The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-02-25 00:00:00

like the Income-tax, must of necessity be paid, be
a man's circumstances, at the moment, ever so
impoverished ; whereas the use of such articles,
as are of the nature of luxuries, might in such a
case he abstained from.

Intimidation, in one form or another, would
seem to have had no little to do in gaining sup-
port to the Ministerial projects in the House of
Commons. Mr. Bright, for instance, in particu-
lar, laboured hard to point out, as the possible
results of the success of Mr. lly. Cane's motion, a
dissolution of Parliament, a general election, a
change of government; -a new budget, and.,
what would be most unfortunate, an estrange-
ment. from Prance. These were the great bug-
bears that they most successfully employed to
frighten those who, otherwise, might have
opposed the whole scheme. It is not on its own
merits, therefore, that it succeeds, but under the
influence of a most unstatesmanly and cowardly
apprehension.

The Morning Herald of yesterday forcibly ex-
poses some of the NI inisterial Inconsistencies, with
regard to the Treaty and the Budget. "What," it
asks, "do the Government think ? They present
us with a Treaty of peace and a war Budget;
they wipe off their import duties and they forge
Armstrong gulls; they bind themselves for tell
years to certain conditions, on the faith of a
powerful monarch ; they make immediate sacri-
fices in order to reap future benefits ; yet at this
moment they are arming in every direction—and
against whom ? The very PotentaV with whom
they profess to be on such intimate terms !" This
is nGt merely an incougruity,—it is an impolicy
so perilous as to jeopardise the safety, as well as
the prosperity of the kingdom. If there has been
any such ground, as Ministers themselves have
declared there was, to arm against the French
Emperor, no mere fiscal sacrifices will ever per-
manently propitiate him.
The case of our silk manufacturers, under the
operation of the new fiscal policy of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, will apparently
be one of the hardest of all ; since, while the
French Government, it seems, may increase the
duty on English silks from 30 to 300 per cent., or
more, French silks will be admitted into England
free of all duty whatever! The effect will
evidently be to destroy the English silk manu-
facture, root and branch.

We would here briefly direct attention to the
copy of a.petition to Parliament in another column,
now in course of signature by the shipowners
&c. of this port, praying the house to withhold
its assent to Article 3 in the treaty until British
shipowners are placed as nearly as possible on
the same footing in the ports of France as French
ships are now placed in the ports of this country.
We need scarcely say we hope it will be numer-
ously. signed.

THE success of the Budget in the House of
Commons, even in its principal provisions,—
which we suppose may now be calculated upon,
—is by no means, in our humble opinion, a con-
summation to be wished for, by those who take,
at once, a comprehensive and a patriotic view of
the interests of the nation. For our part,
indeed, we very much question if it is calcu-
lated in its operation to promote even the interests
of commerce, in a national point of view ; what-
ever it may do for certain great capitalists, who
are embarked in trade and manufactures, and by
the absolute force of their vast pecuniary means
can take advantage of the removal of restrictions
to benefit themselves, without much regard to
the common weal of the country at large. And
where such an opportunity as this is presented,
in any financial scheme that may be
submitted to the House of Commons, those very
considerations which are in theory taken for
granted to act as checks upon such a body, in
dealing with the taxation of the country, in
practice are found to be of little, if any avail.
The theory is, that whereas every law which, by
the remotest construction, may be held to levy
money upon the property of the subject, must
originate—that is, must first be proposed and
assented to—in the House of Coramons ; by
which regulation, accompanying the weight
which that assembly possesses in all its functions,
the levy of taxes is thus virtually reserved to that
popular part of the Constitution. So that the
presumption is, that they will not tax them-
selves, nor vote large supplies, without
being first convinced of the necessity of
what they grant. This, we say, is the
theoretical view of the question. But in the
very case before us it is practically contradicted.
A necessity for such supplies as are demanded by
Ministers, there very probably may be; but thefts
is no necessity for having recourse to an increased
Income-tax for the purpose of raising them, ex=
wept in order to carry out and support those
principles which, under the present state of the
country, are of more than questionable expediency.
Now, the motion of Mr. Du CANE, so far from
denying the propriety of relieving the trade of
the country from all duties of customs which
could safely be dispensed with, actually expressed
a desire so to do. But it proceeded to declare,
that it was not expedient to add to the existing
deficiency, by diminishing the ordinary revenue,
and to condemn the disappointment of the just
expectations of the country by rendering necessary
a large increase of so oppressive an impost as the
Income-tax. So that, with the Conservatives, it
was a question, and very properly so, of time and
opportunity. They deemed it inexpedient to
diminish the ordinary revenue, and thereby add
to the existing deficiency,—and the more espe-
cially so in connection with a Treaty of commerce
with a foreign Potentate who, it may he more
than suspected, has ends to serve which are hostile
to our own national interests ; while they could
not consent to disappoint the country, by increas-
ing instead of reducing an obnoxious exaction
and one which was never intended to be of a per-
,
manent character.

Such a course as that which has heen Inst pur7
sued by the Conservative Qpposition in the House
of Commons is, in every point of view, a most
eonstitntional and patriotic one; and we cannot,
therefore, but deeply deplore the defection, on so
important an occasion, of the Conservative repre-
sentative of this borough, Mr. HORSFALL. Of
eourse, the honourable member has a perfect right
to act on his own conscientious convictions; and Pe
would not, for a moment, doubt ttiat he has dons
so in this instance. But we are sorry OW,
in so doing, he has manifested nut qrily a spirit
of revolt from the Conservative milks, but an appa7
rent inconstancy and. inconsistency. It is the
fetnark of a great moralist, that mutability of
purpose IPlcl. Ileonsistency of principle constitute
the greatest weakness of human nature. And,
without imputing any improper motive to our
respected representative, we cannot but apprehend,
that, by suddenly turning round, and supporting
those whom but a few days before he was f° ""d
determinedly opposing, he has
witheiosstisming. on:
But
tiswsa-e
.as one
that will have to be characterised taken a step
"Of discord and rade incongruity.
'•
than
charged evincing more
y
We are aware that, in
of expressing
a spirit of par
tistA4ction, rata!
utterly repudiate such an idea. It was the obser-
vation of no loss a distinguished and disinterested
i
iover and benefactor of his country than
WASHINGTON, that " within certain limits
pa-
triotism may look with indulgence, I*f
t with
favour, upon the spirit of
party. And if, in
forming our opinion of the course of procedure
which it is the duty of Conservatives to pursue
at the present con'
Pilotilre, with reference to the
financial memwes fthe • •
o Ministry, we appear to
give way to any party f • •is just of
feeling,
that character which
so high and patriotic an
authority as this has thus declared " may be re-
garded with indulgence if not with favouc-,":
Had Mr. HORSFALL assigned any valid TeaScki
for deserting his party on this occasion, the
04Se world have been different ; but after
having just given a vote in opposition to
the policy which he now approves, and
after reiterating his reprobation of a conti-
nued and increased Income-tax, now to turn
round and support that policy, and forward a
financial scheme, of which that he reprobates is
the vital element, does certainly appear to us to
betray a degree of inconstancy and inconsistency
as inexplicable as it is disheartening.
With Sir FRA-NCIS BARING we ask, "Can it be