The Sun.
London, England, 1830-04-15 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

We observe, that in the precious association which
Mr. O'Connell is attempting to found in Dublin,

under the name of the Friends of Ireland," the

Learned Gentleman cot plains of the unequal load
of taxation which is borne by his oppressed and un-
happy country. Such a complaint required a con-
siderable command of voice and features to be made

with gravity in any assembly of Great Britain or
" the sister island," where the audience could count
their fingers. The learned agitator himself, and his
associates, during the discussion of the Catholic
question, continually rung changes on the mighty
host of " seven millions" who demanded the re-

storation of their rights; and as the Protestants had
nut entirely disappeared, though often unoe,rved
in his estimates, he will probably allow thpt they

add more than a million to the mass or Irishmen.

We have thus more than 8,000,000 of people on the
other side of St. George's Channel, who contri-
bute in taxes, for the general support of our na-
tional establishments, about 4,000,000/. ster-

ling a year, or about ten shillings a-head. Ey
such a rate of assessment the whole revenue of
the empire should not exceed 10,000,000/. or
12,000,000/. Now, what is the fact ? The Chan-
.

cellor of the Exchequer will not be satisfied with
less than 50,000,0001., and could not with less main-
tain those establishments and fulfil those obligations

♦vhich Parliament annually sanctions. The inference
is plain, that Great Britain pays in taxes more than
ten times the amount of Ireland, though its popu-
lation does not rise to double Mr. O'Connell's
eight millions." The contributions of Ireland,
though probably enough for its resources, are thus
perfectly insignificant, compared with those of the
empire to which it has the happiness of being
joined. Probably one or two of the English
counties—Lancashire or Yorkshire, for example—
sends more money to the Exchequer than all the
supplies which it receives from the west of the
Irish Channel.' Nay, more: as this association has
for one of its objects to procure the repeal of the
Union, we may just hint that the necessary effect
of such a measure (were it otherwise advisable or
possible) would be to increase the burdens of Ire-
land, instead of diminishing them. Mr. O'Connell's
"oppressed" countrymen not only pay less to
the state than the other parts of the British em-
pire, 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 8,000,000 of people lower taxed
than his countrymen. In France, the rate of taxa-
tion, compared with the number of inhabitants, is
thrice that of Ireland ; in the Netherlands the dis-
proportion is still greater : and even in the misgo-
verned dominions of Don Miguel, more is wrung
from the .retched peasants, the church, and nobi-
lity, in proportion to their numbers, than is sup-
plied by the trade and property of our Irish fellow-
subjects. It is thus evident that a separation of the
kingdoms, and the restoration of an independent
legislature to Ireland, would have the effect of ren-
dering necessary a new and a higher rate of contri-
bution, unless England should openly consent to
support establishments destined for Irish use. Every
year we should be entitled to examine the Irish
budget, and to compare its separate expenditure
with its separate revenue. Every year we should
be obliged to listen to complaints on this side the
water, that the Irish debt was increasing, and the
Irish Treasury empty. Every year the dispropor-
tion of burdens would excite more notice, though
perhaps its effects would not be more felt. If, there-
fore, " the Friends of Ireland" think cheap govern-
merit a blessing, and increased taxation a calamity,
let them beware of Mr. O'Connell and his anti-
union nostrum.— Times.

The feuds which exist in almost every parish in
the kingdom with respect to the management of
parochial funds, the gross abuses committed by the
Jobbing Vestries, who treat with contempt the
complaints of the parishioners, indicate the exist-
ence of defects in the parochial organization of this
country. All sorts of systems are in operation; but
however much they differ in other respects, in one
they agree—namely, the impossibility of subjecting
the office bearers to a proper audit. In most of the
country parishes the accounts are hardly ever ren-
dered in an intelligible manner; and we are assured
by a gentleman extensively acquainted with rural
'natters, that from the manner in which the accounts
are kept, the overseers are often themselves igno-
rant whether they have pail less or more than the
SUMS received by them. In a petition presented to
the House of Commons, on the Sth February last,
by George Gunning, of Frendsbury, Kent, a Lieute-
nant on half-pay, of his Majesty's Ist Regiment of
Dragoon Guards (Appendix to Votes, p. 7), he
prays" that the House will be graciously pleased to
amend. the poor laws, by pass►ng a law to oblige all
parishes to keep their accounts in one fixed form,
showing particularly the cause of the want of relief
by the out-door poor; the accounts also to state dis•
tinctly, under separate heads, the whole expenditure
of the money raised for the use of the poor; all ac-
counts to be passed in open Vestry, every month ;
and every three months an abstract to be furnished
to the Quarter Sessions," &c. We remember hearing
the late Lord Londonderry state, that in the parish
in which he resided, the parish matters were managed
by a female, who troubled herself very little with
accounts of any kind. The Jobbing Vestries, mis-
called Select Vestries, are utterly indefensible. The
Select Vestry system, under the Act of Mr. Sturges
Bourne, is less defective; but still there is g►eat room
for abuse under its provisions. The Local Acts have
generally been framed by those interested in the per-
petuation of abuses, and, with few exceptions, the
Vestries existing under them racy be called jobbing
Vestries. In our account of the proceedings at
Islington on Tuesday, our readers saw the working
of one of the Local Acts. Under that Act, Trus-
tees are appointed to manage the parochial funds,
and Auditors to examine their accounts. It would
appear, that—First, The Trustees are bound to print
the audited accounts. Second, If, at the election
of officers, a ballot be demanded, it is to take place
the day after the meeting of the Vestry ; and the
votes are to be taken according to the provisions of
Sturges Bourne's Act, in proportion to the value
of each man's house in the parish books. Third,
Questions relating to the election of officers are
to be decided by a show of hands. The object
of printing the audited accounts was, of course, to
enable every person interested to see how the pa-
rochial funds were administered. To print the ac-
counts without the remarks of the Auditors, was to
run counter to the object of the Act, for it was de-
priving the parishioners of the information for the
furnishing of which the auditors were appointed.
In this parish, however, because the Auditors dis-
allowed some items in the Accounts, the Trustees
printed their accounts without the annexed remarks
of approbation of part of the items, and disapproba-
tion of others, made by these Auditors on their
males. The first moment the Auditors come into
collision with the Trustees, they are set aside, and
the provision for securing to the parishioners full
reformation respecting their affairs is defeated. At
the Annual Vestry, on Monday, the first motion
made was by one of the Auditors, that the election
of Trustees for the coming year be postponed till
the printing of the accounts, with the Auditors'
remarks. In consequence of disagreeme►lt as to the
number on the show of hands, the mover proposed
the two parties should move to different sides of the
Church; when the Churchwarden determined that
the votes should be. taken in the Vestry, in propor-
tion to the value of each man's house in the parish
books. Tay this method the Trustees had a ma-
jority. It oas been observed, that, by the Act, if
at the election of officers a ballot be demanded, it
is to take place the day after the meeting of the
Vestry. We have seen that a show of hands was
not allowed by the Churchwarden in the case of the
motion of the Auditor. This motion having been
disposed of, the election of Trustees came on next,
and when a ballot was demanded (the Act, as we
have stated above, appointing a ballot the day after the
meeting, if it I.)e demanded at the election of officers),