The Sun.
London, England, 1852-04-23 00:00:00

be an instalment of " justice to the farmer," who, as all
readers of country papers know, is by nature an adver-
t;shig animal. The advertisement duty belongs to a
class of taxes which has not la eizi sufficiently distin-
guished by economists. All duties tend to check con-
sumption ;• but those which have a prohibitory effect
are the most vexatious. If a turnpike deters any
person from taking a drive in his gig, the
road trustees are none the richer, while the owner
of the gig 'loses the use of his vehicle. The
advertisement duty prevents thousands from ad-
vertising—greatly to their own inconvenicce, and
without benefit to the revenue. The amount of
160,0001. yielded by this impost represents but a
small part 'of the loss which it inflicts on the public.
The maid-servants who advertise for their places are un-
duly taxed; yet they
as it is, of contributing,have at least the consolation, such
each her eighteenpence, to the
maintenance of the State and the Monarchy. But the
kitchen-maids who cannot afford to advertise suffer a
still heavier loss from the existence of tho duty—a loss
which is unaccompanied by any gain to the Exchequer.
A. tax ought, 'if possible, never to be levied on the per-
formance of an act which can be omitted at pleasure.
There are theorists who praise fiscal systems which leave
a direction to tax-payers; but the, equitable finan-
cier proceeds on an exactly opposite principle. Sound
financial arrangements leave no room for caprice in the
tax-payer, but assesses him, as far as may be, in pro-
portion to his means. Taxes which favour either im-
providence or undue stinginess are always alike unpro-
ductive and demoralising ; and it is desirable that the
operation of every impost should begin and end with the
levy of the percentage required. A duty such as that
on advertisements constantly interferes with every pru-
dential nictitation. It is on such grounds as these that
the• removal of the " taxes an kaoßledge" will at no
distant day be effected.. Sentimental arguments may
be used for, skirmishing and ostentation ; but the true
economic hearing of various taxes is what will ulti-
mately determine the opinion of Parliament.

THE FORTHCOMING BUDGET.
Mr. Disraeli's Budget is—he tells us—to be laid before
the House of Commons this day week. On that day we
may hope to learn what plans the Protectionists propose
for satisfying the demands of the country. There is no
subject which so much requires the attention of the re-
presentatives of the people as the revision of our whole
system of taxation; and no part of that system is more
faulty and more eeds amendment, than the portion of
it which was to have been brought before the House of
Commons last night by Mr. Williams—the annual
bestowal by the Government officials of about 7,000,0001.
on themselves.

It ie, however, amongst the many evils of the Protec-
tionist faction having succeeded in placing Lord Derby
in office, that the real business of the nation cannot be
attended to, and that our barbarous and costly jumble
miscalled a system of taxation, must beallowed to remain
uninvestigated and unreformed for another year. The
Chancellor of the Exchequer, whose lively brain is filled
with crade finaneial plans, may possibly throw out some
suggestions for lessening, On pretence of equalising,
the burdens on the agriculturists; and
the many clap-traps he has already some one of
nannounced, 1
to the country; but what the people want is a thorough appeal
revision of all our taxation, which will enable themfairly
to compare its cost with the services it pays for,and by
which the burdens of the State will be reduced to a
minimum, and that minimum will be fairly distributed.
The people must be on their guard against Protectienist
tricks, and not permit themselves to be seduced by mere
fin&ncial seh,enes into a bedef that any plan is worthy
of support which deviates from the just and righteous
oh;ects they deiiro.
The great vice which lies at the bottom of that ap-
propriation of 7,000,000/. is not, as the officials have
cunningly represented, the mere stopping 7,000,000/.
in its transit to the Treasury, instead of rending it
thither to be afterwards transmitted to them, but it
is the power assumed by the Treasury to expend su,:h
a vast Sara without first securing the sanction of Par-
liament. To expend 6,000.000/. or 7,000,001)1. on the
navy, and as much on the army, the Executive,
government must present estimates to the Rouse of
Commons, and obtain itseensent to employing and pay-
ing a certain number of sailors and soldiers; but the
Government may appoint any number of Custom-house
and Ekeise officers it pleases, and en them and other
officials employed to collect the revenue, it may expeud
7,000,000/. a year, without submitting any estimate to
the House of Commons, and without rendering it any
account of the manner in which the money is expended.
That is tile vice of the system, and it is unconstitutional
as well as absurd.

The only account the Government renders is this—
that it is pleased to expend about 1,600,0001. in collect-
ing 22,000,0001. of Customs duties, about 1,000,0001. in
collecting 15,500,0001. of Excise duties; 165,000/. in col-
lecting nearly 7,000,0001. on stamps; 360,0001.
in collecting 10,000,0001. of assessed taxes ;
1,200,000/. in collecting by the Post-office about
2,500,0001.; and 325,000/. in collecting less than
500,0001. on Crown lands, besides making draw-
backs, allowances, &c. According to the Parliamen-
tary Paper No. 98, Session 1847, the total annual
amount of money expended in this way which never
reached the Exchequer was 7,004,438/. 1 ls. 7 2-12 d., so
fractionally minute is the Executive Government in in-
forming the Parliament of the sum it pleases to expend
without Parliamentary authority.
It is hastily assumed by the confiding Parliament
and the too confiding people that it is necessary
to expend 51. 15s. Bed. on every 1001. collected of
Customs duties, 51. 7s. 1 led. on every 1001. of Ex-
cise duties, 21. 3s. 7id. on every 100/. of stamps, Si.
3s. 3d. on every 1001. of taxes, and 21. 18s. 2d. on
every 1001 of revenue from the Crown lands—or, in-
cluding " other payments," which we think ought to
be included—to expend 120/. on every 1001. obtained
from Crown lands. Butathere is no other reason for
assuming such an expenditure to be necessary except
the statement of the officials. If the stamps can be
collected (and nobody supposes there are not plenty
of clerks and other officials in the Stamp-office), at
2/. 3s. 7id. par cent , why should the Customs cost
Si. 15s. and the Excise 51. 7s. 1 led. ? The Go-
vernment has complete power over its debtors, and it
is only a carelessness of what it expends—or a love
of expenditure—that can make it expend more than
double the sum in collecting 1001. of Customs and Ex-
cise duties than in collecting 1001. of stamp duties.
Both the chief Customs and all the Excise duties are
collected on a few articles in great masses and at a few
spots, while th© collection of the stamp duties is spread
all over the kingdom. Prima facie it might be inferred,
therefore, that the two former would be collected at a
cheaper rate than the latter. But it has pls,ased the
gentlemen who collect the Customs and Excise to be
dreadfully suspicious of every tax-payer and every tax-
collector, and of every person who might have a tax
to pay, and so they have multiplied guards and checks
to prevent an evasion of payment or a collusion to evade
peement between their own officers and ethers, and
have introduced a complicated system, which is at once
annoying, vexatious, costly, and,. as we know frol
ex-
perience, wofully ineffective. Of all the details olearahe
ns
system the Treasury knows nothing but what
from commissioners and other subordina.tec.c tk
officials,els
antiand
to every one of their suggestions to multi!): Y
hasl
a we jsh
increase the staff of the establishment,'
tthoanra,,r Parliament
to increase its patronage, told expend a larger r
lent a ready ear, because every suchincreaseenashulmodci,ft
w
the taxes, renderoinfg
and the public
a sum is what the
That such a vast sum as
I'h,c7oo7osotoLoifs
ctohlelee6etieopnenided there is no doubt--that it
wilewat otither expendedaceuut
askis
the Government to prove.
putting the slightest
This, too, is what the
oruesaelloyf Commons should sthoouid
public requires to have dietiectly
expend such
elicited, particularly as there are symptoms of tax t-
without
of commerce, or in any manner
limniotPneeefcleuirminegnxti3wiLneintthc:e'iwwedi:u3i'cshtr,y, supply all the wants of
some flourishing and renowned states at an expense of
little more than one pound for every one hundred pounds
levied from
Nrometichse people and paid into the public T.

SPORTING N ES.
No. COXI.
ANALYSIS OF THE CHESTER CUP.
(Continued from No. 210.)

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.
sin,—ln resuming my remarks on the Chester Cup,
it may be as well to state, that during the last day or
two Nancy has received an extraordinary amount of
support, and bids fair to become a rival in the odds for
the premiership to Stilton, whose price this morning
ranges from 6t07t0 1. Turning to my Analysis,
TOM TAYLOR'S
lot is the next that catches my eye. It consists of Lady
Evelyn, Gladiole, Ellar, and the Jemima filly. The first
named, it is said, will represent the stable; and as Nat
will probably have the mount, all that can be done for
her will be accomplished; but lam afraid it will not
enable her to obtain a victory.

FOBERT
has Hippolytus and Lueio, neither of which possesses
any chance of winning.

GILL

has Neasham and Bird on The former is re-
ported scratched, or at- least a declared non-starter. I
believe there is some little truth in the rumour; but
whether or no matters little, as he possesses no earthly
hopes of winning. Bird on the Wing is a fine slashing
filly, and may possibly run very forward in the race.
She is reported to have left this stable either to be tried
with something else, or consequent oa a change of
owflership.