The Express.
London, England, 1854-01-06 00:00:00

vie ersrtos.

a boar Whim ar Kipt:s:r:;•...fie AO webers
•lOsaraa* Y pablaksit gamy Murray NA Pilaw alp% la taro
Or kW.
•Ildgertlesmilibstamilsil for "Tar Ems.' Larks 21.111/ paper,
araa In at tar Okay lisaarlaalrirr. W ellsok ea lb*
I lay of peldisties.

RIOR WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
Tuts DAT —Montag, Afters*" 11. W.
Tealsaairw—gatralss, Ila.---AftarresL Y. OIL

LONDON, FRIDAY, JANUARY 6.

THAT National Balance-sheet, the "Abstract of
the net produce of the Revenue of Great Britain" for
the years and quarten ended dth of January, 1853,
and 1854, was issued by the Treasury last night.
The one great feet on the fain of this document is
that for the year ended yesterday the revenue of
the country shows a large increase. To close ano-
ther twelvemonth with a statement of this kind
affords still further testimony to the wisdom at that
Free Trade policy,—of those principles of fiscal reform
—recently adopted by this country.
In tasting this Return by those which have recently
gene before it, we must, to be fair, rely rather on the
statements for the year than on those for the quarter,
ohm the year gives a result indicating the character
of the principles on which our recent fiscal changes
have been made; whilst the returns for the past three
months show rather those results, which are mire to
make themselves felt when any tax, large in sweat,
like that on soap, is suddenly abolished, and when
others oa articles of general consumption, like the tax
ea tea, are reduced. The redaction of the
stamp duties on receipts most of coarse also
be expected to manifest itself in the statement
of the first three months after the changed law.
When the stamp duties were first reformed by Sir
Cam*. rs WOOD, some time elapsed before the revenue
recovered itself from reductions the wisdom of which,
however, was ultimately and amply proved, not only by
the relief afforded to the public, but by the gradual
though surely increased revenue that followed. The
removal clan obstruction upon business encouraged an
increased number of transaction., whilst by the reduced
stamp tax oa those transactions the Exchequer was,
in the end, amply rewarded. So it was with the
reduction on general stamps—so on the re-
duced system of postage—and we may confidently
expect similar consequences to spring from the latest
instalment of Stamp Act reform. The revenue from
postage fell off, of course, on the first trial of the
penny rate; so also it has fallen on the first trial of
the penny receipt stamp. But in the one case
as in the other, the change being a wise one,
we may confidently expect to see :higher
figures ander the heading of " Stamps,"
in succeeding returns. With a very large increase
on the year, we may regard with philosophic calmness
a decrease on the quarter, when, as in the present
case, that falling-off follows important reductions of
taxation like the abolition of a soap tax and a
reduction of tea duties—a window tax having been
abolished shorty before. In the next year's state-
ments, we may look for another advantage, in addi-
tion to those we have foreshadowed: we may expect
to see t►e produce of the Successions Duty—a heavy
item—which has not yet had time for development.

In place of giving our customary summary of the
remise figures of the Revenue Table, we content our
salves with calling attention to the document it.elf,as
printed from the official oopy received from the Tres- I
Nary at a late hour last night. We cannot deal in I
detail with tables marked by such strange blunders.
The tables state there is e. decrease of 18,0001. in 4
the Post-office revenue for the yearjust ended aa com-
pared with that for the preceding year. But inasmuch
as the Post-office revenue for the year ended sth Jan.,
1833, is stated at 1,022,00 W., and that for the year
ended yesterday 1,104,0001, there must have been
in reality an increase of 82,0001. during the latter year.
Again, the income under the head Miscellaneous,
having been 293,7291. in the year ended sth Jan.,
1853, and only 178,3751. in the year just ended, the
actual decrease on the year has been 117,3541.,
not 17,3341., the sum stated in the official
abstract. To correct these errors, 82,0001. ought to
be added to the column of " increase" for the year
ended sth Jan., 1804; and 18,0001. ought to be
deducted from and 100,0001. added—or, in other
words, 82,0001. added to the column of decrease.
This would alter the krone of the aggregate increase
and decrease on the year from what appears in the
official tables, but not the total increase when a
balance is struck between the two alumna—the same
sum having to be added to each. There may bemire
mistskes in the tables, for in the copy we reselvoi the
83,0001. of increase in Post-office revenue fee the low
ter just ended was set down to the sesseeffiefregarty
tax. This latter error was evidently a sue bissike
in the transcriber ; bat by what mom the dem=
erroneously ascribed to the Pastmllse weer
should be stated at a figure which Imes the beanie
between the aggregate increase and demise& in the
'year's revenue correct, though the adisinte ems of
each are erroneous, we do not vestals to state.
What other blunders may occur in dams tables, or
whether there be any more, it is mmeseimary for
as at the hour we receive them to ascertain.
As some of the errors, too, are obviously of
transcription, not calculation, it is not easy to my
where in any particular case the mistake lies. But it
would be obviously rash to draw any exact inferences
from tables put forth in eo slovenly and inaccurate
a state This is not the first time that the quarterly
returns have been disfigured by gross and
unpardonable mistakes. It is rather hard with so
many well-paid officials that the country cannot have
'erred information for its money.

In the present and probable condition of Europe
our relations to neutral Powers are quite u im-
portant as those to oar allies. It is at no time nay
to bring neutrals and belligerents to view in thalami)
light the exercise of their respective rights. Angry
discussions arising from such differences of opinion
(listract attention, and thereby enfeeble or neutralise
6e efforts of the belligerent, and often afford a crafty
adversary means of gaining allies. The two great
maxims by which a belligerent Power ought to regu-
late its conduct towards neutrals are:—be scrupu-
lously equitable in your conduct towards them; be
fearlessly frank. In former wars England has been
more apt to sin against the former rule
than the latter. The circular that has just base
addressed by the Courts of Sweden and Denmark to
dm Cabinets of Europe, recalls an apt illustration Of
this position. The abstract principle coetsaded lee
by the armed neutrality in 1780—" free leg makes
free goods "—had much to be said in its &veer. The
Courts which combined to assent to it might have sew
creed and unworthy motives, but the principle to
assert which they ostensibly leagued themselves wee
plausible, if not more. England, by amok, the
question on the grounds of justice and empsdismey,
might have succeeded in striking out an ailfastinat
of the dispute which the Courts, if be. Wadi
have accepted ; which, if dishonest, they might have
refused ; but would thereby have °peel the eyes el
their subject■ and merchants generally, sad pissed
England in the right. But, on the contrary,
England obstinately, proudly, meamaingly,
peesistati in acting in conformity to the
old reverenced contrary practice, thereby irritating
thcaggregate commerce of the world, and enabling
the Offoraiseats, avowedly or underhandedly hostile