The Express.
London, England, 1851-05-07 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MAY 7, 1851.

U N C H, for Mar 10, 000taisa : Her Me=
=e~awer atie es the TIM se Mr serreered by
te *h Vie
a— II -Day he Nom'

ratrtar.: - J. the Crystal —rnsell'a on &Van
af tbatoWzgat the Groat Zenbilks. !o.he., ha.
Flaat.tren ; and all liastaeliars and Xmases.

gist ervreoo.

TO CORRESPONDENTS.
A beeend &Mks of " The Express," else roe exesdres
" Gandy" Is published every TSNM7 sad sight, 111 dole
for post.
Advetusemests Wended for "The Express," [dodos Evenles paper,
must be at the DlEce, LU, Bouverte.suset, by Toe o'clock is she
dq of pabiliallos.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
Tsu UsT—llasslas, IS. Mo. Aftersooa, IS..
Taressow—Mrsviss, 6S. 43a.....„ -*itemise, Ts. Ile.

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 7.

SIR CHARLES WOOD is the very ROBIN GOOD-
FELLOW of the Whig cabinet; he is continually lead-
ing his companions into some quagmire or other.
Last night he landed them in another minority. It
is true that Lord NAAs' motion for a committee of '
the whole house on the present mode of levying the
duty on home-made spirits in bond, was carried
against ministers only by the SPEAKER'S casting
vote ; and it is true that the vote only declared that
Lord NAAS' resolution shall be moved, not affirmed:
still, a minority is a minority, an awkward I
position for any government to be placed in. This
might have been avoided, had the CHANCELLOR of
the EXCHEQUER granted the moderate and reason-
able request of the distillers; to his indolence, or in-
capacity, or both, and supercilious obstinacy, Lord
JOHN RUSSELL is indebted for this new mortifica-
tion. The PREMIER gained credit by his handsome
acquiescence in the defeat he experienced at the
hands of Mr. How ; but such admissions of having
erred lose their grace by repetition : and if Sir
W i CHARLES OOD s to continue Chancellor of the
Exchequer, Lord JOHN may make up his mind to do
I penance in a white sheet at least once a week while
I the session lasts.

WE are no admirers of the malt tax—very much
the reverse. We think it a clumsy contrivance in
form, and a grudging, greedy, gambling system in
practice. We think it directly tends to deprive the
labourer of one of the most nutritious specks of beve-
rages, and indirectly tends to depreciate particular
soils, while it suffers others to escape nearly free.
We know that it 11.18 hitherto been prolific of fraud
to an incalculable extent, and consequently of widely-
spread demoralisation among the trading community.
All this we nut only admit for argument's sake, but we
actually feel so deeply that we cannot conceal our
earnest hope that we may one day see it abolished.
We should like that greatly.
But how is it to be done ? If four millions and a
half of revenue is to be abandoned whence is the
vacuum to be filled ? Last year Mr. CATLEY tried
his hand at a supplementary budget, whereby he
professed to provide the means for supplying the de-
ficiency his favourite proposition would cause ; but,
after stretching the economy to be effected in ex-
cise expenditure to the utmost point, appropriating
the surplus on the year, and paying off the
African squadron, there still remained a de-
ficit, if we remember rightly, of about a
million and a half, for which Mr. CAYLEY
could only say that he did not think that was much
to leave unprovided for. The House of Commons,
however, thought differently, as it is to he hoped the
House of Commons always will. Men of all parties
concur in the opinion, that prior to all considerations
of detail the general question must never be lost
sight of—how is the expenditure of the country for
each year to be met ? It wont do to offer a boon, no
matter how intrinsically desirable to particular classes
or interests of the community, unless you can show
that you can clearly afford it. To be generous, parlia-
ment must be just ; and before playing the munificent,
governments are bound to be honest. If, therefore,
the member for the East Hiding cannot distinctly
show how the loss of the duty on malt is to be made
good, he has little chance of persuading any consi-
derable portion of the legislature to lend its support
to his motion.

There arc those no doubt with whom this objec-
tion has little force, or with whom rather a ready
alternative is at hand. We mean those daring poli-
ticians who would re-impose a protecting duty on
corn. But in this, as in every other practical trial
of the faith, as it is in protection, we perceive the
deep misgivings that are entertained by the chiefs of
the party in themselves and their own principles. Lord
STANLEY does not covet a deficit. He does not want
to have the filing up of a great gap in the revenue.
The fearful expenment of realising his own theory
of a moderate fixed duty would then become unit-
voidable ; and this is precisely what Lord STANLEY
does not want to have forced upon him. It is all
very well to propose a rough resolution, that no
more excise shall be levied on malt front and after
the Ist January, 1M52, whereby a sum of several
millions sterling shall be withdrawn from the Ex-
chequer. But who can tell what the price of corn
will then be ? Or who can tell in what cir-
cumstances we shall find ourselves ? What states•
man would venture to create beforehand such
a deficiency, with no other means in prospect
for filling it up, than a scheme for making scarce and
dear the staple article of popular subsistence? Lord
STANLEY is no very cautious politician; but he has
been in high and responsible office, and consequently
knows what the possession of power in this country
implies. It does not require either lofty genius or
pre-eminent ability; but it does require the observ-
ance of the appearances of common sense and of com-
mon prudence; and we were therefore not surprised
last year to find Lord STANLEY openly declaring
against Mr. CAYLEY'S proposition. To threaten a
return to protection in popular assemblages, and to
promise " a remunerative price" for corn at some
future day, by way of inducement to over-rented
farmers to pay without abatement another gale, is easy.
But to enact deliberately, twelve months before-
hand, that which would render the attempt to re-
vive the corn laws necessary, is something too rash,
even for Lord STANLEY; and, accordingly, the more
discreet and knowing advocates of toryism are not
disposed to bind themselves by voting away the malt
tax.

Financial reformers who see their way to
comprehensive and permanent reductions of ex-
penditure arc placed, of course, in a some-
what different position. They would relieve
the consumers, who, they believe, pay nearly the
whole of the tax, because they would remove the
necessity of levying so much taxation. And to this,
always provided that the amount of reductions in the
estimates were ascertained and settled beforehand,
few persons would in the abstract raise any objee-
tion. The question would then probably assumes'
different form. Other taxes would compete for ex-
' tinction with the bete noire of barley-growers. Paper,
soap, timber, and many more, would conspire for
emancipation, and contest the benefit with the staple
of the brewing trade. Even hops would grow more
hopeful, and tobacco breathe more freely. But in
the absence of any pretence of important diminution
in our estimates, and with a surplus already voted
away in mitigation of other burthens, a proposal to
abandon the duty on malt either means to leave the
exchequer with a scandalous deficiency, or to compel
the re-imposition of a tax on foreign corn. We do
not believe that the House of Commons will listen
patiently to either alternative.
Assuming the defeat of Mr. CXYLEY'S proposition
as certain, Mr. BASS has intimated his intention of
recommending that the duty should be reduced to
one-half. This would, no doubt, be extremely useful
to the brewers generally throughout the country;
but it would not materially diminish the price to the
consumer; it would not touch the evils inseparable,
we fear, from all excise taxation,and it would not af-
ford any reasonable ground of expectation that the
increased consumption would make up for the imme-
diate loss of revenue.

IN addition to Mr. LocKE's Railway Audit Bill,
there is another measure aiming at the same end,
by, however, very different machinery, before the
House of Commons. But, as the latter is very much
the government Audit Bill of se..iou NA; with it%
great board of railway audit, its five auditors in chief
with 1,200 f. a year each, its secretary, with 6001. a
year, and its host of subordinate officers, clerks, ser-
vants, and other persons, all to be paid by a rate on

railway profits—as this is tho sum and substance of
the latter bill, and as its success was hopeless when
promoje4. by Idr.-Lusoveunita,:it .1104 weTL
pine- deteeArY tti state' che ittstiperatle ebjcot
there are to such a scheme for taking railway ao- 1
counts out of the hands of railway shareholders,
when it is revived by Mr. STANFORD, Bgentleman
who, though elected for Reading on the faith of a pro-
mine that he would marry a lady of that borough,
has not as yet, we believe, been as good as his word.
Adversity has, in railway management and in
proprietary vigilance. had its uses. The pet-swine! of
the various boards have been greatly modified auk
improved since the discovery of Mr. GEORGE Hen-
SoN'i enormities brought universal suspicion on di-
reetorates ; the affairs of nearly every line in
the kingdom have since then been narrowly
examined by independent committees of share-
holders ; the accounts of several have been,'
at a cost, however, far exceeding the value of the ex-
amination, probed to the bottom by professional ac-
, countants ; the present condition of the various coin-
penes is now thoroughly understood by persons
wholly unconnected with their management ; the
increasing value of railway property has a tendency
to improve the character of railway constituencies;
the influence of shareholders over boards has, of
course, grown with their knowledge, their experi-
ence, and their higher standing ; the statements of
reports issued by directors are clearer, fuller, and
move explicit; confidence between the electors and
the elected is greatly restored; and with the better
prospects of railways, management generally is much
improved.
lf, then, during a period when all faith in railway
administration and railway accounts was suspended
—when between boards and their constituencies

feelings akin to personal animosity almost existed—
when confidence began to wane even in men of such
high character as Mr. GLYN, Mr. DEmsos, and Mr.
licssELL—if even then, railway shareholders re-
jected, repudiated, and disclaimed all external aid
and assistance in the control of their affairs; how
much less likely are they, now that the
tide has ebbed and is again flowing, to
submit to the transfer of the powers of
audit vested in themselves ►o a body such
as Mr. STANFORD has in view? What shareholders
want is not a diminution or an alteration of the
powers conferred on them by the tith 'Victoria, chap.
16; but an increase and extension of its provisions;
I they do not wish fur the introduction of foreign help,
but the augmentation and development of their
interval machinery. And as that is the chief object
of Mr. LocKE's bill, it is, therefore, infinitely pre-
ferable, in principle at least, to Mr. STANFORthi
measure.

Whilst, however, approving of the increased
powers which Mr. Loots bill will, when passed,
confer on shareholders; fully agreeing with
him in the manner in which he would
secure the choice of competent auditors, in-
dependently of all direetoral influence—viz.,
by means of audit committees of share-
holders; and not dissenting from the means of
control he would place in the auditors' hands, there
are several points in which, as we have before shown,
its details might be greatly improved ; and there is
one point (and that the grtatest of all) which it does
nut touch on—we mean the closing of capital
Ac-
counts.

_
We at once admit the difficulties with which that
subject is surrounded; and assent to what we pre-
sume Mr. LOCKE will reply, that it is matter not for
legislation but for management to effect. But
that granted, the fact remains the same that no
audit can be entirely satisfactwv until the Capital
Account is closed ; for, so long as it is open, all those
questions as to what is chargeable to capital, what
to traffic, remain open also and are generally decided
in favour of traffic to the augmentation of capital ;
and, greatly as all circumstances connected with rail-
ways have improved, we see no effOrt being made to
reach this all-important goal—a fixed capital.
But until each railway company shall have a
fixed capital, there must remain about its affairs
that uncertainty, doubt, and suspicion which no audit,
however severe and stringent, can completely remove.
Some two years ago Mr. LAING gave the Brighton
proprietors hopes that their Capital Account would be
soon closed; and though those hopes have not been
fulfilled, there can hardly be a doubt that some part,
at least, of the high value the stock of that com-
pany. has since maintained, has ben produced by the
conviction that tho capital expenditure is nearly
closed. Yet, notwithstanding the all-importance of
that point being reached, there is not another com-
pany in the kingdom the shareholders of which can
with any certainty. look forward to any given period
within which their property will become fixed in
amount; and the probability apparently is, that the
capital of more than one of the later incorporations
will be closed sooner than that of the great companies,
which have now been fifteen years and more in
operation.
. _ _

_
If, indeed, attention be paid to some of the pleas
on which Capital is kept an open and an uncertain Ac-
count, it will never be closed: fur, of course, as the trade
of the country increases,and the demand for additional
railway accommodation with it, that demand will be
met by the existing companies; and, to meet it, more
capital will be required. But this prospect is really
no reason for keeping the Capital Account unclosed.
What is wanted is, at some early, definite, and rea-
sonable period, to fix the amount expended. But,
the fixing of that amount does not necessarily pre-
clude the entry on enlargements of the company's
scheme or traffic when profit is apparently to be
made by such extension. When such a case arises
let it be considered and decided on. But don't keep
capital open for ever on the ground of such openings
for profit occurring. Railways require a pause m
expenditure; that pause they will never have until
their capitals are fixed ; and though there are great
difficulties in fixing capitals, shareholders may de-
pend upon this—that where there is a will there is
also a way to fix them; and until they put pressure
on their directors, and iusist on knowing precisely
what is the amount of property in which they are in-
terested, the most able auditors they can appoint
won't successfully protect capital from bearing some
of the burthen which ought to be thrown on traffic.
Now, to section 8 of Mr. LoCKE'S bill, Mr.
IlcuritakT Ilnow:v proposes to add words directing
the auditors to make special reports to the company
on any increase that may have taken place during
the half-year in capitaL This addition in itself will
greatly improve the clause. But, smelly, a step fur-
ther in the right direction might be taken, by
imposing on auditors the duty of stating half-yearly
why the capital account is not closed ; and thus at
least keep that subject before the attention of the
shareholders.

With this, and the other improvements to which
we directed Mr. LOCKES att,ntion on a former occa-
sion, his measure would, no doubt, be a great im-
provement on the details of the existing law of
railway audit, which, however, is perfectly sound in
principle.