Commons Sitting of 12 May 1806

MINUTES.
Mr. Henry Martin took the oaths and his seat for Kinsale.—On the motion of sir Charles Price, it was ordered, 1. That there be laid before this house, an account of the number and tonnage of all ships and vessels built in Great Britain, in the several years from 1790 to 1804; distinguishing each year, and the ports or places where they were respectively built.—2. That there be laid before this house, an account of the number and tonnage of British-built ships in the year 1792; distinguishing the ports to which they belonged.—3. That there be laid before this house, an account of the number and tonnage of prize ships which had been made free and registered from the 5th of January, 1790, to the 5th of January, 1793, inclusive.—4. That there be laid before this house, and account of the number and tonnage of British-built ships in the year 1805; distinguishing the ports to which they belonged.—5. That there be laid before this house, an account of the number and tonnage of prize ships which had been made free and registered from the 5th of January, 1806, inclusive.—Mr. Matthews, in pursuance of a notice he had given for an amendment in the general Turnpike act, stated, that in consequence of that part of the law which imposed a penalty of 5l. on all persons driving waggons on turnpike roads, with wheels of less than six inches thickness, and with less than four horses, there were numerous complaints made of the decisions of magistrates. What he had to propose was, to give the parties an appeal from the decision of the magistrates to the court of quarter sessions, and to allow half of the penalty to be paid to the informer. He then moved for leave to bring in a bill to that effect, which was agreed to.—Mr. Meheux, from the office of the Commissioners for the Affairs of India, presented at the bar of the house, "Extracts of Letters, &c. received from the presidency of Bombay, relative to the sum of Bombay Rupees 31,25,944 inserted in the account of their Disbursements, for the year ending the 30th of April, 1803, and said to be money lent to the Gulcowar." Ordered to lie upon the table and to be printed.—Mr. Secretary at War, presented to the house (according to order) a bill for continuing an act, made in this session of
102
parliament, intituled, "An act for punishing Mutiny and Desertion, and for the better payment of the army and their quarters, within the United Kingdom, and the islands of Jersey, Guernsey, Alderney, Sark, and Man;" and the same was received, and read the first time, and ordered to be read a second time to-morrow.—Mr. Parnell presented to the house (according to order) a bill to provide for the payment at the Bank of Ireland, of the interest on certain debentures now payable at the Exchequer of Ireland, and also for altering the days of payment of the interest or dividends on certain annuities in Ireland; and the same was received and read the first time, and ordered to be read a second time to-morrow.—The Marquis of Douglas moved, 1. That there be laid before this house, "an Account of all balances of public money in the hands of the receiver general of the land tax, &c. in Scotland, on the 5th day of April and 5th day of October, 1798, and on every 5th day of April and 5th day of October of every subsequent year, with a state of the manner in which these balances were employed by the receiver general, and a state of the remittances and payments made to account, or in full of these balances.—2. That there be laid before this house, an account of all balances of public money in the hands of the receiver general of the customs in Scotland on the 5th day of April and 5th day of October, 1798, and on every 5th day of April and 5th day of October of every subsequent year, with a state of the manner in which these balances were employed by the receiver general, and a state of the remittances and payments made to account, or in full of these balances.—3. That there he laid before this house, an account of all balances of public money in the hands of the cashier of excise in Scotland on the 5th day of April and 5th day of October, 1798, and on every 5th day of April and 5th day of October of every subsequent year; with a state of the manner in which these balances were employed by the cashier of excise, and a state of the remittances and payments made to account, or in full of these balances.—4. That there be laid before this house an account of all sums recovered in Scotland, either in the court of exchequer, or in the courts of justices of the peace, from any person or persons convicted in any of the said courts of offences against the acts of parliament, or any of them relative to the customs, excise, or stamp duties; as also of the amount of all sums received by com-

103
pounding with persons charged with such offences; together with the names and additions of the persons from whom such sums have been recovered, with the date of recovering the same; and also; an account shewing what part of these sums so recovered have been accounted for in the exchequer, as his majesty's share of fines, forfeitures, and penalties, with the dates at which they were so accounted for; also shewing what part of the sums so recovered have been accounted for to the informer in whose name the said prosecutions proceeded, and what part of the said sums was applied in defraying the charges or expenses of such prosecutions, from the year ending 5th July, 1782, to the present time." Ordered.—Mr. Vansittart presented to the house, a paper, intituled, "Return to three orders of the house respectively, dated 11th March, 1806; for an account of all offices granted in reversion in England, wheresoever holden; specifying the nature of the office, the date of the grant, and the period for which the office has been. granted; a like account of all Offices granted in reversion in Scotland; and a like account of all offices granted in reversion in Ireland;" Ordered, That the Said return do lie upon the table; and be printed for the members of the house.—Ordered, That the order of the day, for the second reading, of the bill for the better regulation of the office of receiver general of the stamp duties in Great Britain, be now read: And the same being read; the said bill was read a second time, and Committed to a committee of the whole house, for to-morrow sevennight, the 20th day of this instant May. Ordered, that the said bill be printed.—The order of the day being read, for taking into further consideration the report from the committee of the whole house, to whom the bill to explain and render more effectual an act, passed in the 7th year of King William the Third for preventing charge and expense in elections of members to serve in parliament, was re-committed; Ordered, That the said report be taken into further consideration Upon Monday next.—The ingrossed bill for increasing the salaries of the Judge of the Court of Admiralty in Scotland, and of the Judges of the Commissary Court in Edinburgh, was (according to order) read the third time. Resolved, That the bill do pass. Ordered, That Mr. Alexander do carry the bill to the lords, and desire their concurrence.

AFFAIRS OF INDIA.
Sir Arthur Welles- leysaid, he wished to enquire of the hon. gent. (Mr. Paull), whether he meant to bring forward the charge against the marquis of Wellesley, respecting his transactions in Oude, this Week? The reason why he asked the question was, that it would be much more convenient for him to attend the discussion in the course of the ensuing Week; as particular business required his going for a few days into the country. His object, however, at present, was, pursuant to his notice, to move for the following papers, viz. that there be laid before this house 1. "A Copy of a Letter to the Court of Directors in the Judicial Department, dated 6th July 1802, from the Governor General in council, transmitting a Copy of the Answers to the Governor General's interrogatories sent by the several judicial officers and collectors throughout the provinces. 2. That there be laid before this house, extract of a general letter from the court of directors in the revenue and judicial department; dated 14th September 1803, paragraph 15, to the government of Bengal, signifying the court's approbation of the zeal which the governor general had manifested for the public interests, in proposing certain queries to the collectors and magistrates. 3. That there be laid before this house, extract of a letter from the court of directors in the public department, dated 26th March 1801, Paragraph 48, approving of the arrangements of the governor general in council for the regulation of the press. 4. That there be laid before this house, a copy of the minutes of the governor general lord Wellesley, dated 19th March 1801, and recorded in the secret and political department, for improving the governor general's office. 5. That there be laid before this house, extract of a separate letter from the governor general in Council to the court of directors dated. 31st of July 1801, paragraphs 28 to 40 inclusive, respecting the re-establishment of the town duties, and the improvement of the government customs; together With any reply from the court of directors to the same. 6. That there be laid before this house, extract of a letter in the revenue department from the Bengal government to the court of directors, dated 5th March 1800, paragraphs 14 to 20, inclusive, relative to the stamp duties, and to the establishment of other sources of revenue. 7. That there be laid before this house, extract of a letter from the Bengal government, in the revenue department to the court of

105
directors, dated 5th September 1800, relative to the abkaree or tax on spirituous liquors, and the court's reply to the same S. That there be laid before this house, extract of a letter from the court of directors to the Bengal government, dated 14th September 1803, paragraph 24, approving of the regulatipns for levying a duty on spirituous liquors distilled according to the European method. 9. That there be laid before this house extracts of letters from the Bengal government, in the public department, dated 31st July 1798, paragraph 35, and the 25th December 1798, paragraphs 128 to 134, to the court of directors relative to the revenues of. the post office, and the court's replies to the same. 10. That there be laid before this house, extract of such part of the proceedings of the Bengal Government, in the law department, dated 6th May 1800, as relate to the establishment of the police; together with such proceedings and resolutions of the government, in the judicial department (criminal branch) on the same subject, dated 15th May 1800;
and all such minutes of the governor general, and reports, as relate to the establishment of the police at Calcutta in the year 1800, under the improvements introduced by lord Wellesley. 11. That there be laid before this house, an account of the net revenues of the ceded provinces in Oude, after deducting expences of collection, and other contingent charges, since the conclusion of the Treaty of Lucknow in November 1801 to the latest period, shewing the amount of revenue applicable to the payment of the troops, after deducting all civil charges. 12. That there be laid before this house, a copy of the governor general's minute, in the political department, dated 12th April 1805, relative to Captain Sydenham's allowances." Ordered.
Mr. Paullsignified his readiness to concur in the suggestion of the hon. general and declared his intention to submit a motion to the house on the subject, if some satisfactory reason should not be given for the delay in the production of the Bhurtpore Papers.

PEACE IN INDIA
Mr. Johnstonesaid, he rose for the purpose of asking a question upon a subject which he considered to be of extreme public importance. He had heard that a dispatch had been received at the India House, stating that lord Lake had written letters to general Nicholson and general Jones, in one of which he ordered general Jones to withdraw his troops from the position they held, as a peace had been concluded with Scindia. He therefore wish-
106
ed to enquire whether that report were true? It appeared that the present administration had, on coming into office, approved of sir George Barlow as a fit person to administer the affairs of the company abroad; and certainly, if within three months his government had succeeded in giving peace to that country, it was highly creditable, and a good presage of what was in future to be expected from it.
Mr. Creeveyreplied, that an overland dispatch had certainly been received from Bombay, at the India house, stating not the actual conclusion of peace with Scindiah, but that such an event was probable, and describing the distresses of Holkar. If the hon. gent was desirous of learning the contents of the dispatch, he might have satisfied his wishes by applying in another quarter.

KING'S MESSAGE RESPECTING THE FAMILY OF LORD NELSON.
Lord Henry Pettyacquainted the houre, that he had a Message from his majesty to this house, signed by his majesty; and he presented the same to the house; and it was read by Mr. Speaker, and is as followeth, viz.
"George R.His Majesty having takers into his royal consideration the eminent and signal services performed by the late Vice Admiral Lord Viscount Nelson in the course of a long series of distinguished exploits, and particularly in the glorious and decisive victory of Trafalgar, in which he unfortunately fell; and being desirous to bestow on the family of the said Lord Viscount Nelson such considerable and lasting marks of his royal favour as may correspond with the sense he entertains of services so honourable to the British Navy, and so eminently beneficial to the interests of the nation; and: for this purpose, of granting to the Earl Nelson, and the heirs male of his body, and such other persons to whom the title of Earl Nelson may descend, pursuant to the limitations of the patent whereby the said dignity is granted, a nett annuity of five thousand pounds during their respective lives; and also, of granting a sum, not exceeding one hundred and twenty thousand pounds, as a further provision for the family of the said Lord Viscount Nelson, a part whereof it his majesty's intention should be appropriated to the purchase of a house and lands, to be annexed as above to the said dignity; re- commends it to his faithful commons to consider of a proper method of enabling his majesty to grant and settle such annu-

107
ity, and to make such further provision as aforesaid, in such manner as may be thought most effectual for the benefit of the family of the said lord viscount Nelson.—G. R."—Ordered, That this House will, to-morrow, resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, to take his Majesty's said most gracious Message into consideration

MESSRS CHALMERS AND COWIE'S PETITION.
Lord Henry Pettymoved the order of the day for the house to resolve itself into a Committee of Supply.
Mr. William Smiththen moved, that the petition of Messrs. Chalmers and Cowie, claiming a compensation for the loss they had sustained in the importation of Swedish herrings, be referred to the said committee.
Mr. Huskissonthought the house ought to pause, before they admitted an uninvestigated claim to the amount of 35,000l. The whole of this case had been diligently examined by the late board of treasury, and his it. hon. friend (Mr. Pitt), now no more, after. taking great pains in the investigation, did not think himself justified in admitting the claim. He therefore hoped the hon. member would postpone submitting it to a committee of supply, in order to afford an opportunity for further examination. He said, that since he came into the house this day, he had put a copy of the minute of the board of treasury into the hands of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and he thought he should have time to consider of it before the motion was brought forward.
Mr. William Smithsaid, that he meant to have stated the whole of the case before he made his motion in the committee. He had already put off this business three times, One of which was for the accommodation of hon. gent. himself. As to the paper which the hon. gent, put into the hands of one of the ministers, it consisted of only about twelve lines, and did not require much deliberation. However, if it were the wish both of the hon. gent. and the noble lord alluded to, that he should postpone it, he would do so, as he was aware he had little chance of success, if he had not their concurrence.
Mr. Longsaid, that the lords of the treasury had considered themselves bound to resist the application, and had it been brought forward in the time of the late administration, the petitioners would have met with no encouragement.
Mr. Sturges Bournehoped, that as the attention of the house had not been turned to
108
the subject, the noble lord would not press the matter now.
Lord Henry Pettydeprecated delays in such cases as the present as they were attended with great inconvenience. He wished, however, that the matter might be deferred till Wednesday.
Mr. Huskissonsaid he wished for delay, as he did not know before, that there was any intention of submitting the clam, this day, to a committee of supply.
Mr. Rosethought the house would do well to consider the matter maturely before they decided on a subject of so much importance. Probably all of them had not read the full report of the committee upon it; but they ought to do so before they came to a determination. It was a matter for the house at large to decide upon; for he maintained, that no board of treasury would be justified in deciding upon such a claim of its own authority.
Mr. Wilberforcethough it would be better to take sufficient time to consider of the subject. He had himself been a member of the committee to which the petition was referred, and he understood that the conduct of government in the affair, would, in a great measure, depend on their report. The difficulty, he believed, which the lords of the treasury had, was in not being able of find a precedent for allowing a demand of such extent. For his own part, he thought it an extremely hard case; and though the demand of the petitioners might not be founded in strict justice, yet, in his opinion, they had a very fair claim on the liberality of parliament. The peculiar hardships in their case was, that in ten days after the government brought in a bill to legalise the trade in which they were encouraged to embark in consequence of the dispute with the Northern powers, the embargo was laid on, which occasioned their cargo of Swedish herrings to be spoiled.
Mr. Rosesaid, that he did not give it as his opinion, that no compensation should be given them, but that the treasury board could not allow such a claim by its own authority.
Mr. William Smithexplained, that by the ministers consenting to have the claim submitted to a committee of supply, he did not wish to be understood as saying, that they had agreed to his object in doing so. There was a great disadvantage in putting off things of this kind from time to time, as it caused great inconvenience to the parties,

109
and it at last was liable to be considered as a thing which was not to be brought for ward at all. He should not, however, for the present, object to a delay till Friday next, in order that the subject might not be again deterred, and that no possible excuse might be received for the final determination of the house. It had been frequently the case, that when subjects were postponed from week to week, gentlemen considered that they were of no consequence: this could not apply to the present subject, which was of national importance, as it affected the confidence reposed by mercantile men in the government of the country; and it was of no inconsiderable magnitude to the individuals immediately concerned.—The house agreed to defer the consideration of the merits of the petition until Friday next.

CONDUCT OF EARL AT. VINCENT.
Mr. Secretary Windhamhoped the hon gent. opposite to him (Mr Jeffery) would not object, on the ground of the inconvenience of postponing motions, to delay a little longer his motion respecting the noble lord. Not only his motion, but the order for the third reading of the bill for repealing the Additional Force act, stood for the next day. If he could postpone his motion on that account, it would be a personal favour to him.
Mr. Jefferysaid, he would certainly rather postpone his motion for another day, than that it should throw any impediment in the way of a measure which he conceived of such great importance as that bill; but in consenting to withdraw his motion for to-morrow, he relied on its being suffered to come on without interruption on Wednesday next.
Lord Henry Petty,in the absence of his noble friend (lord Howick), who would have to take a material part in the debate on the subject, requested the hon. gent. would state the nature of the charges he meant to bring forward against the noble earl, to whom his motion was to apply.
Mr. Jefferyreplied, that he was resolved to pursue the course adopted by the hon. prosecutor (Mr. Whitbread) in the impeachment now pending in Westminster Hall, who gave in his charges only on the morning of the day on which the house was to proceed on them.—On being again applied to, Mr. Jeffery stated, that his charges against earl St. Vincent would be for misconduct, neglect, and mismanagement, Whilst he was first lord of the admiralty.

PROPERTY DUTY BILL
Lord Henry Pettymoved the commitment of the Property Duty Bill.
Mr. Francisdid not mean to object to the
110
Speaker's leaving the chair, but he thought it incumbent upon him to state his opinion of the principle of the bill. His objections to it were fundamental, and not to be done away. But the knew the difficulties under which the Ministry laboured, and his object was only to clear himself from the charge of inconsistency, for he was not one of those Who held one opinion while on one side of the house and another when on another side. His opinion was the same as before, with this addition, that his objections to it had been rendered more powerful by the augmentation which had taken place in it. He objected to it as being misnamed, and called a Property Tax, when in fact it was an Income Tax, and, as such, unjust and unequal, and in some cases cruel and oppressive. Having thus stated his objections to the principle, he would, when it came into the committee, give his assistance to render it in its details as unexceptionable as possible. He hoped it would not escape the attention of the house that we were now come to times of difficulty and necessity. The noble lord had found a difficulty in carrying his first tax, and he would feel it more and more in future. It was not that he wished to oppose him, but he really trusted that the house would consider that we were come to the life-blood of the country in taxation, and in proportion as our difficulties increased we ought to attend to other resources. These were parsimony and a rigorous levy of the taxes at present in force. Great frauds were committed in many branches of the revenue departments, especially in the Customs, which might be prevented by a vigilant ministry. Ministers had no right to demand more taxes while waste was permitted, and abuses remained uncorrected. It was an old saying, and a wise one, that "parsimony was the best of all the sources of public revenue." He hoped this would be atttended to.
Lord H. Pettyadmitted the justice of many of these remarks, but the greater the difficulties of the country were, the more necessity did he find for this tax. As to economy, he assured the house, that it was always in his view, and he had frequently urged the necessity of adhering to it.
Mr. W. Smithsaid, he was convinced that His majesty's ministers were fully impressed with the necessty of a strict economy. He agreed with his hon. friend on the bench below (Mr. Francis) in most of his observations, nor was it necessary for him to add a word to what he had before said on this tax. But he rather differed front the

111
honourable gentleman as to the rigorous collection of the taxes. An impartial collection ought undoubtedly, to be made, but the fortiter in modo, as well as in re, would render the taxes ten times more oppressive than at present. He believed however, that the honourable gentleman meant the same thing by the word rigour, which he did by the word impartial.
Mr. Francisexplained that by the word "rigorous,' he did not mean a ruinous, but an exact collection. He was do friend to oppression or cruelty, but did wish to trust government with the discretion in matters of forbearance.
Mr. Fullercomplained that the tax was on property, not on income. He complained of the effect of it on gentlemen of landed property, who were not to be allowed for sums expended on repairs, and were also to be charged for the annual increase in the value of woods. He expressed a hope that next year an income tax would be substituted.
Mr. Tyrwhit Joneshoped and trusted that the chancellor of the exchequer would, in the committee, be induced to relax of that firm inflexibility which he had shewn respecting the exemptions, and that the provisions of the former bill on that head would be restored.—The house then resolved itself into a committee.
Mr. Vansittartproposed, that in going through the clauses, the marginal abstracts should be read, and any clause to which any gentlemen wished to propose an amendment might be read at length.
Sir Robert Buxtonobjected to the first clause. He said he never could perceive the reason why farmers were to be taxed in a different Manner from other classes of the community. Whether the tax were upon property or income, he thought their profits should be estimated in the same way as other traders.
Mr. Vansittartsaid, the reason of the difference was, that, from the great number of farmers, and the imperfect manner most of them kept their accounts, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to judge of their profits, but by an average. The average was not taken high, when it reckoned for profits only a starch equal to three fourths of the rent paid. There were few farmers indeed who cleared so little.
Mr. Holt Leighcontended, that in a year when the farmer might have met casualties, or made no profits, it was unfair that he should be rated on an average.
Mr. Vansittartreplied, that a productive year Would compensate for that loss, and that When the average was low it was a fair mode of computation.
Mr. Fullerwished to know, why the English farmer should pay 1s. 6d. in the pound on his rent, while the Scotch farmer paid but a shilling.
Mr. Vansittartanswered, that the reason was, that the rent of the Scotch farmer was higher, as he was not burdened with tythes, or poor-rates, and therefore, it would not be fair to take the same proportion of those different rents as the amount to be paid to the tax.
Mr. Holt Leighobserved, that it was very hard that a farmer, who with a capital of three hundred pounds, rented a farm of 2001. per annum, should pay the tax when the same amount of Capital engaged in any trade, would be exempt.
Mr. Huskissonobserved, that the hon. gent. seemed to think that the tax affected capital, whereas it was a tax upon profits, and if the profits were made upon 300l. capital in farming, itwas but just they should pay it—The clause was then agreed to.
Mr. Kerasked, whether Irish gentlemen, Who resided six months in England, were to pay for the whole year?
Mr. Vansittartsaid, they certainly were, because no property in Ireland was made chargeable.
On the clause requiring persons to return the names of those resident in their houses, or employed by them who were liable to the tax, an objection was raised by
Mr. S. Stanhopeobjected to this task as impracticable. How was one to judge who was liable? It was a question whether servants on board wages, who would thus receive above 50l. a year, were not liable, while servants who were not on board wages, but who received larger wages otherwise were not liable.—After a long conversation,
Mr. Vansittartpromised, that the various bearings of the clause, and the hints thrown out by the gentlemen who spoke on it, should be considered.
Mr. Rabsonwished to know how the owners of the houses were to know who were liable? He had been applied to that morning by three persons from the country, Who had acted as commissioners, and they begged him to obtain them all the information in his power on that head; for they did not understand by the act who were liable. He wished to know, whether clerks in

113
counting-houses and shops, who had only 75l a year, and a family of four or five children each, Were to pay the tax? If they were, the bill would, in his opinion, be oppressive; for men in such Circumstances could not pay the tax. He did not want to oppose the tax, because he knew if we would have war, we must pay the taxes; but he would take the sense of the house in some future stage of the bill, whether persons having four children, and not more than 160l. a year, or only 100l. a year, should pay any tax at all? He was proceeding farther into a view of the general merits of the bill, when he was called to order. It was then agreed that the clause should be reconsidered.
Mr. Tyrwhit Jonesgave notice, that he meant to propose a clause imposing a penalty on assessors making vexatious sur-charges.
Sir Robert Buxtonafter making some observations on that part of the bill which allowed a deduction of two per cent. to landlords who paid for the repair of the houses they let out, said, he conceived that this deduction would not cover their expenses, and that it was hard the landed interest should be subject to a higher tax than others. He therefore offered a clause to the consideration of the committee, the purport of which was, that eight per cent. should be deducted from the tax paid by the landlord for all dwelling-houses kept in repair by him, and five per cent. for all farmhouses.
Lord Henry Pettysaid, that the land tax which formerly existed, came much higher on the land-holder than this; and as landed property was now only taxed in common with all kinds Of income he could never agree to this clause.—A conversation then took place between Mr. S. Stanhope, Mr. T. Jones, Mr. Bastard, and Mr. Wilberforce, who supported the clause, and Mr. Vansittart, and others, who opposed it. The question was at length called for, and the committee divided, when there appeared; For the clause, 51: against it, 129: majority, 78.
On the clause relative to funded property,
Mr. Francisagreeably to his former intimation, proposed that the profits arising from the interest upon exchequer bills, and every other species of floating public debt, should be subjected to the tax, and liable to the same stoppages on the payment of those bills, or the interest thereon at the
114
bank, as upon any other species of government securities. The hon. gent. supported his proposition by many clear and forcible arguments, to shew that property of that species was as fair and as necessary an object of taxation as any species of funded property could be.
Lord Henry Pettyafter fully admitting the fairness of the principle, observed, that the state derived the proposed advantage in another mode, though not in the precise form suggested by the hon. gent.; for a great part of the property in exchequer bills being in the hands of the directors of the bank of England, and of private bankers and reputable merchants, who, it was to be presumed, would make an honest and correct return of their aggregate profits in the year, would, of course, return the interest on those bills as a part of their income. The tax would operate this way in a manner less vexatious, than in the ordinary mode of deducting from the interest upon the bills, as paid off.—It was, however, argued in reply, by Mr. Francis, Mr. W. Smith, and some other members, that the more regular way, and the best security against evasion, would be the mode adopted in the case of all other funds; and that while no disadvantage whatever could arise to the fair holder of floating funds from the proposed arrangement, the noble lord and the house were bound to take the best security in their power on behalf of the public, for the regular payment of the tax, and for the prevention of all attempts to evade it.
Lord Henry pettythought the arguments of those hon. members entitled to every degree of respect and deference, and requested to have time for further consideration, not doubting that he should be induced to adopt them. The subject was therefore postponed to a future stage of the bill.
On the clause for exempting the property of foreigners in the British Funds from the tax,
Mr. Francissaw no reason why this exemption should exist, or why the thirteen millions belonging to foreigners in the British Funds, should not be as heavily taxed as the property of the natives.
Mr. Secretary Foxwas astonished at the opinion expressed by the hon. gent. on this subject. For his part, he should consider an act, such as that which he recommended, a shameful confiscation. The bill under the consideration of the committee was not for taxing foreign, but British subjects. So unjust did he think such a measure, it

115
would involve in it such a flagrant breach of faith, that if the revenue resulting from it were ever so great, he should think it his duty to reject it.
Mr. Franciscould not conceive why any man, who placed his property in the British Funds, ought not to pay for the security he received in common with the other creditors of the state.
Mr. Alderman Prinsepobserved, that the public faith had never been staked more to foreigners than to any others possessed of funded property, and therefore he did not see why foreigners should be exempt. The contract was never originally made with foreigners; they came into possession of funded property by purchase. As well might it be contended that the property of a foreigner who gained an income by trade in this country, should be exempt from the tax, as that his funded property should be exempt.
Lord Henry Pettyconcurred intirely with his rt. hon. friend (Mr. Fox).
Mr. W. Smithconfessed there was much plausibility in the arguments urged against including the property of foreigners in the tax, but was still of opinion, that in justice and equity it might be taxed.—Mr. Ker and sir C. Price, spoke nearly to the same effect; but after Mr. Secretary Fox's explanation, the objections seemed to be given up. Mr. Vansittart immediately rose and moved, that the chairman do report progress, and ask leave to sit again. The house was then resumed and the committee ordered to sit again to morrow.