The suggestions contained in that Report "would be fully attended to in framing the general measure under consideration. He "assured the House, in the mean time, that "this delay of the legislative provision, "would not prevent the adoption of imme"diate steps to obtain the repayment of the "large balance that appeared to be due "to the public from a person who had lately held an office of high public trust (Ge"neral De Lancey), late Barrack Master "General."But, why this delay as to the remedy in this particular office? And why no mention of the interest, while the money lay in the hands of GREENWOOD, or of others connected with him? The Commissioners state (see the extract from their Report, in the preceding Register, page 678) that the statements given in by the Barrack-Office, and on which statements the Lords of the Treasury issued money for barrack-services, were not correct, that is to say, that they were false; and they mention, as a proof of this, that the balances in the hands of the Treasurer (that is GREENWOOD) were no where noticed; nor was any allowance or deduction made for sums received for the rent of canteens, and sale of dung, and repayments to a considerable amount. They show, besides, that a large sum of money, issued for barrack-services, was immediately transferred by GREENWOOD to De Lancey's private account, and that it so remained for a long while. Now, let me ask, what general measures can possibly reach this past abuse? These men, or one of them, or them and others, had large sms of the public money in their hands, when it should have lain in the Treasury or the Bank; or, indeed, when it should have been in the hands of the people who pay the taxes. They, therefore, evidently owe the interest of this money to the public; and how is any general measure" to get at this interest? How is any general mea sare," which can have in contemplation nothing but the future to come at the false statements, by the means of which money was drawn from the Treasury, and which money was afterwards transferred to De Lincey's private account? This really does, and I am sorry to say it, savour too much of Mr. Fox's, new doctrine! It was not thus, disguise the matter how we will, it was not thus, that we talked and that we acted with regard to the transactions of Lord Melville and Mr. Trotter What this general measure" is, I know not; but, I do hope, that it is not a lumping transfer of all these matters to a snug Board of Commissioners. I do hope, that nothing will be done, which 66 shall afford a pretext for taking the right of inquiry from individual members of par liament, by telling them, that the matter, into which they may wish to inquire, is be fore the proper Board, and, thereupon, stiffing their efforts by a previous question. I do hope, that nothing of this sort will be attempted; for, if it be, I shall find myself under the painful necessity of asserting, that our situation has, by the change of ministry, been rendered ten thousand times worse than it was before. came to a division, 119 for the tax and 109 against it; and the impression was such as not to encourage the minister to try a second division.--If the money "must be raised,”". and all the loan-mongers, sinecure placemen, pensioners and contractors tell us it must; if the money must be raised," it is very little matter in what way it is raised, so that the additional taxes do not add to the already numerous restraints which the taxing system has imposed upon the personal liberty of the people, or to the number of those agents who are authorized to enter their houses and work-shops. But this tax would have created a fresh swarm of ercisemen to interfere, to come with their insolence of office, to distrub the harmony of neighbourhoods and of families; and for this reason I would have opposed the tax. I shall be told, perhaps, that I am, like other weak-minded persons, only putting off the evil day; for, that, to this, and to much more than this, it must come at last. But, besides that my hopes are better; besides that I hope for a great change as well with respect to the national debt as to every other branch of expenditure; besides that I am willing to rely a good deal upon the chapter of accidents for relief, I am, at any rate, for keeping off the exciseman as long as I can from the produce of the earth in its raw, in its first tangible state. Lord Henry Petty (oh, what scenes has he to pass through! and how often will he have to repent that he was cajoled into a rejection of my advice!) said, that this was not a beginning to tax the raw material in this country; and he in-, stanced Cotton, Spanish Wool, and Malt. " The latter is certainly not a raw material; and, as to the others, they are imported, in which circumstance, all the difference exists. The making of Pig-Iron has actually created flourishing and populous settlements in parts of this kingdom where, before, there was scarcely a house to be seen. Can as much be said of Cotton, or of Spanish Wool? And, would it not be a terrible curse upon these rising colonies, and upon the ingenious and industrious and enterprising men who have founded them, to introduce amongst them swarms of excisemen, supported, if necessary, by the warrant of the magistrate, and, in extreme cases, by the bayonet? God forbid it should be again thought of!-Necessity, the old plea, the standing plea, was again urged by the ministers, and that too with more apparent anguish than in the case of the Income Tax.- 66 I beg the House "to consider," said Lord Henry Petty, "that the question now is as to a choice of "evils, that money must be procured for the exigencies of the state, and that the mode now proposed is much less objectionable "than any other that has been suggested. "It has been recommended to me to propose other taxes. A right honourable gentleman has pushed the adoption of a "tax upon coals in the pit, in lieu of that be"fore the House. But, I prefer the latter, " and to those who seem so anxious to present me with a substitute, I will say "Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.” -Very well, my Lord! And I would have told Old Rose and others upon the same set of benches, that, unless the money was procured, some how or other, their sinecures and pensions must go unpaid; and to the loan-jobbers and contractors and barrack-men and staff-men I would have addressed a similar argument. But, my lord, the worst of it is, you were cajoled to take to the concern without previous inquiry; without a previous public statement of the pecuniary affairs of the nation; if you had, as I took the liberty to recommend, taken care to provide yourself with this statement, you would have stood clear; not having done this, you and your colleagues are answerable for all that may happen; which duty of responsibility you did formerly take upon yourselves when you boasted of" the "prosperity of the country" at the opening of your Budget.Mr. Fax, during the debate upon the Pig-Iron Tax, said that, having had the satisfaction to hear the opinions of different gentlemen, their arguments had certainly great weight upon his mind, but there was not a single argument which had been advanced ་ forward. There was hardly one of the taxes that had been laid on for these "twelve years past which he could say he thoroughly approved of They were all "laid on articles which most writers agreed "in saying that they were not fit objects of taxation. But the fact was, that we are now placed in such circumstances that we are driven to adopt modes of taxation "which must, in some degree, affect the prosperity of one branch of our trade or commerce or another."- -This is all I ever wanted you to say, Sir. But (excuse this freedom of manner, seeing that it arises from no want of respect) why did you not say it sooner? Important and unremitted as are your occupations, the time would be well bestowed, if you were even now, to condescend to look at page 164 of the present volume of the Register, where I foretold what your situation would be, unless you adopted the course there pointed out, to wit, the instituting of a parliamentary inquiry, and the making and widely promalgating a full and fair representation of the pecuniary affairs of the country. So far from doing this, however, you, as well as Lord Henry Petty, were cajoled to draw a veil over the nation's distresses. You also talked of the prosperity of the country," and why should you not, after you had been cajoled to vote 40,000l. of the public money to pay the debts of the cousin of Lord Grenville, who had brought the country into its present situation? Now, however, you talk in good plain language. You tell us, that you are "driven to adopt such "modes of taxation as must affect the pros perity of one branch or other of our "trade or commerce." This, if it be not too late, we understand. It is a language we have not been accustomed to. I, for one, most sincerely thank you for it, and certain I am that it will finally produce infinite good I cannot quit this subject without a remark or two upon a paragraph in the Morning Chronicle news-paper, (I never name this print without a melancholy reflection upon the mutability of all sublunary things) which is given as a speech of Old George Rose, as follows: "he earnestly recommended the noble lord to abandon "this tax, and suggested to his considera "tion, as substitutes, taxes upon horses "kept for pleasure, upon those employed "in agriculture, upon male servants, and "upon gentlemen's carriages: These were "sources from which, he thought, the " noble lord might draw a more productive revenue than the tax before the House could promise, and at the same time avoid any kind of oppression or injury to commerce." Why, how so? But, this same man wrote a pamphlet; or, rather, a pamphlet, the joint production of him, Mr. Long and the Grand Operator, was published by the Treasury in the year 1799, entitled "A BRIEF EXAMINATION into the "State of the Finances of Great Britain," after which pamphlet, it would be scândalous to appear astonished at any degree of ignorance from that quarter.This man does not penetrate one hair's breadth beneath the surface of finance. He sees a tax collected from a gentleman who keeps a carriage, a servant, or a pleasure horse, and he thinks that no soul in the world, that gentleman excepted, feels the effect of that tax! To reason against such notions would be to degrade the faculties of the mind.. and, as it has been well and most satisfac torily proved by MR. BARON MASERES, in his work upon annuities, the tax upon Income is a violation of the contract with the original subscribers. Then why talk of keeping faith with those who have purchased from them? We may observe, that, in this instance, and in insisting on the levy of the duty on the floating or unfunded stock, Mr. Francis was acting with the ministers, and was, indeed, most ably aiding the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who, through the whole of the preceding debate, would not hear of any abatement of any kind, or for any reason!The amount of the exemption, even on the foreign property that has already appeared (and new claims are "daily coming in to a great amount"), is, at least, 50,000l. a year; and, this revenue is, as Mr. Francis observed, given up to 'Change Alley, to Foreign Agents, and to Domestic Fraud, while our finance minister tells us, that, in the means of raising money upon us, he has left only "a "choice of evils," and while Mr. Fox himself declares, that, such is the state of our pecuniary affairs, that the ministers are "driven to impose taxes that must affect the "prosperity of some branch or other of our "trade and commerce!" Yes, it is at a moment like this, that, to an argument of Mr. Francis for making the stock of foreigners liable to taxation, Mr. Fox cannot listen without indignation!-Upon the other posi tion of Mr. Fox, that you cannot constitutionally tax foreigners, because they are not represented, one might make some very decent comments, particularly were one disposed to apply it to the state of parliamen tary representation, as the same has been recognized to exist by the money paid to the borough-holders of Ireland. But, this delicate topic had better be abstained from at present, it being exceedingly well calcu lated for a bonne bouche for Messrs. Fox and Grey and Lord Erskine and some others who need not now be named, To take a less refined view of the thing, we may observe, that the position naturally leads to this conclusion; to wit, that, if foreigners were represented, you fairly might tax their stock; that is to say, you might reduce the interest on their stock; and, as to degree, that is a matter to be left entirely to you. The corollary is interesting, and I beg my readers upon "the FATE OF THE FUNDS to attend to it. A loan to government is a contract, in which there are two contracting parties, without any third party to stand bewteen them and enforce the ful filment. The lender, or creditor is one INCOME TAX.It is worth remarking here, at the outset, that this tax, which Mr. Addington called a PROPERTY TAX, is now, even in the parliamentary debate reports, called the "INCOME TAX," as it is also called by the members of parliament themselves; though, as my readers will, perhaps, remember, I was, at the time of Mr. Addington's first naming it, represented as a seditious person for insisting, that it was, to all intents and purposes a tax upon Income, and that the other name had been chosen by that gentleman merely as a gilding of the PILL, which, for the sake of the nation's health, no doubt, he was administering to it.My present observations upon this subject will be confined to one point, namely, the exemptions to foreigners, who have money, or rather stock, or rather the claim to interest in our funds, that is to say, the claim to receive certain portions of the taxes annually raised upon the people of this kingdom; for that is the plain description of the thing. On the 12th instant, in the House of Commons, MR. FRANCIS urged the propriety of making no exemption in favour of foreigners, at which Mr. Fox expressed his indignation, observing, that this was to recommend a breach of faith with such foreigners, and that it would be unconstitutional, seeing that foreigners are not represented in parliament, and, therefore, ought not to be taxed! What! good God! what shall we hear next!" Breach of Faith."--Look at the acts constituting any of the public annuities. They all say, that the interest shall be paid at the Bank without deduction. There the contract with the original subscribers, Dilcounts, 4 party, and the borrower, that is to say the parliament, representing the nation, is the other. Parliament, says Mr. Fox, is competent to tax the funds, that is to say, to reduce the interest upon the stock, without the consent of the lender. Why? Because the lender is represented. Then, in fact, there is but one party; and parliament, as representative, may annihila its own engagements as debtor; which principle will justify parliament in applying the whole, as well as a part, of the interest of the debt, to the current services of the year. Mr. Fox did not maintain this proposition directly in terms; but, his argument maintains it, or his argument is good for nothing.But, really, I confess myself at a total loss to discover any rational motive for this distinction in favor of foreigners. Are not all foreigners here, or trading hither, taxed like other men? As if parliament had ever made either expressly or by implication, any special contract with those fund-jobbing foreigners! As if foreigners did not speculate in our funds, with all the contingencies thereunto belonging, just as the native "muck-worm" does! As if foreigners ought not to contribute to the protection of their own property as well as natives! As if there could be no objection to our furnishing a foreignor living in France, or an enemy, perhaps, with the means, out of our own funds, that is to say, out of our taxes, to assist Buonaparté in carrying his armies to our shores, and these means given without the least diminution; and this, too, at a moment, when Mr. Fox himself tells us, that he and his colleagues are, by the pressing necessities of the state, "driven to impose "taxes" that must " affect the properity" of the country!- -Mr. Francis's opinion was adopted by many persons in the House; Mr. Fox's has been adopted by nobody, either in the House or out of it; and, indeed, this may well be, when it is almost impossible to find upon the face of the earth any foreigners towards whom we ought to think of any thing like acts of tenderness, or, indeed, who stand in need of tenderness at our hands, the Hanoverians always excepted; but, as we have just begun a new, war for them, and as Mr. Fox has so boldly and resolutely declared that he will never make a peace by which the restoration of Hanover to the king shall not be secured, and as he has, moreover chosen to consider Hanover as an appendage to Great Britain, it would, I think, be curious enough, if it were to appear, that the exemption in favour of foreigners was, in any degree, intended to screen Hanove rian property in our funds. that is to say, claims to receive interest annually paid out of our taxes!--Upon the subject of the INCOME TAX the reader will find some excellent papers in the subsequent pages of this present Number of the Register. NELSON GRANT.That this grant, at such a time as this, and considering the circumstances of Lord Nelson's family 'is too great, too much beyond the bounds of propriety, every reflecting man in the nation has long thought, and still thinks; but Mr. FRANCIS has been the first openly and manfully to say it. On the 13th instant, upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer's moving for the granting of the sum of 5,000). a year, for ever, to the heirs of Lord Nelson, and in addition thereunto, an immediate grant of 120,000 to purchase an estate to descend in the said family, Mr FRANCIS spoke nearly as follows. I honour him for his conduct; I heard him with. pleasure; I agree with him in all his senti ments upon the subject; I have retained his words; and I now put them beyond the reach of misrepresentation. "On the merits "and services of the great admiral, whom we "have lost, there can be but one sentiment, "of united admiration and gratitude, in this "house and in this country; and in that "sentiment no man can participate more "heartily and sincerely than I do. Yet, even this feeling, just as it is, and power"ful as it ought to be, must in some rea"sonable degree be subject to the regula "tion of other principles in particular cir 66 66 cumstances. We live in times of great "public services, and great rewards. But we ought not to forget that the times we "live in have another character, which in"dicates other duties; I mean the difficul"ties and distresses, that belong to our si "tuation. Even in the distribution of the "best deserved liberality of parliament, we ought not to forget that the present means "of the country are not quite equal to all "the claims, which great services may have: "on the public gratitude. On this princi ple, painful as it is to me, I cannot refrain: "from expressing a doubt, whether one part of the proposed vote, I mean the sum "of £120,000, (in addition to the annuity. "of £5,000. a year,) may not be more, not "than is due to the merit of Lord Nelson; "far from it; but than can fairly be expect "ed in circumstances, which demand economy from us, even in the exercise of our virtues. The rewards, given to the Earl. "of Chatham, fell far short of this grant. "Those given in the first instance to John Duke of Marlborough, who placed Eng. "land at the head of Europe, I believe, did "not exceed it*. If, happily for his coun"try, the noble admiral had lived to enjoy "these proofs of its gratitude; or, if he had " left children to represent his person, and "to transniit his memory, with all its ho"" nours, to an illustrious lineage directly "descended from him, I should never have "thought of uttering one word, but in sup"port of the question. All my doubt is, "whether the claim on the nation stands "exactly on the same footing in the person "of a collateral relation, as it would have "done, if it had been possible to preserve "the reward of his services, united with his name, in direct descent to his own off"spring, and to their posterity."I have nothing to add here but a repetition of the expression before made of a perfect concurrence in opinion, and my hearty thanks to Mr. Francis for having so well said what I have to accuse myself of having, for too long a time, neglected to say. MILITARY AFFAIRS.- There have been, since my last observations upon this subject were submitted to the public, several discussions, relative to the repeal of the Parish Bill, and, incidentally, relative to Mr. Windham's Plan; but, in these there has appeared nothing new; nothing that I think worth communicating to my readers; for, as to the battlings of the INs and the OUTS, whom you see immediately afterwards walking arm-in-arm, and laughing at what has passed, just like a couple of barristers after a barking and sweating contest in the courts; as to this, it presents to my mind something far different from amusement, and it would, I earnestly hope, afford no amusement to my readers. In a subsequent part of this present Number will be found two letters upon Mr. Windham's Military Plan; the one addressed to "A VOLUNTEER," and defending that part of the Plan which relates to the Volunteers; the other from MAJOR CARTWRIGHT, who, in a most elaborate and able manner analyses the whole plan, and, in particular, discusses the subject of arming the people. Both these letters I recommend * On consulting the Journals of the House of Commons of the 10th and 21st of December, 1702, it appears that when Queen Anne had granted a pension to the Duke of Marlborough of £5000 per annum on the revenue of the Post-Office, and desired that it might be perpetuated in the family of the Duke of Marlborough, which the House of Commons positively rejected, as being a grant far too exorbitant to be n.ade. to the perusal of every one who takes an interest in the military measures now in con templation. INDIA AFFAIRS. (Continued from pages, 171, 197, 237, 303, 368, 460, 530, 545, 609, and 641.) On Thursday, the Sth instant, a debate of considerable length took place, in the House of Commons, upon the suggestion of MR. BANKES, which suggestion was briefly noticed in the foregoing Number of the Register, page 656. But, I was there very much in mistake as to the sort of court, before which Mr. Bankes wished to bring the affair of Lord Wellesley. I called it, the " Court of King's Bench;" but, it was a clear different sort of court, which court I will now trespass upon the patience of the reader in describing. It was not a Judge and Jury, before whom Mr. Bankes proposed to bring the affair of Lord Wellesley; but a court, called the "Court of "Indian Judicature," which court, consists of members of parliament, about 40 in number, chosen at the beginning of every year, by ballot; that is to say, by the majo rity; that is to say, by...... but, there is no occasion to go any further with the explanation.I thought, simpleton that I was, that, by the Court of King's Bench, was meant a real Judge and Jury; and, in that case I should, with the INDEPENDENT WHIG (a most excellent Sunday newspaper), have agreed, that Mr. Bankes's suggestion was a good one; though, I must confess, that I did not percieve any very great propriety in Mr. Bankes's coming forward to suggest to Mr. Paull an alteration in a mode of proceeding, which the latter gentleman had, quite unassisted by any one, so properly and so manfully pursued. Members of the House of Commons are, in that House, all upon a footing of perfect equality; and, out of that House, there are very few of the members who stand higher, in any respect whatever, than Mr. Paull. Mr. Bankes may, probably, have heard (for, indeed, the cry has been incessant), that Mr. Paull is a mere adventurer, seeking for popularity and fame, and, perhaps, emolument, in his pursuit of Lord Wellesley; but, it is due to this gentleman, it is due more especially to the just cause he has espoused, that I, who so heartily approve of his conduct, and who really feel great gra titude towards him for his public conduct, should here state that which I have, as to this matter, taken the pains to ascertain; and which is, that Mr. Paull is an eminent British Merchant, and the very greatest British Merchant now trading to the East; for proof of which reference may be made |