or to make any remission with respect to sugar produced in our own colonies. After full deliberation he had come to the conclusion, that the tax which he had now proposed, would be the most effectual and unexceptionable measure that could be resorted to; and that the humbler classes especially, would regard the adoption of it by Parliament as a gratifying proof that those who moved in the higher walks of society, were prepared, at this crisis of great commercial and financial difficulty, to take upon themselves their full share of the charge necessarily incurred, in order to meet the exigencies of the country. He trusted that by the end of three years, his anticipation of relieving trade and manufactures would be realised, and that he should then be enabled to dispense with the tax.

The financial measures of the Government, especially the Income-tax, met with early demonstrations of strenuous resistance on the part of the Opposition in the House of Commons. Lord John Russell announced, before going into Committee on the subject, that he should oppose the Income-tax Bill at every stage, on the resolutions, on the report, the first reading, the second reading, and the third reading. He was vigorously seconded by several Members of the Liberal party, Mr. Charles Wood, Mr. Hawes, Sir George Grey, Mr. Charles Buller and others, who attacked the measure on various grounds; some objecting to an Income-tax in toto as unjust in principle, or only to be adopted in a crisis of national danger and time of war; others denying the necessity of the imposition at the present time, and viewing it only as the means

of upholding the monopolies of corn and sugar. Some Members, as Mr.W. Williams and Mr. Poulett Scrope, advocated a Property-tax in preference to an Income-tax. The leading Members of the Whig party strongly argued, that there was no greater deficiency than might be well made up by Mr. Baring's propositions of last year, and Lord John Russell's fixed duty

on corn.

It was urged also, that it would have been preferable to revive some of the 25,000,0007. of taxes repealed since the war. It was admitted that a revision of the Tariff was a beneficial measure, but much fault was found with the principle on which that proposed by the present Government was constructed. There were some exceptions, however, to the general disapprobation on the Liberal side of the House.

Mr. S. O'Brien declared that he felt in some difficulty how to vote. He had formerly heard many great liberal authorities, Sir H. Parnell and others, speak in praise of direct taxation, but now that it was proposed they objected to it. He thought it should only be adopted in periods of great emergency, but such he considered the present to be. He could not, from regard to the interests of our Colonies in competition with slavecountries, consent to an alteration of the duties on sugar. And though many had suggested the revival of some of the repealed taxes, no one had put his finger on the particular tax to be adopted. Under these circumstances he could not but think that Sir Robert Peel, in calling on those who had the best means of paying, had proposed the measure which was least open to objection.

Mr. Roebuck offered his meed of praise to Sir Robert Peel for proposing a measure, plain, honest, straightforward, easy of comprehension, and which the country understood to mean this: "If you are determined to raise a gross revenue, the people shall know distinctly and directly in what manner they are to contribute it." He thought it did not lie in the mouths of those who supported the late Government to find fault with the present measure. "The revenue was deficient, and no complaint against the right honourable Baronet for that deficiency could be justified from either side of the House. The deficiency had been created not by this or that side of the House, but by both sides of the House. It was not a Whig or a Tory deficiency, it was a deficiency created by the House of Commons itself. Honourable gentlemen opposite might talk of the wars in Syria and elsewhere; but they were as much the wars of one side as the other, for both sides had concurred in the increased expenditure of the country; in fact, all were intent upon spending, and never thought of saving."

He thanked Sir Robert Peel for no longer "botching" the finances of the country. He could not comprehend Mr. Charles Buller's objection to direct taxation:"Why, if 20,000,000l. were to be paid, could it be important to the commerce of the country whether it were paid directly by the people, or raised by indirect taxation on commodities? But,' said his honourable and learned friend,' there is danger in letting the people know how much they pay.' What! was a Representative of the People -sitting on the Liberal side of the Commons House of Parliament

one prepared to have faith in the powers of the people to govern themselves was his honourable and learned Friend to create himself now into a sort of high priest in financial affairs, to keep the good things in his own hands, and to say to the people, Be blind, but have faith! Was that the course to be pursued in these times?-No. He again thanked the right honourable Baronet for coming forward to let the people see and know what they had to pay."

Sir Robert Peel complained of the party spirit evinced in the attacks upon his measures by the late Chancellor of the Exchequer and others. He asked, if the Income-tax were so unjust and intolerable, why was it so calmly received on the first night of its proposition? He was surprised to hear it so warmly denounced by the Whig leaders, when the opinions of their most eminent financiers had been recorded in favour of such a tax. He passed in review the chief objections to his measure. As to the charge that the measure was ill-timed, it was a mere delusion: he did not propose it simply on account of the war in Affghanistan or the war in China, but on account of the increased expenditure from whatever cause. The Budget of last year, it was pretended, would supersede the necessity of his measure: Mr. Baring reckoned upon receiving 700,000l. additional from the sugar duties: that amount had unexpectedly been realized, without diminishing the deficiency. The produce of the corn-duty it was impossible to estimate. With respect to timber, he admitted that more revenue would have accrued under Mr. Baring's plan; but no reduction of duty would have a

greater effect in encouraging the industry of the country than that which he proposed on timber: in proof of which, he cited the testimony of Mr. Deacon Hume, who said that we only want timber added to our coal and iron to make our case complete; and of Mr Mitchell, who contrasted the superior cottages of Norway with those of the population of our fisheries. Sir Robert denied that his Incometax was proposed in a gloomy view of the national resources: he always said that they were not exhausted, and that they only required time to revive; but the failure of Mr. Baring's additional 5 per cent. on the Customs and Excise justified the inference that it would not be wise to lay any further duties of that kind. He certainly thought a Property-tax preferable to re-imposing burthens which had been removed; since they would incur a heavy expense in the collection, and disturb the trade and manufactures of the country. He agreed with Mr. Charles Buller, that indirect taxation is less sensibly felt in its operation; but he was surprised to hear that sort of argument from the Opposition side of the House. As to the shock to public credit, which it was said his measure would create, look to the index, the state of the Funds. If a tax on income would drive people abroad, did not indirect taxation, by increasing the cost of living, notoriously do the very same thing? The travellers thus escaped the impost of indirect taxation on consumption; but his tax, levied on income, would prevent those who travel abroad for pleasure from evading their due share of the burthen. And would it not thus conduce to the return of absentees?

Against the proposition to throw the burthen on land alone, he quoted the authority of Lord Althorp. It was said that an incometax would press unequally; but what tax did otherwise? did the Beer-tax, the House- tax, the Window-tax or Assessed Taxes? Would his opponents exempt the income of 10,000l. a-year derived from trade or a profession, and come upon the half-pay officer's small fixed income-exempt the rich fundholder, and charge the widow with a life annuity? How would they distinguish between a feesimple and a life-interest in land? If he were called upon to make calculations in every case, he had better abandon the measure. He could not understand the terrible inquisition into men's affairs; nor could he believe that for 2/ 18s. 4d. in every 100l. there would be to the people of this country so multiplied a temptation to perjury.

Lord John Russell agreed that Sir Robert Peel had better abandon his Income-tax than undertake all the calculations demanded of him to make it press equally. "It must be taken as it stood, and dealt with accordingly. But taking it as it stood, it had every kind of inequality attaching to it. These inequalities they could not remedy. Such inequalities were only tolerable in times of extreme danger and peril to the country; but for no such danger as now existed, and for no such necessity as now existed, ought they to establish by law this inequality in taxation."

With respect to the Whig authorities quoted by Sir Robert Peel in favour of the tax, both the Marquess of Lansdowne and Lord Grenville, who proposed it, had declared that it would be intolerable except in time of war. It was

justified in 1798 by the mutiny at the Nore, rebellion in Ireland, and anarchy in France: in 1806 by the menacing arrogance of Napoleon, who had just put his foot on Austria. To compare the wars in Affghanistan and China with such emergencies was ridiculous. Granting a deficiency of 2,500,000l. for three or four years to come, it did not justify such a tax, for it might be made good out of taxes which had been given up: the taxes on carriages and riding-horses alone produced 700,000l. To parry Mr. Roebuck's accusations that the Whigs courted popularity, he appealed to their conduct on Roman Catholic Emancipation, and on the Poor-law, and he vindicated their right to oppose measures of which they foresaw the evil consequences to their constituents.

After a lengthened discussion had taken place an anxious desire was manifested on the part of some Members most warmly opposed to the Government to adjourn the decision of the House on Sir Robert Peel's resolution, with a view to pospone its confirmation till after the Easter recess, which was now near approaching. Several of the leading Whig Members, among whom were Mr. V. Smith and Lord Howick, declared their intention of supporting Sir Robert Peel against the abuse of the power of moving adjournments which was resorted to. However, the minority, though small, were determined not to yield, and after three several motions by Mr. Cobden, Mr. H. Berkley, and Mr. Bernal, "That the Chairman do report progress," on which the House divided, and negatived them by large majorities-Sir Robert Peel, though protesting against the

course pursued, was compelled to acquiesce, and the further consideration of the measure was deferred to the 4th of April.

Immediately after the Easter recess the question of the Income-tax was resumed. It seemed to have been the expectation of its opponents that the interval would have afforded time to organize such a degree of popular opposition to the bill as would have enabled them to make a more effectual stand against the Government upon the question. In this expectation, however, they were disappointed; for though the tax was unquestionably regarded in many quarters with dislike, yet the efforts that were made failed to rouse the feelings of the people generally against it, and when the House re-assembled, little or no excitement respecting it prevailed. The Opposition party, however, returned vigorously to the charge, Mr. Blewitt leading the way by an amendment which he proposed on the motion to go into Committee, to the effect that the Income-tax was unnecessary, and the amount of taxes proposed to be raised greater than the necessities of the public service required, and that the House would not resolve itself into committee until they had examined what amount of existing taxes they would redeem or repeal. The amendment was seconded by Mr. Gibson. Mr. T. Duncombe also supported the motion. Mr. E. Ellice, however, expressed his intention of supporting the Government. Sir Robert Peel taunted his opponents with the total failure of the explosion of public indignation with which he had been threatened before Easter. He disclaimed all intention of postponing the Tariff as had been imputed to him. Finally,

Mr. Blewitt withdrew his amendment, and the House went into Committee.

The first resolution to impose a tax of 7d. in the 17. upon all in comes except the incomes of occu piers of land, was put and carried without discussion.

On the second resolution, imposing a tax on the occupation of land, calculated at the rate of 34d. in the pound on the yearly value being read, the debate on the general question was resumed. The arguments before urged were repeated by several Members. Lord John Russell pointed out the operation the tax might have in inducing landlords to split their farms, so as to make the rental of each below the amount liable to the tax. He gave notice, that on the report of the resolutions, he should move the following as an amendment :

"That it has been stated to this House on official authority, that the deficiency of income to meet the expenditure of the country, may be estimated, for the years ending the 5th day of April 1842, at 2,350,000l., and on the 5th day of April 1843, at 2,569,000l. That this House is fully sensible of the evil of a continued inadequacy of the public income to meet the public charges, and will take effectual measures for averting the same in future years. That, by a judicious alteration of the duties on corn, by a reduction of the prohibitory duty on foreign sugar, and an adjustment of the duties on timber and coffee, the advantage of a moderate price to the community may be combined with an increased revenue to the state. That in addition to those main articles of general consumption, the interests of trade

will be promoted by the repeal or reduction of various prohibitory and differential duties, and that extended commerce will improve the revenue, while it gives employment to industry. That the amount of taxes taken off or reduced from the termination of the last war to the end of the year 1836, exclusive of the tax on income, may be stated in round numbers at 23,873,000l. That the Income-tax having been first imposed in a period of extreme emergency, and during a most perilous war, was repealed on the re-establishment of peace; and having been again imposed on the renewal of war, was again repealed in 1816, on the termination of hostilities. That, considering the various means of supplying the present deficiency, without enhancing the price of the necessaries of life or embarrassing trade, it is the opinion of this House that the renewal of a tax inquisitorial in its character, unequal in its pressure, and which has hitherto been considered as the financial reserve of the nation in time of war, is not called for by public necessity, and is therefore not advisable.”

The second resolution was then put and agreed to, as well as the third, equalizing certain stamp duties in Ireland with those in England, and the report was ordered to be brought up.

On the 8th of April Lord John Russell's Amendment came on for discussion. He prefaced it by a speech of considerable length which he commenced by charging the Government with taking too gloomy a view of affairs, comparing the present aspect of the finances with that when the income-tax was formerly proposed:-" For several years you had been engaged