The Sun.
London, England, 1830-04-23 00:00:00

TAXATION OF IRELAND-" THE TIMES."

In the article which we copied into our publication of
yteterday, from the Times, and upon which we offered
some observation•, the reader will find the following ex-
traordinary statement :
" Mr. O'Connell's oppressed' countrymen not only
pay less to the State, than the other parts of the British
empire, but suffer less fiscal exaction than any other people
of Europe. Though he were to traverse every kingdom,
from Lisbon to Constantinople, he would not find eight
millions of people lower taxed than his conntt ymen."
" Now, in defiance of the unsupported proposition here
set forth, we venture to assert, and we hope, before we
have done with the subject, to prove, that there does not
at this moment exist a country, which, in proportion to its
means of paying taxes, is sn heavily burdened with them
as Ireland. As a general proposition, the Times,
we apprehend will not be disposed to deny that the taxes
of England are heavier, and its revenue proportionably
larger, than those of any other state in existence. Let
us then inquire what arc the burthens levied in England,
from which Ireland is exempt?
" The public taxes colleettd throughout the empire are
divided into five distinct heads or classes, viz.-1. Cus-
toms ; '2. Excise ; S. Stamps ; 4. Assessed Taxes ; 5.
Post-office.

" In two of these departments, the Customs and the
Post-office, a perfect assimilation has been already for se-
veral years past established. In the third department, that
of Stamps, the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposes to
carry the same measure into effect, and he calculates that
the increase of revenue consequent upon it will be about
110,000/. yearly. In the fourth department, Ireland enjoys
one of those exemptions which the treaty of union guaran-
teed to her. As to the value of the sacrifice made by the
Treasury in this instance, some opinion may be formed
from the fact, that subsequent to the repeal of the window
tax, the whole of the remaining assessed taxes on clerks and
shopmen, servants, coaches, chaises, gigs, ktunting-ears,
horses, and dog., although they were levied with the utmost
rigour, did not produce to the revenue more than 100,0001.
a year. We state the fact as well from reference to the
finance accounts, as to the testimony of the Commissioners
of Revenue Inquiry, who distinctly recommended the abo-
lition of this source of revenue in Ireland.

" Exclusi✓e of the assessed taxes, the exemptions which
Ireland enjoys are all in the department of the Excise; in-
cluding the repeal of the beer-duty, the following will be
found a correct list of them, together with the amount of
revenue produced from each, in Great Britain, in the year
ended sth of January, 1828. We select that year as being
one which was not marked by any extreme, either of ele-
vation or depression, in regard to the revenue:--•
Exemptions in Ireland. Produce in Gt. Britain.
" Bricks and Tiles £368,538
" Candles
" Printed Goods 662,141
" Soap
" Starch

" Total £2,800,334

" In the year to which we now allude, the net amount
of the taxes of Great Britain paid into the Exchequer was
46,085,886/. ; and in Ireland 3,495,689/. The revenue
derived from malt in Great Britain, we tvill incidentally
observe, was 3,109,807/. It will consequently appear
that the revenue drawn from the various taxes we have
enumerated, from which Ireland is exempt, is not equal to
the malt duty in Great Britain. We will assume, how-
ever, that if these taxes were imposed in Ireland, they
would produce an amount equal to the malt duty iu this
country, although we are perfectly aware that they would
not, in point of fact, realize half the sum. We find That
the malt duty in Ireland produced iu the year to which we
refer 229,335/.

" Prom these documents we can ascertain, with accuracy
sufficient for a practical view of the subject, the increase
which might be expected to arise to the revenue in Ire-
land, from a complete assimilation of the taxes of the two
countries.

" The Net Revenue in 1827, was £3,495,699 0 0
" The proposed assimilation of Stamp
Duties llO,OOO 0 0
" Assimilation of the Duties of Excise,
calculated as oqual to the Malt Duty 229,335 0 0

.£3,835,02.4 0 0
" If to this sum we add 400,000/.2 the largest yearly
amount which the window and other assessed taxes pro-
duced in Ireland, under the most rigorous system of col-
lestion which could be adopted, the whole revenue of Ire-
land, under the most perfect system of assimilation, would
still produce only 4,235,0001.
" We have gone into this question with a minuteness
which will, to many appear tiresome; but we wish to
expose the system in all the nsked deformity of its injustice.
" The population of Great Britain, consisting of tburteen
millions, are taxed at certain rears, which fall substantially
upon the consumption of the necessaries or the luxuries of
life; and on such consumption they pay to the state a
revenue of 46,000,000/. yearly: the revenue paid being'
a perfect comparative measure of the consumption. The
pop
ulation of lrel Ind may be taken as one-half the population
•
of Great Britain : they are taxed in like manner and at the
same rates, upon the eoasumption of the necessaries and
the luxuries of life ; but these, owing partly to their po-
verty, and partly to the excessive taxation, they are un-
able to purchase or consume, save in a very small propor-
tion. The consequence is, that seven millions, of which
the population of Ireland consists, consume of these
luxuries and necessaries so small a share, that the revenue

raised in Ireland at the same rates of taxation which are
imposed in Great Britain, is only 4,000,000/. sterling
yearly, when it would be—if the people could afford to
purchase and to consume those luxuries and necessaries of
life, which are the objects of taxation, in the same pro-
portion that they are purchased and con,urned in Great
Britain—upwards of 28,000,000/. sterling.
" Be it remembered, that to impose and to apply these
excessive, and, to the poverty of the people of Ireland, these
prohibitory rates of taxation, with an alleged view to in-
crease the revenue of the Stite, and to promote the prospe-
rity of Ireland, was the policy adopted in the 31st year of
the 19th century by the Government of Great Britain ;
and let it not be forgotten, that the Government was
cheered on in this work of justice and sound policy by the
Times newspaper."— Times.

NEW STREET from WATERLOO-BRIDGE.

A public meeting of the inhabitant householders
of St. Paul's, Covent-garden, and its immediate
vicinity, took place last night at the rooms of Mr.
George Robins, Piazzas, Covent-garden, for the
purpose of taking into consideration the propriety
of presenting a petition to Parliament to carry into
effect the projected communication from Waterloo-
bridge to the northern part of the metropolis.
In the absence of Mr. George Robins, who was
to have presided on the occasion, but who was pre-
vented by fatigue, Mr. WINSTON, of Charles-street,
was called to the chair, and explained to the meet-
ing the object for which they were assembled. In
a pecuniary point of view the measure would be-
nefit the parish, for while 400/. a year would be lost
by the removal of houses that now stood, 1,000/.
a-year would be gained by those that would be
erected in their stead.
The CHAIRMAN observed that the inhabitants of
Russell-square, Bloomsbury-square, and the streets
adjacent, were so favourable to the proposed mea-
sure, that they were preparing a petition to Parlia-
ment to forward it.—(Hear.)
Mr. FEW (the solicitor, of Henrietta-street) ob-
served, that as the parish would benefit 6001.
a year by 'the measure, the meeting had only to
consent.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. PHILLIPS said be did not consider the pro-
posed plan of such advantage as it had been re-
presented.
Mr. FEW observed, that small as that parish was,
there was seldom any subject started in it on which
the inhabitants could agree. The gentleman •who
had last spoken was experienced in local squabbles,
but thank heaven this was not a parish meeting.—
(Hear, and laughter.)
Mr. POWELL, surveyor of Waterloo-bridge, and
secretary to the company, eulogized the proposed
undertaking, and said that Government waa anxious
to promote it, not only because it would be a great
public convenience but that it would benefit
the Waterloo-bridge Company who had expended
so large a capital and were receiving such a small
return.

Mr. HARROW asked Mr. Powell if he were an in-
habitant householder of the parish.
Mr. POWELL—I freely admit that l am not.
Mr. HARROW—Then you have no right to speak
here. It is a job altogether.
Mr. YOUNG observed that the observation of Mr.
Harrow was rude and ill bred. If the sense of the
meeting was against the proposed petition, let an
opinion to that effect be expressed, but let the pro-
ceedings be conducted with propriety and temper,
and above all, let not the term " job" be ap-
plied to an undertaking of such great national im-
portance.—(Hear, hear.)
The CHAIRMAN observed that Mr. Beazley, the
architect, was present, and would explain to the
meeting the nature of the proposed measure. •
Mr. BEAZLEY accordingly came forwarded, and
said that the origin of the projected improvement
was literally owing to the voice of the public, which
had so repeatedly called for it. The Commissioners
of Woods and Forests were friendly to the measure,
and the Duke of Wellington, the Duke of Bedford,
the Marquis of Exeter, and others whose property
would be affected by it, had give.] the plan their
decided approbation. The Duke of Bedford, in-
deed, had done more, for he had generously con-
sented to give up the ground-rent of such of his
houses as it would be necessary to remove.—(Hear,
hear.)—lt was at first proposed that the undertaking
could be managed without the interference of Par-
liament, but owing to the peculiar feeling of the
House of Commons ut present, the Treasury had
determined that Parliament should be first consulted
upon the subject. As to the term" job," he con-
ceived it was completely misapplied in the present
instance. With regard to the particular line in
which the proposed improvement was to run, no-
thing had as yet been definitively settled. The ex-
pense of the first opening from the Strand to Charles-
street had been estimated by the Commissioners of
Woods and Forests at 43,000/. The estimate which
he (Mr. Beazley) hail made amounted to 70,0001.,
but in his plan he had proposed two openings in-
stead of one. Mr. Beazley concluded by saying,
that if Government assisted the iindotakinpi in the
first instance, there wonid be no doubt of its ulti-
mate success.--( Hear.)
Mr. THIRSTON, of Brydges-street, complained of
the injury which his business was likely to expe-
rience by the projected measure.
Mr. Dow also complained of the injury which
the undertaking would produce to those who carried
on trade either in Brydges-street or York-street.

Air. CRIBB spoke in praise of the undertaking.
After some further discussion,

Mr. FEW proposed the following Resolution :
" Resolved, it is the opinion of this meeting that it
would be very desirable that a communication should
take place between Waterloo•bridge and the northern
parts of the metropolis, and the meeting: cordially
concur in opinion that a petition to that effect should
be forthwith presented to Parliament."
Mr. YOUNG seconded the resolution, which was
carried unanimously.

Mr. CRIBB then proposed that the petition to
Parliament should be read and adopted.
The petition,.whichAS brief and well expressed,
was then read, and unanimously adopted, after which
thanks were voted to the Chairman, and the meet-
ing separated.