The Sun.
London, England, 1852-05-01 00:00:00

seumina

LONDON, SATURDAY, MAY 1, 1852.

"Thank you for nothing, says the gallipot." Stich Was the phrase by which the lamented Libera-
tor of Ireland Was accustomed to express his sense of
grandilcquent proposition, ushered in with large
professions, but from Which no real benefits could be
fairly anticipated. The expression would have been
peculiarly appropriate to, and, perhaps, have formed
the best commentary on, the anxiously-expected
budget whiff was last night brought under the
consideration of the House of Commons. There
was nothing ,literally nothing done.
Everything
was permitted to remain in statu quo without
vhange or alter ation of any kind. The ineoza,,_ta,
Waii proposed to be re-enacted with all its iniqxdtiva

and injustice, but it was only fora single year that it
was asked. The advertisement duties, the hop duties
were continued in their present shape. Not only
was there nothing done, but there was no distinct or

definite pledge as to what might be hoped for or an-
ticipated on a future occasion. The extraordinary
tact, the remarkable talent of the Right Honourable
Gentleman was never more conspicuous than in the
statement, which, although justly denominated " the
stand-still budget," nevertheless elicited the all but
unanimous approbation of the House, which induced
men of all parties, of the most opposite principles, to
agree for once in praising the man who had accom-
pli3hed the difficult task of pleasing every side ; and

that rather by the grace of his manner, the charm
of his eloquence, than by the substance of his oration.
This great success was partly achieved by the skil-
ful manner in which the hopes of all were excited

and kept up, by the candid avowal that it was
but " a provisional budget "—a mere makeshift
until something better could be introduced, when the

whole system of taxation had been subjected to re-
vision. Something, too, was owing to the lucid and
admirable exposition of the actual state of the national
finances, which showed that the Right Honourable
Gentleman—inexperienced as he was erroneously
supposed to be—was completely master of his subject,
as much so as the most thorough-going red-tapist
that aver addressed a series of pompous platitudes
Ito the collective wisdom. There was, indeed,
no occasion for the numerous apologies which
he offered on this part of the case. No
indulgence was required on account of the shortness
of notice, or brief time for preparation allowed. Had
he served an apprenticeship to the office, and been
trained to its duties from his earliest youth, he could
not have been more completely at home. Those who
sneered at his inexperience, or scoffed at his supposed
-,,....e ...t.. 1,...,,,,A4A3. of figures, eehe fancied that a
solemn stupidity was essential to the character of a
Financial Minister, have been overwhelmed with
shame and confusion at the indisputable faiiure of all
their predictions.
Although personally we feel considerable disap-
pointment at the absence of any immediate relief to
the sufferers under Schedule D, or to those anxious
to obtain employment by means of advertisements,
we must still confess that there were some exceed-
ingly satisfactory indications as to the future financial
policy of the Government. The almost miraculous
results of free trade were never more clearly summed
up. The Right Honourable Gentleman, too,
pointed out the intense feeling of disgust with
which any addition to the Customs or Excise
duties would be received, so distinctly as to show
that he has no intention of attempting to stem the
torrent. His speech was justly considered as a
complete abnegation of " protectionism," and as
such it was applauded by Messrs. VILLIERS,
BRIGHT, HEYWORTH, and others. It was in-
dicative of a gradual change from indirect to di-
rect taxation. It is true that the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman deprecated any attempt " rashly or rapidly to
reduce the resources of indirect taxation," but
it was only became they " had come to no
general conclusion on the principles on
which the public revenue should be raised,"
with a degree of caution, perhaps pardonable in a
Chancellor of the Exchequer, although we confess
that we should have preferred a less timid and more
dashing policy. He does not wish to part with any
source of revenue until an adequate substitute, or at least
the principle of an adequate substitute, has received
the legislative sanction. He pays the Select Com-
mittee appointed on the motion of, and presided over
by, the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose,
the compliment of professing himself desirous of waiting
for their report before ho arrives at a final conclu-
sion on the subject. It is not, however, many weeks,
we had almost said " many days," since he declared
that he would not in any degree delay his statement
for their decision, or something to that effect.
It has, however, suited his purpose to
bring forward every argument in favour of procras-
tination, and he would not, of course, overlook so
strong a point as that above alluded to. He was
himself a member of that Committee, and
of courne acquainted with flub results of
their investigations and the predominant feeling
of its members. He would not, however, act thereon,
and perhaps some excuse might be found in the im-
portant revelation which he made—that the Com-
mittee were unanimously of opinion that the
system of exemptions was highly objectionable,
and should be got rid of in any permanent legis•
lation. This course we have always advocated
when pointing out the principle of the land-tax,
as originally imposed by 4th William and Mary,
cap. 1, as the model for future legislation. In it there
was no exemption of any kind or description ; every
species of accumulated and realised property,
whether productive, or non-productive, was subject
to the charge, either according to the actual income
or the capitalised value ; and it is with great pleasure
that we find so great a prospect of fiscal improve-
ment as that impl;ed by the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER in this portion of his address.

Wiglomeration, as Mr. JARNDYCE happily terms
the expensive and intricate movements of the law, is
unfor;unately not restricted to the Court of Chan-
cery. It occasionally manifests itself within the
very walls of the Legislature. A lamentable illus-
tration of this has been recently afforded by the ill-
success of the efforts made with a view to some
comprehensive measure of sanitary improvement.
Everyone knows very well that the Metropolitan
Interments Bill has proved, as we predicted from the
outset, a dead letter. It promised a great deal, and
up to the present moment has realized absolutely no-
thing in the shape even of a questionable advantage.
The absurdity of the measure was that it nominally
prohibited any continuance of the system of intra-
mural burials, without providing the public before-
hand with the means of interring the departed in
cheap and accessible suburban cemeteries. The con-
sequence of this has been precisely what might have
been reasonably anticipated—what, indeed, we our-
selves declared would be inevitable from the com-
mencement. The old abominations of the London
graveyards have been secretly, of cfourHese,albthut
still
ac-
tually revived ; yet the Board o
flourishes at: Gwydyr House, and, the star of its
leader still continues in the' ascendant. Howlongs
this is to last becomes at length a matter of
serious importance. With the mortality on the in-
crease, the evils aspired to be removed by the sani-
tiry reformers remain as rife as ever, or rather, we
should say, are daily and hourly being multiplied.
The Thames is being polluted more and more
abundantly with the overflowings of the sewage
matter, which, nevertheless, at the same time accu-
mulates under the dwellings of the capital, to the
gradual
Meanwhile
dalincrease of the 700 acres surface spoken of
the other evening by the Earl of SHAFTESBURY.
the water provided for the con-
sumption of the inhabitants of the capital
preserves its impurity as perceptibly as heretofore,
and the want of ventilation in our more densely po-
pulated localities tends as manifestly as hitherto to
the spread of contagious and epidemic diseases. All
the while, moreover,
the diminution
entrusted with the
task of aiding in
having d
ofonethmesuecehviwlshaerree
pluming themselves upon
they have absolutely done nothing—claiming credit,
revelation of the facts complained of,
whebesides,n
thosefor
facts h
have been merely appropriated from
the researches of others, and then—mark
this—
turned to no advantage whatsoever by the Sanitary
Commissioners.

It would be amusing, but that the subject is one of
such obvious solemnity, to observe the really cool
impertinence with which the General Board
of
Health plumes itself upon having
efirstrs brought to
light, in 1649, statements which ten
been published by Mr. G. A. ita before had
wAucE,
a gentleman
who may in a great measure be said to have thus
originated the sanitary movement.
At page 24
of the official blue-book report on "A Ge-
neral Scheme of Extramural Interment," presented
last session by command of her MAJESTY to
both Houses of .Parbailament, it is remarked
by one of the witne3ses : " Probably no
great national question has ever made such rapid
progress in public opinion as the one now under con-
sideration. During the year 1849, I found few per-
sons willing to brave the prejudices of the majority,
and to give evidence as to the evil consequences of
burying
the dead, generation after generation, in the
same graves with their deceased relatives and friends,

THE SUN,

LONDON,

in the midst of the living inhabitants. Even those
convinced of the enormity of the evil were anxious
to give information privately, and to point to other
means of evidence, so as to avoid anything public or
personally invidious. The evidence in my reports of
that year was chiefly wrung, by an excruciating exa-
mination, from sextons and other persons
officially connected with burial-grounds and
interments." Now the passage here extracted from
the report of the Board of Health implies that these
very wonderful discoveries were made in 1849. In
1849 I When ten years previously, namely, in 1829,
a book was issued from the press, not by any obscure
printer, but by a publishing house not only the first
in the Row, but about the first in all England, the
house of the Messrs. LONGMAN, giving the
whole of these remarkable revelations from the
hand of Mr. G. A. WALKER, under the
arresting title of " Gatherings from Graveyards."
Since then the same indefatigable labourer in the
toil of bringing about some practical system of sani-
tary improvement has persevered in dragging to light
the horrors perpetrated in the London graveyards.
His works to this end are spread over an interval of
thirteen years from the volume already particularised
as published in 1849, to the pamphlet published in
1852, not merely describing the past and present state
of intramural burying places, but accompanying
the description with practical suggestions
for the establishment of national extramural
cemeteries. With these productions before them—
ranging, as we have shown, over an interval extend-
ing back to the year 1839—it is wonderful how the
Commissioners at Gwydyr Honse can have the effron-
tery to appropriate to themselves the credit of having
favoured the public first with the graveyard revela-
tions. Possibly the claim is entered by them simply
with a view to screen themselves from the charge of
indolence. Fortunately that indolence cannot now
be very long protracted. Th© cp.eh delivered the
night before last by the Earl of DERBY gives us
assurance that the hopes of the sanitary
reformers are at length approaching the period of
their realization. Never before has Prime Minister
spoken out so plainly in regard to the exigencies of
improvement. The remarks which then fell from
the lips of the Noble Earl, the Leader of her MA-
JESTY'S Government, cannot, indeed, be received as
otherwise than constituting an event, and a very im-
portant event too, in the sanitary movement. They
inspire us with a confident anticipation that we have
at length arrived at the " beginning of the end," and
that before many years have elapsed the mortality of
London may be very considerably diminished by the
organization of a well-considered scheme of sanitary
innovations.