WAYS AND MEANS—THE INCOME TAX. (Hansard, 17 March 1854)

§ Mr. WILSON PATTEN
in the chair.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
said, he would now move the Resolution of which notice had been given.

MR. HUME
said, he really did not see why they should stop at 100l. The property of the country was most inadequately taxed, for he believed it was double the sum at which it was assessed; and he thought, therefore, that there ought to be as few exemptions as possible. Besides, the Government had been urged to go to war by the people of this country, and he was anxious that those who had got up public meetings for that purpose, and who at present escaped the doubled income tax, should be brought within its reach, so that they might at least be made anxious to bring the war to as early a conclusion as possible. He would, therefore, beg to bring forward the Amendment of which he had given notice.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
said, he was not sure whether the Amendment which his hon. Friend had proposed would carry into effect the object which he had in view. As he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) read it, it would, indeed, carry down the tax from incomes of 100l. a year to incomes of 60l. a year, and between 60l. a year and 150l. a year it would raise it one-half, or from 5d. to 7½d.; but he thought it would leave the tax on incomes above 150l. precisely where it was at present, at 7d. in the pound. So that incomes below 150l. would pay 7½d. in the pound, and incomes above 150l. only 7d. That, however, he believed was not his hon. Friend's meaning. His intention was fairly to raise the question whether the income tax should be carried down to incomes of 60l. a year, and whether incomes between 60l. and 100l. should be treated and taxed in the same way as incomes between 100l. and 150l. That was a very 988 important question—a question upon which he should not like, at this moment, to give a conclusive opinion; because, if we were really to look forward to a war, with respect to which they all knew that, when it was once begun, no man could venture to predict anything of its extent or its duration—he should be reluctant to cut himself off, or to cut off from that House, any source of taxation not absolutely wrong in itself, however great might be the difficulties connected with it. At the same time he must say he thought it impossible to overrate the difficulties attending such an extension of the income tax as was now proposed. It was not until last year that the income tax, generally speaking, was levied at all upon persons living upon weekly wages; for although there were a few persons in the receipt of such wages whose incomes exceeded 150l. a year, they were most of them lodgers, and if any of them paid it was only one here and there. The measure which the Government took last year, of carrying down the income tax from a limit of 150l. a year to a limit of 100l. a year, was a measure of great importance and of great boldness; but it was also a measure of no inconsiderable difficulty. It had made it necessary for the Commissioners and those who were concerned in the collection of the tax to deal rather extensively with the labouring classes, and he had already said the difficulty of dealing with the labouring classes in a matter of this kind was immense. They could only be got at through their employers or the occupiers of houses. He had no doubt that employers would generally discharge any duty which the Legislature might impose upon them; but this would be a task of so invidious a character that it would necessarily be unpalatable, and he should not like to impose it upon them without some strong necessity. With respect to the occupiers of houses they would have great difficulty, and even where they succeeded, there would be strong objections on the part of the persons thus got at to pay the tax unless they could be quite sure it was levied with equality. It could not be levied with equality, because where one would pay, five or six would slip through their fingers. They had not yet quite collected half a year's income tax under the altered state of things introduced last year; let them at least see the effect of that great change before they ventured upon anything further. The utmost they expected from the extension of the tax then determined on was an addition 989 to the existing resources of 250,000l. a year, and he was satisfied, that the measure now proposed would not produce so much, or nearly so much as that. He would put it to his hon. Friend whether—considering all these circumstances—considering, also, that persons in receipt of weekly wages were not those to whom it was most likely to be convenient to pay a direct tax half-yearly—it was worth their while to introduce a new inquisition and new machinery, which would make the law extremely odious and extremely onerous, and interfere with the liberty and the comforts of large portions of their fellow-subjects, for the sake of so small a result. He therefore hoped the Amendment would not be pressed.

MR. HUME
said, he was strongly convinced of the importance of making the burden which would be caused by this war fall as far as possible equally. He should leave the question in the hands of the Committee, but should not be satisfied until it had declared its opinion by a division.

§ MR. DISRAELI
said, he considered the question was of too much importance to be disposed of after five minutes discussion, at twelve o'clock at night. He did not think they would do well, in the face of the country, to come to so hasty a decision. The hon. Member would have an opportunity of renewing his proposition during the progress of the Bill through the House if he should think it right to do so.

MR. HUME
said, he had no objection to allow this stage of the measure to pass, if it were understood that he should have that future opportunity. He had been anxious his opinion should be known, and he hoped the House would not let the Bill pass without coming to a decision on the question.

§ MR. SPOONER
said, be considered that the question was far too important to be proceeded with at midnight, and be should therefore move, as an Amendment, that the Chairman report progress, and obtain leave to sit again.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
said, he was sorry that he could not agree to the Motion of his hon. Friend without taking the sense of the Committee. If the House of Commons had made it their duty to search out in vain for a number of new sources of taxation, and had had experience of the effect of the income tax as it at present existed for a whole year, it might be a question of grave 990 debate whether they should carry the tax lower down or not. They had already reduced it to incomes of 100l. a year; but sufficient time had not elapsed to show what would be the result of that measure.

§ MR. DISRAELI
said, that he had supported the Amendment of the hon. Member for Montrose, in the hope that he would be induced to withdraw it. After the present Amendment, there was another one upon the paper, so that it was clear that they could not advance to the proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer that evening. On Monday week last the right hon. Gentleman had made his financial statement, and last Monday they were to have had an opportunity of discussing its merits. No such opportunity, however, had been afforded, the day having been occupied first in reviewing the conduct of three Members of Her Majesty's Cabinet, and afterwards upon a question of Greek politics which had been introduced by one of the warmest supporters of the Government. In consequence, no discussion had taken place upon the financial proposition of the Minister. It had been fixed again for that evening, but the whole of their time had been occupied by another important subject which had been introduced by the Government. The proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was one of the most important that had ever been brought under the attention of that House. It was quite impossible to go into it at that hour, and he thought it desirable that they should close their proceedings at once.

§ SIR GEORGE GREY
said, he would suggest, if they were to divide, that they had better do so upon the Amendment of the hon. Member for Montrose, which was a perfectly plain proposition, to extend the tax to incomes of 60l. a year.

§ MR. WALPOLE
said, he should be disposed, under the circumstances, to support the Amendment of the hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume); but as they had not yet had a year's experience of the last great financial experiment of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he would recommend the hon. Gentleman to withdraw it. They should first ascertain the effect of placing the tax upon incomes of 100l. instead of 150l.; and the argument of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was so cogent, that we should see the tax as it at present stood in full operation before ex- 991 tending its area, that he should now vote for the Resolution.

MR. HUME
said, he must acknowledge the force of that argument, and would withdraw his Amendment.