The Sun.
London, England, 1852-12-06 00:00:00

LONDON, MONDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1852.

A ridiculous pretension has recently been put
forward by the Ministerial organs on the part of
Her MAJESTY'S Government. They assume that
the late division in the House of Commons in
favour of Lord PALMERSTON'S amendment to the
resolutions proposed by the Honourable Gentle-
man the Member for Wolverhampton, must be
regarded as a triumph for the Administration.
Never has a more preposterous opinion been ad-
vanced. Why, the declaration of the Lower
House of Parliament upon the question of Free
Trade or Protection, if it constitute a victory for
any one, constitutes a victory, not for the Ca-
binet, not for the EX-FOREIGN SECRETARY, not
for the Right Honourable the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER, but for Mr. CHARLES VILLIERS, for
the Representative of the West Riding of York-
shire, for the great bulk of Her MAJESTY'S Op-
position. For what in reality is the fact—what
is the nature of that declaration ? Is it not dis-
tinctiy and notoriously an avowal that the advo-
cate% of monopoly have been acting erroneously
throughout? Is it not an explicit acknow-
ledgment that they are beaten, and beaten, too,
beyond the possibility of redemption ? Is it not
an assertionthat- the Honourable CHARLES VIL-
LIERS
Prescient, and wise, and patriotic in
moving, Year after year, that the Corn Laws I
should be abrogated-Is it, not a feather in the cap
of RICHARD COBtot,
tribute to the memory of
Sir ROBERT PEtL___a
Either the enorrae,„ ra
linegyric upon the League ?
ajority declaratory of the
entire success and unassaila
system of unrestricted ble stability of the
competition, means all
that, or it means abs
(Lately n ma' 0 ing. We assert
it. We laugh to scorn the nett°,
of this being
an Advantage gained to the occupants
of the
Treasury Benches.
So far is such from
that the Cabinet being
actually the case
could not, by
been more signally defeated.
The chance, have efeated.
The principal Members of it had in •
sided all
alonr, that the Free-trade principles ought to Le
Legislature. They I
abandoned by thehad as
for years the necessity of restoring the old schem©
of Protection to the agriculturists. They che-
rished this belief in February, when they were
called upon to enter office by their SOVEREIGN.
But, while persisting in this conviction, they
said—" We have an unquestionable majority
against us in the Commons, and win, therefore,
appeal to the people themselves to decide the
difficulty :" adding, " If the country wishes a re-
turn to the state of things prior to 1846, we
shall recognise the existence of that desire on
the a,ssembling of ' the new p
aruament." The
new Parliamens has assembled—and what has
been its deliberate avowal ? Wiry, that_ the
Free-trade system 'Lis permanently established,

~.

i a~d~

that the I enactments of 1846 are incorpo-
rated indissolubly with the Constitution. No-
thing could be more clear than the fact of this
declaration. Added to which, a variety of very
curious circumstances combine for its enforce-
ment. The very Statesman who retired from the:
PEEL Ministry because of its abandonment of the
,
principles of Protection, is at this moment, when
the benefits resulting from unrestricted competi-
tion are formally recognised, the Leader of her
MAJESTY'S Government. The very debater who
was most resolute in opposing the abrogation of
the Corn Laws, is at this juncture the Leader of
the British House of Commons. The once for-
midable body of Protectionists has dwindled down
to fifty-three in a House of nearly five hundred.
Dissolution has not only descended upon the coun-
try party, but decomposition has already followed
hard upon dissolution. It is all up with them
according to their own confession. One of their
oldest, one of their most consistent, and one of
their most experienced advocates has intimated
as much in plain terms—we mean Mr. CAYLEY,
the Hon. Representative of the North Riding of
Yorkshire. And this, forsooth, is spoken of by
the Ministerial organs as a triumph for
the DERBY-DISRAELI Government ! If such
be a victory, we wonder what possibly
can be a defeat. Why, as if to render the success
of the Free-traders complete, the amendment ul-
timately carried by the division in the Commons
was an amendment suggested in favour of their
principles by one of their most powerful opponents,
the amendment of the Noble Lord the representa-
tive of the borough of Tiverton, the amendment
of Viscount PALMERSTON. SO much for the
boasted victory of the present Cabinet ! So much
for the defeat of the Liberal and Reforming
Opposition !

Everything, indeed, appears to have latterly
combined to cover with glory the remembrance of
Sir ROBERT PEEL'S Administration. Those who
among all the legislators of the land were the
most violent in impug,ning his motives, and in

assailing his policy, have been the identical men
who have now pronounced, upon both, words of the
most decisive justification. Could the late inns-

trious benefactor of his fellow-countrymen behold
matters as they stand just at this crisis, he would
perceive that he need not have appealed on his
last retirement from power to any very remote
posterity. He would behold the truth, that, as
learly as 1852, his name was remembered with
gratitude and admiration, not alone in the cottages
of those who labour, but even within the walls of the
Imperial Legislature. He would become aware
that the advantages accruing to the community
from his long-vilified commercial measures have
been asserted in the Speech from the Throne,
with the now Earl of DERBY as Prime Minister,
and the brilliant representative of Buckinghamshire
as Chancellor of the Exchequer. Yet beholding
all these remarkable, and incontestible, and most
significant facts staring them in the face, the
organs of the ruling Cabinet coolly maintain that
the decision of the House of Commons must be
regarded as a triumph to her MAJESTY'S Govern-
ment. A triumph ! What—with Ministers on
their knees confessing their error—with an •un-
mistakeable voice from the Administration crying
out as plainly as any lips could articulate Pcccavi—
with. a STANLEY accepting as unalterable the
system established by the Free-traders--with

a DISRAELI acknowledging with manful courage
that there is no longer any hopo of the realisa-
tion of the dream of the Protectionists ! Truly
a very pretty victory indeed. A victory some-
thing like those gained by the French at Trafalgar
by the Arabs at Isly, by the Mahrattas at Assay°,
by the Seikhs at Goojerat. No—let Ministers
complete their reforms in the Court of Chancery,
let them equalise taxation, let them carry out to
the full our long-desired sanitary innovations, let
them dissipate our colonial difficulties, let them
perfect these and other scarcely less eagerly ex-
pected innovations, and then let the official jour-
nals, if they will, glorify the success of the
Dnuary-DisnAELt Administration. But don't let
us hear the common sense of the nation insulted,
by being told that the recent acceptance of Lord
PALMERSTON'S amendment is a discourage-
ment to the Opposition, and an advantage to
the Government.

If people hearkened only to the language used
by the Ministerial organs, in reference to the late
debate upon unrestricted competition, they might
labour under the impression that a really dreadful
disgrace was thereby inflicted upon the Right Hon.
Baronet the Member for Carlisle, upon the
Noble Lord the Member for the city of London,
upon the Representative of the West Riding of
Yorkshire, and upon the Representative of
Wolverhampton. When, in point of fact, those
four eminent men never stood before the House of
Commons and the country in a position more
firm, or in a light more advantageous. Had not
the Hon. CHARLES VILLIERS, fifteen years ago,
advocated in the presence of Mr. SPEAKER, and
under every conceivable discouragement, those
very principles of Free Trade which are now ac-
knowledged to have proved so beneficial by the
all but unanimous voice of the Legislature ? Had
not Mr. COBDEN insisted with incomparable
energy in the great meetings of the Anti-Corn-
Law League, upon the folly of maintaining that
monopoly which is now held (even by its most
resolute supporters) to be altogether beyond the
reach of restoration ? How about Lord JOHN
RUSSELL'S celebrated letter from Edinburgh ? Has
it not been virtually applauded as wise by the
calm and collective opinion of the English Parlia-
ment ? How again about the course pursued in de-
fiance of so much obloquy by Sir JAMES GRAHAM,
when he assisted so nobly, so bravely, and so
eloquently the memorable enterprise upon which,
in 1846, Sir ROBERT PEEL magnanimously dared
Ito adventure ? Has it not received, by an almost
unparalleled majority in the House of Commons,
the most decisive and glorious commendation ?
Yes—if triumph there has been=—and has there
not ?—in this remarkable decision in favour of un-
restricted competition—it is a triumph for Sir
JAMES GRAHAM, a triumph for Lord JOHN Rus-
SELL, a triumph for RICHARD COBDEN, a triumph
for CHARMS VILLIERS, a triumph, in short, for
the Liberal and Free-trading Opposition ! Not a
victory for the Government. We would commend
our foregoing remarks very earnestly to the calmer
judgment of the Ministerial organs, and -to the
consideration of a prosperous, tranquil, and en-
lightened population.

The most painful, as it was the most obnoxious,
part of the duty of the CHANCELLOR of the Ex-

CHEQUER on Friday evening, was providing for
the deficiency that might be occasioned by the
liberal reductions proposed in the duties of Malt,
Hops, and Tea. That was a point which he ap-
proached with the greatest caution--which he re-
served until he had charmed the House with the
brilliancy of, his eloquence, the liberality of his
principles, and the soundness of his deductions.
There was a manifest reluctance in dealing with
the subject. An energetic appeal, deprecating
the opposition which he must have believed his
proposition would elicit, was made to all parties
and sections in the House. After showing the
necessity of providing an additional source of
revenue, he introduced the topic by declaring that
what he was about to propose " would be in com-
plete harmony with the great principle of universal
competition which the House had adopted ;" that
he " was not going to propose to increase the
revenue by indirect taxation ;" and that "he
was not going to propose a new tax." Had he
not previously dealt with the property and Income-
tax, and declared that the produce thereof would,
withstancling the modifications about to be
made, produce on an average about the same as
under
the existing system,it would generally have
that obvious
been ke
Fl d that he would have resorted to
and the House-tvrtexrrewmaasineexdc,
source for increasing the revenue.
As that, however
wu
tehd , e tt
hh
ee r Lofani ac
he might deal, so as to obtain an additional
revenue.

d-tax had previously
ght Tantouirable Gentleman.
! An equalisation of the L
' been advocated by theßi
Wh,9oairlyensalbiolewdu
tthlllee
Bross and palpable injustice •
While out of office, he
iultabitants of Liverpool to 03e,
dent of i-32d of a penny -P9_ LY the pay.
in the pound,

L

while those of Thengay, iii Cambridgeshire,
are charged 2s. 9d. on the same value ; that only
demands half a farthing in the pound from Mary-
lebone, while St. Paul's, Covent-garden, contri-
butes more than Is. 10d., or 178 as much
in proportion to its value as the adjoining dis-
tricts. An equalised rate of Gd. in the pound
throughout the entire kingdom would bring in
about two and a half millions, or nearly 1,350,0001.
more than at present, while it would afford con-
siderable relief to the inhabitants of 25 English
counties, including Buckinghamshire, which would
benefit to the extent of elevenpence in tlle,pound
by the change, or about 50 per cent. more than the
Property-tax now levied in that county. fihe
Right Hon. Gentleman, however, avoided that
topic, most probably reserving it for some future
opportunity, when we have no doubt lie will make
some attempt to render it more equitable and less
oppressive, even if he does not endeavour to ob-
tain any additional revenue therefrom.
The House-tax then alone remained ; and'
to that the Right Hon. Gentleman most unwisely
turned for the additional revenue required. It is,
true that he attempted to s4eten the bitter dose
he was about to administer, by showing the relief
that had been previously afforded to householders.
He directed attention to the abolition of the
House-tax, in 1843, of the Window-tax, in
1851, and also of the duties on glass and bricks,
and the reduction of the timber duties—all of
which he declared to have been more or less bene-
ficial to householders. He therefore blandly
suggested that there could, or at least ought to,
be no objection to extend the basis of house taxa-
tion, by making dwellings from 101. to 201.
liable,- those worth less than 101. per annum
being henceforward only entitled to exemption, and
also to increase the rate payable to double the
present amount, that is to say—on private houses,
to Is. 6d., and on shops to Is. in the pound.
Now, in the first place, we would venture to
remind the Right Hon. Gentleman, that so far as
the duties on bricks, glass, and timber are con-
cerned, a small proportion only of the owners of
house property have derived any advantage. It
is true that a considerable proportion of those
duties was obtained from houses—but it was
from the construction of new, not from the repairs
of old, houses—and the persons who had already
paid the full amount of these imposts could not
fairly be now called on to pay-an increased rate of
taxation, on account of benefits in which they had
not only not participated, but which, from the re-
ducal price of the chief materials, would cause an
increased competition, and consequently a general
reduction of house rents.

Again, on the point of exemption, although we
cordially concur in the impolicy of exemptions in
auy charge on property, we cannot forget that the
present House-tax was imposed in lieu of
the Window Duties, which merely fell on
houses of less than 201. annual value—in-

deed, in fixing 201. as the point where the
exemptions began the basis was considerably ex-
tended, many who had previously escaped the
impost becoming liable—while few, if any, evaded
the responsibility who had theretofore contri-
buted. The broader foundation on which it
rests will, therefore, include many who received
none of the advantages so strongly alluded to in
the financial statement.

But, after all, the issue must be joined on
higher grounds. "What possible reason is there
why the owner of house property should be called
upon to pay nearly four times as much as the
proprietor of green fields ? Why should -the
former be charged 2s. Id. in the pound on his
annual returns from his houses, while the latter
is only called on for 7d. It signifies little
whetherkthe impost be received as a Property-tax
or a House-tax. In either case it falls on the
owner. Now it is notorious that houses,
although yielding a larger present profit,
are a less beneficial investment than " the
dirty acres." The latter will not pay more
than 4 per cent. at the outside, while on the
former, 7 or 8 per cent. (or even much more on
cottages worth from 101. to 201. per annum,) can
readily be obtained. The sturdy farmer is not so
much inclined "to shoot the moon," or, in other
words, to abscond with his goods and chattels,
leaving landlord and tax-gatherer in the lurch, as
the dweller in a cheap town house. Nor is there
the same incessant demand for repairs, for paint-
ing, whitewashing, altering the kitchen range,
or any of the numerous claims to which the town
landlord is subject. The acres, too, generally im-
prove materially in value, while houses necessa-
rily deteriorate. Let us take, for instance, pro-
perty in houses and lands, bequeathed some
centuries ago—when ALLEYNE, the actor, found-
ed. Dulwich College, his property produced nearly
8001. per annum. It is now worth 12,000/.
a year, or fifteemfold what it then realised. Had
it been in houses the buildings would long since
have crumbled to the dust. They should have
been reconstructed not once, but half-a-dozen times,
and the increase in value would have been com-
paratively trivial. If any distinction were made,
it should be in favour of houses not of lands, in
consequence of their being worth so many years
less purchase money if offered for sale in the
market.

The increased duty on houses should be
strenuously resisted ; but .we would give an in-
crease on Schedules A and C, with which not
only the House-tax, but also the Land-tax,
should be fully amalgamated ; and which, if in-
creased to ls. in the pound, or 5 per cent.,
would allow the abolition of the other branches
of direct taxation on property, and consequently
of the invidious distinctions now prevailing be-
tween town and country.

THE CHRISTMAS ItEcEss.—There is no truth in the
statement that Parliament will be adjourned on the 10th
inst., for the Christmas holidays. The business before the
House of Commons cannot possibly be concluded before
Friday, the 17th inst.—Observer.
DEATH OF ADMIRAL COOKESLEY.—Died at Portis-
head, near Bristol, on the 26th of November, Rear-Admi-
ral John Cookesley. He was distinguished as an excellent
officer and a very ingenious mechanic, and attained his
high position in the navy through his own merit. Rear-
Admiral Cookesley being on the retired list, his demise does
not cause any promotion.
THE NAVAL COMMAND-IN-CHIEF IN THE EAST
INDIES.—Rear Admiral the Hon. Sir Fleetwood Broughton
Reynolds, Pellew, C.B.' K.C.H., has accepted the com-
mand-in-chief of the East India station, vice Rear Admiral
Austen, C. 8., deceased. The gallant Admiral is son of the
late distinguished Admiral Lord Exmouth, Rear-Admiral.
Sir F. Fellow will proceed at once to the scene of his official
duties. Captain Fitzgerald, it is said will be his flag-cap-
tain.—Herald.

IMPORTANT ADMIRALTY ORDER.—An order has been
issued to the authorities at our different dockyards, di-
recting that all foreigners who may pay a visit are not to
be allowed, under any pretence whatever to enter the
workshops or view the vessels at present constructing.
This amounts to a total exclusion.—Kentish Mercury.
NEW WATERWORKS.—There are forty-five apPli-
cations to Parliament this session for new waterworks
and for extensions of old ones, in various parts of the
kingdom.
DEPARTURE OF THE UNITED STATES AND CANADIAN
MAILS.—On Saturday afternoon, shortly before one o'clock
the British and North American Royal Mail Steamship
Africa, Captain Harrison, took her departure from the
Mersey, 'with the usual mails (under the charge of Lieu-
tenant Oke, RN. Admiralty agent), fifty passengers,
and a large and valuable cargo of merchandise on freight.
FUNERAL OF THE COUNTESS OF LoVELACE.—NOT-
TINGHAM, SATURDAY.—The remains of the Countess of
Lovelace, the accomplished daughter of the great poet Lord
Byron, arrived in this town on Thursday by the Midland
Railway, from London. The body remained at the George
the Fourth Inn until the following morning. It having
become known that the deceased lady would be interred in
the village church of Hucknall Torkard, in the same vault
where lie the remains of her noble parent, a vast number
of persons assembled to witness the funeral. At ten
o'clock on Friday morning, a hearse, containing the coffin,
followed by three mourning coaches, each drawn by four
horses, left this town for Hucknall Torkard, to await the
arrival of the mourners by special train. The church bell
tolled at intervals during the morning, and there were
many present who had heard the same solemn note when
the remains of the great poet were conveyed to their final
resting place. At half-past two a special train, conveying
the mourners, arrived at the Hucknall station, from New-
stead Abbey, and the solemn procession soon afterwards pro-
ceeded to the church. The Rev. Curtis Jackson read, in
an impressive manner, the solemnly sublime burial service
of the church, during which the coffin was lowered into
the vault, and placed by the side of that of Lord Byron.
After the ceremony the public were admitted into the
vault. The coffin of the noble bard, as also the urn which
contains his heart, appear in excellent preservation. The
coffin of the deceased born the following inscription :—The
Right Honourable Augusta Ada, wife of William Earl of
Lovelace, and only daughter of George Gordon Noel Lord
Byron, born 10th December, 1815, died 27th November,
1852.

EAST KENT RAILWAY.:—The prospectus of the East
Kent Railway has been issued. The line is to leave the
North Kent Railway at Strood, and crossing the river
Medway, pass through Rochester, Chatham, Brompton,
Gillingham, Rainham, and Newington, to Milton and. Sit-
tcinipgibta°lurrenqeu' iarneq
itshe7noo7oootby F: a.versba,.m. Canterbury. The

,
. •

..~

t-s.;•