gularly falling off every year. The net amount of the window tax, in Ireland, for the years ending 5th Jan. 1816, was 381,5391. 7.s. 6d.; for 1817,344,770l. 9s. 8d. a falling off of 36,768l. 17s. 10d. for 1818, 301,5571. 2s. 8d., a falling off of 43,213l. 6s. 7d.; and for the year ending 5th Jan. 1819, only 223,636l. 6s. 9d., a falling off of 77,920. 15s. 11d. Will you, then, refuse to repeal this tax, at present producing so small a sum, after you have remitted fourteen millions of taxes to the people of England? For all these reasons, I entreat the House to pause before they turn the people of Ireland from their bar, while they are humbly and respectfully praying to be relieved from this most unproductive, odious, and oppressive tax. I now move," That a select committee be appointed to consider the expediency of repealing the 26th of the king, as far as respects the Tax upon Windows in Ireland." to the candid consideration of the House. | tax on the Statute Books was so clear, as The impression throughout Ireland is, that to prevent the possibility of its contiif she had now a resident legislature, this nuance being so considered. He admitted tax would have been long ago repealed. it was a war tax; but then it had been They ask you to remit a war tax, which pledged to the public creditor, and therethey believed you are pledged to remit to fore it was to be continued until some them; they know this tax to be dangerous other security to that creditor was proin its consequences to the public health; vided. When the Income tax was imthey have found it to be most severe and posed in this country during the war, it unequable in its pressure; and they feel was merely a war tax: but when it was it for every reason to be odious. It ap- given as a security for the advances made pears by the returns which I hold in my to the public, it was necessarily continued band, that the notices served on the col- until the public creditor was otherwise lectors for closing up windows for the satisfied. If any less objectionable mode three years, ending 5th Jan. next, of raising an equal sum could be devised, amount to 32,424, and that the tax is re- he could have no objection to adopting it; otherwsie the present tax must be continued. The amount of the debt of Ireland to England was at present 104,000,000l.; and if England was not charged with four millions and a half an nually on this debt, Ireland would be involved to the whole amount of her revenue. He begged to remind the hon. member, that England had not been relieved from any tax which had not been also taken off in Ireland. It was true, the property tax had been taken off in this country, but then that tax had never been levied in Ireland; if it had, it would have been taken off also. Ireland had not been called upon to defray the charge of the countless millions which had been expended during the war; they had been borne almost en. tirely by England. This view of the case was the more material, as it showed that Ireland had no just cause of complaint. Since the peace in 1815, several reductions had taken place in the malt and spirit taxes, and in the assessed taxes of Ireland, to the amount of 183,000l. Irish currency. In 1817, no reduction took place, but in 1818 the taxes were reduced to the amount of 270,000l. In the last three quarters of a year the assessed taxes were reduced, from 480,000l. to 375,000l. He wished to know how he could justify himself to England and Scotland, if after these reductions, he were to take off the window tax. The House must know that no houses in Ireland having less than seven windows were taxed, while in England houses having six windows were liable. The whole number of Houses taxed in England was a million, those not liable amounted to between 800,000 and 900,000; so that in England more than one half of the houses were taxed, while not more than one-fourth of the houses in Ireland were The Chancellor of the Exchequer observed, that if the ground for repealing this tax was so clear, and its necessity so urgent, as was stated by the hon. member, there could be no necessity for a committee upon it; the best way would have been to bring in a bill at once to that effect. When this subject was before the House last year, he thought he had gone far enough to prevent the necessity of the present motion. A considerable reduction was then made in this tax; not from a feeling that its continuance was a breach of faith to Ireland; but because the situation of that country was such as to make it necessary. He was fully aware, that the good faith of government ought to be tenaciously preserved, and that the amount of the tax in question ought not to be put in competition with it.--But he was happy to find, that the entry of this so. Many of the larger houses in Ireland were occupied by the lower classes, who could not afford to pay the tax, but the wisdom of the Irish government interfered to prevent their closing up their windows, by not charging those opened, to prevent contagion. But it was urged that this had not had the desired effect. He would ask what more could be done? If the tax were repealed, it would be the same thing. In the one case, as in the other, it was saying that the windows so opened, would not be charged. In the schedule of the tax, it was said that lodging-houses inhabited by the poor, were only to be charged 1s. per window, and when the House considered that it was the owner of the House who paid this tax, and that those Houses produced large rents, they would perceive that the tax did not fall heavily. Under these circumstances, he felt himself bound to protest against the repeal of this tax. Mr. Vereker stated the grievances felt in Limerick by the oppressive operation of the window tax. He trusted that the wisdom and humanity of the House would suggest some remedy for such an evil, and give a favourable consideration to the petitions which had poured in from all parts of Ireland on this subject. Mr. Carew declared, that the shutting up of windows to avoid the payment of this tax, had, by impeding the ventilation of houses, greatly contributed to propagate the infection of the typhus fever in Ireland. The measure originated as a war tax, and ought not to be continued in time of peace. Sir G. Hill said, that he had last night presented a petition from Londonderry, praying for a repeal of the tax; and certainly, if any portion of the inhabitants of Ireland were entitled to an alleviation * from, or an abolition of this tax, his constituents had that claim, who had, during the prevalence of disease and distress, been foremost in setting a salutary example of providing asylums for the sick and naked, and provision for the hungry and distressed. He regretted that his duty as a representative in parliament, upon a general view of the exigencies and relative interests of the united kingdom, obliged him to support the tax. It seemed, that an opinion strongly prevailed, that Mr. Corry had given, in 1799, a pledge that this tax was to be continued only during the war. It is quite true, that at the period when the tax was first laid on, Mr. Corry did announce it as a tax which the pressure of war rendered it necessary for him to have recourse to, and he proposed it as indispensable from the difficulties of the moment, and no doubt it was, like many other taxes, since made permanent, termed a war tax; but Mr. Corry gave no pledge as to the time of its termination-none whatsoever. He (sir G. Hill) heard Mr. Corry propose it without such pledge; and subsequently in the parliament of the united kingdom, when peace did arrive, and the same Mr. Corry remained chancellor of the exchequer for Ireland, he was present when Mr. Corry was charged with the obligation of abandoning the tax, as having been proposed only for the continuance of the war, and to cease with the war, which Mr. Corry denied, and on appeal to what had passed in the Irish House of Commons, and on full discusssion in the united parliament, of pledge or no pledge, it was decided that no such pledge had been given, and the tax, in consequence, was continued during the peace of 1803. This appeal and discussion, it is material to observe, took place within four years of the time when the pledge was alledged to have been given, and if it was then decided in the negative, under what pretence are we now, at the distance of sixteen years from the time of that decision, to receive it? But, for argument sake, let us suppose that Mr. Corry had made the pledge, and that at the peace of 1803, he ought to have given it up; yet surely when a new and a fresh war broke out, and another chancellor of the exchequer, the right hon. baronet opposite (sir J. Newport), and under another administration, tried, adopted, and augmented even the rate of this tax, without reference to, or notice of, such pledge, nay, without even stating it to be a war tax, with what justice or consistency can this House now be asked to forget this proceeding, to pass by this conduct, and refer back to the terms on which Mr. Corry availed himself of the tax? But how gross the absurdity would be to insist, that the chancellor of the exchequer of the day could bind by his mere declaration, not only all his successors in office, but all future parliaments. Such a pledge, if given, could only be binding upon that minister, administration, and parliament who gave it; however, as no such pledge existed, let us argue the propriety of continuing a window tax in Ireland upon other reasoning-But first-he_must re wealth. He must say that there was a kind disposition, on the part of England to consider the situation of Ireland, upon all occasions with liberal views; this disposition we ought to cultivate and cherish, and not press too strongly upon it, which he felt he should be doing, if he called upon the English members to join him in voting away the remainder of this tax. mind his hon. friend, (Mr. Shaw) that when he and a deputation from the different parishes in Dublin, waited on the chancellor of the exchequer in September 1817, he and they would have rested contented with the continuance of the tax, if, upon that occasion, the reduction of 25 per cent, which was made in the subsequent session, had then been promised to them; and again, during the last session, it was a matter of notoriety, that a reduc. Mr. Knox complained, that the hopes tion of 50 per cent upon the tax instead of the people of Ireland were greatly disof 25, was asked for, and if it had been appointed in the way that this question then granted, the right hon. baronet (sir J. was met. He referred to the words of Newport) and all those who pretended to the original bill to show, that it was a rely on Mr. Corry's pledge, would have measure solely intended for a war expenbeen satisfied and silent on it-therefore diture. The people of the country never the question is a struggle for terms. Now, complained during the war of the burthen gratitude should induce the advocates of of this tax, nor was it until they could no farther reduction to admit that the regu- longer bear its operation, that their comlations and exemptions, particularly with plaints were heard against it. The hon. respect to lodging houses, have reduced member contended, that the operation of the tax in reality 50 per cent. He the law was most unfavourable to the lamented that his duty would not allow health of the community; and that, from him to concur in the motion without the report of the physicians in Dublin, it doing violent injustice to other parts of was evident the fever had greatly inthe empire. With Scotland, surely, Ire- creased, owing to the bad ventillation, so land might fairly be compared; and would many of the windows being shut up. it be just to the inhabitants of that country, Where a tax affected the health or induswho paid all the assessed taxes, the same try of a people, nothing but the most as in England, including window tax, to painful emergency should cause its eninsist on the exemption of Ireland from it actment or continuance. The right hon. altogether? As an honest statesman, he gentleman conceived that he granted a could not urge it, nor could he withhold great boon to Ireland last year, when he the statement of the burthens transferred reduced the tax 25 per cent. But that from Ireland to Great Britain, for the dis- it was not a boon generally felt was evicharge of which the people of England dent from the circumstance, that there and Scotland were taxed, and annually were three or four thousand notices of paying 4,648,9771. The entire farming discontinuance in that year, and, in the or agricultural classes were in Ireland three last years, no less than 33,000. The quite exempt from assessed taxes, a far-right hon. gentleman also stated, that a mer might have three hearths and six windows without charge, and few, in consequence, contributed any thing to the state. He was quite aware of the inability of Ireland to fulfil her union compact, and therefore the treasuries had been consolidated before the expiration of the twenty years; but à fortiori-Ireland ought not to expect the abrogation of a tax so productive as the present-in four years, to January 1818, it had produced nett into the exchequer above 350,000l. per annum. Instead of farther reduction of the window tax, he strongly recommended that his countrymen might look for such extension of aid, as might advance useful internal works and improvements in Ireland, and encourage her progress in industry, and acquirement of great many people in Ireland were not affected by the tax; for instance, the small farmers, and the minor manufacturers. It was true they did not feel the weight of this tax; but if it were to be a permanent measure, it must operate against the improvement of the situation of those persons. Mr. Plunkett said, he considered it a mistake to suppose that the members of the united parliament were not disposed to attend to the concerns of the sister kingdom. He thought that the interests of Ireland were listened to by British members with the kindest attention. It was to the representatives of England, that in this case he should chiefly address himself; and in the first place, he should endeavour to show, that in demanding the repeal of this tax, Ire-made permanent, but liable to the original land had a claim on the good faith and condition annexed to it, that on the arrival justice of parliament. Much discussion of certain events it should cease. But did had arisen whether the tax had been im- he say, that because this was a war tax, posed as a war tax, The hon. mover had parliament could not, in case of necessity, quoted the words of Mr. Corry, at the renew it? He meant to say no such time of the imposition of the tax, but a thing; but this only, that the question. right hon. baronet seemed to think, that should be now considered, not as an ap. if the pledge was given by Mr. Corry, plication to repeal an old tax, but as a reit was not binding on the good faith of sistance to the imposition of a new one. parliament. If this was his argument, We had then to consider the power of it would be for him to state, how the Ireland to support taxation. Ireland, it was said, owed a large debt-her revenue country could at any time know whether a pledge was given respecting any tax, would barely meet the annual charges, a unless from the words of the accredited sum equal to the whole interest of the debt was therefore a deficit? But this and responsible minister? How could a pledge be given or accepted but in such argument went too far. Did the chancellor a manner? It was said, that at the peace of of the exchequer mean to say that Ireland was to mkae up all this deficit? If so, the Amiens this tax had not been discon tinued; but if Ireland had originally jus-question would be, not to raise 200,000/ of the general expenditure of the empire, and hopes had been held out that she would do so, till she was absolutely a bankrupt. But this bubble was now burst, and the expenditure was to be provided for, not by a debtor and creditor account between the two countries, but by providing a common fund for common exigencies, and if it could be shown that Ireland could pay more than she did, he should be willing to agree to a tax, and the people of Ireland would not complain. The people of Ireland were not a complaining or repining people. They had bled as freely from their financial veins as from their purses; and the cries they now raised were not the work of artifice or combination, but wrung from the distresses of a suffering nation. If this tax was to be enforced for the first time, on what ground could the chancellor of the exchequer appeal to the House in its favour? It was a tax on civilization-an act to restrain those improvements in which Ireland would find prosperity, and England security. Every house, of a certain description, built in Ireland, was hostage for its connexion with this country. tice on her side-if faith had been pledged but four millions. Every one who knew to her that it should be repealed, this any thing about the matter, knew that this debt had been contracted in a course breach of promise might be a reason for her to complain, but no reason for a repe-been pledged to pay an extravagant share of madness and folly; thus Ireland had tition of the same injustice. The ques tion now was, had the pledge been given? Besides the declaration of Mr. Corry, there were two acts of parliament since the original imposition of the tax; the acts of the 40th of the king, chap. 4-the next the 40th, chap. 52. The first of these acts stated that the tax was to be raised to keep up 50,000 men in Ireland, a war establishment. The second was passed to regulate the collection. It was asserted, that because in these acts other taxes were included, his argument proved too much, and that either parliament was not pledged to repeal the window tax, or that it was pledged to repeal the other taxes also. But this was a misconception. There were other taxes indeed mentioned in the 52nd chap. but, what strengthened his case more than if they had not been mentioned, the words limiting duration was confined to the window tax alone. It was enacted, that windows were to be rated to the tax in a certain manner, provided the war so long continued. Could it be contended that this was any thing but a war tax? It had been said, that the tax had been re-imposed by the parliament of the united kingdom, and that thus the pledge had been annulled. But the act referred to could be considered as nothing more than a parliamentary regulation. The war taxes had in Ireland been re-imposed from year to year, and in 1807 the practice respecting Irish was assimilated to that respecting English taxes; the tax was a It gave the inhabitants something to | be protected by the law, and tended to put down incivility, and that excess of population, in which all thoughts are turned to the necessaries of life, while its comforts are disregarded. Towards the city of Dublin in particular this tax was most unjust. By that city one-fourth of the whole sum was paid; and certainly if we were to look for objects of taxation, it was not to that part of Ireland that we should turn. No part of the empire had suffered so heavily by that act, the merits of which he should not then discuss. Before that act, that city had a resident parliament, a resident nobility. One hundred noble families made it their abode, not one of whom now resided, but had gone to lay out their incomes else where, to encourage other industry and other manufactures. We had daily melancholy experience of the forlorn state of that people, to a degree of which many gentlemen could not have an idea. In every corner were to be seen instances of the most abject misery. He appealed to that right hon. gentleman (Mr. Grant) for whom, it was no affectation to say, he entertained the highest respect, whether he was fully borne out in this account of the condition of Dublin? But this tax was continually becoming less productive. In 1816, the diminution was 32,000l. beyond the foregoing year; in 1817, it was 43,113/.; and in 1818, 77,9117.; though he was aware, that in this last year, the defalcation was in a measure owing to the reduction of the duty 25 per Without pretending to have any knowledge of futurity, he would predict, that it would daily become less productive. Within the three years he had mentioned, 32,424 notices of discontinuance had been served, of which 3,501 were in Dublin alone; in each notice, it was probable several windows were included; and as 10 or 15 wretched persons lived, on an average, in a house, it was probable that 30,000 persons were thus driven to deprive themselves of light and air. He appealed, in behalf of his countrymen, to the justice of the House, and he hoped he should not appeal in vain. When they were told by the chancellor of the exchequer, that they must find equivalents for the taxes they proposed to take off, he must beg leave to tell him that he a little forgot his duty. He felt for the exigencies of the country, he felt for the difficulties of the chancellor of the exchequer, he had felt for him when he saw him the last night compelled under, no doubt, a sense of duty, to press the House to adopt a measure which must have been repugnant to his feelings. When the right hon. gentleman had not been persuaded to spare the virtue of his cent. own country, he could not hope to appeal to him with success in favour of the poverty of Ireland. But when his financial situation was such, that he could find no expedient to maintain it, but by manufacturing crime in one country, and by a breach of faith in the other, it became his duty to resign his office [Hear! hear!]. Mr. C. Grant thought the right hon. gentleman who had last spoken, had deviated from his usual candour, in representing that the chancellor of the exchequer had acknowledged the continuance of this tax to be a breach of faith. Though he had looked into the case rather with a disposition to find a pledge, he could not persuade himself that it had been given. There was no record of any kind, that Mr. Corry had given any pledge; and if there had been a solemn pledge, was there a probability that it would now be a matter of dispute? In 1800 by chap. 2, 40 George 3rd, the tax was continued, not only for the support of 49,000 men, but for other puposes; and many other taxes were included under the same enactment. By the act of union, all the revenues of Ireland were formed into a consolidated fund, for the payment of the interest of debt and sinking fund, yet there was not a word that this tax should not be continued. The 52nd chap. of 40th of the king contained regulations respecting the collection of the tax. To prevent evasion, houses had been originally taxed according to the number of their windows. By this act, the houses were to be rated according to this enumeration for three years, if the war so long should continue. That this limitation of time applied to the mode of rating only, and not to the tax itself, was manifested from this; the war did not last three years; the mode of rating ceased; but the tax continued. In 1807 also, this tax (with many others which it was not even pretended parliament was pledged to put and end to), was made permanent; and previously, when Mr. Corry, who had first proposed it, had moved its renewal, he had denied that he had ever given any pledge respecting it, and his assertion was supported by several members of the House. He could not thus find the slightest proof that any particular pledge had been given respecting it. He acknowledged that if he regarded his feelings only, he should go much farther than the right hon. gentleman proposed in the repeal of taxes, but it was to be re |