r ^k 
 
 ;vM'::. ' i\ ^ 
 
 
 1 '^ t 
 
 FtijJ^ 
 

 F4MILIAE treatise:,,. 
 
 TAXATION, FREE TRADE, 
 
 ETC. 
 
 COMPRISING 
 
 FACTS USUALLY UNNOTICED OR UNCONSIDERED IN 
 THEORIES OF THOSE SUBJECTS. 
 
 WITH NOTES ON SUBJECTS ARISING INCIDENTALLY. 
 
 LONDON : 
 PELHAM RICHARDSON, 23, CORNHILL; 
 
 AND 
 
 JOHN OLLIVIER, 59, PALL-MALL. 
 
 .^v MDCCCXLVI. 
 
'i <^ s <«? 
 
 //.7::i4/ir 
 
 
 i ** 
 
 
 LONDON: 
 KICHAHDS, PBINTER, 100, ST. MARTIN"S LANE 
 
 .» 
 
ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 Chapter III, On the conBequencfes Snd effects 
 of the selection of subjects of taxation on the 
 social condition and welfare of the people of the 
 United Kingdom; will be published in a Jew 
 days^ and the rest of the work as soon thereafter 
 as practicable. 
 
 The eager haste shown to press forward and 
 pass into law the measures now under discussion 
 in the House of Commons, and in agitation 
 among the public of all ranks and degrees uni- 
 versalis/, has induced the writer of the following 
 pages to publish them, before completion of the 
 intended work, of which they are the beginning 
 — under the impression (unfounded, pei^haps) 
 that the facts stated msLj influence i^eflection upon 
 those measures ; which, in the opinion of the 
 Prime Minister of the day, will, if adopted by 
 the Legislature, have such important and bene- 
 ficial effects — and which, in the opinion of many 
 sensible pei'sons, will or may alter, for much 
 better or for inuch worse, the social condition of 
 very numerous and very important classes of the 
 people of the United Kingdom. 
 
 London, February 16, 1846. 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2007 with funding from 
 
 IVIicrosoft Corporation 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/familiartreatiseOOIondrich 
 
^* s-^ 
 
 On the sources whence the Public Revenue 
 of the United Kingdom, arising from 
 Taxes, is derived. 
 
 There probably exists a principle, upon which 
 every member of a nation or state might be 
 made contributory to its support, in due propor- 
 tion to his stake and interest in it, and to his 
 means. Whether such a principle shall ever be 
 discovered is more than doubtful ; but that it is 
 the duty of every Government, in its taxation of 
 the people, to approximate as nearly as it can to 
 that principle, is manifest. 
 
 The words taxes and taxation in the following 
 pages are to be understood to mean, the con- 
 tributions required by law to be paid by the 
 people annually, out of their rents, profits, 
 earnings, or incomings, to defray the annual 
 public expenditure. 
 

 **/• '-/->-' " •:! t -*•. '9 
 
 There are only three sources from whence 
 revenue from such taxes can be derived, namely, 
 from the rent, profit, or incomings from land ; 
 from the earnings of labour ; or from the in- 
 terest, profit, or incomings from accumulated 
 capital. 
 
 In every country far advanced in civilization, 
 the principal, or main source, of revenue from 
 taxes, will be found always to be the earnings of 
 labour. 
 
 By the Census of 1841, the population of 
 Great Britain is stated to be 19 millions of 
 persons (18,844,434), and of Ireland 8 millions 
 (8,175,124): making the population of the United 
 Kingdom 27 millions of persons (27,019,558). 
 
 Labourers and their families compose, perhaps, 
 more than 24 of those 27 millions of persons. 
 
 Suppose that all those labourers and their fa- 
 milies were exempt from taxation, or were non- 
 existent in the population, whence then, it may 
 be asked, would be derived the 52i millions of 
 annual taxes, exclusive of the tax upon income,* 
 now levied in the United Kingdom ? 
 
 * Ordinary Revenue . . £52,573,955 
 Income-tax 5,329,600 
 
 £57,903,555 
 
 — Finance Accounts of the United Kingdom for the year 
 1844, No. 147, Session 1845, p. 10. 
 
If a labourer could cast up the amount of 
 the taxes paid by him on the luxuries, spirits 
 and tobacco, and on the comforts and neces- 
 saries, beer, tea, sugar, soap, 8^c., consumed by 
 him and his household in a year ; and were to 
 find that amount equal to the amount of his 
 earnings for a month, — it would be the same 
 thing to him, as if he were to labour, in his 
 calHng, eleven months of the year for pay, and 
 one month of the year in the service of the state 
 unpaid. 
 
 It is true that his contribution to the public 
 revenue cannot be taken or received from him 
 in hind, i. e. in labour, but must be collected 
 from him in money, by means of taxes on certain 
 of his consumptions. But, nevertheless, what he 
 r really contributes to that revenue is a portion of 
 his labour, that is to say, of his skill and industry, 
 or of the sweat of his brow. 
 
 The effects produced in the expenditure of 
 the revenue derived from taxes in the United 
 Kingdom, are results of combined exertions, or 
 efforts, made by 27 millions of people ; to what- 
 ever purposes those exertions or efforts are 
 directed or applied, — whether in waging war, — 
 or in averting it, by the maintenance of armies 
 and navies in peace, — in supporting the Royal 
 household, and the honour and dignity of the 
 Crown, — in defraying the charge of the judicial 
 
and all other the civil establishments of the 
 realm, — or in paying the expenses of former 
 wars, by defraying debt incurred for them, 
 which last is in effect to continue to wage them : 
 not, indeed, by effusion of blood, but by strain 
 of the sinews of war, in repayment of the prin- 
 cipal and interest of monies borrowed in former 
 wars for the purpose of carrying them on.* 
 
 In this view of the application of the revenue 
 derived from taxation, — in every exertion or effort 
 accomplished by the Government on behalf of 
 the nation, — whether it be in the construction and 
 equipment of a ship of the line of battle, or 
 otherwise howsoever, — the artisan in his work- 
 shop, the labourer at his plough or at his loom, 
 the shoemaker on his seat, the tailor on his 
 board, are all of them severally contributors out 
 of the taxes paid on the taxed commodities con- 
 sumed by them respectively ; the very abject 
 who sweeps the crossing of the street, when he 
 
 * The amount of the public debt of the United Kingdom, 
 entailed on the present and future by former generations 
 for the expenses of their wars, is about 800 millions : for 
 about 250 millions of which the public never received, and 
 the lenders never gave, any value or consideration what- 
 soever: but which must, nevertheless, be levied by taxes, 
 and paid, if ever the national debt shall, out of a surplus of 
 revenue over expenditure, be redeemed. See Note A, 
 Appendix. 
 
takes his cup of tea or coffee at the stall in his 
 vicinity, or his glass of strong-waters at the 
 neighbouring gin-palace, is a contributor, in his 
 condition and degree, by payment of taxes on 
 component parts of those beverages, — to that 
 and to every exertion or effort of the nation 
 made in the expenditure of its public revenue. 
 
 A short but striking statement will shew, 
 convincingly, that the main source of revenue 
 from taxes in the United Kingdom is the earn- 
 ings of labour, and not the incomings of the 
 richer classes. The only taxes which so much as 
 seem to fall exclusively or principally upon the 
 richer classes are the assessed taxes. 
 
 In the year 1844, the assessed taxes produced 
 in the whole three millions (£3,265,828). Half 
 of those three millions (£1,743,401) was derived 
 from the tax upon windows, — imposed upon all 
 houses having more than seven : — and must there- 
 fore have been levied, much of it from the hum- 
 ble, and much of it from the middling classes of 
 the community. The other half of the three 
 millions of assessed taxes (£1,522,427) was 
 produced by the taxes upon servants, carriages, 
 horses, dogs, armorial bearings, game certificates, 
 &c., inclusive of taxes under any of those heads 
 on persons of all conditions, and, among others, 
 on horse-dealers, tavern-keepers, tradesmen, &c. 
 
In the same year 1844, the direct taxes on the 
 mere luxuries of labour, on spirits and tobacco 
 only^ produced (exclusive of the direct tax on 
 m«7^ used in the distillery) nearly 11^ millions 
 (£11,421,862)* which is more than seven and 
 a half times what was paid for taxes on all the 
 servants, carriages, horses, dogs, &c. &c. in the 
 kingdom ! and more than double the amount of the 
 tax upon income in the year 1844 (£5,329,600), 
 to which tax, as will hereinafter appear, the con- 
 tribution of the class of labourers is a large pro- 
 portion of the whole of its amount. 
 
 If to the sum of the direct taxes on spirits and 
 tobacco^ be added that of the direct taxes on tea^ 
 sugar, and malt, which collectively come to 
 15 millions (£15,021,630),t the amount of the 
 
 * Spirits . , . £7,469,440) ^,,.0, ^^^ 
 Tobacco . . . 3,952,422/^^^'^"^^'^^^ 
 
 The amount of the tax on malt consumed in the distillery 
 is not distinguished in the Finance Accounts from the 
 amount of tax on malt consumed in the brewery, and there- 
 fore cannot be here stated. The whole amount of the tax 
 on malt (including hops, about £214,000) in the year 1844, 
 amounted to 5 millions (£4,966,619). Finance Accounts of 
 the United Kingdom for the year 1844, No. 147, Session 
 1845, pp. 29, 35, 40, and 44. 
 
 t Tea 4,524,093) 
 
 Sugar .... 5,500,919 [-£15,021,630 
 Malt .... 4,996,618) 
 
 —Same Accounts, pp. 27, 28, 35, 36, 39, 40, and 44. 
 
direct taxes on those Jive items, viz. spirits, 
 tobacco, tea, sugar, and malt, collectively, will 
 be found to be 26i millions (£26,443,302) which 
 sum hjive times the amount of the tax upon 
 income, and more than half the amount of the 
 whole public revenue (52,573,955) of the United 
 Kingdom in the year 1844, exclusive of the 
 income-tax. 
 
 But, besides direct taxes imposed on the above- 
 mentioned ^ve commodities, by their measure 
 or weight, by the Officers of Customs or Excise, — 
 there is a vast amount of indirect taxes arising 
 from the ssunejive commodities ; which indirect 
 taxes, are ingredients or component parts of the 
 price of the same Jive commodities to the con- 
 sumer. 
 
 Such indirect taxes comprise all the taxes. 
 direct and indirect, including the tax upon 
 income, paid by maltsters, distillers, brewers, 
 by licensed dealers exclusively in beer, spirits, 
 and tobacco ; and a portion of all the taxes 
 direct and indirect paid by dealers in tea and 
 sugar by wholesale and retail, and by merchants, 
 shipowners, insurers, wharfingers, warehouse- 
 men, carmen, &c. &c., engaged in the importation 
 of those commodities, and in the conveyance 
 of the same from dealer to dealer in them, 
 from the producer or importer to the con- 
 sumer ; — all which taxes, and the profit ultra 
 of every dealer in those commodities respectively. 
 
8 
 
 are ex necessitate additions to the prime cost of 
 the same, and are ingredients and component 
 parts of the price of them to the consumer. 
 
 The amount of those indirect taxes cannot be 
 stated, nor estimated with any high degree of 
 probabiHty ; but, when the great number of the 
 dealers in the five commodities in question, and 
 the hulk and value of them are considered,* the 
 whole of those indirect taxes must be an enor- 
 
 * By the paper No. 18, Session 1845, presented to the 
 House of Commons, the weight of tea, sugar, and tobacco 
 imported and entered for home-consumption in the United 
 Kingdom, on an average of the years 1843 and 1844, appears 
 to have been as follows, viz. : 
 
 Pounds. Cwts. Tons. Tons. 
 
 Sugar 457,962,624.. .4,088,952. ..204,447) 
 
 Tea 40,835,697... 364,600... 18,200^233,345 
 
 Tobacco 23,965,537... 213,978... 10,698) 
 
 By the paper No. 631 of the same session, the quantity 
 of malt made in the United Kingdom, and charged with duty, 
 in the year 1844, was 37,856,131 of bushels. 
 
 By the paper No. 296 of the same session, the quantity 
 of spirits distilled from grain in the United Kingdom in 
 the year 1844, was 20,608,525 of gallons. 
 
 All taxes on beer by measure being repealed, the quantity 
 made by common or public brewers cannot now be stated, 
 and the quantity of beer brewed by private persons for 
 their own use was of course never ascertainable; but the 
 whole quantity of beer consumed in the United Kingdom, if 
 it could be stated, would appear to be very enormous. 
 
 The value of those commodities, calculated at the following 
 average prices thereof to the consumer, viz. Sugar at six- 
 pence a-pound, Tea at four shillings and fourpence a-pound. 
 
9 
 
 mous sum — which, if it could be ascertained, 
 and were added to the sum of the direct taxes 
 on the same commodities, would swell the 26i 
 millions of such direct taxes to an amount so 
 very far exceeding the half of the whole revenue 
 of the United Kingdom as would be astonishing, 
 and at first sight would appear almost incredible 
 
 Tobacco at four shillings and sixpence a pound, and Spirits 
 at eight shillings and sixpence a-gallon, amounts to 34J millions 
 (£34,646,807). If to that sum could be added the value of 
 Beer consumed in the United Kingdom, calculated at the 
 price thereof to the consumer^ — the amount of the price to the 
 consumers of those Jive commodities, tea, sugar ^ tobacco^ 
 spirits, and beer, would without doubt exceed 44 millions, or 
 Jive-sixths of the amount of the annual value of all British pro- 
 duce and manufactures exported from the United Kingdom 
 to all parts of the world, including our own colonies and 
 foreign possessions. 
 
 The value of such exports on an average of three years 
 ending with the year 1844, was 53 millions (£52,747,928). 
 But that amount was composed of sums of accumulated capi- 
 tal, invested in the preparation and purchase of those exports, 
 on which the projits, if realized at the rate of ten per cent 
 thereon, would give incomings to the amount of 5 millions 
 (£5,274,789); while the 44 millions expended in the pur- 
 chase of thejive enumerated csmmodities, by the consumers 
 of them, were only a part, and, comparatively with the whole, 
 only a small part of the earnings or incomings of those con- 
 sumers. 
 
 A studious comparison of those figures, cannot but be an 
 aid to reflection on the importance of the home or domestic 
 comparatively vi'iih foreign trade. 
 
 C 
 
10 
 
 to the many sensible persons who, not having duly 
 considered this important and very interesting 
 subject, have adopted one or some of the very 
 loose and erroneous opinions which prevail, as to 
 the sources from which the public revenue of 
 the United Kingdom, arising from taxes^ is 
 derived. 
 
 Some theorists assert, that such taxes are de- 
 rived principally from land ; others that they are 
 derived principally ivom. foreign trade; and one 
 political economist, whose name passes for au- 
 thority, asserts, that all taxes are derived 
 from capital only (although capital be, in truth, 
 itself only the accumulated fruit of labour); 
 while the real main-source from which such 
 taxes are derived has been, by all those theorists 
 wholly overlooked, — namely, the earnings of 
 labour by the consumers of spirits and tobacco ; 
 who, by the taxes only on those and the oih^v three 
 enumerated commodities consumed principally 
 by them, pay probably more than three-quarters 
 of all the public revenue of the United Kingdom. 
 
 Before closing this chapter, it may be proper 
 further to notice, that there are in the United 
 Kingdom four sources of annual pubhc revenue, 
 not derived from taxes, in the sense to which the 
 meaning of that word is limited by the definition 
 hereinbefore given of it. Those four sources 
 are as follows : 
 
 First. The revenue from stamp-duties, on 
 
11 
 
 probates of wills, letters of administration^ and 
 legacies ; which are not contributions towards 
 defraying the annual public expenditure, out of 
 the annual earnings and incomings of the people, 
 but are fines or forfeitures of part of the capital 
 of personal property, on its alienation by death. 
 The revenue from those stamp duties, on an ave- 
 rage of the years 1843 and 1844, was upwards 
 of two millions per annum (£2,160,985). 
 
 Secondly. The item which is entered in the 
 returns of the revenue of stamps given in 
 the Annual Finance Accounts, printed by or- 
 der of the House of Commons, as " Stamp- 
 duties^ on deeds and instruments not included 
 in any of the therein following heads ^ From 
 inspection of those returns, it must be inferred, 
 that those non-descript stamp duties arise 
 principally from stamps upon deeds executed on 
 the sale or other alienation of land or real 
 property. The stamp-duties on such deeds are, for 
 the most part, if not always, paid out of capital, 
 upon such sale or alienation, and not out of in- 
 come; and therefore are to be considered as 
 coming within the same category of fines or for- 
 feitures, as the stamp-duties on wills^ etc. 
 
 The revenue from stamps, on such non-descript 
 deeds and instruments, on an average of the 
 years 1843 and 1844, was upwards of one mil- 
 lion and a half (£1,588,239). 
 
 Thirdly. The revenue arising from Crown 
 lands, and from small branches of the here- 
 
12 
 
 ditary revenue^ — which, together with a variety 
 of taxes, which had been imposed and existed 
 for the support of the Royal Household, and of 
 the honor and dignity of the Crown, were relin- 
 quished, first, by King George III, and subse- 
 quently, by all the monarchs his successors, in 
 exchange for the grant, by law, of the establish- 
 ment called the " Civil Listy 
 
 That revenue, on an average oijive years end- 
 ing with 1844, has been upwards of 200 thousand 
 pounds (£209,518) per annum (exclusive of 
 the monies received for the ransom of Canton, 
 which were casual items) ; and is so far from be- 
 ing derived from taxes, that it goes towards the 
 public expenditure, in relief or mitigation of 
 them. 
 
 Fourthly. The revenue, if there he now any^ 
 arising from the Post Office : 
 
 That revenue is in no sense a tax^ inasmuch 
 as, every contributor to it, receives a quid pro 
 quo of much greater value than his contribution. 
 The revenue of the Post-Office arises from a 
 monopoly of the carriage of letters^ granted by law 
 to the government. 
 
 On an average of three years, ending with 
 1839, the Post-Office yielded a clear revenue, 
 paid into the Exchequer, of a million and a half 
 (£1,643,382) per annum in aid or relief of the 
 taxes. 
 
 In the Finance accounts of the year 1842, the 
 Post-Office is stated to have yielded from the 
 
13 
 
 uniform penny-postage, a revenue, reduced in 
 that year to 600 thousand pounds. But the 
 Minister of the day, in his speech, on pro- 
 posing the Income-tax in the House of Com- 
 mons, in the year 1842, is reported to have said, 
 (Hansard, vol. 61, p. 434) "I do believe, if it 
 " were necessary, I could show to you, that from 
 " the Post Office, you do not receive one farthing 
 " of revenue. If you will add the charge of the 
 " packets to the other expenses of the Post-Office, 
 " the account which would be presented to you 
 " will show a deficit in the Revenue of the Post- 
 " Office."* 
 
 Exclusive of those four sources of Revenue, 
 and of part of the income-tax^ which operates in 
 compelling contribution out of capital^ instead 
 of out of income^ as will hereinafter be more 
 
 * In the year 1842, the net revenue from the Post 
 
 Office was 600,641 
 
 But from that sum is to be deducted the 
 amount of postage charged on the public 
 departments, viz £141,501 
 
 And the commission received on money- 
 orders, which is the fruit of the trade 
 
 of a Banker f not of a letter-carrier 38,910 
 
 180,411 
 
 Leaving for the carriage of letters in the year 1842 £420,230 
 
 Finance Accounts 1842, No. 44, No. 47, pp. 58, 60. 
 
 By the Navy Estimates, No. 22, p. 46, same session, the 
 charge for packet ships for the year 1842, was £407,549, which 
 was exclusive of charges for packet establishments on shore. 
 
14 
 
 particularly noticed ; and exclusive of casual or 
 extraordinary resources, all the Revenue of the 
 United Kingdom, worthy from its amount of any 
 notice in this inquiry, is derived from taxes ^ as 
 hereinbefore defined — ^the sources whereof, other 
 than those in this chapter mentioned, will appear 
 in the sequel. 
 
Postscript, 
 
 To the theorists who assert that the public 
 revenue of taxes is derived principally from land^ 
 it may be answered; that the whole rental oi lands ^ 
 tithes^ manors^ mines and quarries in Great 
 Britain assessed to the income-tax^ for the year 
 ending in April, 1843, was 48i millions (£48, 
 426,689)* while the public revenue of the United 
 Kingdom in the same year, was 57 millions 
 (£56,935,022),t and therefore that the rent of 
 all the lands, tithes, &c. in Great Britain would 
 have been insufficient by 8^ millions (£8,568,333), 
 to make up such revenue. 
 
 To the theorists who assert that the public 
 revenue of taxes is derived principally from 
 foreign trade, it may be answered ; that in the 
 same year, ending in April 1843, the income- 
 tax on the profits of all trade, foreign and do- 
 mestic, the profits of which, made by any indivi- 
 dual, amounted to or exceeded £150 a year, 
 yielded the sum of less than a million and a half, 
 (£1,466,985). J The sum assessed at sevenpence 
 in the pound, to produce that million and a half 
 
 * Parliamentary paper, No. 102, Session 1845. 
 f No. 147, Session 1844. 
 
 X No. 315, Session 1844. 
 
16 
 
 was therefore 50 millions (50,296,629), and 
 was the total amount of such profits ; the whole 
 of which therefore would have been insufficient 
 by 6^ millions (£6,638,093), to make up the 
 same public revenue of 57 millions. 
 
 And that a comparatively very small part of 
 those profits arose from foreign trade becomes 
 clear to demonstration, when it is remembered 
 that tine gross value of the produce and manufac- 
 tures of the United Kingdom, exported from Great 
 Britain to all parts of the world, including our 
 own colonies and foreign possessions, in the year 
 1843, was only 52 millions (£51,932,056),* 
 which was composed of sums of accumulated 
 capital, invested in the purchase of the commo- 
 dities exported. 
 
 Supposing the profit of the trade in those ex- 
 ports to have been ten per cent, on the 52 millions ; 
 the whole profits on Xho, foreign trade oi Great Bri- 
 tain, in the year 1 843, was 5 ^z7/zo/i.9( £ 5, 1 93, 205 ), 
 showing the profit on domestic trade in Great Bri- 
 tain, in the same year, to have been 45 millions 
 (45,103,424), making together the 50 millions 
 
 * From Great Britain 51,932,056 
 
 From Ireland 346,393 
 
 From the United Kingdom . . £52,278,449 
 -Parliamentary paper No. 315, Session 1844. 
 
17 
 
 assessed to the income-tax^ on profits of trade in 
 that year. If the profit of domestic or home 
 trade was ten per cent, then the sum of accumu- 
 lated capital, of which the sum of 45 millions of 
 profit was the fruit, was 450 millions^ or nearly 
 nine times the amount of the accumulated capital 
 invested in exports from Great Britain to foreign 
 countries in the year 1843. 
 
 But the disproportion between the amount of 
 the profit on foreign^ and the profit on home 
 trade in the United Kingdom, in the year 1843, 
 must have been much greater th^n what appears 
 from the foregoing analysis of the income-tax — 
 because the whole home-trade of Ireland is ex- 
 cluded,* Ireland not being subject to the income- 
 
 * As to the foreign trade of Ireland — the value of all the 
 produce and manufactures of the United Kingdom, exported 
 from Ireland on an average of the two years ended 5th Jan. 
 1843, was less than 400 thousand pounds (£392,668; Finance 
 Accounts, U. K. No. 147, Session 1844) about one-third of 
 which was value of productions of the soil. 
 
 If nothing hut wheat had been imported into Ireland in 
 return for such exports, the value of 133 thousand (133,333) 
 quarters of wheat, at three pounds a quarter (which is less 
 than what was the average price of- wheat in England and 
 Wales in those years), would have been 400 thousand pounds. 
 
 133 thousand qvL2iriQYS of wheat would, at the rate of a 
 gallon and a half per man per week, furnish bread for a year 
 to 110 thousand men (109,402) — the population of Ireland 
 being 8 millions of persons (8, 1 75, 1 24, by the census of 1841 ). 
 
 The quantity of foreign wheat, subject to duty, imported 
 
18 
 
 tax — and because although there be, perhaps, no 
 merchant engaged in foreign trade, whose income 
 is less than £150 a-year ; there is a very large 
 number of small home-traders whose profits are 
 less than £150 a-year, and therefore not subject 
 to the income-tax — which profits, — ^if they could 
 be ascertained, and were added to the profits of 
 home traders^ whose profits of £150 and upwards 
 were assessed to the income-tax, in the year 1843, 
 — would swell by many millions the said sum of 
 45 millions, the amount of the profits of home trade 
 assessed to that tax in Great Britain in that year. 
 
 into Great Britain, and retained for home consumption on 
 the average of the same two years, ended in January 1843, 
 was more than 2J millions of quarters (2,798,502, Parlia- 
 mentary-paper, No. 48, Sess. 1845), which at the same price 
 of three pounds a quarter, was of the value of more than S^ 
 millions (8,395,506), of money, or more than twenty times 
 the value of all the exports from Ireland to foreign countries 
 in that year. 
 
 If the measures proposed to the House of Commons by 
 the prime minister of the day should become law, it is not 
 easy to see how Ireland (containing nearly one third of the 
 population of the United Kingdom), which never imports 
 but annually exports very large quantities of grain to 
 Great Britain, is to derive benefit and not injury from such 
 an alteration of the law, as shall permit the importation into 
 Great Britain of grain, t\iQ produce of foreign countries (in 
 many of which countries it can be grown cheaper than it can 
 be grown in Ireland), upon the same footing as grain the 
 produce of Ireland ; that is to say duty free. 
 
19 
 
 To the political economist who asserts that 
 the public revenue of taxes is derived entirely 
 from accumulated capital^ it is surely needless, 
 after what has just been said, to make any answer. 
 
 From the foregoing, therefore, it is clear to de- 
 monstration — from what source soever the public 
 revenue of taxes is derived, that it cannot be 
 mainly derived either from the owners or farm- 
 ers of land^ or from the dealers in trade^ espe- 
 cially not from the dealers in foreign trade — 
 and that the main source of that revenue is the 
 earnings of labourers^ it is hoped has been satis- 
 factorily shown. 
 
 On the average of three years of the last war, 
 ending in the year 1814, there were serving in 
 the army and navy of the United Kingdom more 
 than five hundred thousand men (522,446).* 
 All those men (their commissioned officers only 
 excepted) were enlisted or raised from the class 
 of labourers ; and that they were paid and main- 
 tained in the service of their country out of the 
 public revenue, arising mainly from contribu- 
 tions thereto drawn from the toil and industry 
 of the same class, seems, upon attentive consi- 
 deration of the foregoing facts and figures, to be 
 incontrovertible. 
 
 Army, 380,780) -oo aa^: 
 Navy, 141,666 r22>^^^"^^«- 
 
20 
 
 If it be true, then, as from the same premises 
 seems to be equally incontrovertible, that the 
 physical force and financial power of the realm 
 reside in that class, it is surely a deep debt, and 
 the imperative duty of the legislature, and of all 
 who possess influence, or have sway over the 
 moral and social condition of that class, to 
 weigh well, and with the most anxious care and 
 circumspection, in what manner such influence 
 or sway shall be directed or exercised. 
 
CHAPTER 11. 
 
 On the Incidence of the Taxation of the 
 United Kingdom. 
 
 All taxes, direct and indirect^ paid by owners 
 or occupiers of land; and all taxes paid by the 
 dealers in the productions of land, on their way 
 from the producer to the consumer — and all 
 taxes whatsoever, paid by producers within the 
 United Kingdom, and by importers of all com- 
 modities for home-consumption, and by the 
 dealers in all such commodities, on their way 
 from such producer or importer to the consumer 
 — as well as all taxes of Customs or of Excise im- 
 posed on such productions or commodities, by 
 their measure or weight, — ultimately fall upon 
 and are paid by the consumers of those productions 
 or commodities, — by whomsoever such taxes may 
 have been paid to the collectors thereof, or into 
 the public chests. 
 
 The merchant importer sells the commodities 
 imported by him to the wholesale dealer^ at a 
 price including the prime cost and all charges — 
 the duties of Customs or of Excise, and all taxes 
 whatsoever direct or indirect (including the in- 
 come-tax) paid by him the merchant-importer, and 
 all tajces/^didi by his clerks or employees (the taxes 
 
16 
 
 paid by them being covered by their respective 
 salaries or wages) and including — ultra such 
 prime cost, charges, and taxes, — that profit on 
 which (after paying thereout the taxes on his own 
 consumptions) he subsists or grows rich. 
 
 The whole sale- dealer sells to the retail-dealer 
 or shop-keeper^ the same commodities at a price 
 covering not only the prime cost paid by him to 
 the merchant-importer^ and all charges and taxes 
 whatsoever (including the income-tax) paid by 
 him the wholesale-dealer^ and the taxes paid by 
 his clerks or employees, (covered by their salaries 
 or wages) but comprising also that new or second 
 profit on which (after paying thereout the taxes 
 on his own consumptions) he subsists or grows 
 rich. 
 
 The retail- dealer or shop-keeper adds, in his 
 ledger, to the prime cost paid by him to the whole- 
 sale-dealer for the same commodities, all charges 
 thereon ; including among the same, the rent and 
 aU taxes on his warehouse or shop, and on his 
 establishment of warehousemen, shopmen, carmen, 
 horses, &c., the tax on his income, and all other 
 taxes and charges whatsoever, paid by him on or 
 as a dealer in the same commodities, and then 
 sells them to the consumer at such price as repays 
 not only the prime cost paid to the wholesale 
 dealer^ and the taxes and charges paid or in- 
 curred by him the retail-dealer or shop-keeper^ 
 but at such price over and above as leaves to him. 
 
21 
 
 » 
 
 that profit on which (after paying thereout the 
 taxes on his own consumptions) he subsists or 
 grows rich. 
 
 It is manifest, that in like manner, all taxes 
 direct and indirect^ including the tax upon in- 
 come^ paid by dealers in the productions of the 
 land of the United Kingdom, on their way from 
 the producer to the consumer^ such as corn- 
 dealers, millers, bakers, maltsters, distillers, 
 brewers, cattle-dealers, butchers, greengrocers, 
 dairymen, &c. &c. ; together with all charges on 
 their respective trades, and the profit ultrli on 
 which (after paying thereout the taxes on their 
 own consumptions) those tradesmen respectively 
 subsist or grow rich, must be paid by the con- 
 sumers of those productions. 
 
 It is equally true, that all taxes, including the 
 tax upon income paid by the owners dindi farmers 
 of the landoi the United Kingdom — as well as all 
 taxes paid by the dealers in the productions of 
 such land, posterior to the sale thereof in the first 
 market after severance from the land — are paid by 
 the consumers of those productions: although 
 that proposition has been so much beset with 
 sophistry, and false assumptions, as to be by no 
 means a received or admitted fapt. 
 
 For it is common to hear both the owner and 
 
 farmer of land (echoed by certain political 
 
 economists) argue, that taxes imposed upon land 
 
 D 
 
22 
 
 • 
 
 or upon the productions of land, fall exclusively 
 upon them and not upon the consumers of those 
 productions. 
 
 The owner of land often propounds, that if 
 tithes were abolished, or if such and such a tax 
 were repealed, he would get more money-rent 
 for the land : and the farmer in like manner pro- 
 pounds, that if tithes, or if the same tax were 
 taken off, he would get greater profit by his 
 farm. ^ 
 
 * It is often asserted by tlie owners of land, that tithes 
 are a tax upon land, or upon the productions of land, and 
 — if tithes were abolished, that they would get a greater 
 rent for their lands And by farmers of land it is often as- 
 serted — if tithes were abolished, that they would get greater 
 profit by their farms. 
 
 But the fallacy of such assertions becomes manifest, when 
 it is considered that tithes are not a tax^ but are, in effect, 
 a rent of part of the land itself. 
 
 Tithes, being the tenth part, severed from the other nine- 
 tenth parts of the gross produce of land, have been dedi- 
 cated to the maintenance of, and have been the property of 
 the clergy in succession, from time immemorial. 
 
 Such tenth part of the gross produce, has been well as- 
 certained to be equivalent to a fifth part of the rent of the 
 land. A charge upon all the land of the Kingdom, equal to 
 a fifth part of the rent thereof, has thus been the right and 
 property of the clergy from time immemorial. 
 
 The purchaser or inheritor of land subject to tithes^ though 
 ostensibly the owner of the whole, is, in effect, the owner of 
 only/owr undivided y?/i^A parts of it ; his right to which is 
 
23 
 
 In fact, however, those are mere unfounded as- 
 sumptions ; for upon strict enquiry it will appear 
 that neither the owners nor farmers of land pay 
 any tax on the productions of land, further or 
 otherwise than as they are themselves respectively 
 consumers of those productions. 
 
 When a farmer takes a farm, he calculates on 
 the one hand the amount of rent required for it by 
 the landlord — the amount of the tithes (or rent- 
 charge in lieu of tithes) to which it is subject — 
 
 evidenced by title-deeds and parchments. The other undivi- 
 ded one-fifth part being, in effect, the property of the clergy, 
 who hold it by a right much stronger than deeds and parch- 
 ments can convey, namely, by the unwritten common law of 
 the land, which has been in force from time before title- 
 deeds or parchments had existence. 
 
 If the spoliation of the clergy were perpetrated by a law, 
 depriving them and their successors of tithes, without di- 
 verting or appropriating the revenue arising from tithes, to 
 the public, or some other service or use — but merely abolish- 
 ing tithes by enacting, simpliciter, that they should be no 
 longer payable — in that case, the owners of land would cer- 
 tainly get an addition to their rent ; but not by increase of 
 the rent of the/bw/* undivided ^/?/<fA parts thereof purchased 
 or inherited by them; but by addition, or accruer, of that 
 undivided one-fifth, which, previous and up to the time of 
 the passing of such law, had been the right and property of 
 the clergy. 
 
 But though the owners of land would, by such an abolition 
 of tithes, become the effectual owners of one-fifth more land, 
 and therefore would get one-fifth more rent for it, — the far- 
 
24 
 
 the amount of capital which must be embarked 
 in stocking and conducting it — ^the amount of 
 taxes and parochial rates which he will have to 
 pay as farmer of that farm, &c. ; and on the 
 other hand^ he calculates what quantity of grain 
 he can by his skill and industry cause to grow — 
 or what cattle he can rear upon the soil — and then 
 what price, (reasoning from the past to the future. 
 
 mers of such land would be in no manner benefited thereby ; 
 they would only, after such abolition, have to pay the rent 
 of the whole land to their landlords, instead of paying/owr- 
 ffths thereof to them^ and one-fifth to the clergy or tithe- 
 owner, as they do, in fact, or in effect at present, and have 
 hitherto done. 
 
 Land, tithe free, lets higher than land subject to tithe ; not 
 because it is exempt from any tax to which other lands are 
 subject, but, because the landlord has somehow become pos- 
 sessed both of the land and the tithe thereof, and therefore, 
 is in a condition to let the whole of the land ; reserving to 
 himself, both the rent and the tithe, in one undistinguished 
 annual sum. 
 
 Any notice of the transfer of tithes into lay hands, since 
 the dissolution of monasteries, in the reign of King Henry 
 the Eighth; or of the commutation of tithes, under the sta- 
 tutes lately passed for that purpose, is here purposely omitted, 
 as not affecting the statement or argument of this note ; 
 though the conversion, by those statutes, of tithe into a rent- 
 charge, might serve to support the assertion that tithes have 
 always been, not of the nature of a tax, but of the nature of 
 a rent, into which all tithes now are, or are in process of 
 being, converted. 
 
25 
 
 upon the average of bygone years) he can sell 
 that grain or those cattle for in the market^ 
 where they begin their course from him the pro- 
 ducer^ through the various dealers therein, suc- 
 cessively, to the consumer. 
 
 The price in the market is manifestly the 
 governing point in the farmer's enquiries and cal- 
 culations, and in his determination, on taking a 
 farm ; as that price must necessarily comprise, as 
 component parts of it, the rent^ tithes^ (or rent- 
 charge in lieu of tithes) and 2X1 taxes and rates to 
 be paid by him — and, ultra the same, and all other 
 outgoings, a fair return for his capital, and that 
 profit on which he is to subsist, or hopes to grow 
 rich. 
 
 The rent paid by farmers to landlords, com- 
 prises all taxes paid by landlords, and the sur- 
 plus ultr4 on which landlords subsist or grow 
 rich— just in the same way as the price paid for 
 commodities, by wholesale dealers to merchants, 
 comprises all taxes paid by merchants, and the 
 surplus ultra on which merchants subsist or grow 
 rich. 
 
 To show the fallacy of the assumption, that taxes 
 imposed in the first instance upon land^ fall ex- 
 clusively upon the owners or farmers of land, — 
 let it be supposed that some heavy new tax were 
 imposed upon, and levied from the occupiers of 
 land. 
 
26 
 
 The Poor-rates (including the County-rates), 
 the Church-rates, and the Highway-rates in Eng- 
 land and "Wales (which are taxes to all intents 
 and purposes) amount to 8i millions a-year.* 
 
 Suppose that the expenses defrayed by means 
 of those rates had heretofore been paid out of 
 the consolidated fund ; that is to say, out of the 
 general public revenue of the United Kingdom ; 
 and that it were determined and enacted by law, 
 that such expenses should no longer be so de- 
 frayed, but hereafter be provided and paid by a 
 tax upon land.f 
 
 That would cause the imposition of a tax 
 upon land, to the amount of 8i millions a-year, 
 suppose of four shillings in the pound, on the 
 full value, or one fifth of the rack-rent, to be 
 paid by a rate or rates, made on all the occupiers 
 of land, in England and Wales. 
 
 * Poor-rates 6,829,067 average of the years 1842, 3, and 4. 
 Highway do. 1,235,776 do. do. 1837, 8, and 9, 
 
 Church do. 363,103 in the year 1839 
 
 £8,427,946 per annum. 
 
 Parliamentary papers. No. 30, Session 1845. No. 344, 
 Session 1841 ; and No. 562, Session 1839— the two 
 last being the latest returns published by the House of 
 Commons. 
 
 f In these days, when so many changes in the social 
 system, by shifting and varying the taxation of the United 
 
27 
 
 Suppose upon the imposition of such a tax, the 
 farmers were in consequence to propose to their 
 landlords a reduction of four shillings in the 
 pound, or one fifth of the rent agreed to be paid 
 for the land. The reply of the landlords would 
 naturally be: First^ " Why should we make such a 
 " reduction? Were we to do so, we should defray 
 " the whole expense of the maintenance and relief 
 " of the poor, and all the County-rates, Church- 
 -rates, and Highway-rates, out of our own 
 '"''purses. It would be, if possible, still more unfair 
 " and unreasonable that you^ the farmers, should 
 "defray that expense, and those rates, out of 
 ''^ your own purses^ if it were practicable for you 
 " so to do. You must pay the new tax, and be 
 " reimbursed by raising the price of your produc- 
 "tions upon the consumer, i,e. upon the public; 
 
 Kingdom, are speculated upon, both in and out of parliament; 
 there have not been wanting suggestions, that the expense of 
 the maintenance and relief of the poor should actually be paid 
 out of the consolidated fund. But, however unequally or un- 
 fairly the poor-rates may press upon realy by the exemption of 
 personal property from liability to contribution thereto under 
 the existing system of levying the poor-rates (as to which the 
 present is not a fit occasion for enquiry) ; to abolish that 
 system, and to defray the expense of the maintenance and 
 relief of the poor out of the consolidated fund, would destroy 
 all the local and personal interest of parishioners in the 
 superintendence and care of the poor, and in preventing the 
 spread of pauperism in their respective parishes. 
 
28 
 
 "on whom it is just and fair, that that tax 
 " should fall, as it did when it was paid out of the 
 " consolidated fund. For ourselves, as consumers, 
 *' members of that public, we and you by the rise 
 " of prices shall pay our shares of that tax. But 
 " secondly: it will be seen as a consequence of 
 "this new tax, that instead of reducing^ we 
 " shall be obliged to increase the rent, — for as 
 " in consequence of the imposition of the new tax, 
 " the price of all the productions of land must rise, 
 " and that enduringly^ during the continuance of 
 " such tax; and as such enduring rise in the price 
 "of all the productions of land must necessarily 
 "raise the money-price of labour, and conse- 
 " quently of every commodity of which labour is 
 " an ingredient,* the rent which you now pay, will 
 
 * It has so long been an universally received and settled 
 opinion of sound political economists, that the price of labour is 
 regulated by and depends upon the price of the productions of 
 land — that it is startling to read the creed of the prime min- 
 ister of the day upon that point, formed upon three or six 
 years' experience, as reported to have been confessed by him 
 (Hansard, vol. 83, p.p. 70, 71,) in his speech on the address 
 to the throne, on the opening of parliament, on the 22nd of 
 January 1846. After declaring that he did not want to 
 deprive of any merit, which is fairly their due, those 
 who arguing a priori, without the benefit of experience, had 
 come to certain conclusions — the minister is reported to have 
 said : " I do not believe after the experience of the last three 
 ''^ years, that the rate of wages varies with the price of food. 
 
29 
 
 " give a command over the necessaries, comforts, 
 " and conveniences of life, diminished by much 
 " more than by what our fair proportion, or share 
 " of the new tax ought to diminish it." 
 
 That landlords who had reserved the rent from 
 their farmers in money would be correct, and be 
 justified in such statement and anticipation, will 
 
 " I do not believe that with high prices, wages will necessarily 
 " rise in the same ratio. I do not believe that a low price of 
 " food, necessarily implies a low rate of wages." Again, " As 
 " to wages, who can deny the fact, that during the three years 
 " that preceded the month of October last, prices were com- 
 " parativelylow? there was comparative cheapness and plenty, 
 " and yet at no period were the wages of labour higher. If you 
 " take the three preceding years, you will find high prices, and 
 " coexisting with high prices, you will find low wages ; well 
 *' then I have six years experience. I have during the three 
 " first years high prices and low wages; I have during the last 
 " three years, low prices and high wages; and I cannot resist 
 " the conclusion, that wages do not vary with the price of 
 "provisions; there is no immediate relation between wages 
 " and provisions ; or if there he a relation^ it is an inverse 
 ''ratior 
 
 Upon the novel opinions broached by the prime minister in 
 the foregoing passage of his speech, it may be remarked ; 
 
 First. — If the conclusion, to which he has been irresistibly 
 led by his last three or six years' experience, be a right con- 
 clusion ; and if the relation which he says subsists (if 
 there be a relation) between wages and provisions .be in an 
 inverse ratio ; then it follows arithmetically, if a labourer 
 were earning ten shillings a-week, and the price of provisions 
 were to become double^ that his wages would thereupon fall 
 
 E 
 
30 
 
 appear — if the effect of such new tax on the rents 
 of landlords who had reserved their rents not in 
 money ^ but in corn (not at so many shillings per 
 acre, but at so many bushels of corn per acre, to 
 be converted into money at the average price of 
 each successive year) be considered. 
 
 By the rise in the price of all the productions 
 of land, in consequence of the new tax, it is mani- 
 
 Xojive shillings a-week, — and vice versa ; if a labourer were 
 earning ten shillings a-week^ and the price of provisions 
 were to fall by a half, that thereupon his wages would rise 
 to twenty shillings a-week — which is surely a proposition as 
 startling as it is new. 
 
 Secondly. — That no sound political economist has ever 
 propounded, that with high prices of food, wages will rise " in 
 the same ratio," for if wages did so rise, labourers and their 
 families would be exempt from vicissitude of life, in conse- 
 quence of the abundance or scarcity of harvests in different 
 years, and would fare as well in years of scarcity, as in years 
 of plenty. 
 
 But no such fluctation of their wages, exempting labourers 
 and their families from the "common lot," in the dispensa- 
 tions of Providence, takes place. In years of plenty, they fare 
 better than in years of scarcity; and in years when the harvest 
 is greatly defective, they must be pinched. 
 
 What sound political economists propound and maintain on 
 this point is this, — that the wages of labour fluctuate and 
 are governed by the price of the productions of land in the long 
 run — and not by that price as it varies yrom year to year — 
 it being ordained, that labourers, in common with all the rest of 
 mankind, shall enjoy the abundance and endure the scarcity 
 
31 
 
 fest that a landlord who had reserved his rent in 
 corn^ would for the same number of bushels of 
 corn get a greater money -rent for his land, after 
 than he did before the imposition of such new tax. 
 He would nevertheless, get not a greater^ but a 
 less real-rent for his land, because the increased 
 money-rent would, cceteris 'paribus^ give him 
 
 of harvests ; obtaining in the long run a fair compensation 
 for their toil and industry. 
 
 Thirdly. — Sound political economists are so far from be- 
 lieving, " that a low price of food necessarily implies a low 
 rate of wages," that they believe exactly the reverse ; viz. — 
 that an enduring low price of food indicates a high real-rate 
 concurrently with a low money-rate of wages: because, an en- 
 during low price of food, is the strongest indication of an 
 abundant recompense of labour ; the wages of labour, when 
 food has long continued cheap, giving more command over it, 
 and over other the necessaries, comforts, and conveniences 
 of life, than when the price of food has long continued dear. 
 
 Fourthly. — If the facts alleged by the prime minister to 
 be undeniable, were true, viz. — that " During the three years 
 "that preceded the month of October 1845, there was com- 
 " parative cheapness and plenty, and yet at no period were the 
 " wages of labour higher" — and that " in the three preceding 
 " years (ending therefore in October 1 842), high prices were 
 " coexistent with low wages," — there might have been many 
 causes in operation, irrespectively of or other than the price 
 of food, sufficient to account for the prevalence of the high 
 wages and the low wages in those intervals of three years 
 each, respectively and comparatively. 
 
 But the prime minister did not offer any 'proof, that wages 
 were higher in the latter, than in the former of those short 
 
32 
 
 only the same command over the necessary com- 
 forts and conveniences of life, as the rent which 
 he got previously to the imposition of the new 
 tax, minus his share of that tax. That such 
 would really be the result to the landlord is un- 
 questionable ; for to suppose otherwise, would 
 involve an inference, that a heavy tax upon land, 
 would or might increase the real^ as well as the 
 money-rent of land; an inference which would 
 be not merely absurd, but preposterous. 
 
 periods ; and with respect to wages of agricultural labourers 
 and the wages of mechanics, artificers, and handicraftsmen, 
 ministering to agriculture, who collectively form by far the 
 greater part of the labouring population of the United King- 
 dom ; well-informed persons do not believe that there has 
 been any change in the rate of money wages earned by them 
 in the last six years. 
 
 The average prices of wheat in England and Wales, in 
 those six years, ending with Michaelmas in each year, taken 
 from the London Gazette, were as follows : 
 
 £. s. d. £. s. d. 
 
 In the year 1840 8 5 In the year 1843 6 2 
 
 1841 8 1844 6 7 
 
 1842 7 8 1845 6 
 
 divide by 3) 1 4 1 divide by 3) 18 9 
 
 Average of those ) q o q Average of those ) q /^ o 
 three years. ) three years. ) 
 
 From which figures it appears — that in the three years eliding 
 in 1 842, wheat was nearly 28 per cent (6s. 3d. + Is. 9d.) dearer 
 on the average than in the three years ending in 1845, and 
 
33 
 
 The landlords who had reserved their rents in 
 money ^ not under disability by force of contracts^ 
 (and landlords under such disability, as soon as 
 the same by efflux of time or otherwise should 
 have ceased) would raise, would be able to raise, 
 and would be justified in raising their rents to the 
 same rate {cceteris paribus) as the landlords, who 
 had reserved their rents in corn. Which last is 
 the fairest way both to landlord and farmer of 
 reserving rents.* 
 
 therefore that the same money-wages paid to labourers in the 
 latter as in the former of those periods, would give them a 
 command over wheat (which may be called their food) 28 
 per cent (or more than a fourth) greater in the latter than in 
 the former period. The same money-wages in both periods 
 were manifestly, therefore, much greater real-wages in the 
 latter, than in the former period. 
 
 It is highly improbable therefore, and it is believed to be 
 inconsistent with fact, that the money-wages of the great 
 majority of the labourers of the United Kingdom were higher 
 in the latter, than in the former of those periods of three 
 years each, as asserted by the prime minister, who in his 
 speech, as reported and cited in the text, clearly spoke of the 
 rate of money-wages only, without reference or allusion to, 
 or contemplation of any distinction between money-wages 
 and real-wages, 
 
 * Supposing without admitting, that the change in the corn 
 laws proposed to parliament by the prime minister of the day, 
 (if adopted by the legislature,) were to have the effect of 
 lowering materially and permanently the price of corn in the 
 United Kingdom, as the corn-law -league and its followers 
 
34 
 
 That the reverse of all the foregoing would 
 arise or follow in case of a heavy tax on land — 
 suppose again poor-rates, &c. to the amount of 
 8i millions^ for example — being taken off the oc- 
 cupiers of land, is manifest.* 
 
 It is sometimes asked by a landlord, ^^how can I 
 raise the rent of my land, when a new tax is im- 
 posed upon it, payable by me? " 
 
 It would be as reasonable in a merchant-im' 
 porter to ask, hoiio he can raise, upon the whole- 
 
 predicate and anticipate — it would deserve serious consider- 
 ation, whether a law ought not to follow to enable all land- 
 lords and tenants under contracts for money-rents of land, 
 for terms of years, of which years are unexpired, to de- 
 mand and receive, or to make good tender of — instead of the 
 money-rent certain contracted to be received and paid — a 
 money-rent varied in proportion to the price of grain, accor- 
 ding to the septennial average prices thereof, ascertained by 
 law for fixing the annual amount of the payment to be made 
 for rent-charge in lieu of tithes in the United Kingdom. Land- 
 lords who had reserved corn-rents, would of course after a 
 permanent fall of prices, get less money-rent, although for the 
 reasons assigned in the text, not less real-rent for their lands; 
 while landlords who had reserved money -rents would after such 
 fall of prices get undue and excessive rents for their lands 
 during the continuance of their contracts existing at the time 
 of the commencement of such fall, if such contracts were to 
 be enforced, and their tenants should be able to fulfil the 
 same. 
 
 * Little reliance can be placed in political arithmetic, 
 when the data are in any degree conjectural — but, for 
 
35 
 
 sale-dealer^ the price of any commodity imported 
 by him on which a new tax has been laid? 
 
 Capital invested in land^ by the force and 
 power of a law^ in the nature of things estab- 
 lished by Divine Providence, will always com- 
 mand a fair profit or return for it, ultra all taxes 
 imposed upon it, or upon the dealers in it ; i.e. the 
 owners smdjarmers of land, just in the same way 
 as capital invested otherwise than in land does. 
 
 Capital invested in land, from the great secur- 
 ity of it, yields a smaller profit or return, than 
 capital invested in any other manner; and land- 
 lords will no more part with their capital, (i.e. let 
 
 the present purpose, it may be assumed (as stated under 
 the Article " Corn Laws and Corn-trade," in Mr. Maccul- 
 loch's Commercial Dictionary), that 14 millions (13,718,279) 
 of quarters of wheat, and 39 millions (38,962,472) of quar- 
 ters of other grain, are annually produced and consumed in 
 the United Kingdom. 
 
 Eight and a half rnillions (the amount of local taxation 
 referred to in the text), which are levied it may be said, al- 
 most wholly from the land, would be equivalent to a tax of 
 six shillings a quarter, on 1 4 millions of quarters of wheat, 
 and two shillings and three-pence a quarter, on 39 millions of 
 quarters of other grain. 
 
 As the producers of grainin the United Kingdom are subject 
 to enduring heavy taxes upon the land which yields it, from 
 which the producers of grain in foreign countries are exempt 
 — the proposal to parliament of the late Whig government, 
 of an enduring fixed duty of eight shillings a quarter, on all 
 foreign wheat, imported into the United Kingdom, was pro- 
 bably founded on some such computation as the above. 
 
36 
 
 their land to be farmed,) for less than a fair profit 
 or return for it, ultra all taxes imposed upon it 
 or upon them, than merchant-importers will part 
 with their commodities for less than such profit 
 or return. 
 
 To ask how landlords are able to fix the rent 
 of their lands, or merchants the price of their 
 commodities, so as to yield such return, is as 
 unreasonable a question, as it would be to ask, 
 how the eternal and, by man, unalterable law of 
 gravity, or any other law of nature produces its 
 effects. 
 
 The assumption that taxes imposed upon land, 
 or upon the owners or farmers of land, fall ex- 
 clusively upon them, implies, that taxes can be 
 imposed on the producers of, or dealers in any 
 commodity, so as to fall on such pj'oducers or 
 dealers, (further than as themselves consumers) 
 and not on the consumers of that commodity — 
 than which there cannot be a more erroneous as- 
 sumption — the error of which may appear more 
 strikingly, if it be supposed, that a tax were to 
 be laid upon the producers of, or dealers in 
 any commodity, equal to the whole amount of 
 their profits as producers or dealers in that 
 commodity. In that case, if they could not shift 
 such tax upon the consumers of the commodity, 
 and were nevertheless to continue their trade, 
 they would labour merely for taxes, to be paid to 
 
37 
 
 the state, without any profit to themselves ; which 
 proves the fallacy of the assumption, by the 
 reductio ad absurdum. 
 
 And as the question is not of quantity or degree, 
 but of principle — ^then it follows — if the pro- 
 ducer, or dealer in any commodity, can shift any^ 
 that he can, and, in the course and nature of things, 
 that he will shift every tax imposed upon him, on 
 the consumer^ contributing himself to such a tax 
 no further or otherwise, than as he is himself a 
 consumer of the commodity in which he deals. 
 
 It would be as illogical to suppose a producer 
 of, or dealer in any commodity himself to pay aU 
 taxes, or any tax imposed upon it, out of his own 
 purse J without reimbursement — as to suppose that 
 a merchant-importer paid out of his own purse, 
 without reimbursement, the taxes of customs on 
 all tea and sugar imported and sold by him in 
 the market, instead of the taxes only on the 
 quantity of tea and sugar consumed by himself 
 and his family. 
 
 The foregoing reasoning or argument, pro- 
 ceeds on the assumption of a free state of things ; 
 that is to say — such a state of things, as that the 
 principle (namely, that all taxes upon com- 
 modities, whether imposed directly or indirectly 
 thereon, are paid by the consumer) is at liberty 
 to apply and to work naturally upon all changes, 
 made by the imposition of taxes, upon particular 
 
38 
 
 persons or things. The existence of contracts 
 between parties, may, and often does for a time, 
 impede and delay the operation of that principle: 
 for instance, in the case of a lease between land- 
 lord and tenant, for a term of years — ^if a tax 
 were imposed directly on the landlord, he could 
 not, pending the term, increase the rent upon the 
 tenant, even though the supposed tax were equal 
 to, and took from him the whole rent of the land ; 
 and therefore such a tax, however little or great, 
 would not, pending the lease ^ increase the price 
 of the produce of land. If all the lands of the 
 United Kingdom were under lease for the same 
 term of years, and a tax of equal amount to the 
 whole rent were imposed, and could be levied, 
 upon all the owners of land, they wovldi^ during 
 that term, as landlords, be penniless. 
 
 But if a tax were imposed directly upon the 
 farmers of land, they would immediately require, 
 and would obtain for the productions of their 
 farms, an increased price equivalent to the amount 
 of the tax, and so throw it upon the consumers of 
 that produce ; themselves bearing only their part 
 of such tax as consumers. If the supposed tax 
 were imposed to an amount equal to the whole 
 average annual profit of the farmer, it is manifest, 
 that he must do so, and be able to do so, or be 
 ruined. 
 
 The disturbing force or power, which contracts 
 
39 
 
 interpose against the free working, or operation of 
 the said principle, has given some colour to the false 
 assumption, that certain taxes fall absolutely and 
 exclusively on the owners or farmers of land. 
 But it must on reflection be evident, that such 
 disturbing force can only operate while it lasts, 
 and that it must necessarily in process of time, as 
 far as arising out of contract^ cease, and become 
 inoperative. 
 
 In such a commonwealth as that of the United 
 Kingdom, the infinite variety of subsisting con- 
 tracts, both as to conditions, and term of duration, 
 may and must, on the first imposition of a direct 
 tax on the owners of land, so many of whom are 
 under contracts, very materially disturb the free 
 working, and delay the full operation and effect of 
 the principle laid down, viz. — ^that all taxes upon 
 commodities — whether laid in the first instance, 
 directly upon them, by their measure or weight : 
 or indirectly on the producers of them, or the 
 importers of them for home-consumption, or on 
 other the dealers in the same — must ultimately fall 
 upon, and be paid by the consumer. But the 
 attempt to show nevertheless, that that principle 
 is true, it is hoped has not been unsuccessful. 
 
 In fact, the very same parties, who sometimes 
 contend, that taxes imposed upon land, or on the 
 owners or farmers of land., are paid and borne 
 exclusively by them — often at other times show, 
 
40 
 
 that thejfeel the truth of the contrary, and that 
 such taxes form a component part of tlffe price of 
 the productions of land, and are paid by the con- 
 sumers of those productions. For in the contest 
 which is now rife and virulent under the watch- 
 words or cries of '* Free trade,^^ and " Protection 
 to agriculture'^ — the agricultural party contends, 
 that the heavy tases upon land, or upon the 
 owners and farmers of land, so raise the price of 
 the productions of land in the United Kingdom, 
 that they are unable to contend in the market, 
 with the foreign grower or producer, who is 
 exempt from such taxes ; which could not be 
 fairly argued, if it were true, that such taxes were 
 paid and borne by the owners or farmers of land 
 themselves exclusively, and not by the consumer, 
 as a component part of the price of those pro- 
 ductions. 
 
 The only tax^ which is not paid by, and cannot 
 be shifted from the persons on whom it is im- 
 posed upon consumers, or otherwise howsoever; 
 but, must be paid and borne by themselves per- 
 sonally, is part of the tax upon income, — ^namely, 
 such part of that tax as is imposed upon incomes 
 which are insusceptible of increase by any act or 
 effort of the owner of them; such as, incomes 
 arising from dividends on the public stocks or 
 funds, or from Government or other annuities — 
 incomes of members of the learned professions, 
 
41 
 
 which arise from fees or honoraria, — salaries 
 of all public functionaries — pay of the army and 
 navy — and incomes of the clergy, arising from 
 tithes which have been commuted and converted 
 into a rent-charge in lieu thereof; of which part 
 of the tax upon income, so different in its nature, 
 operation, and pressure, from taxes upon com- 
 modities — or upon the dealers in commodities — 
 or upon the owners of accumulated capital, who 
 are free to demand a varjdng rate of interest 
 thereon, — further notice will hereinafter appear. 
 
^^ ■ ^^ y U DKjz^ 66 
 
 
 FAMILIAR TREATISE 
 
 ON 
 
 TAXATION, FEEE TRADE, 
 
 ETC. 
 
 COMPRISING 
 
 FACTS USUALLY UNNOTICED OE UNCONSIDERED IN 
 THEORIES OF THOSE SUBJECTS. 
 
 WITH NOTES ON SUBJECTS ARISING INCIDENTALLY. 
 
 LONDON : 
 PELHAM RICHARDSON, 23, CORNHILL; 
 
 AND 
 
 JOHN OLLIVIER, 59, PALL-MALL. 
 
 MPCCCXLVI. 
 
LONDON: 
 KICHAKDS, PRINTER, 100, ST. MARTIN'S LANE 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAP. p;,GE 
 
 I. On the sources whence the public re- 
 venue of the United Kingdom^ arising 
 from taxes^ is derived. ... 1 
 
 II. On the incidence of the taxation of 
 
 the United Kingdom. . . .21 
 
 III. On the effects produced on the social 
 condition of the people of the United 
 Kingdom hy the selection of subjects 
 
 of taxation 43 
 
 Digression on the fallacy or delusion 
 in the mercantile system called the 
 Balance of trade — under which it is 
 assumed^ that the precious metals are 
 drawn from foreign nations^ by what 
 is called a favourable balance. . . 69 
 
 III. Continuation. . . . .98 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAP. PAGE 
 
 IV. Of general rules and principles to he 
 considered on the imposition of taxes 
 in the United Kingdom. . . .170 
 
 V. On the existent taxation of the 
 
 United Kingdom 200 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 Of the effects 'produced on the social condition 
 of the people of the United Kingdom hy the 
 selection of subjects of taxation. 
 
 In the progress of a rude or barbarous people 
 to a state of civilization, agriculture naturally 
 and necessarily is the first step. 
 
 By the advancement and improvement of agri- 
 culture, birth is given to the arts of life and the 
 division of labour — to the artists in raiment first, 
 and then to the artisans and handicraftsmen who 
 minister to agriculture. 
 
 All the labourers other than those engaged 
 in agriculture — for the common convenience 
 of themselves and the advancing society — 
 congregate in localities in the various districts 
 of the country, marked out by rivers, hills, 
 or other natural boundaries ; and form the 
 hamlet, the village, and the town — to the occu- 
 pants of which the agriculturists bring the pro- 
 ductions of the land, in exchange for the produc- 
 tions of manufacture, handicraft, or art; and trade 
 grows and is established. 
 
 Next comes the accumulation of capital — of 
 stocks or stores of the productions of land in the 
 
 G 
 
44 
 
 rural districts^ and of manufactured commodities 
 in towns — kept ready prepared to meet promptly- 
 all demands for the same, by wholesale or retail. 
 
 When by industry and economy, " the hand- 
 maids of fortune,'^ accumulation is made of such 
 productions and commodities, beyond what is 
 requisite for the supply of the wants and effectual 
 demands of the people — vent is sought for the 
 surplus, among other nations, by exchanging with 
 them such surplus, for the surplus productions 
 of their soil and industry. Thn^ foreign trade 
 begins to grow and is established. But it is, of 
 course, the surplus only of productions or com- 
 modities, beyond what is wanted by the people 
 for their own use, which is exported from any 
 country to foreign parts. 
 
 For the convenience of ^uch foreign trade, 
 sea-ports spring up on the banks of navigable ri- 
 vers ; to afford harbour for ships, with docks, quays, 
 and warehouses, to facilitate the exportation and 
 importation of, and for storing up, in transitu 
 from the producers to the consumers at home 
 and abroad, the surplus productions of their se- 
 veral countries. 
 
 Foreign trade soon gives rise to new and more 
 extensive divisions of labour — to the calling of 
 the merchant, the factor, the warehouse-man, the 
 ship-builder, the ship-owner, and the many arti- 
 sans and handicraftsmen who minister to those 
 
45 
 
 engaged in the trades carried on in sea-port 
 places or towns. 
 
 Merchants and traders, and their depend- 
 ents, the inhabitants of sea-ports, from their 
 intercourse and connexion with foreigners, 
 (upon whom, as much as upon their own 
 countrymen, they depend for the continuance 
 of their trades — that is to say, of their 
 livelihood,) become a class, or caste, distinct 
 from the rest of the community dwelling in 
 inland villages and towns, occupied in domestic 
 trade and little affected by foreign connexions 
 or influences. 
 
 The sea-ports of most continental countries, 
 which, usually, present only one line of coast to 
 the sea, are necessarily few, compared in number 
 with their inland cities and towns. 
 
 Even in the United Kingdom — the insular 
 form of which appears to offer so many points of 
 short and easy ingress from the coast into the 
 interior of the country — ^the sea-ports are, compa- 
 ratively with its inland cities and towns, exceed- 
 ingly few in number ; the larger rivers only 
 being navigable for ships of great burthen, which 
 are best adapted for trade with countries beyond 
 great seas. London, Liverpool, Bristol, and 
 Hull, in England — and Glasgow, Leith, and 
 Aberdeen, in Scotland — engross almost the whole 
 foreign trade of the United Kingdom ; for Ire- 
 
46 
 
 land, although more open to the ocean than 
 Great Britain, and although it abound with 
 rivers and inlets on its shores, admirably adapted 
 ioT foreign trade ^ may be said to have no foreign 
 trade at all. — (See notes, pp. 17, 18, ante). 
 
 The settlement of all the merchants of the 
 United Kingdom, and of all the dependents on 
 foreign trade^ in six or seven great sea-ports, and 
 the assemblage therein of ships and vessels from 
 all parts of the world, so numerous as often to 
 seem a forest floating on the bosom of the water, 
 — ^give an air and colour of importance (far beyond 
 what is real) to foreign trade ^ compared with 
 home trade, carried on in the inland cities, towns, 
 and villages scattered over the entire surface of 
 the realm. And hence hath arisen the delusion, 
 (not merely in the popular mind, but also in the 
 minds of statesmen and legislators), that the 
 wealth and power of the state is derived more 
 from the success and extension of foreign than 
 of home trade. 
 
 But a slight comparison of those trades as 
 they exist in the United Kingdom, will dispel 
 that delusion, which is still prevalent, and gives 
 rise to theories which are false, and to legislation, 
 founded on those theories, which is pernicious, 
 in most, if not in all, maritime nations, and su- 
 perlatively in the United Kingdom. 
 
47 
 
 If the commodities oi foreign trade^ instead of 
 being all gathered together in six or seven sea- 
 ports in Great Britain, could be wafted to the 
 places of their consumption, without being all col- 
 lected into entrepots so very few in number, the 
 bulk and the value of them, compared with the 
 hulk and value of the commodities of home trade^ 
 would sink almost into insignificance. If a 
 computation could be made, on the one hand, of 
 the sum of the value of home productions^ and 
 on the other hand, of the sum of the value of 
 foreign productions^ annually consumed in any- 
 great inland town, (in Birmingham, Notting- 
 ham, Leeds, or Sheffield, for example,) the value 
 of the former would amount to very many hun- 
 dreds — perhaps to more than thousands — of 
 times, the value of the latter. 
 
 Even in London — ^the greatest sea-port and 
 emporium of commerce of the realm, perhaps of 
 the world — in which probably more foreign lux- 
 uries and commodities are consumed than in any 
 other city or to^Ti — a slight consideration of the 
 comparative value of the commodities oi foreign 
 and of home-production respectively consumed 
 in that capital will lead irresistibly to the same 
 conclusion. 
 
 The population of the metropolis, within the 
 bills of mortality adopted by the Registrar-general 
 of births, &c. for the weekly bills of mortality, is 
 stated by the census of 1841 to be nearly 2 mil- 
 
48 
 
 lions (1,873,676) of persons, or very nearly a 
 tenth part of the whole population of Great 
 Britain, which in the same census is stated to be 
 19 millions (18,844,434) of persons. 
 
 The value of all the imports into Great Britain 
 (taken at the same amount as the value of all the 
 exports therefrom of the produce and manufac- 
 tures of the United Kingdom), was, in the year 
 1843, 52 millions (£51,932,056, see note p. 16 
 ante). Supposing the annual consumption of 
 foreign commodities by the tenth part of the 
 people of Great Britain inhabiting the metropolis, 
 to be between a sixth and seventh part of the value 
 of all imports into Great Britain, — ^that would 
 give the value of such commodities consumed in 
 the metropolis, (£51,932,056 -^ 7 = £7,418,865) 
 say 8 millions. 
 
 The single item grain, annually consumed in 
 London, — supposing only one tenth part of the 
 52im^7/^07^5 (52,680,751) of quarters of grain con- 
 sumed in the United Kingdom to be consumed 
 in London, — is, in its raw or unmanufactured 
 state, of the value of S^ millions (£8,299,878).* 
 
 * Wheat, ± of 13,718,279 quarters at 50s. ) 
 
 a-quarter 1^.429,569 
 
 Other grain ^ of 38,962,472 quarters at 25s 
 
 a-quarter .4,870,309 
 
 Quarters, 52,680,751 Value, £8,299,878 
 
 See note, p. 35, ante. 
 
49 
 
 The item meat, annually consumed in London, 
 is probably of not less value than the item grain 
 consumed there. And an item, comprising the 
 value of the potatoes, (the quantity of which con- 
 sumed by all classes collectively in London is 
 very great), the productions of the dair}^, the 
 fruit, vegetables, and garden-stuff of all kinds, 
 and the hay consumed there, would show a sum 
 of value collectively, which, if it could be ascer- 
 tained, would be found to be very enormous, and 
 probably not less in amount than the value of 
 the grain or of the meat. 
 
 The collected values of the above three items of 
 home production^ (the raw-material oi food of 
 men and part of the dry food of horses) annually 
 consumed in the metropolis, would amount there- 
 fore to more than thrice the value of all the 
 foreign productions annually consumed therein. 
 
 With respect to the value of raiment, and of the 
 necessaries, comforts, conveniences, and luxuries 
 of life, (other than the above mentioned raw ma- 
 terial of food) of home-production consumed in 
 London : — From Park-lane in Oxford-street, by 
 Holborn, Skinner- street, and Newgate-street, to 
 the top of Cheapside — from Park-lane in Picca- 
 dilly, by St. James*s-street, Pall Mall, the Strand, 
 Fleet-street, Ludgate-hill and St. Paul's church- 
 yard, to the same point, — and from thence by 
 Cornhill and Leadenhall-street to Whitechapel — 
 
50 
 
 in Bond-street, in Regent-street — from Blackman- 
 street, by the High-street of the Borough, Grace- 
 church-street and Bishopsgate-streetto Shoreditch 
 church, — and in other great, and in the smaller 
 arteries, and in numberless veins of the metropolis, 
 — the lines of houses are an unbroken con- 
 tinuity of shops^ — the wares vended in which 
 must annually amount to many hundreds of 
 millions* in value; whereof 8 millions-worth, is, 
 as above stated, a high estimate of the value of 
 the commodities of foreign production. 
 
 Deducting from 52 millions, which is the whole 
 value of the foreign commodities imported into 
 Great Britain, 8 millions-worth for the con- 
 sumption of the metropolis by the one-tenth of 
 whole population — ^there would remain for the 
 consumption of the other nine-tenths of the 
 people, 46 millions-worth of such foreign com- 
 modities ; — an amount of value which, in compari- 
 son with the value of home productions consumed 
 
 * The payments of 46 only out of 79 bankers in London, 
 in the year 1810, made at the clearing-house in Change-alley, 
 amounted to nearly 5 millions (£4,700,000) a-day^ which 
 amount was exclusive of the other daily payments of the same 
 46 out of 79 bankers over their counters, and internally in 
 their several banks among their own customers. — Report of 
 the Select Committee of the House of Commons on the High 
 Price of Gold Bullion, ordered to be printed 8th June, 1810. 
 Evidence of William Thomas, 
 
51 
 
 by those nine-tenths of the people, would sink 
 into utter insignificance, as will appear on con- 
 sideration of the following statements and cal- 
 culations. 
 
 Before the origin or birth o^ foreign trade, all 
 villages and towns, the creatures of agriculture, 
 are of necessity supplied from the country/ in 
 which they have risen, not only with food, but 
 with all the materiel of the arts and manufac- 
 tures carried on within them. 
 
 With the exception of raw-silk and cotton- wool, 
 and, of later years, a portion of sheep's-wool, 
 dye-woods or stuffs, and a few other foreign com- 
 modities of very small value, the cities, towns, 
 and villages of the United Kingdom continue to 
 be supplied from the country/, not only with 
 food, but also, from the soil or minerals of the 
 country, with almost the whole of the materiel of 
 the arts and manufactures carried on within them. 
 
 Assuming 52i millions (52,680,751, see note, 
 p. 35, ante) of quarters of grain to be the quantity 
 annually produced and consumed in the United 
 Kingdom, the hulk of that quantity of grain, 
 at 8 quarters to the ton on an average, would be 
 6i millions (6,585,094) of tons.* 
 
 * 52i raillions (52,680,751) of quarters of grain, reckon- 
 ing ten (10,269) cubic feet to the imperial quarter, would 
 cover an area containing more than a thousand (1054) acres 
 to the depth of 12 feet. 
 
 H 
 
52 
 
 The hulk of the potatoes annually produced 
 and consumed in the United Kingdom (consider- 
 ing that almost the whole labouring population 
 of Ireland, which contains nearly one-third of 
 the population thereof, subsist almost entirely 
 upon that root, and that much of the labouring 
 population of Scotland, and of the northern parts 
 of England, use it very extensively as an article 
 of their food), is probably not less, perhaps 
 greater, than the hulk of the 52i millions of 
 quarters oi grain. 
 
 The hulk of the produce of the dairy (milk, 
 butter, and cheese), and of all the vegetables 
 (other than potatoes), fruit, garden-stuff, and 
 hay, annually produced and consumed, cannot be 
 so little as the bulk of the grain., or of the fota- 
 toes, annually produced and consumed in the 
 United Kingdom. 
 
 The hulk of animal food therein annually pro- 
 duced and consumed, — i, e. the space occupied 
 by it,— from its unwieldiness and insusceptibility 
 of close package or stowage, whether living or 
 dead, is probably much greater than of any one, 
 perhaps than of any two, or than of all the three 
 preceding items. 
 
 The whole number of vessels which belonged to 
 the several ports of the United Kingdom on an 
 average of three years, ending with 1843, was 23 
 thousand (23,204), navigated by 170 thousand 
 
53 
 
 (170,202) men and boys, and measuring in the 
 whole 3 millions (2,980,818) of tons.=^ 
 
 From those figures it clearly appears, that 
 vessels measuring considerably more than twice 
 (2.21) the tonnage oiall the vessels belonging to 
 the United Kingdom would not suffice to hold the 
 grain only (6,585,094 tons) annually produced 
 and consumed therein ; that it would take an 
 equal quantity of tonnage to hold the potatoes ; 
 and another equal quantity of tonnage to hold 
 the other vegetable food, the produce of the dairy 
 and the hay consumed in the United Kingdom. 
 
 Whence it follows, that nearly seven times 
 (2.21 X 3 = 6.63) the tonnage of all the vessels 
 belonging to the United Kingdom, would be 
 requisite to hold those three items oifood of the 
 people and a part of the dry food of the horses 
 of the kingdom. 
 
 With respect to the tonnage of the vessels which 
 would be requisite to stow alive the whole animal 
 food consumed in the United Kingdom, perhaps 
 much more than another 5e^?e7^ times as much 
 tonnage (considering the nature of the stowage 
 of live animals) would be insufficient for their 
 transport from foreign parts. 
 
 It follows as a corollary from the foregoing, 
 that if there were a deficiency of one fifth part 
 of the crops of grain and of potatoes in the 
 
 * Finance Accounts, No. 147, Sess. 1845, p. 142-4. 
 
54 
 
 United Kingdom in any year, being in weight 
 2| millions (6,585,094 -1-5x2 = 2,634,038) of 
 tons, and it were desirable or desired to import 
 such deficient fifth part — ^that nine-tenths of all 
 the vessels belonging to the United Engdom 
 (2,980,818— 298,082 = 2,682,736) would barely 
 suffice to contain the same. Allowing for any 
 practicable number of repeated voyages in the 
 same year to grain-producingybre^^/^ countries, 
 it would clearly be impracticable to withdraw, 
 from the regular trades in which they are conti- 
 nually engaged, a sufficient number of vessels for 
 the importation of such deficient 7?/?^A part. 
 
 The value of the 52i millions (52,680,751) 
 of quarters of grain annually produced and 
 consumed in the United Kingdom, taken at 
 prices considerably lower than the average prices 
 of the last six years, is 83 millions (£82,998,787*) 
 of money — ^the value of the meat is probably not 
 less than the value of the grain — and the value 
 of the potatoes and other vegetables , of the pro- 
 duce of the dairy ^ and of the hay^ must each be a 
 
 * Wheat, . . . 13,718,279 quarters at 50s.| 34295597 
 
 a-quarter 
 
 Other grain, 38,962,472 quarters at 25s. 
 
 a-quarter 
 
 48,703,090 
 
 Quarters, 52,680,751 Value, £82,998,787 
 
 See note, p. 35, ante. 
 
55 
 
 very enormous, and altogether an almost incon- 
 ceivable sum. The value of the grain alone^ 
 taken at 83 millions^ exceeds by more than 
 a half, (52 + 26=78), the sum of 52 millions, 
 (£52,278,449 ; see note, p. 16 ante), the whole 
 value of the exports of the produce and manu- 
 factures of the United Kingdom to all parts of 
 the world, including our own colonies and foreign 
 possessions. 
 
 If another sum of 83 millions be taken as the 
 value of the meat consumed, and another sum of 
 83 millions for the value of potatoes and other 
 vegetables, garden stuff, the produce of the dairy 
 and hay, that would give the sum of thrice 83 
 millions, or 249 millions, as the value of the raw 
 material of the food of the people and a part of 
 the dry food of the horses of the United Kingdom, 
 — or nearly five times 52 millions, the value of 
 all the produce and manufactures of the United 
 Kingdom exported to all parts of the world, in- 
 cluding our own colonies and foreign possessions. 
 
 If a computation could be made of the value 
 of all the raiment of home manufacture in its 
 finished state annually consumed in the United 
 Kingdom, it would probably equal, if not exceed, 
 the value of the raw material of food as above 
 estimated. 
 
 If to that again were added the value of the 
 other necessaries, comforts, conveniences, and 
 
56 
 
 luxuries of life of home production and manufac- 
 ture annually consumed in the United Kingdom 
 — such as are sold in the shops of London (see 
 p. 50 ante) — the amount would be inconceiva- 
 bly enormous, and would sink into a com- 
 parative driblet the 52 millions' -worth of foreign 
 commodities annually imported for home con- 
 sumption in exchange or return for the 52 
 millions' -worth of the produce and manufactures 
 of the United Kingdom annually exported^ which 
 is the value of the surplus of such produce 
 and manufactures beyond what is wanted by the 
 people for their own use. 
 
 Taking the profit on those 52 millions of ex- 
 ports to be ten per cent., that would make the 
 annual profit to the exporters thereof 5i millions, 
 
 A fluctuation of sixpence a-bushel, or four shil- 
 lings a-quarter on the 52i millions (52,680,751) 
 of quarters of grain annually produced and con- 
 sumed in the United Kingdom (a fluctuation 
 which happens sometimes in a week,) makes a 
 diff*erence, in the profit of the growers of grain 
 only^ of 10| millions (£10,536,150) of money, or 
 twice the amount of the whole profit of all the 
 exporters of the produce and manufactures of 
 the United Kingdom. 
 
 The foregoing calculations and comparisons 
 have been made, not with the view of detracting 
 from the real, true, and great importance of 
 
&7 
 
 foreign trade^ but to dispel, as far as the facts 
 and figures stated may avail to dispel, the delu- 
 sion that the wealth and power of this mighty 
 realm, the richest and greatest of the world, have 
 been derived from, and depend for their continu- 
 ance upon, 2i foreign trade in commodities ex- 
 ported : the gross value of all which — ^not the pro- 
 fits thereon, and much less the taxes on those pro- 
 fits — ^but the entire gross value of all which in 
 many years of the last war were not equal to half 
 the amount oii\iQ annual public expenditure; and 
 which gross value has never in any year, at any 
 time, been equal in the whole to the amount of 
 the public revenue of taxes. The whole annual 
 profit on such exports, to the exporters, taken 
 at 10 per cent, on 52 millions^ or at 51 millions^ 
 is not equal to a tenth part of that annual revenue 
 of taxes — is equal to but little more than a sixth 
 part of 30 millions (£30,495,459, anno 1844), the 
 annual charge for interest, &c,, on the national 
 debt — is not equal to a ninth part of the annual 
 rental of the land of the United Kingdom — nor 
 to a twentieth^ or, perhaps, £i fortieth part, of the 
 profit on home trade. (See p. 16-17-18, ante.) 
 
 Notwithstanding the insignificance of the fo- 
 reign^ comparatively with the home-trade of the 
 United Kingdom, it is not surprising that a false 
 importance should have been acquired hj foreign 
 trade, in the eye and mind of wondering dwellers 
 
58 
 
 in inland places and towns, visiting any of the 
 six or seven great sea-ports — and especially 
 London, their queen — (into which collectively all 
 the commodities o{ foreign trade^ both of home 
 and oi foreign production^ are gathered) on 
 viewing the bales and packages of goods, wares, 
 and merchandises piled on the quays and 
 wharfs, and in the warehouses in transitu from 
 producers to consumers in every nation of the 
 world — the fleets of vessels discharging pro- 
 ductions imported from every country under 
 heaven — and other fleets taking in cargoes of 
 home-productions for exportation in return — 
 the stirring and busy scene forming such a con- 
 trast with the silent diurnal traflic of their quiet 
 inland homes. 
 
 But that statesmen and legislators should have 
 been misled by such appearances into the false 
 belief — ^not merely of its foreign trade being of 
 greater value and importance to the nation than 
 its home trade^ but moreover that the wealth, 
 power, and grandeur, of the realm are derived 
 from, and depend for their continuance OTi foreign 
 trade^ is indeed astonishing, and can only be con- 
 sidered as one of those marvellous delusions, 
 which, having once got or taken hold of the 
 human mind, prevail sometimes for several gene- 
 rations, or for ages, not only against the light of 
 reason, but even against experience. 
 
59 
 
 That such delusions as belief in magic, or witch- 
 craft, being creatures of the imagination, should 
 have prevailed for ages against all argument and 
 power of reason, and been made and long continued 
 subjects of penal legislation, is sufficiently won- 
 derful ; but that delusions which are easy of 
 detection and demonstrable by the power of 
 reason, and even arithmetically, to be delusions, 
 should have prevailed, not merely among the 
 vulgar, but in the minds of statesmen and legis- 
 lators, and by them propagated as received truths 
 — and, as such, made the foundation of laws and 
 statutes deeply affecting the interest and pros- 
 perity of the commonwealth — seems to be indeed 
 incomprehensible. 
 
 Such delusions, for example, as that of " the 
 sinking fund^'* which prevailed during the last 
 long war, entailing annually year after year, 
 upon the show or pretence of redeeming part of 
 the public debt, an enormous increase of that 
 debt, and an enormous annually increasing loss 
 to the public ;* and such as that other delusion 
 
 * The establishment of a sinking-fund out of an annual 
 surplus of public revenue over expenditure, and the applica- 
 tion of such a sinking-fund towards the redemption of the 
 public debt, is a measure unquestionably as just and politic 
 as it is honest and wise ; but when the annual public expen- 
 diture exceeds the revenue, it is, of course, impracticable, out 
 of such a revenue, to reduce the public debt. 
 
 The delusion of what was called the sinking-fund arose 
 
 I 
 
60 
 
 touching the paper money of the Bank of Eng- 
 land during its stoppage of payment for a quarter 
 of a century, from 1797 till 1822, — during and 
 under which the proprietors of the bank were 
 permitted to forage, and did remorselessly forage, 
 from the public and distribute among themselves, 
 
 from a fancy of a celebrated prime minister, that — notwith- 
 standing a continuous excess of public expenditure over 
 revenue during war, — the national debt might be reduced, by- 
 borrowing, de anno in annum, money from new to pay off 
 old lenders with a -profit to the public. 
 
 The legislature yielding to that delusion, it was acted 
 upon to such an extent, that many millions of money more 
 than were wanted for the public service were borrowed 
 yearly, and every year of the last long war, and were paid 
 off again, in the same year in which they were borrowed at an 
 immense annual loss. 
 
 In the year 1814 the sum of 106 we'Z/zo/w (£106, 146,907*) 
 of stock was created, for loans of money borrowed by the 
 public, which sum in the same year was reduced by 27 
 millions (£26,925,072*) by re-purchases of stock with the 
 sinking-fund. Those 27 millions of stock cost £4 13s. 5d. 
 per cent.* more, on the repurchase, than was obtained for the 
 same on the creation thereof, and caused, therefore, instead 
 of a reduction, an increase of the national debt to the amount 
 of more than 1 J million (£1,263,375*) in that single year. 
 
 In the short interval of time between the years 1801 and 
 1820, stock to the amount of 346 millions (£345,713,282*) 
 
 * These figures are taken from a return from the National 
 Debt Office to the House of Commons, ordered to be printed 
 4th March 1829. 
 
61 
 
 — profits made in consequence of that stoppage 
 of payment^ to a frightful amount, regardless 
 of the loss, calamity, and misery which, for 
 the sake of such gain, was inflicted and en- 
 tailed on the nation, which is beyond all 
 power of description.* And again, that mon- 
 
 was created and extinguished by such borrowings and pay- 
 ings-off in the same year. 
 
 The fancy of borrowing eveiyyear, merely for the pleasure 
 of paying off in the same year, at continual vast annual loss, — 
 money wanted for no other purpose except the indulgence of 
 that fancy of a minister who was said to have been heaven- 
 borny caused an amount of loss to the nation in those 20 
 years of most enormous amount in the whole, forming a 
 component part of the 800 millions of the now existing 
 national debt. This delusion was certainly, therefore, very 
 appropriately called " the *mAm^-fund." 
 
 * When the Bank stopped payment in the year 1797, 
 it had 8J millions (£8,640,250*) of notes out, and the cash 
 and hulllon in its coffers were reduced to one million 
 (£l,086,l70t). 
 
 The order in council, prohibiting the bank from making 
 further payments in coin, was dated 27th February, 1797, 
 and the reason assigned in that order for that measure was, 
 " the apprehension of a want of sufficient supply of cash to 
 " answer the exigencies of the public service." 
 
 The stoppage of payment of its notes in coin by the bank 
 was afterwards sanctioned by act of parliament, which pro- 
 
 * Report of Committee of Secrecy on the Bank of England 
 Charter, No. 772, Sess. 1832, Appendix, p. 79. 
 
 i Same Report, Appendix, p. 7. 
 
62 
 
 ster delusion, under whicli contracts for loans 
 were continually made, during the last long 
 war and former wars, — i. e., monies were conti- 
 nually borrowed for the public service, — ^by the 
 creation of annuity-stocks, carrying a rate of 
 interest less than the rate of interet in the mar- 
 
 hibited such payment being made until the end of the 
 then war. 
 
 The stoppage of payment continued from the year 1 797, 
 not only until the end of the then war, in the year 1815, but 
 until the year 1822, or in all, for a quarter of a century. 
 
 In that interval of 25 years, the public expenditure 
 amounted on an average to 70 millions a-year — in each of the 
 years 1813 and 1814 to more than 105 millions — and in the 
 whole of that interval to more than 1,700 millions ; all which 
 expenditure was made without the aid of that one million 
 ivhich during all those 25 years remained locked up in the 
 coffers of the bank, and which, had it been resorted to in the 
 year 1813 or 1814, would not have defrayed the public 
 expenditure for four days. And yet, by the prime minister, 
 who with the connivance of the bank caused its stoppage of 
 payment — who, having done so, thereupon promulgated an 
 order in council, founded upon such a pretence, prohibiting 
 the further issue of cash by the bank — and who afterwards 
 procured the sanction of law for the continuance of such 
 stoppage of payment during the then war, i. e., for an indefi- 
 nite period, — it was frequently asserted in parliament, that 
 the bank was and had been the prop and support of the 
 nation. 
 
 Now what, it may be asked, was that prop ? A corpora- 
 tion then composed of about 2,500 persons, of whom about 
 4 or 500 were foreigners resident abroad, about 260 were 
 
63 
 
 ket at the time of such contracts, — ^whereby more 
 than 250 millions (attended hy a charge for 
 interest of 1\ millions per annum) of the 800 
 millions of the now existing national debt were 
 created, — for which sum of 250 millions (nearly 
 a third part of the whole debt), and its attendant 
 
 widows, and 330 spinsters,* — the whole collectively being 
 worth llj millions, and no more; for if each of them had 
 been worth that sum, the whole collectively as a corporation 
 were worth no more, because none of them were liable for 
 its dealings beyond his or her share of the joint stock, which 
 was then ll^ millions (£ll,686,800t).— Such, and no other, 
 was the corporation which was alleged to be the prop and 
 support of a nation sometimes expending 100 millions a-year — 
 a corporation whose whole capital would not have sufficed in 
 the year 1813 or 1814 to defray the public expenditure for 
 six weeks. 
 
 With that delusion of the government and of the parliament 
 the public was infected, ("as good as the bank" was a pro- 
 verbial expression,) and so unscrupulously did the directors 
 of the bank take advantage of the delusion, that they had 
 the effrontery, in a memorial to the then prime minister, 
 dated 28th July, 1796, to write, — "the court of directors of 
 " the bank are very willing and desirous to do every thing 
 " in their power to support the national credit and to en- 
 " ABLE His Majesty's ministers to carry on the public service "1^ 
 
 * Address to the proprietors of the Bank of England, by 
 A.Allardyee, Esq., a member of the Corporation, p.. I ^ London, 
 1798. 
 
 f Eeport of the Lords' Committee of Secrecy on the Order 
 in Council ^Ith Feb. 1797, relating to the bank. No. 17, Sess. 
 lSlO,p. 75. 
 
 J Report of the Lords Committee of Secrecy on the Order 
 in Council ^Qth Feb. 1797, No. 17, Sess. 1810, i?. 90. 
 
64 
 
 interest, the public never received and the 
 lenders never gave any value or consideration 
 
 In nx months after that flourish of its toy-trumpet, the 
 bank stopped payment. 
 
 It would be sickening to dwell on the ruin and misery 
 which was inflicted on the people of the United Kingdom, 
 in consequence of the exercise of the power given by the 
 legislature, acting under this delusion, to the corporation of 
 proprietors of the bank, to issue, to any extent ad libitum for 
 their own profit after and durhig their stoppage of payment^ 
 notes — nominally payable to bearer in coin of the realm on 
 demand, but really prohibited by law from being so paid, 
 until the end of the then war. 
 
 The directors of the bank, acting too manifestly under 
 the influence of the lucri sacra fames, poured out such notes 
 not payable until the end of the then war, — ^but, nevertheless, 
 made by law legal tender in payment of all the taxes and of all 
 debts — till, by excess of issue, they became so depreciated in 
 value as not to be worth by 26^ per cent, the quantity of coin 
 promised by them to be paid ; and the profits, consequently, 
 made by the bank, and distributed by the proprietors among 
 themselves during the stoppage of payment, (ultra the usual 
 or accustomed regular dividend of 7 per cent, per ann. on 
 their capital of IH millions,) amounted to the incredible sum 
 of 14 millions, (£14,174,622,*) or to very nearly ^ 125 per 
 cent, profit on the Hi 'millions of capital possessed by the 
 bank when it stopped payment in 1797. 
 
 To such excess were the issues of its paper-money carried 
 by the bank — that, from 8i millions of notes (8,640,250), 
 payable to bearer in coin on demand, out in the year 1797, they 
 
 % Report of the Committee of Secrecy on the Bank of Eng- 
 and Charter, No. 723, Sess. 1832, Appendix, No. 29. 
 
65 
 
 whatsoever : but which must be levied by taxes 
 and paid if ever the national debt shall, by a 
 
 had increased in the year 18 13 to 28 millions (£27,968,600*), 
 not payable until the end of the then war. 
 
 Of those 28 millions of fiotes not payable until the end of the 
 then war, 9 millions (£9,465,9 10*), being notes of one pound and 
 two pounds — the silver coin of the realm became insufficient 
 to give change in the daily intercourse of life for those small 
 notes : whereupon, under the pretence of obviating that 
 inconvenience, the bank issued notes for five shillings, 
 stampt upon pieces of silver (instead of upon copper or upon 
 paper), which were Spanish dollars, worth about 4 shillings 
 and 4 pence each. Those bank notes for five shillings were 
 called " tokens" and the issue of them was sanctioned by the 
 act of 44 Geo. 3, cap. 71, which became law in July 1804, 
 and imposed heavy penalties for counterfeiting such tokens. 
 
 Four of them being all that the bank would give in change 
 for a one-pound note, the value of a one-pound note was thus 
 fixed by the bank itself at 17 shillings and 4 pence (4s. Ad. 
 X 4 = 17s. id.). 
 
 The bank afterwards issued notes, stampt upon smaller 
 pieces of silver, for three shillings and for eighteen pence — 
 which were also called " tokens" — and on the 19th March 
 1811, issued a notice that the dollar tokens — which had 
 theretofore passed for 5 shillings each in exchange for their 
 notes — should thereafter pass for 5 shillings and 6 pe7ice each 
 in exchange for the same — the value of a note of the bank 
 for one pound, payable at the end of the then war, was thus 
 fixed by the bank itself at 3/i dollars or 15 shillings and 
 9 pence in silver — 15 shilllings and 9 pence being the value at 
 the mint of the quantity of silver contained in 3/i dollars. 
 
 Those 
 
 * Same Report, jo. 73. 
 
66 
 
 surplus of revenue over expenditure, be redeemed, 
 — and its attendant interest of 7^ millions per 
 annum must be so levied and paid until the re- 
 demption of such 250 millions be effected.* 
 
 The delusion oi foreign trade being the nurse 
 of the wealth, power, and grandeur of the realm, 
 gave birth to the theory and practice of " the 
 mercantile system," under which the importation 
 of commodities, the growth or production of 
 
 Those issues by the bank of tokens for 5 shillings and 
 6 pence — for 3 shillings and for IS pence were sanctioned by 
 the 51 Geo. III. cap. 112, which became law on the 26th 
 June 1811. 
 
 When it is recollected, that, in the midst of all this bare- 
 faced continually increasing depreciation of the notes of the 
 bank, openly avowed and proclaimed by the directors of the 
 bank themselves, by issues of such tokens in exchange for 
 their notes 7iot payable until the end of the then war, 
 which issues were sanctioned by acts of parliament, — and 
 while the wives and daughters of honourable members 
 were daily making purchases in Bond-street (Regent-street 
 had not then existence) for a guinea, of wares, which, if 
 paid for in part with a one-jjound Bank of England note, 
 they could not obtain for less than 27 or 28 shillings — 
 the House of Commons, on the 15th of May, 1811, passed a 
 resolution, " that the promissory notes of the Bank of Eng- 
 " land had theretofore been and were at that tiyne equivalent 
 " to the legal coin of the realm," — it is surely not too much 
 to say, that this delusion, so acted upon, touching the paper 
 money of the bank, amounted to legislative insanity. 
 
 * See note A, Appendix. 
 
67 
 
 foreign countries^ is discouraged or prohibited 
 by heavy taxes upon such importation^ or by 
 laws prohibiting it altogether, with the view of 
 eiFecting or encouraging the growth or produc- 
 tion of like commodities at home^ — and the ex- 
 portation of commodities of home growth or 
 production is created or encouraged, sometimes 
 by payment (out of the public revenue of taxes) 
 of bounties — and sometimes by payment, out of 
 the same revenue, of drawbacks (which are often 
 fraudulently made to operate as bounties) on such 
 exportation — under the notion or impression 
 that by increasing the value of exports to, beyond 
 the value of imports from, foreign countries^ the 
 difference, which obtained the name or title of 
 the " balance oftrade^'' would or must be drawn 
 as profits oi foreign trade horn foreigners ; and 
 be remitted or paid by them, moreover, only in 
 the precious metals^ the acquirement and reten- 
 tion of which was, and is still, held to be the 
 summum bonum of the commonwealth. 
 
 As the delusion of the " mercantile system" is 
 still prevalent, though weakened in the United 
 Kingdom, to the extent of the repeal of bounties 
 and drawbacks on the exportation of commo- 
 dities of home production, insomuch that the 
 amount of such bounties and drawbacks is now 
 less than half a million annually, — and are draw- 
 backs upon the exportation of commodities on 
 
68 
 
 which duties of excise may fairly be taken to 
 have been actually paid ;* — ^it may not be unpro- 
 fitable to attempt to give a succinct and summary 
 account of the delusion called " the balance of 
 trade," in the hope of showing the fallacy both 
 of the theory and of the practice of the " mer- 
 cantile system" in the United Kingdom. 
 
 * Finance accounts, anno 1844, Sess. 1845, pp. 28, 29, 
 30, 40. 
 
69 
 
 Digression on the fallacy or delusion in the 
 mercantile system called the Balance of trade, 
 — under which it is assumed^ that gold is 
 drawn from foreign nations^ by what is called 
 a favourable balance.* 
 
 From indefinable associations of vague ideas, it 
 has been a received opinion in almost every civi- 
 lised nation, that it is most beneficial and advan- 
 tageous to have and retain within it a great 
 quantity of gold and silver^ — which have ob- 
 tained the name of the precious metals. 
 
 But after the demand in any nation or realm, 
 of individuals^ for their dead stock oi plate ^ orna- 
 ments^ and utensils ofgold,\ and oiihQ public^ for 
 its dead stock of gold in com, is fully supplied, — 
 the desire to possess more of that metal cannot 
 arise from demand for it, for any use within that 
 nation or realm. 
 
 To hoard it, as property either of individuals 
 or of the public, in chests or in vaults, would be 
 dead loss. 
 
 * This digression is extracted from "The Theory of 
 " Money : being an attempt to give a popular explanation 
 "of it." Richardson, 1844. 
 
 •f Gold will in this digression be mentioned singly, to 
 avoid the repetition of the word silver. 
 
70 
 
 As an article of commerce, a given value of 
 gold is much less desirable to be possessed by 
 any nation, than an equal value of inferior metal, 
 e.g. of iron. 
 
 A piece of gold, of the size of a common brick, 
 such as is used in London for building, is worth 
 nearly £3,900 (£3,897. 125. 10^.) ; it would 
 weigh very nearly 84i pounds troy ; and would 
 purchase, at £5 a ton, 780 tons of bar-iron. 
 
 Such a piece of gold might be transported to 
 a foreign country in a post-office mail-bag, — 
 while to transport beyond sea its value in iron, 
 two or three ordinary-sized merchant ships, fully 
 freighted, victualled, and manned, would be re- 
 quisite. 
 
 To extract, from an iron-mine, ore sufficient 
 to yield 780 tons (two or three ship loads) of 
 that metal, — from a coal mine, coal (converted 
 into coke) sufficient to smelt the ore, — and after- 
 wards to manufacture the iron into bars, — ^would 
 give employment to very many times the number 
 of miners and workers in metal (giving subsist- 
 ence to others supplying all their necessities and 
 effectual demands) than would be required to 
 extract from a gold mine, and form into an 
 ingot, a piece of that metal of the size of a com- 
 mon brick, — which is manifest on the slightest 
 reflection. 
 
71 
 
 To possess mines, and a continual and endur- 
 ing trade in exportation of iron, must, therefore, 
 be much more beneficial to a country, than to 
 possess mines and such trade in exportation of 
 gold. 
 
 It is, indeed, much to be feared, that the pas- 
 sion of nations to possess a great quantity of 
 gold for indefinite purposes, ultra their eiFectual 
 demands for that metal respectively, is only the 
 auri sacra fames. 
 
 But however that may be, it was for many 
 ages attempted to secure the retention of gold 
 within any realm or country into which it had 
 once found its way, by laws highly penal, and 
 even barbarous and sanguinary, prohibiting the 
 exportation of gold in any and every form, and 
 the melting of coin. 
 
 Such laws were always abortive, except of now 
 and then effecting the levy of a penalty, or the 
 infliction of personal punishment on some human 
 victim : but were, nevertheless, not finally 
 abolished in the United Kingdom, until the year 
 1819, by the act of 59 Geo. III. cap. 49 ; whereby 
 it was " made lawful for any person to export the 
 " gold and silver coin of the realm, and also to 
 " melt the same, and to manufacture, export, or 
 ^' otherwise dispose of the bullion produced 
 " thereby ;" and by the same act all former sta- 
 
72 
 
 tutes prohibiting such exportation and melting 
 were repealed.* 
 
 Gold comprises so much value in such small 
 compass, that it can always be, and has always 
 continually been, exported, or sent overland, 
 from country to country at pleasure, without 
 the knowledge or consent of any sovereign or 
 ruling power whatsoever. 
 
 The insatiable thirst for gold having excited 
 in realms or states the desire to know how much 
 of the metal was from time to time possessed by 
 them respectively, — and it being, by reason of 
 the fact above mentioned, impracticable to get, 
 in any country where such penal laws as before 
 mentioned were in force, a direct account of its 
 imports or exports of gold, — recourse was had, 
 with the view of obtaining the result of such an 
 account indirectly or inferentially^ to computa- 
 tions whereby it was held, that that result was 
 obtained or arrived at, by shewing what was 
 called the balance of trade^ which was assumed 
 to be paid by foreign nations, and to be so paid 
 always in gold. 
 
 In order to come at that balance, an account 
 was directed to be taken by the officers of cus- 
 toms of the value of all goods or commodities 
 exported and imported, except gold. 
 
 * Noto B| Appondifl , 
 
73 
 
 If upon such account^ it appeared that the 
 value of the exports exceeded the value of the 
 imports of any country in any year; the dif- 
 ference was called the balance of trade in its 
 favour : which was assumed to have been re- 
 ceived in gold., it being held and considered to 
 be irrefragably ascertained by that accoimt — 
 that, if the merchants of that country did not 
 receive back the value of their merchandize ex- 
 ported., in merchandize imported (of both and all 
 of which account was taken at the custom-house), 
 the diiFerence must have come in and have been 
 received by them, in imports of gold of which 
 alone no account was taken ! and, vice versa., 
 if the value of the merchandize imported was 
 greater than the value of the merchandize ex- 
 ported, that the difference must have gone out 
 in exports of gold. 
 
 It was considered, therefore, much for the in- 
 terest of every country, that such account should 
 always show a much greater value of merchan- 
 dize to have been exported than imported. 
 
 According to the pubHc accounts, compiled by 
 the officers of customs, the value of the exports 
 exceeded the value of the imports of Great Britain, 
 in the century ending with the year 1800, by 
 224 millions. 
 
 By the " balance of trade account," there was, 
 therefore, in the year 1800, accumulated and 
 
74 
 
 then existent in Great Britain, gold of the value 
 or amount of 224 millions^ ultra the gold pos- 
 sessed in plate, in coin, or in other form, by the 
 people of that country in the year 1 700 ; whereas, 
 in the month of February 1797, the Bank of 
 England, for lack of gold, stopped payment ; the 
 bullion in its coffers being then reduced very 
 nearly to a single million (£1,086,170). 
 
 That million (the issue of any and every part 
 thereof being prohibited by law) remained locked 
 up in those coffers during all the war which 
 ended in the year 1815, and thereafter, for a 
 quarter of a century in the whole, viz. from 1797 
 tiU 1822. 
 
 During all that time, instead of there being, — 
 according to the " balance of trade account," — 
 an annual influx of gold into the United King- 
 dom, gold disappeared from the circulating me- 
 dium of the realm, and — (except the single million 
 in the Bank, and what was added to that small 
 hoard, and what was hoarded by individuals) — 
 in consequence of the issue of notes by the 
 Bank for one pound^ for five shillings and six- 
 pence^ for five shillings^ for three shillings^ and 
 for eighteen pence ^^ and of the law making 
 
 * See the Statutes 44 Geo. III. c. 71 ; 51 Geo. Ill, c. 110; 
 and 52 Geo. III. c. 138, sanctioning the issue of such notes, 
 which were called " tokens^^ by the Bank. 
 
75 
 
 the depreciated paper-money of that corporation 
 —not payahle in coin until the end of the war — 
 legal tender, during the war^ for the payment of 
 all taxes and of all debts throughout the realm — 
 was added, melted or unmelted, to the gold of 
 commerce^ of which, consequently there must 
 have been a great efflux from the United King- 
 dom, notwithstanding the penal laws then in 
 force, (unrepealed until the year 1819) pro- 
 hibiting the melting or exportation of the coin. 
 
 The fallacy or delusion of the balance of trade 
 being paid in gold^ or being paid in any manner 
 or way by foreign nations, may be exposed by 
 such considerations as the following. 
 
 The inhabitants of any given foreign country 
 contribute no more or otherwise to the profit, 
 e, g. of British merchants — than the inhabitants 
 of Great Britain contribute to the profit of the 
 merchants of that foreign country. In that re- 
 spect both countries are on a footing, and very 
 little reflection will show, that the merchants of 
 all countries derive their profits exclusively from 
 
 the inhabitants of their own country.* 
 
 \. '. ^ 
 
 * Any consideration of what is called the " carrying trade" 
 is purposely omitted in the text, being so fettered and con- 
 fined by the navigation laws of Great Britain and other 
 countries, as to be entirely unworthy of notice on the present 
 occasion. 
 
 L 
 
76 
 
 A merchant having exported goods or com- 
 modities, imports goods or commodities in return 
 — and his profit is realized, only when and after 
 he has sold his imports to the inhabitants of his 
 own country, for a greater price than he paid to 
 them for his exports. 
 
 The merchants of any foreign country lose 
 nothing by the exchange of the productions of 
 the soil and industry of their country with British 
 merchants, for the production of the soil and 
 industry of Britain ; on the contrary, they gain 
 thereby, otherwise such exchange would not be 
 made — and the custom-house-accounts, both of 
 the foreign country and of Great Britain, may be 
 and most probably are, so made up, as to show, 
 as the result of the exchange of the same iden- 
 tical commodities, a balance of trade, such as is 
 called a balance in favour of both countries, or 
 on both and contrary sides. 
 
 In any country carrying on a gaining foreign 
 trade — upon a true account of the value of its 
 exports^ entered or set down at the price paid 
 for them to the producers^ the inhabitants of that 
 country — and a true account of the value of its 
 imports^ entered or set down at the price re- 
 ceived for them from the consumers^ the inhabi- 
 tants of the same country — ^the value of the 
 imports must always very much exceed the value 
 
77 
 
 of the exports^ not merely by the profit of the 
 merchants of that country, but also by all the 
 costs of the exportation of the exports ultra the 
 price paid for them to the producer, and of the 
 importation of the imports ultra the price paid 
 for them to the foreign merchant — that is to say, 
 by the amount of the expenses of lading, freight, 
 insurance, and all other charges on the exports 
 out — and the amount of freight, insurance, ex- 
 penses of unlading, and all other charges on the 
 imports home^ together with the charges thereon 
 in transitu from the ship, over the wharf, and 
 through the warehouse to the market. 
 
 It is not easy to imagine, why an excess of 
 the value of imports over the value of exports^ 
 caused by charges paid to British ship-owners, 
 insurers, wharfingers, warehousemen, and to 
 British labourers employed about the merchan- 
 dize, in transitu from the producer out^ and from 
 the foreign port of shipping home (all which are 
 paid by the consumers of the imports, together 
 with the profit of British merchants ultra), 
 should becalled or considered a balance of trade 
 against Great Britain ; or why it should be 
 alleged or held, that excess, so caused, of the 
 value of imports over the value of exports, must 
 have gone in gold to some foreign country ! 
 
 Even if the merchants of any foreign country 
 
78 
 
 were so kind as to permit British merchants to 
 import a greater value of commodities^ow, than 
 British merchants exported to them, for some 
 consecutive years ; that is to say, in other words, 
 if the merchants of any foreign country were to 
 give British merchants a great credit for foreign 
 commodities, there is no reason for believing, 
 that the debt of the British to such foreign mer- 
 chants would ever be paid in gold. If there were 
 no hoard of the gold of commerce in Great Britain, 
 such debt of British to foreign merchants could 
 be paid in gold, only by the inhabitants of Great 
 Britain consenting, either to part with their coin 
 (which, under proper regulation, would be all 
 continually and indispensably necessary ^r their 
 own use),, or to the melting of their plate for 
 exportation. 
 
 Such liberal foreign merchants would, in the 
 cas€ supposed, be under the necessity of waiting 
 for payment, until such debt to them could be 
 liquidated by degrees, by means of surplus pro- 
 ductions of the soil and industry of Great Bri- 
 tain in future years; just as foreign merchants 
 actually cause British merchants to wait for pay- 
 ment of the debts of the nature of that now 
 imagined, which foreign merchants are continu- 
 ally incurring and lie under to them. 
 
 Even on the supposition that British merchants 
 
79 
 
 paid for an excess of the value of imports over 
 the value of exports by them, by export of an 
 annual stream of gold — as gold is not indigenous 
 in Great Britain, the flow of such a stream 
 could be kept up only by the gold compos- 
 ing it being first imported from some foreign 
 country, — which gold could be imported and 
 paid for only by export of other commodities, 
 productions of the soil and industry of Great 
 Britain. Such an annual stream of exports of 
 gold, so continually fed and supplied, would 
 therefore be a beneficial and not a prejudicial 
 trade of the merchants of Great Britain. 
 
 To keep up in this realm "the fond delusion" 
 of the balance of trade^ the Custom-house ac- 
 counts were framed or compiled, without regard 
 to truth or reality, and continue to be so kept 
 down to the time now present. 
 
 In the Custom-house accounts, the exports 
 were often, and still continue to be, entered or 
 set down at much more^ and the imports at much 
 less than their real values respectively. 
 
 Those accounts for the nine years ending with 
 5th January, 1843, condensed for the sake of 
 brevity, into annual averages for periods of three 
 years, show for example, as follows : 
 
80 
 
 PERIODS OF THREE 
 YEARS EACH. 
 
 OFFICIAL ANNUAL VALUES OF ALL 
 EXPORTS. 
 
 OFFICIAL 
 
 ANN. VALUE 
 
 OF AT-T, 
 
 IMPORTS. 
 
 Produce and Ma- 
 nufactures of the 
 United Kingdom. 
 
 Foreign and 
 
 Colonial 
 Merchandize. 
 
 Total. 
 
 1st, ending 5 Jan. 1837 
 2nd, ending 5 Jan. 1840 
 3rd, ending 5 Jan. 1843 
 
 £ 
 
 79,146,040 
 
 87,470,001 
 
 101,715,330 
 
 £ 
 12,250,491 
 12,913,643 
 14,027,205 
 
 £ 
 
 91,396,531 
 
 100,383,644 
 
 115,742,535 
 
 £ 
 
 49,835,107 
 59,336,540 
 65,671,885 
 
 
 268,331,371 
 
 39,191,339 
 
 307,522,710 
 174,843,532 
 
 174,843,532 
 
 
 Deduct imports... 
 
 
 Surplus official value exported more than) „ 
 imported in three years j 
 
 132,679,178 
 
 more than 
 
 132i| millions in three, or more than 396 millions 
 in those nine years, which, according to the Cus- 
 tom-house accounts, flowed in streams of gold, 
 as balances of' trade, into the United Kingdom 
 in the nine years ending with 5th January, 1843 ! 
 
 But, however safely it may be inferred, that 
 those Custom-house accounts must be full of 
 error and deception ; that is not a matter of in- 
 ference merely, as proof thereof is furnished by 
 other accounts of the officers of customs them- 
 selves. 
 
 For fiscal purposes, it was required by law, that 
 a declaration of the actual value of all exports of 
 the produce and manufactures of the United 
 Kingdom should be made at the Custom-house 
 on exportation thereof; and by the accounts 
 there kept (laid annually before parliament), of 
 the real or declared value of such exports, that 
 
81 
 
 value differs from the value set upon the same 
 commodities in the " balance of trade account" 
 kept at the Custom-house, during, e, g. the three 
 last of the above-mentioned period of nine years, 
 as follows, viz. : 
 
 EXPORTS OF THE PRODUCE AND MANUFACTURES OF THE 
 UNITED KINGDOM. 
 
 Declared, or real 
 
 Year ending Official value. value. 
 
 £ £ 
 
 5th January, 1841 102,705,372 51,406,430 
 
 5th January, 1842 102,180,517 51,634,623 
 
 5th January, 1843 100,260,101 47,381,023 
 
 £305, 1 45,990 £ 1 50,422,076 
 
 whereby it appears that the official value of the 
 exports from the United Kingdom is set down in 
 the Custom-house accounts (compiled to show 
 the " balance of trade" for those three years), at 
 more than double the real value of the commodi- 
 ties exported. 
 
 It would, moreover, be a mistake to suppose, 
 that in such official value of exports, all commo- 
 dities are treated with equal favour, and are 
 over-valued in the same proportion. 
 
 Cotton was always a favourite commodity with 
 the balance of trade reasoners; and is still a 
 favourite commodity in the eyes of those who 
 thrive or have thriven by the spinning and manu- 
 facture of and trade in that wool and its fabrics. 
 
 Cotton is accordingly favoured in the Custom- 
 
82 
 
 house accounts to such an extent, that in the 
 three years ending with 5th January 1843, the 
 official values and real values of cotton manufac- 
 tures and yarns exported are set down as follows : 
 
 Years ending Official value. Real value. 
 
 £ £ 
 
 5th January, 1841 73,124,730 24,658,470 
 
 5th January, 1842 69,777,021 23,492,489 
 
 5th January, 1843 68,667,909 21,670,127 
 
 £211,569,660 £69,821,086 
 
 whereby it appears that the official value of cot- 
 ton wares exported is set down at more than 
 treble their real value ; although the official value 
 of all exports collectively be set down at only 
 about double their real value — and on compari- 
 son of this last with the next foregoing table, it 
 appears that the official value of cotton-wares 
 exported, is set down in the Custom-house ac- 
 counts at very nearly once and a-half the amount 
 of the real value of all the exports from the 
 United Kingdom! 
 
 To a question put to three Directors of the 
 Bank under examination before a committee of 
 the House of Lords, in the year 1797, after the 
 bank stopped payment ; viz. : whether they re- 
 ceived any answer from the Chancellor of the 
 Exchequer (Mr. Pitt), when from time to time 
 they stated to him their apprehensions from the 
 
83 
 
 diminution of specie in the bank? the reply given 
 was, " We had no precise answer, but the Chan- 
 " cellor of the Exchequer sometimes expressed 
 " hopes that the balance of trade in favour of 
 " this country would restore our affair s^ and 
 " thereby bring back specie /"* 
 
 Before taking leave of the subject of the balance 
 qftrade^ it may interest and give food for specu- 
 lation to the reader, to lay before him the figures 
 foUomng (which, for the sake of brevity, are con- 
 densed into average annual values, upon periods 
 of three years each), from accounts printed by 
 order of the House of Commons, 
 
 Declared or real 
 annual value of all 
 Periods of 3 years each. exports of the pro- Annual Revenue and Expendituiv 
 
 duce and inanufac- of the United Kingdom, 
 
 tui-es of Great 
 Brilain.+ 
 War. Exiienditure. Revenue. 
 
 £> £ £, 
 
 1st, ending with 1812 42,850,260 82,191,070 65,785,312 
 2nd, ending with 1815 48,316,233 101,283,881 70,697,793 
 
 The like of the 
 Peace. United Kingdom.t 
 
 3rd, ending with 1818 43,343,451 56,674,940 56,022,752 
 4th, ending with 1821 36,096,283 52,541,252 54,255,329 
 
 * Report from the Committee of Secrecy of the House of 
 Lords on the affairs of the Bank, ordered by the House of 
 Commons to be printed, 6th February, 1810. Appendix, p. 14. 
 
 f The exports of the four years ending with the year 1813 
 include the exports from Great Britain to Ireland, the ex- 
 ports from the United Kingdom not having been kept in a 
 consolidated account until from and after the year 1814 
 inclusive. 
 
 M 
 
84 
 
 A glance at the foregoing figures shows, that 
 the real value of all the annual exports of the 
 produce and manufactures of the United Kingdom 
 in fche six last years of the last war, was not 
 equal to half the amount of the annual expendi- 
 ture^ and was equal to just about two-thirds of 
 the amount of the annual revenue of the United 
 Kingdom; — and it may be seen, by reference to 
 the accounts annually laid before Parliament, 
 that the real annual value of such exports has 
 never, in any year, down to the time present, 
 been equal in amount even to the diminished 
 peace revenues of the United Kingdom. 
 
 And yet it is a received opinion among many 
 sensible persons, who have never sufficiently con- 
 sidered the subject — that the wealth, power, and 
 prosperity, of this mighty realm are derived from, 
 and depend for their existence and continuance, 
 entirely on its foreign trade. 
 
 When it is farther considered, that a vast pro- 
 portion of all the exports from the United King- 
 dom go to colonies and possessions which are 
 strictly our own — the trade in the exports to 
 parts strictly foreign^ sinks into still greater com- 
 parative insignificance. 
 
 England, single-handed, and often at war with 
 the kingdom of Scotland, with Wales, and with 
 Ireland, and when she had scarcely any foreign 
 
85 
 
 trade at all, carried her victorious arms into 
 the continent of Europe, and subdued, and long 
 held in subjection, powerful states upon that 
 continent. 
 
 If, instead of the ocean for a barrier between 
 her and the other European powers, her territory 
 were conterminous with theirs ; having, like them, 
 only lines of forts on her frontier for her defence ; 
 she has brave hearts and strong hands enough 
 (although resort to cotton and riband factories 
 would be in vain for muster of the latter), by 
 whose courage and power she could keep her 
 ground, as the people of those states do each 
 against other. 
 
 But when it is considered that the three king- 
 doms are now united into one mighty realm, 
 around which, 
 
 " Safe in the love of heaven an ocean flows," 
 
 it is, indeed, a singular creed to hold or to pro- 
 pound, that the wealth, power, and grandeur, of 
 that realm, have been attained and are upheld 
 hy foreign trade, that is to say, by the export of 
 such surplus productions of the soil and industry 
 of the country as are not wanted hy the people 
 for their own use ; — the insignificance of which 
 foreign compared with the home trade of the 
 United Kingdom, has been attempted to be 
 
86 
 
 shown by the facts, figures, and comparisons, 
 contained in the text preceding this digression. 
 
 bolfeo mi.- 
 
 ' Under such delusions, as it has last herein- 
 before been attempted to describe, and in some 
 measure to account iov^^oreign trade has ob- 
 tained the ascendancy over home-trade^ in the 
 opinion of a succession of governments, of par- 
 liaments, and of generations of the people — has 
 been the cause of wars and bloodshed, and has 
 given rise to what are called commercial treaties, 
 between or among the nations of Europe and of 
 the world. But such treaties are, in fact, only 
 peddling or huckstering conventions between 
 nation and nation, to consume reciprocally the 
 surplus productions of the soil and industry of 
 the contracting parties, to the exclusion of the 
 productions of the soil and industry of other 
 nations, by the direct prohibition of the importa- 
 tion of such productions, or by the imposition of 
 excessive taxes on importation thereof — and pro- 
 ceed upon the most narrow and selfish views of 
 the interest of the contracting parties, and upon 
 the most mistaken views of the interest of the 
 republic or commonwealth of nations. 
 ^. Perhaps it may be said to be true, universally 
 ^— that there is no foreign commodity which any 
 
87 
 
 nation importing it could not do without For 
 although there be naany foreign commodities, 
 such as tea,, sugar,, coffee,, wine,, cotton-wool,, &c. 
 which are now in the United Kingdom called 
 necessaries — they certainly, strictly speaking, are 
 none of them such, and the consumption of them, 
 or of any of them, is absolutely optional. Such 
 foreign commodities are therefore the most legiti- 
 mate subjects of taxation — the rather that, as 
 they can find entrance into the country only 
 through a very small number of sea-ports, taxes 
 on them can be collected there in the least ex- 
 pensive manner, and without any infringement 
 of liberty. 
 
 No nation has any just right to complain of 
 taxes imposed by any other nation on commodi- 
 ties imported. The imposition of such taxes is 
 the affair only of the importing country. One 
 nation may pay tribute to another nation — as all 
 the nations of the world pay tribute to Denmark, 
 on passing the Sound at Elsineur — and as many 
 nations paid tribute to the Barbary-powers, for 
 what were called Mediterranean-passes, giving 
 exemption from the piracy of their rovers — ^but 
 no nation can impose a tax on the subjects of 
 any other nation. The importation of a given 
 commodity, the growth of foreign countries, may- 
 be altogether prohibited, or may be so heavily 
 taxed on importation, as very much to discourage 
 
88 
 
 the consumption of it in the importing country — 
 and, consequently, the growth or production of 
 the same in the exporting country. But of that 
 there can be no just ground of complaint : for 
 however unwise and impolitic such prohibition or 
 discouragement of the consumption of any com- 
 modity of foreign growth or production may be, 
 every nation has a clear and unquestionable right 
 to decide for itself what foreign commodities it 
 will import, and how much they shall be taxed 
 upon importation. 
 
 But when, under commercial treaties or other- 
 wise, a commodity, the growth or production of 
 several foreign countries, is prohibited or is less 
 heavily taxed when imported from some one, 
 than when imported from ant/ other country — 
 then all foreign countries, so excluded, have a 
 right to complain of the preference given to 
 what, in such treaties, is called the favoured 
 nation — as being unfair, and as injustice done to 
 the republic or commonwealth of nations — and, 
 of course, the excluded countries make reprisals 
 by prohibiting, or heavily taxing, commodities 
 the growth or production of any nation, from the 
 markets of which they are so excluded. 
 
 The only terms upon which commercial treaties 
 can be concluded, consistently with justice, rea- 
 son, or sound policy, are — that the contracting 
 parties shall or may prohibit the importation of 
 
89 
 
 what they please, and may or shall tax all im- 
 portations, at what rate they please — seeing that 
 such taxes must be paid by their own subjects; 
 but that there shall be no favoured nation. 
 
 To reduce such a treaty to writing would be 
 a work of supererogation. The last-mentioned 
 supposed terms of it would be sufficiently under- 
 stood by declaration, or even by tacit consent. 
 If America were to impose a tax upon iron im- 
 ported from Great Britain of double the amount 
 of the tax imposed upon iron imported from 
 Sweden — Great Britain would of course make 
 reprisals, by imposing taxes on some commodity 
 or commodities, the growth or production of 
 America, of double the amount of the tax or 
 taxes on similar commodities, the growth or pro- 
 duction of any other country. 
 
 Instead of commercial treaties of doubtful con- 
 struction, — which have often been debated and 
 adjusted by warlike arbitrament, — if a common 
 understanding were come to by or among the 
 republic or commonwealth of nations, namely, 
 that all trade should be equally free, and that 
 commodities, the growth and production of 
 any country, should be received as importa- 
 tions into every other country, upon the same 
 footing or terms, and that there should be no 
 favoured nation, — peaceful reprisals only, upon 
 any breach of that common understanding, would 
 
90 
 
 be necessary to establish it. For such an under- 
 standing among the republic or commonwealth 
 of nations would soon lead to the discovery, that 
 a country cannot prohibit or discourage the im- 
 portation of any commodity the growth or pro- 
 duction of another country, without prohibiting 
 or discouraging the growth or production at 
 home J of some commodity or commodities, equal in 
 value — which must have been taken in exchange 
 for the prohibited commodity, if its entry or im- 
 portation had been not prohibited but permitted. 
 
 The foundations of foreign trade are laid by 
 Providence in the diversity of gifts bestowed 
 upon the nations of the world — ^by diversity of 
 the structure of the crust of the earth which they 
 inhabit, and by diversities of soil and climate. 
 To some countries are given metals and minerals, 
 not found in other regions; and to some are 
 given productions of soil and climate, which will 
 not live in the soil or climate of other countries. 
 
 It is this diversity of the gifts of Providence, 
 which is the only true and lasting foundation of 
 the intercourse of nations hj foreign trade. But 
 there is a very striking difference in the bounty 
 with which the Almighty Father of the universe 
 has, in his providence, been pleased to distribute 
 those gifts among the habitants of this planet. 
 
 Within the Northern Arctic- circle (the region 
 within the Southern being uninhabitable), where 
 
91 
 
 eternal winter reigns — where day and night are 
 each of six-months continuous duration — where 
 the half-year of day is barely sufficient for pro- 
 viding food and raiment by fishing and hunting — 
 where, to preserve life, it is necessary for warmth, 
 during the long half-year of night, to burrow in 
 the earth — where no metal nor mineral, for fuel 
 or for any other use, is found — where there is 
 scarcely any green thing — ^where the earth is in- 
 susceptible of culture — the inhabitants of that icy 
 region — having no materiel of the arts of life — 
 no productions to give in exchange, and there- 
 fore no commercial intercourse with other coun- 
 tries — seem doomed to be savages for ever. 
 
 In that region there being no materiel of 
 labour, there can be no division of labour, and 
 accordingly no village or town hath ever arisen 
 within it. it 
 
 Within the tropics, where the earth almost 
 spontaneously produces food — ^where raiment is 
 a burthen — and where labour under a burning 
 sun is almost intolerable, insomuch that it is 
 largely performed by miserable slaves urged to it 
 by the lash — the native and their descendants, 
 if not uniformly barbarians, are, by their posi- 
 tion on the globe, not in a condition favour- 
 able to the developement of the intellectual or 
 physical powers of man. aiiiiiW 
 
 But in the temperate climes, where toil is not 
 
 N 
 
92 
 
 only endurable, but, for the most part, conducive 
 to health and strength — where the ores of all the 
 most useful metals and other minerals abound, 
 for fuel, for the construction of dwellings, and 
 the fabrication of an endless variety of the neces- 
 saries, comforts, and conveniences of life — where 
 the soil naturally yields but little, but, by the 
 skill and industry of man, can be compelled to 
 yield its fruits exuberantly — the human race is 
 found with the greatest capacity, and in its 
 highest state, of moral and physical advance- 
 ment. 
 
 Taking a survey of the temperate climates on 
 the terraqueous globe, the islands situate thereon, 
 which compose the realm of the United Kingdom, 
 manifestly appear to be the most favored portion 
 of the earth. 
 
 Their insular position not only protects them 
 from the assaults of foreign enemies more effec- 
 tually, than if the land were conterminous with 
 other countries, and defended only by the more 
 surmountable natural barriers of rivers and 
 mountains, strengthened by lines of fortifications 
 — ^but it also makes their country the nurse 
 of a more numerous maritime population, than 
 any other country — more numerous perhaps, 
 than the maritime population of all the countries 
 of Europe collectively. 
 
93 
 
 If a map of that quarter of the world were 
 spread out, and a string were passed round Great 
 Britain and Ireland, following the coasts of all the 
 bays, creeks and other inlets, and indentations 
 made by the sea upon the shore ; round the ad- 
 jacent isles of Orkney, Shetland, the Hebrides, 
 the isle of Man, the isle of Anglesea, the isle of 
 Wight, &c. and that string were applied to the 
 coasts of the continent, it would stretch perhaps 
 farther than from the Baltic, to the gulph of 
 Venice in the Mediterranean sea. 
 
 The continental European countries presenting 
 mostly one line of coast to the sea, have little 
 advantage from such line of coast, except for the 
 purposes oi foreign-trade. 
 
 It is found more convenient in France, to 
 communicate between her coast in the Mediter- 
 ranean sea and the interior of the country, by 
 the canal of Languedoc, than by vessels sailing 
 round Spain and Portugal to ports in her pro- 
 vinces in the bay of Biscay. 
 
 But on the coasts of the United Kingdom, a 
 maritime population swarms, like the sea-fowl on 
 the rocks which defend them. Intercourse of 
 trade, between or among the whole people of the 
 realm, is carried on in the most easy, the most 
 cheap, and the most convenient manner, by ships 
 and vessels coasting along the main shores, or 
 
94 
 
 passing from island to island, or along or across 
 the bays, friths, streights, creeks, and inlets from 
 the sea, with which the whole margin of the 
 islands is indented and intersected. 
 
 According to the census of 1841, the maritime 
 population of Great Britain was nearly 300,000 
 (288,650) men,* which is very nearly a seven- 
 teenth part of 5 millions (4,961,045),t the whole 
 male population of Great Britain of the age of 
 20 years and upwards. 
 
 There is no statistical account published by 
 authority (nor is any such account, as is beheved, 
 extant), showing what are the numbers of that 
 maritime population employed in foreign-trade^ 
 and in home-trade respectively — and perhaps it 
 is impracticable to make such an account with 
 tolerable accuracy, because the same vessel is 
 
 * Merchant seamen at sea and on shore on| 
 
 6th June, 1841, including pilots, and I 186,373 
 harbour, and quay-masters . . . ) 
 
 Fishermen, 23,959; boatmen and bargemen,) 
 
 40.276 . . . . .[ ^'''^SS 
 
 Seamen and marines, at sea and on shore,) 
 
 V. 1 • * .1. \ 38,042 
 
 belonging to the navy . . . . J ' 
 
 Total belonging to Great Britain employed) 
 
 ^, , . . , , • .. 288,650 men. 
 
 on the sea and m inland navigation . j ' 
 
 Census of 1841, note f, p. 293. 
 
 t Same, p. 297. 
 
95 
 
 often in the same year engaged both in the 
 coasting-trade and in foreign-trade. 
 
 An account is annually laid before the House 
 of Commons showing the number of ships and 
 the amount of their tonnage annually engaged in 
 foreign-trade^ and in the coasting-trade^ re- 
 spectively, including their repeated voyages. 
 
 That account states the number of vessels 
 belonging to the United Kingdom and its depen- 
 dencies (on an average of the numbers cleared 
 inwards and outwards in the year 1841, the 
 year of the census), to be as follows. 
 
 Engaged in the foreign-trade 21 thousand 
 (21,360) ships, measuring S^millions (8,762,742) 
 of tons.* 
 
 Engaged in the coasting -trade 137 thou- 
 sand (137,140) ships, measuring Hi millions 
 (11,313,451) of tons.* 
 
 Large ships engaged in foreign-trade perform 
 fewer voyages in a year, and are navigated by 
 crews much smaller in proportion to their tonnage 
 than the crews of lesser ships engaged in the 
 coasting-trade. The above figures therefore throw 
 but little light on the numbers of seamen engaged 
 *in those trades comparatively. But there cannot 
 be any doubt that the number of maritime per- 
 
 * Parliamentary paper, No. 15, Sess. 1842. 
 
96 
 
 sons engaged in the coasting and fishing trade 
 of the United Kingdom is several times the 
 number of those engaged in foreign traded* 
 
 Ships engaged in the foreign trade to the East 
 and West Indies, and to the coast of Africa, 
 from the unhealthiness of the climate of those 
 regions, never bring back the number of men 
 which they collectively annually take out; and 
 therefore that foreign trade may, in some sense, 
 be said to be a drain, rather than a nursery of 
 seamen — a drain which is supplied from the 
 coasting trade. 
 
 If the country were always at war^ the navy 
 would be its own nursery of seamen — but as, 
 happily, we live at peace, often for long periods, 
 (long may they continue to be) it is very convenient 
 to be able suddenly to man the navy from a mari- 
 time population, so numerous, and so far exceeding 
 in number and in power, the maritime population 
 of the other nations of the world. 
 
 But the maritime population from which the 
 navy can be most eifectually, on a sudden, 
 manned (ships engaged in foreign trade, being 
 mostly abroad or at sea), is that which exists on 
 the coasts of the United Kingdom. 
 
 * In a memorial from the ship owners of North Shields to 
 the Lords of the Treasury it is stated — that thirty-one thou- 
 sand seamen were employed, in the year 1844, in the coal 
 trade from the Northern Ports only. 
 
97 
 
 If so many as a third part, or 62 thousand 
 (62,124) of the 186 thousand (186,373)* mer- 
 chant seamen, belonging to Great Britain by the 
 census of 1841, were engaged in foreign trade 
 in that year — that would leave 124 thousand 
 (124,249) seamen engaged in the coasting trade ^ 
 which number, with the 64 thousand (64,235)* 
 fishermen, boatmen, and bargemen, would show 
 188 thousand (188,484) engaged in the home 
 trade^ and 62 thousand (62,124) engaged in 
 the foreign trade of the United Kingdom. 
 
 * See note p. 94, ante. 
 
98 
 
 -. f Jan.; ...CHAPTER III.;,... ^,.,,,,,,„,,, 
 
 0^2 ^/le consequences and effects produced on 
 the social condition of the people of the 
 United Kingdom^ hy the selection of subjects 
 of taxation. Uiii: U\^\^i4i'^ 
 
 Continuation. ' /^ ^ ^*J [)OaBi.VtOfli 
 
 When a people have so far advahcea' from a 
 rude or barbarous state, as that civil institutions 
 and some form of civil government have become 
 necessary ; every member of the society is 
 naturally, {i. e. in reason and in justice) bound 
 to contribute to the support of such institutions 
 and government. 
 
 To effect such contribution, taxes become 
 necessary. And in the early stages of civilization, 
 before the birth of foreign-trade^ it would seem 
 to be of little importance, upon what commodites, 
 or upon whom, such taxes were imposed, further, 
 than that each member of the society should be 
 made contributory thereto, (as far as can be 
 devised and provided by law), in due proportion 
 to his stake and interest in the society, and to 
 his means — with the least infringement of liberty, 
 and at the least practicable expense in the im- 
 position and levy of such taxes. 
 
 But even in that early stage of society, it would 
 
99 
 
 naturally occur to the rising statesman — seeing 
 that all taxes imposed upon commodities or upon 
 the dealers in commodities, must fall upon the 
 consumers — ^that, if the taxes were imposed all 
 upon the agriculturists and none upon the manu- 
 facturers, or vice versa — in the one case, the 
 price of food — and in the other case, the price of 
 raiment and of other manufactures would be 
 increased by the amount of the taxes. 
 
 It could not escape his penetration — that it 
 would be better for the society, that, at all times, 
 food should be more cheaply attainable than 
 raiment or ani/ other necessary of life; and es- 
 pecially in times of scarcity, from adverse 
 seasons, which are inseparable from the lot of 
 man — ^that, at all times, and especially in times of 
 scarcity, it would be better for labourers — of 
 which every nation must principally consist — to 
 be clad threadbare, or with a patch at elbow, 
 than to be stinted in their food, upon which 
 their health and strength primarily depend. 
 
 It would be the interest of the society, there- 
 fore, that all taxes upon commodities should be 
 imposed on the materials or finished work of 
 raiment and other manufactures^ and none upon 
 food. 
 
 For although it might appear, 'prima facie^ 
 that, by such selection of subjects of taxation, 
 the agriculturists were favoured and the manu- 
 
 o 
 
100 
 
 facturers prejudiced — it would be easy to explain 
 and promulgate, — -firsts that in reality, such fa- 
 vour and prejudice were but in appearance and 
 not in substance, — and, secondly, even if, in some 
 small degree in substance — that the best interests 
 of the society were nevertheless served by such 
 selection of subjects of taxation. 
 
 As to the first point — although all the taxes 
 were imposed primarily upon raiment or other 
 manufactures, and so appeared to be paid by the 
 manufacturers exclusively — ^yet that every manu- 
 facturer — while he paid no taxes on his food — 
 would really pay taxes only upon such raiment 
 or other manufactures produced by him as he 
 consumed himself; and would reimburse himself 
 all the rest of the taxes imposed upon the rai- 
 ment or other manufacture produced by him, by 
 including such taxes in the price of his produc- 
 tion to the consumers (principally agriculturists 
 or labourers ministering to agriculture), together 
 with the prime cost of the materials — the cost of 
 the labour contained in the production — and the 
 profit ultra to himself; the rate of which profit 
 would, in no degree, be diminished by such 
 
 taxes. aliiiTT^ 
 
 u And, further, if the taxes were in fact all im- 
 posed upon the agriculturists and none upon the 
 manufacturers — the manufacturer would have to 
 pay the same amount of annual taxes on his 
 
101 
 
 consumption of food, as he would pay oil his 
 consumption of manufactures, if the taxes were 
 all imposed on the manufacturers — provided 
 the principle of every member of society being 
 made contributory to the taxes in his due pro- 
 portion were in either case equally acted upon and 
 enforced — and, therefore, that as to the amount 
 of annual contribution of taxes by each and 
 every individual, it could make no difference, 
 whether all taxes were imposed upon agriculture 
 or all upon manufactures — except that, in the 
 one case, the agriculturists, and in the other 
 case, the manufacturers, would be the parties to 
 pay the taxes into the public chests, and to re- 
 imburse themselves by getting them back (minus 
 the amount of the tax on the quantity of his 
 production consumed by each individual himself) 
 from the consumers. iiiiit; -.>u - 
 
 As to the second point — if the imposition of all 
 taxes upon raiment and other manufactures and 
 none uponybofl? — did in substance encourage the 
 production oi food more than of raiment and 
 other manufactures — and did promote the in- 
 crease of the agricultural rather than the increase 
 of the manufacturing population — while at the 
 same time the imposition of the taxes, all upon 
 the one or all upon the other, did not violate the 
 principle aforesaid — that the interest of the so- 
 ciety nevertheless enjoined that the taxes should 
 
102 
 
 be imposed not upon food but upon manufac- 
 tures. 'ao\ uljiSiU v<u v>6 5it,*iij*jf.iioi/ iit)i% dii3 hii^ 
 
 There is anotheir Weighty and impottatit reason 
 for the imposition of taxes upon the productions 
 of manufacture rather than upon the productions 
 of agriculture, namely — that the principle of 
 contribution to the taxes by every member of 
 society, according to his stake and interest therein 
 and to his means, can be applied, or may be ap- 
 proximated in the one case, and not in the other. 
 
 For it would be impracticable to impose taxes 
 ad valorem upon food^ — and if that were practi- 
 cable, the consumption of food by individuals is 
 much more nearly equal in quantity and in cost, 
 than the consumption of raiment and other ma- 
 nufactures^ on which taxes ad valorem can easily 
 be imposed. tff>q-fi 
 
 But by the imposition of taxes ad valorem upon 
 manufactures — cloth, sold at a guinea a-yard for 
 the rich man's coat, could be taxed at three times 
 the amount of cloth sold at seven shillings a-yard 
 for the coat of a labourer — the steel and deco- 
 rated hilt and sheath of the sword or rapier could 
 be heavily taxed, while the iron of the wheel- 
 tire and the plough-share went free — porcelain 
 could be taxed at twenty or fifty times as much 
 as delft — carpets, mirrors, and all the comforts 
 and luxuries of the rich, which are unattainable 
 and undreamt of by the labourer, could all be 
 
103 
 
 made contributory to the public revenue of taxes, 
 and the rich consumers so be made contribu- 
 tory to the taxes, in due and fair proportion of 
 the burthen thereof on them as members of the 
 society, according to their state and condition 
 and their stake and interest thereinku-jjiui^jigfe to 
 
 Amongst the vices of the system of taxation in 
 the United Kingdom are these — viz., that the 
 consumptions of the rich are not taxed materially 
 nor scarcely at all (see pp. 5, 6, ante) — while the 
 taxes imposed upon commodities by measure or 
 weight often operate most unfairly in favour of 
 the rich consumer — e, g. the tax imposed upon 
 tettj sold at nine shillings a-pound to the rich 
 consumer, and at four shillings a-pound to the 
 labourer, is in either case two shillings (2s. 2i) 
 a-pound — being a tax of more than 120 per cent. 
 (Is. 9fd. prime cost + 2s. 2Jd. tax = 4s.) on the 
 poor man^s tea— and a tax of only 32 per cent. 
 (6s. 9jd. prime cost + 2s. 2id. tax =^ Sis.) .on the 
 rich man's tea. Iifoomn r»ffi 
 
 Clear and obvious as it is, that the selection of 
 manufactures and not of food as subjects of tax- 
 ation, is the most just, fair, and wise political 
 economy — it is very remarkable that the reverse 
 of that principle of selection is adopted and en- 
 forced to the very utmost in the United Kingdom. 
 For in this realm there is no tax on cotton-wool 
 (the commodity of foreign production which is 
 
104 
 
 most extensively consumed in manufactures for 
 home-use), nor on any commodity of home 'pro- 
 duction consumed in the manufacture of raiment, 
 or of any of the comforts, conveniences, or luxu- 
 ries of life for home-use (the duty on glass, 
 which produced more than half a million a-year — 
 £641,904, anno 1844 — paid principally by the 
 rich, having lately been repealed ) , while very heavy 
 taxes are imposed on the production oi food. 
 
 Exclusive of the land-tax, which is paid chiefly 
 by the owners or farmers of land in Great Britain, 
 (there being no land-tax in Ireland) which is 
 more than a million a year (£1,164,041 anno 
 1844) — the expense of the maintenance and 
 repair of highways and of bridges — of the fabric 
 of the churches — the expense of the local ad- 
 ministration of justice — and the greater part of 
 the expense of the maintenance of the poor — are 
 all imposed upon the land, or on the owners or 
 farmers of land, ^. e, on the capitalists engaged 
 in agriculture, while the capitalists engaged in 
 manufactures are exempt from all such taxes, 
 which collectively are of very enormous amount.* 
 
 This grievous error in principle has been 
 greatly aggravated by the preference and favour 
 
 * By various statutes, from 3 and 4 Vic. cap. 89, to 7 and 
 8 Vic. cap. 40, the profits of stock-in-trade are exempted 
 from liability to be rated for or towards the relief of the 
 poor. 
 
105 
 
 which foreign-trade has obtained over home- 
 trade^ under the false opinion of the greater 
 importance of the former — which is entertained 
 beyond all former precedent by the prime minister 
 of the day, and his adherents, and followers — 
 and which has emboldened the manufacturers to 
 raise the turbulent but senseless outcry of " free, 
 " ^.e., untaxed trade, " meaning ovlyfree foreign 
 trade^^^ in a country burthened with taxes 
 to the amount of nearly sixty millions a-year 
 (£57,903,555 anno 1844) — a cry which is met 
 by the agriculturists, in terror of heavier taxes 
 being imposed or made to fall on land, or on the 
 owners or farmers of land, and consequently of 
 greater discouragement being given to the produc- 
 tion oi food — by the counter-cry of ^^ protection 
 to agriculture :" cries of opposing disputants in 
 and out of parliament, which are " frightening 
 the isle from its propriety" through the whole 
 length and breadth of the land, 
 rtr hr» 
 
 The agriculturists have been less happy in the 
 choice of their cry, than the manufacturers. 
 Had the counter-cry to free^ i. e. untaxed 
 trade (which means always free foreign -^^'^cfe — 
 although the adjectiveybre^^/^ is craftily omitted), 
 been free^ i. e. untaxed, agriculture — ^it would 
 have sounded better — would have been more 
 
106 
 
 favourably listened to — and the question between 
 the contending parties would have been more 
 dispassionately sifted. Freedom is always a cap- 
 tivating popular word — while protection^ which 
 implies resti'aint^ is the contrary. 
 
 The real question agitated by or between the 
 parties who have joined, or who serve under, the 
 banners whereon respectively those mottoes are 
 inscribed, is however very different, from what 
 the leaders of the/ree foreign trade party, headed 
 by the prime-minister of the day (adroitly avail- 
 ing themselves of the popular delusion, that the 
 wealth and prosperity of the realm are dependent 
 for their continuance and increase on foreign- 
 trade)^ would fain make it appear to be : namely, 
 a great national question; whereas that is a mere 
 pretext, or, if not a mere pretext, is 2i fallacy — 
 although the agricultural party have not hitherto 
 been so fortunate as to detect and expose it— a 
 fallacy nevertheless, which would seem to be 
 exposed by such considerations as the following. 
 
 The main question is — whether yor^?^n grain^ 
 imported into the United Kingdom, shall be sub- 
 ject to a tax on importation^ or shall be imported 
 dutyfree. Without offering, in this place, any 
 opinion upon that question, it is to be observed — 
 
 First — It is a question in which Ireland — con- 
 taining a population of 8 millions (8,175,124*), 
 
 * Census of 1841. 
 
107 
 
 which is equal to more than half the population 
 (15,900,154*) of England, has no interest — or 
 in which, if Ireland have any interest, it is in 
 favour, or on the side of, the agriculturists; — not 
 only because Ireland may be said to have no 
 foreign trade (see notes, pp. 16, 17, 18, ante) — 
 but, moreover, because Ireland never imports 
 foreign grain^ but annually exports vast quan- 
 tities of its own grain to Great Britain ; — and it 
 is manifest that, though it may be prejudicial^ it 
 cannot be beneficial^ to Ireland to be met in the 
 markets of Great Britain by importations of grain 
 from foreign countries — if there be any foreign 
 countries, in which grain can be grown, and from 
 which it can be delivered, in Great Britain, 
 cheaper, — than it can be grown in Ireland^ and 
 delivered, from thence, in Great Britain. f 
 
 Secondly — It is a question in which Scot- 
 land^ which contains a population of 2i millions 
 
 * Census of 1841. '^ Vd b^>80qX'» 
 
 f The quantities of grain, flour, and meal annually im- 
 ported into Great Britain from Ireland, on an ayeraee of 
 the four years, ending with the year 1845, were — 
 
 Quarters. "'k^^:'^ '^^^^, 
 
 Wheat 219,417 Wheat, meal, or floUr/^ 837^436. V5.U\V) 
 Barley 86,122 Oatmeal . ;!i^ Joiil,^ l,366,990'9!t\c\O 
 Oats 1,506,538 i')lip H ^ 
 
 ^( *-^i:l,812,077 Quarters. iloitlJil2,204,420 Cwts. 
 
 Parliamentary -paper, No. 16, Sess. 1846. 
 
108 
 
 (2,620,184*) which is very nearly a sixth part of 
 the population of England (15,900,154*), has 
 little or no interest — the farinaceous food of the 
 labouring population of that country being prin- 
 cipally oatmeal^ which is prepared from grain 
 grown abundantly in Scotland, and even with a 
 surplus for exportation to England. 
 
 The question therefore is merely an English 
 question — and although the whole English people 
 are deeply interested in it, and in the decision 
 of the legislature upon it — ^it lies between the 
 English agriculturists on the one side — and 
 English manufacturers for foreign-trade^ and 
 English merchants engaged inyore?^7z-^r«G^e,on the 
 other side; the agriculturists oi^n^^iiidL — (that 
 is to say, the owners and farmers of the land of 
 England, who are assessed on 48i millions of 
 income to the property-tax (see page 15, ante) 
 — all agricultural labourers — and all the arti- 
 zans and handicraftsmen who minister to agri- 
 culture, whose interests are all English — being 
 the one side; and the merchants engaged in, and 
 manufacturers iov foreign-trade — a moiety of all 
 whose trading interests are foreign — being the 
 other side. 
 
 The amount of the stake or interest of the 
 latter, compared with the former, may be learnt 
 
 * Census of 1841. 
 
109 
 
 from the following account, stating the declared 
 or real value of the produce and manufactures of 
 the United Kingdom exported in the year 1841 
 (the year of the census); in which account the 
 value of every item of such exports as exceed 
 half a million in value, is distinguished. 
 
 Cotton manufactures 16,225,556 
 
 Yarn 7,266,933 
 
 23,492,489 
 
 Woollen manufactures and yarn 6,299,090 
 
 Iron & steel, hardwares & cutlery 4,493,308 
 
 Linen manufactures and yarn 4, 1 1 9, 1 68 
 
 Brass and copper manufactures 1,523,615 
 
 Silk manufactures 788,894 
 
 Coals and culm 671,122 
 
 Haberdashery and millinery ... 634,918 
 
 Earthenware of all sorts 600,580 
 
 Apparel, slops & Negro-clothing 581,154 
 
 Machinery and mill-work 55 1 ,260 
 
 Refined sugar 548,336 
 
 Sheep's wool 508,851 
 
 Articles under the value of half 
 
 a million each 6,404,873 
 
 27,725,169 
 
 £51,217,658 
 
 From the above account it appears, that the 
 gross value of all the produce and manufactures 
 of the United Kingdom exported in the year 
 1841 (the year of the census) was 51 millions 
 CAPITAL-MONEY — which was Only 2i millions more 
 
no 
 
 than the amount (48i millions) of the profits of 
 the agriculturists^ assessed to the Income-tax in 
 that year. And from the same account it appears 
 that the value of the exports of cotton-manufac- 
 tures andyarns^ — 23i millions (£23,492,489) — 
 was nearly equal to (was 0.85 times) the value 
 of all other the exports of the produce and 
 manufactures of the United Kingdom in the 
 year 1841. 
 
 If 23i millions had been taken from the agri- 
 culturists in the year 1841 — they would have been 
 minus nearly half of a year's income (nearly half 
 of 48i millions) which might have been saved out 
 of their future incomes, and their capital have 
 remained undiminished. But if 23i millions had 
 been taken from the manufacturers of cotton in 
 in that year — that amount of their capital would 
 have been swept away — and they would probably 
 all thereupon have become bankrupts or beggars. 
 
 The capital and capitalists engaged in ih^cotton- 
 manufactures have been selected for comparison 
 with the capital and capitalists engaged in agri- 
 culture in England — not only because the value 
 of the exports of those manufactures alone com- 
 poses nearly half the value of all the produce and 
 manufactures of the United Kingdom annually ex- 
 ported from Great Britain — but because, also, it 
 is by those manufacturers that the outcry of free 
 foreign tirade has been raised, and who are fain to 
 
Ill 
 
 appear — who hold themselves up to be — and are 
 flattered by being held up by the prime-minister 
 of the day as — the '''props and supports of the 
 nation;''* while they represent the agriculturists 
 as a set of rapacious, remorseless monopolists, 
 seeking only (regardless of what they, the free- 
 trade party, assert to be the first and best interest 
 of the great majority of the nation — namely, /re^ 
 foreign trade) to secure to themselves a mono- 
 poly of the growth of grain — and thereby to 
 secure excessive rents to landlords ; by the lower- 
 ing of which they, the free foreign trade party, 
 say, the farmers' profits are to be increased (for 
 nobody has the face to say that, of late times, 
 farmer s\i^YQ been making excessive profits) — and 
 the price of grain, moreover, to the consumers, 
 is to be greatly diminished. 
 
 Patriotism is the plea of tha free-ioT^ign-trade' 
 party in defence of their turbulent outcry^ upon 
 which they profess to agitate for pulling down 
 the agriculturists and setting up free^ i. e, un- 
 taxed ioYQign-trade — merely for the public good. 
 
 But when the public good is sought to be pro- 
 moted by the aid of large subscriptions of money 
 — and of a faction organized — by a particular 
 
 * See note on the paper-money of the Bank of England, 
 pp. 61 et seq., ante. 
 
112 
 
 class of traders and manufacturers engaged in 
 foreign-trade^ (moiety of whose interests and 
 connexions are, therefore, foreign) — and when, 
 moreover, ih^ public good is sought to be ad- 
 vanced only along with the profit and private 
 advantage of its promoters — it cannot be uncha- 
 ritable to question and to doubt whether the 
 ostensible be the real motive. 
 
 It requires not a little effrontery of manufac- 
 turers (whose profits on their capital may be 
 ten^ fifteen^ or more per cent, per annum) to 
 impeach landlords of remorselessly taking exces- 
 sive rents — which are for the most part less 
 than, and perhaps seldom so much as, three 
 per cent, per annum ; — for that capital embarked 
 in land seldom yields so high a return as three 
 per cent, per annum is a truism. 
 
 Monstrous overgrown fortunes are never heard 
 of as the fruit of investment of capital either by 
 the owner or farmer of land — while such for- 
 tunes amassed by the investment of capital in 
 cotton manufactures are common occurrences — 
 such as the fortune of the prime-minister of the 
 day; and the fortunes of manufacturers who 
 are the leaders and the supporters of the free- 
 iovQign-trade-party in and out of parliament. 
 
 But, undazzled by the splendour of the wealth 
 of the millionaires and cotton-lords^ who — having 
 
113 
 
 amassed overgrown fortunes by manufactures — 
 therewith buy lands, build palaces, and find their 
 way from their mills and factories into parlia- 
 ment, let them be reduced to their true dimen- 
 sions — comparatively with the real nobles^ the 
 landlords^ and other agriculturists of the realm 
 — let it be seen what is their real stake and 
 interest in society — what employment they give 
 to the people — and what are the numbers, state, 
 and condition of their labourers, compared with 
 the labourers in agriculture. 
 
 That comparison may be prefaced by noticing 
 that, between the agricultural labourer and the 
 farmer, there subsists a kindly sympathy. The 
 state and condition of every resident peasant and 
 his family, morally and physically, are known to 
 his employer, who takes an interest in his lot — 
 visits him — and comforts him when in sorrow, 
 sickness, or any other adversity ; — and every resi- 
 dent landlord (and all the landlords of England 
 may be said to be resident), and every member 
 of that landlord's family, knows and takes a kindly 
 interest in the lot of every resident peasant and 
 his family — at least, on that portion of his estate 
 which he occupies himself, and often far more 
 extensively. But the reverse of all this is the 
 case in the manufacturing town. There there is 
 between the master and the labourer no sympa- 
 thy — there there is no intermediate rank, as 
 
114 
 
 there is of the farmer between the landlord and 
 the peasant ; but there the labourer is a mere 
 slave, treated only as a livings and to a certain 
 extent — (but, alas! how little extent*) an intel- 
 ligent part of the machine which he uses or 
 attends. 
 
 In the preface to the Occupation-abstract of 
 the Census of 1841, p. 8, there is the following 
 passage : — " The different titles, under which 
 " the various persons employed in cotton-manu- 
 " facture were returned, amounted to 1,255 ; 
 " these we have reduced to the general heading, 
 " ' Cotton-manufactures all branches.' If we had 
 " published the numbers under the different 
 '^ subdivisions returned to us, those who wished 
 " to arrive at general results would have been 
 " deceived by omitting to notice branches of the 
 " manufacture, with which nothing but a scien- 
 " tific knowledge of details could have made 
 " them acquainted." 
 
 The above passage is inserted here because, 
 without the authority of it, and without know- 
 ledge of the fact which it states, it would, per- 
 haps, have appeared incredible, that the number 
 
 * See the Report of the Committee of the House of 
 Commons on the Bill to regulate the labour of children in 
 the mills and factories of the United Kingdom. Evidence 
 of the Rev. G. S. Bull, et passim. — Parliamentary Paper, 
 No. 706, Sess. 1832. 
 
115 
 
 of persons collectively — stated at page 16 of the 
 same preface to be the whole number engaged in 
 the manufacture of cotton in Great Britain — 
 could have been accurately gathered or extracted 
 from the said Census. That number (which in- 
 cludes, not only all persons engaged in cotton- 
 manufacture all branches^ but also all persons 
 engaged in the manufactures of hose and of lace)^ 
 is as foUows : — 
 
 -^ ^ - _ Males. Females. Both Sexes. 
 
 Fersons of the age of 
 
 20 years and upwards... 177,995 + 134,395 = 312,390 
 
 Under 20 years of age ... 65,483 + 86,091 = 151,574 
 
 243,478 + 220,486 = 463,964 
 
 By the same census the number of persons 
 engaged in agriculture is stated to be as follows : 
 
 ^ - , ^ Males. Females. Both Sexes. 
 
 Persons ot the age oi 
 
 20 years and upwards 1,215,264 + 66,329 = 1,281,593 
 
 Under 20 years of age . 203,201 + 14,484 = 217,685 
 
 1,418,465 + 80,813 = 1,499,278 
 
 On inspection of the number of persons stated 
 by the Census of 1841 to be engaged in agri- 
 culture^ comparatively, with the number engaged 
 in the cotton-manufacture all branches^ hose and 
 lace] it would seem as if the compilers of that 
 Census, in order to exalt foreign-trade^ and especi- 
 ally the foreign-trade in cotton (see p. 82, ante), 
 
 Q 
 
116 
 
 had taken the lead from, or had followed the cue 
 of, the officers of customs^ in their computations 
 in making out the balance of trade account; 
 not by an overstatement of the number of per- 
 sons engaged in the cotton -manufacture all 
 branches^ hose and lace — but by a most singular 
 and unaccountable understatement of the num- 
 ber of persons engaged in agriculture. For, by 
 the figures above quoted from the said Census, 
 it appears that its compilers — while they found 
 134 thousand (134,395) adult females to 178 
 thousand (177,995) adult males engaged in the 
 cotton-manufacture all branches^ hose and lace^ 
 (which if the females were all married would 
 give 10 wives to every 13 men (10 to 13.2), 
 making the proportion of unmarried to married 
 men 3 to 10) could find only 66 thousand 
 (66,329) adult females to 1,200 thousand 
 (1,215,614) adult males engaged in agriculture; 
 which if the females ■y\^ere all married would give 
 10 wives to every 183 men (10 to 183.1), 
 making the proportion of unmarried to married 
 men 173 to 10 ; — so that almost all the wives of 
 the agriculturists^ however industriously they 
 were occupied, must have been considered by 
 the said compilers either to be persons not occu- 
 pied in agriculture^ or to be non-existent. 
 
 Following the same course, the compilers of the 
 Census allotted 151 thousand (151,574) persons 
 
117 
 
 under 20 years of age^ to the 178 thousand 
 (177,995) adult males engaged in the cotton- 
 manufacture all branches^ hose and lace; which, 
 supposing the parties to be child and parent, is 
 10 children to 12 fathers (10 to 11.8),— while 
 they allotted only 217 thousand (217,685) per- 
 sons under 20 years ofage^ to the 1,200 thousand 
 (1,215,614) adult males engaged in agriculture; 
 which, supposing them to be child and parent, is 
 10 children to 56 fathers (10 to 55.8). 
 
 But if to the number of persons stated by the Census to 
 be engaged in agriculture, viz. . . . 1,499,278 
 
 there be added wives, say to two-thirds 
 
 only of the 1,215,264 adult males 810,176 
 Deducting therefrom the number of 
 
 adult females comprised in the census 66,329 743,847 
 
 And there be added further only two 
 children to each couple, making 
 twice 810,176, or . . .1,620,352 
 
 Deducting therefrom the whole num- 
 ber of persons under 20 years of 
 age comprised in the census . . 217,685 1,402,667 
 
 The number of persons engaged in agriculture 
 in 1841 would appear to have been 
 
 3,645,792 
 
 or 3i millions instead of li million (1,499,278) 
 only, as stated in the said census. 
 
 The above correction of the census, as to the 
 number of persons engaged in agriculture^ must 
 surely be admitted to be made on the most mode- 
 
118 
 
 rate computation; and that corrected number of 
 34 millions comprises only farmers and labour- 
 ers and their families, and none of the artisans or 
 handicraftsmen, and their families, who minister 
 to agriculture; such as the plough-wright — the 
 wheel-wright — the cart and waggon-wright — ^the 
 implement maker — the blacksmith — the harness 
 maker, &c. — ^who each and every of them, with 
 many others, compose a part of the population as 
 essentially ''of or belonging to" agriculture,^^ 
 the farmers and their labourers themselves. 
 
 Another very striking fact, disclosed by the 
 above figures of the Census of 1841, is — ^that the 
 number of adult-males engaged in agriculture is 
 1200 thousand (1,215,264), or very nearly otz^ 
 fourth part of 5 millions (4,961,045), the whole 
 adult male population of Great Britai?i — ^^vhile 
 the number of adult-males engaged in the cot- 
 ton-manufacture all branches, hose and lace, was 
 by the same census 178 thousand (177,995) 
 collectively, or barely a twenty-eighth part 
 (4,961,045 -r- 28 = 177,186) of that whole adult 
 male population ; — the former being the freemen 
 from whom descend ''the yeomen whose limbs are 
 made in England," (of whom 131 thousand 
 (131,464) were serving in the army in the year 
 1841, (the year of the census) and who in the bat- 
 tle-field, as well as in the peaceful fields which they 
 till, are ever ready "to shew the mettle of their 
 
119 
 
 breeding"; — while healthy subjects enough for 
 drummers to such an army, perhaps could not 
 be found among the squalid and ghastly pro- 
 geny of the 178 thousand (177,995), adult- 
 males of the latter — the whole of whom were 
 barely a third part (131,464 + 43,821 = 175,285) 
 more than the number of men, recruited from 
 the agriculturists^ who were actually serving in 
 the armies of the country in the year 1841. 
 
 To carry on the comparison between the value 
 to the nation of the Si millions (3,645,792) of 
 the people employed in agriculture^ and the 464 
 thousand (463,964) employed in cotton-manu- 
 facture all branches^ hose and lace^ would only 
 make the heart sick. The subjection of the chil- 
 dren of the latter to the discipline of the jemmt/- 
 roller and the strap, — their deformed, diseased and 
 wasted frames, — and, worse than all, the awful 
 state of ignorance, debauchery and moral depravity 
 in which they are sunk, — is too painfully detailed 
 and too unquestionably proved, by evidence 
 given before committees of the houses of 
 Lords and Commons ; and particularly in the Re- 
 port of the committee of the latter house " on 
 "the bill to regulate the labour of children in 
 " the mills and factories of the United Kingdom" 
 (being No. 706, sess. 1832) : to which the reader, 
 who is willing to risk the curdling of his blood 
 by perusal of the heart-rending proof of the state 
 
120 
 
 and condition of the white-slaves of Manchester 
 and other manufacturing towns, is referred. 
 
 Of the 464 thousand (463,964) persons em- 
 ployed in the cotton-manufacture all branches 
 hose and lace^ 151 thousand {Ibl^bl 4,) — or very 
 nearly a third i^sirt — are children under 20 years of 
 age. Multitudes of such children having hardly 
 emerged from injanct/{see the said last-mentioned 
 Report, passim), statutes have been enacted to 
 limit the hours of their cruelly enforced unnatural 
 labour, and to restrain the manufacturers in the 
 remorseless sacrifice which is made for ''' filthy 
 lucre,''"' of the health and morals of those unfortu- 
 nates.* But who, it may be asked, ever heard of a 
 statute to limit the hours of ploughing, harrow- 
 ing, sowing, hoeing or weeding; or for the 
 protection of children employed in agriculture 
 from being sacrificed to the lucri sacra fames of 
 their employers ? 
 
 * By the parliamentary -paper No. 87, sess. 1846 — being 
 a Returri of the number and names of the persons summoned 
 and convicted for offences under the Factory-acts, between 1st 
 January 1845, and 1st of January 1846 — It appears — that 
 within that year, 824 persons were summoned for such 
 oifences, of whom 634 were convicted — the complaints 
 against 145 withdrawn on payment of costs ; and against 45 
 dismissed. Among the offences there are some ; for not se- 
 curely fencing dangerous machinery ; by reason of which 
 neglect, children were killed or severely injured ; for working 
 young females more than 1 2 hours a day ; for working young 
 persons during meal times ; at night ; &c. 
 
121 
 
 On reference to the summary of the exports 
 of British produce and manufactures, (page 109 
 ante) it appears, — that of the 23i millions-wovth. 
 thereof consisting of cotton-wares^ 7^ millions- 
 wovth. was yarn^ which commodity is prepared 
 principally by machinery. And the component- 
 part of the value of all cotton-wares exported, 
 made up of the cost of labour of the livings is 
 indeed so small a part of the whole cost of the 
 finished production — that it seems almost an 
 abuse of the word to call cotton-wares as they 
 come from the mills, manufactures; their pre- 
 paration from the raw material (which by the 
 way is the greater part of it the production of 
 slave-labour) being effected chiefly by machinery^ 
 composed of inert matter — though the names 
 given to parts of it — ^viz : "jennies and mules," are 
 borrowed from the animal creation. 
 
 It is stated in the census, that there are in Great 
 Britain 215 thousand hoot and shoemakers^ and 
 126 thousand tailors^ viz : — 
 
 Boot and shoemakers. Males. Females. Both Sexes. 
 
 Persons of the age of 
 
 20 years and upwards 175,769 + 9549 = 185,318 
 
 Under 20 years of age... 27,320 + 2142= 29,462 
 
 Tailors. 
 Persons of the age of 
 20 years and upwards... 
 Under 20 years of age... 
 
 203,089 + 11,691 = 
 
 = 214,780 
 
 Males. Females. 
 
 100,080 + 5339 
 19,710 + 1008 
 
 Both Sexes. 
 
 = 105,419 
 = 20,718 
 
 119,790 + 6,347 
 
 = 126,137 
 
122 
 
 The compilers of the census intimate surprise 
 at the greatness of the number of persons engaged 
 in the former of those two occupations. Had they 
 borne in mind, that jennies and mules, to aid 
 in the making of boots and shoes, or to 
 fashion raiment, have not yet been invented — 
 the absence of all machinery/ in those trades, 
 might have very satisfactorily accounted for the 
 apparent preponderance of the number of the 
 people engaged in them, comparatively with the 
 number employed in mills and factories. 
 
 The number of hoot and shoemakers — 215 
 thousand (214,789), is only one to each 88 per- 
 sons (1 to 87.78) of the whole population 
 (18,844,434 persons) of Great Britain — and the 
 number of tailors 126 thousand (126,137) — ^is 
 only one to each 73 persons (1 to 73.43), of the 
 whole male population (9,262,126 persons) of 
 Great Britain. 
 
 The value of the finished productions of the 
 hoot and shoemakers and tailors (though doubt- 
 less less than the value of the finished produc- 
 tions of cotton-wares by the mules, jennies and 
 living machinery of Great Britain) — must be 
 a vast and enormous amount. Yet search will 
 in vain be made in the account of the exports 
 of the produce and manufactures of the United 
 Kingdom, (see p. 109, ante) for any export of 
 any production of the labour of hoot and shoe- 
 
123 
 
 makers and tailors ; unless the small item de- 
 scribed as ''''apparel^ slops and negro-clothing^'^ 
 stated to be of the value of 581 thousand 
 (£581,154) pounds, be counted as such ; not- 
 withstanding that, very probably, great part 
 of the cost of the labour, which was a component 
 part of tJiat sum, was cost of the labour of the 
 unfortunates whose forlorn and hapless lot is 
 so pathetically lamented in the " Song of the 
 Shirt." 
 
 The number of adult male hoot and shoemakers 
 and to7or5 collectively, (175,769, + 100,080) is, 
 by the census 276 thousand^ (275,849) — or 98 
 thousand (97,854) more than all the adult males 
 employed in cotton-manufactures all branches 
 hose and lace^ who by the same census are in 
 number 178 thousand only (177,995, see page 
 115, ante). 
 
 But it would be idle to multiply proofs of the 
 insignificance of the foreign-trade of Great 
 Britain compared with her home-trade; — and 
 yet so great is the prevalent delusion as to the 
 greater importance of the former, — and that 
 the health and even the life of the state is depen- 
 dent for continuance on foreign-trade — ^that the 
 delusions with respect to the sinking-fund — with 
 respect to the paper-money of the Bank of 
 Engla7id — ^with respect to the balance of trade — 
 and the monster-delusion, under which 250 
 
 R 
 
124 
 
 millions of the national debt, carrying 1\ millions 
 of annual interest, were created, ^or which no 
 value or consideration whatsoever was ever given 
 hy the lenders or received hy the public — are all 
 outdone ^ by the delusion with respect to the im- 
 portance and value oiihQ foreign trade ^ compared 
 with the home-trade of the United Kingdom. 
 
 On reference to the summary of the exports of 
 the produce and manufactures of the United 
 Kingdom (anno 1841, seepage 109, ante), it may 
 be seen — that, besides cotton-wares — o\Aj four 
 items of such exports exceeded in value one 
 million each ; of which j^?/r items, the largest — 
 namely woollen-wares (value 6^ millions) — was 
 very little more than sl fourth part of 23 millions, 
 the value of the cotton-wares exported. Two 
 <i)ther of those J^wr items were iron, and steel, and 
 brass, and copper wares (value collectively 6 mil- 
 lions) and the fourth was linen-wares (value 4 
 millions). 
 
 The quantities of all those wares (except perhaps 
 cotton-wares) prepared and produced for home- 
 consumption, so infinitely exceed the quantities 
 of the same prepared or produced for exportation — 
 that, except a feeble voice from the woollen-fac- 
 tories; the cry oifree ioveign-trade would pro- 
 bably never have been joined in by the manufac- 
 turers of wares other than cotton-wares exported. 
 
 The iron, and steel, and brass, and copper ma- 
 
125 
 
 nufacturers defy all foreign competition. With re- 
 spect to linen-wares^ the producers of them have 
 always been sticklers for protection — which has 
 always been extended to them, by the imposition of 
 heavy taxes on the importation oi foreign-linens. 
 
 The cotton-manufacturers who have found 
 their way into parliament — (who, as will appear 
 in the sequel, spin logic, rhetoric, and political 
 economy as well as cotton) — propound this syl- 
 logism, viz. That the wealth, power and grandeur 
 of Great Britain have mainly arisen from, and de- 
 pend for their continuance, upon foreign-trade ; 
 \k\2X foreign trade has mainly arisen from and 
 depends for its continuance upon the manufac- 
 turers of cotton — and that therefore^ the wealth, 
 power, and grandeur of Great Britain have 
 mainly arisen from, and depend for their continu- 
 ance on, the manufacturers of cotton. 
 
 That syllogism in the logic of Manchester, has 
 the sanction of, and is acted upon by, the prime- 
 minister of the day ; however irreconcileable 
 with the logic of the Stagirite taught in the 
 schools in which he studied in his youth. 
 
 Such is the process in the " art of (false) 
 reasoning," upon which the manufacturers of 
 cotton justify their having raised, first in Man- 
 chester, the cry of " free-ioiv^x^-trade — " and 
 their having then assumed the lead in getting up, 
 by agitation^ sl pressure from without — whereby 
 they hope, and avowedly purpose, to intimidate 
 
126 
 
 the government and the legislature to join with the 
 prime-minister of the day in establishing by law 
 Jree-foveign-trade — ^although the taxes amount to 
 nearly sia:t^ millions a-year (£57,963,555 anno 
 1844), — and although that whole amount of 
 taxes, {li foreign- trade — ^moiety of which is the 
 interest oi foreigners — is to go free^ i. e, un- 
 taxed), must of necessity be imposed, in entirety 
 and totality, upon the land., upon the labour., and 
 accumulated capital engaged in agriculture., and 
 in home-trade; some or all of them: in all which 
 the people of the United Kingdom themselves 
 only are interested. 
 
 In furtherance of that agitation and pressure 
 from without — the cotton-manufacturers embodied 
 the faction., called the Anti-com-law League — 
 supported by subscriptions of money., already 
 made to a very large amount, and which they 
 proclaim are to stop only when the funds of the 
 league shall have swelled to a quarter of a 
 million. 
 
 With part of that money, the confederates of 
 the league agitate; to influence and secure votes 
 at elections for the return to parliament of can- 
 didates who profess free-ioT:Q\gn.-tradej and hos- 
 tility to landlords. 
 
 With other part of that money, they hire 
 rooms, halls, and theatres, wherein — to audiences 
 lured to their meetings by advertisements, hand- 
 bills, and placards — ^lectures and harangues are 
 
127 
 
 delivered, libelling the nobles and landlords 
 of the realm ; extolling Jree -foreign- trade ; 
 and inciting the multitude, as men and as Eng- 
 lishmen, to assert their rights and to swell the 
 crt/ ofjree-foreign-tradej till the welkin ring ; and 
 the houses of parliament be forced to give their 
 startled ear to the shout. 
 
 But the leaguers take especial care that their 
 audiences always consist only of their own ad- 
 herents or followers. 
 
 With other part of that money, the confederate 
 manufacturers publish a newspaper, bearing 
 " The League" for its title, which is circulated 
 among the peasantry in the rural districts of the 
 land ; together with hand-bills, placards, and 
 pamphlets full of abuse of landlords^ whom they 
 nick-name "the Squirearchy" — representing them 
 as greedy, heartless, and rapacious oppressors, 
 enslaving tenant-farmers and their labourers by 
 extortion of excessive rents ^ merely to enrich 
 themselves — asserting, that landlords make the 
 laws — and, by the imposition of duties on the 
 importation oi foreign-grain merely for their 
 own profit^ virtually and actually lay a tax on 
 the people's bread — from all which thraldom and 
 oppression, by the establishment of free-foreign- 
 trade, the league tell the peasantry that they 
 will be freed and emancipated. 
 
 With other part of that money, emissaries are 
 sent, and sometimes leaders of the league them- 
 
128 
 
 selves go, into the rural districts; and there get 
 up assemblages of agricultural labourers ; to 
 whom they deliver similar harangues; always 
 Q^tdWing free-trade^ but ever carefully suppres- 
 sing the adjective foreign — in England "un- 
 pleasing to a peasant's ear" — with amplifica- 
 tions — such as, that if the bread-tax were taken off 
 by the establishment by law oi free-trade^ tyrant 
 landlords would be humbled ; and all the oppres- 
 sion and misery, which they inflict, be redressed 
 and put an end to, — ^that free-trade^ although it 
 might change much of the industry of the country 
 from agricultural to manufacturing labour ; 
 yet, that the agricultural labourers and their 
 families, who, by such change, might be thrown 
 out oifield-worh^ would ^ndifull employment at 
 ample wages in manufacturing towns; as the 
 increase of manifactures by the establishment 
 of free-trade would always give employment to 
 more than all of them who might be thrown out 
 of agricultural-work ; and that such towns would 
 absorb their children as labourers, when their 
 families were redundant, while their parents 
 continued themselves employed in agriculture. 
 
 Such is the tale, with many embellishments, 
 which the leaders and emissaries of the league, 
 for their own sordid ends and purposes, tell to 
 the peasantry of England — reckless of thereby 
 sowing among them, in their peaceful homes, 
 discontent, the fruitful parent of sedition. 
 
129 
 
 But the leaguers do not fell the peasantry — if 
 foreign-trade go free (i. e., untaxed), upon what 
 the sia;t^ millions (£57,903,055 ann. 1844) of 
 annual taxes are to be imposed. 
 
 They do not tell them — (as the fact really is), 
 that, if all taxes were taken off agriculture and 
 laid upon manufactures — England could produce 
 and sell bread and meat cheaper than any coun- 
 try in Europe; and would probably again become 
 a country exporting grain as well as cotton and 
 other manufactures. 
 
 They do not tell them — (as the fact really is) 
 that by such a transference of taxes, the 1200 
 thousand (1,215,264)* adult males engaged in 
 agriculture, would be increasedin number, without 
 any diminution of the 178 thousand (177,995)* 
 engaged in the cotton-manufacture all branches, 
 hose and lace — because that, by such transference 
 of taxes, much of the waste lands of England, 
 and of the realm, would be cultivated and peo- 
 pled ; and very much of the manufactures, now 
 exported and consumed by foreigners, would be 
 consumed at home, without any diminution, from 
 that cause, of the quantity annually exported — 
 and that from its great bulk, the exportation of 
 grain would give employment to many more 
 English ships, and English sailors, than the ex- 
 portation of cotton or of any manufactures, 
 
 * See page 115. 
 
180 
 
 They do not tell them — (as the fact really is), 
 that, if a tax of ^z^o-pence a-pound were imposed 
 upon cotton-wool imported^ produced principally 
 by unhappy slaves in foreign countries (a tax 
 which would not raise the price of the gowns of 
 their wives, or the frocks of their children a half- 
 penny a-yard*) — the half of the taxes on soap^ 
 tea and tobacco^ might be repealed and taken 
 off.f 
 
 They do not tell them — (as the fact really is), 
 that if by such specious misrepresentations and 
 
 * A gown -piece of cotton of nine yards in length, taken 
 from a promiscuous heap in a draper's shop, weighed one 
 pound six ounces and a half ^ say, (allowing for waste of the 
 cotton-wool in spmning) a pound and a half; on which gown- 
 piece a tax of two-pence a-pound — would be three-pence, or 
 one-third of a penny a-yard, instead of a halfpenny a-yard, 
 as stated in the text. 
 
 I The quantity of cotton-wool imported and entered for 
 home-consumption on an average of three years ending with 
 1844 — was 540 millions (540,595,216)* of pounds— a tax 
 of two-pence a-pound on which would have produced 4^ 
 millions (£4,504,960) per annum. The taxes on soap, 
 (£882,664) on tea, (^^4,340,231) and on tobacco, (£3, 7 46,981) 
 amounted collectively, on an average of the same three years, 
 to 9 millions (£8,973,876), f moiety of which is 4J millions 
 (4,486,938). 
 
 * Parliamentary -papers. No. 36, session 1844, and No. 
 18, session 1845. 
 
 I Finance Accounts. Anno 1842, 1843, and 1844. 
 
131 
 
 false tales — they shall be lured from being denizens 
 of the hamlet to become living parts of machinery 
 in Manchester, or some other manufacturing 
 town — that then — 
 
 The breezy call of incense- breathing morn, 
 
 The swallow twittering from its straw-built shed, 
 ,,The cock's shrill clarion, or the echoing horn. 
 No more shall rouse them from their lowly bed. 
 
 For them no more the blazing hearth shall burn, 
 Nor busy housewife ply her evening care ; 
 
 Nor children run to lisp their sire's return. 
 Nor climb his knees the envied kiss to share ; 
 
 for if once so lured, they must quit for ever the 
 cot — ^in the free air of Heaven— with its rose at 
 the window, and its honeysuckle or jessamine at 
 the door — to be entombed alive in a dank and 
 pestiferous cellar, or to shiver in a cold garret ; 
 to which dens or cages they must see their chil- 
 dren return night after night, after eleven or more 
 hours of labour, as living parts of a machine ; lan- 
 guid and haggard from exhaustion, or hectic from 
 the fever of decline ; and many of them sinking 
 into untimely graves — ^yet whom, nevertheless, 
 doing violence to all the ties of parental affection 
 and of nature, they must every morning awaken 
 from sleep, unrefreshed by needful rest, and 
 drag from their pallet (if they be so fortunate as to 
 have a pallet,) to obey the summons of the factory- 
 bell, or the child will be subject to the inflic- 
 
132 
 
 tion of the strap for late attendance. And when 
 parent or child is, at last, about to " sink into the 
 "grave, unpitied and unknown" — in their ap- 
 proaching release from their living tomb, they 
 sigh and wish in vain, while descending into the 
 dark valley, for solace and support on their way, 
 from the kindly pastor, who, in their rural homes 
 was ever present at their call, and frequent in his 
 unsolicited ministrations. 
 
 Without offering any opinion in this place on 
 the question between the controversialists on 
 ^ree-ioreign- trade, (upon which persons of the 
 keenest intellects differ) it would be difficult 
 to refrain from remarking — that if it shall turn 
 out, (when the subject has been thoroughly 
 sifted and investigated — ^which the reader of the 
 facts herein statedjuay perhaps be convinced it 
 has not yet been), that the theory of the free- 
 iovQign-trade party is false, and the theory of 
 the agriculturists is true — in that case, the lead- 
 ers and emissaries of the league will, for the sor- 
 did ends and purposes of cotton manufacturers, 
 have been sowing discontent, the fruitful parent 
 of sedition, among the peasantry of England, 
 with a lie in their right hands. 
 
 Even if the theory of the free-ioreign-trade 
 party were free from doubt (as they assume that 
 it is) the adoption of such a course, to gain con- 
 
133 
 
 verts to it, is not only unpatriotic, but unfair; for, 
 among others, this obvious reason, viz., that 
 they^ the leaguers^ go, and send their emissaries, 
 into the rural districts, and gather audiences 
 summoned from a wide district of thinly-peopled 
 country to listen to their harangues ; — while, at 
 the same time, they are well aware that their 
 opponents, the agricultwists^ have not similar or 
 corresponding adverse power ; for if the agricul- 
 turalists were to go or to send, to descant in favour 
 oi free (^. ^., untaxed) agriculture^ and against 
 free-iove\ga-trade in Manchester, or any other 
 manufacturing town — they would find themselves 
 in a hornet's-nest, and that their voice — or the 
 voice of the goddess of Truth herself — there 
 uttered, on such subjects, would be drowned 
 in a yell of execration ; and they would be for- 
 tunate to effect their escape from such a visit or 
 embassy with unbroken bones. The part taken by 
 the leaguers^ in their conflict with the agricul- 
 turist, may therefore be truly said, not only to be 
 unpatriotic and unfair, but un-English^ — ^be- 
 cause, if not exactly like striking a man when 
 he is down^ it is very exactly like striking a man, 
 with his hands tied behind him, unable to return 
 a blow. 
 
 At such assemblages of rural labourers, peti- 
 tions for free-trade^ got up by the leaguers^ are 
 
134 
 
 signed with the names or the marks of the excited 
 peasantry ; and, with other like petitions, with 
 the signatures or the marks of the assembled 
 hordes of Manchester, and other manufacturing 
 towns, are presented to parliament. 
 
 But what, it may be asked, are the contents of 
 those petitions, but the dicta of the confederates 
 of the Anti-Corn-law League, who are the framers 
 of them ? And upon a question — which the keen- 
 est intellects of the learned in the science of 
 pohtical economy have been unable to decide — it 
 may be further asked, can the opinion of an 
 assemblage of peasants, or of a horde of manu- 
 facturing labourers, be of more value or weight 
 upon such a subject^ than their opinions would 
 be on the " Mfechanique Celeste," or on the " In- 
 finitismal Calculus?'' And yet such petitions 
 are, by the complaisance of parliament, ordered 
 to lie o/z, instead of under ^ the table ; while the 
 prime-minister points to the mass^ as irrefragable 
 arguments in favour of his measure of free- 
 iovQign-trade* 
 
 * It is remarkable, that to one petition to the House of Com- 
 mons from Manchester for free trade, 52 thousand (52,579)* 
 signatures or marks were procured to be subscribed ; al- 
 though for the reasons assigned in the text, the subscribers 
 
 * First report of the select committee of the House of Com- 
 mons on public petitions. 
 
135 
 
 Such having been the conduct of the league 
 out of parliament; and such the courses remorse- 
 lessly pursued by them to excite discontent 
 among the people, and, by agitation, to get up a 
 pressure from without (by which means they have 
 intimidated the government of the day to echo 
 their cry of free foreign trade — and hope to in- 
 timidate parliament to legislate upon it) ; it may 
 next be seen — ^whether the allegation that the con- 
 federacy of the league has been formed, with its 
 intended fund of a quarter of a million^ for the 
 purpose of intimidation — ^be or be not supported 
 by the speeches which the cotton-manufacturers of 
 that confederation, who have found their way into 
 the House of Commons, have ventured to deliver 
 in that assembly. 
 
 One of them, (in the garb of the sect which 
 claims to be christians and lovers of peace, par 
 
 may truly be said to be persons of no knowledge on the sub- 
 ject of that petition ; while to three hundred and nine- 
 teen petitions presented to the same house, between 22nd 
 of January and 10th March 1846, for limiting the hours of 
 labour of children in mills and factories^ being a subject on 
 which the subscribers had but too much knowledge, and but 
 too well understood^ and but too deeply felt ; only 63,070 
 names* or marks were subscribed in all; and that not one of 
 those 319 petitions is stated to have come from Manchester. 
 
 * Thirteenth report of the same committee. 
 
136 
 
 eminence) made a speech in that House on 
 the 17th of February, 1846; in which it is 
 reported (Hansard, vol. 83, p. 113, et seq.) that 
 he gave utterance to the following words : — 
 
 "Look at the population of Lancashire and Yorkshire, and 
 ask yourselves, whether, with all your valour, and although 
 you talk of raising the standard of * protection,' and crying 
 * down with the Anti- Corn-law League,' — there are men 
 in your ranks — and I defy them — who will take that bench, 
 (the Treasury) pledged to a maintenance of this law. It 
 would be presumptuous in me to assume what were the con- 
 siderations that swayed the decision of the Sovereign — but 
 I doubt not there entered into her mind the question: 
 ' Shall I select for office men pledged to uphold the present 
 corn-law ?' And if she had done so, she would thereby do 
 that which would jeopardize the aristocracy, and do a thou- 
 sand times more damage to your institutions than the instan- 
 taneous sweeping away of every vestige of protection ; — the 
 league is expressly formed for the purpose of procuring the 
 abolition of the corn-laws; and when that abolition is effected, 
 its organization will be instantaneously dissolved, — but not 
 till then." 
 
 Another champion of the league made a speech 
 to the house, on the 27th of the same month, in 
 which he is reported (in the Times newspaper — 
 Hansard of that date is not yet out) to have 
 uttered the following sentences : — 
 
 *' If the first lord of the treasury were to go into the 
 manufacturing districts of the Norths his journey would be a 
 continued triumph. 
 
 '* Don't be led away by the men who cheer and halloo, 
 
137 
 
 like the school-boy whistling in the church-yard to keep up 
 his courage. 
 
 " Had there been such an amount of public opinion, as 
 now exists in favour of the repeal of the corn-laws, in sup- 
 port of Charles Stuart, in 1745, the dynasty of the Stuarts 
 would now have occupied the throne of these realms. That 
 amount of public opinion is sufficient to change the constitu- 
 tion of the country. 
 
 " What will teach you what public opinion is ? Must you* 
 be tossed in a blanket ? Must you* be swept out of this 
 house into the Thames ? The country will not be governed 
 by a combination of landlords and tenants. f 
 
 " Be assured, if you prolong the contest two or three 
 years (which you cannot do) — if, however, it comes to the 
 worst, we have the means in our power to meet the diffi- 
 culty, and are prepared to use them. Money has been sub- 
 scribed to prepare our organization^ in every county ; and 
 we are prepared to meet the difficulty and to overcome it. 
 
 " I will tell you what my thoughts were as I sat at home 
 
 * Query — who ? — The Speaker? 
 
 f If the country is to be governed by any combination with 
 liberty to choose its master — it would be well worthy of the con- 
 sideration of <Acpec»p/c, whether they would elect to be governed 
 by the owners of the soil of the Island — the landlords, with 
 their tenant-farmers, and with their 1200 thousand( 1,21-5,264) 
 adult-male labourers and their families, all adscriptis glebse — 
 or by a combination of cotton-spinners — the masters of 178 
 thousand (177,995) adult-male white-slaves and their fami- 
 lies ; all which masters, with their machinery and slaves, 
 may slip over and settle themselves in 2, foreign country^ at 
 any time when it suits their interest or convenience ; and 
 which it is manifest that they would do unhesitatingly, if they 
 thought they would be gainers in money by the emigration. 
 
 J Whose organization ? 
 
138 
 
 patiently reading these debates. As I read speech after 
 speech, and saw the fallacies which I had knocked on the 
 head seven years ago reappearing afresh, my thought was — 
 what fun these debates will afford to the men in fustian - 
 jackets. All these fallacies are perfectly transparent to these 
 men, and they would laugh at you* for putting them forward. 
 
 " You forget that the great mass of the people now take 
 a very different view of these questions from what youf do ; 
 they formerly — seven years ago — did give in, to a certain 
 extent, to your reiterated assertions that wages rise and fall 
 with the price of bread. You had a fair clap-trap against 
 us (as we happen to be master-manufacturers), in saying 
 that would reduce wages. But the right honourable baronet 
 at the head of the government, and the right honourable 
 baronet the Home-secretary, are not suspected by the Eng- 
 lish people of having such motives on these questions. You 
 see I do not under-rate the importance of your leaders^ 
 having declared in favour of free-trade ; on the contrary, I 
 avow that that has caused the greatest possible accession to 
 the ranks of the free-traders. 
 
 "Well, then, the working classes, not believing that 
 wages rise and fall with the price of bread, when you tell 
 them that they are to have corn at 25s. a quarter, instead of 
 being frightened, are rubbing their hands with satisfaction. 
 
 " And then, the danger of having your lands thrown out 
 of cultivation. Why what would the men in smock-frocks 
 in the South of England say to that ? They would say, — ^we 
 shall get our potatoe-ground at a halfpenny a lug, instead of 
 paying three-pence or four-pence for it. 
 
 " How can protection, think you, add to the wealth of a 
 country ? Can you, by legislation, add one farthing to the 
 wealth of the country ? You may, by legislation, in one 
 
 * At whom? t Who ? % Whose leaders? 
 
139 
 
 evening destroy the fruit and accumulations of a century of 
 labour ; but I defy you to shew me how, by the legislation of 
 this house, you can add one farthing to the wealth of this 
 country — that springs from the industry and intelligence of 
 the people of this country. You cannot guide that intel- 
 ligence ; you cannot do better than leave it to its own in- 
 stincts ;* if you attempt, by legislation, to give any direction 
 to trade or industry, it is a thousand to one you are doing 
 wrong ; and if you happen to be right, it is a work of su- 
 pererogation, for the parties would go right without you 
 better than with you. 
 
 " Honourable gentlemen may think that I have spoken 
 hardly to them on this occasion, but I want them to come to 
 a better conclusion on this question. There are but two 
 things that can prevent it ; one is their believing they have 
 a sinister interest in this question, and therefore not looking 
 into it — and the other one, incapacity for understanding poli- 
 tical economy. 
 
 " I know that there are many heads who cannot compre- 
 hend and master a proposition in political economy. I believe 
 
 * Dr. Johnson, in his dictionary, defines instinct tobe " desire 
 or aversion, acting on the mind without the intervention of 
 reason or deliberation." Instincts of intelligence certainly 
 happily express the state of mind of the white-slaves of Man- 
 chester — for the relief of whose children the proposed ten 
 hours bill, is probably thought by the master- manufacturers 
 a piece of highly impertinent legislation, interfering with 
 their instincts. To question No. 4911, in the minutes 
 of evidence annexed to the report of the committee of 
 1832, on the Factories-bill, viz. " Have you yourself seen 
 " certain masters employed in those concerns beating the 
 " children unmercifully, and in succession?" the answer is, 
 " I have seen a master strike several of them, and dash 
 " their head against the frame." 
 
 T 
 
140 
 
 that study is the highest exercise of the human mind ; and 
 that the exact sciences require by no means so hard an effort. 
 But barring those two accidents — want of capacity, and 
 having a sinister interest — I defy any man to look into this 
 question honestly and come to any other than one conclu- 
 sion. 
 
 " It may be well for you to get right notions of political 
 economy. Questions of that kind will form a great part of 
 the world's legislation for a long time to come. 
 
 " I can prove that we advocate nothing but what is agree- 
 able to the highest behests of Christianity ; to buy in the 
 cheapest and sell in the dearest market."* 
 
 Such an eiFusion as this last, certainly beggars 
 comment ; and criticism is precluded by the in- 
 tense modesty of the speaker ; who wanted only 
 the revolving pistol, and the bowie-knife, to 
 complete in him the picture of the orator from 
 Kentucky, on the floor of the White-house at 
 Washington. 
 
 But it is curious to learn from his speech, 
 that the " men in fustian-jackets" (^. e., the 
 manufacturing operatives), are become, by the 
 instincts of intelligence, such masters of the 
 science of political economy (which the speaker 
 says is the "highest exercise of the human 
 mind "), that the fallacies of the legislature in 
 that science are transparent to them. And it 
 is also curious to be informed that the discovery of 
 
 * The sentences quoted from this speech are not con- 
 tinuous in the original, but arei taken from it passim. 
 
141 
 
 the smock-frocks of the South^ and the men in 
 fustian-jackets of the North of England, made 
 by the instincts of intelligence in such a science, 
 coincide with the discovery, made by the prime- 
 minister of the day, on his experience of the last 
 three or last six y ear s^ namely, — that the doctrine 
 of all the learned great who have written on that 
 science, with respect to wages rising and falling 
 with the price of food, is false and erroneous 
 (see note, p. 28 et seq. ante). 
 
 The prime-minister of the day, in repudiating 
 (upon three or six years experience) the doctrine, 
 upon that point, of all the learned political econo- 
 mists of the school, and from the time of. Dr. Adam 
 Smith, evidently fell into the too common error 
 of generalizing from a single case ; — his case 
 being, moreover, as to th.Q facts of it, not proven^ 
 and the presumption being, that there was mis- 
 take as to the actuality of those facts (see note, 
 p. 31 et seq. ante). 
 
 The same error, of generalizing from a single 
 case, seems to have led the same prime-minister 
 to the same false conclusion as the cotton-spinners 
 arrived at by the false reasoning of their syllogism 
 — namely, that the wealth, power, and grandeur 
 of the realm are mainly derived from, and 
 supported by the manufacturers of cotton (see 
 p. 125, ante). 
 
 When that minister surveys his palaces, pic- 
 tures, and statues, and reflects that they are all 
 
142 
 
 the fruit of the cotton-manufacture — it would 
 seem as if he generalized (as in the instance last 
 above mentioned), from his own individual case, 
 and inferred that, because the cotton-manufac- 
 ture was the source of his riches, therefore it was 
 the source of the riches of the realm. And, 
 that that may not be deemed an unfair obser- 
 vation, or a sarcasm, the following declaration, 
 made by him in the House of Commons on the 
 14th Feb. 1845, is quoted (from Hansard, vol. 
 77, p. 483) : — " I know it will be said that this 
 " trade is now in a flourishing condition. But 
 ** we must not disregard the formidable competi- 
 " tion to which it is exposed ; we must consider 
 .f ff how materially this cotton-manufacture has 
 i A* contributed to the strength of the country — 
 hj^^ how materially it aided in enabling us to go 
 " through successfully that great conflict in 
 *• which we were some thirty years ago en- 
 \ ^^ gaged,'' &c. 
 
 ^.. The value of the export of cotton- wares, some 
 thirty years ago, on an average of the years 1813, 
 1814, and 1815, (the three last years of the last 
 war), was 20 millions (£20,212,012)* a-year ca- 
 pital money ; on which the profit, calculated at 
 ten -per cent., was 2 millions (£2,021,201). 
 
 The public expenditure of the same three 
 years was more than 97 millions (£97,007,713)* 
 
 rriii-y ' 
 
 * Finance accounts, annis 1813, 1814, and 1815. 
 
143 
 
 a-year. How materially the taxes on the two 
 millions of annual profits of the cotton-manu- 
 facturers contributed to aid in enabling the coun- 
 try, by an annual expenditure of 97 millions " to 
 " go successfully through the great conflict in 
 " which it was engaged in those three years," (in 
 which the value of the exports of cotton-wares 
 exceeded the value of the exports of the same in 
 any former three years), is left to the reader to 
 compute: noticing here, only — that the seizure 
 and sale for the public service of the whole 20 
 millions-worth of cotton-wares exported, would 
 not have defrayed the public expenditure for 
 ELEVEN WEEKS of any one of those three years. 
 
 When a prime-minister, labouring under such 
 delusions, declares to the assembled parliament, 
 as the prime-minister of the day is reported 
 (Hansard, vol. 83, p. 95) to have declared, on 
 the 22nd Jan. 1846,—" I will not stand at the 
 " helm during the tempestuous nights that I 
 " have seen, if the vessel be not allowed to pur- 
 " sue the course which I think she ought to 
 " take," — it surely may be said — drawing out his 
 allegory — that it is a question of the deepest 
 importance, whether the vessel of the state, and 
 the fortunes and lives of the crew, should be en- 
 trusted to the guidance of a pilot who declines to 
 have his steerage " conned " by the legislature ; 
 and especially when it is considered — that he has. 
 
144 
 
 of late, capriciously put *^ about ship/' to sail 
 upon courses marked as perilous^ upon charts of 
 which he is himself the hydrographer ; — (as in the 
 case of his " tack " on the corn-law Sj and his 
 " tacks " upon other courses, which will appear 
 in the sequel) — and that he has now got the 
 vessel of the state into the " surf" on a " lee 
 shore." 
 
 The editor of a Parisian newspaper (The 
 Journal des Dehats)^ in a notice of the oracle of 
 the league, says : — " His speech was a perpetual 
 ^ defiance hurled against the landed aristocracy. 
 ' He laid bare the basis of the aristocratic influ- 
 ' ence, and complacently showed the ravages 
 ^ that had been committed upon them by the 
 ' repeated assaults of the league. He said, — 
 ' ' We* can also create voters ; and the most en- 
 ' lightened of you well know that we shall eifect 
 ' ourf purposes.' " 
 
 From this quotation, it appears how the lan- 
 guage of the oracle of the league strikes the 
 mind of the foreign journalist. 
 
 The tone of his speech in the House of Com- 
 mons, as well as of the speech of his confederate, 
 the Christian par eminence^ from which passages 
 are above cited, betrays their aims to be entirely 
 selfish^ and that the orators are advocating the 
 
 * Who ? f Whose and what purposes ? 
 
145 
 
 interest of their own class, with the view of 
 putting money into their pockets, at the expense 
 of the owners, farmers, and labourers of the soil 
 — the adscripti glebes of the realm, against 
 whom the leaguers have declared and wage 
 open war. 
 
 It is surely, therefore, most fif^ that the 
 founders oi^ faction^ who speak such "big words" 
 to their " betters," should be shown in their true 
 colours and dimensions ; — in order to form some 
 estimate, of their means ^ and their power to effect 
 the social revolution, which they threaten to 
 accomplish, should the legislature refuse, subser- 
 viently to their will, to enact such fiscal laws as 
 it shall be the pleasure of the league to dictate. 
 
 When the Christian par eminence fulminates 
 his defiance in the House of Commons, and pre- 
 dicates the consequences which would have be- 
 fallen the aristocracy^ if the Queen had not 
 pursued a course approved by the league; when 
 the oracle of the league tells the House of Com- 
 mons that the public opinion now prevalent 
 (i, e,, the opinion of the league)^ " is sufficient 
 to change the constitution of the country ^'' and 
 that the league could now work out a revolution^ 
 although the Stuart in 1745, Avith his army of 
 brave and devoted chieftains and their warlike 
 clans, was able only to raise a rebellion; and when 
 the oracle of the league declares in the House of 
 
146 
 
 Commons, that " when the worst comes to the 
 " worsts the league have the power and the 
 " means to meet the difficulty, and are prepared 
 " to use them — that money has been subscribed 
 " to prepare for their organization in every 
 " county ;" — it is clear to what alternative the 
 leaguers allude, supposing the legislature refuse 
 or decline to make laws at their dictation. 
 
 But the leaguers, when they make such plain 
 allusion to physical force ^ are well aware that, 
 with their own squalid and ghastly ''* men in 
 fustian-jackets^'' they could make no head^ at all 
 comparable with that made by the army of 
 the Stuart, with his highlanders, which effected an 
 irruption into England as far as Derby in 1745. 
 And they therefore use the money, which they 
 have extracted and amassed from the toil of 
 negro-slaves in America, and of white-slaves in 
 Manchester and other manufacturing towns, in 
 going themselves, and sending their emissaries, 
 into the rural districts of the country, to excite 
 the peasantry to sedition, by poisoning their 
 minds by harangues unscrupulously tainted both 
 with the allegatio falsi and the suppressio veri, 
 as hereinbefore mentioned. 
 
 If the leaguers may lawfully sow discontent, 
 the parent of sedition, throughout England, it 
 behoves the owners of the soil (who, according 
 to the oracle of the league, are to be taught what 
 
147 
 
 public opinion is, by being ''tossed in a blank et^^^ 
 or by being "swept out of the House of Commons 
 into the Thames ^^) to bestir themselves in their 
 defence upon their own ground (the enemy's 
 camp being unassailable by them for the reasons 
 aforesaid), and to make the peasantry aware that 
 the leaders and emissaries of the league, when 
 they harangue in order to entrap them, are only- 
 wolves in sheep's clothing, seeking to excite 
 them by discontent to sedition, or to lure them 
 to their caves or dens ; and therefore, (taking 
 the hint from the oracle of the league, as to his 
 proposed discipline of their landlords, by sweep- 
 ing them into the Thames), that they should 
 sweep him — ^the Christian par eminence — and 
 every other leader, and every emissary of the 
 league, when any of them begin their harangues, 
 into the neai^est horse-pond — discipline which 
 they equally merit, whether their doctrine be 
 true or false, when they seek to enforce it by 
 stirring up discontent and sedition among the 
 people. 
 
 Unsupported by the peasantry, and driven to 
 their earths — /. e. to the manufacturing towns — 
 all attempts of the leaguers to attain their ends 
 by such physical force as they could muster 
 there, would be as easy to suppress, as to smoke 
 a hornets nest. ^^^ ^^^ to ^Ton77o ^xl:r asYoried 
 ^-,, Contemptible as the threats of the founders of 
 
 D 
 
148 
 
 the Anti- Corn-law League faction really are — 
 that they have succeeded in intimidating the 
 government of the day is manifest, from the 
 avowal made by the secretary of state for the 
 Home-department, who is reported to have said, on 
 the 27thMarch,1846, in the House of Commons; 
 
 " When we consider the concentration, the union, the in- 
 telligence, the growing numbers, and the increasing propor- 
 tion of the manufacturing population, who have, if not an 
 universal, a very general opinion, deeply seated in their 
 minds, that the corn-laws do enhance the price of bread, and 
 do at the same time lower wages — that they make the manu- 
 facturing workmen pay more and receive less. If you per- 
 sist in maintaining such laws, you may depend upon -it that 
 the population* will not place confidence in the impartiality 
 of your legislation ; the people, upon this point of their 
 daily food, will not at all times listen to reason ; they cannot 
 be cajoled by fallacies : and I am satisfied, in my own judg- 
 ment, that they are not wrong in their opinion. They are 
 right in their opinion, that with the manufacturing popula- 
 tion of this country high prices are concurrent with low 
 wages, and they are placed in a most unfair position. ... I 
 have shown, then, the unanswerable opinion of the manufac- 
 turing population ; I have said that the same opinions pre- 
 vail in many districts among the agricultural and rural 
 population ; I am bound to say that I cannot declare the 
 conclusions drawn by the manufacturing population to be 
 unsound and untrue ; and, believing them to be sound and 
 true, and that it would be dangerous to the permanent 
 domestic peace of the country, and that it would not be safe 
 
 * What population ? See ante p. 118, et seq. 
 
149 
 
 to resist all consideration for this opinion, I shall give my 
 hearty and unhesitating support to the bill now before the 
 house." 
 
 The secretary of state, in that speech, declares 
 his concurrence with the prime-minister of the 
 day, with the leaguers, and with the men in fustian- 
 jackets, and with the smock-frocks, — namely : 
 that the theory of the learned great of the last 
 century, (the masters in the science of political 
 economy), as to the eiFect of the price of food on 
 the rate of wages, is Jalse — a conclusion which, 
 being " transparent to the men in fustian- 
 jackets," and formed by the prime-minister on 
 three or sis years experience^ was probably 
 arrived at by his colleague at small expense of 
 mental labour. 
 
 Upon that opinion, coupled with the fear that 
 it would be dangerous to the domestic peace of 
 the country not to legislate upon it — false though 
 it be (see note p. 28 et seq.) — ^the government of 
 the day, subservient to the league, avowedly 
 found their proposed measures of free-iordga 
 trade. 
 
 Supposing even that the opinion of the league 
 were the public opinion — does it follow, it may be 
 asked, that the legislature should succumb to it 
 unless it were a right opinion ? 
 
 The delusions with respect to the sinking fund 
 — with respect to the paper money of the bank 
 
150 
 
 — with respect to the balance of trade — and the 
 monster delusion, by which 250 millions of the 
 national deht^ attended hy an annual charge of 
 7i millions of interest^ were created^ for which 
 no value was ever paid or received^ — were all 
 for a time public opinions ; but they became 
 such, only because they were taken upon trusty 
 when pronounced and promulgated by the go- 
 vernment or by successive governments of the day, 
 and acted upon by the legislature. How diiFer- 
 ent, it tnay be asked with a sigh, would the 
 state of the country have now been had those 
 transient public opinions not been given way 
 to, but been resisted. That public opinion, 
 when morbid or unsound, can be successfully re- 
 sisted in this land of freedom has been often 
 proved ; and, in extreme cases, even by the tem- 
 porary sacrifice of that freedom itself, by resort 
 to the suspension of the habeas corpus act. 
 
 But that the opinion of the leaguers on free- 
 iove^ign-trade is the public opinion^ is not only a 
 mere gratuitous assumption — but supposing, 
 without admitting, that such opinion does transi- 
 ently predominate by propagation of the league 
 among the "men in fustian -jackets " in the North, 
 and the "smock-frocks " of the South of England, 
 — it is only, so far, the opinion of those labourers 
 upon a subject, upon which, as has already been 
 observed, their opinion is of no more value than 
 
151 
 
 their opinion on the " M^chanique Celeste," or 
 on the " Infinitismal Calcuhis." 
 
 The prime-minister of the day, his adherents 
 and followers, and the leaguers^ rejoice in pro- 
 pounding sundry abstract propositions, on which 
 their theory oi free-iovQign-trade is founded and 
 rests, — such as, thsit foreign-trade should, by the 
 law of nature, be foee ; that to fetter or restrain 
 foreign-trade in any manner is contrary to reason, 
 justice, and to sound policy ; that, by any fiscal 
 law, to prevent manufacturers from buying in 
 the cheapest and selling in the dearest market, 
 (which the oracle of the league declares is 
 " agreeable to the highest behests of Christian- 
 ity") is a violation of natural liberty ; and, 
 above all, that to impose a tax on the importa- 
 tion oiforeign-corii is unnatural and inhuman, 
 as being a tax on the people's bread. 
 
 All which propositions are specious, and, in the 
 abstract, true and undisputable. But there is a 
 tertium quid, which — when those propositions 
 are put forth as maxims for observance by the 
 legislature of the United Kingdom, the pro- 
 pounders of them keep carefully in the back 
 ground ; but which, when taken into such propo- 
 sitions (to borrow the elegant expression of the 
 oracle of the league) " knocks them all upon the 
 head f viz. — that in the United Kingdom 
 
152 
 
 there exists a necessity for raising annually 
 nearly sixty millions of taxes. 
 
 If there were no taxes, all trade^ home and 
 foreign^ would bej^^e. But as the necessity ex- 
 ists for raising sixty millions a-year by taxes 
 in the United Kingdom, the question arises, 
 upon what^ or upon whom shaU those taxes be 
 imposed? 
 
 The solution of that question solves the ques- 
 tion oifree-ioYQign-trade ; and it is easy to show, 
 that, while such an amount of annual taxes must 
 be levied from the people, free-ior^\gx^-tTade is 
 impracticable. 
 
 Antecedent to the birth oi foreign-trade — it is 
 perhaps little important upon what or upon 
 whom the taxes necessary to be levied for the 
 public service are imposed — provided they be 
 imposed upon the principle of making every 
 member of society contributory thereto, accord- 
 ing to his stake and interest in the common- 
 wealth^ and to his means. Yet even in that 
 early stage of society it would seem clearly to be 
 the best and wisest political economy to impose 
 the necessary taxes, not upon food^ but upon 
 manufactures^ for the reasons offered in a former 
 part of this chapter, (page 98, et seq. ante). 
 
 It was there noticed that the very reverse of 
 that course, in the imposition of taxes, has been 
 followed in the United Kingdom — in which 
 
153 
 
 nearly the whole of the taxes are imposed upon 
 food — and but a very small part upon any pro- 
 duction oi manufacture. And yet the reasons for 
 imposing all taxes upon manufactures and not 
 upon food are stronger after^ than before^ the 
 birth of foreign-trade — and become stronger and 
 stronger as the society advances in wealth ; 
 and imperative when it has attained to riches and 
 luxury. 
 
 A member of either house of parliament would 
 nevertheless look in vain on his person, (unless he 
 wear a neck or handkerchief of silk) or into his 
 wardrobe, for a single item of his raiment which 
 is taxed by measure or weight — and it would be 
 difficult for him to find in his drawing or his dining 
 room, or in the sleeping apartments of his house, 
 a single item of manufacture of home-production 
 which pays any such tax, — ^now that the taxes on 
 his mirrors, lustres, chandeliers, girandoles, and 
 his plate and cut glass of every sort, are re- 
 pealed.* 
 
 * The taxes on glass were repealed at the suggestion of 
 the prime-minister of the day to encourage foreign trade — 
 which was a lucky thought for the consumers of those luxuries 
 in the United Kingdom ; and upon that occasion it was said, 
 that the repeal of the tax would be a great benefit to the poorer 
 classes, by cheapening the glass of their windows ; as if the 
 tax on common window glass might not have been repealed, 
 retaining the tax on plate and cut glass consumed by the rich 
 
154 
 
 The taxes of the United Kingdom are almost 
 all imposed upon articles of food^ or upon com- 
 modities consumed by the mouth ; from only^y^ 
 items of which commodities, not less perhaps, 
 than three-fourths of the whole annual taxes are 
 derived (see page 9, ante). 
 
 After the birth and growth oi foreign-trade — 
 any commodity, which can be produced at home 
 at cost not exceeding, or little exceeding, the cost 
 at which that commodity can be produced in any 
 foreign country — will never be imported ; by 
 reason of the expense of the freight, insurance, 
 &c. attendant on its importation. 
 
 But if a tax be imposed on any commodity of 
 
 and luxurious. The auction-duty was repealed at the same 
 time with the taxes on glass. 
 
 The taxes upon auctions and upon glass produced to the 
 revenue 933 thousand pounds a-year (933,349, anno 1844), 
 while the tax upon soap produced 928 thousand pounds, 
 (927,726, in the same year 1844); whence it appears that the 
 retention of those taxes falling chiefly on the rich would 
 have justified the repeal of the tax upon soap which falls so 
 heavily on the poor. 
 
 The consumption of soap (which is an indispensable neces- 
 sary) in the family of a married cottager, is not less than a 
 pound a-week, or 52 pounds a-year — the tax on which at 1 J 
 penny a-pound^ amounts to 6 shillings and 6 pence a-year. 
 The first cost of the glass in the windows of a cottage is not 
 at the charge of the tenant. To keep the glass of his win- 
 dows in repair would cost a cottager probably only a few 
 pence in a year ; and in many years nothing. 
 
155 
 
 home-production — the amount of the tax ne- 
 cessarily becomes a component part of the price 
 of that commodity to the consumer. And if the 
 tax imposed be so high^ that that commodity can 
 be imported from a foreign country into the 
 United Kingdom — and be sold to the consumer 
 there at a less price than that commodity, so 
 taxed on its production at home, can be sold 
 to the consumer — ^the effect of yree-foreign- 
 trade in that commodity would manifestly 
 be, to extinguish at once the home-produc- 
 tion of it, and the tax proposed to be derived 
 from it. 
 
 Such a tax, therefore, would amount to a pro- 
 hibition of the home-production of that commo- 
 dity — would be an encouragement of its pro- 
 duction by foreigners — and would cause, or 
 rather create^ its importation irova foreign coun- 
 tries into the United Kingdom. 
 
 In order to counteract such a result, it be- 
 comes indispensable to lay a tax on that produc- 
 tion on its importation ivom. foreign countries^ 
 to the same amount at least as the tax laid on 
 the production of it at home — and /ree-foreign- 
 trade is at once annihilated quoad that com- 
 modity. 
 
 Many practical instances may be adduced. 
 
 On soap of home-production in Great Britain, 
 a tax is laid of three-halfpence a pounds or 14 
 
 X 
 
156 
 
 shillings a-hundred-weight ; and to prevent the 
 stoppage of the manufacture at home of soap so 
 taxed, by the introduction oi foreign soap, a tax 
 of 31 shillings and Q pence a-hundj^ed-w eight is 
 laid upon all foreign soap imported into Great 
 Britain. 
 
 On malt, and spirits made from malt, of hoine- 
 production, taxes are laid, amounting to more 
 than 12 millions a-year — and to prevent the 
 stoppage of the manufacture of spirits, and of 
 ale and beer made from malt, so taxed at home — 
 there is laid upon foreign spirits a tax of 22 
 shillings and 6 pence a-gallon ; and on foreign 
 ale and beer, a tax of 40 shillings a-barrel — 
 taxes which amount to — and which are expressly 
 and necessarili/ intended to effect — a prohibition 
 of the lawful importation of those beverages. 
 For it is manifest, that the 12 millions a-year of 
 taxes derived from malt and spirits, together 
 with the trades of the maltster, distiller, and 
 brewer, would be annihilated in the United King- 
 dom — ^if 12 millions a-year of taxes were imposed 
 on rrialt and spirits produced at home, — while at 
 the same time, Sifree-iovAgn-trade in spirits and 
 ale and beer were permitted.* 
 
 On hops, on bricks, and on paper, of home-pro- 
 
 * The annihilation of the trades of the maltster, distiller , 
 and brewer, in the United Kingdom, would annihilate not 
 
157 
 
 duction, heavy taxes are laid; (and such taxes 
 were also laid upon glass, before the repeal of the 
 taxes upon glass, see note, p. 153, ante) and 
 therefore, on those commodities of foreign pro- 
 duction, taxes are laid which amount to, and are 
 expressly intended to effect a prohibition of the 
 importation of them — in order to prevent the 
 annihilation of the /iome-manufacture of bricks, 
 and of paper, and of the home-gvovfih. of hops 
 so taxed ; and the consequent annihilation of the 
 revenue derived from the taxes imposed on those 
 commodities. 
 
 What, it may be asked, would the manufac- 
 turers of soap, of bricks, and of paper, the 
 growers of hops, and the maltsters, distillers, and 
 brewers of Great Britain say — ^if the cry of the 
 leaguers extended to a free-iovQ\gn-trade in those 
 commodities (^. e., the importation of them free 
 of taxes), which, without remission of the taxes 
 imposed on the home-production of them, would 
 at once annihilate the manufacture of all those 
 commodities, and the growth of hops, in Great 
 Britain. 
 
 To ^Qvmiifree-fovQigri'trade in those six com- 
 modities only, (viz. — spirits, malt, hops, bricks, 
 paper, and soap,) would cause an immediate loss 
 
 only the taxes on malt and spirits, but would prevent also the 
 growth of all the barley consumed in the production of malt' 
 
158 
 
 of lA^millions of annual revenue ^ or one fourth 
 of the whole annual revenue of the United King- 
 dom (£57,903,555, anno 1844), including the 
 tax upon income. 
 
 Suppose a tax oi fourpence a-pound (which 
 is about the average price of raw-cotton delivered 
 in Great Britain) were imposed on all cotton- 
 wares manufactured in Great Britain^ and that 
 cotton- wares manufactured in foreign countries 
 in which there is no tax on cotton-wares, were, 
 at the same time, allowed to be imported duty 
 free^ — ^in that case, the foreign-manufacturer 
 would undersell in Great Britain the home- 
 manufacturer of cotton-wares. 
 
 How loud, it may be asked, would be the yell 
 of the cotton-manufacturer Sy if such a course of 
 free-iovQ\gn-trade were pursued towards themf 
 Yet such, and no other, is the course, to the very 
 letter, which they ask the legislature to adopt 
 towards the agriculturalists. 
 
 To babble oifree (i. e. untaoced) foreign-trade, 
 in a country burthened with such an amount of 
 taxes upon commodities of hwiys-production, and 
 
 * Spirits . 
 
 . £7,469,440 
 
 ) 
 
 
 
 Malt . 
 
 . 4,996,618 
 
 [ 
 
 £12,710,380 
 
 
 Hops 
 
 244,322 
 
 ) 
 
 
 
 Bricks . 
 
 429,183 
 
 
 
 
 Paper 
 
 011,222 
 
 1,780,367 
 
 
 Soap 
 
 839,962 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 £14,490,747 nn. 
 
 1844. 
 
159 
 
 with such an enormous and inconceivable amount 
 of taxes, upon the whole, is arrant nonsense. 
 
 The end and purpose of the league are not to 
 establish free i, e, untaxed foveign-trade, which 
 is impracticable — as has been proved by show- 
 ing what would be the effect of free-foreign- 
 trade with respect onli/ to the six commodities 
 last enumerated, from which a fourth of the 
 whole public revenue of taxes is derived. Nor is 
 it the end or purpose of the leaguers to seek an 
 investigation of the principles upon which taxes 
 ought to be imposed ; or a revision of the 
 existing system of taxation — but simply and 
 solely to obtain (as is avowed by the very name 
 assumed by the faction, viz. the anti-corn-law- 
 league) the repeal of the existing corn-laws, and 
 a free-foreign-trade in grain only — that is to 
 say — a law authorizing the importation of foreign 
 grain free from any tax — although there is no 
 commodity of home-production so heavily taxed 
 in Great Britain as grain — not only by the /^ 
 land-tax which amounts to a million a-year 
 (£1,164,041 anno 1844), and other direct taxes 
 to an enormous amount before enumerated (see 
 page 104 ante), but moreover because it re- 
 quires many times the quantity of living labour 
 to produce a given value of grain — which it 
 requires to produce the same value of cotton- 
 
160 
 
 wares or of any other manufacture produced 
 principally by machinery. 
 
 The aggregate amount of all the taxes paid by 
 the labourers, and by the artizans ministering 
 to agriculture, whose labour is indispensable to 
 produce a given quantity of grain — forms a com- 
 ponent part of the price of that quantity o^ grain 
 to the consumer — -just as much as the direct 
 taxes imposed on land form a component part of 
 that price.* 
 
 If it be undeniable that to lay a heavy tax 
 on any commodity oi home-production which can 
 be produced at equal prime-cost at home, and in 
 foreign countries, and at the same time permit 
 that commodity to be imported from foreign 
 countries free from any tax, would be, in some 
 
 * There is at the present time (March 1846), a select 
 committee of the House of Lords, appointed to enquire into 
 the burthens on real property. It is to be hoped that the 
 taxes paid by the labourers in agriculture, and by all the arti- 
 zans ministering to agriculture, as forming aburthen on land 
 (/. e., on the productions of land) — will not escape notice in 
 that enquiry, as it is believed has been the case in all similar 
 enquiries, heretofore made by committees of either house of 
 parliament — which have generally confined their enquiries 
 to what are called the direct taxes or burthens upon land. It 
 is manifest that — as to the effect of any tax, which forms a 
 component part of the price of the productions of land to 
 the consumer — it is perfectly immaterial whether such tax 
 be direct or indirect. 
 
161 
 
 cases, effectually to prevent or annihilate the 
 home-production of that commodity — and would 
 in all cases, — ^when the tax imposed is so heavy 
 as to give rise to the importation of any given 
 commodity from foreign countries, which could 
 not be imported if that commodity were un- 
 taxed at home — be to lessen and discourage the 
 home-production of it — it remains for whosoever 
 cannot controvert that proposition to show — why 
 grain only is an exception to the general rule — 
 and though heavy taxes be imposed on grain 
 produced at home, yet that nevertheless — 
 grain produced in foreign countries ought not to 
 be taxed upon importation — but that free, i. e. 
 untaxed foreign trade in grain ought to be per- 
 mitted ; — grain being moreover the commodity of 
 all others, of which it is most essential to the wel- 
 fare and safety of the people to secure the largest 
 possible supply of home-production. 
 
 It is true that the home-production of grain 
 would not be annihilated by free-ioreign-trade 
 ingrain — as the trade of the soap-maker, maltster, 
 brewer, distiller, S^c, would be, by a/ree-foreign- 
 trade in soap, malt, ^c. while taxes of 1 4 millions 
 a-year existed on the home-production of those 
 commodities. 
 
 The bulk and value of grain is so great, that a 
 country of the magnitude of the United Kingdom 
 can never, by any system oi fiscal legislation, how 
 
162 
 
 vicious soever, be made wholly dependent on 
 foreign countries for its supply of food. The 
 Almighty has beneficently placed it out of the 
 power of mortal man, by any system of mis- 
 rule, to effect such calamity. 
 
 The great bulk and value of the quantity of 
 grain annually produced and consumed in Great 
 Britain has already been dwelt upon (page 53, 
 ante) — Having regard to those properties — hulk 
 and value — of the productions of the earth which 
 are the food of man and domestic animals — it is 
 by many sensible persons anticipated — if a free 
 foreign- ^rac?e in grain be permitted in England, 
 that — as SLllforeign-grain must be imported into 
 some sea-port toAvn, and as its price must neces- 
 sarily be enhanced by being sent from sea- 
 ports into the interior of the country — the conse- 
 quence will be, that London and other sea-port 
 places now supplied with grain from the soil of 
 the United Kingdom, and chiefly from the soil of 
 England, will be supplied in a great measure, if 
 not wholly, with grain from the soil of foreign 
 countries. 
 
 The soil of the country contiguous to London 
 and to all great towns, is always kept in pasture 
 and garden-ground for the supply of milk, fruit 
 and garden-stuff; because that is always the most 
 profitable employment of soil in such contiguity. 
 The supply of grain to London and to all great 
 
163 
 
 towns, but particularly to London, therefore 
 necessarily comes from districts of the country at 
 distance — and the consequence is, that grain is 
 always dearer in London than in any other place 
 in the United Kingdom; and always dearer in 
 great towns than in the country at distance from 
 them. 
 
 London alone, {i, e. the metropolis) contains a 
 tenth ^SLYt of the population of Great Britain (see 
 pp. 47, 48, ante) — and were the metropolis only 
 (or a population in the metropoHs and in other sea- 
 ports, equal, collectively/, to the population of the 
 metropolis), in consequence oi free-iovQigxi'trade 
 in grain, to be supplied wholly ^Nithforeign grain , 
 — a tenth part of all the grain now annually grown 
 and consumed in the United Kingdom, would 
 cease to be grown; and would, instead, be in 
 future annually produced in and imported from 
 foreign countries, where it has not hitherto 
 been grown.* 
 
 If the tenth part of ih^ grain which is probably 
 of the annual value of 8^ wzz7//*0725 (£8,299,879, see 
 
 * The metropolis, though supposed in the text to con- 
 sume only a tenth part, consumes much more than a tenth 
 part of all the grain grown in the United Kingdom — by 
 reason of the great wealth and the luxurious mode of life of 
 i\i& tenth part of the population inhabiting the metropolis, 
 compared with the other nine-tenth parts of the population of 
 the United Kingdom. 
 
 Y 
 
164 
 
 note page 54, ante) consumed in the United King- 
 dom, were to be imported untaxed irovn foreign 
 countries^ and were to be paid for, as is antici- 
 pated by the leaguers^ by increased exports of 
 untaxed cotton-manufactures* — the effect would 
 be, to diminish by one tenth the production of 
 grain grown in the United Kingdom — and con- 
 sequently very greatly to diminish the number of 
 the agricultural labourers^ and of the artisans 
 ministering to agriculture^ employed in produ- 
 cing it ; and to increase enormously the production 
 of cotton-wares^ and the number of labourers 
 
 * There is no tax whatsoever imposed on cotton-wool im- 
 ported, nor any tax whatsoever on any manufactured pro- 
 duction of cotton, by measure or weight. The tax on soap 
 consumed in the manufacture of cotton-wares is even remitted 
 or drawn back. 
 
 A very small tax on cotton-wool of 2 shillings and 1 1 pence 
 a hundred-weight upon importation from foreigii countries, 
 and of fourpence a hundred-weight upon importation from 
 British possessions, which produced on an average of the 
 three years ending with 1844, an annual revenue of 664 
 thousand pounds (£663,858),* was repealed in the year 
 1845. 
 
 It is shown in note page 1 30 ante, that a tax of two -pence 
 a pound on cotton-wool imported would not raise the price of 
 a manufactured cotton gown-piece to the wearer, more than 
 one-third of a penny a-yard. It will be found on computa- 
 tion that a tax of 2 shillings and 1 1 pence a hundred-weight 
 
 * Finance Accounts. 1842, 1843, and 1844. 
 
165 
 
 engaged in the production of cotton- wares. In 
 other words, to create in foreign countries an 
 agricultural population not now existent there, 
 supplying one tenth of all the grain consumed in 
 Great Britain — greatly to diminish the agricultu- 
 ral population of England, and greatly to increase 
 her maniifacturing population in order that the 
 one tenth of the population of Great Britain, inha- 
 biting the metropolis and other sea-ports, may 
 be supplied with untaxed grain ^ the production of 
 foreign countries — while the other nine tenths 
 
 would therefore raise the price of such a gown-piece only 
 one twentieth part of a penny (.05,268) a yard — and yet this 
 most minute tax which produced 664 thousand pounds a year 
 to the public revenue — and which if continued would have 
 justified the repeal of two thirds of the tax on soap (£927,726 
 anno 1844) — or would have defrayed or recouped neai'ly the 
 whole of the county-rates of England (£666^97 7 y anno 1842)* 
 or half of the county-rates and all the church rates (363, 103)f 
 of England and Wales — was repealed upon the suggestion of 
 the prime minister of the day, while the cotton-trade, yield- 
 ing such a revenue, from that most minute tax, was, upon 
 his own showing, in a flourishing condition — merely to guard 
 cotton-manufacturers 2igB.ms>t possible foreign competition; and 
 in gratitude to (query to the memory of?)cotton-manufacturers 
 for having " so materially aided in enabling us to go through 
 " successfully that great conflict in which we were some thirty 
 " years ago engaged ! ! " See page 142, ante. 
 
 * Parliamentary -paper J No. 268, session 1844. 
 f Page 26^ ante. 
 
166 
 
 of the people are all consuming heavily taxed 
 grain, the production of their own country/. Such 
 a course is the very reverse of what an enlightened 
 statesman, animated by patriotism and a master 
 in the science of political economy, would pursue. 
 
 Suppose, that by a wish, all the wastes of 
 England, Scotland, and Ireland, could be peopled 
 with farmers and peasantry, as " well to do " as 
 the best of the agricultural population of England 
 now is. Is there, it may be asked, any patriot 
 who would not express that wish? 
 
 Suppose on the other hand that another Man- 
 chester could be created, by a wish — is there, it 
 may as confidently be asked, any patriot who would 
 not regard with horror the expression of it ? 
 
 The cotton-manufacturers seeing nothing, 
 feeling nothing, and regarding nothing, but the 
 prospect of increased gain — by increased exports 
 of cotton-wai^es — and believing that a^'ee-foreign 
 tirade in grain would enable them, by such in- 
 creased exports, to increase their already bloated 
 capitals, — the lucri sacra fames, therefore urged 
 them on, to get up the anti-corn-law league, and 
 to raise the cry of free-ioveign-trade, by which 
 they hope to effect that increase, regardless of all 
 consequences except to themselves. 
 
 The merchants of London and -other sea-ports, 
 through whose hands must pass all those antici- 
 pated increased imports of cotton-wool (the pro- 
 
167 
 
 duction of slaves), and increased imports oi grain 
 in return for increased exports of cotton- wares — 
 see nothing but visions of increased wealth from 
 commissions and other profits on the increased 
 importation of that cotton-wool and grain from 
 foreign countries ; and on the exportation of those 
 cotton-wares in return or repayment, and there- 
 fore echo the cry of free-trade — always like the 
 cotton-manufacturers craftily omitting the ad- 
 ]^{i\k\^ foreign. 
 
 The many sensible persons, who believe that 
 free-ioM^\^-trade in grain will cause London 
 and other sea-ports to be wholly or extensively 
 supplied with grain of foreign production — 
 therefore believe that, among other evil conse- 
 quence of %yjsiki free-iov(d\gii-trade ingrain (and 
 an evil consequence it would indeed be), one will 
 be, to doom the waste lands of England to re- 
 main waste lands for ever (or, at least, as long 
 as free-foreign-trade in grain shall continue to 
 be law — taxes on grain grown at home being 
 at the same time continued), and to throw much 
 of the poorer soils now under cultivation back 
 again into wastes. 
 
 Fiscal laws, followed by such a result (a re- 
 sult which is by many sensible persons antici- 
 pated, if the free-foreign-trade measures, pro- 
 posed to parliament by the prime-minister of the 
 
168 
 
 day, shall become law) an enlightened states- 
 man, animated by patriotism, and a master in 
 the science of political economy, would contem- 
 plate with horror; with regard, not only to the 
 more immediate effect of such laws, namely, of 
 unpeopling the cultivated country, and enlarg- 
 ing the existing, or creating new, manufacture 
 ing towns^ dependent, in great measure, for 
 the life of their population on foreign nations 
 and people^ — but also, with regard to the more 
 remote consequences of such laws, which such a 
 statesman could not but painfully foresee, — 
 namely, that, in the march of time, foreign na- 
 tions and people would learn to manufacture for 
 themselves, — and that that change in loco, or of 
 the site of manufacturing industry, as it gradu- 
 ally took place, would throw out of work, and 
 out of bread, a multitude of the hordes of la- 
 bourers which had been increased or created in 
 the manufacturing towns of the United Kingdom 
 by such forced and unnatural ^5ca/ laws. 
 
 To such a statesman, it would be small conso- 
 lation to reflect — that while undergoing such a 
 change of condition, his country would be saved 
 from a servile war of starving manufacturing la- 
 bourers, by their finding refuge in Union-work- 
 houses, (acting as safety-valves of the social state) 
 through which they would be passed into the 
 grave and sink into oblivion. 
 
169 
 
 How diiferent to such a statesman would be 
 the prospect of the futurity of his country, while 
 picturing it to himself covered with a hardy 
 agricultural population, continually spreading 
 over its wastes, subdued by the plough — in 
 spite of fiscal laws, made indispensable by the 
 selfishness of former generations, in order to 
 defray the expenses of their wars, so unjustly 
 and heartlessly entailed on th^ir posterity. 
 
170 
 
 CHAPTER lY. 
 
 Of general rules and principles to he considered 
 on the imposition of taxes in the United 
 Kingdom. 
 
 Taxes to the amount of more than 30 millions 
 a-year(£30,495,459, anno 1844),being more than 
 half the amount of all the taxes, must be levied 
 from the people of the United Kingdom, to pay 
 interest and charges on the public debt of more 
 than 800 millions incurred by the present, last, 
 and former generations to carry on their wars — 
 the burthen of which, to such an enormous and 
 inconceivable amount, they have entailed on the 
 present generation and its posterity : — and that 
 amount of taxes is swelled hy the taxes annually 
 levied for the current public service to nearly 
 sixtt/ millions a year (£57,903,555, anno 1844.) 
 It is not a matter of indifference, in what 
 manner, upon what, or upon whom, such an 
 enormous burthen of taxes shall be laid or dis- 
 tributed. The power which can impose that 
 burthen, at its pleasure, on the various classes 
 and members of the commonwealth (which 
 power is the legislature) — may work very exten- 
 sively the weal or woe of the people, by the 
 manner in which that power is exercised. And 
 
171 
 
 yet the legislature has never settled any — not 
 even one single — principle^ upon which that 
 burthen ought to be borne and distributed ; but 
 has imposed and repealed taxes capriciously, 
 according to the whim or fancy of successive 
 prime-ministers and governments of the day. 
 
 In searching for general rules and principles, 
 to which regard ought to be had, in the im- 
 position of taxes in the United Kingdom — it 
 will throw light upon the subject to suppose, 
 that all the existing taxes were repealed — in 
 order to be imposed de novo upon definite and 
 declared principles — disregarding, for the sake of 
 argument or illustration, the impracticability of 
 acting suddenly and extensively upon any new 
 system of taxation in the United Kingdom ; in 
 which the interests of so many various classes of 
 the people are interwoven with the vicious sys- 
 tem of taxation established by the existing fiscal 
 laws of the realm. 
 
 If the whole of the existing taxes of the United 
 Kingdom were repealed, they might be imposed 
 de novo all upon the agriculture or all upon the 
 manufactures of the country. 
 
 Suppose that the legislature were under con- 
 straint to elect to impose them all upon the one, 
 or all upon the other — without being at liberty 
 to impose taxes, in the one case upon foreign 
 productions of agriculture^ nor in the other case 
 
 z 
 
172 
 
 on foreign productions of manufacture^ upon 
 importation into the United Kingdom. 
 
 Under such constraint — if the election were 
 made to impose all the taxes upon agriculture^ 
 with a free-ioreign-trade in grain — the effect 
 would manifestly be to encourage the growth 
 and importation of foreign-grain, and to limit 
 and confine the home-growth of grain; and, conse- 
 quently, to prevent the increase and keep down 
 the growth of the agricultural population at 
 home. And if, under such constraint, the elec- 
 tion were made to impose all the taxes on home- 
 manufactures, with a free-trade in foreign-ma- 
 nufactures — the effect would be to encourage the 
 production and importation oi foreign-manufac- 
 tures; and to limit and keep down the home- 
 production of manufactures; and to prevent the 
 increase and keep down the growth of the manu- 
 facturing population at home. 
 
 Driven to make choice under such constraint, 
 it would naturally occur to the legislature, 
 amongst other things, to consider, — 
 
 That, to enhance the price of food by the 
 amount of all the taxes — to cripple the agricul- 
 ture of the country, and limit the home-produc- 
 tion of food — would be a much greater evil, than 
 to enhance the price and to limit the home-pro- 
 duction of raiment and other manufactures. 
 
 That, in the event of war, whether offensive 
 
173 
 
 or defensive, but especially in the event of 
 defensive war — the first consideration should be 
 to victual^ and to secure a continual supply of 
 victual for, the garrison — which, in the case sup- 
 posed, is the whole United Kingdom, encircled 
 by the sea, for its moat. 
 
 That the garrison must be manned^ as well 
 as victualled ; and that the peasant, bred and 
 dwelling in the open country, who can follow 
 and manage his team of horses, could march, 
 or mount and manage a horse, in a field of war ; 
 — that the thewes and sinews which can till, dig, 
 drain, and subdue the earth, could work hard 
 and well in throwing up entrenchments for de- 
 fence, or in forming trenches of approach in 
 the siege of an enemy's fortress or town. 
 
 That the herdsman or the shepherd, accus- 
 tomed to tend his herd or his flock by day and 
 by night in all weathers in peaceful fields, could 
 bivouac on a march or in a war-field without in- 
 jury to his hardy frame. 
 
 That the woodman, accustomed to see the oak 
 bow " beneath his sturdy stroke," would make 
 an excellent pioneer. 
 
 That the manufacturing labourer, bred and 
 dwelling in a cellar, or in a garret, in a crowded 
 town — who from infancy to age had only tended 
 some machine as a living part of it (e.g., some 
 machine used in the production of cotton-manu- 
 
174 
 
 tures any branch^ hose or lace), never having had 
 any sinew strung by exercise, save the sinews of 
 his fingers, — if he were exposed under march, 
 or set on horse-back in a field of war, would 
 probably become non-effective in a single day ; 
 and if he were to pass a night in bivouac under 
 the canopy of heaven, would probably that night 
 sleep upon his grave. 
 
 That the sentiment of love of country animates 
 the peasant : 
 
 " The farm I now hold on your Honour's estate, 
 " Is the same that my grandfather tilled." 
 
 That the herdsman or the shepherd is attached 
 to the fields, the woods, and the streams, where 
 he has tended his herds or flocks. That the 
 peasant has " pleasant memories " of the daisied 
 meads, where in infancy he chased the butterfly, 
 and of the village-green, where in youth he 
 played with his mates. — But who, it may be 
 asked, ever heard of a man who loved, or was 
 patriotically attached to a woollen or cotton-mill 
 or to a stocking-frame ? in association with which 
 he has only most " painful memories :" the re- 
 collections of his youth, and even of his infancy, 
 being only of the savage master* or overseer — 
 the jemmy-roller and the strap. Patriotism is a 
 living sentiment in the heart of the peasant, of 
 
 * See note page 139, ante. 
 
175 
 
 which sentiment the manufacturing operative 
 has, and can have, no conception. 
 
 That the peasant, the farmer under whom he 
 works, and the owner of the soil, (all adscripti 
 glebcB,) belong to one another and to the soil — 
 and that the soil belongs to them — and that, in 
 defence of it, they are ever prompt to peril life 
 and limb. While the manufacturing operatives 
 and their masters — ^having no bond of sentiment 
 or attachment in common between or among 
 them, and living loose, and without any tie to 
 the town, save the tie of sordid interest — are, 
 therefore, always prepared and ready to emigrate 
 to sinj foreign land, whithersoever and when- 
 soever such interest might prompt them to ex- 
 port themselves. 
 
 Under such constraint of electing to impose 
 all the taxes upon the agriculture, or all upon 
 the manufactures of the country, there would 
 seem (regard being had to the foregoing con- 
 siderations) to be no room for doubt or hesi- 
 tation in the choice. 
 
 But if it be supposed, as before, that all the 
 existing taxes of the United Kingdom were 
 repealed, in order to be imposed de novo 
 upon some definite and declared principles — 
 the legislature being free, and under no con- 
 straint, as to the imposition de novo of such 
 taxes — ^the important question would arise : upon 
 what, or upon whom, shall such an enormous 
 
176 
 
 amount of taxes be imposed, with the least pre- 
 judice to the general interest and well being of 
 the commonwealth. 
 
 Some principles would naturally be sought 
 for, upon which to act, in the imposition de novo 
 of such an amount of taxes on the people, on 
 whom taxes have hitherto been imposed without 
 reference to am/ principle. And such principles, 
 when adopted, it would be proper and most ex- 
 pedient to explain and promulgate, in order, 
 by showing the justice, fairness, and impartiality 
 of the unavoidable imposition, to allay, and as 
 far as possible, to prevent or silence the discontent, 
 which taxes are but too apt to generate. 
 
 First. — The principle, hitherto undiscovered, 
 would be sought for as a general principle, by 
 the application of which, on the imposition of 
 taxes, ever^ member of the commonwealth should 
 in justice, and in fairness, be made contributor^/ 
 thereto J according to his stake and interest in 
 society^ and to his means. And if no such prin- 
 ciple were discoverable; then, on the imposition 
 of such taxes, it would be determined that the 
 nearest approximation to that principle should be 
 made. 
 
 Secondly, — If the foregoing reasoning, as to 
 the importance oi agriculture and of manufactures 
 respectively and comparatively, be sound and 
 true- — it would be laid down as a principle — 
 that all taxes (due regard being paid to the^r^^ 
 
177 
 
 principle), should be imposed, so as to press as 
 lightly as possible on agriculture — ^that is to say 
 — so as to raise as little as possible the price of 
 food of home-production by the imposition of 
 taxes upon food^ which taxes necessarily become 
 a component part of the price of food to the 
 consumer. 
 
 And here it is apposite to remark, that the re- 
 verse of this principle has been carried to such 
 unbounded length with respect to the manufac- 
 ture oi cotton-wares^ that (with the exception of 
 the taxes on spirits and tobacco^ tea^ sugar ^ and 
 other commodities consumed by the mouths of the 
 comparatively few labourers, (see page 1 15, et seq. 
 ante), employed in the manufacture of cotton- 
 wares^ and with the exception also of the taxes 
 paid by the master-manufacturers, including the 
 tax on such incomes as they admit they derive 
 from that trade), not one shilling of tax is derived 
 directly or indirectly from cotton or the cotton- 
 trade in any manner or way whatsoever; the 
 very minute tax of 2 shillings and 11 pence a- 
 hundred-w eight on cotton-wool imported (which 
 yielded 684 thousand pounds a-year to the 
 revenue, and did not enhance the price of a 
 woman's cotton-gown the twentieth part of a 
 penny a-yard)^ having been repealed, at the 
 instance of the prime minister of the day, 
 " while the trade was in a flourishing condition, 
 " merely to guard against foreign competition^ 
 
178 
 
 " ^c." (see page 142, and note page 164, ante). 
 And yet the cotton-manufacturers, their own 
 trade being wholly exempt from taxation,, have 
 the face to propose — while grain is more heavily 
 taxed on home-production than any other com- 
 modity — thsit foreign grain may be allowed to be 
 imported untaxed — in order that they, the cotton- 
 manufacturers^ may increase their trade in un- 
 taxed cotton-wares with for eignei^s. Taxes on the 
 people's bread, give cotton-manufacturers or the 
 leaguers no concern when imposed on the people's 
 bread of home-production — but only when im- 
 posed on the people^ s bread oi foreign production. 
 
 Thirdly. — It would be laid down as a clear 
 
 principle — that on the imposition of a tax on any 
 
 conamodity of home-production, at least an equal 
 
 tax should be imposed on that commodity of 
 
 foreign production. 
 
 It would be absurd, senseless and unnatural, 
 to subject to a tax a commodity produced at 
 home — and to leave that commodity, when pro- 
 duced in and imported from ^foreign country, 
 exempt from at least an equal tax. If the tax 
 on the commodity produced at home were so 
 high, that that commodity produced by the 
 foreigner could be imported and sold to the 
 consumer in the United Kingdom, for less than 
 the taxed home-production could be sold for to 
 the consumer, — the palpable consequence of such 
 a tax would be to annihilate the home-production 
 
179 
 
 of the supposed commodity, and of course to 
 prevent any fruit of a contemplated tax upon it. 
 
 Fourthly, — It would be laid down as a prin- 
 ciple that taxes upon commodities, should in all 
 practicable cases, be imposed not by measure or 
 weight only — but ad valorem^ or also ad valorem. 
 
 By the application of this principle, the con- 
 sumptions of the rich would be taxed in some 
 proportion to their wealth — and an approximation 
 would be made to the first principle. The un- 
 fairness and great injustice of taxing a com- 
 modity by measure or weight only, was shown 
 (page 103, ante), in the case of the tax upon tea 
 by weight — by the operation of which, the poor man 
 pays a tax of 120 per cent, while the rich man 
 pays a tax of only 32 percent on that commodity ; 
 that is to say, the poor man pays on his coarse 
 beverage, a tax four times the amount of the tax 
 paid by the rich man on his exquisite beverage, 
 prepared from that herb. 
 
 While the monopoly of the trade in tea was 
 possessed by the East India Company (during 
 which time all tea imported into the United 
 Kingdom, was warehoused in London, and sold 
 by that company only), a tax ad valorem was 
 levied upon tea. But now that that monopoly 
 has ceased, it is not practicable effectually to levy 
 a tax upon tea ad valorem. 
 
 It has been already observed that it would not 
 
 A A 
 
180 
 
 be practicable to impose taxes ad valorem lipon 
 articles oifood ; but that taxes ad valorem could 
 easily be imposed on manufactures (see page 102, 
 ante) ; which is a further cogent reason for im- 
 posing taxes upon manufactures rather than 
 upon agriculture, 
 
 ' Fifthly, — It would be laid down as a principle 
 not to impose a tax on any commodity of home- 
 'production^ until the power of raising taxes upon 
 commodities oi foreign production not inde- 
 genous, or which are not found or cannot be 
 produced in the United Kingdom, should be ex- 
 hausted. 
 
 It is obvious, that it cannot operate prejudi- 
 cially either on the Aome-productions of agricul- 
 ture, or on the Ao/we-productions of the materiel 
 of manufactures, to impose taxes on commodities 
 oi foreign growth or production, which never 
 are, and cannot be, grown or produced at home. 
 
 It has already been observed (page 90 ante), 
 that the diversity of the structure of the crust of 
 the earth, and the diversity of soil and of climate 
 in the various nations which inhabit it, are the 
 only true and lasting foundations of foreign trade ; 
 yet that, nevertheless, so wise and bounteous is 
 the provision made for his creatures by the 
 Almighty Father of the Universe, that there is 
 no foreign commodity which any nation import- 
 ing it could not do without. 
 
181 
 
 • The importation ^voWi foreign coun tries of com- 
 modities, which caimot be produced in the soil or 
 climate of the United Kingdom, or of the materiel 
 of commodities, which cannot he found in that 
 portion of the crust of the earth on which the 
 United Kingdom is situate, cannot affect the pro- 
 duction or price to the consumer of commodities 
 which are produced^ or of which the materiel is 
 indigenous in the United Kingdom, ^uoh foreign 
 commodities are, therefore, the fairest subjects of 
 taxation; because the consumption of them, and 
 therefore the payment of taxes on them, is 
 optional; and because, as they all necessarily 
 find entrance into the country through a small 
 number of sea-ports — taxes can there be levied on 
 them at small charge of collection, and without 
 any infringement of liberty. 
 
 Sixthly. — It would be laid down as a principle^ 
 that any commodity which, by reason of its greater 
 abundance or easier production in any foreign 
 country, can be imported and sold to the con- 
 sumer for less than that commodity untaxed can 
 be produced at A ome— should never be so highly 
 taxed as to prohibit the importation of it, and 
 so to cause or force unnaturally the production 
 of that commodity at home. 
 
 Such a system of taxation of foreign commo- 
 dities has been often practised in the United 
 Kingdom, and now prevails in various nations, 
 
182 
 
 upon a most mistaken and false view of the pub- 
 lic interest. For if any such foreign commodity 
 so prohibited by an excessive tax upon importa- 
 tion, were admitted free from taxation, it would, 
 ex necessitate, be paid for by the exportation of 
 some other commodity or commodities, the pro- 
 duce or manufacture of the United Kingdom — 
 the production of which is prevented by such 
 prohibition of lYioX foreign production. 
 
 Even if the exclusion, by excessive taxation, 
 of a commodity oi foreign production gave birth 
 to the home-production of it in the United King- 
 dom — the consumers of that commodity of home- 
 production would be losers by the increased 
 price which they would pay for it, beyond what 
 it would cost if permitted to be imported — and 
 the public revenue would be a loser of the tax 
 which might be imposed and levied upon that 
 commodity upon the importation of it to such 
 amount, ultra its prime cost landed in the United 
 Kingdom, as would leave it still saleable to the 
 consumer at less than the cost at which it could 
 be produced at home. 
 
 These six general rules or principles seem to 
 be clear and incontrovertible. 
 
 The first, which is the primary and most im- 
 portant, has not yet been, and may never be dis- 
 covered. And, so far from any approximation 
 having been made to it in the taxation of the 
 
183 
 
 United Kingdom, it has been utterly disregarded 
 in the imposition of taxes upon the people. 
 
 The taxes imposed upon commodities by mea- 
 sure or weight, in all cases when there is no 
 difference in quality of the commodity taxed, 
 (e, g, 7nalt, hops, and perhaps sugar), fall with 
 equal pressure on the poor and on the rich; and 
 where there is a difference in quality, fall most 
 unjustly with greater pressure on the poor than 
 on the rich; as in the case of the tax upon tea 
 (see page 103, ante), coffee and dried fruits. 
 And the only tax which is professedly intended to 
 fall upon the richer in relief of the poorer classes 
 of the United Kingdom, namely, that called the 
 tax on property and income, instead of effecting 
 that professed purpose, is a most violent infrac- 
 tion of \h\^ first principle, and the furthest depar- 
 ture from it which could well have been devised 
 -^as will appear in the sequel. 
 ^v The 5ecow(/ has not only been disregarded; but 
 the exact contrary course from that which it en- 
 joins has been pursued in the taxation of the 
 United Kingdom. 
 
 The third has been acted upon ex necessitate in 
 order to secure the revenue on commodities of 
 home-production — but it is now proposed to be 
 violated as far as it affects the heavily taxed 
 home-production of grain, in order to permit the 
 importation oi foreign grain untaxed. 
 
184 
 
 Th^ fourth] with respect to taxes on commodi' 
 tiesj has been wholly disregarded and held at 
 naught : except in a few instances (none of 
 which affect the poorer classes of the community) 
 in which a slight approximation is made to the 
 principle of imposing taxes ad valorem — as in the 
 case of most of the taxes derived from stamps ; 
 and in the case of the assessed taxes on win- 
 dows, servants, carriages, horses, dogs, ^c. by 
 such last mentioned taxes being imposed, on 
 a sliding scale, slightly ascending with the 
 number of those conveniences or luxuries enjoyed 
 or kept by a single individual. 
 
 The fifth has been extensively acted upon, or 
 rather the course which it enjoins has been very 
 extensively pursued in the United Kingdom — 
 although it is believed not upon any predetermi- 
 nation founded upon any principle — but merely 
 from the facility (so obvious that it forces itself 
 into notice), with which taxes can be levied on 
 foreign commodities imported, and the little 
 ground for complaint which the imposition of 
 taxes on such commodities affords ; the consump- 
 tion of them being entirely optional. 
 
 The sixth, the clamourers for free-foreign- 
 trade affect to have just discovered; although it 
 has always and long been insisted upon by all 
 sound political economists, and gives no support 
 
185 
 
 whatsoever to the cry of free -iov^igia.' tirade] 
 aifected to be raised upon that principle. 
 
 However right and just those six general rules 
 or principles are, it is impracticable to apply 
 them suddenly to the existing taxes of the 
 United Kingdom. And it would, doubtless, be dif- 
 ficult, though very far from impracticable, to apply 
 them, by degrees, to those taxes ; and so to work 
 out the great improvement in the social condition 
 and welfare of the people, which so beneficial a 
 change would, in process of time, efi*ect. 
 
 But if all the taxes could be repealed, and im- 
 posed de novo, as if taxes had never before 
 existed in the United Kingdom, there would be 
 one difficulty in applying the third aforesaid ge- 
 neral rule or principle ; but a difficulty which 
 would arise onlt/ in case of taxes being imposed 
 on food the Aom^-production of agriculture. • 
 
 On the imposition of a tax on any commodity 
 of home-production, there would be no difficulty 
 in imposing at the same time, an equal tax on 
 that commodity of foreign production, in all 
 cases in which the supply, and dependent thereon 
 the price, of the commodity of home-production, 
 are governed entirely, by the demand for it. 
 
 But the supply, and dependent thereon the 
 price, of grain, from year to year, in any nation, 
 do not depend entirely upon the demand for it 
 in that nation, — but on the will and pleasure of 
 
186 
 
 the Supreme Governor of the Universe— whose 
 will it is, that that supply shall fluctuate and vary 
 from year to year in different nations, according 
 to the seasons which He sends — ^the demand con- 
 tinuing so nearly the same, that it may be said to 
 increase or diminish from year to year, in any 
 nation, imperceptibly. 
 
 There is no capital which yields so small an 
 annual profit or return in the United Kingdom, 
 as capital invested in land; which seldom yields 
 so much as three per cent, clear per annum. 
 And the profits of ih^ farmers of that land are 
 admitted on all hands, in the existing state of 
 things, to be, and for many years last past to 
 have been, not only at a most moderate, but even 
 at a very low rate. 
 
 Suppose that 50 shillings a-quarter were the 
 just and fair average price at which the farmers 
 of the United Kingdom could afford to sell wheat 
 communihus annis, i. e,, in years when the soil 
 yields an average crop, — Suppose, further, that 
 the crop of wheat were in any year defective by 
 one-Jifth — z. e., that the farmers of the United 
 Kingdom had for sale in any year, only four- 
 fifths of the wheat which they have to sell com- 
 munihus annis. 
 
 To enable them, in such last supposed case, to 
 realize the same small profit which they would 
 get on average crops of wheat sold at 50 shillings 
 
187 
 
 a-quarter communihus annis, it would be neces- 
 sary for them, in the year of their crop defective 
 by a fifth part, to sell \hQ four fifths at 62 
 shillings and 6 pence a-quarter (62s. 6d. — J or 
 12s. 6d. = 50s.), in order to have the same re- 
 turn for their four fifths in the defective year, 
 as for their five-fifths communihus annis. 
 
 With such increased price for their four-fifths 
 in the year of defective crop — ^giving them the 
 same return in money for the whole defective as 
 for a whole full crop — the farmers would not 
 be so well off, as if the same return in money had 
 been for a whole full crop ; because a crop 
 defective by one-fifth in the ear, or in the grain, 
 is generally also defective in the same proportion 
 in the straw ; and the farmers, after obtaining the 
 same price for their whole crop of wheat in the 
 year of the defective as in a year of average 
 crop, would still be minus one-fifth of the straw, 
 for food and litter of cattle, and for manure. 
 
 If taxes were imposed upon grain of home- 
 production (/. e., on agriculture) a tax of at 
 least equal amount to the sum of such taxes 
 would, according to the foregoing third general 
 rule or principle, be, of course, imposed on grain 
 oi foreign production. 
 
 But if the tax imposed on foreign wheat were 
 fixed — e, g., at 10 shillings a-quarter, as the 
 equal or countervailing tax to the sum of the 
 
 B B 
 
188 
 
 taxes imposed on wheat of home-production^ 
 worth 50 shillings a-quarter communihus annis 
 — it is manifest that that would not be an equal 
 countervailing tax on foreign wheat in seasons 
 of defective crop — e. g., in a season of crop de- 
 fective by a fifth^ when wheat of home-pro- 
 duction would rise from 50 shillings to 62 
 shillings and 6 pence a-quarter. For, although 
 foreign wheat imported, taxed at 10 shillings 
 a-quarter^ could not be sold to the consumer 
 in the United Kingdom with profit to the^o- 
 reigner, the price of wheat being 50 shillings 
 a-quarter in the home-market — ^yet foreign wheat 
 imported, taxed at 10 shillings a-quarter^ might 
 be sold to the consumer in the United King- 
 dom with very great profit to the foreigner, 
 the price of wheat being 62 shillings and 6 
 pence a-quarter in the home-market.^ 
 
 * It is not meant to intimate or insinuate by the figures 
 in the text that 50 shillings a-quarter is a fair price in any 
 season for -wheat ; or that 10 shillings would be a proper tax 
 to be imposed communibus annis on foreign wheat imported 
 into the United Kingdom. Those figures are used, merely 
 because they are round and easily divisible numbers. 
 
 Neither is it meant from the statement in the text, to pro- 
 pound as a consequence, that a deficiency of 2i fifth part of the 
 crop of wheat in any year would raise the price of the/bw/*- 
 fifth parts in the direct proportion in the text stated. A rise 
 in that direct proportion is assumed, merely for illustration 
 of the case made. 
 
189 
 
 On the supposed imposition de novo of all taxes 
 in the United Kingdom — if grain of home-pro- 
 duction were taxed^ it would be necessary, in 
 order to carry out or apply the said third general 
 rule or principle, to impose a tax on foreign 
 grain varying or fluctuating ad valorem in years 
 of defective harvest of grain. 
 
 The easiest way of getting rid of the difficulty 
 of ascertaining how such a tax should fluctuate 
 or vary, in order to carry the said third general 
 rule or principle into eff*ect, in the case oi grain — 
 would be to impose no tax on grain of home- 
 production ; which would not only obviate that 
 difficulty, but would, at the same time, be the 
 wisest and best political economy for the reasons 
 already ofl'ered (see page 99 et seq. ante). 
 
 But if on such supposed imposition de novo 
 of all taxes in the United Kingdom, taxes 
 were laid upon grain of home-production — ^. e. 
 upon agriculture — it is manifest that it would 
 be a violation of the said third general rule or 
 principle, if, at the same time, a tax on foreign 
 grain varying or fluctuating ad valorem in 
 years of defective harvest were not imposed. 
 
 The taxation oi foreign grain on the sliding- 
 scale invented by the prime-minister of the day, 
 and adopted by the legislature, and which is now 
 in force by law — is taxation oi foreign grain on 
 a scale which slides the reverse way from that 
 
190 
 
 on which it ought to slide upon the said third 
 general rule or principle. 
 
 By the sliding-scale of the prime-minister of 
 the day, the tax on foreign grain decreases as 
 the price of grain of home-production rises; and 
 at a certain price of grain of home-production 
 (73 shillings or upwards a-quarter) the tax on 
 foreign grain slides down to one shilling a-quar- 
 ter, and therefore may be said then to vanish. 
 WJiereas, according to the said third general 
 rule or principle, the countervailing tax on 
 foreign grain ought to rise as the price of grain 
 of home-production rises in the home-market.* 
 
 That sliding-scale works a two-fold injustice. 
 For, by ^Y, the higher the price of grain of home- 
 'production rises above its average price commu- 
 
 * The sliding-scale referred to in the text was made law, 
 anno 1842, by the 5th and 6th Victoria, cap. 14 ; and, as to 
 wheat, imposes taxes as follows. When the average price 
 o£ wheat per quarter in England and Wales is — 
 
 s. s. s. s. s. s. 
 
 50 and under 51 a tax of 20 62 and under 63 a tax of 10 
 
 51 52 19 63 64 9 
 
 52 55 18 64 65 8 
 
 55 56 17 65 66 7 
 
 56 57 16 66 69 6 
 
 57 58 15 69 70 5 
 
 58 59 14 70 71 4 
 
 59 60 13 71 72 3 
 
 60 61 12 72 73 2 
 
 61 62 11 73 and upwards 1 
 
191 
 
 nihus annis in the United Kingdom — ^the greater 
 is the profit secured to the foreigner, while the 
 revenue is deprived of the tax which he could 
 afford to pay — and the fair market price to which 
 the farmers are entitled for their corn of home- 
 production in years of defective harvest, is the 
 more depressed or kept down by the influx of 
 foreign grain at a great and undue profit to the 
 foreigner. 
 
 When the price of wheat has risen, e.g, from 50 
 shillings a-quarter (the supposed price communi- 
 hus annis) to 62 shillings and 6 pence a-quarter 
 (the supposed price in a year of crop defective hy a 
 fifth )^ \i foreign wheats Paying a tax of 10 shil- 
 lings a-quarter^ could in that year of defective 
 crop be imported with a profit of 12 shillings 
 and 6 pence a-quarter to \h& foreigner^ — then, 
 if wheat of home-production were to rise to 72 
 shillings and 6 pence a quarter^ the foreigner, 
 paying the same tax of 10 shillings a-quarter^ 
 would gain 22 shillings and 6 pence a-quarter 
 on the same wheat. 
 
 The foreigner therefore upon a rise of the price 
 of wheat of hoine production to 72 shillings and 
 6 pence a quarter, could afford, ccBteris paribus, 
 to pay a tax on his wheat, on importation into the 
 United Kingdom, of 20 shillings instead of 10 
 shillings a quarter, and still have (in the case 
 
192 
 
 supposed) a profit of 12 shillings and 6 pence a 
 quarter on his wheat. 
 
 But upon the sliding scale invented by the 
 prime minister of the day — if a foreigner could 
 sell his wheat warehoused in the United Kingdom 
 with a profit of 10 shillings a-quarter^ paying 
 (according to that scale) a tax of 10 shillings a- 
 quarter when the price of wheat of home-pro- 
 duction is 63 shillings a-quarter in the home 
 market — he is secured in profit of 39 shillings a- 
 quarter upon the same wheats when the price has 
 risen in the home market to 73 shillings a- 
 quarter.^ 
 
 Nothing but scarcity can raise the price of 
 grain of home-production in the home-market 
 above its price in that market, communihus 
 annis — and it is only just and fair that in scarce 
 years the farmers of the United Kingdom should 
 receive not less money for their whole lesser crops 
 
 * When the price of wheat is 63 shillings a-quarter in the 
 home-market, the tax on foreign wheat, by the sliding-scale 
 of the prime-minister of the day, is 10 shillings a-quarter. 
 If a foreigner could then sell his bonded foreign wheat with 
 a profit of 10 shillings a-quarter — paying a tax of 10 shillings 
 a-quarter — if the price of the wheat rose from 63 to 73 
 shillings a-quarter, he would evidently gain 20 shillings 
 instead of 10 shillings a-quarter on the same wheat, and 
 would gain 9 shillings a-quarter more by having to pay a 
 tax of only 1 shilling, instead of 10 shillings a-quarter, — 
 making the 29 shillings of profit stated in the text. 
 
193 
 
 than they receive for their whole larger crops, 
 communihus annis — especially when doing so 
 they are still losers in the scarce years by defici- 
 ency of their crop of straw. 
 
 The consumption of grain in years of scarcity 
 is kept down only by the increased price of it in 
 the market. If a maximum price of grain not 
 exceeding the price of it communihus annis 
 could be and were enforced by law — and grain 
 could be and were forced to market by the same 
 law in years of scarcity — the effect of such a law 
 would be to cause a year begun in scarcity to end 
 in famine. 
 
 By the taxes imposed on foreign grain on the 
 sliding scale invented by the prime-minister 
 of the day, it is manifestly intended to effect a 
 prohibition of the importation of foreign grain 
 into the United Kingdom in years of plenty ; and 
 to impose a maximum on the price of grain 
 of home-production in years of scarcity — ^the 
 effect of the taxes on grain upon the sliding 
 scale of the prime-minister of the day being 
 to close the ports of the United Kingdom against 
 the importation of foreign grain in years of 
 plenty, and to open the ports to such importa-* 
 tion in years of scarcity, — by permitting and 
 encouraging the importation of foreign grain in 
 years of scarcity on payment of a tax diminishing 
 as the price of grain rises, till it vanishes when 
 grain attains a certain price in the home-market ; 
 
194 
 
 which is contrary to every principle of justice — 
 for it is an attempt to cast, as far as practicable, 
 the loss and all the ills of a bad harvest on the 
 farmers of the United Kingdom only — although 
 the ills of a bad harvest being the visitation of 
 Providence, ought to be borne by the people in 
 their several ranks and degrees in common. 
 
 For the protection of cotton-manufacturers a 
 tax of 20 per cent, ad valorem (which effects a 
 prohibition of importation) is imposed on foreign 
 manufactured cotton-wares — although no tax 
 whatsoever is imposed either on cotton wool im- 
 ported into, or on cotton-wares manufactured 
 in, the United Kingdom. 
 
 Suppose a heavy tax were laid on cotton- 
 wares manufactured in the United Kingdom, and 
 an equal tax were laid on cotton-wares oi foreign 
 manufacture on importation. 
 
 Suppose that in consequence of defective crops 
 of cotton from bad seasons, from risings of the 
 slaves employed in the culture of that plant, 
 or from other cause, cotton -wool imported 
 into the United Kingdom were in some years 
 to become double its price communibus annis 
 * — and cotton-manufacturers, to get their ac- 
 customed profits on their wares^ therefore ne- 
 cessarily raised the price of their waives to the 
 consumers in the United Kingdom. 
 
 Suppose that immediately on the cotton manu- 
 
195 
 
 facturers raising, for such good and valid reason 
 the price of their wares — the legislature were 
 immediately to repeal the taxes on the importa- 
 tion of cotton-wares oi foreign manufacture upon 
 a sliding scale vanishing to exemption from tax, in 
 order to prevent, ovkeep down,thefair rise in price 
 of cotton-wares of home manufacture in conse- 
 quence of the scarce harvest of cotton-wool — what 
 measure of justice to them^ it may be asked, would 
 cotton-manufacturers deem such a course of pro- 
 ceeding. — And yet, is there, it is asked, a shade 
 of difference between such a supposed course of 
 proceeding towards cotton-manufacturers in such 
 supposed circumstances, and the course which 
 they the cotton-manufacturers^ the leaguers^ and 
 the prime minister of the day, are fain to adopt, 
 and which the prime minister of the day has pro- 
 posed to parliament to enforce by law, against 
 the agriculturists of the United Kingdom ? 
 
 Under such a visitation of Providence as the 
 infliction of a harvest so scarce as to threaten 
 famine — all and every interest must be sacrificed 
 for the common safety. But exceptio prohat 
 regulam. 
 
 Another effect of the sliding scale invented by. 
 the prime minister of the day, is to cause the im- 
 portation of great quantities oi foreign wheat 
 when harvests are abundant m. foreign countries^ 
 which are warehoused in the United Kingdom, 
 
 c c 
 
196 
 
 and poured into the home-market^ when there is 
 a defective harvest, and consequently a high 
 price of wheat in that market. 
 
 Suck a sliding scale — although it secures enor- 
 mous profits on foreign wheat to foreigners or 
 speculators m foreign wheats and works injustice 
 to the farmers of the United Kingdom — ^is happily 
 — owing to the great hulk and value of grain 
 (see p. 51 and p. 54 ante) — abortive of its 
 manifest intent of imposing a maximum price 
 of wheat of home -production in years of 
 scarcity— as the great rise, in such years, of 
 the average price of wheat in the home-market 
 shows — ^notwithstanding such attempt to es- 
 tablish a maximum price, in such years. Such 
 average price actually fell from 57 shillings and 
 4 pence a-quartermXh^ year 1842 to 49 shllings 
 and 3 pence a-quarter in the year 1 843 — being a 
 difference of 8 shillings and a penny a-quarter in 
 a single year — which mere difference in price on 
 14 millions of quarters of z(7^e«#(13,718,279), the 
 annual production and consumption of the 
 United Kingdom (see page 54 ante), would 
 amount to 5| millions (£5,544,471) of money. 
 
 The Almighty, for wise though inscrutable 
 purposes, is pleased to scatter the fruits of the 
 earth in some years with an abundant, and in 
 other years with a sparing hand. To attempt by 
 human laws to counteract that dispensation is as 
 
197 
 
 absurd and futile, as it would be to attempt by 
 such laws to regulate heat and cold, sunshine and 
 rain, the length of day and night — or by such 
 laws to vary or repeal any law of nature. 
 
 And here it may properly be observed with 
 admiration, how uniform or equal in abundance 
 the fruits of the earth are bestowed upon the 
 whole^ or in the long run — although it be the 
 Divine pleasure to vary the productiveness of 
 harvests from year to year — which may be 
 shown in the case of wheat^ by the price of that 
 grain (which is the index of its abundance or 
 scarcity) on the average of each year, from year 
 to year successively — and the price of the same 
 grain in the long run or on an average of several 
 successive years collectively. 
 
 For instance, the price of wheat per imperial 
 bushel, — 
 
 On the average 
 of the year 
 
 s. 
 1840 was 8 
 
 vjn ine average 
 
 of 7 years ending 
 
 with the year 
 
 3 J 1840 was 
 
 Wheat. 
 8. d. 
 6 11| 
 
 Barley, 
 $. d. 
 4 1 
 
 Oats. 
 s. d. 
 2 10 
 
 1841 ... 7 
 
 Hi 
 
 1841 ... 
 
 7 3j 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 2 11 
 
 1842 ... 7 
 
 2 
 
 1842 ... 
 
 7 7i 
 
 4 
 
 ^ 
 
 2 101 
 
 1843 ... 6 
 
 2i 
 
 1843 ... 
 
 7 7i 
 
 4 
 
 oi 
 
 2 91 
 
 1844 ... 6 
 
 5 
 
 1844 ... 
 
 7 7 
 
 4 
 
 li 
 
 2 9 
 
 1845 ... 6 
 
 
 
 1845 ... 
 
 7 4 
 
 4 
 
 H 
 
 2 9 
 
 A comparison of those average prices (taken 
 from the London Gazette) cannot fail to enforce 
 and confirm the truth of the theory of the 
 
198 
 
 learned fathers of the science of political economy 
 — ^viz., that the wages of labour are not governed 
 by the price of foodyrom year to year^ but by the 
 price of food in the long run; which latter price 
 is of uniformity so remarkable. Upon which it 
 was observed (see note, page 28 et seq. and page 
 141 ante) that if the wages of labour did rise 
 and fall with the price of food from year to year, 
 labourers would be exempt from vicissitude of 
 life, in consequence of the abundance or scarcity 
 of harvests in different years. 
 
 Inspection of the above table cannot fail also 
 to show — that the theory of the leaguers and 
 the men mfustian-jacJcets^ that wages do not rise 
 and fall with the price of food — and the theory 
 of the prime-minister of the day, founded upon his 
 experience of three or six years^ that if wages 
 do rise and fall with the price of food it is in an 
 inverse ratio — are theories without foundation. 
 For, looking at the average price of wheat in 
 periods of seven years, it appears that that 
 average price has varied within the last six 
 years only 8 pence a-bushel, and with the ex- 
 ception of the ^r5^ of those six years (1840) 
 has varied only 4 pence a-bushel, during all 
 that time — that the average price of barley 
 within that period of six years did not vary more 
 than 1| penny a-bushel — and the average price 
 of oats not more than 2i pence a-bushel; while, 
 
199 
 
 from the same table, it appears that the average 
 price of wheat, on the average of each single 
 year, was no less than 2 shillings and 3 far- 
 things a-bushel higher in the year 1840 than in 
 the year 1843. 
 
 Upon view of the great uniformity of the 
 average price of wheat in successive periods of 
 seven years shown by the foregoing table — it 
 may be asked, upon what experience did the 
 prime-minister of the day discover^ that in the 
 last three or the last six years the wages of 
 labour rose or fell in an inverse ratio with 
 some and what price of food? or, upon what 
 figures did he calculate that inverse ratio^ and 
 detect the error, alleged by him to have been 
 made by the fathers of the science of political 
 economy, in holding that the wages of labour 
 vary with the price of food in the long run^ 
 and do not vary otherwise with respect to the 
 price of food ? 
 
200 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 On the existent taxation of the United Kingdom. 
 
 The taxes actually existent in the United King- 
 dom may be classed under two general heads, — 
 viz., indirect and direct. The indirect being taxes 
 of which the payment is optional ; and the 
 direct being taxes of which the payment is not 
 optional. 
 
 It ought to be a general rule or principle in 
 the political economy of every well-regulated 
 state, not to impose direct taxes until the power 
 of raising public revenue by indirect taxes is 
 exhausted; and when resort must be had to 
 direct taxes — that they be imposed and levied 
 with the least practicable infringement of liberty. 
 
 Effectively — the imposition of taxes in the 
 United Kingdom (with the exception of the 
 income-tax during the last war, and the income- 
 tax imposed by the prime-minister of the present 
 day, and now existing in time of peace), has 
 happily been very much in accordance with that 
 general rule or principle (although not from 
 application of it a priori) — as will appear from 
 
201 
 
 the following brief summary of the public reve- 
 nue of the United Kingdom, which, for the pur- 
 pose in view, may be comprised under seven 
 heads, viz. : — 
 
 1st. Duties of CUSTOMS — being taxes upon 
 commodities oi foreign production. Such taxes 
 are collected in the few sea-ports, into which such 
 commodities must necessarily be brought before 
 they can be consumed in this insular country, 
 and are there levied at small charge; and with, 
 perhaps, the least possible infringement of the 
 liberty of the subject. 
 
 2dly. Duties of excise — being taxes upon 
 commodities oi home-production^ which are under 
 surveillance of officers of excise, who make do- 
 miciliary visits (in some cases, at all hours of 
 the day and night) to the dealers in such com- 
 modities. Such taxes are, therefore, levied at 
 much greater expense of collection than duties 
 of Customs^ and not without some infringe- 
 ment of the liberty of the subject. But it is 
 only the dealers in such commodities, delibe- 
 rately exposing themselves to such surveillance^ 
 for the sake of gain^ whose liberty is infringed, 
 — and not the consumers^ whose liberty is in no 
 manner affected by the manner of levying such 
 taxes. 
 
 Srdly. Duties of stamps — These are not ex- 
 pensive of collection ; and are levied — (save as to 
 
202 
 
 probates of wills, letters of administration, and 
 legacies) — with very little or no infringement of 
 the liberty of the subject. 
 
 4thly. Duties of taxes — namely the land-tax 
 and the taxes upon window s^ servants^ carriages^ 
 horses^ dogs, &c. usually called the assessed taxes. 
 These are collected at reasonable expense, and 
 with very little infringement of the liberty of the 
 subject, — now that the officers employed in the 
 imposition and collection of them (who were 
 formerly empowered by law to enter, in the day- 
 time, every house liable to the window-tax), are 
 by law prohibited from entering any house in the 
 performance of their duty. 
 
 5thly. The Post-office — ^the revenue arising 
 from which is, (or rather which formerly arose, 
 from which, was) in no sense a tax upon 
 anybody — being derived from a monopoly/ of 
 the carriage of letters granted by law to 
 the government — for every contribution to 
 which the contributor gets a quid pro quo 
 very much to his own advantage ajad saving of 
 expense. 
 
 6thly. Rents and profits of Crown-lands — 
 Small branches of the hereditary revenue of the 
 Crown, made over to the public in exchange for 
 the civil-list, — Surplus fees of regulated public 
 offices — and Casual resources. All which collec- 
 tively are of comparatively trifling amount. 
 
203 
 
 7th. The tax called the tax on property and 
 INCOME — invented by the prime-minister of the 
 present day, — which became law for three years, 
 by the 5 and 6 Victoria, cap. 35, anno 1842, and 
 was renewed for three years more by the 8 and 9 
 Victoria, cap. 4, anno 1845. 
 
 Upon an average of the three years ending with 
 the year 1842, the ordinary annual public re- 
 venue from the foregoing sources, paid into the 
 Exchequer^ amounted (omitting fractions of 
 £1,000) to the following sums, viz. : 
 
 £ £ 
 
 Customs 21,569,0001 o.oo -non 
 
 Excise 13,316,000} 34,88o,000 
 
 Stamps 7,096,000) 
 
 Land-tax 1,134,000 W 1,330,000 
 
 l-taxes 3,100,000) 
 
 Total taxes 46,2 1 5,000 
 
 Post office * 504,000 
 
 Crown-lands and casual income 458,000 
 
 Total revenue 47, 1 77,000 
 
 Expenditure 50,097,000 
 
 Deficit per annum t £2,920,000 
 
 * This revenue after deducting therefrom the amount of 
 postage charged on the public departments, — the commission 
 on money-orders, which is the fruit of the trade of a Banker — 
 and the charge for packet-ships, left less than 100 thousand 
 pounds a-year net on the average of the three years ending 
 with 1842 (see note page 13, ante). 
 
 f The figures in this statement, are taken from the Finance- 
 accounts for the several years to which it refers, annually 
 published by the House of Commons. 
 
 D D 
 
204 
 
 From those figures it appears, that very nearly 
 35 millions ^ov three-fourths of the actual ordinary 
 public revenue of taxes, arose in and anterior to 
 the year 1842, from indirect taxation ; and 11 J 
 millions^ or one- fourth thereof, from direct taxa- 
 tion ; — and that indirect^ in preference to direct 
 taxation, (although not upon any declared prin- 
 ciple, or any determination of the legislature a 
 priori)^ had been resorted to in the imposition of 
 the public taxes; and that duties of Customs^ 
 which are the least objectionable of all taxes, 
 had been imposed in preference to duties of Ex- 
 cise in the United Kingdom. 
 
 It is believed by many sensible persons — 
 that most, if not all, the indirect or optional 
 taxes are susceptible of great or considerable 
 increase by reduction of the rate of impost. 
 
 It is impossible, by foresight, or by any rea- 
 soning or calculation a priori^ to determine at 
 what rate of impost a tax upon any commodity 
 will be productive of the greatest amount of an- 
 nual revenue. That can be ascertained only by 
 actual trial or experience. 
 
 For example, — the tax upon sugar^ imposed 
 at the rate of 24 shillings a-hundred weighty 
 ov 2i pence (2.67 pence) a-pound, yielded upon 
 an average of three years ending with the 
 year 1844, an annual revenue of 5 millions 
 (£5.063,008). 
 
 If that tax were raised to a shilling a-pound, 
 
205 
 
 the revenue derived from it would be nearly 
 annihilated ; and if lowered to a penny a- 
 pound^ would, most probably, be very much 
 less productive than it now is. Lowered to two- 
 pence a-pound^ it would, or might, be more pro- 
 ductive of revenue by increased consumption of 
 sugar; and the tax on the consumer^ which is 
 the public, would be lightened. 
 
 Instead of pertinacious adherence to the rate 
 of tax imposed on any commodity, according to 
 the fancy or caprice of the prime-minister of the 
 passing day, it would seem to be judicious and 
 wise to adopt as 2i principle — ^that the produc- 
 tiveness of every indirect or optional tax should 
 be tested by actual experiment, and fixed at the 
 rate at which it should be so found or discovered 
 to be most productive of revenue. 
 
 To that end — Suppose the tax upon sugar, 
 yielding, when taxed at 2i pence a-pound^ so 
 very large a revenue as 5 millions a year, or a 
 ninth part of the whole annual ordinary public 
 revenue of taxes — ^were lowered to two pence a- 
 pound^ under declaration that, — if at two pence a- 
 pound it should be found as productive as the ex- 
 isting tax was at 2^ pence a-pound^ — it should be 
 permanently lowered to two pence a-pound; 
 and if it were found less productive after being 
 lowered to two pence a-pound^ than it was at 2i 
 pence a-pound — that it should be again raised 
 to 22 pence a-pound. 
 
206 
 
 If found more productive at two pence than at 
 2^ pence a-pound, it would in that case, upon this 
 principle, next be lowered to 1^ penny a-pound 
 under a similar declaration, — and continued 
 lowered or raised again pro re nata under the 
 same declaration ; and so toties quoties uniW. the 
 discovery were perfected at what rate of impost 
 by weight the tax on sugar would be most pro- 
 ductive of revenue; which tax should then re- 
 main, cceteris paribus^ fixed at that rate. 
 
 It is impossible to calculate by how much the 
 annual public revenue might be improved, and 
 the burthen of taxes on many commodities be 
 lightened., by this common- sense method of as- 
 certaining the productiveness of taxes ; but it 
 may safely be predicated, that by such method 
 the annual public revenue of the United King- 
 dom would be improved, and taxation lightened 
 to a very great extent. At all events, by re- 
 course to such, — the only method of ascertain- 
 ing the productiveness of taxes — the public 
 would be satisfied, that the taxes were imposed 
 in the least burthen some manner, consistent with 
 their greatest productiveness — which is for the 
 public interest, in every way ; and especially as 
 tending to prevent multiplicity of taxes. 
 
 But instead of acting upon that common-sense- 
 principle or upon any principle — the taxes 
 of the United Kingdom have been from time 
 to time repealed, or varied, and new taxes 
 
207 
 
 have been imposed, according to the whim 
 or fancy of the prime-minister of the passing 
 day ; and such taxes have been repealed and 
 varied, and new taxes have been imposed, ac- 
 cording to the whim or fancy of the prime- 
 minister of the present day, beyond all former 
 precedent; upon transcendental, though most 
 false, notions of its being essential to the public 
 welfare to encourage foreign-trade^ especially 
 foreign-trade in cotton-wares^ from which his 
 own fortune took its rise. And accordingly, he 
 has now proposed to parliament to adopt the 
 scheme of the cotton-manufacturers and their 
 faction — ^the corn-law-league ; who, under the 
 pretext of encouraging and establishing free- 
 foreign-f?*«c?e, seek only the enactment, by law, 
 of free-ior^ign-trade in xintaxed cotton-wares 
 and untaxed corn the 'production of foreign 
 countries^ with the continuance of heavy taxa- 
 tion on corn of home-production, 
 
 A great reduction of the tax on sugar was 
 proposed by the prime-minister of the day, which 
 was made law by the 8 and 9 Victoria, and took 
 eifect from the 14th March, 1845. 
 
 That reduction, though not avowedly made as 
 an experiment upon the principle above pro- 
 pounded, will show, to some extent, the working 
 of that principle in the case of a commodity of 
 such great and universal home-consumption. 
 
 The duty of Customs on British plantation 
 
208 
 
 sugar ^ was reduced from and after the 14:tli 
 March 1845, from 24 shillings a-hundred- 
 weight or 2i (2.57) 'pence a-pound to 14 shil- 
 lings a-hundred- weighty which is exactly 3 half- 
 pefice a-pound. 
 
 The parliamentary -paper No. 57, sess. 1846, 
 shows that — 
 
 Cwts. Imported in £ 
 
 The gross amount) of sugar... 1844 was 5,216,572 
 
 of duty on J 
 
 And on 4,880,606 „ ...1845 „ 3,682,636 
 
 Increase in weight.. 740,623 Decrease in duty £1,533,936 
 
 Whence it appears, that such reduction of duty, 
 caused a great increase in the home-consumption 
 of sugar; and that the deficit caused by such 
 reduction in the annual revenue, instead of being 
 1300 thousand pounds in a-year^ according to 
 the estimate of the prime-minister of the day, was 
 more than 1500 thousand pounds in 9^ months. 
 
 As the reduced duty was in force only 9^ 
 months of the year 1845 — the ultimate result of 
 the reduction cannot yet be known. 
 
 The decrease of the duty was however im- 
 mediately followed by a great increase of the 
 home-consumption of the commodity : but as the 
 loss of revenue from so great a reduction of duty 
 was heavier in 9i months by 200 thousand 
 pounds than the loss for a year^ which was an- 
 ticipated by the prime-minister of the day — it is 
 probable, that it would have been more politic to 
 
209 
 
 have reduced the duty from 2i (2.57) pence to 
 2 pence a-pound^ or by a fifth of its previous 
 amount in the first instance — instead of reducing 
 it all at once to 3 half -pence a-pound, or by 
 two fifths of its previous amount. But time will 
 show, whether so great a reduction of the tax, as 
 two fifths of its amount all at once, was ju- 
 dicious and politic or not. 
 
 Certain politicians having broached an opinion 
 that the national debt cannot be, and ought 
 not to be, redeemed; successive governments 
 of the day, acting on that opinion, repealed or 
 reduced taxes upon and after the termination of 
 the last war in the year 1815, not only until no 
 annual surplus or reserve for reduction of the 
 public debt was left, but went so far, upon that 
 false and insane system, as to reduce the public 
 revenue below the expenditure in time of peace ; 
 and the public debt, instead of being diminished, 
 went on at last annually increasing until, upon 
 an average of the three years ending with the 
 year 1842, the deficiency of the ordinary revenue 
 to meet the expenditure amounted to nearly 
 3 millions a-year^ as is shown by the table, page 
 203 ante.* 
 
 * Bankruptcy of the State has often been predicted, as an 
 inevitable consequence of the growth and enormous increase 
 of the public debt, which now amounts to 800 millions. 
 
 Although such predictions have happily not yet been ful- 
 
210 
 
 That false and insane system has been in one 
 instance carried even to fanciful extremity — 
 namely, in the sacrifice of a million and a half 
 of clear annual revenue from the post-office^ to 
 indulge the whim of carrying letters from the 
 Land's-end to John O'Groat's house, and even 
 from Orkney or Shetland to Guernsey or Jersey, 
 at the same charge of a penny each, as for car- 
 rying letters from one end of Downing-street or 
 Parliament-street to the other. 
 
 If the prime-minister of the year 1839, when 
 he proposed the uniform penny-postage to par- 
 liament (the annual public expenditure being 
 then in excess of the revenue by a million and 
 a /i«//'£ 1,38 1,938), had rested that proposal sim- 
 pliciter on the ground — that it would be yerj phi- 
 lanthropic to sacrifice a million and a half more 
 of the then already defective annual public reve- 
 nue, in order to enable the post-office to convey all 
 letters of half an ounce in weight throughout the 
 United Kingdom at a penny a-piece, and letters 
 
 filled ; and although it be impossible to measure the actual, 
 or to foretell the future ability of the people of the United 
 Kingdom to bear and endure debt, which shall be good 
 security to the public creditor — this proposition seems, 
 nevertheless, undeniable — viz. — that if peace succeed to war, 
 and war to peace, in all time hereafter as in all time hereto- 
 fore — and if in the succeeding peace, the debt incurred in the 
 preceding war be not redeemed — but each succeeding war be 
 begun with an increased debt — a bankruptcy or insolvency of 
 the State must take place some time or other. 
 
211 
 
 of greater weight at a proportionate charge — can 
 any one, it may be asked^ doubt, whether such 
 a proposition would not have been scouted with 
 scorn and contempt, seeing that the adoption of 
 it would have doubled the then deficit of a million 
 and a half of the annual public revenue to meet 
 the expenditure. 
 
 The uniform penny-postage was considered a 
 notable discovery in political economy and in 
 finance. But that it was not originally intended 
 by the legislature to sacrifice the whole or any 
 material part of the public revenue from the post- 
 office by adopting the scheme, appears evidently 
 from the third report from the select committee 
 of the House of Commons on Postage (No. 708, 
 sess. 1838), in which (at page 45) the anticipated 
 financial result of that plan is thus stated: — 
 "The gross revenue to arise from the uniform 
 ^' penny-postage would be 2 millions { £2 fiSS^SSS) 
 " and the expenditure 868 thousand pounds* 
 
 * The expenditure of the post-office anno 1845 was 1,125,594 
 
 And for packet-ships included in the expences of | ^^^f. ^ .^ 
 
 the Navy | 709,04b 
 
 Amount exclusive of charges of packet-establish- ) , ^^ . ^.^ 
 mentson shore 1 1,834,640 
 
 Which is very nearly a million above the reported estimate 
 of expenses of 868 thousand pounds. The net receipt of 
 postage in the same year 1845, deducting therefrom the 
 postage charged on the public departments, was £1,749,505. 
 
 E E 
 
212 
 
 " (868,967), which would leave a net revenue 
 " upon the uniform penny-postage oi 1200 thou- 
 '' sandi^ounds (£1,214,366), and the net revenue 
 " now (anno 1838) arising from the inland postage 
 " —being 1500 j^Aow^a/zo? pounds (£1,498,820)— 
 " the difference 284 thousand ^ounA^ (284,454), 
 " would he the loss which the revenue would 
 " sustain from the reduction of the present rates 
 " of postage to a penny. ''^ And the penultimate 
 paragraph of the same report is in these words, 
 viz. : — " In the opinion of all the witnesses, 
 " excepting most of the officers of the post- 
 " office^ the adoption of Mr. Hill's plan would 
 " occasion a very great increase in the number 
 " of letters posted — and in the opinion of most 
 *' of them, a far greater increase than would he 
 " required to maintain the revenue at its present 
 " amountr^ 
 
 The notable plan of the uniform penny-post- 
 age, however, ends in the discovery that the 
 pleasure of carrying letters weighing half an 
 ounce all over and throughout the United King- 
 dom for a penny a-piece^ and letters of greater 
 weight in proportion, is enjoyed only by the sacri- 
 fice of a million andahalfoi clear annual revenue, 
 which was derived not from any tax^ but from a 
 monopoly of the carriage of letters, granted by 
 
 * The words in italics in this quotation are not in italics 
 in the original. 
 
213 
 
 the legislature to the government; under which, 
 every contributor to that revenue, received a 
 quid pro quo for his contribution of ten, twenty, 
 or a hundred-fold the value of it. 
 
 At the sacrifice of another million and a half 
 (which is the present gross annual receipt of post- 
 age, but which is all and more than all (see note 
 p. 211 ante) expended in the conveyance of the 
 mails), to be replaced by an increased tax upon 
 income^ the pleasure of the public as cheap letter- 
 carrier^ might be heightened by carrying all 
 letters gratis* 
 
 By the parliamentary paper. No. 361, sess. 
 1845, it appears, that the net amount of all taxes 
 
 * It was generally considered that the repealed rates of 
 postage of letters were too high — not with respect to the 
 value given and received for postage^ but with respect to the 
 productiveness of the revenue of the post-office. Many sen- 
 sible persons believed, and still believe, that a clear annual 
 revenue of two millions or more might be derived from the 
 POST-OFFICE, from postages charged at rates less than half 
 what were charged under the abrogated system, — especially, 
 if the common-sense plan of charging postage of letters, ac- 
 cording to the distance of their conveyance, were adopted, — 
 e. g. for miles, or to the nearest post-town, a penny ; 
 
 for miles 2 pence ; for miles 3 pence ; and so on, 
 
 with a maocimum postage of for any distance exceeding 
 
 miles. It was offered as one of the most cogent 
 reasons, for adopting the uniform penny-postage plan, that it 
 would facilitate and cheapen the correspondence of the poor. 
 The revenue which is renounced or sacrificed for that, 
 among other assigned reasons, is a million and a halfQ,-yQ2i.T, 
 
214 
 
 repealed^ expired or reduced from the end of the 
 last war in the year 1815, down to the end of the 
 year 1841, after deducting therefrom all taxes 
 imposed during the same period, and exclusive 
 of the lost revenue of the post-office^ was as fol- 
 lows, viz. — 
 
 Repealed Net amount 
 
 or Imposed. repealed or 
 
 reduced. reduced. 
 
 £ £ £ 
 
 CustomG 9,005,766 3,733,219 5,272,547 
 
 Excise 14,077,400 3,928,300 10,149,100 
 
 Stamps 1,024,237 31,334 942,903 
 
 Assessed taxes 5,557,930 315,011 5,242,919 
 
 £29,665,333 8,007,864 21,607,469 
 
 To which is to be added the tax upon income im-^ 
 
 posed in the time of the late war, and repealed 1 4 i ^^r 5^-3 
 in the year 1816, amounting on the average' ' ' ' 
 of the three last years of the tax to 
 
 Total amount of taxes repealed or reduced, he-") ^05 *7*yK qao 
 tween the year 1815 and the year 1841 j ' ' ' 
 
 All taxes are paid by the consumers of the 
 commodities or things taxed : but there are con- 
 sumers of different ranks and degrees. 
 
 which is more than 2i fifth (.228) part of the total amount of 
 the poor-rates in England and Wales (£6,829,067, see note, 
 page 21 ante). 
 
 The tax upon soap yields 900 thousand pounds a-year 
 (£927,726, anno 1844). Had that tax been repealed, even 
 by the sacrifice of a part of the revenue of the post-office, it 
 would have freed a married cottager from a tax to the 
 amount of at least 6 shillings and 6 pence a-year (see note, 
 page 154 ante); while the postage incurred by cottagers 
 
215 
 
 It is of little importance to the higher and 
 richer, though of the utmost importance to the 
 lower and poorer classes, what may be the 
 quantum of taxation on spirits or tobacco^ soap, 
 vinegar^ ov pepper. 
 
 On the other hand, it is of little or no import- 
 ance to the lower and poorer, though it is by no 
 means disregarded by the higher and richer 
 classes, what may be the rate or quantum of 
 taxation on wine, silk, plate and cut-glass, 
 servants, horses, carriages, or armorial bearings. 
 
 The higher and richer classes impose all taxes ; 
 and the disproportion in which they have made 
 or left themselves contributory to the exigencies 
 of the state, by taxes laid on their own consump- 
 tions, in comparison with the taxes laid on the 
 consumptions of the lower and poorer classes, is 
 very stuiking, as has been shown in the foregoing 
 first chapter. 
 
 The following is an account (taken from the 
 same paper. No. 361, sess. 1845, in the nearest 
 
 collectively, one with another under the repealed system, 
 did not probably amount to the odd sixpence a-year paid by 
 l^em for tax upon soap. And if it were thought desirable 
 to exempt or relieve certain poor persons residing beyond 
 miles from their connexions or friends from postage, 
 ultra per letter, that might easily be effected — e. g., 
 
 by authorising two justices in petty sessions to exempt letters 
 of poor persons known to them, from postage ultra per 
 
 letter. 
 
216 
 
 round numbers) of loss to the annual public re- 
 venue, by the repeal, expiration, or reduction of 
 certain taxes, between the end of the war in the 
 year 1815 and the end of the year 1841, com- 
 posing part of the above sum of 21i millions 
 (£21,607,469, page 214) : 
 
 ASSESSED TAXES. 
 
 £ £ 
 
 On houses, windows, servants, car-j.^.^oio 
 riages, horses, and dogs ) ' ' 
 
 All such taxes, and the hearth-tax, in) ^,. ^^a 
 
 Ireland...} ^^^,734 
 
 4,662,952 
 
 CUSTOMS. 
 
 On wine 843,405 
 
 On rum 628,816 
 
 On raw and thrown-silk 640,632 
 
 On cotton-wool 602,414 
 
 2,715,267 
 
 EXCISE. 
 
 On printed cottons 529,000 
 
 On flint-glass 207,000 
 
 On paper 382,500 
 
 On spirits for home-consumption in ] .^. ^^^ 
 
 Ireland...) ' 
 
 1,592,500 
 
 STAMPS. 
 
 On newspapers and advertisements 397,800 
 
 £9,368,519 
 
 The foregoing list shows that the assessed 
 taxes and the taxes on ivine^ silk, and fiint-glass, 
 which were repealed or reduced between the year 
 1815, and the year 1842, amounted to nearly 6| 
 
217 
 
 millions (£6,353,989), and such taxes on cotton- 
 wares to more than a million (£1,131,414), making 
 collectively with the li million of lost revenue 
 ivom.ihQ post-office^ 9 millions a-year.* 
 
 * Taxes were repealed or reduced between the end of 
 the war in the year 1815 and the end of the year 1841 other 
 than and besides those mentioned in the text on the follow- 
 ing commodities, viz.: 
 
 £ £ 
 
 Beer and cider 3,080,000 
 
 Malt 2,564,200 
 
 .5,644,200 
 
 Salt 1,796,411 
 
 Sugar 596,411 
 
 Dried fruits 245,907 
 
 842,318 
 
 Hides and skins 696,100 
 
 Coals 1,287,646 
 
 Candles 476,500 
 
 Soap 363,000 
 
 2,127,146 
 
 Hemp 244,583 
 
 Sheeps, hares, and conies- wool and skins... 381,487 
 
 Various commodities collectively, yield- ^ 
 
 ing severally taxes of smaller amount I 506,705 
 than the above j 
 
 12,238,950 
 Amount in the text page 216 9,368,519 
 
 20,607,469 
 The income-tax, of the last war was 14,167,573 
 
 Amount in the table, page 214 ante £35,775,042 a year 
 
 which is exclusive of the million and a half o£ lost revenue 
 of the post-office. 
 
218 
 
 Considering from what class of the people the 
 revenue which arose from such repealed or re- 
 duced taxes was drawn — the abrogation of them 
 shows very strikingly, how mindful of themselves 
 and of their own class, those who have the power 
 to impose and to repeal taxes, were, and are. 
 
 At the times of the repeal or reduction of those 
 taxes, there was a surplus of public annual revenue 
 over the expenditure; — which being considered 
 as surplus in excess — was held to justify the re- 
 mission of them. 
 
 Had it been proposed at the time of the repeal 
 or reduction of any of those taxes — to preserve 
 the then surplus of the public annual revenue to 
 go towards the reduction of the public debt — and 
 to repeal all or any of such taxes, upon condition 
 of replacing the revenue which would be lost by 
 such repeal or reduction, by a tax upon income — it 
 may be doubted, whether a single member of the 
 legislature would have given his vote for such re- 
 peal upon that condition. And if that be verily 
 so, it seems decisive of the right of the country 
 to have had some and enough of such taxes on 
 the rich reimposed, at least sufficient to restore 
 or make good the deficiency of the public annual 
 revenue to meet the expenditure, caused or 
 created by the repeal or reduction of such taxes 
 on the rich. 
 
 The annual revenue on an average of the three 
 
219 
 
 last years of the last war, ending with the year 
 1815, was more than 70^ millions (£70,697,793 
 see page 83 ante) — and on an average of the three 
 years ending with the year 1842, was by abro- 
 gation or remission of taxes reduced to 47 
 millions (£47,177,000, see page 203 ante). 
 
 That the wealth, power, and resources of the 
 realm have been continually growing and in- 
 creasing since the termination of the last war, 
 and are now greater, and were greater in the 
 year 1842, than at any and in all preceding time, 
 is unquestionable — and it is equally unquestion- 
 able, if the taxes which were repealed or re- 
 duced since the end of the last war had been 
 continued, that they all, and each, and every of 
 them, would have been more productive of 
 revenue, than they were while they continued 
 in force.* 
 
 * That the taxes repealed or taken off, between the year 
 1815 and 1842, would have become more productive of 
 revenue had they been continued, seems to be unquestionable, 
 when it is considered — that the annual public revenue, ex- 
 clusive of the income-tax, anno 1815, was *£57,613,880 
 
 From which,if the difference between the\ 
 
 amount of taxes repealed ov reduced, and of ^, ^^^ ^ 
 
 >- 21 607 469 
 new taxes imposed between the year 18151 
 
 and 1842, be deducted, viz., (see p. 217 ante)j 
 
 Carried over £36,006,411 
 
 * Finance-accounts^ anno 1815. 
 
 F F 
 
220 
 
 Yet the prime-minister of the present day, 
 when he came into power in the year 1841, — the 
 annual public revenue being then insufficient to 
 meet the expenditure by about 2i millions — 
 instead of reviving any of the immense sum or 
 mass of taxes above particularized, which had 
 been recklessly, selfishly, and improvidently re- 
 pealed or reduced as aforesaid, proposed to par- 
 liament in the year 1842 the tax upon income 
 now in force ; which then became law for tlvree 
 years, expiring on the 5th April 1845, and was 
 afterwards continued for three years more on 
 and from that day. 
 
 Amongst the reasons assigned by the prime- 
 minister of the day for proposing that tax, the 
 following are reported (Hansard, vol. 61, pp. 
 431, et seq.) to have been given by him in 
 
 The annual revenue, had the continued taxes'] 
 not become more productive in that interva 
 of time, could, in the year 1841, have pro- 
 duced only the sum, brought over, of 
 
 Instead of which, the annual revenue from the] 
 
 said continued taxes amounted, in the year P4 7, 9 17, 521 
 1841 to J 
 
 36,006,411 
 
 Showing that the increased productiveness of \ 
 the same taxes between the years 1815 and I £11,91 1,1 10 
 1842 was the annual sum of J 
 
 * Finance accou7its, anno 1841. 
 
221 
 
 his speech in the House of Commons on the 
 11th March, 1842 : 
 
 " Shall I, then, levy taxation upon the articles of con- 
 sumption — upon those articles that appear to some super- 
 fluities, but which are known to constitute the necessaries of 
 life ? I cannot consent to any proposal for increasing taxa- 
 tion on the great articles of consumption by the labouring 
 classes of society. I say, moreover, I can give you conclusive 
 proof that you have arrived at the limits of taxation on arti- 
 cles of consumption, I am speaking of articles of luxury, 
 which might be supposed not to constitute the consumption 
 of the laborious classes ; and I advise you . not to attempt 
 taxation even upon those articles, for you will be defeated in 
 your expectation of revenue. 
 
 " Whatever may be your financial diflSculties and necessi- 
 ties, you must so adapt and adjust your measures as not to 
 bear on the comforts of the labouring classes of society. 
 
 " Instead of looking to taxation on consumption, it is my 
 duty to make an earnest appeal to ihQ possessors of property, 
 I propose that, for a time to be limited, the income of this 
 country should bear a charge not exceeding sevenpence in the 
 pound, or £2. 18s. 4d. per cent. — for the purpose, not only 
 of supplying the deficiency in the revenue, but of enabling 
 me, with confidence and satisfaction, to propose great com- 
 mercial reforms, which will afford a hope of reviving* com- 
 merce, and such an improvement in the manufacturing 
 interests, as will react on every other interest in the country. 
 
 " I shall propose that, from the income-tax I now recom- 
 mend all incomes under £150 shall be exempt. 
 
 " I propose, for I see no ground for exemption, that all 
 
 * The declared annual value of the exports, the produce, 
 and manufactures of the United Kingdom, according to the 
 
222 
 
 funded property, held by natives of this country ov foreigners, 
 should be subject to the same charge as unfunded property. 
 
 " I calculate on a surplus of 1,800 thoiisand pounds, after 
 providing for the excess of expenditure on actual votes. 
 Having that surplus, I propose to apply it, in a manner which 
 I think will be most conducive to the public interests, and 
 most consonant with public feeling and opinion — ^by making 
 great improvements in the commercial tariff of England; and 
 in addition to these improvements, to abate the duties on some 
 great articles of consumption,'*'^* 
 
 Looking at the tables in page 216, and 
 page 217 ante — it is not easy to understand 
 what was meant, by the passage in that 
 speech: You have arrived at the limits of 
 taxation on articles of luxury^^ Sfc, For it 
 is almost literally true (see page 153 ante), 
 that in the United Kingdom there are no taxes 
 on ^'articles of luxury not constituting the con- 
 sumption of the labouring classes ^ And looking 
 at the said tables, it might well be supposed — 
 
 annual Finance-accounts published by the House of Com- 
 mons, amounted as follows : — 
 
 £ 
 
 In the year 1837 to 42,069,245 
 
 „ „ 1838 to 50,060,970 
 
 „ „ 1839 to 53,233,580 
 
 „ „ 1840 to 51,906,930 
 
 „ 1841 to 51,634,623 
 
 Looking at those figures, it is difficult to understand 
 what was meant in March 1842, by reviving commerce, in 
 the speech in the text. 
 
 * The v/ords in italics in the text are not in italics in 
 Hansard. 
 
223 
 
 that, in reinstating the public annual revenue 
 which had been reduced below the expenditure 
 by unwarrantable remission of taxes — the only 
 embarrassment which a statesman would have 
 felt in the year 1842 — would have arisen from 
 view of the variety of repealed or remitted taxes, 
 amounting from and after the year 1815 to nearly 
 36 millians a-year, (35,775,042, see p. 217 ante), 
 among which he had to choose, to make good so 
 small a deficiency as less than 3 millions a-year 
 (see page 203 ante) in that revenue, — assessed 
 taxes^ and taxes on only three commodities, all 
 consumptions of the rich only^ viz. — on wine^ 
 silk and flint-glass — to the amount collectively 
 of more than 6i millions (6,353,989, see page 
 216 ante) a-year^ having been repealed or taken 
 off in that interval. 
 
 If human ingenuity had been racked to invent 
 a tax, the imposition of which should be the 
 greatest possible departure from, and the great- 
 est violation of, the principle of making every 
 member of society contributory to it in due pro- 
 portion to his stake and interest in the common- 
 wealth and to his means — a tax more effective 
 of that purpose than the tax upon income, in- 
 vented by the prime-minister of the day, could 
 not, perhaps, have been devised. 
 
 But before noticing some of the particular 
 instances of the great injustice of that tax, in so 
 
224 
 
 completely violating that principle — ^it may first 
 be shown, that the whole scope and professed 
 object and political policy of that tax, as declared 
 by the prime-minister of the day, are mere de- 
 lusions ; for, so far from not falling upon articles 
 of consumption of the labouring classes of society^ 
 on which he declared that it was not intended to 
 fall, and would not fall — it actually falls most 
 heavily on such articles — ^by far the greater part 
 of the revenue derived from the income-tax^ 
 being derived from the consumers of those very 
 articles. 
 
 It has hereinbefore been observed (page 2 
 ante), that there are only three sources, whence 
 revenue from taxes can be derived ; namely, — 
 from land, from labour, or from accumulated 
 capital. 
 
 On those, some or all of them, the tax on 
 incofne therefore must fall. 
 
 It is levied under fve heads, which are 
 classed, in the act imposing it, in five schedules, 
 marked with the first five letters of the alphabet, 
 which impose the tax, — 
 
 Produce in the year 
 ending Jan. 5 1844. 
 £ 
 Under A and B, on the rent and profits ofjg ^q- -^^ 
 lands, tenements, and hereditaments j ' ' 
 
 Under D, on profits or gains of trade, or from) , --g ^^^r^ 
 any profession, employment, or vocation.,.) ' ' 
 
 Carried forward 4,255,605 
 
225 
 
 Brought forward 4,255,605 
 
 Under C, on profits arising from') 
 
 annuities and dividends, to any 1795,702 
 person out of any public revenue] 
 
 And under E, on profits of any 
 public office or employment, and 
 on every annuity, pension, or 
 stipend payable out of the pub- 
 lic revenue, except annuities be- 
 fore charged in schedule C 
 
 321,479 
 
 1,117,181 
 
 Total amount in the year ending 5 Jan. 1844 £5,372,786 
 
 If what is propounded, on the Incidence of the 
 taxation of the United Kingdom^ be admitted to 
 be proved by the statements and reasoning con- 
 tained in the preceding chapter upon that subject 
 (ii. ante) — it would be idle to waste words here^ 
 in proving that the whole of the income-tax — 
 levied under schedules A, B, and D, (which in the 
 year ending 5th of January 1844, was 4i millions 
 or four 'fifths of the whole amount of that tax) is 
 a tax on articles of consumption^ although some 
 small part of the impost may be deferred from 
 immediate incidence on such articles, by reason 
 of subsisting contracts (see page 38 ante). 
 
 Is there, it may be asked, a shade of difference, 
 even down to the very mode of the levy, between 
 the land-tax^ and the income-tax on the rent of 
 land, which is assessed from the poor-rates (or 
 upon the same principle as the poor-rates, are by 
 law directed to be assessed), viz, — upon the full 
 value of the land at rack-rent ? 
 
 Again — to a brewer, a distiller, a maltster, or 
 
226 
 
 a grocer — it would and could make no difference 
 in the result to him and his customer, the con- 
 sumer — whether all the taxes levied upon the 
 commodities in which he deals, or upon him as a 
 trader, were levied and paid by him in one sum, 
 or in man^ different sums — that is to say, 
 whether he paid duties of Customs, or of Excise^ 
 or both, on the commodity or commodities dealt 
 in — stamp-duty on his license to deal therein — 
 assessed-taxes on his horses, warehousemen, 
 shopmen, Sfc, or whether he paid the whole same 
 amount of such taxes collectively in one sum^ 
 levied by a tax on his income, or otherwise levied, 
 by some or any other name in one sum ; because 
 all taxes imposed on him or on his trade in any 
 manner or way whatsoever, and paid by him, he 
 does and must get back from the consumer of the 
 commodity in which he deals (except the tax on 
 so much of such commodity as is consumed by 
 himself), together with a profit ultra; otherwise 
 he neither would nor could carry on his trade ; 
 — and that it is not in human power to impose a 
 tax upon a trader in any commodity, and effectu- 
 ally provide by law, that he shall pay such tax 
 himself out of his profits, and not lay it upon the 
 consumer, is a truth, which must be felt; and 
 which surely may be alleged to be incontro- 
 vertible. \. 
 In the speech of the prime-minister of the day, 
 made in the House of Commons, on first pro- 
 
posing the income-tax, on the 11th March, 1842, 
 he avowed, in the words above cited from that 
 speech, that he proposed that tax " for the pur- 
 " pose not only of supplying the deficiency of the 
 " revenue, but also to enable him to propose great 
 " commercial reforms, which would aiford a hope 
 " of reviving commerce, and such an improve- 
 " ment in the manufacturing interest as would 
 " react on every other interest in the country ;" 
 and in his speech proposing a prolongation of the 
 tax for three years more, made in the House of 
 Commons, on the 11th February, 1845, he is re- 
 ported (Hansard, vol. 77, pp. 45«3, 472) to have 
 said : — 
 
 **It will be incumbent on me to propose to the conpilera- 
 tion of parliament whether the tax on property and income 
 imposed in the year 1842, shall be continued for a further 
 limited period, for the double purpose of providing efficiently 
 for the exigencies of the public service, and for enabling 
 Parliament to reduce and repeal other taxes bearing more 
 immediately on the industry and commercial enterprise of the 
 community. 
 
 "There will be left on 5th April, 1846, and in successive 
 years as long as the income-tax continues, and the other sources 
 of revenue remain equally productive, a net surplus of ^\ 
 millions (3,409,000). 
 
 " I should not have proposed the continuance of thexwcowie 
 tax, unless I had the strongest persuasion, partly founded on 
 the experience of the last three years, that it will be compe- 
 tent to the House of Commons by continuing the income-tax 
 to make such arrangements with respect to general taxation, 
 as shall be the foundation of great commercial prosperity. 
 
 G G 
 
228 
 
 " If we receive the sanction of the House for the continuance 
 of the income-taXf we shall feel it to be our duty to make a 
 great experiment with respect to taxation.'^ 
 
 Acting on the second part of his avowed 
 double purpose in inventing the income-tax — 
 the prime-minister of the day proposed to parlia- 
 ment the repeal or reduction of the following 
 taxes, which, between and in the years 1842 and 
 1845, were by law repealed or reduced accord- 
 ingly, viz :— 
 
 EXCISE. 
 
 £ £ 
 
 Glass repealed 647,674 
 
 Auctions „ 305,340 953,014 
 
 CUSTOMS. 
 
 Cotton- wool repealed 680,000 
 
 Foreign sheeps-wool,, 97,140 
 
 Hides untanned „ 61,271 
 
 Turpentine , 75,614 914,025 
 
 Timber reduced 734,867 
 
 Coffee „ 287,287 
 
 Currants „ 95,816 1,117,970 
 
 Sugar „ 1,300,000 
 
 Numerous articles of minor import- 1 924,901 . ^^g g^g 
 ance, — mostlj repealed ] ' ' 
 
 STAMPS. 
 
 Stage-carriages reduced 71,304 
 
 Marine-insurance and bills of lading „ 112,602 183,906 
 
 Total amount repealed or reduced *£5,393,816 
 
 * Extracted, as to customs and stamps, from Parliamentary 
 Papers, No. 361, sess. 1845, and No. 109, sess. 1846 ; and 
 as to glass and auctions, from the Finance-accounts, sess. 
 1845. 
 
229 
 
 The alleged purpose of the prime-minister of 
 the day in repealing or reducing the above enu- 
 merated taxes, and replacing them by his tax 
 upon income^ was the revival of commerce^ and 
 the improvement of the manufacturing interest. 
 But the whole effect of those measures was, and 
 is, to relieve those classes of the people who paid the 
 Excise duty on auctions^ and those who were the 
 consumers of the commodities the taxes on which 
 have been repealed or reduced^ from the burthen 
 of such taxes ; and to cast them on the people 
 universally on whom the income-tax falls. The 
 burthen of the repealed duties on glass and on 
 auctions^ which amounted to nearly a million 
 (£953,014) 2L-year^ is thus removed from the rich 
 and laid principally on the poor^ on whom ulti- 
 mately, as has been shown, the income-tax under 
 schedules A, B, and D, principally falls. 
 
 The case is nearly the same with respect to the 
 repealed tax on cotton-wool^ and the reduced tax 
 on foreign timber — on which the taxes remitted 
 amount to more than 1400 thousand {\,^\^fiQl) 
 pounds a-year. For although the poor do consume 
 gowns, frocks, stockings, and a few other cotton- 
 wares — their consumption of such wares is small 
 indeed, compared with the consumption of rai- 
 ment^ hangings^ and oioiho^v furniture of cotton- 
 wares by the rich. The same may be said 
 with respect to the tax on foreign timber — 
 
no 
 
 the reduction of which cannot be any rehef of 
 taxation on the pooi^^ who are not consumers of 
 foreign or any other timber. 
 
 The avowed purpose of the prime-minister of 
 the day in repealing the whole of the above enu- 
 merated taxes (except the tax on auctions) to the 
 amount of 5 milUons a-year (£5,088,476 ex. the 
 tax on auctions), was, and is, the revival (which 
 can only mean the increase^ see note, p. 221 ante) 
 oi foreign-trade — and thereby, the improvement 
 of the manufacturing interest^ i. e. the interest 
 of the manufacturers of cotton-wares. 
 
 How laying 5 millions of income-tax on the 
 land^ the labour^ and the accumulated capital of 
 the people at liome — and taking off that amount 
 of taxes on the productions oi foreign countries 
 paid by the same people, the consumers of those 
 productions— is to benefit them or any body — 
 except the dealers in those foreign commodities, 
 it is not easy to discern. But this seems to 
 be undeniable, viz. — that when hofne-trade can 
 be increased or improved, the profits thereby 
 created to the dealers on both sides accrue to 
 people at home — while the increase or improve- 
 ment of foreign-trade gives a moiety of the 
 profit of it to foreigners. 
 
 The extent and importance of the home-trade 
 and foreign-trade of the United Kingdom, com- 
 paratively, have been already dwelt upon (p. 47 
 
231 
 
 et seq. ante). The gross value of all exports of 
 the produce and manufactures of the United 
 Kingdom, including the exports to our own 
 colonies and foreign possessions, on an average of 
 3 years ending in January 1843, was 50 millions 
 (£50,040,693, see p. 81 ante) a-year ; which 
 being, in a year of 300 days, 167 thousand pounds 
 (£167,136) a-da^ — is probably not half or 
 quarter of the value of the commodities which the 
 tradesmen on one side of Regent-street sell 
 every day — while the gross value of all the 
 dealings in home-trade must be — who can 
 say how many — tens of millions a-day. In the 
 year 1840, there were 75 banking-houses in 
 London ; a part of the payments of 28 of which 
 establishments (made at what is called the 
 clearing house, see note p. 50 ante) amounted to 
 nearly 1000 millions a-year,* How inconceivable 
 
 * Barclay and Co 107,000,000 
 
 Glynand Co 105,000,000 
 
 Jones, Lloyd, and Co 104,000,000 
 
 Masterraan and Co 90,000,000 
 
 Robarts and Co ...„-- 80,580,000 
 
 ^y. Smith, Payne and Co. •^••♦•v.- 64,000,000 
 
 7 WilUams and Co 56,000,000 
 
 21 Not exceeding 50 millions each 371,916,800 
 
 28 Firms Total ...£978,496,800 a year. 
 
 From these figures it appears, and it is surely a very 
 
232 
 
 then must the amount be of the daily payments 
 of all the 75 London and all other banks — 
 and the daily payments made over all the whole- 
 sale and retail shop counters in London, and 
 in all the other cities, towns, and villages, 
 and in all the fairs and markets, of the United 
 Kingdom, collectively — and how must the com- 
 parative value and importance oi 2. foreign-trade^ 
 the gross value of all exports of which is only 
 167 thousand pounds a-day^ sink to utter in- 
 significance in the comparison — and yet to this 
 foreign-trade (which without disparagement of its 
 real true and great importance, may compara- 
 tively with the home trade truly be called 'paltry^ 
 and to the cotton-manufacturers^ who furnish 
 about hafihe, value of the commodities annually 
 exported in carrying it on — it is, that such home- 
 trade and every other home interest of the people, 
 are proposed, by the prime-minister of the day, 
 to be made subservient. 
 
 A comparison of the ordinary annual public 
 revenue of the year 1841, (the year before the 
 repeal or reduction of taxes now to be replaced by 
 
 striking fact, that the amount of a part of the yearly pay- 
 ments (viz. their payments made at the clearing house only), 
 of each of the three first named bankers in the above list, 
 is more than double the amount of the yearly value of all 
 the exports of the produce and manufactures of the United 
 Kingdom. 
 
233 
 
 the tax upon income^ in pursuance of the plan 
 or scheme of the prime-minister of the day) — with 
 such revenue of the now last year (1845) shows 
 the following results : — 
 
 Customs. Excise. , ^ Total, 
 
 assessed taxes. 
 
 £ £ £ £ 
 
 Anno 1841. ..21,898,845 13,678,836 4,482,912 
 „ 1845... 19,768,393 13,296,620 4,224,039 
 
 Decrease... 2,130,452 382,216 258,873 2,771,541 
 
 Post-office, Total revenue, 
 
 Stamps. ex. charge for ex. crown lands 
 
 packet-ships. & casual income. 
 
 Anno 1841... 7,135,217 455,000 47,650,810 
 „ 1845... 7,660,340 791,000 45,749,392 
 
 Increase... 525,123 336,000 861,123 
 
 Decrease of the whole ordinary reve- ^ 
 
 nue between the years 1841 and >• £1,910,418 1,910,418 
 1846 ) 
 
 The income-tax anno 1845 produced ) - ^o« c^rn 
 
 net into the Exchequer / &,o^b,&/u 
 
 Changing such decrease of the whole ) f^ 1 1 6 1 '52 
 
 revenue to an mcrea^e anno 1845 of J ' ' 
 
 From those figures it appears irresistibly, that 
 the income'tax must be continued — or the taxes, 
 or part of the taxes, repealed or reduced since 
 the year 1841 be reimposed — or new taxes be 
 imposed — or the annual public revenue again 
 become insufficient to meet the expenditure. 
 
234 
 
 By the account (page 228 ante) it appears that\ 
 the revenue lost, by the repeal or reduction 
 of taxes, in pursuanceof the scheme or plan of V 5,393,816 
 the prime-minister of the day, since the 
 year 1841, is j 
 
 The public expenditure anno 18'l*5|*4q nfii 412 
 was ) ' ' 
 
 And the ordinary revenue in^j 
 
 that year, ex. the income-tax, 1*46,692,548 
 (£5,026,570), was ) 
 
 Deficiency £2,368,864 2,368,864 
 
 Which shows — if the taxes repealed or reduced 
 between the years 1841 and 1846 had not 
 been repealed or reduced, — without the 
 imposition of the income-tax, there would 
 have been a surplus of annual revenue over 
 expenditure anno 1845 of 
 
 £3,024,952 
 
 Which surplus would have been li million more, 
 or 4i millions^ if the revenue which arose from 
 the post-office had not been wantonly thrown 
 away. 
 
 That the annual public revenue, lost by repeal 
 or reduction of taxes to the amount of the said 
 sum of 54 millions (£5,393,816), since the year 
 1841, would have been all preserved (perhaps 
 with growth and increase after the year 1841) 
 had such taxes not been remitted, will appear 
 from the following, viz : — 
 
 First, — With respect to the taxes of Excise — 
 It maybe seen from the account, page 228 ante, 
 that the revenue lost by the repeal or reduction 
 
 * Finance-accounts, sess. 1846, page 15. 
 
235 
 
 of tajces of Excise between the years 1841 and 
 1845, was 953 thousand pounds (£953,014); 
 while the decrease of the whole anriual revenue 
 of Excise in that interval of time was only 382 
 thousand pounds (£382,216, page 233 ante). 
 
 But that the whole annual sum of 953 thou- 
 sand pounds was lost to the revenue by the 
 repeal of the taxes of Excise which were re- 
 pealed^ cannot be doubted; when it is remem- 
 bered, that such repealed taxes were taxes on glass 
 and auctions only. And it is impossible not to 
 believe — ^that those taxes, had they not been re- 
 pealed but had been continued^ would have been 
 at least as productive as they were in the years 
 last previous to their repeal — and that the annual 
 revenue oi Excise would have been 953 thousand 
 pounds (the annual amount of those two taxes), 
 more had they not been repealed, than the same 
 revenue was after their repeal.* 
 
 Secondly, — With respect to the taxes of Cus- 
 toms — it may be seen by the same account (page 
 228 ante), that the revenue lost by the repeal or 
 reduction of taxes of Customs between the years 
 1841 and 1846, was 4i millions (£4,256,896), 
 
 * The other taxes o^ Excise were and are, taxes on bricks^ 
 malt, hops, spirits, licences, paper, post-horse-duty, and soap. 
 It is not easy to conceive that such taxes, or any of them, 
 were in any manner affected, as to their productiveness or 
 otherwise howsoever, by the repeal of the taxes of Excise on 
 auctions and on glass. 
 
 II H 
 
236 
 
 while the decrease of the whole revenue of Cus- 
 toms in that interval of time was only 2 millions 
 (£2,130,452, page 233). Yet nevertheless, that 
 the 4^ millions of such remitted taxes of Cus- 
 toms were wholly, or so nearly all lost to the 
 revenue, that they may almost truly be said to 
 have been entirely lost thereto — appears, when 
 it is considered, — 
 
 1st. With respect to the taxes of Customs which 
 were wholly repealed^ — ^viz,the tax on cotton-wool 
 and the taxes on the other commodities, which 
 together with the tax on cotton-wool yielded 
 to the revenue the annual sums of £914,025 
 and £924,901 (see page 228 ante)— that there 
 is not the shadow of reason for believing 
 that such taxes would have yielded a less 
 amount of annual revenue had they been 
 continued, than they yielded prior to their repeal. 
 And if that be admitted, or be true, it follows 
 that by the repeal of such taxes, their amount 
 of nearly 2 millions a-year was absolutely lost to 
 the revenue. 
 
 And 2ndly. With respect to the taxes of Cus- 
 toms which were reduced. 
 
 The effect of the great reduction of the tax on 
 sugar has been already shown at page 208 
 ante. — And as to the only two other com- 
 modities worthy of notice, on which taxes of 
 Customs have been reduced, viz. : — foreign- 
 
237 
 
 timber and coffee — ^the reduction of the tax 
 on coffee has, from the increased consumption 
 of that berry, caused a loss to the revenue on an 
 average of the 4 years ending with 1845, of only 
 150 ^Aow^a/ie/ (£150,202), instead of 287 thou- 
 sand ^owndi^ (£287,287 seepage 228 ante). And 
 if the consumption of coffee continue to increase, 
 the revenue may suffer no ultimate loss by the 
 reduction of the tax on coffee^ but may perhaps 
 gain thereby. 
 
 But with respect to the reduction of the tax 
 on foreign-timber^ the loss to the revenue has 
 been very great. 
 
 £ 
 The revenue arising from that tax on an aver-) ^, ^. , oro 
 age of three years ending with 1841, was ... j ' ' 
 
 And on an average of four years ending with' 
 
 1845 (the tax having been repealedin 1842), |- *902,015 
 was 
 
 Loss to the revenue per annum £709,337 
 
 which is very nearly the whole sum of £734,867 (see 
 page 228 ante). 
 
 When the tax w^on foreign-timber was pro- 
 posed by the prime-minister of the day to be re- 
 duced^ he said, " that the adoption of the measure 
 " could not fail to produce a great loss of reve- 
 " nue, but that he proposed it to remove a 
 " burthen pressing on the springs of manufacture 
 " and commerce; and to encourage the commer- 
 
 * Finance-accounts, 1839 to 1845 both inclusive. 
 
238 
 
 ^' cial interests of the country''' (vide Hansard, 
 vol. 61, pp. 460-1). 
 
 Supposing, without admitting, that the reduc- 
 tion of duty on foreign-timber could have any 
 effect in encouraging manufactures and com- 
 merce^ it is manifest that it could have no such 
 effect upon agriculture — ^because the timber used 
 in agriculture^ may be said to be all of home- 
 growth. 
 
 But the reduction of the duty of Customs on 
 foreign-timber^ at so great a loss as 700 thousand 
 pounds a-year to the revenue, was in every way 
 most injudicious and impolitic; because ^r^«^/2- 
 timber is a commodity to much of which Xh^ fifth 
 rule or principle, and to all of which the sixth 
 rule or principle, of taxation (propounded pp. 
 180-1 ante) applies. 
 
 Timber of home-production is subject to no 
 tax^ not being liable to parochial or county- 
 rates, and being exempt by the statute of syha 
 ccedua (45 Edward iii, cap 3, anno 1371), from 
 tithe ; because timber produces no annual in- 
 crease which can be severed from the soil, and 
 therefore no annual income.^ 
 
 Foreign-timber is, therefore, a commodity 
 
 * If the owner of growing timber were made subject and 
 contributory, as such, to parochial or county rates, or to 
 tithes de anno in annum — inasmuch as some timber (e. g., 
 oak) does not come to perfection in less than 150 years — the 
 
239 
 
 on which it is not requisite to impose any 
 tax to countervail taxes on timber of home- 
 production^ there being no taxes on timber 
 of home-production. But for the purpose of 
 obtaining revenue (especially in the United 
 
 amount of such rates and tithes, if paid, would form an 
 annually increasing charge on such timber, and with the 
 compound interest of which it would cause the loss, would 
 probably amount to a charge, before the timber were ripe, of 
 many times the value of the timber when fallen. 
 
 Timber generally grows on land, which, from its nature, si- 
 tuation, or form, is not susceptible of culture by the plough; 
 — and only, or mostly, on the estates or property of very 
 large landed proprietors ; to whose families the profit of a 
 fall of timber (though sometimes very great) accrues but 
 seldom. 
 
 The cultivation of timber not being adapted to the enter- 
 prise of private individuals, who could not live to enjoy the 
 fruit of capital devoted to the culture of trees of the forest — 
 the State — in order to secure, in time to come, a continual 
 supply of timber for 7iaval architecture — has placed, under the 
 charge and management of the Board of Commissioners of 
 Woods and Forests, large tracts of woods and plantations, the 
 property of the Crown, now under oak and other timber trees 
 or plants, to the extent of 50 thousand acres — to which it is 
 contemplated gradually to add from 10 thousand to 20 thou- 
 sand acres more. That extent of land under forest-trees, 
 when brought into full and successive bearing, will, it is 
 thought, be sufficient to supply future generations with all 
 timber requisite for the maintenance of the navy — except 
 fir, for 7nasts and spars, which is found in greater perfection 
 in other countries, than it can be brought to in the soil and 
 climate of the United Kingdom. 
 
240 
 
 Kingdom, where there is such a demand for 
 revenue to pay interest of 800 rmllions of 
 public debt, and to meet the annual public 
 exipendituve), foreign' timber ought to be taxed 
 to the utmost, subject to the said sixth rule 
 or principle propounded page 181 ante ; i, e. 
 up to that point at which it should be found 
 most productive of revenue by the test pro- 
 pounded at page 204 et seq. ante. 
 
 The reduction of the tax on foreign-tijnber 
 which fell, and falls, on the consumers of that 
 commodity (in the first instance principally on 
 house and ship-builders ; and ultimately on the 
 occupiers of houses^ and the consumers of com- 
 modities with which ships are freighted)^ at a 
 loss of 700 thousand ^oMTidi^ a-year to the public 
 revenue, to be replaced by a tax upon income 
 falling upon all the people of Great Britain who 
 are principally labourers^ seems to be contrary to 
 every principle of justice, of wisdom, and of sound 
 political economy. 
 
 Thirdly — With respect to the revenue of 
 Stamps. It appears by the account at page 233 
 ante, that that revenue increased by half a mil- 
 lion (£525,123) in the interval between the 
 years 1841 and 1846; notwithstanding the re- 
 duction of Stamp-duties by the annual sum of 
 184 thousand pounds (£183,906, see page 228 
 ante) in that interval — in which the assessed- 
 
241 
 
 taxes (in which no alteration was made in that 
 interval), decreased^ as appears at the same page 
 233 ante, by 259 thousand pounds (£258,873) a 
 year. 
 
 The foregoing figures seem to prove arithme- 
 tically — that if the prime-minister of the day had 
 refrained from shuffling the taxes which consti- 
 tute the public revenue of the United Kingdom, 
 and from shifting them from the rich upon the 
 poor^ by means of the income-tax — and had 
 refrained from the repeal and reduction of taxes, 
 which, with the exception of the tax on sugar, 
 fell almost entirely on the rich — there would 
 have been, in the year 1845, arising solely from 
 the taxes which existed when the prime-minister 
 came into power in the year 1841, a surplus of 
 public revenue over expenditure of 3 millions 
 (£3,024,952, see page 234 ante) ; and, if he had 
 repaired the error of his predecessors in throwing 
 away the li million of revenue from the post- 
 office, which was a tax upon nobody — the 
 surplus revenue anno 1845 would have been 4| 
 millions, and the people would, moreover, have 
 been saved from the infliction of the income-tax. 
 
 It has been frequently asserted in these pages, 
 that the gross value of all the exports of the 
 produce and manufactures of the United King- 
 dom never in any year amounted to a sum equal 
 
242 
 
 to the public annual revenue ; which was 
 accurately true when those pages were written ; 
 — the Finance-accounts for the year 1845 (issued 
 on the 30th April, 1846) not being then out. 
 
 From those accounts it appears that such 
 exports anno 1845 amounted in value to 60 
 m^7/^o/^5 (£60,111,081), while the gross receipt 
 of the public revenue of the same year was 57f 
 millions (£57,799,084). Such exports^ there- 
 fore, in the year 1845, for the first time since 
 foreign-trade had birth in the United Kingdom, 
 surpassed the amount of the public revenue by 
 2 J millions (£2,311,997), — the increase arising 
 principally from increased exports of cotton- 
 wares ; — the value of the exports of cotton-wares 
 in the year 1841 having been 23^ millions 
 (£23,999,478)— andin the year 1845 having been 
 ^ millions (£26,135,190). 
 
 It has been more than once hereinbefore no- 
 ticed that no revenue whatever is derived from 
 the cotton-trade — there being no tax whatever 
 on cotton-wool imported, or on cotton manufac- 
 tured at home — the cotton-trade being " taboed" 
 from taxation (see page 177 ante) for the profit 
 of the manufacturers of cotton-wares^ whose 
 profits are now sought to be further increased 
 hj free-trade in foreign- grain — grain of home- 
 production continuing at the same time to be 
 heavily taxed. 
 
243 
 
 t. The prime-minister of the day has boasted, in 
 the House of Commons, that the increased value 
 of exports is an eifect of his financial opera- 
 tions, — ^viz. : the repeal and reduction of taxes 
 on foreign commodities imported^ and the repeal 
 of the taxes upon auctions and upon glass ; and 
 the replacement of such repealed and reduced 
 taxes by a tax upon income. 
 
 Supposing, without in the least admitting, 
 such to be the fact — (for it may be that such 
 effect is not in consequence^ but in spite^ of 
 those measures) — the increase of the value of 
 such exports from 52 millions (£52,091,544), 
 on an average of three years ending with the 
 year 1841 — to 57 millions (£56,991,274), on an 
 average of three years ending with 1845 — 
 amounts to 5 millions a-year; which is equal to 
 a day and a halfs payments of a few London 
 bankers at the clearing-house (see note, page 232 
 ante), and on which increase of exports the profit 
 at ten per cent, would be 500 thousand pounds, 
 gained mostly by master -cotton manufacturers. 
 
 That result, therefore, which the prime-mi- 
 nister of the day boasts of having effected (sup- 
 posing it to he the fruit of his financial policy and 
 measures) — has cost the nation loss of revenue 
 of 51 millions (£5,393,816, see page 228 ante), 
 by the repeal and reduction of taxes, which 
 with the exceptionof the awc^^o/^-^^/^^ (£305,340) 
 
 I I 
 
244 
 
 were all mdirect and optional taxes, now replaced 
 by a direct tax upon income — which has operated 
 a shifting or shuffling of the greater part of the 
 amount of those repealed or reduced taxes from 
 the rich^ upon the poorer members of the com- 
 monwealth. 
 
 Had such been the only injustice worked by 
 the income-tax invented by the prime-minister of 
 the day, that alone would seem to demand speedy 
 redress by repeal of it, and the re-imposition of the 
 repealed or reduced taxes, or some of them. But 
 it has hereinbefore been asserted (page 223 ante) 
 that had human ingenuity been racked to invent 
 a tax, the imposition of which should be the 
 greatest possible violation of the principle of 
 making every member of society contributory to 
 taxes in due proportion to his stake and interest 
 in the commonwealth, and to his means, — a tax 
 more effective of such purpose than the income- 
 tax invented by the prime-minister of the day, 
 could not have been devised. 
 
 Irrefragable proofs of that assertion are so 
 numerous, that it would be endless to offer the 
 half of such as might be urged. The following are 
 a few of the most prominent. 
 
 First. — Ireland containing nearly a third part 
 of the population of the United Kingdom (see p. 
 2 ante), is wholly exempt from the tax. — The 
 
245 
 
 ^ 
 
 ground of such exemption was stated by the 
 prime-minister of the day, in his speech in the 
 House of Commons, on proposing it on the 11th 
 of March 1842, in the following words (as reported 
 in Hansard, vol. 61, pp. 444-5) viz. : 
 
 " When I am proposing a tax limited in duration in the 
 first instance to a period of three years, and when the amount 
 of that tax does not exceed 3 per cent. I must of course con- 
 sider with reference to public interests, whether it be desir- 
 able to apply that tax to Ireland. I must bear in mind that 
 it is a tax to which Ireland was not subject dunng the period 
 of the war : that it is a tax /or the levy of which no machinery 
 exists in Ireland — Ireland has no assessed taxes — the machinery 
 there is wanting, and I should have to devise new machinery 
 for a country to whi^h the tax has never been applied."* 
 
 After giving such reasons for not extending 
 the income- f as to Ireland — (of which reasons the 
 cream was that Ireland has no assessed taxes !) 
 — the prime-minister of the day proposed by way 
 of an equivalent from Ireland for exemption from 
 the income-tax (in addition to exemption from 
 the assessed taxes), to impose a tax upon spirits 
 manufactured in Ireland, which he estimated 
 would produce 250 thousand pounds a-year — 
 and also to impose certain stamp-duties in Ireland 
 which he estimated would produce 160 thousand 
 pounds a-year — making together 410 thousand 
 pounds a-year. 
 
 * Tlie words in italics in the text are not in itiilics in 
 Hansard. 
 
246 
 
 ^ Such t^"^es'otl spirits and on stamps in Ireland 
 were accordingly imposed bylaw in the year 1842. 
 
 But in the following year, that tax on spirits 
 in Ireland^ was, by the same prime-minister, pro- 
 posed to be repealed, upon the ground (as re- 
 ported in Hansard, vol. 70, page 181), that ''^ it 
 had led to a progressive increase of offences 
 against the Excise laws^ and to the increase of 
 immorality'' — and by the 6 and 7 Yictoria, cap. 
 49, (which became law on 10th of August 1843,) 
 that tax was repealed accordingly. 
 
 What, if any, revenue accrued from the stamp- 
 duties^ which were to produce from Ireland the 
 said sum of 1 60 thousand pounds a-year, cannot 
 be distinguished. But the whole revenue of 
 
 stamps in Ireland^ 
 
 £ 
 
 On an average of 3 years ending ) ^^^i ooi 
 
 with the year 1841, was j ' 
 
 And on an average of 4 years ending | *549 633 
 
 with the year 1845, was j ' 
 
 Total increase per annum after the year 1841 £98,252 
 
 So that, if the whole of that increase of revenue 
 from stamps in Ireland arose, not from any in- 
 crease of the old,^ but all from ihe new stamp- 
 duties imposed in 1842, such new stamp-duties 
 
 * Finance-accounts anno 1839 to 1845. 
 t There was an increase of revenue from the old stamp 
 duties in Great Britain, between the years 1841 and 1846 — 
 of 525 thousand pounds a-year (£525,123, see page 233 ante). 
 
247 
 
 produced the sum of 98 thousand pounds a-year 
 only, instead of the anticipated and intended sum 
 of 160 thousand pounds a-year. 
 
 That sum of 98 thousand pounds (£98,252) 
 a-year is, therefore, the utmost and the whole 
 equivalent contributed by Ireland to the public 
 revenue, for exemption from the income-tax^ by 
 which 5 millions a-year (£5,026,570 anno 1845) 
 are levied from the people of Great Britain. 
 
 In addition to the reasons given by the prime- 
 minister of the day for exempting Ireland from 
 the income-tax — (the cream of which was " that 
 she had no assessed taxes'^) — ^he might, in the 
 same vein, have urged, as a further reason for 
 such exemption, that all incomes of 150 pounds 
 a-year, and a fortiori all incomes upwards of 150 
 pounds a-year, give more command over the ne- 
 cessaries, comforts, and conveniences of life in Ire- 
 land, than in Great Britain, in which all incomes 
 of 150 pounds a-year and upwards are subjected 
 to the income-tax. 
 
 Exquisitely curious as such reasons were, and 
 are, for the monstrous injustice of exempting 
 \hQ ^Archbishops^ Bishops, and all the Clergy — 
 the Lord Chancellor, Judges, and all the lawyers 
 — all professional persons — all capitalists — all 
 the rich resident proprietors, and all other the rich 
 population of Ireland (for, according to the theory 
 of the prime-minister of the day, the income-tax 
 invented hy him does not affect the poor), from 
 
248 
 
 a tax by which 5 millions a-year are levied from 
 the people of Great Britain — they were ^owTzr/, by 
 the majority which the prime-minister of the day 
 commanded in the House of Commons, to be 
 valid reasons ; and Ireland was, therefore^ ex- 
 empted and continues exempt from the income- 
 tax. 
 
 Secondly. — All incomes under 150 pounds 
 a-year are exempt from the tax which is imposed 
 at sevenpence in the pound on all incomes of 150 
 pounds a-year and upwards in Great Britain. 
 But why 150 pounds a-year is fixed upon as the 
 minimum income to be subject to the tax, and 
 therefore to pay £4. 7s. 6d. a-year, while an in- 
 come of 149 pounds a-year (which, taxed at the 
 same rate, would contribute £4. 6s. lid. a-year), 
 is wholly exempt therefrom, no reason is, be- 
 cause no reason can be, assigned ; being the mere 
 whim or fancy of the prime-minister of the day. 
 
 The tax being imposed arbitrarily^ and not 
 upon any princip)le of justice or equity, has been 
 avoided extensively, upon the letter of the law^ 
 by employes — whose salaries were £150 a-year 
 before the imposition of the tax — relinquishing a 
 sliilling a-year of their salaries respectively. 
 An Jncome of £149. 19s. a-year exempt from 
 tax, being a better income by £4. 6s. 6d. a-year 
 than an income of £150 a-year, subject to a tax 
 of £4. 7s. 6d. a-year. ^ ^ vvrKi.hr., ^c 
 
 Thirdly, — Incomes for life, or lives — for terms 
 
249 
 
 of years, however short — and even incomes de- 
 rived from the earnings of labour^ which are 
 suspended when the labourer is in sickness, or 
 is any way incapacitated for his labour, and 
 which perish with him, are subjected to the tax 
 at the same rate of sevenpence in the pound^ 
 as enduring incomes derived from land^ or from 
 accumulated capital. 
 
 An income of 150 pounds a-year, earned by a 
 married man struggling theremth to support a 
 numerous family, is subjected to the same tax of 
 sevenpence in the pound^ or £4. 7s. 6d. a-year, 
 as the like income of an unmarried man, or a 
 man who is vulgarly described as being " without 
 encumbrance.'^ 
 
 Sevenpence in the pounds on 150 pounds 
 a-year, amounts to £4. 7s. 6d. a-year — on a 
 thousand pounds a-year, to £29. 3s. 4d. a-year 
 — and on 10 thousand pounds a-year, to 
 £291. 13s. 4d. a-year. 
 
 To levy £4. 7s. 6d. a-year, from a man of £150 
 a-year, is to deprive him of a sum which serves, 
 and is all that he has, for the subsistence of his 
 family for more than ten days of every year; 
 which (to speak "in sober sadness" in the fustian 
 of the league)^ may be too truly called a tax upon 
 the poor man^ s bread. To levy £291. 13s. 4d:' 
 a-year, from a man of 10 thousand pounds a-year^ 
 is to deprive him of a modicum of income spent 
 
'250 
 
 in the subsistence 6f ^^rt ofhisphW^^'^WSft(^ 
 to subject him, Heu miserum ! to forbearance 
 from adding a trifle to his hoard of savings — or 
 to his collection of pictures, or of vertu — to the 
 expedient of letting his box at the opera on 
 the nights of the season when he does not go 
 to it himself — or to the expedient of making 
 his equipage and the liveries of his servants 
 last a little longer than if he were free from 
 such an impost. tu biiA 
 
 To the mind which, upon this bare statement, 
 is not shocked at the merciless imposition of 
 a tax, which, drawing on the absolute necessa- 
 ries of the jooor, and only on the most extreme 
 luxuries of the rich — is a studied violation of 
 the principle of every member of the state being 
 made contributory to its support, according to 
 his stake and interest in it and to his means, — 
 argument upon that point would be addressed 
 in vain. — Yet such is the tax which the prime- 
 minister of the day boasts of having invented ; 
 and of having imposed as less onerous than taxes 
 on commodities of which the consumption was 
 optional — as less onerous than taxes on glass, on 
 auctions, on foreign timber, or on cotton-wool— 
 which taxes only, had he let them alone, would, 
 with the restored revenue of the post-office 
 have now been producing a surplus of a mil- 
 lion and a half of annual public revenue ov^^ 
 
 i\ n 
 
251 
 
 the expenditure of the United Kingdom, without 
 the infliction of the income-tax* t 
 
 More than ten days' subsistence cannot be 
 drawn by a direct tax from a family having an 
 income of 150 pounds a year, and no more, for its 
 subsistence; without diminution of the indirect 
 or optional taxes which were paid by that family 
 on the consumption of taxed commodities before 
 being subjected to such an imposition. 
 
 And there is this further great diff*erence to 
 such a family, between the direct tax upon its 
 income and indirect taxes on commodities of 
 optional consumption — ^viz., that, in sickness, or 
 other calamity, the gratifying self-denial of 
 parents and children in health, or exempt 
 from the visitation, enables them, by refrain- 
 ing, or abstaining from the consumption of 
 commodities which is optional^ to minister to 
 the wants of their sufi^erer or sufferers ; — 
 while by the dismaying and detested but resist- 
 less demand of the gatherer of the income-tax^ 
 parents and children are ruthlessly deprived of the 
 
 * The repealed taxes on auctions, glass and coiton- 
 woolf and the reduced tax on foreign-timber, produced col- 
 lectively (2,367, 871), which with the renounced revenue 
 from the pout-office made 4 millions a-year (£3,867,871), while 
 the deficiency of the ordinary public annual revenue to meet 
 the expenditure anno 1845, was only 2J millions (2,368,864 
 see page 234, ante). 
 
 K K 
 
252 
 
 power of gratifying their natural love, and curse 
 the power — (^. e., the government and the laws 
 of their country) — which, in ease of the rich 
 from taxation, freezes in the poor the current of 
 the fondest affections of the heart. ,,^j 
 
 Fourthly. — As the taxlevied under schedule D, 
 namely, on all incomes arising or accruing from 
 any trade^ profession^ employment^ or avocation^ 
 can be imposed on the possessors _of such in- 
 comes, only according to their own showing 
 and admission as to the amount thereof — such 
 tax under schedule D, can be, and it is to be 
 feared is, very extensively evaded — and therefore 
 it is a demoralizing tax, by the temptation which 
 it holds out to evade it by misrepresentation, 
 falsehood, and fraud — especially by those classes 
 of the community which are proverbially un- 
 scrupulous, namely, traders. And if the verifi- 
 cation upon oath, of the returns of their incomes 
 made by such persons, were extensively insisted 
 upon, in terms of the statute imposing the tax — 
 perjury would become rife, and would become a 
 moral pestilence spreading itself over the length 
 and breadth of the land. 
 
 Fifthly. — As the tax imposed on, and paid by 
 all producers of and dealers in commodities^ is by 
 them laid upon the consumers of such commodi- 
 ties (see page 21 ante), the price of such com- 
 modities is raised to the consumers thereof, by 
 the amount of the tax. 
 
253 
 
 And seeing that all traders and dealers in 
 commodities, whose incomes are less than 150 
 pounds a-year^ get the benefit of such rise in 
 price of the commodities of their trade, while 
 they are exempt from payment of the tax which 
 causes that rise — the tax actually operates a be- 
 nefit in extra profit to them — which is unnatural, 
 and preposterously unfair, and unjust. >»'^i.Yn^ 
 
 Sixthly. — The imposition of a tax requiring 
 a return of every income of 150 pounds a-year 
 and upwards, is an inquisitorial infringement of 
 the liberty of the subject — and the law imposing 
 it violates the sacred reserve and modesty of pri- 
 vate life — ^lessens the dignity of honourable 
 poverty by exposure of it — and excites disgust, 
 mortification, and evil passions in many, at having 
 their most private affairs subjected to the scrutiny 
 (often the vexatious or malicious scrutiny) of 
 their inferiors, by an enforced disclosure of such 
 afikirs, the knowledge of which is — from not un- 
 becoming pride, or other better or higher moral 
 sentiment, often studiously withheld from the 
 nearest and dearest. 
 
 Seventhly. — The statute nominally imposes 
 the tax only on all incomes o/* 150 pounds a-year 
 and upwards — but is so contrived that a very 
 considerable revenue is craftily drawn from par- 
 ties whose incomes are less than 150 pounds a- 
 year. Because, very many such last-mentioned 
 parties, find it impracticable to go through the 
 
254 
 
 forms required to entitle them to a return of the 
 tax — and many other, rather than undergo the 
 ordeal^ through which only, they can obtain a 
 return of it^ submit to the payment of it — e, g. 
 a gentlewoman or person of condition in nar- 
 row or reduced circumstances, living respected 
 and looked up to by her poor neighbours who are 
 ignorant, and have no right or title to know, 
 by what self-denying management her bounty 
 and beneficence is extended to them — may have 
 to make a statement in writing of every item and 
 particular of her income, and from whence de- 
 rived, to her butcher, her tallow-chandler, or a 
 publican, or beer-house keeper, in the country- 
 town, or village, in which she dwells.* 
 '^' This mighty realm is fallen indeed — if a few 
 millions a-year of taxes cannot be raised within 
 
 JO-* 
 
 * The modus operandi of the statute imposing the tax 
 is such, that incomes, or parts of incomes, under \ 60 pounds 
 a-year, are in very many cases subjected to the tax in the first 
 instance ; and to get it back, the party taxed is bound to 
 show that his or her income is less than \ 50 pounds a-year y 
 by giving a statement in writing to the assessor of the tax, 
 of what every part and parcel of such income less than 
 \ 50 pounds a-year consists, and the source of every several 
 component part thereof. 
 
 The writer knew an instance where a lady to obtain a re- 
 turn of the tax, was required to make a statement of every 
 part and parcel of her income to the assessor, who was a 
 gardener, hired to work for her a day or two occasionally as 
 a labourer. i-iiiqimj^ 
 
255 
 
 it — except by sacrificing the liberty, and corrupt- 
 ing the honesty and morality of large classes of 
 the people, by the imposition of a tax upon in- 
 come so nefarious as that which is now in force 
 in Great Britain. 
 
 ->, The income-tax invented by the prime-minister 
 of the day, which is levied under schedules A, B, 
 and D, however unjust in its operation, — im- 
 politic as a change from taxation upon commodi- 
 ties oi^Jbreign-productionj to taxation upon com- 
 modities of home-production J SLTid as a change from 
 indirect or optional, to direct taxation, — yet does 
 not prevent the parties, upon whom the tax 
 under those schedules is primarily or in the first 
 instance imposed and levied, from indemnifying 
 themselves by shifting it, either immediately/ or in 
 the long run, upon the consumers of the commo- 
 dities produced or dealt in — the producer or dealer 
 himself paying the tax only on such part of 
 those commodities as is consumed by himself. 
 
 But here it is proper to notice, that there is 
 a part of the income-tax levied under the said 
 schedule D, which must be excepted from the 
 last observation, a part namely of the tax levied 
 under that schedule which must be borne by the 
 parties on whom it is imposed, and cannot be 
 shifted on any other person — for schedule D 
 comprises the income-tax not only on the profits 
 
256 
 
 or gains of trade^ but also on the profits or 
 goixis oi ^ny profession^ employment^ov avocation^ 
 productive of income of £150 a-year or upwards, 
 in Great Britain. ^^* lo bn^.. 
 
 t'f The accounts published by the House of Com- 
 mons, give no particulars or detail of how much 
 of the income-tax levied under schedule D, is 
 derived from profits or gains of trade^ and how 
 much from profits or gains of professions^ Sec. 
 separately and respectively; nor is that know- 
 ledge, it is believed, attainable, except by the 
 command of either House of Parliament. 
 
 Hereinbefore in these pages, therefore, the 
 whole tax levied under schedule D, has been 
 treated as derived from the profits or gains of 
 trade, from which doubtless the greater part of 
 the tax levied under schedule D does in fact arise. 
 - The whole amount levied under that sche- 
 dule, having been hereinbefore considered as 
 the fruit of the income-tax upon the profits 
 of trade only, has given to trade over agri- 
 culture, (when their comparative extent and 
 importance has been hereinbefore estimated or 
 tested by the fruit of the income-tax, derived 
 from them respectively) — a great advantage in 
 the comparison. But the importance of agricul- 
 ture preponderated so much, that the profits of 
 professions, &c. were thrown in to the profits of 
 trade, rather than the comparison drawn between 
 them should be embarrassed by the detail which 
 
257 
 
 would have been necessary, in order to > except 
 the i^rofits of professions, &c. if<^'i4^^frRl^o?fTrBS 
 ,e.i Members of the learned professions of the law, 
 and of medicine, and of other professions (if any 
 other there be), whose incomes are derived from 
 Jees or honoraria, have a double ground of com- 
 plaint against the income-tax invented hy the 
 'prime-minister of the day — 1st, as being unjust 
 to them under the third exception to it, page 248 
 ante ; and 2ndly, as further unequal and unfair, 
 because they cannot like the traders taxed with 
 them under the said schedule D, and like the pro- 
 ducers taxed under schedules A and B, shift any 
 part of the tax from themselves upon any other 
 persons or parties. bjji^snti 
 
 The Clergy of England, now that all tithe is 
 (or forthwith is to be), commuted for a rent- 
 charge in lieu thereof, are not exactly in the 
 same category with respect to the income-tax, as 
 the members of other learned professions — because 
 the incomes of the clergy are to be regulated by 
 the average price of corn. And in a natural state 
 of things their incomes so regulated, though they 
 would fluctuate slightly from year to year, 
 would give them in the long run, the same com- 
 mand over the necessaries, comforts, and con- 
 veniences of Hfe — the price of which is regulated, 
 at least mainly or principally, by the price of 
 . coca , in Uia . long run. And , lu^w , ^li^lyv.ttot 
 
258 
 
 price varies in the long run^ appears from the 
 table of septennial averages of the price of corn, 
 at page 197 ante. 
 
 The rent-charge in lieu of tithe, was by the 
 statute establishing it (6 & 7 William IV, cap. 
 71, anno 1836), directed to be ascertained and 
 fixed by the average price of corn^ during seven 
 years ending on Thursday next before Christmas- 
 day in every year, to be ascertained by the comp- 
 troller of corn returns in England for the time 
 being. But as that statute was enacted at a time 
 when the corn- laws were in force, which are by 
 the prime-minister of the di^iy ^iho, cotton-manufac- 
 turers^ and the leaguers now proposed and sought 
 to be repealed — and as there is no provision in 
 that statute, made, or now proposed to be made 
 by law, against the effect of any alteration in the 
 corn-laws on the price of corn — the Clergy will 
 have just ground of complaint of injustice done 
 to them by such alteration of the corn-laws^ as 
 shall permit the importation of foreign-corn free 
 or untaxed; if the average price of corn to be 
 hereafter ascertained upon the price of highly- 
 taxed English corn, with a large admixture 
 or addition of untaxed foreign-corn^ shall 
 turn out to be much less than what it would have 
 been if it had continued to be taken on the price 
 of corn in England, including foreign corn sub- 
 ject to taxation under the corn-laws as they 
 
259 
 
 e&isted, or were in force at the time of tl 
 
 qf'ithe tithe commutation-act.: fftmnaJqoa lo sldfi^ 
 
 iaa T61 9§fiq iB 
 
 9^The foregoing objections to the income-tax' m- 
 vented by the prime minister of the day, great 
 and unanswerable as they seem to be, sink never- 
 theless into insignificance, in comparison with the 
 objections to such tax levied under schedules C 
 and E, viz. on profits arising from anmtities or 
 dividends payable to any person out of any public 
 revenue^ and on projits of any public office or em- 
 ployment or pension payable out of that revenue. 
 
 When a nation or an individual is in difiSculty 
 fi^om excess of annual expenditure over revenue 
 or income^ there are two ways of making the 
 ends meet ; viz. either by lessening expenditure 
 or by obtaining, if practicable, increase of revenue 
 or income. 
 
 By far the easiest and most attainable of those 
 two ways of making the ends meet, is the lessen- 
 ing of expenditure ; because that is almost alwaj^ 
 within the power of the party, while increase of 
 income may be unattainable. "^'-'^ ' '^^^ ijjui-jijii 
 
 When the prime minister of''tTie'My^^ropB§^,^ 
 by schedules C and E, to stop from the public? 
 creditors sevenpence in the pound, or £2. I85. 4rf,' 
 l^f bent out of the dividends contracted io^ ^^ 
 p^M ih themi and the like per centage from thfe^ 
 sIMne#* or profits of all persons in atiy public' 
 
 L L 
 
260 
 
 office or employment, (judges^ ministers of state ^ 
 jyuhlic functionaries^ employes in all the public 
 offices^ &c. ) ; and from the pay of the aryny and 
 navy^ in all cases where such dividends, salaries, 
 profits, or pay, amounted to £150 pounds a-year 
 or upwards — it was a misnomer to call that stop- 
 page of payment a tax upon income. It was 
 simply a refusal or withholding payment of part 
 of the dividends or annuities contracted to be 
 paid to the public creditor — of part of the salaries 
 or allowances granted, to such public function- 
 aries, &c. — and of part of the pay of the officers 
 of the army and navy. 
 
 The stoppages directed to be made under 
 schedules C and E, of the statute imposing 
 the income-tax, was therefore only an exercise of 
 that easy and summary method of making the 
 ends meet which is effiscted by lessening expen- 
 diture. And such stoppages of payments lessened 
 the public expenditure, anno 1845, by 1100 
 thousand pounds (£1,117,181, seep. 225, ante). 
 
 The justice of such a proceeding seems how- 
 ever to be very questionable in the case of public 
 functionaries, officers of the army and navy, and 
 others, who might fairly object to any stoppage 
 out of their salaries, allowances, or pay; upon 
 the ground, that they accepted (or perhaps, pur- 
 chased) their situations, places, or commissions, 
 on at least an implied understanding, that their 
 
261 
 
 salaries, allowances, or pay, would not he 
 lessened. 
 
 On the other hand, it may be argued, that the 
 public has a right to vary the wages of its 
 servants ad libitum; and if they do not like 
 their pay, that they may quit their service. 
 
 But however thM may he^ it is quite clear that 
 the public has and can have no right to be guilty 
 of breach of contract with its public creditors — 
 who, as such, are wholly unrepresented in the le- 
 gislature — for if an individual were the owner of 
 the whole public debt of 800 vnillions — such 
 ownership would not give him a qualification to 
 sit in Parliament, nor even so much as a vote in 
 the election of a member of that assembly. 
 
 The government, which was supplanted by 
 the prime minister of the present day, proposed 
 to increase the public revenue by the imposition 
 of a tax on the transfer of stock in the public 
 funds. — Upon that occasion (the 13th February, 
 1831) a leading member of the then House of 
 Commons, in opposition to such proposed mea- 
 sure, made a speech, from the report of which 
 (in Hansard, vol. ii.. Third series, p. 441) the 
 following extracts express, more forcibly than 
 the writer of these pages is able to express, the 
 grounds upon which it was urged and insisted 
 that such a measure was utterly indefensible, 
 
 " All the matters that had been discussed since the com- 
 mencement of the session, were trifling and of minor impor- 
 
262 
 
 tance, when compared with the proposition which the noble 
 Lord had made for the imposition of a tax on the transfer of 
 funded "property. He trusted her Majesty's government 
 would not persevere in a measure, which, in his view, would 
 tarnish the fair fame of this country, which had remained 
 hitherto unimpeached. He asked the noble lord, whether he 
 had read the words of the contracts that had been made with 
 the public creditor ? All the Acts for raising public loans 
 were nearly in the same words ; and could any words be 
 more distinct and binding, or admit of less doubt?* How was 
 it possible "to rail the seal from off the bond ?" It was upon 
 this express condition, that the pitblic creditor had advanced 
 his money ; and if this condition were forgotten, they would 
 violate good faith, and depart from that proud position which 
 this country had always occupied, in contradistinction to every 
 other country, in its dealings with its creditors. No in- 
 genuity could get rid of the force of such an objection. An 
 Hon. member had said, that as Parliament had imposed a 
 property-tax — as it had violated the contract with the public 
 before, there was no reason why it should not be violated 
 again. That was the very thing which he feared. He 
 dreaded that an inference would be drawn from the proposed 
 violation of law and good faith, that a further violation was 
 not improper. If a small duty was to be imposed at a time 
 like tlie present, contrary to the principle and express con- 
 dition of the contract, what could the public creditor expect, 
 but that, under the pressure of foreign war, or of adverse 
 
 * The words referred to, taken at random from one of the 
 acts — viz. : 10 Geo. 4, cap. 31, sec. 18 — are as follows, viz.: 
 " The subscribers to the said annuities, their executors, &c., 
 " shall be entitled by virtue of this act to have receive and 
 " enjoy the said annuities by this act granted, and shall 
 " have good and secure estates therein, and the said annuities 
 " shall be free from all taxes, charges, and impositions mhat- 
 " soever.'' 
 
263 
 
 circumstances his property would be seized on. It would be 
 little consolation to him to quote the proposed invasion of his 
 rights as a reason for their violation again. This was not so 
 much a question oi policy, or oi prudence, as it was a question 
 of morals. 
 
 *' He had heard of a public writer who claimed a right to 
 violate his engagements, and contended that he ought to be 
 allowed to hold himself discharged of a debt he had contracted, 
 upon the ground that some change had taken place in the 
 policy of the country, which rendered him not so well able to 
 meet the demands upon him. This was the doctrine of a 
 public writer, and he had never heard that doctrine mentioned 
 in public or in private, without its being received with a 
 burst of indignation — but if the state without difficulties {and 
 he could conceive no difficulty which could justify such a de- 
 parture from honour and good faith in a nation) in a period 
 of steady and progressive improvement, was guilty of such a 
 violation of good faith, let them not upbraid an individual if 
 he followed the example. If the question was not to be tried 
 by the sense o^ justice which every man had in his own mind, 
 and which must lead him to the conclusion, that public faith 
 ought to be maintained inviolate— \i the question were tried 
 not upon such principles, but merely as a question of policy 
 and prudence, he was content it should rest upon such con- 
 siderations. He did not expect to hear the noble Lord come 
 forward with a proposal which was a direct attack on the 
 national credit, which was calculated to shake all faith in the 
 professions of the government, and to give a blow to industry 
 by weakening and destroying the confide^ice of the capitalist. 
 He objected to the measure, from a regard to the public 
 credit, the public industry, the public morals, and the public 
 property ; and as a breach of those solemn engagements to 
 which that House was itself a party."* 
 
 * The words in italics in the above quotation are not 
 
264 
 
 The feeling of the then House of Commons em- 
 bodied in that speech, against the imposition of 
 any tax onthe public stocks or funds^^o,^ so strong, 
 that the proposed measure of imposing a tax on 
 the transfer of them, was abandoned by the 
 government of the day. 
 
 But it may surprise the reader to learn that 
 the member of parliament who made that speech 
 in the year 1831, was the prime-minister of the 
 present day ; who in his speech, made in the year 
 1842, on proposing the income-tax, dryly dis- 
 posed of the " binding and unquestionable con- 
 tract with the public creditor — of law — of na- 
 tional honour — oi good faith — oi public policy — 
 oi prudence — of the public credit — of the public 
 industry — of the public morals — and of the pub- 
 lic property^ (on which he ran such a descant in 
 his said speech, in the year 1831) in two cool and 
 concise sentences — viz. — " / propose that for a 
 " time to be limited^ the income of this country 
 " should bear a charge not exceeding sevenpence 
 '' m the poundJ^ 
 
 " I propose, for J see no ground for ex- 
 '' emption, that all funded property held by 
 " natives of this country or foreigners, should be 
 ^' subject to the same charge as unfunded pro- 
 " perty'' (see pp. 221-2 ante). 
 
 in italics in Hansard; and the passages quoted are not all 
 continuous in the original, but are taken from it passim. 
 
265 
 
 It being '' impossible to rail the seal from off 
 the bond''' — the prime-minister of the day, having 
 the bond in his possession or power, thus tore 
 the seal from off it, — sans phrase. 
 
 In his said last-mentioned speech, and also in 
 his speech, made in Feb. 1845, on proposing the 
 continuance of the income-tax for three years, to 
 commence from the expiration of the three years 
 for which it was first imposed — the prime- 
 minister of the day avowed and declared that he 
 proposed the imposition and continuance of the 
 income-tax^ for the express purpose of applying 
 the surplus revenue to arise from such tax " to 
 " abate the duties on some great articles ofcon- 
 " sumption'^ (see page 222 ante), 'Ho enable par- 
 " liament to reduce and repeal other taxes ^ and 
 •* to make a great experiment in taxation" (see 
 pp. 227-8 ante) ; and not because the state was 
 in difficulties — in which had the state been, the 
 prime-minister of the day had declared (in his 
 said speech in the year 1831), " he could conceive 
 " no difficulty which could justify such a depar- 
 " turefrom honour and good faith in a nation^ as 
 '' to attempt to hold itself discharged of a debt 
 " which it had contracted — upon the ground of 
 " some change in the policy of the country.'^ 
 
 It has been hereinbefore observed (pp. 143-4 
 ante), that, when the prime-minister of the day de- 
 clared to the assembled parliament in Jan. 1846, 
 " that he would not stand at the helm unless the 
 
266 
 
 " vessel of the state were allowed to pursue the 
 " course he thought she ought to take — " that, 
 it was a question of the deepest importance, whe- 
 ther — drawing out his allegory — the vessel of the 
 state should be entrusted to a pilot who capri- 
 ciously put " about ship" to steer upon courses 
 laid down by himself as perilous — and that it 
 would appear in the sequel that he had done so 
 on more tacks than in his tack on the corn-laws 
 — and it is left to the reader, to decide, whether 
 in the sequel here^ that does not now appear — 
 and in a form which in politics and morals is 
 hideous and detestable — and that the prime- 
 minister of the day has so steered as to have 
 actually stranded the vessel of the state in clear 
 day -light, on a shoal pointed out by himself — 
 on which she must become a wrecks unless, 
 hauling upon all anchors out, she can be got off 
 by the efforts of the crew. 
 
 The public creditor holding stock in the funds 
 of the united kingdom, has no demand for the 
 principal money carrying the annuity for which 
 the money was lent — although he is bound to 
 receive that principal money when tendered to 
 him in full in redemption of the annuity which 
 it carries. His only legal demand is for payment 
 half-yearly of his annuity, which is secured to 
 him by Act of Parliament, containing the grant 
 of his annuity with the solemn asseveration 
 
267 
 
 (cited in the note p. 262 ante) that he shall have 
 a good and secure estate therein, free from all 
 taxes^ charges^ and impositions whatsoever. 
 
 The income-tax, by the statute imposing it, 
 is nevertheless laid on the annuities so con- 
 tracted to be paid and never to be taxed — and 
 accordingly by that statute, each annuity of 
 three pounds contracted to be paid to the holder 
 of stock in the 3 per cents,, is (by the deduction 
 of seven-pence in the pound, under the name of 
 income-tax, directed to be made from it) reduced 
 to an annuity of £2. 18s. 3d., or by a thirty- 
 fourth part — and by the same statute the annuities 
 carried by the other public stocks or funds are 
 reduced at the same rate of a S4:th part, or by 
 sevenpence in the pound. 
 
 Such a deduction, under the name of a tax, 
 from a fixed annuity contracted to be paid to 
 the public creditor, is not of like nature as a tax 
 on the interest of accumulated capital, borrowed 
 and lent on mortgage, bond, or other security by 
 individuals — because the lenders on private secu- 
 rities (subject only to any subsisting contract) 
 can call in their principal money from the bor- 
 rowers and obtain for it the increased rate of 
 interest in the market, which is the natural and 
 certain consequence of a tax laid on the interest of 
 all accumulated capital in the United Kingdom.* 
 
 * That a tax upon the interest of accumulated capital 
 
 M M 
 
268 
 
 But the holder of an annuity in the public 
 stocks cannot raise or vary the rate of his an- 
 nuity, which is fixed by his contract with the 
 public — and, therefore, any deduction by the pub- 
 lic from that annuity is nothing but a barefaced 
 withholding of a portion of the debt contracted 
 to be paid to the creditor ; and such a deduction, 
 at the rate of sevenpence in the pound,, from the 
 public creditors — holders of the stocks — is nei- 
 
 would become a component part of, and would raise the rate 
 of interest in the market, just in the same manner as a tax 
 upon any commodity becomes a component part of and raises 
 the price of that commodity — will be evident if it be sup- 
 posed, e. g. that the rate of interest in the market were four 
 per cent per annum, and that a tax of one fourth part were 
 laid on all interest on capital borrowed and lent on private 
 securities in the United Kingdom — such tax to be levied 
 upon and paid by the lender. 
 
 By the imposition and payment of such tax of one fourth 
 part, the lender's interest of four per cent per annum, would 
 be reduced to three per cent per annum — whereupon if he 
 called in his money and raised his interest to five per cent 
 per annum — paying a tax thereon of one fourth part, or 25 
 shillings, he would receive — after the imposition and payment 
 of such tax, and after he had raised his interest to five per 
 cent — £3. 15s. per cent per annum only, instead of thQfour 
 per cent i^er annum, which he received for interest of his capi- 
 tal-money lent before the imposition of the tax. In that case 
 the borrower would pay 20 shillings per annum of the tax, 
 and the lender 5 shillings per annum thereof — which would 
 very probably be their respective fair proportions of such a 
 tax. 
 
 To suppose that on the imposition of a tax on the interest 
 
269 
 
 ther more nor less than a confiscation by the 
 state of a thirt if -fourth part of their property. 
 
 To make any deduction under the name of a 
 tax, or under any other name or pretence, from 
 the fixed annuities (usually called dividends)^ 
 contracted to be paid to the public creditors, is 
 not only rank injustice and dishonesty, but is, 
 moreover, egregious impolicy and folly — because 
 the assumption of power by the state to deduct 
 
 of all accumulated capital borrowed and lent in the United 
 Kingdom, such tax would be paid all by the lenders and none 
 of it by the borrowers of money — would be to suppose a 
 manifest absurdity — and it would be equally absurd to sup- 
 pose that the legislature, imposing a tax upon the interest of 
 accumulated capital, which is the subject of dealings between 
 free agents to which there must always be at least two parties — 
 could J by any law effectively provide (how desirous soever so 
 to do) that the whole of such tax should be borne and paid 
 by one of such parties, and not in due proportion by loth of 
 them — according to the same law which governs the distribu- 
 tion of a tax imposed on any commodity between the ^)ro- 
 ducer, and the consumer of that commodity respectively. 
 
 A low rate of interest in the market and a flourishing 
 commerce, always go hand in hand. A trader, when he can 
 borrow capital — e.g., at three per cent. — can reserve a greater 
 profit to himself, and also sell the commodity or commodities 
 in which he deals cheaper — than when he must pay interest at 
 six or at ten per cent, for borrowed capital. 
 
 Taxes laid on the interest of accumulated capital are, 
 therefore, a discouragement to trade and commerce — as, by 
 raising the rate of interest in the market, such taxes raise 
 the price of all commodities in the production of which 
 accumulated capital is necessary or is engaged. 
 
270 
 
 ad libitum^ from its creditors, a portion of the 
 debt solemnly by law contracted to be paid to 
 them, upon any alleged, imagined, or pretended 
 necessity^ must shake public credit to its base. 
 
 If it be once admitted that some present ne- 
 cessity justifies or excuses the withholding (^. e., 
 the confiscation) of a thirty -fourth part of the 
 debt due to the public creditor — it follows — that 
 a greater necessity would justify or excuse the 
 withholding (z.e.,the confiscation) of a seventeenth 
 — a seventh — ^the halfov the whole of that debt. 
 
 But the tyrant's plea of necessity^ cannot be, 
 was not, and is not, urged by the prime-minister 
 of the present day for the deduction under the 
 statute imposing the tax upon income^ of the 
 thirty-fourth part of the annuities contracted to 
 be paid to the public creditors of the United 
 Kingdom — ^he having specifically avowed and 
 declared that he proposed the tax upon income, 
 including income from funded property — for the 
 express purpose of repealing or lessening taxes 
 on commodities; that is to say, for the express 
 purpose of efi^ecting a change in " the policy of 
 the country^' with respect to the incidence of 
 taxation. 
 
 In consequence of that change of " the policy 
 of the country" effected by himself — a discharge 
 has been claimed and taken of a thirty -fourth 
 part of the debt due to the public creditors — 
 although in his speech made in the year 1831 
 
271 
 
 (see page 263 ante) he said that " to claim a 
 " right of discharge from a debt contracted'''' 
 (which of course means from any and every 'part 
 of a debt contracted), " upon the ground of some 
 " change in the policy of the country^ he had never 
 " heard mentioned in public or in private^ with- 
 " out being received with a burst of indignation.''* 
 
 He has, nevertheless, applied the thirty fourth 
 part of the debt contracted to be paid to, but 
 fraudulently stopped and withheld from, the 
 public creditors, in aid of replacing the revenue 
 lost by repeal of the taxes upon auctions and 
 upon glass J which produced 953 thousand 
 pounds a-year (£953,014, see p. 228 ante). 
 
 By that change in the policy of the country, 
 with respect to the incidence of taxation, — ^the 
 rich are enabled, at the loss and cost of the 
 public creditor, to panel the rooms of their man- 
 sions with mirrors, to adorn their saloons with 
 girandoles and lustres, and their sideboards mth 
 cut glass, at small expense, exempt from any 
 contribution to the public revenue on the con- 
 sumption of those extreme luxuries, being a 
 change in the policy of the country — which in 
 the opinion entertained in 1831, by the prime- 
 minister of the present day, ought to have been 
 received when proposed by him with a burst of 
 indignation ! 
 
 The public creditors are moreover tricked out 
 of their property at an undervalue, by the opera- 
 
272 
 
 tion of the income-tax invented by the prime- 
 minister of the day, in the way following, which 
 very much resembles the feat of a juggler — 
 viz., — By stopping under the income-tax act the 
 payment of the thirty -fourth part of the annuity 
 contracted to be paid to the public creditor — the 
 value of the capital carrying that annuity is of 
 course depreciated — and there being a surplus 
 arising from the income-tax^ of annual revenue 
 over expenditure — that surplus is by law directed 
 to be, and is, applied in reduction of the public 
 deht^ by buying up, therewith, annuities in the 
 public stocks or funds in the stock-market. But 
 the annuities purchased with that surplus^ being 
 depreciated by the imposition of the income-tax^ 
 are not only purchased up at an undervalue from 
 such of the public creditors, as are under the 
 necessity of selling them — but are actually pur- 
 chased up partly with the money stopt out of 
 their own dividends^ under the powers of the 
 act imposing the said income-tax ! 
 
 The excess of the ordinary public revenue 
 over the expenditure anno 1845, was 2 J millions 
 (£2,657,706*), of which, the sum 766 thousand 
 
 * By the Finance-accounts 1845, No. \ 
 
 144, sess. 1846, p. 15, the net ordinary I ^^j ^^^ ^^g 
 public revenue, j9Z«s the income-tax j ' ' 
 anno 1845, was ' 
 
 Expenditure 49,061,412 
 
 Surplus £2,657,706 
 
273 
 
 pounds (£766,066*), levied under schedule 
 C, was the amount stopt from the annuities^ 
 dividends^ or interest due to the public creditor. 
 Therefore 766 thousand pounds, was the amount 
 applied, anno 1845, by the jugglery under the in- 
 come-tax acts, in buying up debt due from the 
 public to public creditors, with their own money! 
 
 It is of course impossible to believe, that a 
 majority of the members of either House of Par- 
 liament, deliberately intended or contemplated 
 such a state of things between the public and 
 its creditors, as has been brought about by the 
 operation of the income-tax acts — or not to 
 believe that a very great majority of them will 
 regard, with regret and remorse, the shock given 
 to public credit by withholding payment of part 
 of the debt contracted to he paid to the public 
 creditors, when there is a large surplus of public 
 revenue over expenditure — to which pass the 
 country is brought, as between it and its cre- 
 ditors, by the insidious shuffling and shifting of 
 the taxes, by the prime-minister of the day, in 
 order to swell the already bloated fortunes of 
 cotton-manufacturers. 
 
 Had he proposed to parliament to repeal the 
 tax upon glass, which yielded a revenue of 
 648 thousand pounds a-year (£647,674), or to 
 reduce the tax upon foreign-tim^ber, at a loss 
 
 * Parliamentary-paper, No. 167, sess. 1846. 
 
274 
 
 of 735 thousand pounds a-year (£734,867, see 
 page 228 ante), and to replace the loss to the 
 revenue by repeal of the one, or the reduction of 
 the other, of such taxes — simpliciter by stop- 
 ping 766 thousand pounds a-year, from the 
 dividends contracted to he paid to the public 
 creditor — can it be doubted, that such a pro- 
 position would have been received " with a burst 
 of indignation y 
 
 Yet such and no other is the result which the 
 prime-minister of the day has craftily brought 
 about — 1st. — By obtaining the income-tax, upon 
 the grounds that he could give conclusive proof 
 that the country had arrived at the limits of taxa- 
 tion on articles of consumption — (though he 
 offered no proof, and could give no proof of that 
 allegation, which was, and is, manifestly untrue, see 
 pp. 216-7 ante), and that the income-tax -proposed 
 byhim,would^// upon the possessors of property 
 (see p. 221 and p. 249 ante) — and 2ndly, — after 
 having obtained the tax for three years, and a pro- 
 longation of the same for three years more, from 
 the expiration of the first three — by proceeding to 
 the repeal and reduction of taxes, which have had 
 the effect and consequences hereinbefore attempted 
 to be stated. And it is clear to demonstration by 
 figures, from the statement at page 233 ante, that it 
 is contemplated by the prime-minister of the day 
 to continue the income-tax — or at least that the 
 income-tax must he continued for an indefinite 
 
275 
 
 time^ unless the repealed and reduced taxes or 
 some of them be reimposed, or new taxes be im- 
 posed, instead of the tax upon income invented 
 hy the said prime-minister — under which so 
 much injustice and wrong is inflicted on the 
 people — and especially on the poorer classes of 
 them and on the public creditors. 
 
 Unrighteous and indefensible as it is, upon 
 any pretence, to withhold from the public credi- 
 tors any part of the annuities contracted to be 
 paid to them — even when such creditors are sub- 
 jects of the realm — it is far more iniquitous to 
 withhold under the name of a tax, or upon any 
 pretence whatsoever, any part of annuities due to 
 foreigners^ for money advanced by them on the 
 faith of contracts with the public, confirmed by 
 acts of Parliament, which, in order to make " as- 
 surance of security" to the creditor "double 
 sure," contain a solemn asseveration that the 
 holders of such annuities shall have good and 
 sure estates therein free from all taxes, charges^ 
 and impositions, whatsoever. 
 
 From the income-tax which was imposed in the 
 last war, all annuities in the public stocks payable 
 to foreigners, even though alien enemies, were 
 exempted; as it was felt by the legislature of 
 those days that it would be a gross fraud — 
 would degrade the country in the eye of the 
 
 N N 
 
276 
 
 world, and ruin its credit abroad — ^to withhold 
 from foreigners any part of annuities so con- 
 tracted to be paid to them ; although the income- 
 tax then imposed, was resorted to, under the 
 impression and belief of then successive govern- 
 ments and of the legislature, that resort to it 
 was necessary, for the preservation of the very 
 life of the state; on which the security of the debt 
 due to all its cv^diitov^^ foreign as well as native, 
 was dependent. 
 
 It was reserved for the prime-minister of the 
 present day, to impose an income-tax on funded 
 property — not for the preservation of the life of 
 the state; but to enable him to repeal and re- 
 duce taxes on commodities consumed by the 
 people of the United Kingdom, without even in 
 that case excepting from such tax the property 
 oi foreigners in the public stocks. 
 
 By that measure he has ensured for the United 
 Kingdom in the page of future history, the in- 
 famous celebrity of having been the first example 
 of an European nation, which, in the midst of peace 
 and prosperity, or at any time, enacted an arbi- 
 trary law, that its foreign creditors should re- 
 ceive annuities or interest solemnly contracted to 
 be paid to them for money lent, minus whatever 
 sum or portion of such annuities or interest, it 
 might be, or might become, the will and pleasure 
 of the indebted state to deduct and keep back, ac- 
 
277 
 
 cording to its imagined necessities^ or merely in 
 ease of some tax or taxes become unpopular. 
 
 Suppose that 500 of the 800 millions of the 
 public debt had been borrowed from 2i foreigner 
 in consideration of an annuity at three per cent, 
 or of 15 millions per annum — solemnly guaran- 
 teed by parliament to be paid to him, half-yearly, 
 free from all taxes^ charges^ and impositions 
 whatsoever, until tender should be made to him 
 of his 500 millions principal money. — Suppose 
 notice given to him by the prime-minister of the 
 United Kingdom, that it was intended not to pay 
 him his principal money — but nevertheless to stop 
 seven-pence in the pound out of the annuity/ con- 
 tracted to be paid to him, for the loan of that 
 money, which would amount to 437 thousand 
 pounds (£437,500) a-year — the reason given for 
 such stoppage being — that the revenue of the 
 United Kingdom had fallen below its expenditure 
 — and to make good such deficient revenue, that 
 a tax of seven-pence in the pound on all incomes 
 of 150 pounds a-year and upwards had been 
 imposed on the people of Great Britain. 
 
 Suppose in reply to such notice, the foreigner 
 were to say : — 
 
 *' To stop the payment of any part of the annuity of 15 
 millionsy which you have contracted to pay me for interest 
 of my money lent, /r^e/roma/Z taxes, charges, and impositions 
 whatsoever — without tendering to me my principal, and giving 
 me the election whether I will consent to lend it at lower in- 
 
278 
 
 terest or not — will be neither more nor less than a rank 
 and gross fraud upon me, founded on a very shameless 
 pretext. — For if your revenue has become defective to meet 
 your expenditure, you have yoursslves made it so ; by re- 
 pealing and reducing taxes, many of which fell only upon 
 the rich, who were well able to bear and pay them. And 
 now that you announce such an intention as that of stopping 
 payment of part of the annuity contracted to be paid to me 
 upon such a pretext — I must suspect, that you craftily re- 
 pealed and reduced such taxes, merely to make that pretext 
 for withholding from me payment of part of my annuity. 
 You propose now to deduct seven-pence in the pound from it 
 —what security have I, that you will not go on repealing 
 or reducing more and more taxes, and upon the same pretext 
 of more and more deficient revenue to meet your expendi- 
 ture, stop 14 pence — 28 pence in the pound of my annuity — 
 and so on — till you rob me of the whole of my 15 millions 
 a-year, which you have contracted to pay to me. For if 
 your present pretended necessities warrant your withholding 
 from me a part of the annuity which you have contracted to 
 pay to me, your future greater j^retended necessities will be 
 made the warrant for withholding the whole. 
 
 ^' I have the misfortune to hold bonds of the American 
 State of Pennsylvania, the people of which have repudiated the 
 whole of their debt to me upon such bonds; you noiv repu- 
 diate only a thirty fourth part of your debt to me — but, having 
 abandoned all principle and begun repudiation of your debts, 
 {II ny a que le premier pas qui coute), what security can I 
 have that you will not, step by step, finally, like the State of 
 Pennsylvania, repudiate the whole? 
 
 *' Your plea of necessity is moreover merely a shameless 
 pretext, — For, when you were involved in war with nearly 
 all the world, you had a revenue raised by taxation of more 
 
279 
 
 than 70 millions a-year (see page 219 ante), which your peo- 
 ple are better able to pay now than they were then. 
 
 " It became your pleasure, when that war ceased, to 
 reduce that revenue to 47 millions a year (see page 203 
 ante), by repealing and reducing a multitude of taxes, falling 
 very much of them only on the rich and wealthy classes of 
 your people — and so have yourselves deliberately brought 
 your annual public revenue under your expenditure. The 
 reimposition of little more than two millions (see page 234 
 ante), of that enormous amount of repealed or reduced taxes 
 will make your revenue again equal to your expenditure ; 
 and yet you have the effrontery to propose to rob me of 437 
 thousand pounds of my 15 millions a-year, which you have, 
 by repeated acts of your legislature, solemnly contracted to 
 pay to me, and by such acts asseverated that I should have a 
 good and secure estate therein — rather than reimpose that 
 most minute portion of the repealed or reduced taxes which 
 you had no right to repeal or reduce, if thereby you disabled 
 yourselves from performing your covenant with me. 
 
 " But that is not all. For it appears manifestly, that, 
 instead of being in any distress, your country has prospered 
 and risen astonishingly since the last of my money was lent 
 to you — insomuch that the same taxes, which produced only 
 36 millions (£36,066,411) a-year, grew and increased to 48 
 millions (£47,917,521) a-year between the years 1815 and 
 1842; being an increase of 12 ^nillimis a-year, from the same 
 taxes, in 27 years (note, page 220 ante). 
 
 " And to complete the infamy of your intention to cheat 
 me a foreigner, under your statute imposing an income-tax 
 on the people of Great Britain — by making a deduction of 
 437 thousand pounds a-year from the annuity which you 
 have contracted to pay me, (a deduction which you could not 
 make had you not got my property into your custody and 
 power, upon the solemn asseveration of your legislature that 
 
280 
 
 I should have a good and secure estate therein), I find, on 
 looking into that statute— that, though it assume to subject 
 my income from your public stocks to the same tax of seven' 
 pence in the pound as is thereby imposed on the people of 
 Great Britain — ^yet, that one-third part of your own people, 
 (namely, the people of Ireland) are excused from payment 
 of it altogether. 
 
 " Thus it appears, therefore, that, if I had an annuity of 
 1,000 pounds, or 10 thousand pounds, in the Irish public 
 stocks or funds, that a thirty-fourth part of that annuity 
 would be deducted from me a foreigner — ^while a like annuity 
 in such funds would be received by an archbishop, bishop, 
 judge, or any other resident public functionary in Ireland, 
 however rich, or by any rich resident proprietor of land or 
 personal property in Ireland, free from any deduction what- 
 soever ! You tax — i. e., make a fraudulent deduction of a 
 thirty-fourth part of the annuity of 15 millions a year which 
 you solemnly contracted to pay me a foreigner, with asseve- 
 ration of your legislature as aforesaid— only the better to 
 enable you to pay in full, and without deduction, the annuity 
 payahle under the sayne contract as your contract with me, to 
 all the^ archbishops, &c., and to every rich resident proprie- 
 tor of Ireland who has stock in the public funds in Ireland! 
 
 " I notice by the report of your speech in Parliament, that 
 the reason given by you for exempting the Irish people from 
 the income-tax is, because they pay no assessed taxes,-^ 
 neither do I pay assessed taxes — which ought to be, at least, as 
 good an excuse for me £l foreigner, as for them ; and I notice 
 that a further reason given by you in that speech for not 
 imposing the income-tax on the people of Ireland is, that 
 machinery does not exist in Ireland for the levy of that tax — 
 which is not true as far as concerns the annuities payable to 
 public creditors, holders of stock in Ireland. For machinery 
 did and does exist, and was by the act set in motion and is in 
 
281 
 
 motion, to tax such holders of the public stock in Ireland, as 
 were, and are, absentees or foreigners; though not to tax re- 
 sidents in Ireland, who are by the statute exempted from the 
 operation of such machinery." 
 
 The reply which the prime-minister of the day- 
 would give in defence of extending the income- 
 tax invented by him to the property of fo- 
 reigners in the custody and power of the go- 
 vernment and people of the United Kingdom — 
 to such arguments of a foreigner^ can only be 
 left to the reader to imagine — if he can. 
 
 It is argued in support of the income-tax being 
 imposed upon funded property — ^that it would 
 be unjust and unfair if stockholders were left 
 exempt from a tax imposed upon all other 
 their fellow-subjects. But the objection made 
 to the income-tax^ on the part of the public cre- 
 ditors who are stockholders, is not that they are 
 made contributors to that tax in common with 
 their fellow- subjects : but that the tax is levied 
 from them in a way different from that in which 
 it is levied from other their fellow-subjects — in a 
 way which depreciates most unjustly the value 
 of their property — in open violation of the con- 
 tract between the public and them — confirmed 
 by the legislature, by solemn asseveration of its 
 strict observance. 
 
 The first section of the 5 and 6 Victoria, cap. 
 35, imposing the income-tax^ invented by the 
 
282 
 
 prime-minister of the day (which became law on 
 the 22nd June 1842), directs that that tax " shall 
 " be charged, levied, collected, and paid, upon the 
 " annual profits and gains arising or accruing 
 " to any person residing in Great Britain, from 
 " any kind of property whatever situate in Great 
 " Britain or elsewhere^* And by subsequent 
 sections of the act, it is made imperative on every 
 person or party, on whom the income-tax is 
 thereby imposed, to deliver a statement and de- 
 claration of the income of such person or party, 
 in order that the same may be assessed to the 
 tax. 
 
 Under those provisions of that statute, it is 
 apprehended, that every holder of stock in the 
 public funds would be bound to deliver a state- 
 ment and declaration of the income received 
 from annuities or dividends arising or accruing 
 from such stock, in order to be assessed to the 
 income-tax — -just as much as the same person or 
 party would be bound by the provisions of the 
 statute, to deliver a statement and declaration of 
 any other income subject to the tax possessed by 
 such person or party. 
 
 If there be any doubt in the law as it stands, 
 upon that point, — or if any party were to set up 
 
 * Provisions are contained in the act for charging tem- 
 porary absentees from Great Britain with the tax. 
 
283 
 
 as a ground of exemption of all or any part of 
 his income from the tax, that such income arose 
 or was derived from stock in the public funds^ 
 and therefore not subject to any tax after it had 
 been received, any more than it was before it 
 was paid — a few words declaring that the ex- 
 emption, by the statutes creating them, of all 
 annuities arising from funded property from all 
 taxes before being paid^ should be no exemption 
 from the income-tax ^ upon income derived from 
 such annuities, after payment and receipt of 
 the same. 
 
 The difference is wide indeed between the in- 
 come-tax assessed and levied on income derived 
 or arising from the annuities or dividends car- 
 ried by the public stocks or funds, after the 
 same have been paid and received — and such tax 
 taken^ before payment, by stoppage of a part of 
 such annuities or dividends under the name of a 
 tax thereon — even if such taking were not a 
 violation of the solemn covenant with assevera- 
 tion by the legislature, that the same shall 
 never be taxed. For the deduction (^. e., the 
 confiscation) by the State, the grantor — of a part 
 of the annuity contracted to be paid to the 
 public creditor, not only strips him of that much 
 of his income^ but also greatly depreciates the 
 value of his capital. 
 
 An annuity of £2. 18s. 3d. (paid to the holder 
 
 o o 
 
284 
 
 of £100 3 pert^ents — after stoppage of the in- 
 come-tax therefrom) must, of course, sell for less 
 than an annuity of three pounds : and the depre- 
 ciation in value of such an annuity by such 
 deduction is not merely in arithmetical propor- 
 tion, as the thirty-fourth part (by which it is re- 
 duced) is to the whole — ^but by the risk, moreover, 
 that (having once been reduced by the arbitrary 
 will and power of the State, the grantor, — in 
 violation of contract and of law— not even 
 upon any pretence of necessity^ but upon the 
 avowed and declared ground of applying the 
 revenue gained or saved by such deduction to 
 the abatement of taxes on articles of consump- 
 tion) — the annuity contracted to he paid may 
 be reduced again and again upon the same, or 
 upon any ground; when a ground so shameless 
 for withholding payment of a thirty-fourth part 
 of the annuity, has been avowed by a government 
 and sanctioned by law. 
 
 If the annuities payable to the public creditor 
 in respect of his stock in the fu7ids — e. g,^ in the 
 3 per cents. — were subject to no deduction 
 under the name of a tax or otherwise, he would 
 always have an annuity of three pounds to sell; 
 with a confident assurance of the buyer that he 
 was purchasing such annuity oi perfect security, 
 indefeasible and irredeemable without his con- 
 sent, except only on payment of 100 pounds. 
 
285 
 
 But if such annuity be made subject to deduc- 
 tion at the will of the grantor {i. e., the State), 
 notwithstanding the solemn covenant with asse- 
 veration that the grantee shall have a good and 
 secure estate therein — the public creditor, the 
 holder of it, has nothing to sell but an annuity 
 of three pounds — subject to reduction down to 
 annihilation^ at the ^vill and pleasure of the 
 grantor. 
 
 Annuities contracted to be paid by a nation 
 sacredly holding, " that no difficulties could jus- 
 " tify such a departure from honour and good 
 " faith as to be guilty of violation of the con- 
 " tract to pay the same," (see the speech, page 
 263 ante) would always be held in the highest 
 estimation in the money-markets of the world ; 
 and would always sell, by reason of their great 
 security, at a higher price than any other an- 
 nuity of equal amount arising from any other 
 investment of capital. But when that " honour 
 and good faith" has once been departed from by 
 the grantor, and that moreover in violation of 
 liis solemn asseveration that it should never be 
 departed frora — by what rule, it may be asked, 
 can the value of such an annuity — subject to be 
 again and again reduced, in breach of contract, 
 down to annihilation^ at and by the arbitrary 
 will of the grantor — be estimated ? 
 
 The income-tax assessed and levied under sche- 
 
286 
 
 dule D, upon the profits or gains of trade, or 
 from any profession^ employment, or ax>ocation — 
 is all assessed and levied only according to the 
 showing of the parties themselves, upon whom 
 the tax is imposed under that schedule — without 
 any check or control, except the conscience of 
 the parties, which is in too many cases, doubt- 
 less, very flexible and pliant — and except such 
 check, as the dread of espionage, and of the in- 
 quisitorial powers of the acts imposing the tax 
 may inspire. The oath of the party may be de- 
 manded in proof of the truth of the statement and 
 declaration of his income ; but it is too much to be 
 feared, that a party who has made a false state- 
 ment and declaration, will be apt to add the sin of 
 perjury to cover his fraud, rather than incur the 
 shame of confessing it ; and the penalties of the 
 act moreover for making a false statement and 
 declaration of income (see page 252 ante). 
 
 But false statements or declarations of their 
 incomes by holders of the public stocks, would 
 hardly be made, at the risk of incurring the 
 penalties of the income-tax acts for making a 
 false statement and declaration — in the face of 
 the evidence of the amount of their incomes 
 contained in the books of the Bank of England, 
 with which such statements and declarations 
 could be compared. And if the holders of the 
 public stocks or funds were charged to the in- 
 
287 
 
 come-tax as the parties taxed under schedule D 
 are charged — namely, upon statements and de- 
 clarations of their incomes, instead of having the 
 thirty-fowth part of their annuities stopt from 
 them in violation of their contract with the public, 
 solemnly confirmed with asseveration by the 
 legislature as aforesaid — a multitude of frauds, 
 most of them perhaps never contemplated even 
 by the framers of the acts — and which (except 
 the^r^^ next hereinafter mentioned) it is impos- 
 sible to suppose were contemplated or fore- 
 seen hy the legislature; but which are never- 
 theless perpetrated by the modus operandi of 
 those acts, would be avoided — such among other 
 as the following : — 
 
 First, — Foreigners would have to make no 
 statement or declaration of their incomes under 
 the income-tax acts; and would in justice and 
 common honesty be exempt from any deduction 
 from the annuities due and^ payable to them as 
 holders of the public stocks or funds — ^to which 
 deduction under the name of a tax^ they could 
 not be subjected as they are, were not the an- 
 nuities due to them under the controul and 
 power of the grantor^ i. e. of the State. 
 
 Secondly. — Parties whose incomes are less 
 than 150 pounds a-year would have to make no 
 statement or declaration of their incomes, and 
 
288 
 
 would therefore have the benefit of that exemp- 
 tion from the income- tax, which the statutes im- 
 posing it purport (query pretend ?) to give them — 
 but of which benefit they are in too many cases, 
 deprived by the modus operandi of those statutes, 
 as shewn at pp. 253-4. 
 
 It is provided by the first of those statutes (5 
 and 6 Victoria, cap. 35, sec. 95,) that, under the 
 name of income-tax^ a deduction of sevenpence 
 in the pound (the 34th part) shall be made at the 
 Bank of England from every annuity or dividend 
 arising from the public stocks or funds, of 50 
 shillifigs and upwards in any half year — which 
 is paid into the Exchequer, and there retained — 
 unless and until the party entitled to such annuity 
 prove by a statement and declaration in the 
 manner mentioned in the note, page 254 ante — 
 that his or her income is less than 150 pounds 
 a-year. But there are a multitude of parties who 
 find it impracticable (from ignorance, helpless- 
 ness, and many other causes), to go through the 
 forms imposed on them by the statute, which 
 they must observe before they can obtain a return 
 of the tax — and there are numbers of other par- 
 ties who submit to such deduction from their 
 annuities, rather than go through forms which 
 they feel it would degrade them to go through — 
 as stated in the said last-mentioned note and in the 
 
289 
 
 text referring thereto* — all which parties would 
 be exempt from the injustice of being subjected 
 to the tax upon income^ contrary to the true in- 
 tent and meaning of the statutes imposing it — if 
 payment of part of their annuities or dividends 
 under the name of income-tax were not, pursuant 
 to the letter of such statutes, stopt at the bank. 
 
 Thirdly, — There are very large sums of stock 
 invested in the public funds, in the name of the 
 Accountant-general of the court of chancery — 
 pendente lite — and in the names of trustees 
 executors and administrators, for security of the 
 assets in their hands, which are the property of 
 creditors or of the estates of parties deceased^ — 
 ultimately to be applied to the payment of dehts^ 
 for the payment of which the whole of such sums 
 of stock so invested are insufficient. A deduc- 
 tion is made of sevenpence in the pound, or of 
 the SAth part, of the dividends on all such stock, 
 under the name of income-tax, by virtue of the 
 89th sect, of the 5th and 6th Victoria, cap. 35, 
 
 * It may surprise many to be informed of the parcels in 
 which the stocks or funds of Great Britain are held by the 
 public creditors : and how few, comparatively, the number 
 of such stock-holders is. By the Parliamentary-paper, No. 
 202, sess. 1833, it appears — that the total number of per- 
 sons or parties to whom a half-year's dividend was due on 
 the two then last half-yearly payments viz., in October 
 1832 and January 1833, on evenj description of public 
 stock and terminable annuities, was 280 thousand persons 
 
290 
 
 although such dividends are not income of any- 
 body. 
 
 To diminish such a fund — by stopping part of 
 the dividends arising from the investment of it — 
 is to take, not from the income of anybody^ but 
 
 or parties (279,751); who held the whole of such stock in 
 parcels carrying half-a-year's dividend as follows, viz.:— 
 
 Dividends Persons Persons 
 
 not or or 
 
 exceeding Parties. Parties. 
 
 5 87,176) joi 824 
 
 10 44,648} ^^^'«^^ 
 
 50 98,305 
 
 230,129 
 
 100 25,641\ 
 
 200 14,701 1. ..44,837 
 
 300 4 495) Public-companies 
 
 500 2,827) A -iQ^ Joint-accounts. 
 
 1000 l,367r" 
 
 2000 266 151 
 
 3000 40 35 
 
 4000 15 24 
 
 5000 4 10 
 
 Exceeding 5000 12 34 
 
 279,497 
 
 Total number of parties 279,751 
 
 It is more than highly probable that a very great majority 
 of the persons or parties above stated to be in number 230 
 thousand (230,129), have incomes less than £150 a-year — 
 and there is but too much reason to fear,for the reasons men- 
 tioned in the text — that by far the greater number of those 
 of them, who are entitled to, never get a return of the stop- 
 page from their small dividends, made ^wrsitani to the statute 
 at the bank, under the name of income tax. 
 
291 
 
 is to take from a body of creditors, part of a fund 
 devoted to the payment of their debts, for which 
 payment it is insufficient. 
 
 No statement or declaration of income arising 
 from annuities or dividends from such stocks or 
 funds would have to be made by anybody under 
 the income- tax acts ; and therefore such annui- 
 ties or dividends would be exempt from deduc- 
 tion under the name of such tax^ as in justice 
 they ought to be, and as they would be ; if the 
 dividends arising therefrom were not impounded 
 and deduction made from them under the income- 
 tax acts as aforesaid. 
 
 Fourthly. — There are other very large sums 
 of stock in the public funds, which are the pro- 
 perty of divers Life-insurance companies — the 
 annuities or dividends arising from which are 
 not income — but the growth or increase, by inter- 
 est, of the fund arising from premiums paid by 
 the assured, to be annually or otherwise added 
 to that fund when received, by way of ac- 
 cumulation thereof at compound interest — in 
 order to enable such companies to pay the sum 
 contracted to be paid on the death of every 
 person whose life is assured by them. 
 
 The amount of annual or other premiums 
 charged to the assured, by Life-insurance offices 
 on granting policies on lives, is necessarily 
 fixed on a calculation of the value or amount of 
 
 p p 
 
292 
 
 such premiums laid out at compound interest, 
 during the life of the assured. To levy a tax 
 on the interest annually or otherwise growing 
 upon such a fund, is not to tax the income of 
 any hody^ but is to check the growth of the fund 
 by a seizure or confiscation of part of it — and 
 thereby to diminish the safety of the assured — 
 or to raise the annual or other premium neces- 
 sary to be paid by him or her. 
 
 The risks run by Life-insurance companies 
 being all terminable; they frequently invest part 
 of the fund for payment of the sum contracted 
 to be paid on death of their assureds in termina- 
 ble government annuities — from which seven- 
 pence in the pound, or the 34th part^ is also 
 deducted under the income-tax acts — whereby 
 that tax^ by being deducted from terminable 
 annuities^ is made to operate more oppressively 
 and unjustly upon assureds, than it does when 
 it is deducted from the perpetual annuities^ 
 arising from the public stocks or funds. 
 
 Fire-insurance companies^ and other com- 
 panies and societies — whose engagements to pay 
 monies, being contingent or remote, are entered 
 into, upon the principle of accumulation of their 
 funds at compound interest — and who for the 
 purpose of such accumulation invest their annu- 
 ally or otherwise accruing funds in the public 
 stocks or in terminable government annuities — 
 
293 
 
 are all wronged and injured, by having the accu- 
 mulation of their funds checked, by deduction 
 therefrom of a thirty-fourth part of the whole 
 accumulation, under the name of income-tax — 
 and the security of the assured^ or other cus- 
 tomer of all such companies, is weakened by 
 such deduction. 
 
 No statement or declaration of income arising 
 out of such accumulating fund (to be added 
 thereto, when and as it arises), would have to be 
 made by any body under the income-tax acts — 
 and therefore, all such funds would be exempt 
 from the very unjust deduction to which they 
 are subjected under such acts by sevenpence in 
 the pounds or a 34th part thereof being stopt 
 from them, under such acts. 
 
 As all such companies have to make a statement 
 and declaration of their annual profits, and are 
 assessed like all other persons or parties charge- 
 able to the income-tax under schedule D — what 
 may be said to crown the injustice of deducting 
 the thirty-fourth part of the accumulation at 
 compound interest of the funds or capital of 
 such companies invested in the public stocks, or 
 in terminable government annuities — is, that 
 they are actually constrained to make such 
 return of their profits under schedule D, and are 
 taxed at seven-pence in the pound on such 
 profits, and the said thirty- fourth part of their 
 
294 
 
 accumulating capital or funds is stopt, and 
 taken from them under the name of income-tax, 
 over and above ! 
 
 The injustice of the income-tax invented by 
 the prime-minister of the day — if it were imposed 
 and levied as the acts imposing it purport — 
 namely, only by enforcing a contribution of 
 sevenpence in the pound, from every person in 
 Great Britain, possessing an annual income of 
 150 pounds and upwards, might too truly be said 
 to be supreme. But when the further wide- 
 spreading intolerable injustice done by the modus 
 operandi of those acts (whether contemplated by 
 the inventor and framer of them or not), is 
 taken into account — only as far as has hereinbefore 
 been stated — to which very much might be 
 added* — it is left to the reader to decide whether 
 
 * Among the anomalies and absurdities of the modus 
 operandi of the statutes imposing the income-tax, there is this: 
 viz., — If £100 stock in the ^ per cents, be sold by a party 
 having an income of £150 a-year, and therefore subject to 
 the income-tax at sevenpence in the pound, to a party possessed 
 of less income than £150 a-year, the buyer purchases an 
 annuity of three pounds, while the seller parts with an an- 
 nuity of £2. 18s. 3d. only, — and vice versa if the buyer have 
 an income of £150 a-year, and the seller a less income than 
 £150 a-year. 
 
 The omission of a note which was intended to be ap- 
 pended to the first objection to the income-tax invented 
 by the prime-minister of the day (page 244 et seq.) — namely, 
 the exemption oi Ireland therefrom — may here be supplied. It 
 
295 
 
 the allegation which has more than once herein- 
 before been made — be proven, or be true, or not 
 — namely, " that if human ingenuity had been 
 " racked to invent a tax, the imposition of which 
 " should be the greatest possible departure from 
 " the principle — of making every member of 
 " society contributory to it in due proportion to 
 " his stake and interest in the commonwealth 
 " and to his means — a tax more effective of that 
 ** purpose than the tax upon income, invented 
 *' by the prime-minister of the day, could not 
 " perhaps have been devised." 
 
 The annual public revenue of the United 
 Kingdom, on an average of 3 years ending with 
 the year 1815, was 70i millions (£70,697,793, 
 see page 83 ante). And that the wealth of the 
 
 was in such note intended to state, that under the law 
 empowering parties to transfer parts or parcels of the 
 public stocks, 01* terminable government annuities from Great 
 Britain to Ireland, and vice versa — the annual charge, in 
 respect to such stocks and terminable annuities, payable to 
 the public creditor in Ireland 
 
 on the 5th of January, 1846, had increased to £1,437,317* 
 the like charge on the 5th of January, 1842, 
 the year of the imposition of the income- 
 tax, having been 
 
 l,183,846t 
 
 Increase £253,471 
 
 From which figures it appears that such annual charge pay- 
 
 * Finance-accounts, anno 1846. i Same accounts, anno 1842. 
 
296 
 
 realm has wonderfully grown and increased since 
 that time is unquestionable — and is proved 
 arithmetically, in the note, page 219 ante; where 
 it appears, that the public revenue derived from 
 the same taxes grew or increased, in the interval 
 of time between the said year 1815 and the year 
 1842, from 36 to 48 millions^ or in the propor- 
 tion of one third (36 + 12 = 48). 
 
 There is no reason to doubt or disbelieve — had 
 the whole of the taxes which produced TOJ mil- 
 lions in the year 1815, been continued unreduced 
 or unrepealed — that they would have grown or 
 increased in the same proportion — ^in which case 
 they would now in the year 1846 have been pro- 
 ductive of an annual and still growing public re- 
 venue of 94 millions (70i + 23^ = 94). 
 
 The annual public expenditure of the United 
 Kingdom, on an average of the same three years 
 ending with the year 1815, was 101 millions 
 (£101,283,811, see page 83 ante), ^hich was all 
 met and defrayed. 
 
 Were the United Kingdom again to go to war 
 with any powerful state, it would become neces- 
 
 able to the public creditor in Ireland grew and increased, 
 by transfer from Great Britain, where it was subject to such 
 tax — to Ireland, where it was exempt from the same — hjmore 
 than afifthpart{£l,lSS,S4:6 + J, or £236,769= £1,420,615) 
 in the ^rst four years of the income-tax — the acts imposing 
 which opened the door to fraud by such transfer. 
 
297 
 
 sary to increase her public revenue of taxes from 
 52 millions, which was the amount thereof on 
 an average of the three years ending with the 
 year 1845,* to the 94 millions or more which 
 the taxes existing in the year 1815 would now 
 have been producing had they been continued 
 unreduced or unrepealed ; or to such further or 
 greater annual amount as would suffice to cover 
 the annual expenses of the war. For if the pro- 
 position in the note page 210 be indisputable — 
 to defray the expenses of a new war by resort to 
 loans (whereby such expenses would be charged 
 and entailed on future generations, and only the 
 interest on such expenses be paid by the present 
 generation), would be to make a long stride 
 towards that gulph of bankruptcy and ruin into 
 which persistance in the system of carrying on 
 wars at the expense of future generations must 
 inevitably lead. 
 
 That 50, or many more millions a-year, ultra 
 the 49i millionsf now necessarily raised annu- 
 
 * Ordinary revenue. t Ordinary expenditure. 
 
 £ £ 
 
 Anno 1843. ..51,069,978 49,477,635 
 
 1844.. .53,317,093 49,640,868 
 
 1845. ..51,719,118 49,061,412 
 
 3) 156,106,189 3) 148,179,915 
 £52,035,306 £49,393,305 
 
 — Finance-accounts, anno 1843, 1844, and 1845. 
 
298 
 
 ally to defray the interest of the public debt and 
 the ordinary annual public expenditure, could 
 be levied by taxes and paid by the people of the 
 people of the United Kingdom, to enable them 
 to carry on an offensive or defensive war, is un- 
 questionable. For it is unquestionable that they 
 are a richer, greater, and more powerful people 
 now^ in the year 1846, than they were 30 years 
 ago, in the year 1815. 
 
 That such a people should sink so low as to 
 spoil their foreign creditors of an annual sum, 
 which must be comparatively the merest trifle — 
 not from distress or necessity^ but avowedly in 
 order to reduce taxation on themselves^ in open 
 and flagrant violation of solemn contract — must 
 surely mortify every subject of the crown and 
 realm who has a spark of patriotism in his 
 bosom. 
 
 The prime-minister who, to raise supplies for 
 carrying on war with almost all the world, ^r^^ 
 resorted to an income-tax — although he did 
 (most unwisely and to the great loss of the pub- 
 lic) impose that tax on the public stocks or funds 
 eo nomine^ and did stop it out of the annuities 
 or dividends payable to the public creditors, sub- 
 jects of the realm, in respect of the stocks holden 
 by them— yet specially exempted the property 
 o{ foreigners in such stocks, upon the ground 
 that to stop payment of any part of the annu- 
 
299 
 
 ities or dividends payable to them^ who owed no 
 allegiance to the Crown, nor service, nor contri- 
 bution in defence of the realm — would be mere 
 spoil and plunder, even if it were not a breach of 
 a solemn contract with asseveration by the legisla- 
 ture that they should have good and secure estates 
 in such annuities, which should never he taxed* 
 That prime-minister, in violating the sanctuary 
 of PUBLIC CREDIT in his great extremity^ may be 
 likened unto David, when he took the consecrated 
 bread from the altar to preserve himself and his 
 warriors from perishing with hunger. While 
 the prime-minister of the present day, spoiling 
 and plundering foreigners^ avowedly to ease the 
 people of the United Kingdom from taxation of 
 themselves ; and that, moreover, on articles of 
 luxury (£648 thousand pounds on glass, see 
 p. 228 ante), and with the view of increasingyb- 
 reign trade and the exports oi cotton-wares^which 
 he boasts of having hereby, and by other ways 
 and means, effected — ^may be said to have violated 
 the sanctuary of public credit and taken the 
 consecrated bread from the altar, to throw it as 
 a sop to his confederate cotton-manufacturers, 
 leaders of the corn-law-league. 
 
 The capital of the funded and unfunded un- 
 redeemed public debt, and the annual charge 
 
 * See note B, appendix. 
 
 Q Q 
 
300 
 
 thereon, at the end of the year 1822 and at the 
 end of the year 1842, was as follows, viz. : 
 
 Debt Annual charge 
 
 thereon. 
 £ £ 
 
 At the end of the year 1822... 832,81 1,294*... 29,906,275* 
 At the end of the year 1842... 791,250,440*... 29,241,309* 
 
 Reduction in 20 years... £41,560,854 £664,966 
 
 Whence it appears, that, in the 20 years of 
 profound peace, ending with the year 1842, the 
 public debt of 833 millions was reduced by no 
 more than 41^ millions^ or at the rate of about 
 2 millions (£2,078^043) a-year ; at which rate 
 it would take more than 400 years from and 
 after the year 1822 to redeem the whole of the 
 then public debt of 833 millions. 
 
 And it is to be observed, that even that small 
 reduction of 41| millions in 20 years, was not 
 effected by a surplus of public annual revenue 
 over expenditure — but was effected, principally, 
 by granting annuities for lives and terms of 
 years, in consideration of stock transferred to or 
 placed in the names of the commissioners for the 
 reduction of the public debt, which was by them 
 cancelled. 
 
 From the above figures it further appears — that, 
 although the principal of the public debt was re- 
 duced by 41i millions in the said period of 20 
 
 * Parliamentary-paper, No. 12, sess. 1845. 
 
301 
 
 years — the annual charge thereon was reduced 
 by only 665 thousand pounds (£664,966) ; 
 whereas, had the 41i millions (£41,560,854) of 
 cancelled debt been all 3 per cent, stock only — 
 the annual interest or dividends thereon, by the 
 amount of which that annual charge would have 
 been reduced, would have amounted to — 
 
 £ 
 1,246,825 
 
 The reduced annual charge for divi- 
 dends or interest, on the conversion of 
 stocks from a higher to a lower rate of 
 interest, in that same interval of 20 
 years, was as follows, viz. : 
 
 On 150i millions (£150,603,106) of 5 per cents.) 
 
 converted into 158 millions (£158,075,528)1*1,207,134 
 of 4 per cents, in the year 1822 ] 
 
 On 76 millions (£76,206,882) of 4 per cents.) 
 
 converted into the like sum of 3^ per cents. L 1381,034 
 in 1824 J 
 
 On 150 millions (£150,329,325) of 4 per cents." 
 
 converted into the like sum of 3 J per cents, l- J 751,647 
 in 1830 
 
 On 248^ww/Z/o>/s(£248,656,275)of3iper cents, 
 converted into the like sum of 3^ per cents. 
 in 1844 
 
 • §621,641 
 
 £4,208,281 
 
 or 4 millions — which is the amount whereby the 
 
 * Finance accounts, sess. 1823. f Ditto ditto, sess. 1825. 
 J Ditto ditto, sess. 1831. § Ditto ditto, sess. 1845. 
 
302 
 
 annual charge on the public debt would have 
 been reduced in the year 1842, instead of by the 
 said sum of 665 thousand pounds (£664,966), 
 only — had the reduction of the said sum of 41i 
 millions of that debt (which was effected in the 
 said period of 20 years ending with the year 1822) 
 been effected, by means of a surplus oi public 
 annual revenue over expenditure; and had no ter- 
 minable annuities for lives or years been granted. 
 
 The conversion of perpetual annuities carried 
 by the public stocks or funds into annuities ter- 
 minable on the expiration of lives or years — 
 although, during the continuance of the lives or 
 terms of years, it very greatly increases the 
 annual charge on the public debt — ^yet, reduces 
 the principal of that debt ; and moreover throws 
 the charge or cost of such reduction upon the 
 present or passings instead of w^on future^ gene- 
 rations — which is so far just and good ; and the 
 further that the conversion of the perpetual 
 annuities carried by the public stocks into aimu- 
 ities for lives or terms of years can be carried, 
 upon fair and equitable terms, the better mani- 
 festly it will be, in furtherance of justice and 
 sound policy, by the reduction thereby of the 
 principal of the public debt by the present or 
 passing generation. 
 
 But the reduction of 41i millions of the public 
 
303 
 
 debt in the 20 years ending with the year 1842, 
 howsoever eifected, is a reduction so paltry, that 
 the extra-expenditure of a single year of war, 
 would probably exceed the whole amount of it. 
 
 A succession of governments of the day since 
 the termination of the last war in 1815 — instead 
 of making great and manly efforts to shake off, or 
 lighten, the grievous burthen of the public debt 
 by gradual liquidation or reduction of it — which, 
 whether prudently or foolishly contracted^ must, 
 in honour and in honesty, be paid — have left the 
 people of this mighty realm burthened with and 
 groaning, for 30 years, under that enormous load 
 of debt, selfishly created by passing generations, 
 to enable them to wage their wars without raising, 
 de anno in annum^ supplies for carrying them on 
 — but throwing the cost of them w^on future ge- 
 nerations, by raising such supplies upon loans 
 charged on their posterity — a load of which the 
 burthen is almost intolerably aggravated, by debt 
 amounting to more than 250 millions (nearly a 
 third part of the whole funded debt of 800 mil- 
 lions) insanely created^ and now remaining due 
 -—for which the lenders never gave and the pub- 
 lic {the borrower) never received any value or 
 consideration whatsoever.* 
 
 By the non-payment or non-reduction of that 
 
 * See note A appendix. 
 
304 
 
 enormous debt — it may be truly said, as was 
 hereinbefore observed (page 4 ante), that the 
 present generation are still carrying on war — not 
 by effusion of blood — but by strain of the sinews 
 of war — ^by a continual drain of public revenue 
 of taxes ^ to pay debt, incurred in former wars 
 for carrying them on. 
 
 The fatal consequences — however they may be 
 remote — of perseverance in the selfish and das- 
 tardly course of continued postponement of pay- 
 ment of that debt, with the unnatural view and 
 intent of shifting it from the now passing genera- 
 tion upon their posterity — in the event of a new 
 war, or of successive wars, has more than once 
 been hereinbefore noticed (pp. 210 and 297 ante). 
 
 Were a war now to break out — the people of 
 the present generation would have to raise, by 
 taxes^ supplies for carrying it on — while raising, 
 by taxes ^ at the same time, nearly 30 millions 
 a-year^ to pay the annual charge on 800 millions 
 of debt, created and entailed upon them for carry- 
 ing on wars by their progenitors — a sum of taxes 
 which would perhaps enable them to defray the 
 annual charges of a new war — should war unhap- 
 pily arise. And thus, by having to defray that 
 30 millions a-year for charge on debt for wars of 
 their progenitors — and to raise in addition thereto 
 30 millions a-year, the supposed annual expense 
 of a new war — it may too truly be said — that they 
 
305 
 
 would be carrying on at the same time the new 
 war of their own, and the wars of their progeni- 
 tors, who unnaturally secured so powerful an 
 ally of the foe^ as 800 millions of debt. 
 
 That enormous and unnatural load of debt 
 necessarily alFects the attitude of the United 
 Kingdom in any contention, or altercation with 
 foreign powers — which are all too well aware, of 
 what was sarcastically observed by somebody, — 
 namely, that the Cro\VTi and realm of the United 
 Kingdom had entered into a bond of SOO millions 
 to keep the peace. 
 
 Had that enormous debt not been incurred — 
 or had it been redeemed — the question of free- 
 trade by which the country is now agitated — 
 would not have arisen — for if no taj!;es were 
 necessary to pay the charge of the public debt — 
 the taxes for the support of the Crown and 
 government, and other the necessary expenses of 
 the State, would be comparatively of so small 
 amount, that there would be little or no question 
 about the imposition of them — the question of 
 free-trade being, when stripped of its false colour- 
 ing, a question merely — upon what and upon 
 whom shall the taxes for payment of the charge 
 on the public debt and other the taxes be im- 
 posed. 
 
 The plan and system of the prime-minister of 
 the present day — is to persevere in that un- 
 
306 
 
 natural, un statesmanlike and insane course of 
 continued postponement of reduction of the 
 public debt. For in none of his novel and fanci- 
 ful measures of shifting and shuffling the taxes is 
 there the least provision made, contemplated, 
 or alluded to, for the reduction of that debt, the 
 incubus on the people. In his speeches propos- 
 ing in the year 1842, the imposition, and in the 
 year 1845, the conti?iuance of the income-tax 
 invented by him — ^his avowed plan and policy 
 was to apply any surplus public annual revenue 
 which might arise from that tax — not in reduc- 
 tion of the public debt, but in reduction of the 
 taxes on articles of home-consumption, with the 
 view of encouraging foreign-trade, nearly the 
 moiety of which consists of exports of cotton- 
 wares, from which not one shilling of public re- 
 venue is derived, except as aforesaid (see page 
 177 ante). 
 
 That a small surplus of annual public revenue 
 has for the last three years been applied to 
 the reduction of the public debt, is entirely 
 owing to the circumstance of the revenue arising 
 from the taxes having increased — beyond the cal- 
 culations, anticipations, and political foresight 
 of the prime-minister of the day — and created in 
 each of the three last years a surplus, which being 
 devoted, by law, to be paid over to the commis- 
 sioners for the reduction of the public debt, to 
 
307 
 
 be by them applied to that salutary purpose, 
 and has been so applied by them accordingly.* 
 
 But by the tariff now in the year 1846 pro- 
 posed by the prime-minister of the day to parlia- 
 ment, he proposes to get rid of that surplus^ by 
 further reduction or repeal of taxes on commodi- 
 ties oi foreign production^ iov the further en- 
 couragement of foreign-trade^ of which nearly a 
 moiety consists of exports of cotton- wares. 
 
 Had the taxes reduced or repealed at the instance 
 of the prime-minister of the present day (which 
 without being a burthen upon any hody^ except 
 what it pleased any body to bear or assume — 
 being all taxes on commodities the consumption 
 of which was and is optional — and which any 
 body could very well do without) — instead of 
 being reduced or repealed, been continued — 
 there would now have been (as shown at p. 234 
 ante), a growing surplus of public revenue, with- 
 out the income-tax^ of 3 millions (£3,024,952) 
 a-year ; and if to that surplus the restored revenue 
 of only 1 J million from \hQ post-office were added, 
 there would now be, without the grinding oppres- 
 
 £ 
 
 * Surplus of the year 1843 1,443,303) 
 
 1844 3,356,105 [iJ8,617, 049 
 
 1845 3,8l7,64lJ 
 
 or 8 J millions in three years. Finance-accounts, ann. 1844-5-6. 
 
 E R 
 
308 
 
 sion and injustice of the income-tax^ a surplus 
 annual revenue of 44 millions. 
 
 The annual revenue lost by the repeal or re- 
 duction of taxes between the year 1815 and the 
 end of the year 1841, was nearly 36 millions 
 (35,775,042,see page 214 ante). If of that enor- 
 mous sum of repealed or reduced taxes, there 
 had been reserved an annual surplus of only 5 
 millions — and had that comparatively small sum 
 been applied as a sinking-fund towards the re- 
 demption of the public funded and unfunded 
 debt, it would, at the end of the 30 years from 
 the year 1815, which expired in the year 1845, 
 have extinguished 238 millions (£237,877,075), 
 of that debt, calculating interest at only three 
 per cent, — and in 30 years more, which would 
 have expired in 1875, would have sufficed to 
 extinguish 815 millions (£815,267,185), or with- 
 in a comparative trifle, the whole funded and 
 unfunded debt of the United Kingdom, existent 
 in the year 1815. 
 
 If it be true, as unquestionably it is, that — 
 notwithstanding the indispensable necessity of 
 now raising by taxes an annual revenue of 49^ 
 millions (£49,393,305, see page 297 ante), to pay 
 the interest of the public debt, and the peace ex- 
 penditure of the United Kingdom — the people of 
 this mighty realm could raise by taxes revenue 
 ultra^ sufficient to enable them to carry on an 
 
309 
 
 offensive war with any nation, and to maintain a 
 defensive war with all the nations of the earth — 
 how slight, it may be asked, would have been, 
 and would be, the effort of such a people to raise 
 the comparatively paltry sum of 5 millions 
 a-year to pay its dehtsl 
 
 It cannot but be mortifying to every lover of 
 his country to think how different its attitude 
 would now have been — and how much more it 
 would have been regarded by its people with 
 pride, and with an approving conscience, and 
 with awe and veneration by all the nations of 
 of the earth — ^if the power of that people had been 
 exerted to fulfil honorably their engagements— 
 which so very slight an exertion of that power 
 would have enabled them to do — instead of sub- 
 mitting to be led by a succession of governments, 
 composed of party politicians — to persevere in 
 the selfish and unpatriotic course of exempt- 
 ing themselves from a small annual amount 
 of taxes, the burthen of which they would 
 have never felt (and which, like ^sop^s basket, 
 would have been continually growing lighter 
 and lighter even to emptiness), in order un- 
 naturally to shift upon their posterity perhaps to 
 their ruin^ the whole public debt, selfishly created 
 by their forefathers to carry on their wars — and 
 of at last submitting to be led by the government 
 of the present day to pillage their foreign credi- 
 tors of a part of debts, solemnly contracted to be 
 
310 
 
 paid ( Heu prisca fides! ) — avowedly not from any 
 necessity (which it would have been too shameless 
 to set up or pretend), but simply and avowedly to 
 ease themselves of taxation — and taxation more- 
 over on articles not of necessity^ but merely of 
 convenience or of luxury. " How are the 
 mighty fallen!" 
 
 But the nation, though it has been led or en- 
 snared to deviate from the path of nobleness and 
 honour, and even of honesty — ^may regain that 
 path, unless it be led by the government of the 
 day farther and further astray from it, until it be 
 lost in a labyrinth, without a clue whereby to 
 retrace its steps. The way back is : — 
 
 Mrstj to put an end to the shifting and shuffling 
 of the taxes — taking them oiF from commodities 
 of foreign production (the price of which to any 
 body, or even the want of which by any body 
 well supplied with all commodities of home-pro- 
 ductionj is a grievance to give a statesman or 
 lover of his country small concern), and laying 
 them on the land, the earnings of labour, or the 
 produce of accumulated capital oj the country, 
 some or all of them, in order unnaturally to 
 encourage foreign-trade — ^the absolute insig- 
 nificance o/'which, compared with home-trade, has 
 been so much dwelt upon in these pages, (see pp. 
 50, 57, 84, 97, 241, et seq. ante), by reason 
 of the inveteracy of the false opinion of the im- 
 portance of foreign-trade, so generally prevalent — 
 
311 
 
 insomuch that many sensible persons, who have 
 not given due attention to the subject, believe, that 
 foreign-trade is essential even to the life of the 
 state. 
 
 Secondly. — To repeal the iniquitous and sacri- 
 legious income-tax ; and reimpose all or the 
 greater part of the taxes reduced or repealed at 
 the suggestion of the prime-minister of the day, 
 in furtherance of his design, and the design of the 
 cotton-manufacturers, and their faction the com- 
 law-league, (under pretence of establishingyree- 
 foreign-trade)^ to estabhsh effectually a trade in 
 untaxed foreign grain only — while grain of 
 home-production is heavily taxed. 
 
 It appears arithmetically (at p. 234 ante), as 
 above stated — ^that by the reimposition of such 
 reduced or repealed taxes, with the restored re- 
 venue of the post-office, there will be a surplus, 
 and a growing surplus, after the repeal of the in- 
 come-tax, of annual revenue over expenditure of 
 more than 4i m>illions, to go as a sinking fund 
 towards redemption of the public debt. 
 
 If it were desired to have a greater surplus 
 of annual revenue over expenditure to effect that 
 redemption by a larger annual sinking fund than 
 41 millions — ^nothing is easier than to raise such 
 greater surplus. 
 
 It is stated (in the note page 130 ante) that a 
 tax of only twopence a-pound on cotton-wool, 
 imported for home-consumption — (a tax which, 
 
312 
 
 as is there shown, would fall so lightly on the 
 consumers of cotton-wares, that they would 
 actually be insensible of its existence) — would 
 produce 4i millions (£4,504,960) a-year, subject 
 to duninution by a draw-hack^ (if thought expe- 
 dient to be allowed,) of the amount of such tax 
 on the wool consumed in the fabric of cotton- 
 wares exported. 
 
 It has been much insisted on in these 
 pages, that taxes on foreign commodities im 
 ported are the fairest and most judicious of 
 all taxes (see page 86 et seq. ante) — because 
 such commodities can find entrance into the 
 country only through a small number of sea- 
 ports, where taxes on them can be collected at 
 little expense, and without infringement of 
 liberty; — and because taxes upon foreign commo- 
 dities, which are not indigenous, and cannot be 
 produced at home (being commodities which any 
 body at home can do very well without, and of 
 which the consumption is absolutely optional)^ 
 cannot reasonably be complained of by the con- 
 tributors to such taxes, especially when, by the 
 imposition thereof, they are exempted from taxes 
 on commodities of home-production. 
 
 It has hereinbefore further been observed (p. 
 90 ante), that the foundations of foreign-trade 
 are laid by Divine Providence, in the diversity 
 of gifts bestowed upon the nations of the world, 
 by diversity in the structure of the crust of the 
 
313 
 
 earth on which they are habited, and by diversity 
 of soil and climate. 
 
 It has also been observed, that no nation can 
 impose a tax on the subjects of another nation, 
 and that all taxes must be paid by the people of 
 that nation in which they are imposed. 
 
 Tyuq, free-foreign-trade in the United Kingdom 
 would be established by opening its ports to the 
 importation of the productions of all foreign 
 countries upon equal terms — taxing similar com- 
 modities alike^ from whatever foreign country 
 imported^ whatever the quantum of tax laid on 
 such commodities might be, which is the affair 
 only of the people of the United Kingdom, the 
 consumers of such commodities, on whom only 
 such taxes fall. 
 
 Foreign-trade, established on a basis so fair 
 and equitable, would flourish free from all im- 
 pediment or question as to its justice and policy ; 
 for such a foreign-trade, established by law pro- 
 mulgated, would render null, useless, and void 
 every commercial treaty extant between the 
 United Kingdom and any and every nation of 
 the world, and would render unnecessary and 
 useless any future commercial treaty with any 
 nation whatsoever. 
 
 That the United Kingdom, in that position and 
 attitude with respect to all foreign nations, would 
 always command a supply of wine, oil^ tea, sugar, 
 
314 
 
 coffee^ tobacco^ fruits^ spices^ gold, silver, silk, 
 cotton, and all other commodities not found, not 
 indigenous, or not produced in her soil and 
 climate — is free from doubt ; and it is as free 
 from doubt, that the foreign countries sending 
 such commodities into her ports must take com- 
 modities, the produce of the United Kingdom, in 
 exchange, or otherwise stop in their own coun- 
 tries the production of such commodities for the 
 use and consumption of the people of the United 
 Kingdom. 
 
 It has hereinbefore been contended, that re- 
 course should not be had to direct taxes, until 
 the power of raising revenue by indirect or op- 
 tional taxes has been exhausted. But if, and when 
 recourse must be had to a direct tax, there is no 
 tax so just and fair as a house- tax. 
 
 Among the repealed assessed taxes (in the list, 
 page 216 ante), was the house-tax, while half the 
 tax upon windows has been continued and re- 
 tained ; although the latter be odious — because it 
 is a tax on the light of heaven ; and is unequal, in- 
 asmuch as it falls upon ancient more oppressively 
 than upon modern houses, constructed always with 
 reference to it; and is injurious, because to avoid 
 it, windows of houses are closed up, depriving 
 their inmates of vital air, as well as of the 
 light of day ; — while a tax, imposed upon a sliding- 
 scale, ad valorem, upon houses, is perhaps the 
 
315 
 
 fairest of all dii'ect taxes whatsoever : and the im- 
 position of such a tax would justify the repeal of 
 all the assessed taxes^ the collection of Avhich is 
 attended with very many disagreeable accompani- 
 ments. 
 
 The repealed house-tax was assessed upon a 
 sliding scale ad valorem^ upon the rack-rent. 
 The continued window-tax is in reality a house- 
 tax assessed upon a sliding scale ad valorem^ 
 " after a sort" ; i. e. upon the number of windows^ 
 instead of upon the rack-rent of each house.* 
 And, surely such repeal of the house-tax as- 
 sessed upon a sliding scale ad valorem upon the 
 rent — and the continuation of a house-tax as- 
 sessed upon a sliding scale ad valorem upon the 
 number of its windows^ cannot but be deemed 
 a singular fancy of the legislature. 
 
 The rent of the house in which a man, with or 
 without a family, resides, is, perhaps, the fairest 
 standard or criterion of his ability to pay taxes. 
 His choice of it announces his own estimate and 
 measure of that ability, in which, if he have 
 erred, he can change it for a better or less good. 
 A man's choice of his house, is a tacit declaration 
 
 * All houses having only seven are exempt from the tax 
 upon windows ; houses having eight pay a tax of 16s. 6d. ; and 
 houses having more than eight windows pay a higher tax on 
 an ascending scale, up to houses having a hundred and eighty 
 windows, which pay £46. lis. 3d. for that number. 
 
 S S 
 
316 
 
 or admission of the power of his income, subject 
 to whatever charges it may be liable. And, from 
 various causes, the propensity of most men is, to 
 live rather in a better house than they can well 
 afford, than in a worse. 
 
 There is not a single objection that can be 
 made against a tax upon houses^ which may not 
 be urged, with much greater force, against a 
 tax upon income; while on the other hand, there 
 are many reasons in favour of a tax upon houses^ 
 which do not apply to a tax upon income, 
 
 1st. The infringement of liberty in ascertain- 
 ing the value of a man's house, compared with 
 that in ascertaining his income^ is so infinitely 
 less, that words are wanting in which to make 
 the comparison. 
 
 2ndly . The expense of collection of a tax upon 
 income must be, perhaps, many times the ex- 
 pense of collection of a tax upon houses; for 
 which all the machinery is ready made, perfect, 
 and complete ; not requiring the appointment of 
 a single new officer or collector. 
 
 3rdly. A tax upon income^ derived from accu- 
 mulated capital, may be evaded, or avoided, by 
 the owner of it removing with his capital, and 
 investing it in the funds of some foreign country, 
 exempt, as ever 7/ foreign country is believed to be 
 exempt y from so oppressive and unjust a tax ; 
 whereas the houses of the United Kingdom can- 
 
317 
 
 not be removed, but must remain subject to any 
 tax imposed on them. 
 
 4thly. A tax on the houses of traders will fall 
 much less oppressively on the consumers of the 
 commodities of their trades, and on themselves 
 as such consumers, than a tax on the income of 
 traders; and as evasion of a tax on such 
 houses will be impracticable, and the rent of them 
 be ascertained and fixed by public officers, — not 
 only will all resort to fraud and perjury in the 
 statements and declarations of their incomes by 
 traders, which can be taxed only on their own 
 showings be averted, — but the tax will moreover 
 be imposed fairly^ because the rent of houses 
 occupied by traders, as well as of houses occupied 
 by all other persons, will speak for itself. 
 
 Lastly. The argument that the dishonest, dis- 
 loyal, or unpatriotic, may evade or avoid the tax, 
 by fraud, cunning, or absenteeism, applies to 
 every tax, but less, perhaps, to a tax upon houses 
 than to any other tax ; because houses will not 
 be left unlet by their owners, merely to avoid a 
 tax on the rent, and cannot be removed, with or 
 without their owners, to another country, nor be 
 concealed nor undervalued at home. But all such 
 argument being applicable to every direct tax that 
 can be devised, is wholly unworthy of notice in 
 the consideration of tax so universal^ as a tax 
 upon houses. 
 
318 
 
 Many other reasons will occur to every reflect- 
 ing mind, in support of a tax upon a sliding-scale 
 ad valorem upon houses, as the fairest of all direct 
 taxes, and as a blessing compared to the tax upon 
 income, which, may truly be said to be a national 
 curse. It is needless therefore to state such reasons, 
 especially as the subject of this treatise has been 
 already too much enlarged upon — far beyond the 
 intention of the author, when it was commenced ; 
 and some apology is due for having said so much. 
 
 It is respectfully hoped, that the great impor- 
 tance of the main subject, and the interest which 
 must naturally be excited by it, and by the 
 lesser, yet very interesting subjects, which offer- 
 ing themselves, have been noticed incidentally, 
 will be accepted as the apology. It is also hoped 
 that the reader will pardon any error or mistake 
 which may have inadvertently been committed in 
 attempting a fearless and free — though as it is 
 hoped, and certainly as it has been intended, an 
 honest and unbiassed inquiry into a subject of 
 deep interest, as afi'ecting the attachment of the 
 subject to his country, — as afi*ecting the honour 
 of the Crown, and the credit and character of the 
 Nation — and, generally, as aflPecting, directly, or 
 indirectly, the property or interest of every 
 individual member of the commonwealth. 
 
319 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 NOTE A (p. 66). 
 
 The bare mention of so enormous a loss as 250 millions is 
 startling, and the fact seems to be incredible. It is, however, 
 capable of being easily proved. 
 
 From two papers ordered by the House of Commons to be 
 printed 27th March, 1822, (being returns from the Commis- 
 sioners for the reduction of the National debt), it may on 
 calculation be found, that during the wars, or period of time 
 between the years 1793 and 1816, both inclusive, the sums 
 contracted to be paid (and which became due and owing 
 to the lenders of money, as the price of the redemption of 
 annuities sold or granted by the State, for loans or advances 
 for the public service) created debts amounting to — 
 
 3 per cents. 4 per cents. 5 per cents. 
 
 the capital | £701 308,513 47,027,518 122,840,561 
 sums or ... j ' ' ' * ' 
 
 whereof were I 273,950,898 7,796,400 142,000 
 
 redeemed I 
 
 leaving capi-' 
 tal debts cre- 
 ated amount- 
 ing to 
 
 427,357,615 39,231,118 122,698,561 
 
 And collectively to £589,287,294 
 
 From the paper, No. 398, session 1823, it may in like 
 
320 
 
 manner be found, that during the whole of the above period, 
 from 1793 to 1816, the average price of three per cents, was 
 under 62. It will be an over estimate to take the four per 
 cents, at 80, and the Jive per cents, at 90, during the same 
 period. 
 
 Now, if all the above-mentioned capital debts shall be re- 
 deemed on payment of £100 in money for every £100 
 stock (the four per cents, have been so redeemed, and the 
 five per cents, have been redeemed at a price higher than 
 £100 of money for £100 of stock), the loss on the above 
 capital debts, will stand as follows : viz. — 
 
 On £427,357,615 3 per cents, at 38 per cent. £162,395,896 
 
 39,231,1 18 4 per cents, at 20 per cent. 7,846,223 
 
 122,698,561 5 per cents, at 10 per cent. 12,269,855 
 
 On £589,287,294* A loss of £182,511,974 
 
 Add, loss by additional capital created on the^ 
 conversion in the year 1822 of £140,250,828 
 >^e per cents, into £147,263,328 new four)- t7,Ol2,500 
 per cents., as appears at page 154 of the 
 Finance-accounts, anno 1823 , 
 
 Total lost.... £189,524,474 
 
 Hence it appears that for loans for which less than 407 
 millions'^ of money was received, the State contracted to pay 
 more than 596 millions^ of money. And the said loss of 
 1891 millions, being incurred in respect of 596 millions of 
 debt created since the year 1793 — and the whole of the un- 
 redeemed funded debt, being now about 800 millions, all 
 contracted at loss, at least equal to the loss incurred on the 
 part created since the year 1793; the whole loss mentioned 
 in the text must, therefore, exceed 250 millions ; || a loss 
 which may be said truly to be inconceivable. Its value in 
 gold would weigh nearly 2 thousand tons, and in silver nearly 
 
321 
 
 30 thousand tons, (enough to load a fleet of a 100 ships, of 
 300 tons each); and if a man were employed to count the 
 sum, he could not, at the rate of 120 sovereigns a-minute 
 and working ten hours a-day, accomplish his task in less 
 than nine years and a-half. 
 
 These calculations are stated to assist the mind in attempt- 
 ing to form some notion or conception of the immensity of 
 such a loss; the whole of which must, in very deed, be levied 
 by taxes in the United Kingdom, and paid, if ever its public 
 debt shall, by a surplus of public income over expenditure, be 
 redeemed. And it may here respectfully be asked — whether 
 it be not truly wonderful, that a system of finance, should 
 so long have been sufiered to prevail among so enlightened 
 a people, under which, loss to such an inconceivable amount, 
 in the whole, was not merely possible, but year after year 
 — during the greater part of the half-century ending with 
 the year 1815— continually and deliberately being incurred 
 and created, until it grew to such a hydra? 
 
 £ £ 
 
 *427,357,61 5 — 3 per ct. at 62 = 264,961,721 
 
 39,231,118-- 4perct.at80= 31,384,894 
 122,698,561 — 5 per ct. at 90 = 1 10,428,705 
 
 *589,287,294 Stock ^406,775,320 Money 
 "^abovel t7,012,500 Stock 
 
 §596,299,794 Stock 
 
 II 596 millions : \S9^ millions :: SOO millions : 25i millions, 
 stated in the text as more than 250 millions. 
 
322 
 
 NOTE B (p. 299). 
 
 The stoppage of payment of part of the annuities or divi- 
 dends payable on the public stocks or funds under the name 
 of income-tax during the last war, when there was every 
 yea?' a deficiency of annual public revenue to meet the public 
 expenditure, was not only impoUtic and unjust, but was 
 moreover supreme /(9%, affording a strong proof of the truth 
 of the homely maxim — " honesty is the best policy." 
 
 That continual annual deficiency of the public revenue 
 was provided, by raising it upon loans, which were always 
 insanely borrowed upon annuity stocks, carrying a less rate of 
 interest than the rate of interest in the market. 
 
 For example. - A loan was contracted for in the year 1797, 
 when 3 per cent, stock was at 48 pounds money, for 100 
 pounds stock. For every 48 pounds then borrowed the 
 public contracted to pay an annuity of 3 pounds to the lender, 
 until tender of 100 pounds for the 48 pounds lent; which 
 100 pounds (though its value now in 1846 be only 96 pounds) 
 must be levied by taxes, and paid to redeem the debt, being the 
 only condition upon which the said annuity of 3 pounds can, 
 without the consent of the holder of it, be redeemed. 
 
 Were any individual to borrow money, on terms of grant- 
 ing an annuity of thi-ee pounds for each 48 pounds lent (being 
 at the rate 6J per cent, per annum interest), with condition 
 that he would continue to pay such annnuity half-yearly, 
 until he should tender 1 00 pounds for every 48 pounds lent — 
 such borrower would be thought by every body to be at a 
 gallop on the high road to ruin — and the lender would be 
 thought a griping usurer, deserving no pity, should he lose 
 his whole stake in such a transaction. 
 
 It is not easy to see any difference in the character of such 
 
323 
 
 a transaction, from the circumstance of the public or ^State 
 being one of the parties to it. 
 
 Under the statutes imposing the income-tax during the last 
 war — 10 per cent, was stopt and deducted, under the name of 
 such tax, from the annuities or dividends on the public stocks, 
 payable to any holder thereof, whose income amounted to 
 200 pounds, and a less per centage upon lesser incomes. 
 
 An annuity nominally of 3 pounds, but subject by law to 
 stoppage or deduction of 10 per cent, thereof, is neither more 
 nor less than an annuity of 2 pounds 14 shillings. 
 
 In the year 1814 the income-tax of the last war was in 
 force, and in that single year loans were contracted for by 
 the public, to the amount of 106 millions (£106,146,907), 
 which was reduced by the operation of the sinking-fund, (at 
 the loss of more than 1260 thousand pounds, see note p. 60 
 ante) to 79 millions (£79,221,835). For every 100 pounds 
 of that 79 millions contracted to be paid, the public received 
 on and average, £54.1 2s.4d, being a contract to pay £45.9s.8d., 
 in every 100 pounds more than received, or 83 (£83 33) per 
 cent, on the money lent, more than received. 
 
 Each 100 pounds of that sum of 79 millions was attended 
 by an annuity nominally of 3 pounds, but really and actually 
 with an annuity of 2 pounds 14 shillings only. The lenders? 
 therefore, who gave the sum of £54. 12s. 4d. for an annuity 
 of 2 pounds 14 shillings, would have given for an annuity 
 of 3 pounds of equal security, the sum of £60. 135. Ad. 
 
 Had no stoppage of payment been made from the annuities 
 or dividends payable to the holders of the public stocks, under 
 the name of income-tax, during the last war, the loss upon 
 loans contracted during that war, upon the insane system of 
 borrowing upon annuity stocks, carrying a less rate of interest 
 than the rate of interest in the market, would have been less 
 by many tens of millions. 
 
 In the single year 1814, the loss on the 79 millions of 3 
 
 T T 
 
^24 
 
 per cent, stock, would hsLvehQenSj^ounds 1 shilling less^^aii' 
 it was (£60. 13s.4d.— £o4. 12s. 4d.=£6. Is. Od.) on every 
 100 pounds of that sum, which would in that single year, 
 have saved more than 4| millions (je4-769-500). 
 
 But the saving, or rather avoidance of loss, would probably 
 have been much greater, had the public stocks been held sacred 
 from taxation, pursuant to contract and the solemn assevera- 
 tion of bona-Jides by the legislature — because the saving of 6 
 2)omids 1 shilling on every 100 of those 79 millions, is calcu- 
 lated in the arithmetical proportion which 2 pounds 14 
 shillings bear to 3 pounds. But there was a depreciation in 
 the value of the annuity of 2 pounds 14 shillingsy below the 
 annuity of 3 jwunds of incalculable amount — namely, because 
 the security was tarnished and shaken by the gvajator jwssessing 
 the j}ower — ^had exercised the wrong of deducting 10 per 
 cent, from the annuity of 3 pounds, solemnly contracted by 
 him to be paid with asseveration that it should never he in any 
 imy reduced ; and therefore there was no security that the an- 
 nuity of 2 pounds 14 shillings — for which a loan was hazarded 
 — might not be reduced doivn to annihilation by a grantor who 
 had been guilty of such a flagrant violation of honesty, of 
 honour, and of good faith. 
 
 The losses of capital on loans contracted for while the 
 income-tax was in force during the last war, losses (now to 
 be levied by taxes and paid), which were caused by the 
 stoppage of payment of part of the annuities or dividends on 
 the public stocks, under the name of that tax , amounted to 
 very many times the amount of the revenue derived under 
 the income-tax acts from all the stoppages made from such 
 annuities or dividends. 
 
 A fact upon which no comment so forcible can be made as 
 the reiteration of the said homely maxim — "honesty is the 
 best policy." 
 
^ 
 
 YB .i 794-5 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA LIBRARY