The Sun.
London, England, 1854-05-22 00:00:00

in steadily pushing on through the still lagging win-
ter and its icy obstructions, a remarkable amount
of earnest perseverance. More than this, he has
justified by every portion of his progress since the
period when he first led his fleet through the
channels of the Skaggerack and the Cattegat, he
has justified by every portion of his progress since
then all that was said on a memorable occasion
Loid.of the Admiralty about the
gallant
yallathne F
t
si-re3tteran's Discretion. Sir CHARLES
NAPIER has, we maintain, united in the
command of the British fleet in the Baltic
remarkable discretion with extraordinary per-
severance. Remembering, therefore, in what
a notable and commendable manner the brave old
Sea-Captain combines prudence with pluck in
carrying out his present momentous adventure—
England may await the issue of the approaching
maritime struggle in the North not less confi-
dently than the coming military contest in the
East, not only sanguine as to the ultimate triumph
of the Western allies of Turkey, but, relying with
unshakeable belief, under the aid of GOD, upon
that ulterior victory of France and England being
illustrated both by sea and land by achievements
not unworthy of the fame of the leaders of civi-
lisation, the defenders of the rights of the Moslem,
the champions of the broken peace and the
violated laws of Christendom.

Whatever differences of opinion might exist on
other parts of the Budget, there was one portion
at least in which every disinterested and unpreju-
diced person fully concurred with the Chancellor of
the Exchequer. The propositions for making the
duty on Bills of Exchange proportionate to the
amounts thereby secured, and also for assimilating
the tax on foreign and inland bills, are so mani-
festly just that they command immediate assent.
Neither question could be contested for a moment
on equitable grounds ; and unless some very
serious objections could be pointed out, the ob-

noxious principles should be at once modified and

placed upon sounder foundations. On investiga-
tion, however, it turned out that the gross ine-
quality of taxation, as well as the unfair exemp-
tion afforded to the foreigner, was as unwise as
it was unfair—that the impediment occasioned by
an exorbitant charge was placed in the very
quarter it was most likely to be severely felt, and
where it might even prevent a negotiation from
being brought to a satisfactory conclusion. No

large transactions would be prevented by a tax of
Is. per 1001. on the amount for which credit was
required, but ls. or Is. 6d. according to the date
of payment on a 51. matter, or 2s. on one of 101.,
would become an appreciable item in the calcula-
tion of profits. A payment of 3s. 6d. on say 351.
or 401. might be taken into consideration when it
would be totally disregarded. Indeed, it is diffi-
cult to conceive what could have induced any
financial Minister to propose, or Parliament to
sanction tables constructed with such unequivocal
disregard to any principle whatsoever which would
charge ls. 6d. on 21. ls., and only levy 30s. on
200,0001., which made 3,0001., the maxi-
mum sum charged on allowing any higher
amount to be perfectly free from duty.
It might be thought that if a graduated
scale were to be brought into operation
it should have been made favourable to the less
wealthy classes; but here the salutary rule was
reversed. The small tradesman was made to pay
very heavily, while the millionnaire, who would
not mind the impost, was allowed to escape with
comparative impunity.
Now the first part of the present proposition—
that of equalising the duty on inland bills—will,
if carried into effect, afford great relief in all
transactions under 5001. And it is against the
wide jumps in the table, as from 5001. to 1,0001.,
from 1,0001. to 2,0001., and from 2,0001. to
3,0001., and the total exemption of all above the
latter sum, that the new resolutions strike a for-
midable blow. Everything is to be taxed accord-
ing to its value, and the rule is simple and uni-
form in its application. It will require no ela-
borate tables to be hung up in the office, or car-
ried about in the pocket-book of every com-
mercial man—threepence for every 251., or
fractional part of 251., up to the first 1001.,
and Is. for every 1001., or fractional part of
1001. afterwards, can easily be remembered. The
small tradesmen and shopkeepers who are obliged
to pay for their purchases from the wholesale

houses by bills of exchange will be the great
gainers. They will nearly, if not altogether,
"save their income tax " by the change. There
will be no loss on any sum less than 1,5001., and
our merchant princes, whose " names are good on
'Change" for higher amounts need not scruple to
pay is. for every 1001. in a speculation which
they deem sufficiently auspicious to enter into.
But the reasons in favour of the extension of
the duty to foreign bills are even much stronger.
It is unnecessary to say that we are not the ad-
vocates of anything in the shape of protection—.
that we do not wish to impose or to retain a single
restriction on the foreigner to which our own
fellow-citizens are not equally subjected. Bnt if we
require no advantage, we must not be exposed
to any unfair burden from which our rivals are
exempted. Now hitherto there has been such an
exemptions which, like every exemption, led to
many fraudulent evasions of the charge. The
foreign merchant drew his bill without a stamp.
It was accepted in England, and made payable in
England, and competed in the money market with
purely English bills bearing the regular stamps.
Was this " Justice to England ?" But this was
not all. Bills were manufactured in the city of
London purporting to be drawn abroad, but to
all intents and purposes issued by English houses
and cashed on their credit exclusively. The fact
of the fraud, too, might be taken advantage of by
the wrong-doer—to deprive " the innocent holder
for valuable consideration, without notice," of
the security which he thought he held. One
man might thus make another suffer for the
crime of which he himself was exclusively
guilty. The mere possibility cast a shade of
doubt over every foreign bill, which was very pre-
judicial to the parties concerned—a doubt, the
removal whereof would be cheaply purchased for
Is. per 100/.

Mr. GLADSTONE does not, it appears, expect to
realise anything from the alteration. His only
object is, not to lose by the alteration. We have
no doubt, however, that in this case, " virtue
will be rewarded." We venture to pro-
mise him, not merely that he will not be
a loser by the change, but, on the contrary, that
the proposition, which was only intended to
do justice to those who had previously been
wronged, will, like the penny receipt stamp,
return more than double what was anticipated.
The principle is sound—and the results will prove
it to be so. It will, therefore, be seen that in
financial, as in all other matters, " honesty is,
indeed, the best policy." We are happy to be
enabled to tender our best thanks to Mr. GLAD-
STONE for his judicious and equitable proposition.

A comparison of the respective merits, as
financiers, of Mr. DISRAELI and Mr. GLADSTONE,
was inevitable, of course, from the mere circum-
stance of the latter having immediately succeeded
the former in the responsible office of the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer. It is altogether absurd
to argue, for an instant, that the comparison referred
to is one vrhich has beenunnecessarily thrust upon
the natienal attention by the aggressive criticisms
pronounce(' upon the successive Budgets of March,
April, and May, by the
Right Hon. Gentleman the
Leader of her AIEs TY s Opposition. As ridiculous,
indeed, as it would bto assert, on the other hand,
that the coy nparison was originally provoked by
the defensive arguments put forward in reply
(sometimes not with the best grace or
in the best temper) by the eminent rival
and 'ministerial successor of the member
for :3uckinghamshire. The comparison of
their : cespectivo merits as financiers was altogether
ineviti able, we repeat, under the circumstances.
More than this, it must be admitted that the
cont r ast presented as the result of this compari-
son . is, in several respects, considerably in favour
of M DlSRAELl—notwithstanding the enormous
reput Lition for statesmanship enjoyed by his suc-
cessor in the Chancellorship of the Exchequer.
Mr. G LADSTONE possesses the advantage of having