cumulation of our funded debt, and the ruin of our public credit. The prefent furpaffed the proudeft period of British hiftory. He bestowed the highest praises on our armies and navies, and particularly the fecrecy and vigilance difplayed in our naval department, and a skilful difpofition of our maritime force. But the great and permanent fource, he faid, of our glory, was thofe pecuniary refources, and the proper means of calling them forth, which had enabled us to persevere in the conteft, to weary out adverfe accidents, to strike at length a moft terrible blow, and to bring about the greatest events. When the interests of themselves and their pofte rity, of England, and alfo of all other nations, were at ftake, he was confident, that after the difficulties they had already encountered, they would not fhrink from the prefent arduous crifis, or refign thofe titles to pre-eminence, for which they had already been fo celebrated, and which were the pride and glory of all those who had the honour of calling themselves fubjects of Great Britain. On thefe grounds, therefore, he propofed a feries of refolutions, on the plan fubmitted to their confideration, which were agreed to. The refolutions were, "That it is the opinion of this committee, that fo much of an act made in the laft feffion of parliament, intituled "An act for granting to his majesty an aid and contribution, for the continuation of the war," as charges any perfon with an additional duty in proportion to the amount of the rates of duties to which, prior to the date of the fifth day of April, 1798, fuch perfon was affelfed, according to any afVOL. XLI. feffment made in purfuance of any act of parliament in force, at the time of pafling the faid act of the laft feffion, be repealed. "Refolved, that it is the opinion of this committee, that towards raifing the fupply granted to his majefty, there be charged annually, during a term to be limitted, the feveral rates and duties following, upon all income arifing from property in Great-Britain, belonging to any of his majefty's fubjećìs, although not refident in Great Britain, and of every body politic or corporate, or company, fociety, or fraternity of perfons, whether corporate or not corporate, in Great Britain, whether fuch income shall arife from lands, tenements, or hereditaments, wherefoever the fame fhall be fituated, in Great Britain or elsewhere, or from any profeffion, office, employment, trade, or vocation. It has already been noticed that no income was to be burthened with any tax, if it did not exceed fixty pounds. If it amounted to 100. but did not exceed 1057. it was charged with a duty of one-fortieth part. Intermediate incomes were charged in fimilar ratios. Mr. Tierney declared himself an opponent to the financial measure propofed, chiefly on the ground of its being unequal. The tax was faid, by its mover, to fall nearly equally on all forts of property. That was not true. It did not fall on the property of a certain defcription of ftockholders, or what might be called the leading London gentlemen: not the mals of stockholders, but thofe whom the chancellor of the exchequer always chofe to favour; the monied men of the city. Thefe gentlemen could pay off any [N] by tax without burthening themselves. Indeed, the greater the taxes were, the richer they became, and they never fucceeded better than when the minifter fucceeded in taxes. There was, among other confiderations urged by Mr. Tierney, on which merits particular and profound attention. Under the prefent plan, the whole property of England would foon fhift hands: which would make a great difference in the ftate of the country. For, faid Mr. Tierney, if the rich man in the city buys the fmall eftates of a number of gentlemen, which will be one of the operations of this plan, although the eftate will be the fame, and the revenue the fame, yet the condition of whole diftricts of inhabitants, will be materially altered. When a gentleman of small fortune fells his eftate, let him get ever fo much for it, there are evils arifing to his family from that fale, which can never be avoided, nor adequately defcribed. But not only the condition of the farmer, Mr. Tierney might have added, by fuch transferences, would be altered, but that alfo of the farmers and others. Between old families and their tenants, there arifes a mutual fympathy: nor does the offer of a higher rent always induce the farmer to banish the latter from the foil cultivated by his forefathers. The mere monied man, for the most part, measuring all things by money, fcruples not to fend them packing, whenever another monied man of fers a higher rent, with as much fang froid as a London honfe-builder lets a row of houses. If one rich farmer offer to rent the whole eftate, the abfentee, unrestrained by any fympathy, or recollection, (as was commonly the cafe with great landed abfentees, from Ireland,) accepts the offer. Thus farm is added to farm. The middling clafs of farmers, the actual cultivators of the foil, is gradually extinguished, and the nation divided into mafters and fervants, much in the fame manner as Jamaica planters. Such, indeed, is the operation of all great capitals of credit: which enable the capitalift, by means of banks, to multiply the natural power of his ftock even three or four fold; to grafp, monopolize, and controul every thing; moderate farms and farmers, as well as other articles, and other induftrious individuals, and, in a word, to turn the world upfide down. Large capitals and credits cannot certainly be confidered as evils in themselves, but as national advantages; though it must be allowed, that they arife, in many inftances, from the diftrefs as well as the profperity of the country. That they have a tendency to monopolization, and to form a kind of bourgeois and upftart ariftocracy, with all the faults of the former, without any of its virtues, is alfo undeniable. But, another truth, equally certain, and equally to be deplored, is, that it would be difficult for the legiflature to check the evils arifing out of immenfe capitals and credits, without allo checking a fpirit of industry and enterprize. Yet the evils arifing from an immoderate extenfion of farms are so obvious and rapidly increafing, that fome measures may be expected for reftraining it, and opening, by the improvement of natural opportunities, the earth to the cultivation of men, in men, not as hirelings to others, but come-tax was taken into confideraon their own account.* Before the tion. report of the committee-tax was taken into confideration, the chancellor of the exchequer, on the tenth of December, informed the houfe, refolved into a committee of ways and means, that he had bargained for the limited fum of three millions, as a loan, and referved the remainder till after Christmas. The 3 per cent. confols were at 52: the reduced at 51. For every 100%. in money, there was to be given 52 confols, and a proportion of feven-eighths of a hundred pounds the reduced, amounting to 877. 9s. 6d. the value of which, in money, was 467. 12s. 34d. The payments were to be made before the month of February, in four inftalments. And, as the public fervice did not require prompt pay ment, there would be no difcount. In lieu of the difcount, an allow ance was to be made, as a bonus to the contractor, of 13s. 4d. The whole fum then given for every 1001. lent to government 991.15s.5 d. Since that period stocks had rifen, and the premium on the loan was 2 per cent. Thus it would appear, that the reafons for poftponing the whole of the loan, at the prefent period, were founded in prudence. He then moved, that the fum of three millions be railed, by way of annuities, which was agreed to. On the fourteenth of December, the report of the in Sir J. Sinclair thought that, if fuch extraordinary contributions were to be levied, there ought to be half per cent. on capital, and only five per cent. on income, above 2007 He urged, against the income-tax propofed, three radical objections; namely, that it would promote emigration, diminish the produce of the old taxes, and raife the price of all! the neceffaries of life. Among a variety of ftrictures on the bill before the houfe, made by this speaker, the following arrested, in a particular manner, our attention: "For merly our principal taxes, arifing from confumption, and not extending to many of the real comforts and neceffaries of life, were, in a manner, voluntary. The exchequer was enriched; the people were happy; and the profufion of government was happily checked, by the conviction that, if the taxes were carried beyond a certain length, the produce, inftead of increafing, would be diminished. But if this bill pafs, the whole property of the country will, in future, he at the mercy of the minifter. For though he now, very moderately, requires only a tenth part of our income, he establishes a principle, that the government of this coun try is entitled to demand a certain part of the income of each individual, and is alfo entitled to enforce that compulfive requifition, * Were it certain (which is controverted) that large capitals and large farms are the beft means of raising the greatest quantity of cattle, grain, or other physical produce, at the least expenfe; there is in political economy a previous queftion. Is the advancement of agriculture itfelf, fo defined, to be preferred to population, health, virtue, contentment, general independence, and an immenfe reduction of the poors rates? See Mr. Newte, of Tiverton's, Tour in England and Scotland, and "An Effay on the Right of Property in Land." Walters. Both thefe publications have been tranflated into the French language, and been received with the highest approbation by the French economists. [N2] by by the stricteft, and harfheft regula tions." Mr. Simeon faid, as the honourable baronet had not fhewn, that the price of labour would be affected, he might allay his fears refpecting the emigration of the laborious clafs. And, for his own part, he had no apprehenfion that perfons of 2001. would emigrate. The country, he faid, was now better able to pay the tax than it had been. So rapid had been the increase of our commerce, that we had not fhipping enough to do the bufinefs. Mr. M. A. Taylor objected to the bill, that it difclofed property, and, what was worse, invaded it, (though, by the genius of the conftitution, it was held facred) to its inequality, and to its operation, as a check on the vigour and energy of the manufacturer and merchant. It hurt not the rich man; but hundreds of industrious people, employed by that fplendour from which he would now be obliged to retire. He would prefer a tax that fhould be borne, generally by all claffes of people in the community. Mr. Taylor, though widely differing from Mr. Paine, in both religion and politics, quoted what follows, from his publication, of which he was reminded by the bill before them, "Governmer always take to themselves, all the produce of the industry of the people, under the head of government." The folicitor-general faid, that when it was propofed to repeal the affeffed tax bill, and to fubftitute this mode of collection, the principle was preferved, though the means were altered: that principle, approved by the houfe, and fanctioned by experience, he was of opinion, the houfe would not now controvert. He was furprised to find that fir J. S. was an advocate for taxing capital, because it feemed to be an opinion almoft univerfally agreed to, that income, and not capital, was the proper object of taxation. It was on this principle that most of our taxes were founded. What were the land-tax, the country rates, the rates for building bridges, and fo on, but taxes on income. That principle was eutirely affented to by Sir W. Young, who obferved, that the natural confequence of paffing the funding fyftem to an extreme would be, to raise the intereft of money to a degree that would be extremely dangerous; becaufe, if men could get an extravagant intereft for money, without expofing it to the risks of commerce, they would be much inclined to lay out their money at intereft, and thus all commercial enterprize would be checked. As to disclosure of property, he did not confider it as any mighty hardship. In the Weft Indies, and in many parts of America, a man could not have a bond or note, without its being registered, and confequently, to a certain degree, difclofing his property: yet he did not know that it ever was confidered as an inconvenience, or had ever produced any prejudicial effects. Sir Francis Baring thought the prefent measure as liable to evafion, and even more fo than that of last year. In commerce, the bill would be liable to evasions and frauds without end. On the whole, he difliked the measure, and augured ill of its fuccefs. Mr. William Smith admitted, that the principle of the bill was the fame as that of the assessed taxes last year, as far as it went to raise a certain portion of the fupplies within the the year. As it related, however, to the criterion, by which the means of contributing were to be afcertained, it differed widely. A man might think himself able to spend a certain fum of money, but his expenditure was at his option. His income, however, could not be faid to be a voluntary criterion : over this he had no control. It had been laid by an honourable gentleman, (Mr. Ellifon) that they fhould all put a hand to the plough and free the bill from all its inconveniences. But he would ask that honourable gentleman whether, if he thought the bill unconstitutional, unjuft, oppreffive, and cruel; he might alfo add, fraudulent-would he then infift on forcing it on the houle and the nation? Such was his opinion of the bill; he would not, therefore, put his hand to the plough, On the prefent fubject, Mr. Smith quoted Dr. Adam Smith, whofe authority would have more weight than his fpeeches Capitation taxes, if it is attempt ed to proportion them to the fortune or revenue of each contribu tor, become altogether arbitrary. The state of a man's fortune varies from day to day, and without an inquifition more intolerable than any tax, and renewed at least once in every year, can only be guelled at; his affeffments muft, therefore, in most cafes, depend upon the good or bad humour of his affeffors, and therefore be altogether arbitrary and uncertain. Mr. Pitt defended the bill. It was fome fatisfaction to him, that he had no reafon to think that any gentleman objected to the principle of the bill, but the hononrable baronet who opened the debate: if there were any points in it really objectiona a ble, they might be altered in the committee. On the whole, the measure propofed, affected in juft and equal manner, the com-. merce of the country, all proprietors of land, all on whom the commerce and economy of the country depended, all thofe through whom the administration of juftice took place, all on whom the protection of the poor was incumbent, all who formed the great and important links in the chain of fociety. The house then divided on the reconfi deration of the bill. For it, 133; against it, 25. On this reconfideration, which took place, in a committee of the houfe, on the seventeenth of December, a motion was made for poftponing the preamble of the bill. This preamble stated, that under the affeffed taxes bill, people were not taxed in proportion to their income, and that frauds and evafions had been pràctifed with fuccefs. Mr. Tierney defired to know what reafon there was to fuppofe, that under the affeffed taxes, people were not affeffed in proportion to their income, and that frauds and evafions had been practiced with fuccefs. He thought the preamble a libel on the people of England. A debate of confiderable length enfued: but the queftion, for the reading of the preamble was carried in the affirmative. After several amendments, in feveral commit→ tees, the chancellor of the exchequer moved, December 31, that the income-bill fhould be read a third time. Mr. Nicholls obferved, that if it was fair that the scale fhould rife from 1001. a year, to 2007. it was equally fair that it fhould rife from 2001. upwards.Mr. Abbot faid, that it feemed [N 3] now |