The Sun.
London, England, 1849-01-25 00:00:00

State-rcoms.
X6l
s 5 1 2 5

Panama to Realeio
ditto Acapulco 1,500
(Etta San BIEL=
ditto Mazatlan
ditto San Diego
diVo San Francisco 3,500
43&ar,re in the lowa. cabin at a reduction of one fifth
irol:a the above rates. Passage in the forward cabin,
ficla, Panama to either of the above-named ports, 100
V• Pay in advance in all cares.— Washington Union.
AILVRE OF TWO BANKS IN WREKIIAM,—Tbe
,e,r`trY and inhabitants of Wrexham have been quite
4,randed by the stoppage of the two old banks—those
Mr. liendrick and Lloyd. The bank of Mr.
4_.tririck was firrt closed, and an offer was made to his
clediters of 14s. in the pound. Atter several meetings
the creditors, it was ascertained that 14. 6d. might
bisci realized, and accordingly-the creditors have generally
ig2ificd their acceptance of that dividend. Mr. Kenci-
J.;:6.liabilities are under 22,000/.' The astonishment
°f inhabitants was beyond all bounds when they wore
iiforrnecl that the bank of Mr. M. Lloyd was closed. So
'f„ea,twits the bzlief in 1,i4 solytney., tlitit many persons
tvr,-.T" 110:: believe there was ttitopprge until they wept
c" the bank and ascertained the--fact-tbe,naselvcr. The
nlifidence reposed in Mr. Lloyd was unbounded ; he
tons treasurer and banker for nearly all the clubs in the
wn and neighbourhood. One club alone had upwards
of ow
with tint. His liabilities are upwards of
that
and his assets are very trifling ; estimated
it is
'Mt his estate will not realize 2e. 6d. in themi
pon,. The
Froiczatest depression exists in the town and neighbour-
Itlany 'er.e-de-tt up3Ll
njr,e,. acre y c
J his bank. Both g.,-.ntkmera
magistrates for the county of Denbigh.—iVorth Wales
~,
ron wk.

$175

estimate) -•
• ••• 040 • ••
Sugar, half the present amount (pro-
duced last year, 4 404,8371.) • •
Wines, at lowest duty, compatible with
highest revenue (Mr. Macgregor's
estimate) ... ••• .. •••
Legacy duty, or personal property (pro-
duced last year) •• ••• ..
Legacy duty, extended to all other Fo-
perty (Mr. Cobden's estimate) ...
Unredeemed land tax • • • • •.•
Stamps—striking off, as Mr. Macgregor
proposes, from the sum produced last
year, those on marine and fire in-
surances, and on stage carriages,
1,557,6681.—would leave 6,083,755/.:
but these should be equalised and re•
duced one-half, or .. ••• • •
Post-office—not a proper subject for
revenue—its revenue should be ex-
pended in increasing accommodation
at home and abroad, instead of nar-
rowing it, which is now often the
case.

2,000,000

2,000,000

1,500,000
1,200,000

3,000,000

£24,700,000

My offering to you consists of a plan for paying
off, in an honest manner, the National Debt— to begin
this year, and to be completed—as far as taxes are
concerned—before its close. Pay off the National
Debt ? I hear some of you exclaim, "It is im-
possible !! "
Now that word impossible ought to be banished
from our language. Everything that is just and
proper to be done can be accomplished, if 'people are
determined that it shall be done;- and I propose to
prove to you three propositions, each of which will
perhaps excite nearly as much surprise as the pro-
posal to pay off the National Debt.
While you are reading this lei ter, it will be useful
to bear in-mind two facts which are passed :-
Ist. That if a measure similar to that which I pro-
pose had been adopted, as it honestly ought to have
been, after the termination of the war, or previous to
Sir Robert Peel's Bill of 1819, every property which
then contributed to the payment or the debt, would
be far more valuable than it is at present.
2d. That we have paid, since the termination of
the war, in interest, a sum more than sufficient to
have paid off the National Debt.
I will now prove to you,—
First—That it is discreditably dishonest not to pay
off the National Debt.
Second—That it would be very my to pay it off.
Third—That it would be profitable to pay it off.
IST. That it is discreditably dishonest not to pay off
the National Debt.
The first question which naturally arises is,—For
what purpose was the National Debt incurred ? I
do not ask the question with the intention of telling
you that if it was borrowed fors an unjust purpose it
ought not to be paid ; for it is a dishonest act not to
pay a debt which has been incurred, merely because
the money has been improperly spent.
Neither will I take the answer from those who
were always opposed to borrowing the money, and
who said, that it was a mean trick of a borough-
mongering oligarchy, to prevent the spread of reform
principles to this.ceuntry.
No ' • will take the answer of those who proposed
that the money should be borrowed. It was this—
" That the moriey was borrowed to carry on a war
on the Continent, which was the best means of pre-
venting the invasion of this country." Am I not
correct in saying that this was the answer given by
those who borrowed the money at the time they bor-
rowed it ?
And this, you will remember, repeatedly said, not
by obscure persons in low places, but in both Houses
of Parliament—from the Throne, and the National
Church : there can be then no honest doubt who
borrowed the money, and for what purpose it was

borrowed.
And the desired end was obtained—the country
was not invaded; and the next question comes,—
Who should pay the expenses which were incurred ?
The answer which every honest man whether peer or
Peasant would give, must be—Those who reaped the
benefit from the successful effort to prevent the in-

vasion.
And who did reap the benefit ?—the industrious
portion of the people, the skilled artizin the agricul-
tural labourir,- or the bricklayer's hodman ? Will
any oligarch, or their servile press, point out what
would be the difference to these parties were Louis
Napoleon now King of England, having succeeded to
his father?
Would their daily toil be more severe ?—their pay
less ?—their homes less comfortable ?—their families
wcrse clothed or fed ?--.--Trtith replies—lt would be
impossible! 1 Would the professional man who alle-
viates the sickness of a French peer, receive a less
.reward-than he does for attending an English baron ?
'ould those who, by their mental toil, now add to
the comfort
society,
umfortandhappiness, or alleviate the sorrows of
English
be less richly rewarded then if their
powers were exerted with a foreigner on the throne ?
Again Truth replies,—No.
Turn then to.the owners of property of every de-
r.l;7.d let Troth say what wo;t1(11-r,ve been
thdz lot had

pT v'C.

.~

unsucceslstul. Lock at then- position
whether landowners, fundholders, owners of houses

DR.
Interest on 1,500/. at 4 per cent.

• • . . 60

Cr. X.
Present Property Tax, 3 per cent. upon his income
of 1,0001. per annum .. 30
Assessed Taxes .. ... 20

Window Tax .. . • .•• .••

£6O

You see he would be no loser if he paid only the
above taxes, and they were repealed when he was as-
sessed five per cent. to pay off the debt ; but you
well know the large sum an individual with 1,000/.
per annum pays fur taxes on articles in the list I have
ennutterated, and which would be reducedjo such an
extent !
Then consider these articles—malt, hops, soap,
paper, wood, insurance stamps, &c.—the duty on
which would entirely cease; and what a sum he
would save in consequence of those he employs having
their taxes so much reduced! In diminished poOr's-
rates alone; the inevitable result of the employment
necessarily consequent upon such a measure, he
would save a large sum.
Tell me then honestly, have I not proved beyond
doubt that it would be very profitable to pay off the
National Debt ?
Yet I have kept the most important item to the
last. I believe none who have studied the subject
will be disposed to deny, that if the National Debt
was fairly paid off, land and every description of pro-
perty would rise enormously in value. Forty years'
purchase would be more easily obtained with no debt,
than thirty years' as at present; and if this were so,
then deducting the 601. per annum which he has paid
for his contribution, his 9401. per annum would at
forty years' purchase produce 37,6001., or 7,600/. more
than its present value. - .
Is not honesty the best policy ?
The fundholder would be in the same position—
his Dr. and Cr. account precisely the same—he would
obtain the same benefit from the taxes which were
repealed, as well as from those which were reduced.
He would purchase land at thirty years purchase
with the money with which he was paid off; and
this, in a few years, would be of much greater value.
And the owner of railroad property : it is hardly
too much to expect that he would receive a far greater
benefit than either. '
Little remains for me to say : speaking of in-
' dividuals, I have, I think, proved the three propo-

sitions :

Ist. That it is dishonest for property not to pay off
the National Debt.

2d. That it would he easy to do so.
3d. That it would be very profitable to do so.
Who will deny the advantages the nation would
receive in a national sense ? ho ventures to attack
the strong ? And what nation can be stronger than
that in which every individual finds himself and
family in comfortable circumstances ; instead of being
the heaviest, the subjects of these realms would be
the lightest taxed persons in the world.
It is unnecessary to trouble you with those details
which would be necessary to facilitate the carrying
out the measure—important no doubt, but still a
mere matter of business—easily arranged. Let the
public shout for the payment of the National Debt,
nod I will chow you bow easily my plan could be
worked.
A parting word to the owners of property, espe-
cially the aristocracy. Ido not say the handwriting
is on the wall, but there are parties, and powerful
ones, desirous of fixing upon you the payment of the
greater part of the tax s.
The Liverpool Financial Association was formed
for this specific purpose. It is yet in its infancy;
it has not yet used the argument that the war having
for its end the Protection of property, the expenses
' ought to be paid by property—when it does, it will
attain a giant's growth with a giant's strength.
Put Lot your trust in the oligarchy—confide not
in red-tapists ; or again will be played over the game
of catholic emancipation, the loaded dice of the corn-
law. Act in public as you do in private life—if a
debt be honest discharge it yourselves instead of em-
ploying an attorney.
Mr. Macgregor, an able financier, one who has
studied the subject, and not a man of extreme views
upon any question, has proposed that you should pay
five per cent. upon your incomes—a mild beginning.
Will any of you, who have studied history otherwise
than as an old almanac, not infinitely prefer the adop
tion of my plan, and the country without a National
Debt?. - -

I ive per cent. ur.On property would take from the
party whose Case I have stated in the preceding remarks
501. per annum ; and he would still be loaded with
his share of other taxes to the amount of forty-one
millions. By the plan I propose he would only pay
Got. per annum—the country freed from the National
Debt, and himself only liable for his share of a taxa-
tion very little exceeding twenty millions.
And then how eas;!y the five per cent. might be
jot-4bl,d

me,
Your very faithful and obek;ientservant,
RIGBY WASON,