The Sun.
London, England, 1830-03-18 00:00:00

TAXES IMPOSED.

Spirits per Gallon—England, Is. Od.
Ireland, Os. 2d. 330,000
Seotland,Os. 2d.
Stamps, assimilating the duty in Ire-
land to that in England llO,OOO

£440,000
Leaving an actual annual balance in favour of the
tax-payer of two millions nine hundred and thirty-
five thousand pounds; or, as we have already ob-
served, three millions in round numbers out of a
taxation of 50,000,0001. Now, leaving the interest
of the public debt wholly out of the question, as a
matter sacred and intangible, there remain seven-
teen millions with which the Chancellor of the
Exchequer had to deal, and on which a reduction to
the extent at least of 25 per cent. ought to have
been effected;—far such an increase has taken
place in the value of money, from a return to a me-
tallic currency, that seventeen millions at the pre-
sent time are nearly of equal ♦alue to twenty-two
millions of paper money—yet instead of an abolition
of taxes to that extent, we are only to have a reduc-
tion of three millions—leaving the Government a
gainer of at least two millions, independent of the
increase arising from the additional consumption of
malt—the additional duty on spirits—and the addi-
tional revenue from the equalization of the stamp

duties. Now, we again ask, what ground there
is for rejoicing at the emission of such a Budget ?
But this is not our only objection to the pro-
posed measure of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Mr. Goulburn professed his belief—and it is the
most sensible belief which he ever entertained—first,
that it was better to abolish the whole of a tax than
to reduce a part of it, because the same establish-
ment would be required, and the same expence in-
curred, for the one as for the other. 2dly, That
the diminution of a tax did not always imply a dimi-
nution of the revenue, but, on the contrary, was
generally followed by an addition to it. Now we
again ask, why not apply the principle more exten-
sively ? Why not, for the same reason that the
taxes on beer, on leather, and en cider, are to be
abolished, abolish also the tax on printed cottons,
and numerous other taxes, which, although they
yield little to the revenue, press heavily on the in-
dustry of the country, and are most expensive in the
collection ?—The tax on printed cottons amounts only,
we believe to 600,0001., with which the Government
might easily dispense by reducing other taxes, so as
to place the articles on !which they are imposed
more within the reach of the consumer ; yet this
tax is continued, and no reduction intimated of
any other reduction, although there are many
which would not only bear reduction, because ex-
cessively high, but many which would add to
the amount of the revenue by being reduced!
We will just mention one which has been alluded
to by an evening cotemporary (The Sun)—the
stamp and advertisement duties, respecting which it
is very justly observed—" Let the Chancellor of the
Exchequer but try even a small reduction, and we
promise him an increase threefold. Let him but
take off one penny on the Stamp, and one shilling
on the Advertisement, merely as an experiment;
and we can assure him that the success of the ex-
periment will induce him to go still farther next
year. The excessive duty on advertisements is a
very great drawback on commercial enterprise. Let
the Right Hon. Gentleman but take our advice,
and he will have ample cause of congratulation—the
risk he runs is nothing, while the gain is certain.
If a free press be useful, it should at least have fair
play. This is peculiarly the age of free trade—why
then fetter and clog that which should be the freest
of all commodities—the vehicle for communicating
knowledge and information ? The press is the organ
of public opinion, and the echo of Government. It
is the bond of unity between the Government and
the people, and as such should enjoy the especial
favour and protection of both." In these sentiments
we cordially concur—nay, we would go farther and
say, reduce the duty on each one-half, and even then
there will not only be a great benefit to the public,
but a great addition to the revenue. Our limits,
however, are for the present exhausted, and we
must conclude with repeating what we have already
intimated in pretty plain terms—that the proposed
reduction of taxation is neither more or less than a
tub to the whale, and a sop to the aristocracy.—
Morning Advertiser.
The Debate, or rather the division, of to-night,
will decide whether the House of Commons is de-
serving of the confidence of the country. The
question before it is the distress of the people, and
it is one which not only claims the attention and is
entitled to the calm deliberation of that assembly,
but it is a question which, if not fairly considered
there, will force itself into notice elsewhere, and
in a way which it is fearful to contemplate. We
solemnly warn the Ministers to beware resisting
those demands which emanate from the heart and
strength of an injured nation; and we caution
those supporters of the Ministers, who with pocket
evidence and concocted documents, would con-
ceal the truth by palming upon the Commons of
England the most deliberate mis-statements and
the most audacious falsehoods that ever were
submitted to the House—we would caution these
gentlemen against the consequences of their own
folly and the recoil of their own fire-arms. It is
truly lamentable to see the degrading lengths to
which Honourable Members are driven to prop up
the present Ministers. If these gentlemen have
eyes let them look towards France and learn
wisdom from example. If they be desirous of
knowing the truth, let them seek it in the usual
way, by a committee and by oral evidence. The
letter system of Mr. Irving and Mr. Herries is
a novelty unrecognized by the courts even where
the property of a costermonger or the cha-
racter of a thief is involved, and it ought not
to be tolerated by the Legislature. If Mr. Ir.
ving have any information of his own to com-
municate let him declare it, and perhaps his testi-
mony may have some weight. But the letters of
his correspondents might have been made more
useful had he employed them in lighting his
counting-house fire instead of employing them to
illuminate the " noblest assembly of freemen in
the world." We say the same to Mr. Herries.—
If these gentlemen can vouch for facts on their
own personal knowledge such facts would be ad-
missible; but we deem the statements of their cor-
respondents to be irrelevant. If Mr. Gott be a
respectable man let him be produced and moss-
examined. If Mr. Kirkman Finlay be a person
of veracity and entitled to credit let him be
summoned to the bar of the House. Otherwise
his correspondence, his trade letters, his cotton
despatches, his invoices of bandanas and twist,
are not worth a cheese paring. Good God ! are
we to be told in spite of the petitions which load
the tables of Parliament—in spite of the remon-
strances which are addressed to the fourth estate of
the realm—which, instead of flowing to the Sove-
reign as hitherto, are sent to the Duke of Welling-
ton—are we to be told that these documents are un-
worthy of credit on the epistolary evidence of Mr.
Gott anal Mr. Finlay ? If this is the way in which
the petitions of the people are to be beaten down
and pronounced to be false the sooner the doors of
the House of Commons are shut the better. If
this be parliamentary justice it is a sort of justice
which the people of England do not understand,
and which we trust they are not yet so debased as
to endure.—/Iforning Journal.