principle. The power of the sword was in no case to be justified in the violation of treaties. Were it, however, allow able to have any prepossession on the subject, he owned there might be one case in which he might less violently oppose it; not certainly in the case of Great Britain, but in the case of the weak against the strong. Without en. tering into the question, he observed, that where we had decided every thing by treaty, our obligations became the stronger.

The paper was ordered to be printed.

PROPERTY TAX BILL.

Lord Henry Petty moved the order of the day for the third reading of the property tax bill.

Mr Vansittart moved certain clauses by way of riders. The first for exempt. ing Commissioners of the income tax from being parish officers, or obliged to serve on juries.-Agreed to. The second, that the assessments should not be suspended on account of the former assessments not being completed.

Mr Johnstone conceived this clause to create a very great hardship, in obliging people in one year to pay 16 per cent. on their whole incomes.

The objection was answered by Lord H. Petty and Mr Vansittart, who thought, if it were not so, a bonus would be given to those who had evaded the as

sessment.

This clause was also agreed to, as were also another, brought up by Mr Vansittart, for facilitating the assessments for former years, and a clause for enabling the India Company to stop the tax from the interest of bonds issued after the 30th September 1806.

Mr Francis said, that an Hon. Member had remarked, that unless they were exempted from this tax, foreigners would withdraw their money from the funds. With respect to that question, he would inquire into the policy of it. The capital vested in the name of foreigners on the 6th of this month would produce a tax of between 40 and 50,000l. per ann. and it is increasing every day; so that what you are going to give up will, in reality, soon amount to 100,000l. annually. The money of foreigners is here in a state of security, and they will not draw it out of the funds merely on account of paying the tax. Where

else could they place it so safely? But they find not only security, but speculation. The interest of this money is, however, spent in France, and for the support of our inveterate enemy. And how is it possible, even if the principle were just, to distinguish between real and pretended foreign property? If that could be done, perhaps all the real foreign property would not be worth the attention that I am bestowing upon it.-Mr Francis here adverted to the great sums of money that were sent over to this country confidentially, by unfortunate people who were obliged to emigrate, and to the flagitious use that was in some cases made of that confidence. The present clause, he said, would lay the ground of similar iniquities, perjury, and crimes.

He then read a clause of an article of agreement made with the contractors for the loan in the time of Queen Anne, and which he said was continued in all the subsequent contracts, stipulating that no charge, tax, &c. should be levied on their annuities. But these contracts, as far as they were specific, have been violated. It is saying, with you, who are British subjects, we will not perform our contract; but to you, who are foreigners, we will remit certain dues. Are not these foreigners bound, according to their means, to support the Government which protects them? But of all arguments, it appeared to him to be the strangest to say, that because they were not represented, they should on that account not be liable to pay taxes.-That would certainly not be the argument of those who were for taxing America. He had himself belonged to the society of "the Friends of the People," and was one of the last of them. They had petitioned the House for a reform in Parliament, and stated, that the people of England were not adequately represented, but they never stated, nor never thought, that they should not pay taxes. In that society were the present Lord Chancellor of England, the First Lord of the Admiralty, the Treasurer of the Navy, and almost all those who were now high in his Majesty's Administration. The present state of the country should also be considered, when it was impossible to collect a tax that would not wring from the poor what they could not afford to

give. To abandon 100,000l. per annum to foreigners, at such a time, would be most grating to their feelings. At present they were in despair; unless used with great tenderness, they might be driven to madness. He concluded by moving for the expunging of the clause. Mr Fox admitted the disinterestedness of his Hon. Friend (Mr Francis) in bringing forward his motion, and hop. ed he would do those with whom he had the honour to act equal justice, by believing, that in postponing this clause, they could not have been influenced by any particular tenderness to foreigners. He thought it would be extremely impolitic to discourage foreigners from vesting their money in the funds. The sum said to be vested in their names, he must conceive, was exaggerated. It was at all events only matter of opinion. The system, he would not deny, might be open to fraud, but it did not appear that any had been practised. If his Right Hon. Friend were to vest his property in the funds in the name of any foreigner, and he were to die, the property would go to the heirs of that foreigner, according to the French, or Dutch, or any other foreign laws.-With respect to the contract which his Hon. Friend mentioned in the time of Queen Ann, he was ready to admit that something had been done, which, without a strained construction, might be considered as a tax upon funds. But in the assessed, income, and property du. ties, the tax was never laid as on funded property. If laid upon foreigners, however, it could not be laid in any other manner than as a tax upon the funds. The arguments with respect to foreign ers, he thought, were in some respects invidious. Would they not be able to aid the enemy more with their capital than the interest? And can you hinder its going to the enemy, unless you confiscate it all? Gentlemen should, in order to be assured that they were promoting justice, suppose themselves, not only in the place of others, but in the place of an enemy. The Hon. Gentleman need not be afraid, that this money would be pocketed by the indivi dual, without being subject to any tax; there was, he believed, a property tax in France, as well as in England; and in ever country in Europe there was some kind of a which would seize on

a portion of this money. Another argument might be made use of against the justice of the measure. The money arising from this tax was expended in raising and supporting an army and navy, the principal object of which was to destroy France: so that the foreigner might exclaim, that a part of his property had been seized on for the purpose of enabling England to take possession of the remainder.

As to what the Hon. Gentleman had said on the subject of representation, no one who had said, that the representation of the country was inadequate, except perhaps a few eccentric men, had denied that the people owed obedience to that House as their representatives. The very phrase inadequate re. presentation proved, that the friends of reform conceived, that the people were represented, that the virtual representation, indeed, was not complete, and that it ought to approach more to what was real. Every person with whom he had been connected, disclaimed the idea of universal suffrage, but he did not know on what the constitution of the country depended, if the people were not considered as virtually represented in Parliament. It was because America was neither virtually nor really represented in Parliament, and that the Americans had no complete communion of interests with this country, that our right to tax America was denied? that it was on precisely the same grounds that he now objected to taxing the property of foreigners in our funds. He never could agree with the Hon. Gentleman, that Parliament had a right to tax this property, because they had a power; and confessed that he was of the same opinion with Lord Thurlow, who said, that he did not understand that species of right, which, the moment it was done, was a wrong. It was impossible that the House could vote away money that did not belong to them; and this appeared from the act itself, the words of which were, "We give and grant to his Majesty so much money," which necessarily implied, that it belonged to the donors; and his Majesty's answer in receiving it is," that he accepts it from his faithful subjects." The Government could not tax the country, it was the people that taxed themselves; by the constitution they had a right to give

their

their own, but not that which belonged to others; or, in other words, they had no right to give away any part of the property of those who were not represented in Parliament, and whose interests were not only not the same, but totally different. There was but one opinion in the House, that the point of taxation they had come to was truly lamentable; it was the opinion of all, that the burden should be lightened on the poor as much as possible; but he conceived,that, to attain this end in any degree, they should not be guilty of an injustice, they should keep their hands clean, and not defile them by giving away that which did not belong to them, for the purpose of lightening the load on the poor.

Sir Robert Buxton said he must enter his solemn protest against the tax, as a measure that went to defeat its own

object, and lay a grievous burden of 13 instead of 10 per cent. upon the landed interest. If it was to be considered as a land tax, let it have all the benefit of a land tax, by being made only an an. nual measure.

Mr Vansittart and Lord H. Petty said, it was so far annual, that it might be repealed at any time.

Mr W. Smith could not let the bill pass without again giving his opinion on it. He said, that notwithstanding any ameliorations it might have under. gone, there were still so many instances of injustice and inequality in the measure, that it should never meet with his concurrence. He had, in general, no objection to a tax on property. But a tax regulated like the present, was unequal and oppressive. An instance of the kind had come to his knowledge that very day. He had a letter from some persons who declared the only income they had was an annuity which would expire in 1808. And yet this annuity, which had a little more than two years to run, would pay a duty of 10 per cent. This was only one among various other instances he knew of.

Mr Huddlestone said, it would be impossible for the bill ever to operate. The most grievous hardships would be sustained by persons having incomes from the funds, under 5ol. a year.

The effect would be, that many poor people must sell their capital; and when

the principal was gone, spend the remainder of their lives in workhouses. He had made a calculation, by which it would appear, that the number of stockholders having incomes under sol. ayear, amounted to 220,000l. All these would now be liable to pay 10 percent. as well as the man who had so many thousands. He would ask if this was justice? The plan would make the funds lower, because poor people would dislike to put money there, and he did not think it would yield any revenue, because many of those who contributed to the burdens of the state, would shortly themselves become burdensome. He thought the tax ought to have been increased on persons of large fortunes, so as to lighten it on small ones.

Lord De Blaquiere asked if it was liberal or fair to enter protest against a bill after it had passed through all its stages? It had already received the sanction of the House, and it ought not to be sent into the world with a tin can nister tied to its tail.

Mr Vansittart said, if the documents before the House were examined, it would be found that the higher classes were comparatively so few, that a great burden on them would not make up for the loss of revenue arising even from a slight alleviation exercised towards the lower classes.

Mr Atkins Wright said, he knew of property in the funds possessed by persons who received parish relief. Yet this property would not be liable to the duty.

The bill was then passed.

On the report of the Irish stamp duty bill, Sir John Newport moved a clause to repeal that part of the former Irish stamp duty act, by which a newspaper was to be suppressed if the printer of it should be absent ten days, or the proprietor three months, from Ireland."

The House resolved itself into a committee to consider of allowing salaries to the new Military Commissioners. It was then agreed, on the motion of Mr Vansittart, that 1500l. a-year, during the time they were employed, be allowed to the Chief Commissioners, and 1000l. to the others; with an increased allowance in case of going abroad; allowances to clerks, &c..

Friday,

Friday, May 30.

NEW MILITARY SYSTEM. The House resolved itself into a Committee on the mutiny bill, when

Mr Windham rose and adverted, first, to the clause containing the form of the oath to be taken by the person enlisting: He was to swear that he was of the proper age that he did not belong to any regiment. of militia, or to the navy; and that he proposed to serve his Majesty for the period of seven years, and further as his Majesty should direct, not exceeding three years; such service was to terminate at the end of six months of continued peace, subsequent to the expiration of the seven years; and there was to be a direction in the act, that if the person was under 18 when he enlisted, so many years should be added to the term as would make the seven years commence from his age of 18 years. There were other clauses, particularly that every soldier entitled to his discharge, who should be serving abroad, should be sent to Great Britain free of expence, and be entitled to have and receive marching money, and be allowed the usual number of halting days till he reached the place where he was first attested. These clauses constituted the most material alterations in the bill. The House was already in possession of the subject. He trusted he had by this bill secured what he wished that while the contract with the soldier was secured to the public, the soldier also had the pledge of Parliament for its performance. A power was still left to the Executive Government to vary the contract after a cer. tain number of years. It was impracticable, upon a subject so varied, to provide before hand for all possible cases. Something must be left to be regulated at the discretion of the instant. He referred to the measures adopted prior to the present war for recruiting the army, and pointed out their inefficacy. The plan of the supplementary militia, which was to have raised 100,000 men, was one of the first adopted. Could any one suppose that a ineasure so oppressive would have been resorted to, if the ordinary method of recruiting had not failed? It was at tempted to raise the militia by the force of ballot, but it was well known, that the number fell considerably short of

what were wanted. Recourse was had to penalties of 1ol. then of zol. All these measures were so many confessions of the want of the power and means of recruiting. So many schemes having failed, it was evident that there was no remedy but going back to the ordinary means of recruiting. By the high bounties, and various other modes, a necessity had been created for doing that which was now called a wanton innovation, and it was necessary to adopt a total change. The only question was as to the fittest plan. He thought that all the good sense upon this subject lay in a narrow compass. He had stated, when he opened the cutline of his military plan, that all the option which nature furnished was force or choice.He was therefore willing, in the first place, to try the effect of voluntary enlistment; and, to encourage it, he knew no way but to make what was offered worthy the acceptance of those to whom it was tendered, and having done so, all had been done that could be done. If afterwards it was found that a sufficient number of the community could not be taught to think that the condition of a soldier was preferable to any other, then certainly recruiting by voluntary service was impossible; the army must be left unrecruited, or recourse must be had to compulsion.What was to be done? You could not change your population, but you might change the nature of your service. If any thing was in the power of Government, it was that of effecting a change in the capacity of those it retained in its pay. True it was, that Government could not make a soldier's life a life of ease, plenty, or great profit; but in every age, and every period, motives had not been wanting to draw men into that honourable station. If those motives alone were not sufficient, other advantages must be called in aid. One advantage was, the stripping the service of the impediment of enlisting for life, or for an indefinite term. It had been said, that if the service was not eligible for life, how could it be expected to be so for seven years? He thought it unnecessary to argue, that the option of quitting a station was a reason for entering into it. It was certainly an advantage to a man, that if upon trial he did not like service, or any change hap

pen