HC Deb 07 June 1825 vol 13 cc1064-8
Mr. Sykes

rose, to call the attention of the House to the Duty on Soap and on Tallow Candles. He was quite ready to confess his concurrence in the general principle of the financial arrangements for the year. It was by no means his intention to disturb those arrangements. All that he required the House to do was, to agree to a pledge, that whenever circumstances would permit, they would reduce the duty to which he had alluded. He really felt that he could not go down to the country without being able to tell his constituents that something, however little, had been done by parliament to relieve their burthens. If he were to tell them that the duty on wine had been diminished, they would answer "The poor drink no wine." If he were to say, that the duty on spirits had been reduced, they would reply, "We have no wish to burn up our livers; give us clean hands and clean linen; and we leave to others red noses and bloated bodies." It had always been the opinion of the wisest statesmen, that those taxes ought to be the soonest repealed which pressed most on the industry of the people. The duty on salt and leather had been diminished, because those articles were necessaries of life; but the duty on soap and candles still remained, although the expediency of repealing them rested precisely on the same grounds. It was one of the great vices of all taxes of this kind, that a much larger sum was wrung from the consumer than went into the Exchequer. The expense of collection and the mode of collection were both evils; but the greatest evil of all was the encouragement which the high duty gave to contraband trade. Smuggling was an evil which it was especially incumbent on the legislature to repress; and in no article did it exist to a greater extent than in those to which he had alluded. The smuggling system was "monstrum horrendum, informe, ingens"—he could not add, "cuilumen ademptum," for no being could be more quick-sighted than the smuggler. When it was considered that the duties on soap amounted to 120 per cent, it was evident that the temptation to smuggling must be irresistible. He had declared it to be his conviction, that the revenue was deprived of above a million a-year by the contraband dealing in soap. In the last year, notwithstanding the increasing luxury, and the consequently increasing consumption of the article, there had been a positive decrease in the amount of the duty on soap. The last annual receipt had fallen short of that immediately preceding it by 3,260l. He read a statement of the amount of tallow imported, and the amount on which duty was paid; proving that 53,000 tons remained unaccounted for to the Excise. If 13,000 tons were deducted for the greasing of wheels, machinery, &c. that left 40,000 tons still deficient as to revenue. The duty on soap was 3d. a pound; that on candles 1d. Supposing the fraud on the revenue were equally divided, and that 20,000 tons of the tallow thus escaping the Excise were employed in making candles, and 20,000 in making soap, the result would be, that the revenue would be defrauded of the duty on a million pounds. Thus, as was the case with all duties on articles of necessary consumption, the price of the article was raised to the people, while but a small part of that increase went into the Exchequer. The duty on soft soap was not so high as on hard; but, it was of that kind which was the most impolitic; the greater part of it being returnable on allowances. The nett receipt of this last-mentioned duty was 38,000l. Now, was it worth while to continue a duty, the produce of which was so small? He should propose, therefore, the total repeal of this duty; and that the duty on hard soap should be reduced one half. He was sure that the smuggling system would never be defeated, unless this reduction in the duty were to take place. With respect to the duty on candles, every consideration proved the impolicy of keeping it at its present rate. Although not so high as the duty on soap, it pressed very heavily on the people. By the invention of gas, the use of wax, and other means, the upper ranks felt this duty very slightly. But, it was severe on the poor man. A large proportion of the labour of the country was performed by candle-light; and a poor man, who earned probably not more than eighteen-pence a day, had a penny or three half-pence to deduct from his earnings for candles. Dipped candles, which were used by the poor, paid more, in proportion to their value, than mould candles, which were confined to the consumption of the higher classes; for the duty was equal on the pound, while the price of the one was ls. a pound, and that of the other only ten-pence. An injurious distinction was thus made between the different classes of the community; the higher orders paying a lower duty, and the lower orders paying a higher duty. If he had made out his case, he thought he had a right to call on the House to declare, that, in the next session, they would take the expediency of reducing those duties into consideration. He wished to be able to state to his constituents, that the House had come to such a determination. A man distinguished for his learning and probity, who once represented the town which he now had the honour to represent—he meant Andrew Marvel—used to correspond with his constituents every day of his life, informing them of his efforts to reduce their burthens. He ( Mr. Sykes) could not boast of such diligence, but he visited them once a year. But how should he be able to face those constituents, if he was unable to inform them of any step which had been taken throughout the session, to diminish the burthens under which they laboured? The hon. gentleman concluded by moving, "That it is expedient, early in the next session, or as soon as the financial state of the country will admit, that the duty on Soap and Tallow Candles be greatly reduced."

The Chancellor of the Exchequer ,

in answer to what the hon. gentleman had said of the expediency of diminishing taxation, would observe, in the first place, that taxes to the amount of 1,500,000l. had been taken off in the present session. Various arrangements had also been made of a fiscal description, which, although not very important in themselves, had contributed to relieve the community. Nor should it be forgotten, that propositions had been made by several hon. gentlemen for the reduction of taxes, to which propositions the House would not agree. When it was recollected, that propositions for diminishing the duty on spirits and the duty on tobacco, as well as for the repeal of the assessed taxes—all bearing on what might be called the necessaries of life—had been rejected, he could not conceive that the House, by agreeing to the present motion, would turn suddenly round on its own decisions. He also confessed that he objected to the mode in which the hon. member proposed the measure. It was not to be immediate, but prospective. It was to take place in the next session, "if the state of the revenue would permit it." This was a conditional proposition, liable to a variety of interpretations; and which, therefore, could not be adopted without inconvenience. He did not deny the abstract principle on which the hon. gentleman rested his argument. He knew very well that a duty so high as to be disproportionate to the price of any article, was a temptation to practise fraud on the revenue. But, he denied that, in the present case, the evasion of duty had been extensive. It was certainly true that the produce of the last year had been 3,000l. less than the produce of the year preceding; but really the defection of so small a sum in an amount of 1,200,000l. was not a subject of grave moment. In the year 1814, the duty was taken upon 78,000,000lbs., and in 1824, it was taken upon 109,000,000lbs. This increase of nearly half, in ten years, was a proof that the tax upon tallow had not had the effect of preventing its consumption. The tax on candles was one penny a pound, and the price was 4s. 11½d. a dozen pounds; to say, therefore, that the tax was a desperate grievance, was to overstate the case. It was quite evident, upon a consideration of prices, that the tax had nothing to do with the subject. In 1814, dipped candles sold at 11s. 2d. per dozen pounds; the price was now only 4s. 11½d. Whether a poor man got his candles cheaper from the retailer, he could not say; but it was clear that the tax was not the cause of any dearness of price. On these grounds, he should oppose the motion.

Mr. Hume

complained, that the chancellor of the Exchequer had mis-stated the data of all the calculations he had just been making, and of the inferences which be had drawn from them. The right hon. gentleman would find it very difficult to purchase his dipped candles a 4½d.apound. The duty amounted to 20 per cent. The right hon. gentleman might talk of this as a mere trifle, but few persons who had to pay the tax, would consider it in that light. This tax pressed or on the poor precisely in the ratio of their industry; for the mechanic who was the earliest in the winter mornings, or the latest in the evenings at his workshop, felt the tax the most. It was important that the absolute necessaries of life should be brought to the market at the lowest rate. The right hon. gentleman had also mistaken the argument upon soap. His hon. friend had justly said, that every tax was objectionable which drew from the pockets of the people a greater sum in proportion, than was eventually paid into the Exchequer; and in this case the fact was clear, that where the Exchequer gained one penny, the consumer paid two pence. Another reason for the reduction of this tax was its unequal operation upon the poor artizan who had to work at night. What better tax could be selected for repeal, than that which went to relieve the poor man from an inequality of burthen. If the duty was reduced, the increased consumption would more than make up the difference to the Exchequer. He could not agree with the hon. mover, in the propriety of postponing his object until the next session; the reduction ought to take place at once.

Mr. Alderman Wood

put in a strong claim for the proposed measure, on the part of the Cornish miners, who were obliged to work day and night by candlelight. If the right hon. gentleman could throw away 6,000l. a-year upon a grant to the duke of Cumberland, he ought to remember, that the amount was paid out of the pockets of the labouring classes.

Lord A. Hamilton

bore witness to the extent of the illicit trade, in consequence of the tax upon tallow. The tax was also extremely objectionable, from the disproportion between the sum levied, and the amount paid into the Exchequer.

The motion was negatived.