The Sun.
London, England, 1853-10-15 00:00:00

LONDON, SATURDAY, OCTOBER 15, 1853.

The Bears are playing a reckless, almost a
desperate, game. They have exhibited, and are
exhibiting, an unbending determination, an inflex-
ible resolution, which, in a better cause, would
merit the highest praise. Unfortunately, how-
ever, we can no more admire the firmness and
courage, the objects whereof are to depreciate the
national credit, to reduce the value of the public
funds, and materially increase the loss to the Ex-
chequer consequent on Mr. GLADSTONE'S brilliant
financial experiment, than we can applaud the
audacity of burglars and highwaymen, who like-
wise display activity and skill in their perilous
vocations. There can be no doubt which is the
most mischievous member of society—the Bear or
the Burglar. A housebreaker may plunder the
widow and the fatherless of their ready money
and valuables, but the scenes of his exploits are
necessarily limited. A few families only can suffer
through his misdeeds. The extent of the damage
which he can inflict will not at the utmost exceed
a few hundred pounds, and when he has obtained
his booty he has to abscond from the public gaze,
to hide his diminished head from the hue and cry
instituted, and the rewards offered for his appre-
hension. But the energetic and thorough-paced
Bear, if he succeed in his iniquitous manoeuvres,
plunders many thousand families, robbing the
widows of their substance, and taking the bread
from the mouths of helpless orphans. Nor has
he to shrink from the public view, or to conceal
the amount of his ill-gotten gains ; on the con-
trary, the larger his profits, the more proudly he
struts on 'Change, admired and envied by less
fortunate speculators.
The objects of both—the Burglar and Bear—
are very similar. Each. desires to put his money
into his own pocket at the expense of his neigh-
bours, and is by no means scrupulous as to the
means by which his wishes may be accomplished.
But although the " morality" of the one is scarcely
less questionable than the other, the results are
very different indeed. The gallows or the hulks
are the fitting recompences awarded to the less
dangerous of the two. A villa in Herts or Surrey,
a mansion in Portland-place, and a seat at the
civic banquets, and possibly on the direction of
prosperous companies, are the rewards achieved
by the other.
_ _

Let us not be misunderstood. We conceive
that any man who is the actual bona fide posses-
sor of stocks or shares of any description is entitled
to sell them for any price, however inadequate,
that may be offered. We may deplore the
folly, but we cannot impeach the integrity of
such a person. He " may do as he will, with
his own " But the mere speculator for a fall—
the man who without having a single pound's
worth of stock, or a solitary share, contracts to
deliver that which is not in his possession, and
which he must himself purchase at a depreciation
in order to obtain a profit by the transaction—
the mere " Bear" in fact—has no possible grounds
of excuse that may not be put forward on behalf of
the swindler or thief. It is only by reducing the
quotations that he can possibly succeed, and, un-
fortunately, when such a temptation is held out,
we cannot feel surprised at the lengths to which
the " gamblers " who have staked their all, or
possibly more than their all, on the result, pro-
ceed. It is not too much to say that lying and
slandering, backbiting and calumniating are freely
resorted to ; that there is the circulation, if not
the invention, of fictitious rumours, well knowing
them to be false, or, what is scarcely more ex-
cusable, the wilful exaggeration of matters having
some trifling foundation in fact—the suppressio
Teri and the suggestio fictsi--all, in fact, that can
excite the apprehensions or injure the property of
the parties really interested. It may be
" sport " to the Bears, but it is death
to their victims. And when we consider
that these victims are the national creditors, or
those who have taken shares in great public under-
takings. We feel that they have a right to corn-
plain that enactments are not framed adequate to
abate the nuisance, and that those which are still
nominally in operation have been suffered to be-
come obsolete—mere scarecrows of the law that
have become the sport and not the terror of the
offenders.

Let us now look to the actual state of affairs,
from which we may in a moment discern the criti-
cal positions in which the ursine fraternity are at
present placed. We find it stated that—" For
the accounts the quotations throughout the day
were lower than those for money ;" and also,
" that some large deliveries of stock were conse-
quently made upon very advantageous terms, the
accounts being bought back for the 10th of Novem-
ber at a price that will yield a profit, while not
only will the natural interest of the stock accumu-
late in the mean time, but interest will be gained
from the deposit of its proceeds with the Joint
Stocl Banks or discount liottses." We also learn from
the same authority, that there was " a continuance
of purchases on the part of the public, and a great
scarcity of stock in connexion with the Settlement."
The same might be asserted of the share market,
and, in fact, en both stock and shares there was
what in (lapel-court parlance is termed a " back-
ardation" of about per cent., or, in other
words, parties who could lend stock to the ope-
rators for a fall,
-
not only had its money value
deposited in their hands
use of the money for but besides having the
nearly 'a
month, received
10s. per cent. more than G per cent. per annum
for accepting the loan.

This simple circumstance shows the desperate
cußdition of the Bears. It proves that they have
speculated beyond their means, and that if bond
fide holders.; be only true to themselves, -they must
speedily disgorge a considerable portion of their
unhallowed profits. They must buy back the
stock that they have borrowed for a time ; must
give the price that holders may demand. If that
simple fact be borne in mind, all will be right.

A prudent resolution will save the public from
the snares of the spoilers. Those, however, who
lend stock, should consider the effect of their pro-
ceedings. In order to make a trifling profit of
lOs. per cent., they prevented a general rise of 2
or 3 per cent., in which they themselves would
have participated. They supplied weapons and
munitions of war to their adversaries, and must
not feel surprised at their being turned against
themselves. They are now • warned, and should
not commit a similar error on future occasions.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer is unques-
tionably a brilliant and effective orator. He
possesses a quick and ready eloquence, with very
acute reasoning and argumentative powers, which
enable him for the time being to put forward
fallacies under the most plausible aspects, to seize
on and expose the weak points of his adversaries'
case, while he skilfully conceals or slurs over
those where he is himself liable to attack. It
may be said that he so arranges his facts with
respect to the matter under discussion for
the time being, that he leaves nothing requir-
ing notice untouched, while he seldom if ever
falls into the error of expatiating at any length on
unnecessary or damaging topics. He is equally
free from rhetorical mistakes of omission or com-
mission, and it is not, perhaps, too much to say
that, if he be not the most skilful debater, he is,
at least, the second in the Cabinet of all the
talents. There is, however, one grievous fault to
which he is peculiarly liable, and which materi-
ally impairs his efficiency as a Statesman. He is
too entirely wrapped up in the topic of the mo-
ment—too completely absorbed to regard any-
thing but the temporary triumph. He therefore
frequently makes admissions, and puts for-
ward arguments, which may be used against
himself with tremendous power on other and
more important occasions. No man has been so
often confuted out of his own mouth, for none
have made more inconvenient disclosures, or
what is vulgarly but expressively termed " let
the cat out of the bag," more frequently than
himself.

During his recent ovation at Manchester the
Right Honourable Gentleman has again com-
mitted himself on a very important ques-
tion. He has made revelations respecting the
fiscal policy of last Session which, if made while
the Budget was yet under discussion, would,
notwithstanding the remarkable subserviency
and tergiversation of persons facetiously denomi-
nated " independent Members," would probably
have led to the failure and rejection of the entire
fiscal scheme. Our readers will remember the
credit taken for the intended total abolition of
the iniquitous Income Tax in 1860. How the
ABERDEEN organ trumpeted forth the total ces-
sation of that obnoxious, because unfairly assessed,
impost, and demanded support for the inimitable
measure of financial ability which provided for
that great desideratum ! For that great purpose
Parliament was required to renew the ini-
quitous charge, unchanged and unmodified,
with all its abominations for seven in place of
three years. To achieve that object financial re-
formers were called upon to relinquish all their
well-considered objections—to sacrifice their cha-
racters as public men, for that they were to vote
the succession duties to carry every crotchet of the
brilliant financier, lest the project which guaran-
teed the removal of the Income Tax in 1860 should
be in any degree prejudiced. We appeal not
merely to fiscal and financial reformers, but to
every unprejudiced and disinterested person, no
matter of what party, whether that was not the
understanding on which the bill for the renewal
of the Income Tax was carried—whether Par-
liament, or at least the party of which the Right
Honourable Gentleman was the representative,
could have been more firmly pledged on any point
than it was to the total abolition of the Income
Tax in 1860 ; that is to say, unless some urgent
and unlooked-for pressure should arise in the in-
terval that might render it impossible to, sur-
render so important and so productive an item on
the credit side of the National Balance-
sheet. In vain we uplifted our warning
voice —in vain we inquired whether it
was just or reasonable that the then representa-
tives of the people should legislate for their suc-
cessors seven years hence ? Whether they could
feel themselves justified in araesting the further
development of the wise and beneficial policy en-
tered on under the auspices of the late Sir ROBERT
Pyrn, and to which a large majority of their
numbers had pledged themselves in the most so-
lemn manner ? The prudential cautions were,
however, disregarded. General reliance was
placed on the implied, if not the express, promise
given by the Right Hon. Gentleman, on the part
of the Joint-Stock Administration, and all
remonstrances were despised by people ready
and willing to be deceived. The result is known.
The budget was carried in its integrity (or rather
want of integrity !), and the unmodified Income
Tax was submitted to for seven years, because the
nation was then to get rid of it for ever.

The Corporation of Manchester adopted this
view of the subject, and in their recent address
they referred to this matter in distinct, unequivo-
cal terms. Mr. GLADSTONE has, however, at
length—and when it is too late to act on the
knowledge thus acquired -- uplifted the veil. It
is no longer necessary to keep the people in dark-
ness—and therefore the delusion, under which they
have so long laboured may be dispelled, and the
mists dispersed. Accordingly we find the Right
Hon. Gentleman using the following language on
Wednesday last, in answer to the various ad-
dresses poured on him from various bodies in the
manufacturing metropolis. He said :
"There is one reference in the address of the corporation
that I must briefly notice. It is stated here that we have
re-enacted the income tax with the clear and distinct un-
derstanding that at the expiration of the renewed term
for which it is imposed such taxation was to be repealed.
Gentlemen, in a very few words, I will state to you how I
consider that matter stands. lam myself not particularly
anxious respecting the income tax, on this ground, that it
is impossible to reconstruct it, and it being impossible
to reconstruct it, a sense of injustice and inequality
on the part of the public attends its operation, though
the people of England may be found willing to accept
and submit to it, either to attain a great object of
public good, or to ward off a national danger ; but it
is not well suited, I think, to form part of the ordinary
system of taxation. But, in regard to what Parlia-
ment may have done respecting it, it would be in-
effectual, it would be ludicrous on their part to bind
the Parliament of 1860. The present Parliament have
done no such thing. What they have done is this—
knowing that a promise at present for the removal of
the income tax would be delusive, and would form part
of that system of public imposture which, I hope, will
never be admitted into the government of this country ;
namely, a system of conducting public affairs by
promises instead of by performances—knowing that we
never asked Parliament to bind a future Parliament
to the repeal or continuance of the income tax—we
asked Parliament to adopt positive measures for the
reduction of the income tax in the time that is to
elapse between 1853 and 1860, and likewise by drawing
from another source—namely, the succession tax, mo-
ney, which might, in some considerable degree, replace
the reduction of the income tax, we asked them, by
adopting this measure, so to reduce the amount of the
income tax, and shape the other financial resources of the
country, that in all human probability, and barring the
calamity of a general war, that when the year 1860 shall
arrive, the Parliament of that period may be able to do
what no Parliament since 1840 has been able to do—
that is, to exercise freely an unbiassed judgment on the
question, whether there is to be an income tax or no
income tax. That is what we have done, no more and
no less : we have enabled the people of the country to
say, by their representatives—to say, at a certain time,
whether they will part with the income tax, or whether,
which, for my part, I hope they will not, they will con-
tinue it as part of our ordinary system of taxation."

Now this is placing the matter in a new and
unexpected light. It proves that the Budget was
carried under an erroneous and mistaken impres-
sion, if not by " false pretences," by something
not very far removed therefrom. If Mr. GLAD-
STONE did not deceive the people, he suffered them
to deceive themselves. Had he been as explicit
in April or May, as in October, the question
would now, in all human probability, rest on a
very different foundation. Let fiscal reformers,
however, profit by the tardy information thus
obtained, and organise a judicious agitation to
obtain a repeal of the unfair and unfairly obtained
Act of last session. After all, the ovation of Mr.
GLADSTONE, puerile and ridiculous as it appeared
to be, may be of some advantage to the commu-
nity ifitfreeos and purifies
the truth on this
thteruirvisi:n,and
en-
ables
important subject.