Page images
PDF
EPUB

posed to repair that injustice those selfish aristocratic countryby laying upon property a new gentlemen of England who were tax amounting to not less than the supporters of Lord Derby's 2,000,0001. a year. (Opposition Administration. (Cheers.) cheers.)

Mr. Evelyn Denison declared He hoped that Mr. Gladstone that, after listening attentively to would, as others had done before the speech of Sir Edward Lytion, him, retain his position and cor he was at a loss to know whether rect his measure. (Laughter.) he wished to continue the IncomeIt sometimes is represented that tax in an amended form, or to put gentlemen on Sir Edward's side an end to it altogether? For of the House are indifferent to himself, he thought this was the all taxes that do not oppress them- first time since they had embarked selves; he rejoiced that upon this on the sea of the Income tax that occasion at least they could trium- they had seen land—the first time phantly rebut that charge. It that there had been any fair and might be true that some had reasonable prospect of coming to thought it their duty-and he be an end of the tax. He applauded lieved correctly thought-to vin- the compensations of the budget, dicate the claims of British in- and was determined to support it dustry upon the part of the farmer. as a whole. The country would It was something of the same feel, as the House must have felt, principle that they would defend that a great mind is engaged in now in the case of the British its affairs. The people would tradesman-(Cheers, and laughter know how to appreciate such rare from the Government side of the intelligence and truthful honesty. House) - because they believed Mr. Booker, representing an that the rights of industry are in- agricultural constituency, felt the vaded whenever they tax at the greatest dismay at Mr. Gladstone's same rate the precarious earnings plan, which offered no relief to of labour and their own hereditary owners or occupiers of land, whose possessions. There had been, he case he said was made out by believed, some vague intimations Mr. Gladstone himself, when he of a dissolution in case this mea showed that agriculturists are paysure should be lost. He, and ing 9d. in the pound, while others those with whom he acted were pay but 7d. At that fåte, agri. quite ready to encounter such a culturists have been mulcted of calamity. He could not pretend 10,000,0001. during the last ten to judge how many gentlemen, the years, and would be mulcted of representatives of towns, might be 3,000,0001. more if this proposition disposed to vote against this reso. were carried. Now, they had no lution. He could not doubt their desire to shrink from the compehonest motives if they did; but, if tition to which they had been they did not, and if the threatened subjected, but they asked to start dissolution occured, let them go even in the race. With regard to back to their town constituencies, the manufacturing and commercial canvass them on behalf of the In- community the proposal placed come-tax, and tell those whose sole them in an improper position. He fortune was their toil and skill claimed on their behalt that there how they had been opposed by should be a marked difference be

tween precarious and permanent and that it would drive still more income. The agricultural com emigrants across the Atlantic. He munity regarded the tax on succes further contended, that the extensions “ with horror:” it would sion of the tax to Ireland would “go further towards the ultimate be inconsistent with the Act of dismemberment of the empire than Union, which stipulated that Ireany scheme hitherto devised;" it land should contribute to the would “slowly but surely break general taxation only in a certain up the great landed aristocracy of proportion, which had already been the kingdom." ("Hear, hear!" exceeded. and laughter.)

Mr. Buck dwelt upon the sufMr. Hume expatiated upon the ferings of the agriculturists, and inequalities of the present scheme wondered Parliament should be of the tax, the defects of the asked to renew the Income-tax, system of assessments, and the which he said " had crept into the abuses existing in the collection, House under a false pretence.” He and eulogised the merits of what declared his opposition to every is termed the “ actuaries' plan.” part of the Budget. He meant to regard the Budget as Mr. Blackett, approving the a whole, and as such he approved Budget as a whole, regretted the of it, especially of the legacy duty, omission of the timber duties—that which was its great charm. He no amendment was made in the concurred in the extension of the machinery for the collection of Income-tax to Ireland, and in the the Income-tax, and that its exproposal with regard to the assessed tension was not accompanied by the taxes, because they interfered with electoral franchise. On the other labour; and in the repeal of the hand, Mr. Knightley, taking the soap duty, because it induced to Budget as a whole, disapproved of the health and comfort of the it;—agreeing with Mr. Gladstone's working classes.

premisses, he demurred to his conColonel Sibthorpe had always clusions. . opposed the Income-tax, and should Mr. W. Williams combated the continue to do so. However good arguments of Mr. Fagan, and apin time of war, the tax was un proved of the Budget in its enwarrantable in a period of peace. tirety.

Mr. Fagan felt compelled re Mr. Maguire replied to Mr. luctantly to oppose the proposition Williams. Ireland had been told of Mr. Gladstone. He argued she might cultivate her manufacthat Ireland, just recovering from tures; which, from the time of her embarrassments, could not be "hook-nosed William"downwards, justly charged with the Income England had done her best to tax;' that the Consolidated An- destroy. She was in a worse posipuities ought not to be considered tion now than in 1842: then she in relation to this question; that exported 93,000 quarters of wheat England had been largely the and 2,358,000 quarters of oats, in gainer by the remission of duties

1851 she only exported 44,000 concurrent with the imposition of of the former, and 1,141,000 of the Income tax ; that if imposed the latter. Was it a sign of Ireat the eleventh hour, Ireland land's prosperity that no less than would pay more than her share; 8,700,0001. worth of property has VOL. XCV.

[F]

changed hands in the Encumbered broken up by younger brothers in Estates Court ?

the National Convention. With Mr. Warner warmly approved regard to the Income-tax it was of the Budget, and defended the pot fair to object to it as an unIrish of it.

popular impost; it was the subMr. Newdegate attacked the stratum of a scheme for creating whole Budget, and denied that a machinery by which the national upon Mr. Gladstone's own showing debt might be ultimately reduced. there was any necessity for continu. Mr. Muntz said it was with reing the Income-tax. He opposed

He opposed gret that he opposed the Budget, the legacy duty upon

real property, because it contained a great deal which taxed a man at a period of which he approved; but he when he was least able to bear could not support so oppressive a the burden. He excited much tax as the present

Income-tax-a laughter by describing the remis foul blot upon the Budget, which sion of the soap duty as “ another he advised the Chancellor of the boon to Manchester." He would Exchequer to amend. like to know when these boons to Mr. Stanhope argued against Manchester were to end ? For the the inequalities of the Income-tax last eight years we had been in its incidence upon land, and he doing nothing but legislate for protested against imposing a furManchester. (Cheers from the ther tax upon land of 2,000,0001. Opposition.) He considered that

a year, without taking into consithe Budget “ involves another deration its peculiar burdens. blow at the agricultural interest." Mr. J. Ball felt that the secret (Laughter from the Ministerial cause of the opposition to the benches.)

Budget was, that it was a great Mr. Monckton Milnes, compar- step towards the equalisation of ing this Budget and the last, pre- the taxation of the country, which ferred the present. He regretted recommended it to him. As an that the discrimination between Irish Member, he had satisfied fluctuating taxed incomes would himself that the effect of the pronot -be obtained in renewing the posed measures upon Ireland had Income-tax, but should not, on that been misrepresented, and he exaccount, oppose one of the greatest plained the grounds of his belief, experiments of financial revision that Ireland was not unfairly, but ever proposed by a Minister of was, on the contrary, favourably the Crown.

treated in the Budget. Sir W. Jolliffe said, if ever Mr. Grogan questioned the acthere was

a Budget proposed curacy of the data whence Mr. which made free trade more im- Ball had drawn his conclusions. possible than ever, by a system The debate was then adjourned of taxation incongruous with its to the 28th of April, when it was principles, it was this Budget. opened by Mr. Cobden in a speech

Mr. Drummond denied that the of considerable length. He made legacy duty would, as Mr. Booker use of one of his old arguments, had suggested, break up the aris that if the military expenditure tocracy; it was nothing more than had been kept down to the a tax upon elder brothers; the 10,000,0001., which he would aparistocracy of France had been propriate for that purpose, the

agriculturists would not have had Mr. Serjeant Shee, under feelto complain of extra burdens. He ings of irritation produced by Mr. took pains to show that if gentle- Cobden's speech, attacked him and meu on both sides would be ex Mr. Ball for presuming to lecture travagant, they must be so at the Irish Members on their duties in expense of property, and not of that House as members for the commerce. He wished to im- United Kingdom; and he argued press upon the House that succes that Ireland had been an immense sive remissions of indirect tax. loser by her connection with Eng. ation were inevitable, and the land. Noindependent Irish Member question was, how were they to could vote for the Budget as it stood. be met? There was nothing more Mr. J. L. Ricardo objected that unjust, or inequitable, or demoral- Mr. Shee endeavoured to separate ising in the Income-tax than in the interests of England and IreCustoms or Excise duties; but he land. He frankly confessed that, thought Mr. Gladstone had over- although he had taken part in the rated the difficulties (which he ad- outcry in favour of the adjustment mitted to be greater than he had of the Income-tax, yet, after hearanticipated) in the way of modify- ing the evidence before the Com. ing and mitigating the inequalities mittee on the subject, he now of the tax. Unmodified, however, thought that any adequate adjustas it was, the other parts of the ment would be tantamount to the Budget not only went far to re- abrogation of the tax altogether. dress the inequalities of the In- IIe was for direct taxation, the procome-tax, but presented a bold per and equitable principle, and it and honest proposal; and, looking was for this reason he voted for the at the tax, coupled with the com- Budget, which contained, in the pensatory portions of the Budget, duty upon successions, the founda—the legacy duty upon real pro- tion of a system of direct taxation. perty in particular-he was ready Mr. French condemned the to take them with both hands, as Budget as it regarded the interests a whole. He approved of lower of Ireland. He believed the only ing the line of exemption to 1001. object in reducing the tea duties as a wise measure; and he justi was to secure a market in China for fied the extension of the tax to English goods. He showed that the Ireland,

upon the principle he had Budget would impose taxes upon always advocated, of equal legis- Ireland of three times the value of lation, accompanied, as it was, by the boon to be conferred upon her, a very large and beneficent boon, an injustice to his constituents, almost an equivalent for the tax. he should resist it to the utter. Mr. Cobden then proceeded to most. criticise some of the subordinate Mr. Bellew contradicted this features of the Budget-the duty view, and believed the Budget on licences, the advertisement and would be a great boon to the tenant newspaper stamp duties; and ex farmers of Ireland; the Incomepressed his sincere hope that the tax would fall upon the class best Budget — which he believed had able to bear it. been generally accepted by the Mr. Sandare, speaking from the country-would, in its main pro. Opposition benches, said he was visions, pass the House.

about to vote differently from those

with whom he usually acted, but, could not regard as other than a taking the Budget as a whole, he concession which Ireland might thought it a great, bold, and states claim. He then compared the man-like measure. He concurred result of the Budget as regarded with Mr. Cobden, that the feeling England and Ireland, showing, acin the West Riding of Yorkshire cording to his calculations, an was strongly in its favour.

enormous balance of advantage in Sir F. Baring rejoiced that the favour of the former country. amendment had been brought for Lord Lovaine argued against the ward, because it involved the Budget generally, and, in partiwhole principle of the Budget, cular, against the legacy duty upon and did not lead to a vote upon land. small details only. He was glad Mr. C. Fortescue confined him. that the Government had taken self to the subject of the extension the bold step of laying down as a of the Income-tax to Ireland. Sir principle that the Income-tax was F. Baring, he said, had failed to to be abandoned, and had taken convince him that the scheme of measures for that

purpose,

and the Budget bore unfairly upon thought they had acted wisely in Ireland. He could not make up not taking immediate measures. bis mind to refuse to lay upon It was asked, what security there that country a fair and equal share was that this tax would be aban- of the Imperial burden, that she doned in 1860 ? We had, first, might have a right to share in the pledge of the Government, Imperial privileges. and means were provided to the The Marquis of Granby opposed extent of 2,770,0001., leaving only the continuance for seven years of 1,700,0001. to be, met. He did a tax which was unfair, unequal, not doubt, therefore, that the In and unjust, and insisted that, concome tax might be relinquished sidering the local burdens and in 1860. He was not, however, other incidents attaching to the prepared to extend this tax, con land, it was neither fair nor wise to demned as a permanent tax, to impose a legacy duty on real proparties who had not hitherto paid perty concurrently with the Init. Was it wise to place a tax, come-tax. admitted to have a demoralising

Sir C. Wood recommended meminfluence

upon the higher classes bers of the landed interest to of tradesman, upon the lower? He accept the Budget as a whole, and objected likewise to the extension not to vote for an amendment of the tax to Ireland. If it was which made their case worse, creatthought that Ireland ought to be ing a difference against the land. taxed, it would be wiser to impose Arguing the question as a landsome other tax than this, which lord, he maintained that the prewas not only demoralising, as in sent Budget was more beneficial this country, but required in Ire to the land than that of the late land the creation of a machinery Government. Sir Charles entered for its collection. What was the at much length into demonstration compensation offered to Ireland ? of this position, and rectified cerThe Consolidated Annuities, the tain misapprehensions respecting abandonment of which, after the the amount of the legacy duty report of the House of Lords, he which would fall upon the land.

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »