TAXATION. 
421 
poorer classes, by the graduated scale, would be benefited, and the 
rich would not be pressed too hardly. Mr. Collier at some length 
combated the arguments against the graduated scale of taxation, 
and pointed out that at present there was a graduated scale ; for a 
man who got less than £100 a year paid nothing, while he who 
got less than £200 had to pay on a different scale from he who had 
a larger income. Every description of property should be rated 
fairly, so that a man who had invested his money in land should 
not be worse off than his neighbour who had taken the precaution 
to invest his capital in the stocks ; but the lecturer did not see that 
it was practicable to make any distinction between the man who 
had had property left him and he who had earned his riches by his 
own industry. He therefore considered that there could be no 
distinction in this respect. He considered an expenditure-tax was 
far better than an income-tax, which latter he characterized as en- 
couraging the idle, and contrarily affecting the thrifty. Take, for 
instance, a man with £100,000, who put the money in business, 
and realized £12,000 a year. Out of that sum he spent £2,000, 
putting the rest of the sum to his business. He would, therefore, 
have to pay 10 per cent, of his private expenditure on the income- 
tax, whilst he who spent the money in one year had a much 
smaller percentage to pay. There were certain affairs, such as 
legacies, probate duty, &c, which might be put on a different 
scale in taxation. The scheme of graduated expenditure would 
have as its effect the handicapping of the highest talent in the race 
for wealth. They could not draw the line between the industrious 
and the idle rich, for such a distinction could easily be evaded. 
He contended that the tax should be levied on expenditure, and 
not on income. He (the lecturer) advocated the interests of those 
who had a small income, who had to pay on the same scale as those 
of the rich, who spent their money to waste in the country without 
benefiting it. The idea he expressed was an old one, but it was 
first brought forward at a time when it was associated with mob 
law ; but he believed the time had come when respectable citizens 
might see that there were two sides to the question, which had 
never been made a formidable one. He believed it would be again 
brought forward to public notice, but it must be decided on its 
merits. 
