behave fo difhoneftly, and come forward and fwear to what was known to be falfe. He knew many inftances of this himfelf. This he lamented as much as he held it to be criminal; for however he might oppofe any measure while it was in that Houfe, and that he had a right to do, nay, it was his duty to do fo, if he thought it a wrong meafure; yet after it had received the fan&tion of the legiflature, he confidered himfelf in confcience, as well as in duty, bound to obey it; a contrary doctrine tended to deftroy all notions of obedience to law, and he faw no difference between defrauding the public of its property, and defrauding an individual, except that in the one cafe he was liable to be tranfported, and in the other he was only liable to a penalty. This doctrine he was convinced of, and he did not eftcem it the less from having heard it maintained by a worthy man, the late Mr. John Lee. The evafion to which he alluded was the more glaring, as it was practifed by thofe who pretended to be ready to give their last guinea for the fupport of the war; but when they came to be tried, fo far were they from being willing to give the last guinca, that they did not wish to give the first.

But now, to come to the meafure before the Houfe-if the right hon. Gentleman could fatisfy him (and he hoped he was not very difficult to be fatisfied) that this measure would be attended with none of the inconveniences he was going to ftate, he would certainly give him his vote; for he had no fixed hatred against the Chancellor of the Exchequer, nor had he any piftol in his pocket to shoot the Minifter-a fate that was faid to have befallen another great man lately in another part of the world, for attempting to raife a contribution among the people.

The first objection he had to urge against the meafure was, that it would caufe a general difclofure of property. It was indeed faid, that the ftate of each individual's property fhould be kept a fecret: but how was this fecrefy to be kept up? Did not every man give his anfwer to the tax-gatherer at the door? Any perfon in the village in which a man lived might know the state of his property. How was this money collected? By the common tax collector. Was it not childish to fay that any fecrefy could accompany fuch a proceeding? Secrefy, in fuch a cafe, was abfolutely impoffible. He was not able to fay how fuch a meafure as this would affect merchants and manufacturers: they muft judge for themselves, but it appeared to him to be a measure that would fubject them to monftrous inconveniences. In fome cafes fpecula

tion was not only indulged, but conftituted part of the wealth, or rather was the mean whereby a man procured wealth in certain fituations in commerce. He really thought that this meafure would affect a number of perfons in this refpectIt would affect the credit of many men. For instance, if a merchant paid ten per cent. on 10,000l. and it appeared that he lived in a very fplendid ftile, he owned that he fhould not like a bill of fuch a man for a large fum of money, because he knew that 10,000l. a year would not fupport very great fplendour, and the merchant would have no means of concealing this; nothing was more eafy than for any one to know it.Again, to take the cafe of a private gentleman : was the Houfe totally unacquainted with the cafe of fome gentleman of property, who, in the early part of their lives, had been imprudent, and had brought fome incumbrances upon their eftates? Would fuch perfons like that thefe things fhould be disclosed? And yet fuch must be the cafe under the provifions of this bill. Many individuals might have expectations from rich relations, which expectations would be all disappointed, when the cautious perfon came to fee the imprudence of the object of his intended bounty; for rich perfons, in general, were very averfe to the idea of leaving their property to any but those whom they thought would take great

care of it.

His learned Friend had faid, that the office of the perfon who was to make the enquiry into the income, was a refpectable office, and that he might as well have called the Attorney and Solicitor General fpies, as call this perfon a fpy; for his part, he expected his learned Friend, the Solicitor General, to get up with great warmth, 'at being compared to fuch a character as one of thefe furveyors, as they were called; for, by this the learned Solicitor was made to appear, as if he was one of the moft contemptible men in the kingdom. But what fimilarity was there, in point of fact, between the Solicitor General and one of thefe fpies-what did the Solicitor General know of the property of any individual? His office was above any fuch contemptible enquiry. He caufed men to be brought to juftice who had mifconducted themselves, and his office was an honourable one; he was led to say these things, because the office of these informers had been treated with too much dignity that night. He knew how the cafe ftood already, with regard to thofe who are employed by Government to examine into people's fortunes: They were employed by Government to look how VOL. I. 1798.

far

far people are accurate in the payment of the taxes, and whether they are fairly affeffed, or not. These perfons go round at random, and furcharge, without caring what they do. The mischief of this was in many cafes monftrous; for inftance, he himfelf lived 160 miles from London; fuppofe, while he was in the country, he was unfairly furcharged in London; he fhould have no remedy, but by appeal before the commiffioners in London; the expence of his coming to town to obtain redrefs, would amount to more than the fum he was overcharged, and thus he muft fubmit to be cheated, for he had no adequate remedy for the evil. If this bill ever went into a committee (which he hoped it would not) he fhould have to propose a clause to remedy the evil of which he had been fpeaking, and to give cofts to any party who fhall be furcharged unfairly."

Another objection he had to this meafure was of a Conftitutional nature. The genius of the Conftitution of England was, that a man's property is facred. It was upon the strength of that principle that every man's houfe was called his caftle in this country: It was from that principle that the excife laws had always been held fo odious in England. If excife laws were odious in this country, what was to be thought of the bill now before the Houfe? An excifeman came to a man's dwelling to fee whether he had taken into, or fent out of his houfe, fome particular articles, without having previously paid a given fum to the revenue; but here a fpy comes, not only into the houfe, but opens the cabinet or bureau of every man, and becomes acquainted with all his moft fecret concerns. A man muft fhew to this fpy his notes, his bonds, and all his fecurities. This was monstrous, but the minifter feemed to take this as if there was to be a Temedy for it; if there was, he fhould try to find it; at prefent he knew of none. He knew it would be faid "There was no occafion to difclofe, unlefs the party liked it;" but it was forgotten that the commiffioners, if a man did not difclofe to their fatisfaction, had power to charge him what they think right; and by the proceedings of a court of juftice, if a man was called upon to produce his books, and did not produce them, every prefumption was to be against him; fo i would be in this cafe, because it could not be otherwife.

He knew that a tax on income had the appearance, upon a glance at it, of being an equal 'tax; but to try this for a moment, he would afk, what fort of equality there was between ten per cent. upon income merely, and ten per cent.

upon

upon that income which is the produce of a capital? For inftance, let us fuppofe a gentleman of 6000l a year with two daughters, and that the eftate goes away at his death to fome other branch in favour of male iffue, what does fuch a man do? he faves as much money as he can to provide for his daughters at his death. Now fuppofe another person of the fame income exactly, but whofe eftate devolves upon his children, what is the cafe with him? why, he may enjoy the whole of his eftate during his own life, and yet leave his children better provided than the other who faves half his in- come for his life, and yet thefe two perfons being of the fame income must pay the fame money under this bill, viz. 6ool. a year each.

There was another fpecies of property which was of a peculiar nature, he meant that which belonged to church eftablishment, and whatever he night with to be fettled, if we had to begin again, he could, from his confcience declare, he hoped in God, he should not with to live to fee any alteration made in the church. He was a friend to a church establishment, he was of opinion that the clergy were very ferviceable to every community where they were known, for they inftructed the mafs of the people in their duty. He would afk any man, whether any perfon having a thousand a year in the church, ought to pay the fame fum as a perfon of a thoufand a year landed property? Befides this, he objected to the fcale of duty. It was faid, that men may reduce their expences, in order to enable them to pay this impoft, A gentleman of only 1000l. a year cannot reduce. He then read fome calculations that were made by very able calculators, to fhew the monstrous inequality of the fcale, as it now flood in the bill, which, however, might be amended in the committe, and the minister was welcome to thefe calculations, if he thought they would be of use to him. He then proceeded to ftate fome more general obje&ions to this meafure. He confidered a tax upon income as a tax upon industry, and fuch as would make men unwilling to labour. They would argue with them felves thus: why fhould we labour when government runs away with the effect of it? This was the great objection that had always been taken to tythes, and as far as it went it was certainly unanswerable. From this one point, if there were none other against it, he was perfuaded that this bill would become very unpopular. He did not with to fay much upon this bill now, becaufe if it went into a committee, frequent opportunities would occur to say more; Dd2

but

but he did not fee why he fhould have faid lefs than he did; for he really thought the measure extremely dangerous, inasmuch as it would check the vigour and energy of the merchant and manufacturer.. There was an author who had made great noife in the world (Mr. Paine,) who was prosecuted for his book, part of which was brought into his mind by the bill before the Houfe. He quoted that author the more readily as he differed from him in the outline of his work, and therefore was the lefs partial to any thing he wrote, We differ a little," faid Mr, Taylor, for he happens to like a republic, and I deteft it. He defpifes a church eftablishment, and I. revere it. Thefe works, however, I read by way of obtaining negative inftruction. They fhew me what I am. to avoid." Here he read a paffage from Mr. Paine's publication, the fubftance of which is, that government always takes to themfelves all the produce of the induftry of the people, under the head of revenue, &c. He faid that this bill reminded him of that paffage. He obferved that if this bill was fuppofed to affect chiefly the rich gentlemen in the country, it was a mistake. It hurt not the rich man, it only made him retire from his former fituation of fplendour; and who fuffered not him, but hundreds of the induftrious people who were employed and paid for their trouble in attending upon or working for that fplendour. Better far would be a tax that was to be borne generally by all claffes of people in the community. There was one thing more which he mutt beg leave to obferve in anfwer to his learned friend who had preceded him in this debate. It had been ftated as if his hon. friend (Mr. Tierney) had faid that corporations and church lands fhould be laid hold of for the ftate. His hon. friend had faid no fuch thing. He had faid that if any property was to be made a facrifice, that might be facrificed with the reft; but that he hoped nong would be facrificed. He fhould be glad to hear his honourable. fiend explain that matter. He concluded with obferving that he had taken up more of the time of the Houfe than per haps he ought, but he was compelled to say the things he did because he felt them.

The Solicitor General began, by obferving, on two ob'ections which had been urged with much confidence again't the financial measure now under confideration of the Houfe. The first, that it argued a dereliction of the principle laid down by his right hon. Friend last year, in bringing forward the bufinefs of the affeffed taxes, appeared to him to be per

fectly