The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1848-03-14 00:00:00

MR. CARDWELL AND THE INCOME TAX

We have had handed to us a correspondence which has
just taken place between Mr. Edward Cardwell and the
National Confederation. The first letter is from the Con-
federation, and is dated Feb. 22d ; and the secretary, whilst
enclosing two resolutions of that body, declaring the
budget of Lord John Russell most objectionable, espe-
cially for the proposed attempt at increased taxation,
requested to know Mr. Cardwell's opinions on the subject.
To this Mr. Cardwell answered, that government was ex-
pected to make some further statement, and that as soon
as he had heard it, he would send a reply. On the 26th,
the Confederation expressed to the hon. member the dis-
appointment they felt at so general a reply to specific
questions, which were again put to him as follows:

" Ist. What course you may have determined on pursuizz in
reference to the ministerial budget, as it has been announced?
" 2d. What course you may have determined on pursuing in
reference more especially to the principle involved in it, of
attempting to lay an increased amount of taxation?
" 3d. And what course it is your purpose to take in meeting
the attempt intended to be made by the government, to perpe-
tuate the unjust principle involved in the exaction of the same
per tentage on income derived from labour and industry, as on
that derived from accumulated property ?"
The communication added tbat the Confederation was
of opinion that no explanation of the Government could
alter the fact that certain proposals had been made, and
they wished to know Mr. Cardwell's opinion on the Bud-
get as it then stood. To this Mr. Cardwell returned the
following reply :----

" Whitehall Gardena, 28th February, 1848.

" I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your last
letter, and beg to-express my regret that my acknowledgement
of your former communication should have occasioned any
-ttisappoistment 40 your committee.
It was not intended for a reply upon the subject on which
you wrote; but was, on the contrary, only designed, in cour-
tesy, to acquaint you why. I wished to postpone, for a short
time, stating whether I should support the financial proposi-
tions of the Government; viz., that I wished, before making
any such statement, to learn what these propositions actually
were. _ . _ .

‘liliese, which formed the subject of your letter, have been,
as I thought was probable, withdrawn this evening; and you
will perceive that I asked and obtained for the house, and for
the country, time for consideration of that which has been
substituted.

zifaiWihese circumstances, and with this explanation, I
think your committee will consider that I have acted consis-
tently with my public duty, and with my respect towards them
and the other electors of Liverpool with whom I have been in
communication on the subject.
. .

I have the to be, &c.,

CARDWELL.

" Mr. Micdonald,SeCretiry."

On the 2nd March, the Confederation again expressed
their regret that the reply was not more specific, and
added—
"There still remain most objectionable points in the Minis-
terial scheme. The proposed increase is set aside, but the
monstrous injustice of taxing realized property and income on
trades, and from other precarious sources, at the same rate, is
left untouched. This, the committee would suggest, will,
your best attention. The Government ought

loubt lesg, recet‘
either to propose a just and rational principle to regulate the
tax, or do away with it altogether. They ought, as the com-
mittee think, to propose such principle to-morrow evening, or
postpone the incomes of that class until a committee may hat e
reported on a just and equitable principle. The Government
ought to be urged to appoint such committee to-morrow ever.
int, far_ it the matter is not now seen to, the principle will be

persevered in, and the past quoted as authority for the future,
in time to come."

The following is Mr. Cardwell's reply :
" Whitehall Gardens, 4th Mareh,)B4B

SIR,—In answer to your letter received 'last night, I have to
acquaint yon that I have again referred, as you desire, to your
former communication, in which you advert 'especially to the
principle involved in the budget, of attempting to lay on an
increased amount of taxation.' _ _ .

"This proposal for increased taxation was the basis of your
correspondence with me. and P considered the withdrawal of
the one the natural termination of the other.

" With reference to your renewed inquiry, I have to reply,
that I am very sensible of the pressure of any income tax upon
an industrious community like that of Liverpool, and that I
have not heard any proposal made which would effectual]•
',id it -- • -4, V'

correc, .ne admitted objections against it, and migh., .nere-
fore, be regarded as an adjustment of the question, satisfac-
tory to all classes, and for all future time.
" Under these circumstances, though I have neither personal
connexion with, nor party attachment to, the present Ministry,
I have not ventured, in the present condition of the finances,
to ;- A •• -f 9fr • - to tt -fir

,recur tne great responsibility of refusing .hose charget,
with the Executive Government a continuance of the duty for
a limited period, at the existing rate of sevenpence.
" I have taken my share, with great satisfaction, in the re-
moval of many imposts which operated unequally and injuri-
ously upon the commercial and trading classes, and hare every
disposition to go forward in the same course, and to promote
the retrenchment of every unnecessary expense.

have th,

honour to-be, -&c.,
"EDWARD CAItDWELL

J. M. Macdonald,

A note was addressed to Mr. Cardwell, under date Bth

of the correspondence wan nun, suouta tne committee
of the Confederation think it desirable to lay the same
before the public ; _to which application the following is
Mr. Cardwell's reply ;-
6. Whitehall Gardens, 10th ?March,

" Sir,—l have to acknowledge the receipi last evening of your
letter, in which you ask whether I have any objection to your
committee publishing my replies to your late letters.
" I have to assure you that my replies were written without

may •11l 1.7.• "
that I have no suggestion to Offer to your committee with re-
ference to the exercise of their discretion in the mutter.
"It is,-for the sake of clearness, to be borne in mind, that
your letters of February 22nd and 26th were written upon the

supposition that the income tax was to be continued for rive
years, at an increased rate, for the first two years, of five per
cent., and were answered by me as having been written by you
upon that basis.* • Also, that your first communication, !liter
you had heard of the change in the ministerial propositions,
was received by me on the night on which Mr. Horsinans pro-
posal was made to the House, and was, therefore, replied tot
after I had heard, considered, and voted on that plan.
" I request that this letter may be regarded as part of the
correspondence, and remain, &c.,
(Signed) " EDWARD CARDWELL.
" Mr. Macdonald, Secretary."