276 
any deviation from equity muft exift, the 
rich certainly fhould not be the clafs 
favoured. The fubject is lefs underftood 
than perhaps any other branch of political 
ceconomy ; and, it is with pleafure I find 
that the abilities of Mr. FrR—EnpD have 
lately been employed in inveftigating ‘‘the 
princitles of taxation.” 
The foundation of his fyftem is the 
fame on which Mr. Pirr pretends the 
tax on income refts, that ‘‘every man’s 
contribution to the ftate ought to bein 
proportion to his means, and the relative 
fituations of perfons, the fame before and 
after payment of atax.’? The truth of 
this propofition will be difputed by none, 
except thofe who with to fee taxation made 
the means of intreducing a greater 
equality of condition; an idea, the juf- 
tice of which is doubtful, and which 
probably, will never be reduced to prac- 
tice. Admitting the principle therefore, 
the point on which difference of opinion 
is likely to arife, is the mode of eftimat- 
ing@he taxable means of individuals in 
different circumftances. Mr. FREND, in 
comparing the fituation/of two perfons, 
the one deriving his income from landed 
eftate, and the other from perfonal in- 
duftry, adds to the income of the former, 
the value of his eftate at a certain number 
of years purchaie, and deducting in each 
cafe the amount of income abfolutely 
neceflary for fubfiftence, confiders the re- 
{peCtive remainders as the proportion of 
contribution. Thus, if an eftate of zool. 
er annum is valued at 20 years purchafe, 
the preperty of the proprietor 1s 4200l. 
whiie that of the perfon whofe income 
arifes from induftry is only the year’s 
income; and 30]. being deducted from 
each, if the perfon with 200]. a year 
from induftry is taxed at 20]. or 2-17ths 
of the taxable part of it, the proprietor 
of the eftate producing the fame income 
ought to pay 4gol. Ii either poffefs un- 
productive property, its amount beyond 
20}. is included in their taxable means. 
It would be unreafonable to objeé& to 
the fums which Mr. FrENpD has adopted 
as deductions for the untaxable part of 
every perfon’s property, as they might be 
fixed greater or lefs; but it feems that it 
fhould by no means be the fame in ail 
cafes, for the tax profefles to leave the 
members of the ftate in the fame relation 
to each other in which it found them ; 
and it will not be pretended that the m- 
come ab(clutely neceffary to enable a day- 
labourer and a peer to maintain their 
refpective fituations is the fame, or with 
refpect to a married man with a young 
Mr. Frend’s Principles of Laxation. 
[May 
family and an unmarried man: the de= 
duétion fhould therefore be an increafing 
proportion accommodated to the fituation 
of individuals. Again, if the tax leaves 
perfons with equal incomes in the fame 
relative fituations in which it found them, 
it fhould at leaft permit the capitalift to 
expend the fame annual fum as the perfon 
who derives his income from induftry ; 
if the latter is taxed at 2ol. for 200l. a” 
year, he has 18ol. to {pend, but if the 
former pays 4gol. tax and {pends 380]. 
it is evident, though the tax decreafes, 
his capital will foon be annihilated ; the 
progrefs ot its diminution, upon the fup- 
pofition that he continues to fpend this 
fum yearly, will be as follows : Bris 
Years. Copital. Incomes 
3 £4000 £200 
2 3529 176 
3 3093 554 
4 2689 134 
5 2555 be 
6 1963 98 
7 1647 82 
3 1349 67 
9 1074 53 
TO 318 40 
1X 581 29 
Iz 362 18 
13 159 & 
In the thirteenth year the capital and 
income amount to only 1671. fo that 
whether the tax is paid or not there is 
not fufhicient to {pend 180]. and the whole 
of the property is confumed. . Thus the 
perfon who by his induftry has accumu- 
lated a capital which will preduce an 
income that he judges fufficient to live 
upon, is not only to diminifh his expen- 
diture in the fame proportion as others, 
but 1s alfo to pay fuch further tax upon 
the produce of his paft induftry, as will 
entirely deprive him of the means of fub- 
fiftence at the very time when he will be 
the moft unable tc help himflf. It is 
true, fome variation is propofed in the 
mode of taxing income derived from 
capital when it 1s reduced to gol. perann. 
-but the adoption of this alteration, ac- 
cording to which the income fill di- 
minifhes, fiews that a more general rule 
is defirable. 
That perfons deriving their income 
from capital, ought to be taxed much 
higher than thofe who derive the fame 
income from induitry ; which, of courfe, 
if they fpend the fame fums, will gene- 
raily intrench upon the capital of the 
former, cannot be denied by any who 
confiders the fubje&. Many perfons 
‘fee the effect of the tax in diminifhing 
the 
‘ 
