The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-11-18 00:00:00

lead in the provinces ; aril ho expresses a confident opinion
tliat, by the popular demand which. al

ng repre:en•
" the new Reform Bill

Le at ►r.

tation a reality, inster,d of mockery,
which Lord John Russ3ll has been so goo .I as to promise u
perseded." He suggests that Liverpool should t

prepared to &mind partition into three or four district
boroughs. As to the first subject the Council is, of course,

disposed to give its hearty co-operation—administrative
reform, and financial reform, being substantially one and the
same thing; but, according to its present constitution, it
cannot, as a body, interfere in political movements.

INCOME TAX ASSESSORS AND COLLECTORS— DIRECT
'TAXATION.—Mr. John Green, of Birkenhead, addressed
a letter to the Council on the case of a trades-
man, charged on £95 as profits of ..his business,
he having no other source of income to render him
liable to the tax. The facts have been laid before the Board
of Inland Revenue, which, ho expects, will at once quash the
assessment, without giving the person unjustly charged the
trouble and annoyance of an appeal to the Commissioners,
Mr. Green, who is bookkeeper in Mr. John Laird's ship-
building establishment, thus mentions another case of
attempted extortion :—" One of the foremen in Mr. Laird's
employ has been charged £lO, the duty on £l5O, as his
income to the sth of April last, lie gave to the assessor
(who, it should be stated, is -also collector, thus receiving-
double poundage) a statement, showing that the average of his
receipts for three years was below £lOO, and, therefore,
claiming exemption-from any assessment. I can confirm the
fact from our books ; but you are aware that the Commis-
sioners are not entitled to ask for any evidence other than the
appellant's oath, to verify his statement. Treating the honest,
industrious, well-conduCted mechanic as a liar, the assessor his
had the audacity to charge him with £lO of duty, in the hope,
doubtless, that, qua collector, ho May have the pleasure of
adding to his already very large poundage, by extorting so
enormous a sum from the earnings of a hard-working man. I
will, however, defeat him, cis I did in upwards of 200 similar
cases, in 1854. Should the charge, nevertheless, be insisted
on, I can only say, 2 would not be the collector to enforce it
by distraint; and, most assuredly, the man, under my advice,
will never PAY it." Referring to a former correspondence
with the surveyors for Birkenhead and Toxteth Park, Mr.
Green says : " They wrote me, and our precious surveyor told
me, that clerks and such like' could not claim to be relieved
or-assessed under the three years' average clause ; and, as they
were, therefore, totally ignorant of their own duties, and of
the people's rights, I caused the Board of Inland Revenue to
instruct them uhat these were, to the great gratification and
relief of 2QO persons (as already stated) who would otherwise
have been undoubtedly the victims of official zeal and cupidity."
The Secretary was directed to thank' Mr. Green for his coin-
raunication, and to inform him that the Council would bo glad
to receive some statistics on the subject, which he proffered.
It was observed that incalculable damage was done to sound
principles, by the way in which the Income and Property
Tax is carried out. As Financial Reformers, they had great
difficulty in persuading their own friends, that direct taxation
—falrly and equally levied, and a properly adjusted system—is
vastly preferable, in all respects, to the cumbrous and expen-
sive system of taxes on commodities and materials, which
cripple commerce, manufactures, and industry; diminish
employment—enhance prices far beyorrd tho amount of the
ditties imposed ; and, in various ways, burden the country to
double or treble the amount which finds its way into the
national exchequer. The policy of allowing the assessor and
collector to be " two gentlemen in one," was also strongly
censured. Some doubt was expressed as to the possibility of
so gloss a blunder, of which the evil tendency is so manifest—
having been perpetrated; but there is no doubt as to the fact.
The commissioners appoint the assessors; the Act empowers
the assessors to appoint " fit and proper persona" to officiate as
collectors ; and assessors, probably thinking no other persons
so "fit and proper," have, in many, instances, appointed them-
selves. They have, thus, a double interest in screwing all
they can from the public. It can never have been the inten-
tion of the Legislature that the assessors should appoint them-
selves collectors,; but it has given them power to do so, if they
please; and.some of them have exercised that power to their
own great profit, doubtless, but with very problematical
advantages to the public. This is one of the many grievances
of-detail and principle, which a wise Government would
protnply redress; but, from the manifest indisposition of our
rulers to meddle with any of them, it would seem to be their
object to make the impost as unpopular as possible, with a
view to retard, or prevent altogether, the adoption of just and
sound principles of taxation which, whilst raising the
necessary revenue in the manner least prejudicial to the
country, would, at the same time, induce the public
knowing—what they cannot know under the present mixed
and anomalous system—exactly how much they paid in taxes
to give much more attention to good and economical govern:
ment, and the means necessary to obtain it, than they do at
present. It was also regarded as most anomalous that, under.
the Income Tax Act, neither government nor commissioners
can dismiss collectors, however grossly they may misconduct
themselves in matters unconnected with their official duties;
the only resource in such cases being, it was alleged, the de-
manding of exorbitant securities. It was stated that, in one
instance, this expedient has been tried in vain. The commis,-
sioners are reported to have required sureties to the amount of
£14,000. The collector having found such sureties, laughs at
his supposed masters, and says that if they want security to the
amount of £30,000 they shall have it

THE " DAILY POST " ON " DINING OUT

Newspaper difficulties, or, perhaps, more correctly
speaking "squabbles," we have ever cautiously avoided on
our part, and we can safely say, that we have never been
the aggressor in any instance, when we have been com-
pelled to enter the lists. We have had, on some few
occasions, to stand on the defensive, when grossly
attacked without the shadow of cause having originated
with us; and, we trust we have vindicated ourselves in
a spirit of fair play, and without insult to the feelings of
any, personally or professionally. An exceedingly
offensive, and totally untrue paragraph, clearly referring
to us, which appeared in the Daily Pose of Thursday, in
reference to a dinner given by Mr. Stitt (town councillor),
on Monday last, obliged us to repudiate it in terms that
it merited. On Saturday that journal published the
following paragraph in reply to our observations :
44 We (Daily Post) never questioned the conduct of our
cotemporary, and never reproached any gentleman con-
nected with his office of doing ought unworthy of the
profession. We neither assert nor insinuate any thing
against any cotemporary, his office, or his reporters.
Our remarks quoted above, will be justified by the follow-
ing extract from a letter with which Mr. Stitt honoured
us on Tuesday last :—" I was much mortified last even-
ing to find no one from your establishment at the dinner
given to my friends and supporters during the late
looniest; and, on discovering the circumstance, I im-
mediately despatched a cab for one of your reporters,
but you had all left the office. illy instructions, in the
first instance, to invite one of your staff, wore most
particular; but, it appears, through some blunder, that
the note of invitation intended for one of your servants,
and addressed to the Daily Post office, was sent on from
thence to the NORTHEN DAILY TIMES office, in conse-
quence of the wrong name being inserted."

It may be logicalon the part of the Post to state, that
that offence was not intended tow•irds us. We take him
at his word--but how will he reconcile this statement,
with the sentence that immediately follows, namely :
" Our remarks (the remarks in Thursday's paper) will be
justified by the following extract from a letter, with
which Mr. Stitt honoured us on Tuesday last."
There is an anomaly here—a confession so palpably
absurd, that it would be useless to discuss it If " offence"
was not intended, how can the "extract from Mr. Stitt's
letter of Tuesday justify the remarks" made by the Post ?
We do not stop to enquire how Mr. Stitt came to address
the Post on Tuesday—the day after the dinner. Why not
publish the whole letter ? But, in order tojustify our re-
marks on the Daily Test paragraph, we are oblig?d to pub-
lish the, following letter, which reached our office on
Saturday, the Bth inst., the envelope being directed as
follows :

S Redmond, Esq.,
_Daily Times Office.
and marked 'c private" on the corner.
(Private.) EVERTON AND KIRKDALE WARD.
Elm House, Belmont Grove, Nov. 6, 1856.
"Dear Sir,—Mr. Stitt's committee will dine together
at the Derby Arms Hotel, Kirkdale, on the evening of
Monday, the 10th instant, at seven o'clock, when he will
be happy to meet them. Your company is requested on
the occasion. An answer will oblige.
P.S.—Please bring this note with you to the place
of incetino%
S. Redmond,b Esq "
Mr. Redmond being a burgess of the ward,and one of Mr.
Stitt's supporters, felt some difficulty about the matter
(as the note was marked "private,") and consulted one
of his colleagues (to whom he exhibited the letter), who
referred him to the proprietor of this journal. That
gentleman (on reading the note) said, " You had better
attend the dinner, if the invitation is intended for you—
in your private capacity, be it so if in your professional