The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1845-03-18 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-WEDNESDAY

Reports from Committees on Petitions for Private Bills
were brought up, from which it appeared that in the
London nod South-Western Railway ; the Larrib,-th and
Bungerford Suspension Bridge; the Midland Railway ;
the Manchester, Bury, and Rochdale Railway ; the
Newcastle-upon-Tyne, and North-Shields Railway ; the
Manchester, Leeds, and Hull Association Railway ; and
the London, Bedford, and Birmingham Ratio ay ; the
Standing Orders had been complied with.—Leave was
then given to the petitioners to bring in the Bills prayed
for.
The Blackburn and l're.too Railway Bill, ale Newt

LIC
and Sheffield Railwa Bill, the London and Geenwich
Rill and they York and North-Midlandr Railway

Biil, were severally read a first time.
The second reading of the Smoke Prevention Bill was
postponed until the 2d of April.
0,. the motion for the second reading of the Property
Tax Bill.
_ Mr. WAKLEY called the attention of Government to

the c:.se of Messrs. Fielden, who had been surcharged to
the amount of £24,000, though they NO actually lost that
sam. instead of making any profits on the average of three

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER professed never
to have heard of tbe case before, and stated that the 31st
clause of the act gave parties so si'uated a right of appeal
to the Commissioners of Somerset House.
Sir R. PEEL said that the Lords of the Treasury were
exceedingly desirous to obviate any inconvenience or un-
pleasantry to which those who had this tax were exposed,
and they had therefore appointed special commissioners
as a tribunal appeal.
Mr. SPOONER proposed, as an amendment. that per-
sons in trade employing their own children or relations in
carrying on their business, without giving them salaries,
shall be allowed to deduct the value of their maintenance
and labour. He also proposed to deduct the annual pay-
ments for insurance, poor rates, and other charges.
The motion was seconded by Mr. MUNTZ, but lost.

Sir It. INGLIS proposed to add the following proviso at
the end of clause 1 :—" Provided always, that the said
rates and duties shall not be assessed or taken upon any
income whatever under the amount of £5OO. except in
respect to the sum by which such income shall exceed the
isum of £150."
After a discussion this clause was negatived by a majo-
rity of 59 to 25.

Sir N. CLAY entered his formal protest against the
tax as dangerous in principle, and most unjust in opera-

Sir R. PEEL said, that although the Hon. Baronet, the
member for the Tower Hamlets, might feel that his op-
position to the bill was likely to be unavailing, yet he had
a right to pnt on record his parting malediction. (A
laugh.) He thought that the general acquiescence in
direct preferably to indirect taxation, did not arise from a
mere abstract love of direct taxation, or an/ deficiency of
patience in bearing the income tax, bat that amongst the
middle and upper classes of this country, there was grow-
ing up a strong feeling that capital should bear its burd.tn
in airy experiment to extend the field of industry, and
lighten the pressure of taxation on the humbler classes of
the community. As to the duration of the tax, he felt
that it was due to the house and the country to leave an
unpledged freedom on the subject of the repeal or the re-
newal of the tax at the end of three years.
After a long discussion the bill was passed.
The Sugar Duties Bill was read a second time.