duced any effect in spreading the contagion of fever through Ireland. He had devoted much of his attention to the subject of contagious fever, and conceiving that the operation of the window-tax was likely to increase that disorder by a want of air, in conse quence of the windows being closed up, he issued an order to different collectors and inspectors in the districts where the disorder prevailed, directing them to have it made known, that where ever it was found by a physician that windows should be opened in houses where fever existed, there would be no additional tax charged for any windows so opened. When this or der was issued, the persons to whom it was directed were ordered to make returns of the applications made in the different places for leave to open windows, in order to ascertain how far the tax really operated in increasing the contagion. He would now inform the House what were the returns made on that occasion, from which it would be clearly seen, that the window-tax did not at all tend to the increase of fever. In Dublin there was not a single application to open a window-in Kildare none-in Waterford none-in Cork none-in Coleraine one. In all-there were only seven applications in Ireland. It was possible that physicians might have ordered windows to be opened in some instances without having informed the inspectors of taxes of it; but such could not be the case to any extent. From this it appeared, that the window-tax was not, in any manner, instrumental to the fever in Ireland.

Sir John Newport said, that the window-tax affected the great body of the poorest part of the community in Ireland. He alluded to those who resided in lodging-houses in great cities and towns. He denied the statement of the right honourable gentle.

man, that the shutting up of windows under this tax had not had the effect of spreading more widely amongst the population of Ireland the fever which had proved so fatal. This he stated not on the authority of any ambigu ous order, worded so as to prevent, not encourage, applications. He would appeal to the authority of all the medical men who had considered the subject, and who declared, that the shutting up of the windows had produced the most lamentable effects. Dr Barry of Cork had given evidence on this subject, which was perfectly conclusive. He had stated, that in the lower rooms of houses in that city, where the windows were not blocked up, the tenants were free from fever, while the upper rooms, where there was not a free circulation of air, were filled with contagion. If Ireland did not pay an equal share of public contributions, facts would easily prove this to be merely because burdens were laid upon her beyond her strength. In 1808, the revenue of Ireland amounted to 4,417,000%. Since that period, taxes were imposed on the suggestion of the finance minister, to the amount of 3,500,000l. What was the result? How much did the revenue of last year exceed that of 1808? It exceeded it in the sum of only 50,000l. Yes-taxes estimated to produce 3,500,000l. had really brought in only 50,000/.! This was a decided proof of the inability of the country to pay. He should call the attention of the House to the increase of taxation since the Union. At that period, the window-tax was from one to four shillings per window: it was now from three to 14s. At the period of the Union there was no horse-tax; there was now a horsetax of 21. 17s. Tea, of the best kind, paid 7d. per lb., the worst 5d. ;-the tax was now 98 per cent ad valorem. The tax on wine had increased in the

proportion of five to two; and the revenue had decreased in the proportion of two to five. On an average, the taxes were more than doubled since the Union; and thus individuals, deprived of their comforts, were induced to become absentees. He strongly recommended to Parliament to lessen the taxation on Ireland at present, that she might be better able to bear it at a future period.

Mr Shaw's motion was supported by Sir Frederick Flood, Mr Grattan, Mr Calcraft, and some other mem bers. Being put to the vote, it was negatived only by the small majority of 67 to 51.

On the 13th May, the Chancellor of the Exchequer laid open his plan for the mitigation of the Irish assessed taxes. He did not conceive that Parliament lay under any pledge for the repeal of the window-tax, nor that Ireland had any claim to that extent. At the same time, looking to the distressed situation of Ireland for the last three years, he thought it becoming the justice and liberality of Parliament to afford her some relief. Of the window-tax, accordingly, he was prepared to grant a reduction; and he would very shortly explain the nature of his proposition for that purpose-noticing also the principal alterations he proposed to introduce under other heads. But he must first state, that he had no intention of proposing any alteration in the hearthtax. From the window-tax, which was necessarily felt to be very severe in its pressure, he proposed to make a reduction of 25 per cent, bringing it to what it had been before the last augmentation. Since which, he was obliged to allow there had been a continual falling off in the proceeds of the tax. That sprang, perhaps, from the general stagnation in business, which peculiarly affected Ireland

she feeling, in a much higher degree

than this country, the loss occasion ed by the want of consumption consequent on the war. It might seem that an entirely new scheme was more advisable; but, considering the fate of that proposed by the gentleman at the head of the department in Ireland, he was led to believe that an abatement of the tax, as already existing, would give more general satisfaction. By the law, as it before stood, no house in Ireland having less than seven windows paid a duty. It was now moreover proposed, that in houses with more than that number, of which a great proportion was let in lodgings to poor people, 1s. a window only should be charged; but with the condition that this indulgence could be granted only in such cases where the windows were used not only for light, but also for the admission of

air.

Of late years great additions had been made to all the taxes on carriages, servants, and all the rest pressing more peculiarly on the higher orders. The laws imposing them had been looked upon as sumptuary laws, necessary for prohibiting imprudent show and ostentation. On each of these he now intended a great relief, in the hope that diminishing the duty on carriages would produce employment for the manufacturer; and that a general abatement in the taxes would operate as an inducement to gentlemen of property, now absentees, to reside at home. On all descriptions of carriages a great abatement of duty would be made, but more particularly on one class, which he might call the national one, jaunting cars. The duty on keeping that vehicle, which had been 61. 10s. was now to be reduced to two guineas.

Sir H. Parnell considered the hearthtax as the most exceptionable of all, on account of the odious right of search in the dwelling-house with which it was accompanied; but the

Chancellor of the Exchequer stated, the collecting-officer in Ireland could not enter into every room of a house in order to make a correct return, but was obliged to form an estimate upon a general view, the tenant being obliged to shew the contrary if he objected to it.

Sir John Newport afterwards moved, that the reduction of the window-tax should be 50, instead of 25, per cent. A debate of considerable length followed, in which Mr Peel, Mr Vesey Fitzgerald, Mr Leslie Forbes, Sir F. Burdett, Lord Castlereagh, and other members, took part; but little new could now be advanced, either in point of fact or argument. The original motion was then carried, by 80 against 55.

The hardship of the additional leather tax imposed in 1812, having been the subject of numerous petitions, Lord Althorpe, on the 12th March, moved for leave to bring in a bill for its repeal. His motion, he said, was supported by more than a hundred petitions; and though all trades were ready to petition for what was beneficial to themselves, he was prepared to shew that the leather trade had remarkably declined, since the imposition of the new tax in 1812. During the five years previous to the additional duties being imposed, there were forty-five bankruptcies in the leather trade, making an average of nine in each year. Whereas in the five years immediately subsequent to that period, there were seventy-five bankruptcies, making fifteen in each year, and a surplus of thirty bankruptcies in the five years. In 1808 there were 1725 licences for the manufacturing of leather; in 1812 there were 1760; but in the course of five years after the additional tax, there was a reduction of 889 licences, which shewed that the additional duty was oppressive. Within the last half year, there

had been thrown out of the trade no less than 189 tanners, 338 tawers, forty-one oil-dressers, and twelve parchment-makers. He stated, that those yards which were still occupied were not in full work, and that the trade had declined equal to oneseventh, instead of having increased with the population of the country, as it had always done before the imposition of the double tax. The decrease of this trade, the noble Lord deduced also from the diminution of the import of foreign hides, which diminution was nearly equal to onehalf the quantity imported in 1812. He was aware that the produce of the tax had rather advanced within the last year, but that advance was in fact the consequence of the increased quantity of leather disposed of in that year by those who were selling off their stock, in order to get out of the trade altogether. The whole produce of this tax did not exceed 200,000l. ; and be it recollected, that the tax objected to was imposed in war-that it was deemed a war tax, which was to cease upon the restoration of peace. But, was the sum which he had stated such as should reconcile the House to the hazard, if not the ruin, of a great branch of our manufacture? It was calculated that not less than 71,000 persons had been already deprived of employment by the depression of this trade, in consequence of the additional tax, and that the loss thus sustained in the resources of the country, exceeded one million and a half.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer would have no objection to a committee of inquiry into the state of the leather trade; but he begged leave to state, that it was by no means in the declining condition which had been represented. He would go back to the American war. For the four years after 1778, the average amount

of the leather tax was 204,000l. In the four years before 1791, it was =215,000l.; in the four years before 1812, it was 394,000l.; and in the last two years since the peace, it was 264,000. It appeared from those statements, that the duty did not by any means impede the consumption of leather, as it appeared, that between 1791 and 1815, there was an

increase of 50,000l. a year. Fiftysix of the seventy-five bankruptcies mentioned had taken place within the last two years and a half. That number deducted from the whole number, seventy-five, within the period mentioned, would leave a less average than the noble Lord had laid down for the five years before the tax. With respect to the number of licences, it was perhaps known that the peace of 1814 had disappointed several leather manufacturers, who reckoned on a continuation of the consumption occasioned by the war. Another ground mentioned in favour of the bill was the decrease in the importation of hides. But the noble Lord should recollect, that during the war England was the great market open to the continent of South America, and that the greater part of the continent was supplied by England with the hides which came from that country. But now that peace was restored, England shared that market with other countries. The leather trade had not only increased, but was still increasing, as well in consumption as in price. In March 1817, sole leather was from 15d. to 17d. per lb.; and in March 1818, it was sold at from 18d. to 21d. per lb. The number of steam engines employed in it had increased from one to five. The trade in oil-dressed leather, upon which no additional tax had been imposed, had decreased much more than any other branch, having fallen off from 133,000l. to 40 or 50,000l. He

did not wish to treat the petitions with neglect, but proposed to refer them to a committee, though he must let the House into the secret of why they were so very numerous. A letter had come into his possession, which had been addressed as a circular to all persons concerned in the trade. It was as follows: "It is necessary that you should send as many petitions as possible to Parliament against the additional duty on leather, before Thursday the 12th of March. Every exertion ought to be used, both by applying to members, and by every other means, as the present very favourable opportunity is not be neglected." He begged the House to consider calmly what would be the result of repealing duty after duty, on the complaints of petitioners. There were at present petitions on the table praying the repeal of duties and taxes to the amount of three millions and a half, without including the English window tax, which would probably share the fate of the Irish window tax, if the latter were repealed. If the entire of the taxes were to repealed in that way, what was to be done? If they were to continue repealing the taxes which were necessary to the country, they would in a short time have no other alternative left but disgrace and bankruptcy on the one hand, or the imposi tion of the property tax on the other.

Lord Castlereagh could not avoid saying a few words on this question, which appeared to him to involve most important consequences; there might, upon every subject of taxation, be such warm appeals made to the feelings of the House, as, if effectual, would soon leave the country without any revenue. He hoped the House would pause and consider the subject seriously before they adopted the motion. He trusted that, out of any false or mistaken feel

ings of humanity, they would not do an act which would tend to destroy the revenue of the country. Although there might have been a diminution of the demand for leather, yet late returns shewed the trade to be reviving. From a comparison of the quantity of leather exported for the five years before the increased duty, with that which had been exported in the same period after it, the account was entirely in favour of the latter period. For the former five years, the quantity exported was 5,603,395 pounds weight, and that in latter years, including the year 1817, it amounted to 10,710,073 pounds. This proved the increase of the trade; but if the number of the manufacturers was diminished, it was to be attributed to the cause he had before stated, the effects of great capital being embarked in the business.

Mr Brougham said, there had already been two committees appointed without any valuable result; and he was convinced that the issue of the one now proposed would be the same. If there was no evidence before the House,-if they were quite in the dark upon a subject, and wished to get information by means of a committee-then ministers said, "no committee-do not inquire;" but when there was evidence before the House when the information derived from former committees was in black and white upon their journals -then the cry was a committee inquire." He saw no necessity for any inquiry in the present case. The thing was quite clear, and no additional evidence was necessary to have it understood. This tax was one upon a common necessary of life, and he conceived its imposition highly impolitic. It was one of those arithmetical blunders in which the appearance of immediate increase was adopted, though it led to a certain ulti

66

mate loss to the revenue. The effects of this tax were severely felt by all persons who were great employers; but as government was the greatest employer, so it fell with particular force upon them, and what they imagined they gained in one way, they lost in another. After a debate of some length, Lord Althorpe's motion was carried against ministers by a majority of ninety-four against eightyfour. Leave was therefore given to him and Mr Brougham to bring in the bill.

Ministers, though thus defeated in the opening of the measure, determined to make another stand against a proceeding which appeared to afford a dangerous precedent. On the 6th April, at the second reading of the bill, Mr C. Grant moved, that it should be read a second time this day six months, that is, not at all. After a warm debate, consisting chiefly in the repetition of former arguments, Mr Grant's motion was carried by the narrow majority of 136 against 130. The measure was thus lost in the present session.

Salt, both as a necessary of life, and a material in the most important productions of industry, is perhaps the most improper of all the subjects on which taxation is imposed. When used, indeed, in agriculture or the fisheries, it is allowed either duty free, or at a reduced rate; but the arrangments for keeping this favoured salt distinct from that which pays duty, subjects the dealer to much inconvenience, and affords ample room for fraud and evasion. These circumstances had drawn the particular attention of Mr Calcraft, who was unwearied in his efforts, either to obtain a repeal of this duty, or to remove the grievances with which its collection was attended. In bringing it forward, on the 10th March, he stated that it was unnecessary to