Wrexham and Denbighshire Advertiser and Cheshire Shropshire and North Wales Register

SANITARY ANfi BUILDINGS COMMITTEE. A meeting of this committee WAS 1161(1 in we council Chamber, at the Guildhall, on Wednesday, when there were preeentz Councillors Thomas Jones (chairman), Lloyd, Davies, and Thomas. NOT COMPLYING WITH THE BHi. iiAWO. I I I I The Surveyor reported some houses naa osen erected bj Mr Stretch in Chapel-street, without depositing the necessary plans, and notice had been served upon him to stop, but still hb persisted iu going on. In addition to this the buildings did not come within the meaning of the bye laws, the kitchen windows being six feet in- stead of seven feet six, and the upper windows only five feet eight instead of seven feet six—not one-tenth the superficial area.—Mr Davies said Mr StreteLi had called I upon him, and stated that he was only converting a stable into houses.—The Surveyor said the bnilding was new from the foundation.—The Town Clerk raid Mr Stretch had rendered himself liable to a heavy pen- t'lty, or he could be compelled to pull the building down again. The surveyor was directed to see Mr Stretch aid ascertain whether any alteration could be made in the building to bring it within the scope of the bye laws. If he would not come to terms proceedings to be taken I agaict him. I THE DISGRACEFUL HOVELS IN BARN FIELD. Some time ago Nos. 11 and 17, Barnfield, were con- demned as unlit for human habitation. The surveyor reported there was one Michael Dusketh and his wife Still JiViD- iu 17. He was told the son locked the old people in at night, and then went to No. 11. The owner was Mr Joshua Roberts, of Rhosymedre. The surveyor was directed to see the necessary parties, aud if they still continued to defy the law, a similar order for taking proceedings was made as iu the preceding case. NEW BUILDINGS. Plans of a new house about to be erected by Mr Strachan, in Grusvenor Road, were submitted aud passed. The architect is -I-r Roberts, Chester. HIGH TùWS. Plans of some additions to houses erected by Mr Elias Jones, in Hightuwn, were examined and passed. THE OLD THREE TUNS. Plans of beer stores at the Old Three Tuns, were sub- mitted zini passed. HOPE-STREET. Plans of additional buildings about to be erected by Mr William Bayley, at the back of his new buildings iu Hope-street, were submitted and passed. SHEEP AFFECTED BY SMOKE. The Surveyor said he had had complaints of a nui- sauce arising from the smoke of a pipe works, situate in the Walks. Mr Owen, who had sheep in the adjoining field, said he was ashamed of taking them into the fair they were so biack.—Mr Jones said he had sold some of them, and they were as black as if they had been in a chimney. Au order was made on tiie occupier to con- sume his own swuke or raise the chimney higher. MADEIRA HILL. I Allusion was made to some work contracted for by I Mr Edward YtiUiams, opposite Mr Haden's house in Madeira Hill, which he had failed to carry out. An order was made to the effect Uwt if the work be not cairicd out in the time specified that it be relet, and Mr "Williams charged with the cost. THE WALKS. I Mr Davies called atteution to some cottages in The I Walks, that were a nest of filth and dirt, having no back places nor auy conveniences. The Surveyor was I directed to give an eye to them. A SETTLEMENT. I The attention of the committee was called to a settle. ment that had taken place in the house of Mr Robert Robeits, 30, Bridge-street. The Surveyor said it had gone from the Eagle Breweiy. Mr Duvies said the Eagle Brewery had gone from it. Some alterations were made at the Eagle Brewery a few years ago iu which they depended upon the house No. 30 for support. That support was taken away in the recent alterations at No. 30, and the adjoining bnilding gave way. The fcurveyor was directed to inspect it, and see if it were I dangerous, if so, it would have to be taken down. CHURCHYARD. I Complaint9 were made of the length of time the I boarding had been by the arcade in the Churchyard, and it was ordered that notice be served on the contractor to remove it. CAU LANE. I Mr Davies said there was water running down the I CHis. Lane, from some cottages that was a great nui- I sance. There ought to be a trap there. The surveye. 1 was directed to look to it.

MEETING IN MR WALLIS'S NEW PUBLIC I HALL. I A public meeting was held in this hall on Thursday evening, for the purpose, as stated in the announcement, of petitioning the Town Council in the present extra- vagaut expenditure of the borough rates." The hall forms part of Mr Wallis's business premises' in Hope- j street, and including a retiring room, extends the whole length of his shop, having a platform at one end and a gallery at the other. It is exceedingly well lighted. Amongst the leading ratepayers present we noticed the Rev. W. Davies, Mr Gummow, Councillors Hugh Davies and Thomas Jones, Mr Edward Williams, Mr Robert Parry, Mr Williams (hosier), Mr Jones, iron- monger (Hope-street), Mr Young (builder), Mr William Evans. The chair was occupied by Mr Pryce Jones, photo- grapher, who, after reading the notice convening the meeting, intimated that a petition had been got up (which he rea.1) aud that petition had been signed by some of the most influential, the highest. and largest i —o c owners of property in the borough of Wrexham. He would just draw their attention to one thing before sitting down. A meeting had been held a few days previously and a deputation of gentlemen appointed to visit the two burial ground, of which they had after- wards made a survey. The result was they found that in Rhcsddu there was room for 263 bodies in ground that spade had never entered. He did not suppose it would be presumed for a moment by anyone that the New Burial Ground was full. There was ample room there for many years to come. Mr Thomas Francis was the first speaker. He said be must mind and not fly too high that night. They had been told that some of them had been nying too high. He must mind aud not fly too hi?h that night lest the wind should be taken out of his wings, and he should fall and get crushed. He had stated at one of their meetings that the receipts of our local parliament were between three and four thousand pounds, and somebody had since said that he was beyond the mark. To clear that up he would give them the rateable value of the corporation property, which for Wrexham Abbot id Wrexham Reyis was X19,154 od,L At 4s. in the pound they would tind the receipts or that to come to £3,819. But he was told there were some cottagers who would now be excused, aud land in the borough that was not rated so high as houses for which he would allow £ 226, leaving a balance of nearly £ 3,600. He should like to ku«w what they get for this ? He should like to have in the local parliament something like thev had in the House of Commons, a financial statement of all their liabilities, the interest on the same, and what they require for the coming year. He did not know how much money had been borrowed-nor how much received, nor anything about it. Tne council were going on in a very strange manner. Not long ago there was something ;he matter with the tatiks-ttiose tanks that stink the whole neighbourhood. (Laughter.) There was £10 wanted to carry the sewage over the brook somewhere or other. Then at the next meeting that ten pounds was a hundred pounds. What they wanted was something like a budget from their Chan- cellor of the Exchequer whoever he was. (Cheers.) Mr Jonathan Owen here stepped forward and showed that the right of burying in Rhej'ldu burial ground belonged exclusively to the Old Chapel-street and Mr Brown's Chapel, although Calvinists, Independants, Wesleyans, Ranters, and Muggletonians had been in the habit of burying there but he was a trustee of that burial ground now, and should look into it that no one was buried there but what had a legitimate claim. Mr Bott next addressed the meeting at some length, and asked firstly, was a cemetery desirable secondly, was it necessary. It was asserted by some to be desir- able on account of the disgraceful state our present burial grounds were kept in. He proposed to remedy the disgraceful state of the burial grounds by asking the town council to pay something towards putting them in repair-he was quite prepared to pay his quota. The necessity he disputed altogether. They had heard there was virgin ground in Rhosddu far 263 bodies. Then there were some very deep graves where more might be buried, and graves where no one had been buried for 150 years. He asked the sexton at the New Burial Ground how many he thought conld be buried there decently and respectably, and he said between four and five thousand, the annual number buried there being two hundred. That would serve for 25 or 30 years to come. It that were a correct stata of affairs he thought it would be wrong of the Town Council to lay upon them an annual rate of five or six hundred pounds. (Cheers.) Mr Jonathan Owen here rose to explain something, w hen the chairman told him he had spoken. Mr Owen insisted on speaking, when the audience hissed and cried down with him," and a rather rich scene took place, which lasted for some minutes. Mr Edward Williams was next called upon. He said I hope we shall be able to leave this place without the impression going abroad that we don't know how to behave ourselves. (Hear, hear.) I don't know that I can add anything more to what has been advanced. It is well known we have soma large rate- payers in the town council, but then they are more able to pay than some of us without feeling it. One of them has been writing a letter on this matter. but he will repeat that. I can tell you there are some in the council as anxious as we are, and those men are prepared I to Stand up in the council and represent the -views and feelings of this meeting. I thought after the failure of the tanks and the failure of the slaughter houses they would have had enough of that sort of thing. But they appear to rush on as if failure No. 3 would cure failure) No. 1 and failure No. 2. (Laughter and cheers.) I am quite astonished at men who. in others things, display ordinary ability. They are able to manage their own business-able to nonage their own families-but they can't govern the alaughter houses nor they can't govern the tanhs. (Great laughter.) There is a great deal going on that we don't know of. The reporter has been very cunning and has not told us all the sly cunning work. (Laughter and cheers.) I am g&d to see so large a meeting, and glad that the petition has been 80 well signed. I hope the result will be to.make the council pause before they take this most fearful leap. Where they will land I don't know. There are two or three innocent sort of men amongst theki. I don't know whether yon would trllst them to take a pig to the fair or not. (Terrific laughter, followed by several rounds of cheering.) What a big man a man fs if he pays twenty-five pounds a year rates, according to what we see in the paper. We little people feel afraid of meeting him. (Laughter.) It ieems to have become quite popular to pay rates. (Renewed laughter.) The collector of the rates has brightened up, and appears quite proud of his office now it has become so popular to pay rates. (Laughter and cheers.) It's so popular to go about with a book that some man tried it at Leicester. His scheme succeeded for a day and a half, then he bolted with the prize. (Immense laughter. But it is not so easy to part with .the money when you are crushed down that you have to part w.th the last shillinrr. (Cheers.) Like Jerry the Barber when he went to the cupboard to fetch the—(the end of this sentence was drowned in roars of laughter.) I re- member a man coming down from London to Wynnstay one races, and he went to Jerry's to get shaved. (Laughter.) After being shaved he put down a shilling. Jerry got the change out all in halfpennies twenty-two half-penuies. (Immense laughter.) He counted them slowly one at a time, but his customer took the full change. (Renewed laughter.) If you would treat the tax collector in this way he would not be so ready to come for his money. (Laughter and cheers.) Mr Williams then proceeded to review the cemetery ques- tion, in which his sentiments were identical with those of the previous speakers. Mr Yonnc next briefly addressed the meeting, and was followed by Mr Wallis, who analysed the borough statement of accounts, published in this paper on the 12th of Decembar last, which appeared to contain most of the information that Mr Francis said he was short of. The item JE732 lid. 2d. for scavenging aud watering roads was received with great horror. The statement of the amount of income from the slaughter-houses was received with great laughter. In quoting the item for sitlaries-9349 jig.-he asked did tbat include the little sum of £1150 for work that was once done for sevcnty or eighty pounds a year ? That office was now taken with the distinct understanding the surveyor should do no other work, but he did do other work. He (Mr Wallis) did not blush to tell th-m so, for he Wll under the thumb of no man. (Cheers.) There wore Mr M'Dermott's.two houses Mr Turner did the planing I of those, and why ? because Mr M'Dermott knew that I by employing him he could get the plans passed. Not far from them they would find four cottages done in the same wiy. He had no right to do it. (Cheers.) After a short address from the chairman the meeting was brought to a close, a number afterwards signing the petition.

LECTURE ON TRE INCOME TAX BY G. H. WHALLEY, ESQ., M.P. On Tuesday Mr Whalley, M.P. for Peterborough; delivered a lecture in the Town Hall, Wrexham, on "The Income Tax on Labour, Trades, and Professions, with a view to show that it would be just and expedient, having regard to the interest of all classes, to repeal such Tax, and raised the deficiency by a Tax on Land and fixed Pro- perty." It had been announced that the Mayor (T. Rowland, Esq.) would occupy the chair, but Mr G. Bradley said he had received a letter from his worship, stating that he was unable to attend owing to indisposi- tion; and in his absence he had great pleasure in proposing that Mr Low take the chair. (Cheers.) The Chairman assured the audience that it was as I unexpected to him as it was to them that he should be called upon to preside that evening. He came there to listen to a lecture on what was to him a new subject. Bat he knew that his duties would be light, and as the subject was one that he knew very little about, he should therefore content himself with calling upon Mr Whalley to deliver his lecture, who would, no doubt, do so in his usual eloquent style. Mr Whalley then came forward and was received with cheers. He said: I beg to thank in the first place the Mayor for having promised to preside this evening, and also Mr Low for so kindly consenting to fill his place. In the next place I shall say a few words in explanation of why I have presumed to invite you to hear my views on this subject. The income tax is pretty well known in Wrexham as well as other places and it may be known to you that I have called attention to the subject in the House of Commons, and also given not,e that I shall move for a repeal of the tax. Several persons I find have taken advantage of this motion and have gone about the country collecting money professedly for 1 the promotion of this obj ect; and I am sorry to say they represented themselves as authorised to do this, aud they are now suffering imprisonment for the offence. Tha success they had in obtaining subscriptions indicates that there is a strong feeling against the income tax, and should encourage us to make every effort for its repeal. The first proposition to which I ask your assent is that the present taxation of our country is enormous. It is in round numbers, including par- liamentary and local taxation, about one hundred millions year, a sum which one can only understand by comparing it with such sums as we are in the habit of dealing with in ordinary affairs, and this I leave to such as are disposed to the task to work out for themselves. My second proposition is that it is excessive. Being much more than L3 per head of the entire population of this kingdom, it is far more than is paid for ordinary public purposes by any other nation in the world. While the people of England thus pay more than others for public purposes, they are by the concurring testimony of all nations and of history the most self-governing people in the world. This is proved by our success as colonists, notwithstanding the legislation of the last half century, which has transferred to paid officials the police and other duties which our ancestors discharged for themselves. I am justified in stating there is still no country in the world where so much public service is rendered gratuitously as in England. Members of Parliament, magistrates, juries, and recently the efforts of the people to supply the military requirements of the country all tend to establish that it is not necessary that the public service of England should thus be more costly than that of any other country, and this fact should stir us up to the inquiry how this evil-yearly increasing, and in the opinion of Mr Gladstone already assuming a magnitude most threatening to the peace, safety, and even stability of the empire-can be corrected. In soliciting your attention this evening to that charge known as the income tax, I propose to consider, not the question of reducing the amount of public expenditure —either imperial or local-but simply how the burden can be adjusted so as to bear as lightly as possible upon the entire body politic of the nation, for the heavier the burden the more necessary it is that it should be fairly distributed, and by the better distribution the mind and judgment of the nation will be more effectually aroused to the question of how it can be diminished; for the best chance for economy is to make those who by their position and influence have the power to control public expenditure feel directly its pressure and inconvenience. This being my object, I trust that I shall need no further apology for inviting you to this meeting. As to a'tery large proportion of the payers of income tax, I may say nine out of ten-the income tax is not ultimately paid hy the person assessed to it any more than is the duty on sugar or tea by the grocer. Every tradesman who pays the duty on the articles of his trade charges it again with a profit in the increased price of the article to his customers, and as the income tax based on profits tends to diminish them, of course, he reckons amongst the expenses of his trade, and charges against his cus- tomers, whatever sums he pays to the collector. A more substantial objection to the petitions that were sent to Parliament for the repeal of the income tax, and so far as I have yet heard, the only answer ever vouch- safed in Parliament to the universal remonstrance againt the tax, is that the necessities of the public service will not admit of such repeal-an obj ection that will last for ever-and I have therefore anticipated this by proposing that any deficiency arising from such repeal shall be made good by a corresponding increase of the tax on land and fixed property. At the first glance this may appear to be, to say the least, a bold proposition, and, no doubt, there will not be wanting such terms as confiseation and other epithets, such as from time out of mind have been made to supply the place of facts and arguments in political discussion. If the comparatively small amount hitherto raised from the property and income tax, in all about one million for each penny, is to be regarded as confiscation when levied on land and fixed property, what term can we find strong enough to mark the monstrous injustice of con- fiscatmg the brain and the muscle of the country by levying these pennies upon the mental and manual labour engaged in the trade and commerce of the country, on the artizans and those who exhaust their health and their lives in the labour of the brain (cheeis). The disparity between a revenue derived at a like rate from land and other fixed property, subject to no rishs, I demanding no thought or labour on the part of the owners, and in the employment of which he is protected by the State without the slightest effort, and a revenue derived from labour, whether manual or mental, and to which when aided by a money eapital is to be added the anxiety and the risk attending such employment of money, this palpable disparity is so great that the instinctive sense of such injustice can only be weakened by dwelling upon or attempting to prove it. That it is unjust in the highest sense of that term is, however, of little avail in political argument, unless backed* by some power to redress that injustice. If proved injustice could avail against political errors and wrings, we should not have had to await a famine in Ireland for the repeal of the corn laws; and if to prove error on the part of the landed and other fixed property interests, and that they were but legislating against themselves when they sought apparent relief from the burdens of the State by taxing their best customers-money capital, intellect, and labour-then it would not have required all the years that have passed since the corn laws were repealed, during which land and fixed property have steadily increased in value, to prove that their opposition thereto was for their own interest, unwise as it was to the public. Much leisure and great opportunities, and the vast wealth that distinguishes from the like class throughout the world the landed aristocracy of Eng- land—every one can see within the range of his own personal observation—does not enable a man to dispense in matters of State policies with the wide and practised discipline of business and whatever may be the other claims of the landed a.istocracy on the respect and confidence of their fellow countrymen, the wisdom and practical ability demanded in affairs of State are not to be at all times included. In politics as in morals, honesty is the best policy and as no one will assert that it is just or honest to tax the artizan, who, at the constant risk of health and life, struggles upwards to 2100 a year-the tradesman, who risks in addition his money in his trade, or the professional man earning his income under difficulties and trials, and at risks to health and life that none but those engaged in the struggle can appreciate, at the same rate as the owner of land and fixed property I might fairly here conclude my argument, and, relying upon the extension of lhe suffrage, and that the people of England have more political power now than in the days of the corn laws, dismiss all epithets about confiscation by the reply that the landed interest will, as in the repeal of the corn laws, soon discover that honesty is the best policy-that to release from income tax, labonr, trade, and profession is their true interest. (Loud cheers.) Propertied classes in this as in all other countries are disposed to ignore and evade all arguments addressed to their reason and judgment on behalf of those who have nothing but argaments to oppose to them. In advocating now the riddance of this great wrong of the income tax, although one may hope that by recent legislation the power as well as the argument will be found to he on the side of those who have to work for their livelihood, yet I for .)Ile desire on their part not to rely on mere power or exclusive legislation for the benefit of tJY classes of the community, firmly convinced, as I uip, that in this ) nation there 13 an absolute community of interests, and that what is unjust to one class cannot be otherwise than inexpedient for all others. I base all my efforts, therefore, upon this assertion, that it is in the highest degree expedient for the interests of the owners of land and other fixed property that they should relieve from the income tax at their own cost those classes who now contribute, at equal rate with themselves, on the earn- ings of labour or the profits of trade. In the first place, how does it happen that for centuries past all parochial and municipal taxation has been raised exclusively from land, houses, and other fixed property ? The owners of such property have invariably had full power to tax what and whomsoever the law permitted; and in the case of parochial taxation, for the poor, highways, and other purposes, the law as enacted in the time of Elizabeth enabled every parish to assess to the rate stock-in-trade and other personal property. The rate- payers have had the power for above 300 years in every parish in the kingdom to assess to the rates the trade and personal property within their parish, and yet they have not done so, saving in perhaps a dozen cases, just enough to show that the law does give them that power. Why is it that the farmers in these local parliaments representing the landowners have refused to avail themselves of laws ready made to their hands to tax the tradesmen of their parish, while landowners repre- senting these farmers and all othei ratepayers in the Impe ial Parliament have enacted laws in lirect opposi- tion to the practice which local knowledge dictated as the best for themselves in their vestries and towns ? It is indeed a remarkable fact that the science of political economy, which declares with unalterable truth that the land and fixed property of the country is the only source from which the revenue of States can be wisely and economically derived, should have thus, in defiance even of Acts of Parliament to the contrary, have been recognised and acted upon in all cases where the duty of ra&ing such revenue has rested with practical men, such as farmers and the ordinary ratepayers in parishes or towns; while on the other hand those who are supposed to be elected by these classes as better qualified by their superior wisdom, position, and responsibilities to represent them in the Imperial Parliament have set at naught alike these lessons of political science and of practical experience, and, actuated solely by the incon- venience of what may be called cash payment in ready money, have exhausted their ingenuity in taxing the brain and the muscle, and that money capital of the nation, from which alone land and fixed property derives all its value. And yet this admits of explanation within the limits of a parish. It requires no greater ability to see that if you tax the grocer or other trades- men upon his stock-in-trade, or otherwise beyond the value of his premises, he will inevitably reimburse him- self by a rate of profit on his goods far exceeding what he may have been thus called upon to pay; and there- fore though by law empowered so to tax the grocer and others, no local voice is raised for the purpose. And so it is through all our towns for municipal as well as for parochial purposes, and the revenues are in all cases raised directly, and upon the value of the land, houses, or other fixed property within their jurisdiction. On the other hand, gentlemen assembled in parliament will neither see nor consider anything beyond the fact that if a given sum is required to be raised by direct taxation these will have to pay, it may be Is. if the assessment be confined to property, and but 6d. if income and trade profits are included, and they ask exultingly is it right that Rothschild or this or the other millionaire should be exempt from contributing to the taxes ? I remember that on one occasion Baron Rothschild expressed to me, his regret that he was not present when a discussion on this subject was raised by me in the Housfe of Commons, and gave me to understand that as his name had been mentioned, he would himself have explained what was the actual operation of the income tax as regarded him- self-the substance of which was, as I understcd him, that it mattered little or nothing to him what amount of tax was imposed on his property, seeing that he re- covered it in the price of the article he dealt in- money—and that the value of fixed property being always dependent on the price of money, landowners, in taxing such as himself were, in fact, paying him back, such tax with a profit adequate to the usual risks and cir- cumstances of his business. But this further fact appeared that in order to be free from the vexation and annoyance of this tax, and especially the exposure and investigation of private affairs, a very large amount of business that would otherwise be transacted in England was transferred to France, greatly to the advantage of the rival financiers of the country; and we hear that his partner in Paris, who lately died, left behind him in French capital forty-four million sterling. The overseer of a parish can read ly see the oppression of taxing the parish grocer, but Mr Gladstone himself, in a conversa- tion with me after one of these discussions, avowed that he felt it far beyond his powers to convince the landed gentry of Pngland, as represented in the House of Commons, of the fact that what is true in parochial is equally so in imperial affairs, and that it is as expedient as it would be just to adopt for both the like system oL assessment. A tax upon money every one can see in a moment tends to drive money out of the country and as the value of land and other fixed property rises or falls, exactly in the proportion that money is attracted to or driven away from this country, it is clearly the policy of killing the goose that lays the egga of gold to tax mere money. Then as to trade, manufactures, or professions, you cannot mention an instance in which they do not resolve themselves into money, which at one time in the hands of the owner, free to do what he pleased with, he has thought fit to invest in some occupation with a view to obtain as much profit or increase thereto as his ability and attention to business will enable him. Tax him in the articles of his trade, or for the privilege of carrying it on, and be will endeavour to recover that tax from his customers. If he fails in that, it will be not on account of the tax, but owing to the fact that other persons here and in other countries can supply the articles at a lower rate; and in that case those who are in trade and manufactures gradually withdraw, and no others will supply their place. It has been urged, against the wisdom of local administration, that the reason why parochial and town assessments are restricted to land or houses is the difficulty attendant upon reaching other kinds of property. Assuming for a moment such to be the case, I ask whether that difficulty has been surmounted in the assess- ment of the income tax? It is not the sum that is paid by the tradesman or others that explains the repugnance, to this tax-for he is not the person who ultimately pays it, but his customer—it is the inexpressible an- noyances and the positive injury he sustains in the mode of assessment. I need not dwell upon that which every one concerned so well knows by experience, but I do say that the indignity to which an honest man is exposed by having to exhibit in a court more or less public all the private transaction of his business-just as though he were a bankrupt, and that the country were his creditor demanding an account of what he had done with public money, is such as must inevitably tend to lower the tone of commercial integrity. In- stances have come to my knowledge of men prefering to give up their business as traders rather than be again subjected to the inquisition of clerks or commissioners, whose duty always is it may be supposed a painful one. The system of calling upon a man to make an assess- ment upon himself of his trade or professsonal pronts is to require from him, if honest, the most difficult task that a man can be called upon to perform, for the risks of trade extend over every shilling that is already ex- pended or that is yet to be received, and the estimate of the actual annual profits of almost any given busi- ness might be honestly stated at different amounts- when therefore the Government orders a man to make his own assessment, and afterwards puts him on his trial as to its accuracy, there is no possibilit3 of ascertain- ing beforehand by what standard or rules he is to be tried. The very basis of the whole transaction is uncer- tain-and every man assessed to income tax is at the mercy of a tribunal whose rules of procedure and standards of value it is impossible to foresee, and there- fore the very worst element of tyranny and oppression is inherent in the entire system from the beginning to the end. (Loud cheers.) As in all such cases the dis- honest tradesman is the safest, the legislature does its best to make honesty the worst instead of the best po' "cy. This has been established by the reports issued fro: Somerset House, the verification of it may be learnt from accountants versed in preparing income tax balance sheets, and I will say no more on this, not the least painful feature of the subject, than to ask whether it can be expected that dishonesty thus en- couraged by the Government, and almost justified in the estimation of those engaged in it by the notorious and admitted inj ustice of the tax is not in itself an evil of portentious magnitude—striking as it does at the very root of that national character for commercial in- tegrity, to which the world-wide dominion of England in matters of trade is mainly due. If not alone at home but abroad, doubts are from time to time shadow- ing forth over this invaluable reputation would it not be well to remember that once lost it will be well nigh irrecoverable, and that it is the nrst duty of the Govern- ment to reconsider—if on this account alone, the system tempting men to acts of injustice by constituting them first the judges in their own case as to what they should pay to the income tax—and then testing their conduct hy standards unknown alike to themselves and to those by whom their ehtimates are to be conducted. You will have seen iu the newspaper reports of the agricultural societies that they have been discussing the subject of local taxation, and that they have so far anticipated the arguments I have been urging as to resolve in many cases to make an appeal to Parliament to assimilate 'o..1 taxation to this imperial experiment of the income tiix. They do not, so far as I have read, d(-,h;e that trade profits should be taxed for local purposes; but simply that local taxation should be relieved by being taken, like the police of Ireland, into imperial man- agement and payment, and there is no doubt that some such question will be raised and discussed in the en- suing session. As I am myself connected with some of these agricultural societies, and my personal interests being identified with that class, it is some gratification to me to be enabled to state that all agriculturists are not carried away by what I cannot but deem a delusion and an error as damaaing to their reputation for wis- dom and justice on public affairs, in the history of their proceedings in respect to the corn laws. As we had Fitzwilliams and others whose names should ever be recalled with honour to stand by Mr Cobden in ad- vocating Fr-o Trade, so there are many members of these agricultural societies who are not afraid to raise their voice against this new ciy of Agricultural Protec- tion. It is not that I apprehend any serious peril to the ancient financial policy of our towns and parishes that I refer to this movement. I look upon it on the con- trary as a rather hopeful feature in the attempt to get rid of the income tax. Nothing is so difficult to deal with as that inert resistance which exhausts itself in saying No." .This non Possumus argument is the great shield with which error and wrong protects itself against assault, and therefore when the advocates of the agricultural and landed interests give signs of beginning the contest, and ask to share in the benefit of the great imperial experiment of taxing labour and commerce, it seems to me that they muct abide by the answers that they call forth, and as that answer must pe conclusive, I trust that they will derive consolation from knowing t'aat all the honours of financial wisdom and justice and expediency rest with them in their local adminis- tration for centuries past, and that the imperial experi- ment and parliamentary wisdom has failed, and must adopt again the policy of the vestry and the town couucil. No one can be more impressrd than myself wit4 the grievances to which the agricultural in common with any other class suffers from that enormous and excessive burden of taxation to which I first referred, but having given my fair share of attention to the progress of local taxation in all its branches for the last thirty years, I am convinced that the cause of it is mainly attributable to the centralising tendency of our legislation and '1 our local institutions, and that no remedy will be found so effectual as that of retracing our steps and bringing the management of local affairs, and especially our local expenditures, back agaiu to those who are interested therein, and I believe that amongst other resuli- of inquiry will be that the representation system oi Boards, Poor Laws, Highways, and the like, is no efficient sub- stitute for that personal and practical supervision which for ages has been the successful and constitutional practice in all that concerns local expenditure. It will be time enough to meet the claim for tne application of imperial fuuds to local purposes when that question arises, but that the vast increase in the amount of local taxation must fairly be ascribed to the centralizing in- lfuences of poor law and other boards, and the absence of local and personal supervision in parochial matters may fairly be inferred from the experience of the last thirty years. During that period local taxation has increased above 100 per cent. In 1837 the relief of the poor cost four millions; in 1817, five aud a half; in 1857, six millions; and in 1867, seven millions while as to the county rates in ld37, these were about one- one-sixths million in 1847, one-two-thirds million in 1857, two-one-fcurths million. In 1866 the joint amount of poor and county rates was E9,982,000, and in 1867, £ 10,905,000; and I would ask in the words lately reported by an able friend of the agricultural in- terest, Are these vast sums necessary; are they wisely and judiciously spent. Is our complex and varied system of local administration adequate and ser- viceable. Is our poor law favourable and lenient to the idle and the vicious, and severe on the unfortunate. Do our boards of guardians act alternately with lavish extravrjance and niggardly parsimony. Are our police at once expensive and ineffectual; our gaols more en- ticing than our union houses our roads costly, and yet badly made and badly kept." These are questions which should be answered before we proceed further in the work of centralisation of local government. The cry of the day is the constitution and the party which relies mainly on agricultural support have deemed it expedient to adopt the new title of Constitutionalists. I proceed to show that if there is one priuciple of the constitution more distinct than any one or than all others together it is this-that the land and fixed pro- perty of the country should pay the ttxes, and su far as other kinds of property or other classes of persons arc- to be brought in to contiibute, the constitution does most expressly recognise t) at it is only as an exceptional resources to be resorted to only in cases of proved emergency. To call upon a man to state the income derived by him from his labour, trade, or profession, and then to require him to make public all the trans- actions of his trade or other means of gaining his liveli- hood is not only not in accordance with the ancient laws and constitution of this country, but is by far in excess of any of the attempts ever made by the most arbitrary of sovereigns to over-ride or evade these laws au^constitution, and it is not as it seems relieved of I this character by having been enacted by the parlia- ments of recent times. The constitution uf this country so far as relates to the question of taxation, is very simply explained. The king or queen is the head of the government, with full power to administer the laws (which consists in th3 ancient customs of the realm, they are by the like custom sworn to administer justly) to declare war and to make peace, and to do all that is required to maintain good order throughout the land. One thing however, the sovereign has no power to do, and that is to levy taxe1; and in fact the very notion of taxation as we know 't, is not only not recognised by the constitution, but may be said to be not contemplated, for the sovereign being also recognised as the owner of the entire surface of the land the constitution both in theory and practice enabled him to grant to those whom he thought fit to put into possession of the land the conditions on which they should hoid, aud these con- ditions also recognised by custom were that the owners of the land should contribute whatever might be requi- site for the king's service in the discharge of the sovereign prorogatives and duties of the crown. Th., I repeat is not only the theory of the constitution, it was until a period comparatively recent, the actual practice for it was only in the reign of Charles the Second that the obligations under wnich the land was held, and which are known by the name of feudal obli- gations were commuted for a fixed payment, and in the reign of William the Third, this was converted into a land tax with the intention that such tax should be levied from time to time, according to the value of the land at not exceeding 4s. in the pound. In a few years after this arrangement was made the parliament, con- sisting then as until recent changes, mainly of the owners of land thought fit to enact, that this land tax should be assessed only according to the value of the land ana fixed property as then declared, and then it happens that at the present time it yields a mere frac- tion of the revenue, whereas but for this parliamentary enactment it would yield considerably more if assessed according to the present value of land and fixed pro- perty than all the revenue imperial or local which is now required for the public service. I have thus stated the case briefly and without any of those technical details which tend merely to obscure the main features of the case, and I assert and challenge contradiction to the fact that by the constitution of their country the land and the fixed property is at this day held by the owners upon the express condition of providing what- ever money is required by the sovereign authority for the government of the state. ihat tne king and the lords of the soil have from time to time solicited and received aids and subsidies trom the people of the country, merchants, traders, and all others is quite true, but the manner in which these aids were solicited and the conditions on which they were given all tend to prove that the same were in the strongest sense of the term voluntary, and by nothing can we better refute the claim of the Constitutionalists of the present day than to quote the very language of their ancestors, the land- owners of England in their appeals for aid to the com- mons, and the mode in which the commons dealt with such appeals. Other n iions long before they have reached the same condition of taxation to which we have attained, cut the dian Knot by repudiation of debts or open and av^ .ed confiscation of individual property. Happily there is not a sign of such a solu- tion of the difficulties with us. No public credit stands so high as that of England, anti so it must be if the voice of the English people is heard for we will be half of us paupers upon the rest rather than forfeit our na- tional character; but why should we be driven to the extremity to which by the figures I have quoted we seem to be fast hastening. We have one great store in reserve by which the trading and manufacturing classes may hope to negotiate with the land and fixed property of the country in mitigation of the pol cy which I ad- vocate as the best for all classes, and thdt is-to speak out frankly, the revenues of the church. I proceed to justify this suggestion by appealing to the records of parliament. First, to show how it happened that the common people of England were first called upon to assist the landowners in providing funds for be public service and secondly, how at a memorable period of our history the House of Commons proposed to apply the revenues of the church to that purpose those who like myself desire to repeal the income tax on those principles of the constitution which our opponents rely, will not refuse their aitention to the following nar- rative :—It was in the reign of Henry 3rd,—the 13th century—that our House of Commons was first formally cGj^iitsted, and it arose out of his call for heip. The king thought fit under bad advice to canc-1 the famous magna charta, granted by his predecessor, King John, and his barons and great men as they are called, deemed it wise instead of again having recourse to civil war to try what conld be done in the way of purchasing peace by money-on their own part, however, they declared that having personally served him in the wars, and been at great- expense to no purpose they were reduced to poverty and owed no to aid the king at that time, and after some years of contention they promised the kL-,y that if he would reform the kingdom according to their advice, they would endeavour to procure him a common aid or tax for that purpose, this was in 1258, and in 1265-to use the language of the old chronicle, the famous parliament was called, which, with another in the reign of Edward I, were certainly the models of our present English Parliament." From this time forward. the Commons of England as distinguished from the nobles and great men—equivalent in these days to the ands granted to the king such sums of money as the special circumstances of the day required in aid of the ancient and regular revenues derived from the nobles and other owners of the soil. The appeal to the Com- mons was always made in the form of a request for special aid, and the circumstances demanding it being fully stated, the Commons invariablv treated it as a L-inii of voluntary contribution on their part aud generally at- tached to the grant conditions, either as to the mode in which it should he expended, or as in the case which first called them into couacil demanded some specific remedy for recognised grievances. It would be very instructive and not without amusement to enumerate the quaint and sensitive efforts which the Commons re- sorted to in order to evade these demands on their liberality and patriotism, and that which I mention may be found useful as a precedent in the present day. In 1405 the king having represented to his parliament his great want of an extraordinary aid, the Commons'went in a body and by their speaker addressed him, remon- strating that without burthenitl his people he might supply his occasions by s, iziti-, on the revenues of hia clergy" and amongst other arguments said li it was evi- dent the riches of the ecclesiastics made them negligent in their duty and the lessening of their excessive in- comes would be a double advantage both to the Church and State." The chronicle goes on to say that the Arcii- bishop of Canterbury being present spoke in reply, and having urged the value to the State of the Church's prayers, the speaker of the House of Commons, it is said seemed to smile," and having said openly that he thought the prayers of the church a very slender supply, the Archbishop suddenly failing upon his knees before the King, strongly pressed him to consider that of all. the crimes a prince could commit, none was so heinous as an invasion of the church's patrimony." This was in 1405, and in 1410 we find that the Commons before they granted an aid, renewed their former instances in regard to the clergy, and in a formal address stated that the clergy Clalie an ill use of their riches, and consumed their incomes in a very different manner from the intent of the donors, and that by appropriating their revenues to the service of the State, the kingdom's safety would be better provided for, the poor better maintained, and the clergy more attached to their duty. Again in 1414, the Commons, it is said 11 put the king in mind of what had been devised in Parliament four years before rela- tive to converting the land and properties of the clergy to the service of the state." All these entreaties by our Roman Catholic ancestors were however not only rej ected but the House of Commons was so to speak reformed, in a few years after by abolishing Household Suffrage, and though a civil war ensued upon his attempt to muzzle the voice of the people, that muzzle is only now in this very year taken off and the voice of the house- holder again allowed to speak in Parliament, and the question of who shall pay the taxes is again coming forward. We all know that in the reign of Henry VI [I soon after the close of the civil war, which ensued up- on the very bold stroke made by the clergy to muzzle the House of Commons, that a sort of compromise was effected, and that under the name of a Reformation of of Religion a large portion of the revenues of the clergy were applied to secular purposes and to the services of the sttRe, what was then left, to the Church. Now again so far as Ireland is concerned—constituting a great difficulty in regard to its disposal—I not only believe with our ancestors of the fifteenth century that it would be a double benefit-alike to the church and the state to apply the church revenues to secular purposes, following up tke precedent of the time of Henry VIII., but that this will be found as to Ireland the only mode of carrying out that policy of pacification to which the country is pledged. Ail agr- b, that the established church of England cannot be maintained for a day after that of Ireland has been disposed of. The revenues of the church of England will far more than compensate to the land- owners for the transfer to land and fixed property of the present income tax-in fact, it would go far to pay it off, and, although I do not rest my argument for the repeal of the income tax on the realisation of such com- pensation, yet I have not the least doubt that, in the spirit of our ancesters of the fifteenth century, tha Commons of England will most gladly concur in appro- priating the church revenues to the service of the state. So far as my own observation extends, for one elector who voted for the chsendowment of the Irish Church to counteract the Romish priesthood at the heart, two would vote in like manner for the right to pay off the income tax. In conclusion, will you give me your support in such efforts as I may be enabled to make in the House of Commons for the abolition of the income tax, according to the notice of motion I have given for that purpose. It is not in my power to organise public opinion on the subject, that must be left to those who feel that there is an injustice in this tax which demands redress, and I have endeavoured to point out practical means of securing such redress by transferring the income tax to that npon land or fixed property. I have brought forward the subject repeatedly, and the argu- ments I have laid before you have never been replied to or contradicted, on the contrary Mr Gladstone has him- self admitted not only all that can be said as to the inequality and injustice of this tax, the breach of faith with the public who have been so often cajoled into continued subscriptions by promises that not only have never been fulfilled but which lit: is difficult to believe were ever intended to be fulfilled, and he has also admitted, as I have distinctly understood him, that no other answer can be given to the claim now put for- ward to the transfer of this burden to fixed property and land than that it is not practicable, having regard to the state of public opinion as heretofore represented in the Heuse of Commons; or to use his own words he cannot discharge the duty of professor of political economy to members of Parliament, or hope to give them that education which is requisite for this purpose. Is this, however, to survive our reform in Parliament ? and if so, of what benefit is that reform ? or what can be more imperative t j ugtify the efforts by which that reform has been accomplished than to distribute more fairly—more wisely-more constitutionally—and more for the interests of all classes of the community the present intolerable and ruinous burden of our taxation ? If that expenditure be indeed necessary and inevitable it has become a still more urgent necessity to distribute it with justice and wisdom. If not, as I do most firmly believe, then I am equally confident that it is not from spasmodic economy in details that redress is to be expected, but as in the case of parochial and town rates to distribute the burden that the taxes shall be paid by those who have the power to control their expenditure. The proceedings were brought to a close by a vote of thanks to the lecturer, proposed by Mr Lester, and a vote of thanks to the chairman, proposed by Mr Bradley.

| The preference given, for thirty years, to Horniman pure tea (in packets), is attributable to its uniform good quality, great strength, and real cheapness. For Local Agents see our advertising columns. DEATH OF THE MABQUIS OF ANGLESEY.—We regret to announce the death of the Marquis of Anglesey, on Saturday, at Beaudesert, his seat, near Lichfield. The deceased nobleman was the eldest son of Field-Marshal the Marquis of Anglesey, who died in 1854, and who had been elevated to the marquisate for his dis- tinguished military services in the Peninsula and Rt Waterloo, by his first wife, Caroline Elizabeth Villier, third daughter of Gehrge, fourth Earl of Jersey. The latter peer was born in July, 1797, and had baen married three times-first to Eleanora, second daughter of the late Colonel John and Lady Charlotte Campbell, who died in July, 1828; second in August, 1833, to Henrietta fourth daughter of the late Sir Charles and Lady Harriet Bagot; and thirdly, in 1860, to the daughter of Mr G. Barnard, who survives him. By his first marriage he leaves surviving issue Henry, Earl of Uxbridge (his successor to the marquisate) and Lady Constance, married to the Earl of Winchelsea; by the second marriage, Lady Florence, widow of the lately deceased Marquis of Hastings; and Lord Henry, Alexander, and Berkley Paget. The late Marquis was summoned to the House of Peers, in his father's barony of Paget, in 1832, up to which time, from 1820, he hnil represented Anglesey in the House of Commons. In 1839 he was appointed Lord Chamberlain of her Majesty's household, when he was created a member of the Privy Council, and held that appointment until 1841. In Juue, 1854, he was appointed Lord Lieu- tenant and Custos Rotulorum of the county of Anglesey. The present Marquis, Henry William George, was born in 1824, aud married in 1845 the second daughter of Mr James Eversgeld, of Denne-park, Sussex. He was M.P. foi Sontil Staffordshire from 1834 to 1857, and was for some time an officer in the 1st Life Guards, from which regiment he retired in 1845. He was appointed Deputy Lieutenant of Shropshire in 1851, and was Lietitentin,-C)Ionel of the Staffordshire Militia from 11852 to 1855.