sufficient to entitle them to rank as a peculiar service, is in some degree proved by the eagerness, which according to the accounts of officers acquainted with the circumstance, is manifested by the soldiery for serving in that, in preference to other corps; and even this is an advantage which need not be gratuitously thrown away. There is no difficulty in dividing force when circumstances may require it, but considerable disadvantage in combining troops which have not been accustomed to act in concert. If, therefore, some loss may possibly result from one proceeding, and no disadvantage from the contrary, the public will give the hon. author full credit for the disinterestedness of his intentions; but will not insist on his surrendering the offspring of his talents for the sake of furnishing a name to the company of honour in a battalion of light infantry. Marksmen, chasseurs, or many other titles might be invented, which would produce an equal effect, and might be common to the light infantry and rifle battalions.You have yourself, Sir, been a British soldier, and will, I am sure, regard with interest every thing which relates to the welfare of the British army. And while an enlightened administration gives to every suggestion on subjects of public importance, the attention which the talents of their authors may demand, you will not refuse your indulgence to the weakest, in consideration of the good intention which directed them.-PUBLIUS. PROPERTY, (or INCOME) TAX. [Written, observe, previous to the opening of the New Minister's Budget.] SIR,Thouh distinguished by various modifications, the Property and Income Tax may, respecting its operation and results, be justly considered as being inseparably united. The principles on which this tax is founded, viz. "That in times of great public exigency every member of the community should contribute in proportion to his "ability, and to the stake he has to preserve; exempting, as far as possible, the lower "order of the people from additional bur"dens," are just, wise, and humane.--If income, therefore, were, in reality, a fair standard of ability to bear taxation, or could by any modification become such, the Income Tax, so far from being objectionable, would become one of the most eligible and equitable imposts that government could adopt.-But equality of income, derived from sources or causes totally dissimilar, cannot be a just standard for equality of contribution. To enumerate the various means by which the subjects of this highly civilized and commercial nation become possessed of income would be useless, on this occasion, even if it were possible. It is sufficient, therefore, in proof of the above position, to observe, that possessors of income, or property, liable to taxation, may be generally classed under the four following heads: 1st. The proprietor of land, houses, money at interest, in the public funds, or private loans. 2dly. The merchants, wholesale dealer, in any article of trade or necessary of life, shopkeeper, tradesmau, mechanic, &c. 3dly. The pensioner, or life annuitant, who is possessed of a certain yearly stipend to the attainment and continuance of which no exertion or trouble is required. 4th. All those who derive their annual income from public or private salaries, wages, or periodical payments, for which public or private duty is required. This last comprehensive and numerous class extends to the highest and the lowest orders of the community; including alike the first minister of state, and the lacquey that rides behind his carriage. They all (supposing them possessed of no extraneous property) subsist on a salary, or wages, which ends with their life, and for which they are required to perform adequate service. Thus it is evident, that in the four classes above enumerated, there are four different kinds of income subject to the same indiscriminate and heavy pressure of this boasted standard of equality! The fullowing example, selected from thousands, will suffice to prove, beyond the possibility of contradiction, of even of doubt, the injustice, impolicy, and hardship of the Income Tax, in its present mode of operation. -A person possessed of 2001. per annum, either in landed estate, or in the funds, is assessed to the Income and Property Tax 51. per cent. on the interest only of his property, which, at his death, descends to his children or his heirs, or legatees, Another, placed in a public or private department, the duty of which demands his whole time and attention, and probably may, if serving in the army, put his life to hasard in his country's cause, receives a like sum of 2001. per annum, which is his only property, which ends with his life, and which, if he a has family, must be very inadequate to their subsistence while he lives, must also pay 51. per cent. to the Income and Property Tax, because the former pays so much on the interest of his property! A moment's reflection on this statement will convince any of your readers, that equality of annual income is far from being a true standard of ability to bear taxation, and that the equal pressure imposed on such very unequal powers of sustaining it, proves its injustice. The man of property. has many ad, antages compared to him whose and precisely at the time when it should exert its most powerful and beneficial energy. its operation becomes entirely suspended! By the Income Tax, as it now stands, an income of 60l. per annum pays 14 per cent. one of 1501. per annum 5 per cent. and one of 20,000l. per annum no more! Thus from the scanty pittance of 150l. per annum, (perhaps, too, an annuity, and incumbered with a family, 71. 10s. is taken for Income Tax, leaving only 1421. 10s. for all other taxes and demands, while from the very liberal fortune of 2,000l. per annum, the interest of real property, and from the princely revenue of 20,000l. or 40,000l. per annum, the same ratio of 5 per cent: only is deducted! A tax thus constituted and levied, and that too with an addition last year of 2 per cent. on the former assessment, totally departs from its avowed principle, "that every one is bound to contribute to "the public exigencies in proportion to his "ability,and to the stake he has to preserve." income is the produce of his exertions, even while he lives on the interest of that property. Attend them both to the concluding scene of their lives! Each is probably surrounded by a mournful family, equal in number, but how utterly severe is the contrast. The property of the former descends to his widow and children, to console and maintain them; the latter can bequeath nothing to his disconsolate family but indigence and affliction! I am well aware, that this is one of the irremediable consequences of civil society; salaries cannot extend beyond the lives of their possessors; but this is surely an additional reason for their not being assessed so much beyond their proportion or ability-It might, perhaps, be very difficult, not to say impossible, to fix on a standard of texation so exactly proportionate to the different classes assessable to Income Tax, as to be exempt from error. But does it therefore follow, that the present inequalities and injustice in fixing the quantum of contribution, should remain? Would it not-Nothing is wanting to render this tax be far more consonant to reason and justice that all persons possessing pensions, salaries, or wages, or, in short, any income for life only, should be liable only to half as much per centum on such incomes, as land and stock-holders pay on their yearly income, e. on the interest of their property?-The only objection that could, with any semblance of reason, be opposed to a modification so clearly just and humane would be, that the Income Tax must be (quoad hoc) less productive. To this I beg leave, with due deference to reply, that the present standard of contribution is not only erroneous in its principle, but inequitable in its graduation; and I humby conceive a modification might, in this respect, be justly adopted, which would not merely compensate for the proposed deduction on life annuities, but afford a surplus more than sufficient to pay the interest of the present loan of 23,000,000l. -Admitting, for argument sake, that all income is derived from the same origin, and is merely the annual interest of real property, it will follow, that the ratio of tax. ation should have a progressive increase, commensurate to the income; or, in other words, to the ability of contribution, and value of the state to be preserved by it.Yet so far is this from being the case, that by the present Income Tax, though the above principle is clearly acknowledged, and in the lowest assessments actually adhered to, yet after the yearly income exceeds 1501., (as a war tax) equitable in itself, and highly beneficial to the public, but to approach as nearly as possible, to this standard of justice. The wisdom of the British Legislature is, doubtless, competent to this arduous task; and may, from various plans and modifications presented to them, select and arrange a plan of an income tax, in every respect more eligible and more productive than those which have hitherto been acted upon.Without attempting to ascertain the exact ratio of ability between the various classes assessed to the Income and Property Tax, it must be universally admitted, that if the life annuitant were to pay in all cases where h's income and that of the land or stock holder were equal, only half the percentage of the latter, he would still pay full as much, as (or perhaps more than) he ought, and yet find his present burden greatly alleviated.When the pressure of other taxes, and the rapid advance of price on most of the necessaries, as well as on the comforts of life are considered, it will surely be admitted, that no income whatever under 1001. per annum should be liable to assessment.That all income arising from landed or funded property, or any permanent source, should pay for the first 1001. per annum 21. per cent, and for every additional 1001. per annum, or the aliquot parts thereof, up to 2,000l. per annum, an addition of 1 per cent. on the whole income, as by the following table: R Supplement to No. 61, Vol. IX-Price 10d. 900 .91. do 1,000 101. do. 64 0 81 0 100 O 2,000 201. -do. 400 0 The intermediate sums between the 1,000l. and 2,000l. per annum, to pay in the same progressive proportion; the maximum for 2,000l. per annum and upward, being 201. per cent. on the original assessment. But the whole progressive series to be liable to the advance of the last year's assessment, if judged necessary, and to commence from 5th April, 1806. To include (as at present) all real and personal property, trades, professions, &c.; but life annuitants of all descriptions, to be assessed one half less, liable to a proportional advance, on the original assessinent, E. G. a proprietor of 5001. per ann. estate, at 5 per cent.225 0 0 per ann. Advance last year 25 per cent. on assessment Annuitant of 500k per ann. at 12 per cent, Advance for last year's. assessment, 25 per ct, on assessment 65 0 £31 50 12 10 0 3 26 £15 12 6 Having already observed that an Income Tax, thus modified, would be at once more equitable and more productive than the present, I shall forbear to expatiate on the great and evident national advantages that would result from such an alteration. In tracing this mere outline of a plan which is capable of great improvement, it is far from being my intention arrogantly to dictate to those whom I readily acknowledge to be as much any superiors in ability as in station, and to whom every source of information is accessible; yet, I trust it may be allowable, and apprehend it to be my duty (with all due deferent and respect to the public and to to avail myself of the ineslege which every British submunicating his thoughts measures in which all are deeply interested.-BRITANNICUS. 25th March, 1806. NATIONAL ECONOMY. MR. COBBETT-Although a distant, I àm a constant reader of your weekly publi cation. I like and achite the principles on which that very entertaining and instructive work is founded. Yet, I often, (and I trust you will not think the worse of me,) differ with you in sentiment and opinion. I wish, Sir, to add my mite to our national reform and prosperity; by offering, through the medium of your Register, some subjects, the consideration of which may ultimately lead to them. If you think this worthy to meet the public eye, I may be induced to trouble you hereafter, more at large, perhaps, but not on a more important subject than on that of national economy. Upon this point, I have no reason to suppose we shall differ. It is that on which the prosperity, nay, the very existence of this country depends; and, truly happy am I to read the solemn pledge, which the Noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, has given on this head. 1 was not an admirer of the political conduct of those gentlemen who compose the present administration, when they formed the opposition phalanx. It appeared to me, they of ten thwarted measures which would have greatly tended to the public good, and instead of proposing others, seceded from parliament, withheld their counsels, and abandoned their duties as representatives of the people. But, Mr. Cobbett, as I am not a party man, I was inclined to think, others, under such circumstances, would have done the same; and that the loaves and the fishes were the only objects of their contemplation. When, however, on the death of Mr. Pitt, I was told, all the abilities of the country were to be united, to form a vigorous and effective administration, I felt no small degree of pa triotic satisfaction, and ardent hope of future national prosperity. It is certain, the cream of four distinct parties has been taken to form the present administration, and the country looked to it with anxious expectation. For my own part, I thought some, and those very transcendent abilities, were excluded, and I much doubted, whether an administration composed of such heteregeneous matter could amalgamate and long hold together. To their first measures i looked with deep anxietude; apprehensive, I confess, that each man was not appointed exactly to his proper station; and, I tinink so yet... I mean, Sir, such as is best befitted to his political pursuits, his studies, and his abilities. Yet, I had no right to doubt ther general good intentions, and I trust they will acquit themselves with that zeal to which they are pledged, and with that honour, honesty, and integrity, which can alone support them in the public estimation; and the want of which must plunge them and the nation in disgrace, obloquy, and ruin.-But as my present subject is that of national economy, I shall confine myself to the conduct of the Noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I admire the abilities of that Noble Lord, though I by no means approve his system of taxation. That, however, is a matter of speculative opinion, and which I shall leave for animadversion on some future day. What I do approve; and I approve it most heartily; is his solemn proms, made to the representatives of the pole, that his whole ministerial conduct slai be marked by the most rigid and exact economy. I ought not to suppose he will er forget this pledge, to which he has bend himself by every tie of private honour public faith. It may perhaps, be told, the sins I ain about to mention, do not, all at least, come exactly under his cognizance, or within the routine of his office. But, I conceive. Sir, the minister who has the guardianship of the public purse, must be Consulted on every nonal demand, upon it; and is accountable for its experditate in sonte meastre, at least, as far as his voice goes.-I shall first, tlten, notice the immense cost of the sea fencibles, I will confidently appeal, and the appeal is reasonable and fair, to every admiral commanding at our several 'sea-ports, and to every commissioner in every dock-yard in the United Kingdom; if any benefit whatever has accrued to the, naval service of Great Britain, by the institution of the sea fencibles? I would ask, if the abolition of them would not greatly contribute to man our ships of war? I would then ask the revenue officers, both of the customs and excise, if the protections given to sea fencibles do not greatly promote smuggling? Should their answers be such as I expect, will ministers hesitate to abolish this, not only useless, but obnoxious corps? Let the Noble Lord, who is the guardian of the public purse, look to the expense attending it. Let him consider the situation of the Hon. Admiral Geo. Berkeley, with a salary of 1500 for doing nothing here in England. Or, if he has any thing to do, if he visits the sea-ports, musters the fencibles, and inspects the impressed men, (a new fangled part of his official duty) who have perhaps, been rejected before, he will cost the nation twice that sum in post-horses, and travelling expcases. Let ministers, 1 say, ask those to whom i have before appealed, if the labourer is worthy the hire? Then let them, turn their eyes to Admiral Hawkins Whitshed, who fills the same post in Ireland, under the pompous name bestowed upon him by the fate administration, of Naval, confidential Adviser to the Lord Lieutenant. Whether, with this new administration he has lost, of kept this high sounding title, I know not; but certain it is, the said admiral is just now sent back to Ireland, in the same situation; to call it a command would be ridiculous, and truly insulting to the navy. He enjoys too, the same appointment of 15001. per annum, which Admiral Berkeley does here. Let them next compute the further expendi ture under the various branches of this ridiculous and contemptible service. The pay of the captains, licutenants, and a long list of others employed under them. And, sorry am I to add, these are invalided officers, who from wounds or length of service, might be entitled to attention and repose. But they are young and active, such as should be employed in really fighting the cause of their country, and should nor be put on full pay` for doing nothing. I am not, Sir, personally known to, or acquainted with either of the admirals, to whom I have alluded, I dare to say, they are very worthy and respectable men, both in their private, and professional characters. But I do not like their present employ. If they were dismissed from it, I should hope they would experience no great, or long inconvenience. The one is half brother to the Marchioness of Buckingham, the other married a namesake and relation of the Duke of Portland. Comfortable births would therefore, most likely be provided for them; though Mr. Secretary Fox is reported to have said jocosely, (speaking of the followers of the present administration) "that they were so thick as to be stored three in a bed already." Be that however as it may. The whole sea-fencible establishment is what I object to. I wish it to be done completely away. An immense saving would be made to the public; many good seamen would be obtained for the real service of the navy;" and smuggling would receive a very considerable check. The next object to which I would wish to turn the attention of the Noble Lord at the head of the Treasury, is that of pensions. I believe the evil is already so great, and increasing so fast, that it must shortly cure itself. But if it is left to work its own cure by time, it will leave, I fear, some dreadful marks and scars behind it. I highly approve the very liberal sum, I believe 90,000 1. given by Mr. Burke's Bill, to the crown annually, in order, not only to better would it have squared with the boast support its dignity and splendour, but to enable the Monarch, who wears it, to enjoyed resolution of economy of the Noble Lord, the gratification of rewarding merit, and bestowing tokens of his royal munificence and personal regard, on those whom he thinks deserve them. I highly approve too, every mark of national gratitude, voted by the representatives of the people, to those who have essentially served the state, either in the cabinet or the field. The well-earned honours of a hard fought victory, would often become a dreadful charge to those on whom they are bestowed, if unaccompanied with a pecuniary gratuity. But here let pensions stop. No longer let each successive administration grant those pensions to the younger brothers, sisters, or daughters of rich and affluent peers, such as the Earl of Uxbridge and others; which ought to be reserved for, and bestowed only as the rewards of merit. And when the same administration retire from office, let not ALL the relations of ALL those who have given it their countenance and assistance be pensioned also. There is no end to this, Mr. Cobbett, we already see the tax-collectors sufficiently often at our doors, to levy our contributions for the necessary exigencies of the state, without being called upon to contribute towards the support of pensioned political friends, their relatives and dependents. And here, in the name of justice and reason, let me ask how the Noble Chancellor of the Exchequer could think of imposing another, and that so heavy a duty on sugar, (an article already over-taxed) as three shillings per cwt. whilst he should continue to exact from the planters of the Windward Islands four and a half per cent. on the produce of their estates, paid on the spot; and suffer the amount thereof still to be divided in pensions? This, Sir, in my idea, does not tally with the Noble Lord's plighted professions of economy. The duty to which I allude, was obtained by a positive compact befween the mother country and her colonies: that the one should maintain an adequate, specified force for the defence of the other, the consideration of the 4 per cent. duty, on the general produce of the latter. This agreement, Sir, has been violated under every administration, almost from the time it was made, so that no particular charge of violation can in that respect be adduced against the present one. No adequate force has ever been kept in those Islands for their defence; witness the depredations of the enemy there last year. Indeed, they have been often left to the protection, I should have said mercy of a black regiment. How much more honourable and just would it have beep, how much if, instead of imposing the additional heavy duty on sugar, which must be the ruin of the inferior planters of the smaller Islands, his lordship had appropriated the 44 per cent. duty to the public service, and exigencies of the state. It is true, he would thus have deprived some persons of pensions to which they have neither right nor title, from merit or service; but he would have rendered a double justice, and a double benefit both to the mother country and her colonies. -SENEX.- -East Bourne, April 6, 1806. WAR TAXES. SIR- -Your financial statements, from time to time, have naturally interested all reflecting persons who have had an opportu nity of perusing them.-A letter from a correspondent of yours, addressed, lately, to Mr. Fox, particularly attracted my notice; because his figures appear to me to convey irrefragable demonstration, provided the fact be admitted from which they are deduced. But, if I am not mistaken, both you and he have most egregiously underrated the aggregate income of the country. Not being a man of figures or calculation myself, I desired a friend of mine, who by the by, I think has, like yourself, got rather a twist about the funds, to try if he could extract from the newspaper reports of Lord Henry Petty's budget, how things really stand. He has just handed me the enclosed, as he calls it, hasty sketch in round numbers, presuming upon our future expenditure during the war, to be equal to what it is now taken at; and that all the taxes will produce what they are laid at; though he is pleased to inform me the latter is impossible. As it evidently appears that the new administration agree in opinion with their predecessors, as to the solidity of our finances; I think it is a duty you owe the public, either to quiet the alarm you have incautiously given, by a candid acknowledgment of your error, or otherwise to defend your former opinions.-I for one would wish very much to know the truth, favourable or unfavourable: and, therefore, am extremely anxious to know your present opinion on this subject, which I own appears, as well as to yourself, of the first importance to your constant reader. -W. S.- -March 31st, 1806. *This letter, it will be observed, was written previous to the publication of may ar ticle upon the Budget, in the Register of the 5th instant. |