The Sun.
London, England, 1853-04-27 00:00:00

~~ ~

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 27, 1853

There was a remarkable unanimity, on one
point, perceptible during the debate of Monday
evening, on. the renewal of the Property and In-
come Tax in its present form, without change or
alteration, in which the friends and opponents of
the measure fully and completely coincided. All
(with the single exception of Mr. EVELYN DEM-
I sox, whose advocacy we freely and willingly re-
linquish) agreed in recognising a distinction be-
tween precarious and permanent income, and de-
ploring the unbending resolution of the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, which based a finan-
cial scheme, good in many respects, on a
gross and palpable injustice. The strongest
speech in favour of the amendment—next to
that of its distinguished proposer—was de-
livered by Mr. HUME, who, however, at the same
time anno'anced his intention of voting in favour
of the pro.position which he had so clearly and
unequivoc ally condemned, and against the amend-
ment, in every word and portion whereof he en-
tirely coincided. Othets, with greater consistency,
refused to support that which in their souls and
consciences they believed to be wrong, however
highly they might approve of other portions of
the scheme, and felt themselves bound to refuse
becoming in any degree participators in the infa-
mous swindle, which, having been suffered to
expire, is now attempted to be resuscitated with-
out modification or amelioration. A revision of
the schedules producing anything like an approxi-
mation to justice would at once be accepted on
every side, and would, notwithstanding other ob-
jections, insure the adoption of the Budget, with
comparatively trivial alterations. The Right
Hon. Gentleman has, however, deterrained to
stand or fa'll with his crochet. He apparently mis-
takes a perverse obstinacy for a laudable firmness,
and neutralises the value of the boonshe is willing to
concede by the nauseous and unwelcome addition
which he is endeavouring to force on the unwilling
recipients.
What, then, will be the duty of Fiscal Reformers
on this critical emergency ? Should they, like
Mr. HUME, surrender at the first summons and
swallow the unpalatable dose, or should they
rather, like Mr. MuNTz, refuse to identify them-
selves with. such unjustifiable proceedings, and
give their motes according to the merits of the pro-
position un.der consideration at the moment, and
without re,!erence to the quarter from whence it
has emanat rd ? Shall men of intellect and ability
surrender t hemselves as the slaves of the Minister
for the time being, succumbing to his imperious
dictates without venturing on a remonstrance, or,
if, with " hated breath and deep humility," they
should hint their objections ; at the same
time, professing their readiness to vote black
white, in order to gratify the unrelenting task-
master. Surely, even SIMON LEGREE never ex-
acted from miserable serfs a more despicable
and humiliating submission.
The prim:iple is, however, so objectionable in
every particular, the precedent established
and that on high authority so danger-
ous—that, notwithstanding our high respect
for .the veteran Member for Montrose, we
must enter our earnest protest against it. No-
thing can possibly be more dangerous, more sub-
versive of that due control which independen?

Members should exercise over the Government,
than the notion that they must adopt any crotchet
however abs,ard or indefensible, of one of its lead-
ing Members. It is a complete recognition of
the nearly-exploded doctrine of "men not mea-
sures," calculated to create a Ministerial despot-
ism, rendering the official, for the time being,
indifferent to the remonstrances that may be ad-

dressed to him, because, however urgent-may be
the complaints, the Minister can afford to de sDise
them, when, assured that his so doing will
be attended with no untoward result in the

shape of votes alienated, or supporters changed

into vigorous opponents. It encourages, too, 'the

injudicious and unconstitutional threat of " rc 3sig-

nation " whenever the high behests of the would-

be Autocrats are called in question.

It sho u2d,

therefore, be strenuously and energetically •re-

sisted whenever it should be put forward.

EN 'en

the high character of Mr. EtumE cannot justify

so great a• dereliction of duty.

On another point of the Budget there will a: lso
be a determ.ined contest. Mr. MILNER GI; )N

carried his resolution respecting the Advertise-
ment Duty by a very clear and decisive ma-
jority. The sum could be easily spared, and, in-
deed, the Chancellor of the Exchequer was willing
to surrender the amount. But in place of be-
stowing it as a general boon on journalism, in
which all, from the highest to the lowest might
participate, he determined to offer a handsome,
shall we call it " bribe" or " gratification ?" We
leave it to our readers to fill the blank according
to their own fancies—to the Times. The com-
plaints on this subject are loud and general; the
majority are indignant at the contemptuous dis-
regard of their views thus exhibited. The substi-
tution of another of his crotchets for that which
had obtained the sanction of the House, and one
which would greatly affect the value of the boon
about:to be conferred on journalists. As we have
repeatedly shown, a reduction of the duty would
not meet the exigencies of the case, and the with-
drawal of a portion, more especially for the pur-
pose of disposing of the balance in the proposed
manner, was merely felt to be adding insult to in-
jury. No, Weventure to assert that the resolution,
deliberately adopted, must be carried out in its
integrity, and that no compromise can be adopted
in this portion of the Financial Scheme.

England is criminal. Otherwise the CHAN-
CELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would never have as-
sumed to himself judicial authority—subjecting
the country to criminal treatment—sentencing
the people of the United Kingdom virtually to
seven years' transportation ! Seven years' trans-
portation to the penal settlement of the Income
Tax. A sentence of this duration is ordinarily
reserved for individual felons, convicted after long
trial of some heavy and grievous misdemeanour.
It is seldom pronounced, without defined culpa-
bility in the recipient, upon the aggregate of an
enormous population. It is so, nowadays, never-
theless. Mr. GLADSTONE, like a judge on assizes
rather than a sedate administrator, has—in re-
ference to what we have called the penal settle-
ment of the Income Tax—devoted the inhabitants
of this land to seven years' transportation. There-
fore—we repeat, and the conclusion must be ob-
vious—England is criminal. She will be criminal
at least if she submit quietly to this criminal
treatment. She is criminal already in the
estimation of the CHANCELLOR of the ET-
CHEQUER. Criminal in what ? Can it be
in having consented, almost without a mur-
mur, to the recent organising of the Coali-
tion—to the formation of a Ministry unsus-
tained by any perceptible principles—to the con-
solidation consequently of what may for that
reason be termed a glaringly unprincipled Govern-
ment ? Really so it would appear. If the de-
duction be in any way unsatisfactory to the ad-
visers of the SOVEREIGN, they have, in this, solely
and entirely to thank themselves. They have
shaken the confidence of the community in the
good faith of its statesmen. They have trans-
formed consistency into a shibboleth. They
have violated all preconceived ideas as to
the laws of political propriety. They have ren-
dered their past a mockery—their present a contra-
diction—their future a source of national solici-
tude. All this they have accomplished in build-
ing up an anomalous and heterogeneous
Administration. And now, having fulfilled their
intentions, having grappled the reins of office,
having comfortably settled themselves down to
official toil, with a view, no doubt, to their
becoming permanent squatters in Downing- street
—her MAJESTY'S Ministers deem it but right to
subject the nation to the penalty due to its late
indifference. They sentence it, through the
mouth of the Financial Administrator, in the
manner already specified—namely, with reference
to this delectable settlement of the Income Tax—
to Seven Years' Transportation. Query—Will
the country, having consented to accept the Coali-
tion, consent also to accept the consequences of
the Coalition ? Having permitted the wholesale
abandonment of principle by the Members of the
new Government, is the nation to tolerate, as
the first result of that concession, the continuance
for seven years of the most unpopular tax ever
imposed during a time of profound peace upon a
multitude peculiarly alive to such injustice ?
Coupled with this, moreover, we have seen a bribe
of many thousands sterling held out, not by stealth
in a back room at Derby, but openly on
the floor of the House of Commons. A bribe
offered, not by W. 8., not by FRAIL the
barber, not by MORGAN the bricklayer, but
by the Members of her Britannic MAJESTY'S
Government. A bribe not to some half-inebri-
ated elector, but to a portion of the Fourth
Estate—to a division of the Press—to a section
of incorruptible (!) Journalism. Well, the people
of England see a Budget brought under the con-
sideration of the lower branch of the Legislature,
having in it those two remarkable items—the re-
newal of the Income Tax for seven years—its
renewal until 1860, when it shall " cease and
determine," and with this the remission of up-
wards of 40,0001. sterling hitherto derived from
the stamp upon newspaper supplements. Ministers
must have counted rather confidently upon the
gullibility of the British population, before
they could venture to introduce such pro-
posals in the course of their Financial Statement.
If we might judge, indeed, from the facility with
which the Budget has entrapped the veteran Mem-
ber- for Montrose, we should presume that the
Cabinet had not altogether calculated without its
host. The 'bated brlath of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, using the word in its double applica-
tion, has decoyed the Political Father of the whole
body of the Reformers into a virtually uncondi-
tional acceptance of the Budget in its entirety.
The melancholy extravagance of this proceeding
on the part of Mr. HUME was sufficiently in-
dicated by the deformity, or distortion, or
perhaps we should rather say by the di-
rect contradiction and irredeemable absurdity
of his argument. His argument, in fact, was
this—" I so fully concur in all that has been said
by the Hon. Baronet the Member for Herts in

condemnation of the Income Tax as heretofore
levied, I so fully agree with him in reprobating
its injustice and severity, that I shall give my
cordial support to the Budget of the Right Hon.
the Chancellor of the Exchequer." .In other
words, " I regard the Income Tax as odious,
without some distinction being made.between pro-

perty fixed and precarious—that—I' shall forward,

by every means in my power, its extension to in

comes of 1001. per annum, and its renewal for a

period of no less than seven years' duration."

Never was there a more preposterous non sequitur,

And this from the veteran Reformer ! The course

pursued by him in this matter bears a painful re-

semblance—we venture to introduce a quo-

;ation from Othello, even with the fear

of the Earl of CLARENDON before our eyes
—bears, we say, a somewhat painful resem-
blance to that of IA GO, when exclaiming, in a

voice of indignation, " Stab a man in the dark ?
0, shame, shame !" all the while perforating with
his sword the bosom of the duped and defeated,

RODERIGO !

THE DUBLIN EXIIIBITION.—The number of season

tickets sold up to yesterday evening was 5,312. There
are now nearly 1,300 men employed at the building
every day.
PRICE OF GOLD.—The quotation of gold at Paris is
about at par (according to the last tariff), which, at the
English Mint price of 31. 17s. 10d. per ounce for
standard gold, gives an exchange of 25.17; and the ex-
change at Paris on London at short being 25.04, it
follows that gold is about 0.38 per cent. dearer in Paris
than in London. By advices from Hamburg the price of
gold is 427 per mark, which, at the English Mint price
of 31. 17s. 100. per ounce for standard gold, gives an
exchange of 13.6 ; and the exchange at Hamburg on
London at short being 13.51, it follows that gold is 0.12
per cent, dearer in Hamburg than in London. The
course of exchange at New York on London for bills at
60 days' sight is 1091 per cent., and, the par of exchange
between England and America being 109 23-40 per
cent., it follows that the exchange is nominally 0.17 per
cent. in favour of England : but, after making allowance
for charges of transport, the present rate leaves no profit
on the importation of gold from the United States.
DIVIDEND.—A circular was issued yesterday by Mr.
Coleman, the accountant, announcing a first dividend
of 7s. 6d. in the pound on the estate of Messrs. Coll-
mann and Stolterfoht, who failed on the 10th of January,
and whose direct liabilities amounted to 153,811/. It
is understood, at the same time, that the gencral liquida-
tion of the estate is proceeding as favourably as was anti-
cipated when the meeting of creditors took place in
February, and that a further early distribution may be
looked for.