in the country being charge-
able with it evinced that it did operate with peculiar severity on
the poorer classes who occupied the exempted dwellings. Then
the rate of duty varied from Is. lid. to 2s. 3d. and 2s. 101 in the
pound, according to the value of the house. What could be
fairer than this shifting scale of assessment ? The number of
houses exempt from payment of window tax was 2,468,708.—
From these figures he argued, it appeared, that although it
might be true that many of those on whom the tax fell expe-
rienced considerable pressure, yet that the pressure from this
cause did not fall on th4seat mass of the community. it was
not a sufficient answer to say that great multitudes of people
complained of the tax; it could be shown that, in some cases at
least, more complained of it than suffered by it, for he knew an
instance of a petition against the house and window duties having
been Signed by 2000 individuals in a town where the number of
payers of those taxes did not exceed 120 ( hear," and laugh-
ter) ; so that the number of signatures did not correctly repre-
sent the number of sufferers. 'fhe hon. gentleman's motion in-
volved the absolute repeal of £2,500,000 of taxes. Assuming
that the amount could be spared (which he denied), into whose
pockets would the sum remitted fall ? Into those of the land-
lords after the expiration of existing leases. (Hear, hear.)—
He had before him a paper which had been industriously cir-
culated, and was probably intended to form a sort of text-book
or manual to confirm members' votes on this subject. The do-
cument was evidently the production of a metropolitan reformer,
who took a one-sided view of the question, and declared, that
as the land-tax had been partly redeemed, it would be incon-
venient to meddle with it, and therefore it had better be allowed
to continue. He proposed to repeal tot only the house and
window duties, but the whole of the establishment taxes of Eng-
land, including the duties on carriages horses, &c. Having
got rid of taxation to the amount of 5,160,000, minus the land
tax, the projector recommended the government to take a vote
of credit in the house, in order to make good the engagements
of the country. (" Hear," and a laugh.) He wool(' repeal
the permanent taxes, on which our credit could alone rest in
security, and supply the deficiency by a vote of credit. It was
unnecessary to spend time in replying to and explaining the
absurdity of propositions such as this. He had merely alluded
to the subjett with a view to caution hon. members from receiv-
ing the paper as the result of absolute wisdom. (A laugh.) In
conclusion, he declared that the concessions made by ministers
were large and liberal, and ought to be so estimated by the coun-
try. Those were not true friends of their country who depreciated
or denied the relief afforded, and who told the people that the
House of Commons did not represent their interest truly, and
that such being the case, they had no cause to repose hope or
confidence in the Parliament or the government. He thought
all impartial persons must admit that, looking to what had been

reluctance, considering the time at wilich the proposition hal
been brought forward' by his hon. colleague, that he felt bound
to oppose it. That proposition was neither more nor less than
that tue house should say, that from the sth of October next the
house and window tax should cease. For this great reduction
of the revenue, amounting to no less than 2,500,0(X), no substi-
tute had beeu prOposed. This impost could not be given up
without a substitute,. and if that substitute was to be a property
and income tax, in his judgment an injury would be inflicted
upon a large portion of the community, and a..much greater
evil would-be generally effected. It was under these circum-
stances that, with the deepest regiet, he felt bound to oppose
his motion. He, however, was not ignorant of what passed
within the limits of the borough he had the honour to represent,
and such were his feelings, that if it were possible to do away
with these taxes consistently with the exigencies of the state, no
effort should be wanting on his part to attain that object. The
borough of Marylebone was deeply affected by this impost.; for,
indeed, there were not above 2(X) houses that were of a less an-
nual value than from £lO to £l2; and, therefore, if ever the
time should come when the revenue of the country could afford
it, these taxes should, for the sake of j ustice and humanity, be
taken off. The reduction would be well worth any sacrifice
that the government could make, but the present was not the
period. (" Question, question.")
Mr. HOME said, in reply to the allegations which he had so
frequently heard, of the inability to effect reductions consistently
with the maintenance of the public faith, that he believed it
would be a very easy matter to retrench without producing the
dreadful consequence. With regard to these taxes on houses
and windows, he (Mr. Hume) thought ministers had acted with
singular inconsistency. They first proposed a reduction to a
certain amount; they gave up that, and then came down with
another proposition for a reduction to the amount of' only one
half of the former. Why, be asked, did they dole out relief to
the people in that way ? Why not explain at once their inten-
tions? But the inconsistency of ministers was further shown
in the circumstance of their being willing to take off one-half
of the assessed taxes, and yet retain all the machinery of their
collection. The charges on the revenue for this collection
amounted to £239,000 annually. He strongly condemned the
assessment of the tax on houses. He thought it was placed
with unequal severity on 'the smaller houses. Besides, why
should this species of property tax alone be suffered to remain
while the others were removed ? He condemned it likewise for
the encouragement it. afforded to a system of espionage, and of
extortions under the shape of surcharges. The expense of the
collection of these taxes, he repeated, ought alone to be a rea-
son for their entire instead of partial abolition. The real defi-
ciency of revenue left to be provided for was 1,100,000, and was
this a sum which could not be saved,. by economizing out of
£'22,000,0)3? Let the noble lord look over the retired and pen-
sion lists, which would afford reductions to the extent of more
than 10 per cent., leaving little more than £1,000,000 to be pro-
vided for. Then the question was, shall the people of England
have relief? Let the house only act firmly, and this million
would soon be made up. If it was left to him (Mr. Hume) lie
would find no difficulty. (A laugh.) He would not injure the
public creditor, and he would adopt a better course than time-
serving expedients. There was a most confident hope through-
out the country of relief from this tax, and if its repeal did no-
thing else, it would fulfil expectations, and get rid of an expen-
sive establishment.. Now was the time to try his Majesty's
ministers; leave them £1,000,000 minus, and see if they could
not make it up as they had done before.
Lord ALTHOae observed, that the hon. member for Middlesex
hadconsidered that he (Loffl. Althorp) had still the same amount
of surplus, although he admitted that he had lost £u09,000 by
reduction of taxation. (Hear.) He said also, that there had
been a deficiency of 'revenue last year, which the hon. member
attributed to an increase of the establishments ; but it was oc-
casioned by a reduction of taxation to a larger amount than the
state of the country warranted. He (Lord Althorp) objected
to the motion altogether, not because he was particularly fond
of this tax, nor because, if lie had the means, he was not ready
to give it up ; but because he did not think it possible to provide
for so large a reduction. He had, however, much rather that
the tax should be reduced at once, and then we should know!
where we were, than it should be deferred to a future period,
when the state of the finances was uncertain. The bon. member
for Marylebone proposed the sth of October; but it might hap-
pen, unless the revenue improved more than could be expected,
that the country might theu be placed in extreme difficulty.—
He could not, therefore, agree to the proposition, considering
that it might place the country in such a situation. That there
were irregularities the tax which should be remedied he
agreed. The hon. member for Middlesex complained of the in-
justice of surcharges : he (Lord Althorp) admitted it was a part
of the machinery of the tax which was liable to objection, that
too large a proportion of the emoluments of the surveyors arose
from surcharges. He had always, in his communications with
the Board of faxes, pressed upon them not to allow vexatious
surcharges, nor unless there was good reason to suppose fraud.
It was always very easy to argue against a tax, because a tax
was at all times an evil; because it was only by comparing the
evil of taxation with that of a deficient revenue that the question
could be decided; the house must look at the whole, not merely
at a part. Ile was ready to leave the case on the speech of his
hon. friend, the Secretary of the Treasury (Mr. S. Rice), which
he thought had not been answered.
Sir S. WHALLEY, in his reply, denied that the tax fell upon
the landlords. He recommended the right hon. member for
Lambeth not to press his amendment.
The gallery was then cleared, when, as we understood, the
amendment was negatived without a division. The house
divided on the original motion, and the numbers were :
Ayes
Noes

Majority 149
On the motion of Mr. F. O'CoriNon, the following returns
were ordered :—Of all books in which cases determined at
petty sessions in the West Riding of the county of Cork are
entered, setting forth the names of the magistrates who usually
attend such sessions : of the number of persons committed to
the prison of the county of Cork within the last 12 months for
non-payment of fines imposed by magistrates at petty sessions,
and that such return shall specify the date of committal, offence
charged, amount of fines and extent of imprisonment awarded
for non-payment thereof.