Motion by Mr. Fox, for repealing the foop tax; fupported by Mr. Lambton; reply of Mr. Pit; motion rejected. Bill brought in for farming the poft borse duty; meets an early oppofition;. Mr. Pitt's defence of the meajure, as not being repugnant to the conftitution, nor dangerous as a precedent; opposed on the jecond reading by Mr. Marsbam, Mr. Lambton, Mr. Baftard, and Mr. Wyndham ; bill paffed. Singular petition from debtors in Newgate. Infolvent bill paffes the house of commons oppofed and rejected in the house of lords; Sentiments of the chancellor upon measures of that nature; of lord Rawdon. Motion by Mr. Grey, relative to abuses in the poft office; fatis from the report of the committee; animadverfion by Mr. Fox and Mr. Sheridah upon Mr. Pitt's conduct ; retort of the latter upon the coalition ; firièture on Mr. Pitt's temporizing with lord North, by Mr. Adam; violent altercation between Mr. Pitt and Mr. Grey ; motion of cenfure respecting the post office by Mr. Grey; oppofed by lord Maitland and Mr. Pitt; rejected without a division. Motion in the boufe of lords, relative to the votes of the dukes of Queensberry and Gordon, in the election of the fixteen peers; opposed by the chantellor; fupported by lord Kihnàird; opinions of lord Douglas, earl of Moreton, and duke of Richmond; motion carried. Motion in the boufe of commons, relative to the right of the fons of Scotch peers to reprefent Scotch boroughs or counties; opinions of Sir John Sinclair, Mr. Dundas, Sir James Johnftone, and Sir Adam Ferguffon, in the negative; of lords Beauchamp,. Maitland, and Elcho, in the affirmative; carried for the negative. UR readers will 24th April. recollect that the tax impofed upon retail fhopkeepers in the year 1785, was ftrongly oppofed at the time by the inhabitants of London and Weftminster, as partial and unjust in its principle, and peculiarly opprellive in its operation upon those two cities. The following year their members were inftructed to move for its repeal; and though the motion was rejected by a great majority, they continued, with unremitted perfeverance, to take the moft active and vigorous measures for fecuring fuccefs upon fome future occafion. Meetings were held, affociations formed, committees appointed, and a correfpondence carried on with all the confiderable towns and corporations of the kingdom; many of which, being proportionably fufferers, readily joined the capital in another application to parliament for relief. The bufinels was this year committed to Mr. Fox, who on the 24th of April moved the houfe for the repeal. He faid, he had never been forward in oppofing taxes, because he thought it the duty, in general, of members of parliament to fupport government in the arduous and invidious measures of finance: but at the fame time he thought there were limits to this duty, and that they were bound to infift upon the abolition of any tax, which upon a fair trial was found to be oppreflive and unjust. Such a trial the tax in queftion had [1] 2 undergone, undergone, and it was found by experience to be, what he had originally declared it would prove, a partial tax upon houfekeepers, whofe houfes had fhops annexed to them; it was to all intents and purposes a perfonal tax, unjustly levied from a particular defcription of men. To perfift in faying that the confumer paid the tax, when the thopkeepers knew and were ready to declare on oath, that they paid it themselves and could not lay any part of it on their customers, was the moft ridi culous obftinacy. If the hopkeepers came to the bar, and faid, "We "pay the tax, and as it affects us olely, we beg to be relieved from it," would the house say, "No, 66 you do not pay the tax, we pay "it, though you do not know it, "and we chufe to continue to pay "it?" The partiality of the tax, he faid, was in the highest degree glaring. The whole fum affeffed for the shop tax amounted to 59,000l. of which the cities of London and Weftmin fter, and the adjacent parishes, paid 43,000l. In fome parts of the kingdom not above 100l. was affeed for a whole county, and not above fifty for a few. If, according to the opinions of fome politicians, every place thould fend fuch a number of reprefentatives to parliament as was proportionable to their payment of taxes, the inhabitants of London and Westminsterwould fend not less than 350. Thefe facts, Mr. Fox contended, proved the tax to, be fo partial and unjuft in its operation and preffure, that he could not, fee how the minifter could resist the application for its repeal with any colour of reafon or candour. Mr. Fox was feconded by Mr., Lambton, a young member, who had just taken his feat for the city of Durham, and who declared that he rejoiced in the opportunity of opening his lips, for the firft time. within those walls, with a remonfirance against a partial, oppreffive, and unjuft meafure; for as fuch he was warranted, not only by his own conviction, but by the inftructions of his constituents, to reprobate the tax in question. Mr. Lambton ftated his objections to the tax in a long fpeech, with fo much eloquence and ingenuity as to draw from the chancellor of the exchequer, who followed him, ttrong expreffions of his admiration. Mr. Pitt declared, however, that he was by no means convinced by his arguments; and that be muft ftill maintain, that the tax would fall not upon the shopkeepers but the confumers. It was true, this would not take place through the means of any general and uniform addition to the prices of particular articles; but each fhopkeeper would naturally confider what article of his dealing was the moft convenient for him to enhance, fo as to bring him in an equivalent for the tax and although the fame article might not be chofen by an-. other shopkeeper for the fame purpofe, yet there was no danger of the former lofing his cuftom thereby; for if it were found that on the general average the prices of both were equal, the buyer would, from motives of convenience, refort to the fame fhop. In addition to this and other arguments in favour of the tax, he begged the houfe to confider, that in giving it up now they abandoned it for ever; and in any further emergency would be tied up and precluded from having refort to it. Upon a divifion there appeared, for for the repeal 147, against it 183. 26th April. On the twenty-fixth of April a bill to authorize the commiffioners of the treasury to let out to farm the duty upon poft horfes, was brought into the houfe of commons by the chancellor of the exchequer. A meafure fo totally without precedent in this kingdom, and adopted from the practice of countries, whofe forms of government were lefs favourable to the liberty of the fubject than ours, was received, as might be expected, with great jealoufy and fufpicion. Before the bill was fuffered to be read a first time, the minifter was called upon to ftate the neceffity upon which it was founded, the extent of the frauds it was defigned to prevent, and the new powers that were to be given to the farmers of the tax, to enable them to put a stop to thofe frauds in future. In order to afford the houfe the information that was required, Mr. Pitt remarked, that the fraudulent evafion of the tax was a matter of fuch notoriety, that he believed it could not have efcaped the obfervation of a fingle member of that affembly. The extent of thefe frauds had not, he said, been ascertained, but he believed no one doubted of its being very confiderable, and it was a circumftance which added much to the grievance, that the tax for the most part was exacted with great strictness from the public, but that a large proportion of it, through collufion between the inn-keepers and the collectors, never found its way into the exchequer. To correct great an abufe, and to fecure to the public the receipt of that money, which the individual was thus obliged to pay, it was neceffary to put the duty under fome regulation; and the only effectual mode, which had occurred to him, was that of letting it out to farm. It was intended, he said, to divide the ifland into diftricts, each of which, a few inflances excepted, would contain a county. These were to be put up to public auction; and that the public might at leaft be fure of lofing nothing by the bargain, the bidders were to begin from that fum, which the district, at its highest rate, had ever yet produced. There could be little doubt that many candidates would offer themfelves, and that the duty in each diftrict would let nearly for what might reafonably be fuppofed to be its full value. It was propofed, that the agreement should continue for three years, that the leffee should keep a regular account of his receipts,and that thefe accounts fhould be fubmitted to the infpection of the treafury. No greater powers were to be given to the farmers than had been given to the prefent collectors;. and it was merely from the fuperiour, because the more interested, vigilance of the former, that they could derive any advantage. He had heard it, he said, objected, that there was fomething in the principle of fuch an efiablithment repugnant to our conftitution, and to the general fyftem of our revenue; but for this objection he faw no folid foundation. It was true, that fuch a principle did generally obtain in fome countries of more defpotic and arbitrary forms of government than ours; and perhaps fome degree of oppreflionmight arife from the manner, in which that principle was carried into effect. But But thofe oppreffions were not to be attributed to the fyftem of farming the revenues, but to the form of government, which of itfelf would naturally lead to arbitrary and oppreffive modes of collection under any fyftem of revenue which might be adopted. In thofe countries there was not, as in this, a parliament jealous of the rights and liberties of their fellow-fubjects, and able to protect them; there the farmers were invefted with their powers by the crown fingly; whereas here, without the confent of parliament, no fuch powers could be given, even if a minifter fhould be defirous to have them granted. With refpect to its being an innovation-that, he contended, was not, in fact, ftri&tly true. He referred to the turnpike duty, which, he obferved, was of all others the moft analogous in its nature and the mode of its collection to that under difcuffion; and which was almoft univerfally let to farm. Another inftance adduced by him was, that of the cross-letter poftage, which had been for many years let out to Mr. Allen, the gentleman who firft fuggefted it. A farther alarm had been taken, from an apprehenfion that the precedent might hereafter be followed up, and other branches of the revenue put under a fimilar regulation. He denied that he had any fuch in tention; and he defired the house to confider, whether there was not fomething in the poft-horfe duty, which made it peculiarly proper to be placed under the new fyftem, and which might not be applicable to any other branch of the public revenue. He concluded with fome obfervations upon the neccility of enforcing a vigorous and effectual collection of the revenue, as the only method of fupporting the power and credit of the country. Thefe arguments not appearing fatisfactory to the minority, the houfe divided upon the queftion, whether the bill thould be read the first time; when there appeared, ayes 76, noes 39. The oppofition was renewed upon the fecond reading of the bill, and feveral ftrong objections were made both to its principle and provifions. It was urged by Mr. Martham, that no proof had yet been afforded the houfe of the exiftence of the frauds mentioned in the preamble, and not even an affertion, that the tax was declining in its produce. The reverie indeed was the fact, it having increased in the last quarter upwards of 9,000l. Before the houfe adopted a measure of fo new and important a nature, they fhould at least have the neceffity of it established by fome fort of evidence. He objected to the term of three years, for which time the farmers were to hold their contracts; he even doubted, he faid, whether the house could put the power of repealing a tax, or enacting necef fary regulations refpecting it, out of their reach for fuch a space of time. Mr. Lambton ftrongly condemned the bill and the mode of proceeding upon it, as tending to eftablish a dangerous precedent. The exiftence of notorious frauds might be al ledged in any other branch of the revenue, if no evidence or specifi cation of them was to be required by that houfe. It ought to be remarked, he said, that the contractors were not to be deprived of their votes at elections. This was the fruit which the minifter looked forward to pluck from the tree he was planting; but he hoped the houfe would blast that fruit in its bud. Mr. Baftard thought the bill in many reípects unconftitutional. Befides the influence it tended to create, he thought the houfe could not delegate the powers of the exe-, cutive government to others, who were not amenable to that houfe. The executive government, in adopting this measure, were getting rid of their refponfibility, and the houfe was giving up their power of redrefs, which was the laft thing they fhould part with. Provided the fubject was aggrieved and complained, what could the houfe on fuch an occafion do?-Nothing, till the contract expired. The contrac. tor knew this, and would be tempt ed to opprefs by the fecurity of his. bargain. He was armed indeed with no other powers than what the government collectors poffelled; but there would be an infinite difference in the execution of them between the avaricious rigour of a private person in the purfuit of his own intereft, and the liberal proceedings of a board, who were only agents for the public. Mr. Wyndham remarked upon the fallacy of the argument that had been used to prove that the public might gain, but could not lole by the bargain: the very reverfe, he faid, was the truth. It could not gain, because the produce of the tax being in a state of progreffive improvement, and being put up to fale at its prefent rate, the farmers would take care not to raife the price beyond the certainty of reaping fome profit from it; it might lofe, becaufe,upon a fuppofition that the prefent collection is 100,000l. and that the farmer confents to give 105,000l. yet if he, by an enforced collection, obtains 115,000l. we clearly give away 10,000l. for 5,000l. and the public pays the whole. Mr. Wyndham contended, that it was the duty of government to keep the collection in their own hands, and to try, by apt and proper regulations, to bring into the exchequer as much as poffible of what was really paid, and not to put it in the power of grinding farmers of the revenue to make large fortunes at the public expence. He adverted alfo to the bad precedent, which the prefent bill would eftablish; and asked, whether any man ever introduced a precedent, of which a bad ufe might afterwards be made, in a manner glaringly objectionable in itself? The bill was fupported in its feveral ftages by Mr. Grenville, the attorney general, Mr. Rolle, and fir Richard Hill; and was finally carried, upon a divifion, by 162 to 95. Early in the prefent feflion of parliament, a petition was prefented to the houfe of commons from the debtors confined in the jail of Newgate, in which, after reprefenting the various hardships of their fituation, and praying the houfe to take their cafe into confideration, they concluded in the following words; "At the fame time they beg leave most humbly to remark, that by the breach of a civil contract (unless this honourable house pass a bill for their relief) they mutt linger away their unhappy lives in a loathlome jail, while felons, who defy the laws of their country, fuffer a lefs punifhment, by enjoying their liberty [4]4 in |