Duty On Coals.
The Times, 1824-02-12T00:00:00

A Public Meeting of" the Inhabitants of London and laces adja- cent, i..terested in the hiigh dutY on coals, was conveneX yestera at thle citY of London Tavern, Bi:ahopsgate-street, to take inito consi deration the verv heavy tax of us. 4d. per chaldron on coals entering the port of London, and to petition Parliament for its repeal. The hand-bills and advertisements announced the meeting for one but added, that the chair would be taken precisely at two o'clock. At the latter hour, however, there were-not (except the reporters from the morning papers) more than3 a dozen persons in the room. At about a quiarter past two the memibers had increased to 50 or 60. At this timne Sir Charles Price, Bart., entered the room, followedi by Aldlerman Wood and Brvdges ; Mr. Wi. WVilliams, Al. P.: Mr. T. Wlilson, Al1. P., Mr. Perkins; Mr. Blanchard; Mri. Smiith -,and a few other gentlemen. On the motion of illr. Aldermain WOOD, Sir Charles Price was called to the chair. Thie Hon. Baronet having taken the chair, stated, that in conse- quence of a mistake in the bills, announcing the meeting, hie badi to regret the absenice of very miany, respectable individuals of WVest- ninister anid the places adljaining_who wauld othierwise have attended. However, notwithistandling the thinness of the presenit assemblage, it was thoughit proper, as pubio notice had been given, to go, on with the bu-ines's of the dav. The comnmittee which had been appointed at the general mieetingj last vear, had not been inattentive to thte dluty whichi hiad devolvedI on th&m. They hail again commuinicated to hiis Majesty's Al inisters their intention of. once miore presenting a petitioli to Parliament for a repeal of the very partial and op- pressive dusies which were imposed on coals imported into London and( its vicinity ; and consitiering the present flourishing sitate of the couintrv, and the intimation miade from the thirone that some taxes would'he remlitted, they entertained a hiope that their application to the legislature-in this instance would not be without effect. Indeed. it was impossible to an4kipate any fair objection to their claim on the present occasion. The g,round upon whlich thiev went was, the very partial and oppressive nature of a tax which fell so hieavily up- on the citizens of London and Westminster, andl the neighbour-ing countis tram whichi all the othier counities of England were free. Ttei inabitants of those places helhad namnedhad alreadyvpaid somle milions in this way towar(is the general expenses of thie countrv, and he thoughit it was but fair that if it was found necessary th;at suchi a stumi shouldI continue to be raised, the burden of it shouild be equially borne boy all paTts Of the country for whose comm'on benefit it was imiposed. In the year '1792, an application sim ilar to that which this meeting was noGW calledI uPon to sanction hael been mrade to his Majesty's Ministers. They wer-e then requested to relieve L-ondon and the parts adijoining from the exclusive duty. In teply to that applicatifln,Ainfi;ters had expressed themnselves not unwilling to remove the 'tax; but, unfortunately, circumstances soon after oc- curred wicih F'or years preventetd their carrying their intentions into effect. In 1818, another application, of a similar nature, was made to Mtinisters. Thiey didI not refusd to attend to it, but they were so circumnsta',ced (with applicationis for the repeal ofother taxes), that this, could notbave benreoe withiotst a tax to Su pply it lce, and they did not know where to place a tax for its substi- titte. Now, hiowever, the case was different. Some taxes had been removed, and a hope was held outc, at tile opening of thie present session, that others would be repealedl in the course of it. Under these circumsaicates lie hoped that Mlinisters would consider the situ- atioin in which the citizens of Londlon were placed, and not act upon the principle, that because thev wvere already bound by thie act of Parliamtent, tliev ought to cont-inue to bear so oppiressive and une- qual a burden. 'Tile meeting hiad now every reason to look forward for aidI from the legislature, anti to hiope that at laist it would do that whicli was only an aet of justice in thieir favour. A series of resolutions would now lie suibmittel to the mewetin-, and a petition to Itie H-ouse atf Commons fouinded upon thens. '1'he petition was couched in strong but temperate language, such a-s was thiought prop)er to assert what was Constidered to be their righit to at least equal ta xation ; antil lie trustedi tiie justice of its prayer would pro- curTe it many Supporters in Parliament. The Hous'e of Comimons hadi already received several petitions from otlier qtiarters in favour of the samne object. He would now onl[y adld, that this was a new petition, and would require fresh signatures-. It wouild, he trusted, be very numnerously sigited, before its presentation. He would not delay the meeting by any otiser remarks, as there were otiser gentlemen wlio would entera nore ftuly into the businessof tue day'. Air. SMITHr Said,. that after wvhat hiad fallen from the hon. bart. in tite chiair, it wou~ld not be ttccessarv for Iittin to occupy the utten- tion of the meeting at aniy lenrth. Th'ey were not taict there fbr the first timne on this sutbject. Thiey might be said to be a continuation of thie meeting-bf the last year, as,semnbled for the purpose of carrying into effect the resol utions etiteredI inito at the time. 1They 'were tiot successfttl in their endeavoturs last year, but it ap- pecared that illir,i:ters were. waiti-ng to ascertain what were the feelirgs of all the parties concernemi. Since then titers liad been Pettin presented from niost of the places whose inhabitants were afficte0d `by the tax, from wliirli it was manifest that the feeling against it was very g!eneral. It was a most unitust principle that one part of the commnil'nity, should be burdlenedI With an oppressive tax, froin which atll the othiers ware exemipt. It appeared froiwt calcula- tions niaile at the time, that in the year 1818, London paid upwards Df 500,0001. duties on coals, from which other places were exempt. It furthier appeared. that by a population of about 4 millions in Lon- don, and several Coutnties adijoining, there was paitd in the teame year the siim of 2.461,0001. in' poor rates, and a sum of 1,1149.0001. coal dluties, whhile a population of between five and six millions, in several other couintis pai(l only 1,700.0001. poor rates, andi no coal-iluties wlhatever. Thre were nearly 500.0001. duties paid by the 4gricultfiral counties of Mliddilesex, Kent. S~urrey, Susq- sex, Devon, Han ts, and Wiilts. The injustice of stich an unequal dlivision of taxation imust be apparent at irst sight. Ile wvould not, however, dwell upon this topic tarther at present, bult would call the attention of the mneeting to the resolutions agreed to at the meeting iast year. H te read the following resolutions:- "IThtfuel being not only a necessary of life, but a powerful instritment of tradle. andI most useful in agricultuire, any tax thereon is an addition to the imisfortuiies of poverty, and a burden uponi in- -lustra'. "2. That any tax which falls exclusively upon Some members of a commutnity, andi to whiich the other members of the same conismtu- nity do not in any way contribute, is tenjust in its principle. 1 13. That the coast duty of 9s. 4d. per clialdron upon Coals ins- ported into the port of London, and of 6s. per chaldron upon coals imorted iilto any, dther pore, adds most heavily to the burdens of thoseC who can onily obtain sea-borne coal ; whilst those who can ob- tain coals4 withiout having been sea-borne, are whiolly exemipt from any such burden, and therefore it is partial and unequal. "4. That the larger part of the present duty uponi coals carried coastwvise to a'Ll ports in England, was originailly imposed for tem- porary purposes;, andl a latrge piroportion of' the present duity upon coals brouight coastwise into the port of Londoni, was imposed for purposes of a local nature, which having long since been answrd is now applied to else general service of the nlation. "45. That having bnrqe this unequial buirden whiilst our country wPas engaged in struggles in which its existence as an indcependent state was at stulke, we ho e, n thi pe~riod of peace, when vie have been itiformed by a RoyafSpeech"`Ithaft his Mlajesty trusted that the House of Cotmnmrns wouild be sble, after providing for the service of the year, anti without affcting publie credit, to make a further considerable reduction in the bur.letis of his people, that we may be ralieved from the coast duty on coal. " 8C. That the tax upon fuel is so impolitic in its nature, that we will not seek relief froin itr: injuistice by attemptinig to transfer any pare of its burden upon any class of our fellow'cutrae whoare net now subject to it. and we deprecate every plati of eqxia- lization of the presen't duty, or tile imposition of duty or. coals which are now exempt from it, ~and we will seclc oinly for an unqualified repeal of the existing partial tax.. " 7. That small coal exportedl to foreign parts is now sutbject to an export duty, equal to 3s. per London chaldren, whilst the coast duty on the same coal, if brouglit to L-ondon, is hIs. 4d. per clitaldron, and if carriedi to any other port is Cu-. par clhaldron ; whereby the miann- factilrers at Hamiburgh, and other places on the Continent,purchase such cnals at a cheaper rate th.in the mianufacturers its this city." He (Mt. Smith) wouldI now beg to propos~e that these resoluions should be taken as the basis of their proceedings on this occasion. The niiners and smelters of capper in Cornwall were allowed a drawback on the coals they conssurned in such works. Thisi was not done with a view of any piarticuilar favour to Cormwall, but because it was considered that the articles they mnanufactured could -aot be prodluced without Such an allowance. Now he could s!eg no reaton why tile Iron smiths should niot be exempted as well;- or why aCoP- persmith in onie place should not bec entitded to tise Same indulagence as a Coppersmith in another. !' e effe:ct of this tix; was not only felt by one or two trades. but every species of.mianufacitune in this' pat of the country whiic'. required culinary, preparation. The efict was, that tIme price of suchi articles as well as the price of labour had been consideraEbly increased.. The Scofeh peo- ple, about 30 years ago, libti obtained, and very justly, a relief from tie coast duty-,amnd in lieu of it a mo~re ge-neral tax liad been imposed. 'Whyv uould not the saine principle be applied here'? Mr. Alderman BItsDoGis seconded the mnotion, anti lie did so, lie observed, purely from a feeling hf justice towards hiis fallow-citi- zeus. Considering the great number of poor ins London who con- eetnedcoals,and the;great pressure 'rith whichthehigh idutics fell upon them, he thought it was very lhard that such' a pressure should be allowedl so continue. Indeed, he did believe that it wits not the wvish of his Mlajesty's Ministers that suchi a tax should be Conti- niued. They ha~d taken off some taxes of whiichi the public had already felt thie benefit, arid they were dispoged to take off otherts, if cfircumstances permitted; but lie kaew of no tax, for the removal of which there (7ere so many, just. claims, as tliat on'coals. HE trusted'that all present would enter into themupirit of the resolutions6 read to themi, and that Parliainent would at an e&ily periodl take the subject into their serious consideration. On the rmotion being put, Alr. Ht'sss' (Henry Hunt) hiere begge6, that as he had not dis: tinctly heard the resolutions of the last. meeting, which Isiad beeni just read, they might be read from the chair. They were read accordingly. Dhr. HIVwT t4oa obuelved, that he woq2d take theblberty of say- ing that one of the propositions. conained an Inauracwy, and the inemting would commsit themselves byladopting it. It wag stated iba; the original duty waS laid on for a teTporary purpose ; but if. he understood it correcdy, ore part of the-duty was granted by one of the Charles's for the support of ne- of his bastteds, -and that an. other was for the support of the Orphan Etwnd. I The CIIAIRMAN here rerharked, that Iir. Hunt was rnistaken- the duty for the Orpban Fund was paid lnrLondon, besides the other dudes of 9s. 4d. per chaldron. . Mr. PnExRNs said that the grant to which the"gentleman (Mlr. Hlunt) alluded was called the Richmond shilling, and paid at Newcastle, upon every chaldron ef.coals (equal to two London chal- dron) shipped from thence. Some. years ago that duty was pur. chased by Government from the Duke of Richmond, and the pur- chase-uoney was laid out in busing for him the estate of Goodwood- park, in Sussex. Besidcs the duty of sLX shillings per chaldron paid in l,ondon in common with other -plaLces- London had to paty three shillings and four pence exclusively. In thins hevv -prescsure upon the trade iur coals from Nlewcastle to I,ondon, the interests of the navy, for which so great a nursery of able seamen was found in the col- liers, were neglected; for if the duty was less, it was clesr that the trade would be increased. - AMr. BLANCUAnD said, that besides the increasec duty on coals brought to London, there was another- inconvenience to which the citizens were put, in being prevented from bringing their coals from any part of the kingdom they pleased. They were'obliged to bring them by sea, andYo resort only to tworivers,the Tyne sad the Wear. The collieries in that quarter being in few hands, our supply came, he believed, from not more than seven or eight persons. fie might be wrong in the numbers he had mentioned, but certainly they were but few. The cotsequence of this was, that they met every month, to determine what quantity should be sent up to the London market. The CHeAInsrAN asked what this had to do with the object for wbich the meeting had assembled. Alr. HUxvT.-1 think it is extremely important. Mr. BI.ANCHARD said he had intendea to found a resolution upon it; for int consequence of it, we were now obliged to pay the same price for coals as we did in the height of the war, and he thought it 7as for the committee to inquire from what othler sources we might be sqpplied, in case the present law respecting duties on coals sbould be repealed. The resolution was put, and carried unanimouslv. Mr. StsIT1H then moved that a petit6on, founded upon the resolu- tions, should be agreed to. The petition having been read from the chair ir. H UNT said, that he did not mean to object to the petition, but he regretted that it did not go farther. He regretted that It did not allude to anotber class wbich was not less heavily pressed by the coal tax than those already mentioned. Jt was said, that the ma- nufacturers and the aristocracy were affected by it, but it was silent on the subject of the poorer classes, who were most severely oppress- ed by the operation of the tax. This, if properlv set forth in the petition , might have an effect on the Chancellor of the Exchequer; for as to the members of the House df Commons, us they caUed themselves, it was nothing. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer thoughlt proper to Tepeal the tax, it would be repealed; and if not, it would continue. He felt that a reief had been given by taking off half the window-tax, but then that was made up by a surcharge on 'hotses. That was the way Mlinisters re- lieved from taxation. They took off a penny, and laid on twopence. (Cries of "* Qulestion.") He contended this was to the question. In tWis very small raeeting (there were at this time about 150 persons in the room), and he was surprised that where the interests of so many hundreds of thousands, lie might say of so many millions were con. cerned, there should be so small an attendance. He should have thought that if proper means had been resorted to on this occasion, they would have found nearly the half of London endeavouring to cram themselves into that room to support a propition for the abolition of this unequal and oppressive tax. W 'hy had there not been Common Halls and Wardmotes assembled to petition on this occasion ? Perhaps the worthy alderman (Wood) would ex- Fplain to the meeting why some such steps kad not been taken. Per- laps it was that some men in power, who were not so great out of the city as in, did not wish for stich interferenre. Perhaps some of those had near reletions chief coal-meters (Cries of " Chair, chair," which Mr. Hunt appeared to mistake for " Shame, shame.") Why cry " shame ?" He was not in the habit of saving any thing that lie would be afraid to speak out ix a much larger' meeting than that whicrl he now addressed. He would speak out: the chief coal-me- ter was the brother-in-law of the Lord Mlayor. He (Mr. Hunt) was not to be intimidated fronispeakinghismind. Ie had spoken itin that room when he was threatened with assatssination, and the public had seen how the individual io whom he had alluded had been since rewarded with a consulship. There was a general camplaint of the want of coal-meters,and tlierespectable coal-merchants,Messrs.Davey and Sawyer, with whom he dealt for the coals he consumed, often told him that a ship with the particular kind of coal he wanted, was in the pool, but that they waited to have. a meter appointed to it. In conclusion, he said lie had Do doubt, that if a resolutiox was passed by the committee to that effect, this important question woultl be generally taken up, with a zeal proportioned to the magnitude of the interests which it affected. Mlr. Alderman WVOOD said, that beimgpersonally called upon, he begged to state to the meeting that there had been ward-meetings on the present subject,' at which petitions against the tax were agreed to. This was the case with his twNo wards, and he had nO doubt it was the same with some others. As to the thinness ofthe meeting, he believed it arose from a mistake in the placards and notices which had been posted up. and wlhich mentioned that it was to be held "to-morrow," without putting the day of the month in sufficienitly large characters to be equally distinguished with the " to-morrow." The fact was, thie subject v as generallv felt to be of great import- anse, and lie had no doubt that the petition would be very numerous- ly signed. As the name of their worthy chief magistrate had been mentioned, connected with the coal-meters, it was butjustice to him to state, that the duty of Alr. Reeve, a very respectable individual, who was at the head of the land coal-meter's-office, was to see that the consumiers hadl their proper measure froni the venders. lie (Alr. Reeve) had nothing to do hei thc sea-coal-meters' de- partment. His dIuty was more important to the public than that of the sea-coal meters, for they had only to superintend the measure from the ships to the coal-inerchents, and they always took care to see that theyhlad their proper measure. But with respect to the present Lord Dlavor, he (Aldernan Wfood) could assure the mceting, that when liit the Common Council lie proposed tlle ap- pointment of 12 additional meters, the Lord Mlayor was anxious that 40 or 50 should be a ppointed , fof he stateod, that he bad receiv. ed msany complaints of the inconvenience arising from the want of a sufficient number to work the ships at market. (Hear, hear.) As to the 3a. rluttV he had stated, in the presence of Lord Liyerpool and thc Chancellor of the Excheqi-er, that the city had been robbedof it. It was imposed in the year 1710, for'the purpose of erecting fifty churches, of whicls only eleven were built. Soon after, Government took 500,0001. from the siioney raised by it to pav lotterv-tickets. At length, being unwilling to bring an annual-account of this transac- tion before Parliament, they carried the whole amoant over to the conisolidated fund, towimicli ithiad since been paid. He now repeated what lie had before mentioned upon the grant of 150,0901. for the building of London-bridge-.,that if the whole or the sums p:aid by the city on account of this duty werc cal- culatet, and compound interest allowed, the surm would not be less than ten millions of money at the present day. The grievance ofthe whole duty was felt, not only in London, but in the western counties, wherelime was so dear in consequence ofthescar- city of the high price of coals, that it cost about 8s. per acre ins many plates to hime ground which was not worth more thati that sum. Another effect of these duties was, that large quantities of small coal were burnt at the pit's mouth, which,if there was no duty, would be sent to London and other ports, and would be purchased as useful for many purposes. The honourabie alderman, after adverting to the inconvenience of the citizens of London not being allowed to bring coal from Stafforlshire and other places, con- cluded by observing, that unless the representa ives of those places which were affected by the high duties on coals went privately to the Chancellor of the Exchequer (for that w -uld be just as ef- fectual as stating their sentiozent% to him publicly), and declared, that the) wished for the repeal of thoseduties, petitions would be in- efuectualt For hisbown part he would do every 'thing in his power to support the prayer of the petition, but he knew that what he should say on the subject would have no effect unless supported as he had just stated. Alr. HUsYT said, he admitted he was in the wrong in whiatbe stated abotit the lanti coal-meters; but he was glad to have given the worthy alderman an occasion to make the explanation which the meeting had heard. The petition was then put,and adopted. The ether resolutions were then put, and azreed to. iMlr. T. WIL SON, Al. P., expressed his willingness to support the prayer of the petition whenever it should be presented. On the motion of Air. WILLIAMrS, a. P., -thanks were voted to the Chairman. Sir CsrAstES PRnCx in retuming thanks said, that it was not his intention, as the gentleman before him (Mr. Hunt) seemed to think, to have omitted the oppression of the tax on the poor. He had condemned it as unjust to ill classes, bat he considered it pecu- arly so as applying to the pooser classes. The meeting then adjourned. DUTY ON COAL..