JET. 38.] THE INCOME-TAX. 303 



The tactics which had defeated the Orders in Coun- 

 cil were now employed with entire success to prevent 

 the continuance of the income-tax after the termina- 

 tion of the war. The ministers had resolved to keep 

 up one-half, or five per cent, with some slight modifi- 

 cation of the former impost. But they saw the risk 

 they ran, being quite certain that we should pursue 

 the same course of debating petitions night after night, 

 which had proved fatal to the Orders in Council. 

 Their only chance lay in the utmost despatch being 

 used. Accordingly, Vansittart, their Chancellor of the 

 Exchequer, on a Tuesday in February 1816, gave 

 notice that he should bring in the bill on Thursday. 

 We immediately took the alarm ; and in presenting 

 a petition from one of the London parishes I think 

 Clerkenwell I gave my notice that I should avail 

 myself of all the forms of the House to obstruct a 

 measure which there appeared a manifest design to 

 hurry through. Folkestone (now Eadnor), entirely 

 agreeing with me in opposing the bill, strongly seconded 

 my intimation or, as Vansittart termed it, my threat. 

 More petitions were thrown in next day, and Vansit- 

 tart postponed his bill for a week. Had he ventured 

 to bring it in as intended, and hurried on the second 

 reading, it would almost certainly have been carried. 

 But the week's delay proved decisive, and I really 

 never doubted that the day was our own. For so 

 many meetings, as I foresaw, were held, and so many 

 petitions poured in, that the bill did not make its 

 appearance for weeks, and the second reading only 

 could take place on the 17th. March. Above six weeks 

 were thus spent almost entirely in receiving and dis- 

 cussing petitions against the tax. It was seen that 



