Mr. Bennet wished to ask the chancellor of the exchequer, whether it was true, that within a short period the salaries of six collectors of the taxes in Scotland and thirty-six in England had been increased? The Chancellor of the Exchequer intimated his intention of answering that question to-morrow. Mr. Protheroe, although he felt the exorbitance of the estimates, yet thought they ought to be considered in the committee. The question was now loudly called for, and the House divided :- Majority List of the Minority. Macdonald, James 241 Preston, Richard 121 Russell, lord G. W. Lewis, F. 120 Dundas, Charles Duncannon, viscount Elliot, right hon. W. Ebrington, viscount Folkestone, lord Fitzgerald, lord W. Fazakerley, J. N. Finlay, Kirkman Fellowes, Newton Fergusson, sir R. Fitzroy, lord J. Foley, hon. A. Foley, Thomas Gordon, Wm. Grenfell, Pascoe Guise, sir B. W. Grant, J. P. Hamilton, sir H. D. Heron, sir R. Heathcote, sir G. Howorth, H. Hurst, Robt. Horner, F Howard, hon. W. Hornby, E. Jervoise, L. J. Langton, W. G. Lambton, J. Lemon, sir W. Lloyd, sir E. Lloyd, J. M. Lyttelton, hon. W. H. Lockhart, J. T. Mostyn, sir Thos. Morland, S. B. It was agreed, that the House should go into the committee on Friday; after which the House adjourned at half-past four o'clock on Thursday morning. HOUSE OF COMMONS. PETITIONS AGAINST THE PROPERTY TAX.] Mr. Shaw Lefevre presented a petition from Reading against the property tax, which he prefaced with a few observations expressive of his cordial concurrence in the sentiments of his constituents. Sir John Simeon denied the accuracy of his constituents in their statement that parliament would violate their pledge by the continuation of the tax. He, for one, denied that any pledge had been given on the subject. At the same time he admitted, that under all the circumstances of the case, it was not desirable that the tax should be continued, and it was his intention to vote against that continuation. The petitioners had, however, very preposterously imagined that there was a connexion between the property tax and the proposed military establishments. For himself, if he thought the proposed military establishments endangered the liberty of the country, he would be the last man to consent to their adoption; but the supposition was too absurd to be for a moment cherished. The application | left it to them to imagine. He dwelt emof the petitioners was premature. Mr. Horner was glad to hear that the hon. and learned gentleman's constituents were at least to have the benefit of his vote against the tax. With respect to the tax itself, the hon. gentleman's constituents were more in the right than the hon. gentleman. There was nothing preposterous in connecting the property tax with the military establishment, because it was on the alleged ground of the necessity of the latter that the former was demanded. His objections to the establishment, were to it as an establishment, and his objections to the property tax were, to the imposition of such a tax for such an object. The hon. and learned gentleman did not seem to understand the language of his constituents. They had not accused parliament, but his majesty's ministers, of a breach of faith. The former would have been absurd; the latter was the fact, and a grave subject of complaint it was against them. He had attended parliament as diligently as the hon. and learned gentleman, and his distinct recollection was, that ministers described the measure to the House as a war tax, and only a war tax. The attempt to impose it on the people in time of peace was a forfeiture of that pledge. Mr. Methuen wished to know, if the hon. and learned gentleman fancied his constituents premature in their application to parliament on this subject, when he thought would have been the proper time for them to have chosen. phatically on the advantages enjoyed by the fundholder over the landholder; and yet it appeared the determination of ministers to support the former, and to destroy the latter. He warmly deprecated making the funds every thing and the land nothing. The welfare of those who were connected with the soil was the only solid superstructure of national great ness. Mr. Staniforth presented a petition from Kingston-upon-Hull against the property tax. The hon. gentleman represented the trade of Hull to be in such a state of de pression that if the tax were persevered in, the consequence must be general ruin. Mr. Thompson confirmed the statement of his hon. colleague. As many bankruptcies had occurred in Hull within the last ten months as had taken place there within the preceding ten years. The farmers in the neighbourhood were still greater sufferers than the merchants; for they were shut from all appeal from the assessments. To these evils they had for two years submitted as quietly as their sheep. They had been shorn to the skin. But he trusted they would soon be relieved, and that of this measure, which was an unequivocal breach of faith, and against which so many petitions had been presented, the House would soon hear no more., Mr. Lockhart presented a petition from the united parishes of St. Andrew's, Holborn, and St. George the Martyr, against the property tax. He said that he agreed Mr. Davenport rose merely to say, that for the most part in the sentiments of the he had always considered the property petitioners. It was most unjust to put the tax as a war tax, and as a war tax only, trading part of the community, and those and on that ground he should vote against who derived their income from temporary, it. on a footing with those who derived their Sir Charles Mordaunt stated the preva-income from permanent sources. lence of the general feeling out of doors as to the violation of faith which the proposal to continue the tax involved. He trusted the right hon. gentleman would not persevere in the measure. Mr. Dickenson, in presenting a petition from Wellington, in Somersetshire, against the property tax, stated, that his opinion was still stronger against the measure than that of his constituents. He represented in powerful terms the distresses of the farmers, and declared, that if the existing grievous weight of taxation were not taken off, the House would see one class of society sink down into that next it; and what would become of the lowest class he Still, however, a certain sum must be raised, and a property tax seemed to him to be necessary. He would, however, have it considerably modified: he would have it bear on the fundholders, and on the pos sessors of places and pensions, to the relief of the agriculturist and the tradesman. He would support any property tax which had that object. As to the question of pledges, he conceived that parliament could never give a pledge that should be held as precluding them from the discharge of their first, their original duty, to consult the interests of the people in every case, with reference solely to the particular circumstances of the time. Sir John Newport observed, that the measure which the hon. and learned gentleman recommended, would no longer be a property tax. He thought it an extraordinary way of supporting a bill, to say, that in the committee three-fourths of it might be got rid of. The shorter and simpler method would be to reject the tax in the first instance; and the hon. and learned gentleman might then bring forward a bill founded on his principle. If he did he should have his support. Lord Nugent exposed the fallacy of the hon. and learned gentleman's assertion, that it was necessary to raise a certain sum for the expenses of the year. The noble lord said, his chief objection to the tax (laying aside for the moment his great objections to its principle and details) was, that it threw a great revenue into the hands of ministers, before they had pledged themselves to measures of retrenchment. Until that was done, he would oppose not only the property tax, but every modification of it, and every measure that might be suggested for the purpose of raising to interfere of late against meetings of the people, convened in order to petition against the property tax. They had done so, rightly judging that without such a tax their own salaries, in many instances unmerited, could not be continued at their present high rate; and therefore prudently thought it better that they themselves should be affected by a tax which took from them but five per cent, rather than be obliged to part with their lucrative salaries altogether. Among other instances which might be brought forward, he would notice the conduct pursued by the mayor of a very considerable town, which he need not mention. This gentleman had refused to give his sanction to a requisition duly signed for a meeting to petition against the income tax. Now, it so happened that a very near relation of this magistrate enjoyed a situation under government, the salary of which had been lately raised from 600 to 800l. per annum. Another mayor of a borough had in like manner refused to convene a meeting for a legal purpose, although every proper form had previously been gone through. And here he would take an opportunity to rebut the assertion of those who said, that the Crown, by the creation of new offices, did not acquire a new and dangerous source of influence over the liberties of the people. The maINCREASE OF TAX-COLLECTORS SA-gistrate to whom he last alluded had LARIES.] Mr. Brougham moved for an account of the number of additional collectors and assessors of taxes appointed in Scotland since the 25th of March 1815, and their salaries.-Ordered. money. Sir C. Burrell contended, that the pledge given that the tax should be a war tax only, ought to be considered as inviolable. The petitions were ordered to lie on the table. Mr Bennet moved for an account of the increase of the salaries of the commissioners of taxes since the 25th of March 1815; also, an account of the increase of the salaries of the post-office, and of any new offices appointed since the 1st of January 1815.-Ordered. Mr. Lambton moved for an account of the increase of the salaries of the Auditors of the Excise since the 25th of March 1815. Mr. Brougham expressed his hopes that a return of nihil would be made to some of these expenses which were suspected to have been increased. Such a return would prove a most refreshing sight to the country, oppressed as it was with burthens. He was the more anxious for the motion of his hon. friend, because many of those who were interested in the continuance of the most odious taxes, had thought proper three sons in the navy, and one in the victualling department. It should be remarked that magistrates, such as he had mentioned, did not merely do individual injury to the cause which they opposed,. but that from their influence as heads of corporations, and of the respective bodies to which they belonged, they must possess considerable power of determining many, contrary to what they really thought and felt. He could mention another case of similar interference in one of the most respectable cities of the west of England, and many others also, but they were too well known to require him to dwell longer on the subject. He would not, however, omit to put in his most solemn protest against any right which a mayor, or other head of a corporation might assume, of refusing to comply with a requisition duly signed for a lawful purpose. The instances which he had mentioned, though but a few selected out of many, would serve to show what means were employed to smother the voice of the country. Mr. Arbuthnot, in answer to what had been observed by the hon. and learned gentleman who spoke last, could sincerely declare, that so far as his information extended, no influence whatever had been exercised by his majesty's government to prevent the people from meeting to express their opinion on the subject of the property tax. Mr. Brougham, in explanation, said, that he had not charged the Treasury with direct interference on these occasions, but he entertained little doubt that the representatives of the boroughs to which these magistrates belonged, would, when an opportunity offered, mention the names of these gentlemen as highly loyal men, fit to fill offices which it might be convenient for ministers to present them with [a laugh]. Mr. Ponsonby did not think that ministers had been charged with direct interference, but he conceived their conduct in that House respecting the property tax, was a pretty clear intimation to their agents abroad, how they would wish them to act. Lord Milton observed, that persons who were looking to the government for patronage understood these matters very well, without having received any special intimation. Individuals would say when applications were made to them for support at elections, "I have such and such sons in the army, and therefore I cannot support such a candidate." Mr. Arbuthnot begged to state most positively, that in no way whatever had government authorized any persons to prevent petitions from being sent to that House. It could not be supposed that they should wish to stifle objections in any part of the country; but if individuals took upon themselves to interfere, ministers should not be made responsible for their conduct. Lord Binning said, that the hon. and learned gentleman had commenced his attack on the government, but it appeared that his battery was now changed. If certain mayors, in certain corporations, who were under obligations to government, had endeavoured to stifle petitions, or to make the petitioners approve of the tax, ministers ought not to be accountable for those measures. Mr. Brougham begged to explain the charge brought against him by the noble lord, the new chancellor of the exchequer. He had not changed his battery; he had always said his complaint was against those mayors whose conduct was influenced by favours already received, and the expectation of further advantages. Lord Binning repeated that, at the close of his speech the hon. and learned gen tleman did make the charge on his majesty's government. Sir M. W. Ridley was sure that his hon. and learned friend never made such a charge, but had stated, that the influence of ministers in the excise, customs, and other departments, had produced a very decisive effect in preventing these petitions from being brought forward. The numerous petitions then upon the table showed that they had not succeeded; but it could not be doubted that the patronage of government had influenced the conduct of individuals in particular places. Sir George Warrender knew that a very great difference of opinion existed in many parts of the country respecting this mea sure; but he could confidently state, that in his neighbourhood the plan of finance of his right hon. friend was particularly approved, because the agricultural distress would be relieved by upholding the public credit of the country by means of this tax. From all he had heard, he could not forbear to observe, that if charges of this nature were to be repeated, it would be a very pretty sort of war. The grossest misrepresentations had been circulated in the country respecting this tax. He had himself read hand-bills, that it was intended to lay the tax on servants, and to deduct it from the wages of artisans. These statements could be made for no other purpose than to excite public clamour. If ministers chose to recriminate, and say that gentlemen on the other side had made representations which the lower orders did not understand, there would be no end to this kind of war. Sir R. Fergusson said, it might be very possible that many friends of the hon. baronet approved of this tax; but with respect to the particular part of the country from which he came, it had been always distinguished by a most tenacious adherence to every measure of every administration. Lord Binning would venture only to remind the hon. general, that there was at least one administration to which they were not attached: he meant that admi nistration to which the hon. general himself had belonged. Sir R. Fergusson said, their continuance تو in office had been so short, that the people had not time to form an attachment to them. Sir George Warrender repeated, that notwithstanding the weight and influence which the hon. and learned member seemed to have with some gentlemen opposite, various districts had positively declared, that they approved of the plan of finance of his right hon. friend. Mr. Bennet observed, that with respect to his hon. and learned friend, he ought to have the greatest weight on that side of the House, because he always stood forward in defence of the rights and liberties of the people. Mr. Thompson hoped, that whatever might have been the understanding between government and certain individuals, the people would continue to meet and express their opinions without the control of any mayor or constable whatever. The motion was then agreed to. IRISH FARMS RECOVERY BILL.] Sir John Newport rose, in pursuance of his notice, to move for leave to bring in a bill to obviate certain difficulties to which landlords and tenants in Ireland were liable. The object he had in view was to assimilate the law of Ireland to that of England, in so far as, whenever a tenant should abscond, and not leave sufficient property on the premises, the landlord might not be obliged to have recourse to the circuitous mode of ejectment, but avail himself of that summary process which was used in England. He also wished to secure tenants against the evils to which in Ireland they were peculiarly liable; he meant, where the mesne tenant received rent of the paravail tenant, and did not pay the paramount landlord, whereby the property of the paravail tenant had been frequently distrained. The third object was, to enable the landlord to recover possession when half a year's rent should be in arrear, and there was no sufficient distress upon the premises. This was the law of England; but, in copying the words of the statute, a mistake had been made, and, instead of "half a year's rent," the words "more than half a year's rent" had been introduced into the Irish act, so that the landlord was obliged to suffer a whole year's rent to be in arrear, as rents in Ireland -were generally received half-yearly. The last object was, that where tenants overheld, after having given notice to quit, (VOL. XXXII.) they should be bound to pay double rent. Having stated these objects, he should reserve himself for a more particular detail of the provisions of his bill, if the House should permit him to bring it in. The right hon. baronet then moved, "That leave be given to bring in a bill tó amend the law of Ireland, respecting the recovery of farms, from absconding and defaulting tenants, and for the protection of the tenant from undue distress." After a few words from Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald, and colonel Vereker, leave was given to bring in the bill. HOUSE OF LORDS. Friday, March 1. CIVIL LIST.] The Marquis of Lans downe, before the House proceeded to the order of the day, was desirous of taking that opportunity of calling their lordships' attention to a matter in which, their own dignity, as well as the respect due to a legislative enactment, were very much concerned: and, as a foundation for what he was about to say, he proposed that the clerk should read the first clause of the act of the 55th Geo. 3d, cap. 15. [The clerk accordingly read the clause, in which certain returns respecting the amount of excess on the civil list were ordered to be made regularly to parliament in every year, on the 28th of February at the latest.] The noble marquis called the attention of the House to this, in order to obtain from the noble earl opposite some explanation why, if there was any such excess on the civil list, the returns had not been made to their lordships, pursuant to the act. The Earl of Liverpool said, there was no intentional negligence. The delay, he presumed, had been occasioned by some unavoidable causes; but the accounts, he could undertake to state, were in forwardness, and would soon be presented. The Marquis of Lansdowne said, he trusted the noble earl would take care that the accounts should be soon presented, and also come prepared to state what were the unavoidable causes which had prevented the returns from being made at the regular periods. At the same time he could not help observing, that it would have been much more proper, and more consistent with the respect due to parliament, if the noble earl, finding that the papers could not be presented within the regular time, had brought down à (3 Ú) |