CO882-(1-2) — Page 148

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

TTC.O. 882

1

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

26

4498. Mr. Hume.-Were you a member of the Execu- tive Council when the new tax ordinances were intro- duced --Yes.

4499. Were you in favour of them, or of which of them did you approve, and which did you oppose?—I opposed some of them. I was not in favour of the tax upon dogs, nor of the shop-tax; those were the principal ones that I opposed; there were others brought forward together with them.

4500. Were you in favour of the gun-tax ?--I was not so much opposed to that, as regards the principle of regis- tration.

4501. Were you opposed to making it an annual tax?—

I did not at first anticipate the same difficulties.

4502. Did you abstain from voting in any of those cases?--Most of those taxes were first of all included in a draft of the stamp ordinance in the shape of licences; at first there were also several others; there was a tax upon notaries, a tax upon advocates and proctors, a tax upon auctioneers, and a tax upon retail-dealers: all of which were included under the head of licences in the original draft of the stamp ordinance.

4503. What part did you take in those ordinances ?— They passed through the different stages of the Legislative Council in that Bill till the very end of the Committee, or even the third reading, I am not sure which; when they were put to the vote, motions were made for leaving some of them out. Upon the divisions on those motions I did not vote.

4504. Are you aware that Lord Torrington, on the 9th of February, forwards the ordinance, and takes no notice of any opposition to that ordinance?-In the ordinance he sent home those licences did not any longer remain.

4506. Do you know that Lord Grey was furnished with

any

official information, enabling him to judge of whether that ordinance passed with unanimity, or was opposed by yourself and others?—I did not oppose the ordinance itself. The avowed object of the ordinance was to amend the stamp ordinance of Ceylon; in bringing forward that the Governor introduced those licences as a part of the schedule attached to the ordinance, and when it was put

to the vote, item by item, I did not vote upon those parti. cular matters.

4507. You disapproved of them in that form?—Of several of them.

4508. Had Lord Grey any means of knowing that you did so disapprove of them?--Not that I know of.

4509. Then the approbation which he conveys from Her Majesty must have been expressed without a full knowledge of all the facts connected with the discussion? — But those things were taken out of that ordinance; they were taken out at the last stage; and the ordinance which Lord Torrington sent for Lord Grey's approval, did not

contain them.

4510. Mr. Hawes,-In fact, Lord Torrington yielded

to the objections made ?—Yes.

4512. Was there opposition to the ordinance as sent

Wodehouse.

-

June 19, 1849.

1

Wodehouse.

June 19, 1849.

27

home? No, I do not recollect there was; those particular things in the schedule were withdrawn.

4524.* Has the shop-tax been repealed?—Yes, alto- gether.

4525. When was it repealed The papers will show. 4526. Did not the tax cause a very considerable excite- ment in the town of Colombo and in the colony—It was very unpopular in the towns to which it applied.

4530. Do you believe that Lord Torrington could have fallen into so great a mistake as he did here if he had allowed the members of the Executive and Legislative Councils to give their opinions and votes candidly and fairly while the measure was passing ?—I can state that in the Executive Council those measures were very fully discussed indeed. The papers which were laid before the Executive Council were Sir Emerson Tennent's reports, and the report of the Committee in Downing Street, and Lord Grey's despatch, and they were all fully discussed.

4532. Mr. Hawes.-Upon this occasion there was no reservation of opinion in the Executive Council or in the Legislative Council, was there, in reference to those tax ordinances; opinions were freely expressed, and the dis- cussion was full and ample?—Yes, in the Executive Council.

4535. What was the case in the Legislative Council ›--- Those measures came into the Legislative Council first of all in the stamp ordinance; they then came forward in a separate shape before the Legislative Council, as distinct ordinances.

4534. And there they were fully discussed?—There was very little discussion.

4535. Was there opposition ?—No.

4536. Therefore there was no adverse opinion to trans- mit home? No. I have before stated that I abstained from voting: I did not press the opposition, standing alone as I did, when they came forward by themselves.

4537. Chairman.—Having abstained from voting in the Executive Council, you did not oppose them in the Legislative Council?—I abstained from voting in the Legislative Council, which was tantamount to voting against them when they came forward as separate measures. No other member had originated an opposition, and I did not think it right to do so.

4538. Mr. Hawes.-Your original objection being * formal and technical one ?—No.

4589, You objected to their being all incorporated in one ordinance ?-Because by their being so they could not

be discussed upon the principle of that ordinance. My objection to them was as taxes; but when they came for- ward in their separate shape, as no other member origi- nated an opposition, being in the Executive Council, I did not think it right to do so myself.

4540. Sir J. Hogg.-You approved of all the ordinances

1

* It is not known by whom this and the next three questions were asked. The name of Mr. Hawes is printed in the evidence, but this appears to be a mistake.

I