The Press.
London, England, 1853-06-18 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

hold in the Ministry seems to satisfy the democrats,
and convinces me that there are places in reserve for
some of these placid gentlemen in the pot-pourri of
the actual Administration.
In the meantime they remain passive spectators of
a fancy camp, ornamental tournaments, and dra-
matic engagements, however expensive these amuse-
ments may become to the nation.
Had this Chobham camp been projected by the
late Ministry, great would have been the clamour in
and out of Parliament of the economists and pacifi-
eators. These men, who cavil at the award of small
pensions to the worn-out soldier of long service—who
would reduce or abolish the pecuniary rewards of
the few remaining old soldiers of long-past and
victorious battles—who would disclaim the noble
defenders of their own spinning-jennies and cotton-
looms, hear without a dissent of the 35,000/. this
spectacle is to cost the nation, a sum which will be
doubled before the " piece " is ended, and the half-
price returns added to the amount.
It is true that Sir De Lacy Evans is appointed to
command a brigade at Chobham, and it may be pos-
sible that the Peace Society tolerate all these pro-
ceedings for the sake of employing his advocacy of
their principles amongst the heroes of Chobham, who
may by his advice and the inconveniences of camp
life be converted to the doctrines of Bright, Cobden,
and Co., and renounce all ball practice except that
of the London season, and all service but that of the
dinner-table. I am, sir, your obedient servant,
C.

THE STATUE OF CA:EUR DE LION.
TO ME EDITOR OF "THE PRESS."
Sir,—l observe that the Jermlds, and other prac-
titioners in the light departments of "sting-and-
snarl " literature, are carping at the selection of Maro-
chetti's statue as a fitting memorial of the Great Ex-
hibion. The sculptor's title invites detraction, as a
matter of course, and offers a point for Radical inu-
entities, at the same time that his foreign origin
suggests an appeal to the jealousies of British sculp-
tor; of "flabby Graces," and the native designers of
" babies with a bowel complaint." These objections
are capped and consummated by a third—that the
subject is a Norman king, who, because he was a
Norman and king, as well as a hard hitter, is repre-
sented as less worthy of commemoration than " Tom
Cribb." The generosity and chivalry of the lion-
hearted monarch are regarded, I em aware, as un-
marketable in these days ; but it strikes me, sir, as
somewhat singular, that not one of his literary dis-
paragers have recognised him in the capacity of a
fellow-humorist. It may be shown, that of Richard's
bon mots the worst which has descended to us would
have made the reputation of a metropolitan littera-
teur. His bequest of his vices among the different:
orders of monks was the obvious original of the
famous will of Chatterton ; and another of his jokes,
which I will recal to your recollection, is in the best
style of Sydney Smith, and better than the best of
Jerrold's. When the Pope Celestine wrote to re-
monstrate with him for keeping "his son" the Bishop
of Beauvais in prison, Richard returned for answer
the bishop's coat of mail, with the text from the
Vulgate—" Sec whether this be thy sou's coat or no."
I will not mention other instances of his waggery,
for these will vindicate his claim to something supe-
rior to hone and sinew. And, after all, this contro-
versy is beside the considerations that Marochetti's
statue exhibited the most vigorous treatment of an
English subject at a festival where Englishmen freely
competed, and that the figure of an English monarch,
which is a work of rare genius, may properly remind
us of a temple which -his hereditary successor inau-
gurated.—l remain, sir, your obedient servant,
Extuanee.

GORTHE'S CHARLOTIT."
TO THE EDITOR OF " THE enrss."
Sir.—ln the Pficss of June 4 it is stated that
Kestner, the Hanovetian Charge d'Affaires at Rome.
has discovered" the original correspondence of
tioi;the with the lady who was the type of Werther's
" Charlotte." I have the pleasure of being personally
acquainted with M. Kestner, and it was from himself
I learnt that this lady was M. Kestner's own mother.
and that these papers came to him by inheritance.
He showed me her portrait in his apartment at Rome
at the time he mentioned this fact, and told me that.
when " Werther" was published, the lady and her
husband were greatly distressed and annoyed at what
they considered a breach of contidenee on Csoahe's
part. From this arose an estrangement between
t;aaghe anal his former friends, who became, however,
reconciled to him from the deep regret he evinced at
having unintentionally offended them. The portrait
of the real Charlotte is that of a handsome woman,
with a high forehead. tine features, and a very frank
expression of countenance.
Thinking you might be glad to correct this mistake,
I send you this statement, and am your obedient
servant, F.

SATURDAY,

trottOings ins',parliament.

RUSSIA AND TURKEY.
Inquiring as to the truth of the statement in the
Moniteur respecting the simultaneous orders said to
have been given to the English and French admirals,
by their respective Governments, to act in concert in
support of Turkey against Russia, the Marquis of
CLANRICARDE expressed his cordial satisfaction at the

announcement :
" Whether such instructions might or might not
been given at an earlier period, might or might not he
matter for inquiry at a future time; but he was sure that,
if the advisers of the Queen acted in concert with the
French Government and the British navy acted in con-
cert with the French forces, it would be almost impossible
for any war to disturb the peace of Europe. (Hear, hear.)
He had read the announcement with great satisfaction, net
because he wished to see any hostile demonstration, but
because he looked upon it as a guard and security for die
preservation of peace. (Hear, hear.)•'
The Earl of CLARENDON stated that the report
alluded to as having been published in the MoniUur
was correct. The noble earl continued:—
" When the news reached this country of the dtb-
parture of Prince Mi'nschikoff front Constantinople, to lie
followed in a few days by the whole of the Russian legation,
and when the rupture of official relations between Russia
and Turkey was accompanied by menacing circum-
stances, her Majesty's Government thought it was their
duty to give to Lord Stratford de Redefine authority to
send for the fleet, and to instruct Admiral Dundas to pro-
ceed to the neighbourhood of the Dardanelles. there to
await the communications he might receive from her
Majesty's Ambassador et Constantinople. My noble
friend is likewise right in thinking that this step was
taken in concert with the French Government, between
whom and her Majesty's Government there has throughout
existed, and I am happy to say there still continues to
exist, the most cordial understanding upon this important
(met' . lieers.) The ambassadora and admirals of t
hi-
two countries are furnished with instructions precisely of
a similar character. Both the Governments believe that
their ambassadors will use the same discretion and modera-
tion in exercising the powers now entrusted to them at
Constantinople. and they hope also that the necessity will
not arise for their having recourse to that power, because
the measure which her Majesty's Government has taken
has been considered solely as a matter of precaution; and,
so far from precluding, I verily believe it will tend to pro-
mote that pacific solution of the existing differences to
which I need hardly assure your lordship,: the best en-
deavours of her Majesty's Government have been directed.

(Hear, hPar.)" -
The Earl of Dimly : Will the noble earl be kind
enough to state to the house the date when the instrue•
tions were issued to the admiral ?
The Earl of CLARENDON : I cannot exactly state the date ;
but it was the next day but one after we had received the
information of the departure of Prince Menschikotf from
Constantinople.
In reply to similar interrogations in the House of
Commons Lord Join; RUSSELL stated this date, " upon
memory," as being the gnd of June.
LEGACY DUTY.
The committal of the Successions Duty Bill
standing among the orders on the paper for Monday
night,
Sir J. PmastvroN moved that the bill be committed
that day six months. Reviewing the position which
the question had assumed in both houses, he urged
that in that house the minister had introduced it in
a speech which consisted of little more than a suc-
cession of apologies ; while elsewhere a narrow
majority had been obtained for the principle by aid of
the votes of men—the bishops—each of whom must
be classed as a corporation sole, and who had ex-
pressed their approbation of a tax which neither
themselves nor their order would ever be called upon
to pay. The chief argument for creating a tax on
successions lay in the alleged anomalies of the ex-
isting legacy duty. But he contended that it
would be more consistent with justice, and more
conducive to the satisfaction of the public, to abolish
the whole series of imposts won inheritance :
He necept the alternative, because he thought it
would be far better to repeal the legacy duties than to pass
this measure, and he believed the people of the country
would rather submit to any means of making up the
am o unt that would be lost by the repeal of the legacy duties
than submit to the provisions of the bill they were nuw
about to pass. )bar. )•,
Attributing the suggestion to a party who sought to
undermine every aristocratic institution in the country,
and whom the Government seemed only too ready to
assist in that endeavour, Sir J. Pakington entered
upon a series of calculations showing the heavy in-
justice it would perpetrate towards the landed and
other interests depending upon real property. Al-
ready, as he computed, the rateable property of the
country paid seventen and a half millions to the
general burdens of the country, equivalent to a tax
of 12 per cent. on its gross returns. while personalty
contributed at the utmost 3or 4 millions. Another
objection to the tax was derived from its inherently
accidental character. Mr. Pitt had refused a similar
impost in 1805, because it was a tax upon misfortune.
I.: fact, the amount which different properties would
have to pay under it must depend entirely upon

JVNE 18, 1853.

chances of life and health. One property might
contribute nothing for half a century ; another might
never be out of the hands of the tax-gatherer.
A just name for the tax would be to call it a pro-
perty rather than a succession tax ; but it was, indeed, a
property tax under a peculiarly objectionable and
odious form
" The Chanoellor of the Exchequer could never have
ventured to submit this proposal to Parliament if he were
not presuming on the weakness and selfishness of human
nature, inasmuch as those who now possessed the property
would not have to pay this property tax, but it would de-
volve upon their suocessors, and therefore he had ventured
to make a proposal which he never would have brought
forward if the existing holders of property were to be
called upon to pay the tax. (Hear, hear, hear.) They
should, however, recollect that this was avowedly a perms-
neut tax—that those who held the property would soon
pass away—and that then other men would be exposed to
this odious impost. (Hear, hear.) With regard to the
corporations sole, he was glad to hear, so far as the poorer
clergy were ooncerued, that the right honourable gentleman
intended to exempt them from the payment of the tax.
The position of the clergy in many respects, in regard to
the income they held, was a very hard one ; but he must
say that he could only consider the admission made with
regard to these corporations sole as in fact an admission
against the whole tar. (Hear, hear.) He confessed that
he saw no sufficient reason why the property of corporations
sole was to be altogether exempt. ( Hear, hear.) With
regard to one portion of these corporations sole.—he meant
the biahops—(Hear, hear.)—they had already expressed
their high approbation of the tax, and he did not see on
what ground they could release them as they had no ob-
jection to it. (A laugh.) They were, in the eye of the
law, a corporation, and, if all corporate property was to be
burdened with this tax, he did not see how they could
justly exempt them. (Hear, hear.) He could not cer-
tainly admit one of the right honourable gentleman's main
arguments in favour of the exemptions of corporations
sole—namely, that they were subjected to a heavy expense
on succeeding to their property; for, though it was perfectly
true, it was equally true with regard to all owners of real
property who were subject to peculiar burdens and pay-
mute at that particular season. (Hear, hear.)"

Adverting to the machinery of the bill, Sir J. Pa-
kington denounced the inquisitorialprocess by which
the revenue to be derived from it must be assessed
and exacted :

' The inquisitorial nature of the income tax was nothing
as compared with this. Under the proposed tax, the moment
a death occurred, those who were responsible were called
upon to communicate to the tax-collector the fullest and
must detailed description of the property, with every charge
and deduction upon it, and this was to be enforced by
clauses of a highly penal nature. He did not blame the
Chancellor of the Exchequer for these penal clauses, as
no doubt he knew full well that the tax would be so odious
that there would be a general feeling in the country to
evade it, and if the tax was to be paid it would be necessary
to enforce it by tyrannical and arbitrary enactments. There
were, however, two questions to be asked on the subject—
would the house be so subservient as to pass this bill ; and
if so, would the country submit to it when passed? (Hear,
hear.) He believed that the House of Commons would
not pass the bill ; but if it should do so, though he would
be the last man to counsel his countrymen to resist the
law, still he would exercise, every feeble influence which he
possessed to tell the country to resist by every legitimate
and lawful means en impost so vexations, by machinery so
tyrannical and inquisitorial. Wear, hear.) When such
were the merits of the scheme, he sought for the motives
that had iuduced the Government to propose it, and found
them in the necessities which surrounded a Ministry with
no party of its own, and compelled to seek aid and sup-
port among discordant aud irreconcilable ausilitiries.
They constituted a Government which had no party upon
which to depend, but was compelled to consult how it
could obtain the support. of some four or five different sec-
tions upon which it was dependent, whether this was to be
obtained at one time by an apology for a Protestant speech
--(laughter and eheerel—in order to bring back Roman
Catholics and Roman Catholic support, or at other times
—as he was afraid in the present case—by pandering to the
radical prejudices of some of its supporters. (llear,hear.)
He traced this proposal of the Government to the necessity
of its position—to the fact that it had determined to pro-
pose an unmodified income tax, and that it had no hope of
obtaining the support to that plan of one of those sections
upon which it depended for existence, unless that proposal
were combined with another blow at rateable property.
Finally, Sir J. Pakington warned the house and
the Ministry that, when
the nature and machinery of the measure were known
throughout the country, au amount. of feeling would be ex-
cited with which no Government would dare to struggle.
(near, hear.) He felt convinced that if passed the time
was not distant when the present Government, or its sue-
eessora, whoever they might be, would find themselves
obliged to propose the repeal of the act in obedience to the
unanimous demand of an indignant nation. (Cheers.)"
Mr. MEADLAM panewrised the manufacturers for
consenting to a budget whch laid many burdens upon
themselves, because they thought it beneficial to the
community, and suggested a disparaging contrast with
regard to the landowners as represented by Sir J.
Pakington.

Mr. FRESHEIELD drew from the speeches and acts
of Pitt, Fox, and Peel, fresh arguments to support
the conclusion that an income tax and a succession
tax ought not to stand together. Dissecting some of
the details of the bill, and estimating its inevitable