390 Attorneys' Certificate Duty-Fallacies of the" Times." man has his vocation, is the patron saint of ting forth the grounds of the claim to reattorneys; so once a year he returns to the lief, and, in 1836, a deputation from the House at the head of rather more than two Incorporated Law Society waited upon the hundred attorneys' clients-of the rich, then Chancellor of the Exchequer upon the landed, and encumbered class—and fairly subject, when the minister stated his discarries the House by assault." position to take off the tax, if the same The supposed difficulty the writer pro- amount could be raised by other and less fesses to feel in understanding why a noble- objectionable means. Again, in 1848, a man wholly unconnected with the Legal deputation consisting of delegates from the Profession, and distinguished, even in his country law societies, united with the Inown elevated sphere, for uncompromising corporated Law Society, waited on the independence of character and sterling Chancellor of the Exchequer, and it was not worth, should desire to identify his name until the Government of that day declined with the repeal of the Attorneys' Tax, to hold out any promise of relief that a Bill it will be perceived is at once overcome was prepared, and not until the year 1850, when the noble lord's supporters are when the national revenue, as at present, referred to. The 219 gentlemen who exhibited a surplus, that the sense of the went out with Lord Robert Grosvenor, House of Commons was for the first time are not individualised, and may, therefore, taken upon the question. with more safety, be aspersed. They are In that Session, after successful divisions disposed of in mass by our candid contem- on bringing in the Bill, and on the second porary, as members belonging to "the rich, reading, the Bill was again discussed in landed, and encumbered class." A glance Committee, amended, and reported as at the Division List will show the general amended, but at the last stage, upon the inaccuracy of this description. The majo- motion for the third reading, at three rity contains the names of many members o'clock in the morning, and in a House of wholly unconnected with the landed aristo- only 200 members, the Bill, as amended, cracy, and of some who, though rich, are was rejected by a majority of 24. In the notoriously and happily not encumbered. next Session, from causes not within the The Times complains, that whilst other control of its promoters, the Bill was not trades and professions, suffering" an equal introduced until the 8th of July, a period amount of injustice," a are content either to which rendered it impossible to do more bear what is inevitable, or "now and then than take the sense of the House upon the to memorialise the Chancellor of the Ex- principle, and thus reverse the unfavour chequer, in a quiet, rational, argumentative, able effect of the division upon the third fashion," the attorneys "do not make it a reading in the preceding Session; and in case for memorials or arguments, or any the last Session (1852) no Bill was introreasonable representations, but storm the duced, but the promoters contented themHouse of Commons once a year. Empha- selves with laying a statement of their tically denying that any trade, or the mem- grievances before the late Chancellor of the bers of any other profession, are suffering Exchequer, and relied upon his assurance equal injustice" from a tax upon articles to give the question an early consideration. of clerkship, a tax upon admission, and the The history of the movement, therefore, annual tax from which attorneys are now proves, that if "the immensely potential seeking to be relieved, we cannot allow the agency of attorneys in British society" flagrant misrepresentation conveyed in the exists, as suggested by the Times, in this statement above cited to pass wholly un- instance, at all events, the power has been contradicted. What are the real facts? exercised with singular patience and mode Is the Times ignorant, or does it desire to ration. Be the merits of the question, forget, that the grievance at length about, which the Times thinks fit to characterise as we trust, to be redressed, had been the an "excessive absurdity," what they may, subject of repeated petitions and memorials it cannot, with a semblance of veracity, be for several years before any Bill for its repeal was brought into Parliament? As stated in this publication some time since, in the year 1835, Mr. Freshfield presented a petition to the House of Commons set 143 Leg. Obs., p. 290, published 14th of February, 1852. denied, that it has been modestly and tem perately urged, and that personal canvass was not resorted to, as the means of obtaing relief from personal hardship, until every other means had been ineffectually resorted to. We pass over the statementmiscalled a fact-upon which some flimsy reasoning is attempted to be founded, that Attorneys' Certificate Duty-Fallacies of the "Times." 391 the movement "has never gone beyond one for public worship is attended with some triumphant majority," by a reference to the expense. All derive good from it, but those Session of 1850, when the Bill reached the who attend divine service are the persons last stage, after four triumphant majorities, directly and primarily benefited. They to examine the only shadow of argument can only be taxed by church-rates, pewthe writer in the Times has ventured upon. rates, and parish clerks, but it would be He tells us, that the tax is not such a hard- inconvenient, if not impossible, to make ship as the attorneys would make believe, and the proposition is thus supported : them pay for every sermon they hear. The best way to tax "this part of the affair," therefore, is to put a poll-tax upon parish clerks, with a graduated scale for "There are many costly legal institutions maintained in this country in the shape of pew-openers. The miserable sophistry Courts of Law, judicial functionaries, prisons, ventilated on this occasion, however, is and other modes of punishment and represtotally unfounded. The client does not sion. They must be paid for, and, though all pay the attorneys' certificate duty any more derive benefit from them and all help to pay than he pays the attorneys' income tax, for them, yet it is evident some derive greater or his house duty, or his butcher and baker's and more immediate benefit than others. The bills. The suitors of the Courts-the class persons thus directly, and in the first instance we presume pointed at as "the clients of benefited, are necessarily the clients of attorneys, and it is fit those clients should pay charge by reason of the certificate duty, but attorneys," are subject to no increased something more than others for the common benefit in which they have an extraordinary it has for some time been pretty generally share. They can only be taxed through attor- considered, that they already pay more than neys, stamps, and fees, and, as it would be enough for any individual benefits they reimpossible to tax every legal consultation or ceive, in the shape of stamps and fees, to lawyer's letter, the best way to tax this part say nothing of the necessary expense of of the affair is by a poll-tax on the attorney procuring evidence and professional advice, often operating as a practical denial of justice. Here is an argument, which certainly has The certificate duty does not add to the the merit of novelty, however deficient in amount of the attorney's bill, and it is not soundness, and it is the only argument yet suggested that its repeal will diminish the put forth, in or out of Parliament, against amount. It is not proportioned to the exthe repeal of the certificate duty. Courts and prisons, says this profound economist, are maintained with some expense, they are useful to all, but peculiarly beneficial to the clients of attorneys, and as those clients can only be taxed through attorneys, stamps and fees, it is best to put a polltax on the attorney himself. himself." tent of the attorney's business, the number of his clients, or the amount of his profits, and when the public interest rendered it expedient that the expenses of legal proceedings and the emoluments of attorneys should be materially diminished, the attorney's poll-tax was discarded from the consideration. The article referred to con with other professional men, three per cent. on that portion of his bill which is remunerative. The certificate duty is over and above the income tax: a payment of 127. for income tax, supposes an annual income of 400l., and a return of the number of attorneys with incomes below 4001. per If the Finance Minister adopts this prin- cludes with the suggestion, that the only ciple, he will be able indefinitely to extend alternative for the certificate duty is a perthe area of taxation. Let us see how it centage-" say one per cent. on every lawwill apply to other classes as well as attor-yer's bill." The writer has overlooked the neys. Why not impose a poll-tax upon fact, that any attorney whose income exceeds silversmiths? If the reasoning of the 1507. per annum, already pays, in common newspaper writer is good for anything, the silversmith escapes improperly. As thus:the police force must be paid for, it is beneficial to all, but more immediately beneficial to those who possess large quantities of plate. The possessors of such plate can only be taxed through a police-rate and their silversmiths, and as it would be impossible annum would afford some idea of the to tax them on every occasion on which a policeman looks down towards the pantry, the best way to tax "this part of the affair" is by a poll-tax on the silversmith himself! So as to the Church, not to cite it irreverently :—the maintenance of a place number of struggling professional men, upon whom the tax presses with undistinguishing severity, and whose pending appeal to the justice of the Legislature, has been thus met by the generous hostility of the writer in the Times. 392 Times. Fallacies of the " Times.”—Debate on the Attorneys' Certificate Tax. The Bill is in the same form as on previous occasions, repealing the Tax, not only on Attorneys and Solicitors, but on Proctors, Writers to the Signet, and Notaries. It also, as to the attorneys and solicitors of England and Wales, re-enacts the clauses in the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 73, relating to their annual registration. These clauses have been in all the prints of the Bill, and it was deemed proper to add to the former title the words "and to amend the Law re We refer to another part of the present seeing that he had so often called attenNumber for the Opinions of the Editors of tion to the same subject, in doing more than several other newspapers, who take a very reading the notice on the paper of the House, different view of the subject from the make the motion, and sit down; but as there were 200 gentlemen in the present who were not members of the last Parliament, he felt he should scarcely do justice to those whose interests had been committed to his charge if he did not again direct attention to the history of the tax, and the arguments on which the demand rested for its repeal. At the conclusion of the last century, Mr. Pitt being at the time in great distress for money, was compelled to raise it, not by any fiscal scheme, the principle of which he approved, but by any tax the House could be induced to vote. Mr. Pitt admitted that he could not justify this tax on attorneys and solicitors on any principle, and to make it tolerably fair in its application, he attached to it the duty on warrants having reference to the amount of business done. But this fair and reasonable feature of the tax had long since been repealed; and now, without reference to the amount of business, the certificate duty was charged upon all the Profession alike, 121. a year for Metropolitan solicitors, and 87. in the country; and the consequence was, that while to the house of large practice it amounted to one-half, or onefourth per cent., it was upon the young man just lating to the Registration of Attorneys and Solicitors." This part of the title was not expressly included in the terms of Lord Robert Grosvenor's notice of motion; and therefore, according to the forms of the House, it became necessary to re-introduce the Bill, and this has accordingly been done. DEBATE ON THE ATTORNEYS' THE motion for leave to bring in the Bill to repeal the Attorneys' and Solicitors' An-entering into business, or the man whose pracnual Certificate Duty came on in the House tice was small, 6 or in some cases 7 per cent. of Commons on Thursday, the 10th instant. objection to the tax, he was aware that if the Though, however, this inequality was a great Lord R. Grosvenor said, before going into case of the attorneys and solicitors rested upon the merits of this case he wished to notice the that ground alone, they would be met by the position in which the question was placed. So argument that the same ground might be urged much had the Profession felt this tax to be a for the repeal of the taxes or licence duties on grievance, that during the last 20 years they all trades subject to them. Still he conceived had never ceased to petition for its removal. it would hardly be contended that because for He himself had given notice to move for its the purposes of revenue certain trades paid repeal in 1849, but wa not able to bring for- licence duties that therefore a Profession-or ward the question till 1850. On that occa- rather, a part of a learned Profession-should sion, although opposed by the Government, he pay an annual certificate duty to entitle them was successful. The bill went through several to practice; for, it should be remembered, that stages, until at last, towards the end of the to qualify for the one required a long, laboriSession, it was defeated through one of those ous, and expensive education, while the others difficulties which were incidental to the attempts might be followed with little if any educaof private members at legislation. In 1851, on tion. And if it were the principle to lay a tax account of the ministerial crisis and the de- on the permission to follow professions, then bates on the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, he was the barrister, the physician, the artist, the unable to bring forward his measure until late sculptor, the architect, and all other profesin the Session, and on that occasion, although sions, ought to pay as well as the attorneys. again opposed by the Government, the bill But even were those professions made to pay was carried by a greater majority than before. an annual certificate duty they would be dealt He had some reason to believe that had his with more fairly than were the attorneys friends remained in office, they would have and solicitors. With regard to the attorsupported the principle, and, deferring to the ney and solicitor, the tax-collector met him opinion of the House, would have considered on the very threshold of his Profession, the claims of the solicitors unanswerable. Last and called upon him to pay 1207. before his year, in consequence of the political circum- parent, if he had one in the Profession, could stances of the time, and the near termi- communicate to him the first rudiments of pronation of the Session, it was obvious that fessional knowledge. When his articles were the House could not possibly pay sufficient out he was again called upon to pay a tax of attention to the subject. If this were the 251. before he could be admitted to practise. same Parliament, or the House was com- Then, when he did practise, he had to pay 3 posed exclusively of the same members as per cent. income tax on his earnings, and bein the last year, he should not feel justified, yond all this he was charged a certificate duty, Debate on the Attorneys' Certificate Tax. 393 which amounted to 3 per cent. on the aggregate | And that being the case, he trusted there would returns of the Profession. He knew it had be no objection to a motion, pledging the been the fashion to revile this branch of the House to the repeal of a tax so objectionable Legal Profession, and to call the members of it in principle, and so unjust and unequal in its extortioners, bloodsuckers, vampires, and he operation. He did not anticipate any objec knew not what besides; and he had heard of tion from his right hon. friend, as to the period one member of Parliament who, having been at which the motion was brought forward, for asked the difference between an attorney and he imagined his right hon. friend would naa solicitor, replied that there was precisely the turally desire to know the mind of the House same difference between them as there was be-in reference to the claims for the repeal of this tween an alligator and a crocodile. But as it or any similar tax before he brought forward appeared to him it was the Government who his Budget, rather than that he should afterwere the extortioners in maintaining a fiscal wards be compelled, by a subsequent vote of system, by which 120,000l. a year was extracted the House, to make reductions for which he from the pockets of that Profession in the shape might not have been provided. The old obof certificate duty, 80,000l. in the stamp duty jection against motions for abolishing or reon articles of clerkship, and on the stamp ducing taxes-that if brought forward before duty on admissions-in all, 200,000l. a year the Budget, they were too soon, and if after the on the industrial earnings of one portion Budget, they were too late-he did not expect only of a learned Profession. When this cer- to be met with on this occasion; for that had tificate duty was first proposed by Mr. Pitt, Sir been completely disposed of on a former evening E. Ashley, who was member for Wilts, ex- by the right hon. the President of the Board of pressed himself delighted at the notion of skin- Trade on the motion of the hon. member for ning the attorneys, and said that he looked upon Montrose. After thanking the House for the law as a luxury, and that all who indulged in attention with which they had listened to him, it ought to pay for it. He (Lord R. Grosvenor) the noble lord concluded by moving for leave did not think law was a luxury but a necessary to introduce a Bill to repeal the Attorneys' and evil. He thought law, which in other terms Solicitors' Annual Certificate Duty. was "the administration of justice" should be Mr. Cowan seconded the motion. After remade so cheap that it should be open to all. ferring to the petition which he had presented It was far better to simplify the law and make that evening against the tax, signed by 111 it cheap than to maintain a system appa- members of the Legal Profession of Edinburgh, rently for the benefit of the practitioners, by he said that the petitioners objected to the tax, which it was made complicated and dear to the and he agreed with them, on the ground that it public, compelling those practitioners on the was an additional charge imposed upon them other hand to bear an undue proportion of the beyond the ordinary taxes. With regard to public burdens. He was glad to find that after the principle of taxing professions he knew of many long delays the Government and the Le- no fairer tax that could be imposed than an gislature had at length entered in earnest upon annual licence duty, provided that it extended the career of legal reform; but, as by those to all professions alike. Two years ago he had reforms the profits of the Profession were ne- given notice of a motion on this subject in cessarily largely reduced the claim for the abo- Committee on the Income Tax Bill, but the lition of the certificate tax was the greater. success of his hon. friend's (Mr. Hume's) proHe had hoped that his right hon. friend the posal to refer the bill to a Select Committee, Chancellor of the Exchequer would have prevented the opinion of the House being taken spared him the necessity of making a speech upon it. There were now 20 trades and proby at once acquiescing in the motion; and, fessions paying licence duty under the excise though it appeared he was mistaken, he was and 12 or 13 paying licences under the stamp altogether at a loss to conceive on what grounds duties. The amount paid for excise licences in the very ingenious mind of his right hon. England, Ireland, and Scotland was 1,269,000l., friend would venture to resist it. If, as he and for licences under the stamp duties hoped and believed, his right hon. friend en- 215,000l., together, 1,484,000l. Looking to tertained a strong objection to this tax he the small number of trades and professions could understand that he might be desirous of which contributed to these taxes, he begged to having the opinion of the new Parliament ex- suggest to the Chancellor of the Exchequer pressed on the subject before dealing with it. that schedule D in the Income Tax Act should If so, he felt sure that when that opinion was be repealed, and that the Government should pronounced, as it had been in the last Parlia- consider the propriety of substituting for it an ment, it would be met with respect and defer-annual licence or certificate duty extending to ence by his right hon. friend. One word as to the amount of revenue involved in the proposition. The whole amount of this annual certificate duty was only 120,000l., a sum so insignificant that if there were no surplus, injury to the revenue ought not to be urged against its repeal. As it was, however, there was no reason for supposing that the revenue was not in a position easily to bear this trifling abstraction. all trades and professions. The Chancellor of the Exchequer observed, that whatever might be the intention of the hon. gentleman who had just sat down, on the question before the House, it was clear he did not esteem it so highly as the general principles of public spirit and patriotism; because, while he urged that this particular duty was of an exceptional character, he recommended that 394 Debate on the Attorneys' Certificate Tax. its principle should be extended to all trades House was aware, the attorneys in London and professions. Much was to be said, no paid a certificate duty of 121. a year, while the doubt, in the way of argument in favour of the country attorneys paid 87. a year only, and it doctrine which the hon. gentleman advocated; might be contended that that difference related but-and he did not say it should be done-if to, and was consequent upon, a state of things the House thought that it was a question which, under which the London attorneys possessed under possible circumstances, deserved consi- an advantage over the country attorneys, and deration he would still submit that nothing could were supposed to have the larger and more be more embarrassing and perplexing than to lucrative share of the practice of the country, disturb portions of the system which now ex- and that railways had changed matters in this isted, in order that hereafter they might start respect, and in a great measure removed the upon it afresh. It would be more reasonable, inequality. It might, therefore, be a fit quesbefore they proceeded to abolish any existing tion for consideration whether the same amount tax-when the question was, whether the prin- should not in future be charged on all certificiple of that tax should be made universal-cates. Again, it might be right to consider that they should retain the taxes they already whether it might not be possible to readjust the had based upon the principle which they wished to extend. He could not at all subscribe to the argument which had been addressed to the generosity of the House, on the ground that the body with whom they were dealing, were limited in numbers, and therefore limited in power. On the contrary, there was no one question brought under the notice of the House that was always so sure of obtaining a fair hearing, and something more than a fair hearing, as the question of the repeal of the Attorneys' Certificate Duty. His noble friend said, he hoped that he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would acquiesce in the proposition for the abolition of this tax ;-he should be sorry to make any abstract or universal declaration on the subject, but would go to the point that no person holding the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer ought, under any circumstances, to consent to the abolition of any tax until he considered the arguments in favour of such abolition in conjunction with the arguments which might be brought forward for abolishing or reducing other taxes-and if the Government intended to abolish this particular tax, as part of their financial arrangements for the year, they must still have felt it their duty to oppose the motion. He by no means denied that in the duties which bore on attorneys and solicitors there was no case for consideration. But at the same time, he did not consider the annual certificate duty as the most unjust of those duties. No doubt it was open to those various objections which might be urged against almost every other similar tax; but he thought upon the whole that those taxes which were levied upon certain trades and professions, and leviable annually, were amongst the worst in our fiscal system. That they were good or unobjectionable he would not say; but this he had no hesitation in saying, that there were many that could present much stronger claims for abolition. He admitted that there was some force in the argument of the variety of duties that fell upon this particular Professionand that there were questions as to the amount and the adjustment of those several taxes which deserved the consideration of the Government when they knew the financial resources of the country, and were in a position to do justice to all classes who had claims for the reduction of taxation. For instance, as the tax-and another question still more important which might arise was, whether the House, in lieu of abolishing the annual certificate duty, should not make a considerable modification in the stamp duty on articles of admission. Those who had applied to his noble friend and secured his valuable services, had not thought fit to lay that part of the case before him. He wished the House to understand that, although he thought the fiscal considerations involved, in acceding to the motion, were serious, there were other questions besides the amount which, by the repeal of this duty, would be lost to the revenue, that must not be overlooked. Let the House consider what was the effect of saying to a youth at the door of the Profession, you shall not enter until you have paid down 1201. Why, the effect of that was to create a virtual monopoly. But his noble friend proposed no alteration in that heavy duty, which, in its effect was like a fence or a wall erected round the Profession, to secure them from competi tion. The proposal was to take the burden off those who had the means and the power to bear it, and to leave it upon those who had not. He trusted the House would come to no such conclusion. When the proper time for considering the case of the attorneys and solicitors arrived, it would be a question deserv ing consideration, whether the most proper method of affording relief to the Profession would not be by means of an important reduction in the duty on articles of admission-one effect of which would be, to give the public the benefit of freer competition than by the mea sure proposed by his noble friend, the result of which would be, to make the monopoly which now existed, whatever that might be, still more stringent. His noble friend asked, Why do you not lay the tax on barristers?" Why, his noble friend must know that there was all the difference in the world between keeping on a tax they had already got, and laying on a tax that they had not. He would impress on the House that the question they had to deal with was not the abstract merits of the tax. Upon that point he admitted, that not this tax simply, but the entire taxes which affected this Profession, were deserving of consideration, together with the claims of other classes, when the state of the public finances would allow of it; but he protested against that practice which would 66 |