The Sun.
London, England, 1852-08-31 00:00:00

6PIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
temporary and
CHRONICLE.—The most plausible ground for a
exempt, if possible, all savings discriminating tax on incomes, imposed so as to favoe .r
.Mill suggested precarious returns, is that which Mir.
to the committee when he proposed tai
for assessment. As he elearlyg
explained more clearly the "
fiscal inequality involved in
ten years' purchase ought,
the popular plan of capitalizing every individual income
expiration, to have cope
tributed to the Exchequer one-half of the sum due in
respect of an equal annual raven
purchase. An equal a
ss
e
s
s
ue worth twenty years'
ment of 5 per cent. on the
capitalized value would evident!
sum of 1,0001. in one case, and of
sv:duce an aggregate
according to the popular plan, the 5001. in the other. Bat
to
allowance would be
made twice over. The income of years' daratiosa
would be assessed at one-half the annual
other, so as to pay 254 a year for ten amount
a the
while the Income of twice the value wyoueldars, or 2506;
501 a-year, and taxed for
wthheiuhpriinscitioulee
twenty be at
at
itasshewxohpwa.etde,v.aner.,
i,nNcoomewwituoreths 3
producing 1.0001.
in" ispro7otrteilliaatOLtme‘‘ainths,
" This, I conceive," ' Yeteledae%7l
ot the f
paying
gs s ,
principle on which the tax is at present
levied." Mr. Mill, however, advocates an entirely dif-
ferent standard ot taxation. Ido not conceive," he
says, " that the tax should be in proportion to the means
only, but that it should take into consideration the
meat's, aid also the wants." Holders of precarious in-
comes are liable to burdens front which the owners of
hereditery prepet ty are compfßatively exempt, since
they have to provide out of thetir annual receipts, by
saving or by insurance,. for the future wants of them-
selves and their families. On this prourtd, if on any,
professional men and traders must rest their claim to,
the comparative fiscal exemption which they cannot
show to be consistent with strict arithmetical equality.
The eminent economist whom we have quoted would
;carry out his principle with perfect consistency, by
relieving from the Income-tax any annual saving
which even the riches t landowner or millionaire may
make from his revenue. There is no doubt that habits
of economy in individuals directly tend to increase
the general wealth of the country. Of all private
vices, the practices of the miser approximate most nearly
to the character of public benefits; but it is not on
grounds of national expediency, or with the view of
favouring accumulation, that the claims of the profes-
sional and trading classes have generally been urged.
The rights and hardships of individuals supply more
plausible and popular arguments than any economics"
. theory respecting the inertitsse=ef-Public wealth. It is
not because the interest of the community may be pro-
moted by fostering habits of private forethought and
self-denial, but because traders and professional men •
have strong personal motives for saving, that it is pro-
posed to distinguish between the sums which they re-
spectively devote to expenditure and to accumulation.
As a class, hereditary proprietors wish merely to main-
tain their position, while those who are engaged in the
active pursuits of industry desire, not only to secure a
livelihood, but at the same time to advance themselves
in the world. It is not till we descend to the lowest
and most numerous section of the community that
we again find, in the economy of the unskilled
labourer, an equality between income and expendi-
ture. Where there is any possibility of saving, the
personal outlay of every individual may be assumed
toi represent with sufficient accuracy his own estimate of
h s available income. Mr. Mill considers that this dia.
pos
a portionble of a taxpayer's revenue forms the mea-
sure of his ability to contribute to the public necessities.
If possible, he would assess the impost according to the
annual expenditure, from whatever sources the latter
might be supplied; and he calls attention to the fact that
the interest on savin
pay its share of incognage
would,ta in the next year, either
interest, to the eventual bxe,neofir t
of accumulate at compound
should be remembered, however,
thatall
the Exchequer. It
modities were formerly defended on
tah taxes on com-
e
as falling directly upon expenditure,
althoughs expe-
rience has shown that they can only be
productive
they are levied on articles of general and necessarywhen
con-
sumption. Mr. Mill recognises the difficul, t
rather the impossibility, of procuring any accurate
return of men's private expenditure, and he proposes
to take an average of the probable savings from all
temporary and precarious incomes. But it is not
easy to understand how his scheme differs, in prin-
ciple, from the proposal for capitaliz ng incomes as the
basis of taxation, which he so clearly sees to in-
volve an arithmetical error. In reply to his suggestion
of the ulterior benefit arising to the State from the
future interest on accumulations, a member of the Com-
mittee pertinently remarked, that the owner of savings
would pay a larger contribution hereafter only because
he would be richer. It is no part of a financier's duty
to alter the comparative positions either of classes or of
individuals. A freeholder and a professional man, who
each receive 1,0001, a year, are evidently unequal in
wealth, and in ability to contribute to the public re-
venue; but any artificial deduction from their respective
means ought to leave their relative conditions unchanged.
The enjoyment derived by the landowner from his pro-
perty may be represented by an expenditure equal to
the whole of his income. The physician or the lawyer,
on tin other hand, will fix his outlay at 7001. or 8004,
devoting the remainder to investments, or to premiums
on insurance.s, But it is difficult to understand why
the enjoyment or advantage ot becoming richer should
be left out ot consideration in the estimate of a man's
resources. If an income-tax enforces a certain diminu-
tion in the comforts which the landowner has heretofore
procured with 1,0001., a proportional sacrifice will be
made in the establishment which bas hitherto cost 7001.;
but why is the professional man still entitled to lay by
the same sum as before ? The advantage of his posi-
tion consisted in the power of spending, coupled with
that of saving. His neighbour had the same right of
choice, but preferred to exercise it differently. The one
was rich enough for his wants—the other, having no
patrimony to fall back upon, reasonably wished to be
richer. No income-tax that is ever likely to be irepostd
would make it impossible for him to save; but, for the
purposes of fiscal equality, the means of accumulation
ought to suffer as much as those of personal enjoy-
ment. The individual case which we have selected
illustrates the nature of the claim of the en-
tire professional and trading class to a partial ex-
emption in favour of that permanent and certain income
which, in the case of each several holder, is undoubt-
edly temporary and precarious, We have repeatedly
shown that a distinctive impost would raise the propor-
tionate value of the incomes assessed under schedule
D, as compared with thoee which arise from property.
The instance of the medical or legal earner of 1,0001.
shows how this result would be produced. The practi-
tioner, whose wealth consists in his skill and connec-
tion, naturally wishes for the securer tenure enjoyed by
the capitalist, and he devotes a portion of his income to
the attainment of this object. But if', in his pursuit of
wealth, he succeeds more rapidly through legislative
interference than he would have done otherwise, he
forms one of a favoured class, and he must assign some
*reason to justify the privilege. The tendency of the in-
dustrious classes to accumulate wealth is, no doubt, be-
neficial to the country at large ; but no individual, and
no body of individuals, can have a • h erent right to
grow richer independently of the
ordinary conditions
which regulate the distribution of wealth, one of
which is the percentage levied by the State. Every
shilling which is earned is precisely the same in Tai"
with a shilling received in the shape of rent or of divi-
dends; and a new tax ought to diminish the value of
both classes of receipts in an exactly equal degree. °
TO4e
lawyer, who formerly spent 7001., and invested 3°tax
will on the imposition of a 3 per oell,,ing°l2lll.
maintain his family on 6791, and Jay by •- his while
his neighbour the squire is forced to
diminishrofessional
ex-
penditure by 301. The accumulations of pelof the tax,
man, both before and after the
in3l"sleti°of the land-
amounted to three-tenths of the income the princi-
owner ; and no economist has yeti):
entitled to lay by,
ple on which the former wooled
_flee,
the same amount
without a larger proportional
ISidell
for children, or for
as before. The desire to?
-r°the highest degree natural
the wants of old age, no part of the business of the
and laudable; but it L p
trimony shall leave au ersons who received no pa-
State to take care
that inheritance behind them. All
do is to provide that no fiscal in-
that a financier can
der a beneficial and reasonable mode
equality shall
money less easy than any other applies-
ot disposing of rn.,_. view,,4o;vever, ie
in
tion of incosirie..oll
b and, having the sanction of his autho-
We and p
; Cliessuesr ve s serious consideration; but it is time
rith -• journalists should cease to repeat the gross
that public
ti g precarious with permanent in-
tear f 1
contras n
° it were proposed to subject them to an
cornea, as
manent tax. The sovereign, we are told,
eneally
which Per
`9,- is received in rent, represents 30 other sovereigns;
whilst that which is received in fees represents nothing
but itself.
Our contemporaries forget to tell their reader&
that, on the same assumption, the sevenpence paid by
the landowner represents 30 other sevenpences, while
the sevenpence exacted from the physician is paid Once
for all. Careless and voluntary fallacies such as this
only postpone the serious discussion of the question
which they encumber and confuse,

DEATH IN TILE POT.
From the last report of the Analytical Sanitary Com-
mission, published in the Lancet, as records of the results
of microscopical and chemical analyses of the solids
and fluids consumed by all classes of the public, it ap-
pears, with regard to vinegar and its adulterations, that
Out of 28 samples, purchased at the houses of various
retailers, in different parts of the town, and the produc-
tionsh of almost every maker of any note by whom the
entire metropolis and its suburbs are supplied, only four
out of the above number were free from sulpuric acid acawera
oil of vitrol; that 24 were adulterated with tha'tnePd it in
ful and corrosive mineral acid; that two contained in
a small quantity only; that in three it 7
considerable amount; that 12 contained -
itainpvery Con-
eiderabl amount; and that in 7
it Wadies, as usual,
mense quaWity. The report then publishes,
the makers of the
the names of the parties selling anddh
the names of the
adult. rated articles, together :0
and vendors cif the
makers (unfortunately
only
yheo vinegars of these four
present in im-
pure article. The fact of entirelyt free from sulphuric
makers being found to
be
as most important, inas-
much or oil of vitro' is regarded
that the use of that
much as it proves most convincinglyd
highly objectionable even in small quantities, is
acid,
preservation of vinegar, and
not necesgary to instil.- is made rather for the purpose of
shows that its addi+i,
pp alit strength. The report concludes
increasing
showing how families might manufacture
aleretter from Mr. Fletcher, surgeon, of
shra very simply process, sufficient vine-
for themselves, by
l ).:u. fix the purpose of pickling, by using
byl3 opmu
sbg.l ir:ohverti,g a -11-
gar for the table,
and water, and a fungus known as the
sugar, treacle,
thus
honePsgart man
vto make.
thuaseives independent of
ufacturers
dis

The Hon. C. A. Murrty, British Consul• General
in Egypt, contradicts the report that he has resigned that
post, declares that he has left Egypt on leavo of absence, and
proceeding to the United States on private business.