One twenty-sixth part of such income, if the same shall amount to 135l. but shall be under 1401. One twenty-fourth part of such income, if the same shall amount to 1401. but shall be under 1451. One twenty-second part of such income, if the same shall amount to 145l. but shall be under 150l. One twentieth part of such income, if the same shall amount to 150l. but shall be under 155l. One nineteenth part of such income, if the same shall amount to 155l. but shall be under 160l. One eighteenth part of such income, if the same shall amount to 1601. but shall be under 165l. One seventeenth part of such income, if the same shall amount to 165l. but shall be under 1701. One sixteenth part of such income, if the same shall amount to 170/. but shall be under 175l. One fifteenth part of such income, if the same shall amount to 175l. but shall be under 1801. One fourteenth part of such income, if the same shall amount to 180l. but shall be under 185/ One thirteenth part of such income, if the same shall amount to 1857. but shall be under 190/. One twelfth part of such income, if the same shall amount to 190/. but shall be under 195/ One eleventh part of such income, if the same shall amount to 195%. but shall be under 2007. And one tenth part of such income, if the same shall amount to 2007. or upwards. The resolutions were agreed to, and the report was ordered to be received on the following day. December 14, 1798. MR. HOBART brought up the report of the committee on the bill for impos"that this report be now ing a general tax upon income. On the question taken into further consideration," MR. PITT, in reply to Sir John Sinclair, and some other members, who had expressed their decided hostility to the bill, spoke to the following effect : SIR,-Impressed as I am with the conviction that there never was a subject of greater importance in all its aspects, and in all its consequences, agitated within these walls, I should not have thought it incumbent upon me, in the present stage of the business, to have troubled you with any observations, were there not some points which have been touched upon to-night, which I am desirous, as soon as possible, to place in their proper point of view. What has been urged by some gentlemen who spoke in the course of the debate, while it could not be considered fairly as argument, was directed in such a manner against the farther progress of the measure, was so calculated to excite prejudice, and to beget misconception, that it demands some degree of notice. It is a satisfaction to me to find that the propriety of raising a certain part of the supplies within the year has in general been conceded. If we can judge from what has appeared tonight, there is nobody in the house, except the honourable baronet* who opened the debate, who is disposed to contest the principle. I am thus relieved from the necessity of detaining the house with any argument upon that subject, or saying any thing in reply to one solitary antagonist by whom the principle was denied. Whatever authority may belong to that individual member, and no man has more, the worthy baronet himself seemed to rest entirely upon that authority, as he did not add a single argument in support of his position. The house then will no doubt be willing to dispense with any argument upon this branch of the question. There were some others, however, who, entering upon the consideration of the subject with liberal professions of approbation, and a firm conviction of the necessity of great and extraordinary exertion in the cause in which we are engaged; admitting the benefits which might be derived both in present vigour and permanent resources, from the plan of raising a great part of the supplies within the year, yet thought themselves at liberty, not after full consideration of the whole details, not after weighing maturely the regulations by which this great principle is to be carried into execution, and followed up with effect, not after long and sincere endeavours to remedy what was defective, and to im • Sir John Sinclair. prove what was wrong, reluctantly to dismiss the measure as impracticable to the end proposed, but, in the first instance, hastily, peremptorily, and impatiently, to shut the door against all improvement, and to oppose all farther deliberation. Although agreeing in the principle, and aware as they must be that a measure of such magnitude and importance must depend much upon the arrangement of details, and the regulation of provisions, they seem resolved to check all attempt to bring these points again into consideration. Confessing the necessity of great and vigorous efforts for the salvation of the country, in which some of them, now for the first time, have tardily discovered, that our safety is involved, they do not wait to reject the measure upon any ground of final and invincible objection, but they come forward to resist it in the very outset, previous to a mature examination of its details, and a sincere endeavour to correct its provisions. The honourable gentleman who spoke last* approves of the principle of raising a considerable part of the supplies within the year, but he declares himself an enemy to any plan of rendering that principle effectual by a general tax. The house will, no doubt, think this a most valuable concession of the honourable gentleman! If it be necessary for the effort which we are called upon to make, if it be essential to the firm establishment of public credit, to the future prosperity of the empire, to obtain that supply which is requisite for the vigorous prosecution of the contest, it is evident that it must be obtained by a sudden tax immediately productive. If it is impossible, by an increase of the existing taxes on consumption, by introducing evils ten times more severe than those which are imputed to this measure, it is evident that nothing can realize the principle but some extraordinary and general tax. If the honourable gentleman, as I perceive he does, admits that such an increase of the taxes on consumption as would produce ten millions within the year is impracticable, it follows that there is no other mode but a tax upon property, so far as it can be discovered. We must lay the contribution, then, * Mr. W. Smith, either upon capital or on income. From this general operation, however, the honourable gentleman would exempt all those whom he is pleased to call exclusively the useful classes, and lay the whole of the weight on what he calls the useless class. In the class of useless the honourable gentleman has thought proper to rank all the proprietors of land, those men who form the line which binds and knits society together-those on whom, in a great measure, the administration of justice, and the internal police of the country depends;-those men from whom the poor receive employment, from whom agriculture derives its improvement and support, and to whom, of course, commerce itself is indebted for the foundation on which it rests. Yet this class the honourable gentleman thinks proper to stigmatize as useless drones, of no estimation or merit in the eyes of society. When the consequences with which this light flippant theory, the offspring of mere temporary unthinking policy, would be attended, are fairly considered, the honourable gentleman will find that his distinction between useful and useless classes is as little founded in truth, as the practical system he founds upon it would be consistent with the general interest of those whom he thinks entitled to peculiar favour. The question then is, whether capi❤ tal or income be the proper object of contribution? The honourable gentleman says that capital is the criterion which ought to be adopted in the case of the commercial man, and income where it is derived from land. Taking for granted, that the principles of the honourable gentleman were well founded, no less than three-fourths of the whole income liable to contribution is calculated to arise from this source. Even upon his own argument, then, he ought not to consider this measure as so incurable as to refuse going into the committee. If, then, he is sincere in his profession of desire to facilitate the raising of a considerable part of the supplies within the year, why should be refuse to proceed farther in a measure which is at least capable of embracing three fourths of his object; and in other parts susceptible of alteration and improvement? If, however, what has been so universally recognised as important to be done, is to be done effec tually, and the great consideration is, on which of these leading objects it will be most advantageous to the public, and least inconvenient to the classes of contribution to impose this general and comprehensive tax, I am afraid, that to that very plan, which he himself thinks preferable, those objections on which he rested the desponding hope, that the country neither could, nor would submit to the measure, would apply with aggravated force. Every objection, which he so long and vehemently urged against the danger of disclosure, will apply to those new theories of policy on which he would act. The honourable gentleman says, he is against disclosure. How, then, is he to ascertain the amount of that commercial capital, the profits of which he thinks might justly be made to contribute? Would he be contented with that loose declaration, which experience has proved to be so favourable to evasion? Would he recognise the justice of a principle, which he would utterly defeat and nullify by the provisions he recommends to carry it into effect? What then does he do to support that great cause, to 'invigorate those ex◄ traordinary efforts which are necessary for our success in a contest, which all but a few, who but lately have got some few lights, have long considered to be connected with our existence? Yet, when appearing for the first time as a proselyte to the cause of his country and of mankind, though standing in the new character of a convert, he still retains so much of the bias of his old opinions, that he denies the means of rendering those measures effective, which he acknowledges to be indispensable, and carrying into practice that principle which he professes to approve. The real dispute between us, then, is nothing but a matter of detail. The greater part of the honourable gentleman's speech was founded upon objections to the provisions of the bill; and many of his objections were either utterly unfounded in any thing it contains, or they were of such a nature as to admit of being corrected in the committee. In arguing the matter in this way, in the present stage, the honourable gentleman could be regular only upon a point of strict form. He knows very well that the |