The Press.
London, England, 1857-01-17 00:00:00

CHINA.

IN our present unfortunate rupture with this
Power, there are two distinct questions at
issue. The one is, our right to demand repa-
ration for the seizure of a Chinese crew on
board a vessel named the Arrow ; the other,
our right to insist upon permission to enter
the town of Canton in alleged accordance
with the terms of previous treaties. The
latter demand is in no way connected with the
dispute about the Arrow, but that is consi-
dered to afford a very suitable opportunity
for enforcing a dormant right. In the lan-
guage of those who defend the conduct of the
British authorities, they avail themselves of
the first petty dispute that happens to make
a final settlement of a long-pending question,
and to reverse, once and for ever, the results of
Chinese duplicity. In the words of other
people, we are only taking advantage of success
in a petty wrong to proceed to a still greater,
or rather, we ►night say, the perpetration of
deliberate injustice to avoid' being driven to
the confession► of a trifling error.
It is maintained that the Chinese officers,
in pursuit of certain notorious pirates, boarded
a British vessel lying in the harbour of Canton
with British colours flying, and forcibly
carried away twelve of her crew as prisoners ;
whereas their proper course was to have de-
manded the interference of the British Consul.
In consequence of this supposed insult, divers
complaints were forwarded to the Imperial
Commissioner, and on his refusal to acknow-
ledge his countrymen in the wrong, or make
such apology as the British authorities deemed '
becoming, those hostile measures were re-

SATURDAY,

sorted to which few persons in this country
have heard of without reiret.
The case, as for Ai w ekn understand it,
appears to be as follOws. Tl4O Arrow Was not
a Brigsh vessel at ill. pe was built by a
Chingse, owned by 4 phin@fe, and engaged in
Chinese trade. BO she 1s navigated by an
Englishmo, aud h mphased a register
from ;in •uglisb. mer pt, which seems to
have given her die rig t to heist English
A
coiourg. This, its the Chinese Commissioner
observes, is evidently a most objectionable
practice. But even this cannot be pleaded in
our justification, as by the Bth of October, the
day the seizure was made, the effect of that
register had expired. It is said that the Chi-
nese did not know it had expired —an argu-
ment the futility of which we have exposed
already. But, however this may be, the crew
of the lorcha must have known it well enough ;
and the fact of their having British colours
aloft after the right to do so had ceased, may
possibly be indicative of a practice which
would naturally lead the Chinese to pay but
little attention to the appearance of the Bri•
tish ensign upon native vessels. As this is a
result for which the one nation is just as re
sponsible as the other, we cannot in common
fairness lay the whole blame upon the Chi-
nese. The Imperial Commissioner, indeed,
denies that the flag was flying when the Arrow
was boarded. But even if it was, our indigna-
tion ought to be considerably mitigated by re-
flecting on the improper manner in which she
had gained the right to carry it, and that even
the sham character with which this transac-
tion invested her had then expired. The
sooner British protection ceases to be thus
bought and sold by any petty trader to whom
it may be convenient, the better for the honour
and dignity of both countries.

In regard to the second claim which our
representatives have considered this period of
violent irritation as a peculiarly favourable
moment to advance, we can only say that it
seems to us, if possible, even still more base-
less than the other. Permission for British
subjects to cuter and reside in the city of Can-
ton upon the same footing as they are
admitted in certain other Chinese ports had
been long sought by this country, and long
promised by the Imperial Ministers, contingent
on the consent of the people. It was constantly
urged by them that nothing could be done in
opposition to the popular will ; and when,
after reucated attempts, the inhabitants of
Canton still refused to accede to this arrange-
ment, the Chinese authorities intimated that
the case was hr the present hopeless, and the
claim was with great goad sense formally
waived by the British Envoy, Sir GEORGE BON-
HAM. This was in 1849, and since then
nothing further has been done in the matter. It
seems difficult, therefore, to understand upon
what ground the Chinese are now taxed with a
breach of faith ; while. on the other hand, it is
both impolitic and iniquitous to endeavour to
force them into an agreement from which their
national prejudices revolt, at a moment when
those prejudices must naturally he more
inflamed than usual.

A war may be very inglorious, and yet
very expensive ; and the natives of the
Celestial Empire, with their recent practice
in warfare, may be able to protract hos-
tilities to a most inconvenient length. Just
at the moment when the country was con-
gratulating itself on the return of peace, and
the possible relief from many of those burdens
which the war had entailed, it is rather too
bad to find ourselves plunged into another
contest, from which we can reap nothing coin •
mensuvate, simply by the hot-headedness of
our authorities, and the inveterate love of
bluster in our own Government. Let the wrong,
if wrung there is, be redressed at once. But
do not let us go to war on this paltry pretext
for the sake of an ulterior purpose, which is
not founded in justice, and is alien to that
spirit of moderation which ought to regulate
our conduct towards those whom we so boast-
fully term barbarians. Things almost seem
as if we had sought a peg to hang a new war
upon. If this be so, woe to the Government
which has found it !

JANUARY 17, 1857.

THE INCOME TAX.

WHY IT SHOULD BE ABOLISHED, AND HOW

IT MAY BE ABOLISHED.

WITH the complete re-establishment of Peace,
and with the resumption of amicable relations
with all tha great Powers of the world, it is
only natural that the mind of the Public
should be particularly directed to a readjust-
ment of the Taxation of the Country. During
the War, it was necessary that the Revenue
should be very greatly increased, and accor-
dingly additional taxes were imposed,
which raised the public income from about
34,000,0001., at which it stood at the conclu
sion of the financial year 31st of March,
1954, to about 08,000,0001., at which we may
assume it will stand on the 31st of March next.
This increase of revenue to the amount of
14,000,000/. is mainly due to the additional
Income Tax levied, the amount from this
mpost having risen from 6,000,000/. to
16,000,0001. The other• part of the increased
revenue, amounting to .1,000,0001., is due partly
to the natural growth of the Revenue, arising
from the expansion of commerce and progress of
industry, but principally to the increased taxes
which have been levied on articles of consuuip
tion, particularly on spirits, which have been
made to yield, by the additional duties imposed
by Mr. GLADSTONE in 1854 and by Sir G. C.
I,Ewis in 1855, an increase to the Revenue of
about 1,500,000/. The great question, there-
fore, to be decided in the next session of
Parliament is, in what way taxation shall be
reduced so as to bring the public income to
something like the amount which was thought
sufficient before the War broke out.

We propose in this article to set forth some
reasons why the Income Tax should be totally
abolished ; and by a plain reference to figures
to show how it may be abolished. We must
claim the patience of our readers while we re-
fer to Official Returns of Revenue and Expen-
diture previous to 1554, as in that way we can
best clear the ground for a fair estimate of our
present financial condition.

The public income for the last year of peace,
ending 31st of March, 1854, was, as we have
said, 54,000,0001., excluding the charge of col-
lection, or about 58,500,0001., if the charge of
collection be included, And this may be
taken as a somewhat higher amount
than that at which, with some varia-
tion, the Revenue had stood for several
years previously. The expenditure, exclusive
of the charges of collection, was about
50,500.0001., or Uith the chaige of collection
55,000,000/., leaving a surplus of about two
millions stem ling applicable to the reduction
of the National Debt. We make this statement
in general terms, as it would only lead to con-
fusion were we to give the exact figures, and
attempt to discriminate between ordinary and
extraordinary sources of revenue. The fact
is, that since the year 1842, to the period of
the War breaking forth, there has teen a con-
stant surplus of revenue over expenditure,
excepting the two years 1847 and 1848, when
there was an extra expenditure to relieve the
ish famine. For the eight years from 1843 to
1850, inclusive, we find that the gross returns
of revenue and the gross amounts of expen
diture were as follows:

Gross Tot al
Year. Revenue. Expenditure. Surplus. Deficiency.
1843 .. —156,944,043 65,501,739 1,443,304
1844 . ... 58,4.59,750 55,103,645 3,356,105
1845....57,690,704 53,873,1X12 3,817,64'2
1840 .. .. 58,429,333 55,583,025 2,846,305
1847.-50.273,730 1511,230,-113 .. 2,9156,683
1848....58,194,317 58,990,736 790,419
..
1840.. .. 57,578,785 55,480,059 2,098,19.6
1850....07,517,341 54,938,530 2,078,800