The Sun.
London, England, 1849-05-17 00:00:00

actually chargeable under the different Acts were
sufficiently onerous in themselves, that they imp,
burdens of sufficient weight without the expenses of
litigation being superinduced, or of severe penalties
intended for the suppression and punishment of fraud
being inflicted on the fair dealer, who had requested
instructions as to the nature of the returns he was
required to make.
" Sed Diis saliter visum,"

The Excise Commissioners thought otherwise. It
would create a greater respect for the law, a greater
admiration of the system, if persons who had
offended, however unwittingly, against its penal
enactments were dragged into court as public
delinquents, and subjected to ruinous costs and crush-
ing exactions, because they dared to arrive at conclu-
sions, different from those which " the Board" con-
sidered proper.
The Hon. Member for Glasgow, in his admirable
scheme of financial reform, adduced the strongest
and most convincing reasons for the total and imme-
diate abolition of these iniquitous taxes, but the
simple facts of the case to which we have alluded,
afford arguments more practical, and even more un-
answerable than any general view of the subject
could exhibit.

Mr. SHILLIBEER, the defendant, had deserved well
of the country. No private person had, during a
p
long series of years, done so much to in-
crease the national revenue, or to promote
h
indeed we much doubt
w he
conveniencectice and strained interpreta-
tions of all the Commissioners since the country was
first blessed (!)
the public
whether
thewith a "Board of Excise" had lie
sharp
ra
con-
tributed so largely to the Exchequer as the enterprize
of this persecuted individual, and while the footsore
and weary pedestrian, expedited in his journey
through the metropolitan thoroughfares by a cheap
ride in one of the thousands cf omnibuses plying in
every quarter, and saved both time and labour thereby,
blesses the name of " SIIILLIBEER," the inventor and
introducer of the system, benedictions of a very
different character are bestowed upon those who screw
from the industrious tradesmen charges which a strict
adherence to the letter of the law may possibly justify,
but which are wholly opposed to the spirit of its
enactments.

When deprived by increased competition, and
the almost universal adoption of his inven-
tion of the legitimate profits and emoluments
he might reasonably have expected, and
which would have been insured in a country where
useful discoveries were fairly encouraged, Mr. SHIL-
LIBEER started " The Economic Funeral Company,"
in which, by means of a patent carriage which he
bad invented, and by combining in himself the occu-
pations of a "funeral postmaster" and a "furnishing
undertaker," he was enabled to reduce the charges
for funerals to about " one-third" of what they had
previously been, and to lessen the crying abuse of
intramural interments, by bringing the sub-
urban cemeteries within the reach, and
within the finances of the less wealthy classes.
In this novel undertaking Mr. SHILLIBEER met with
the encouragement to which he was so eminently
entitled. The Excise Commissioners, however, are
opposed to all improvements or innovations ; any
alteration occasions some degree of trouble to those
well-paid functionaries, and, therefore, changes are
discouraged and ameliorations regarded as rank
heresies, deserving"of the most stringent punishments.
It is unfortunately but too notorious that improve-
ments in the process of manufacture are retarded, if
not rendered wholly impracticable, because experi•
meats are forbidden as being contrary to " Excise
regulations," and calculated to disturb the old and
time-honoured modes of assessing the duties to be
levied on the different articles. Any invention there-
fore excites the utmost indignation of " the Board,"
and it may easily be conceived that so active and
ingeniousn
cu r e d
thea spirit
deepest as Rb'Sodmy.ust have
ißut his discoveries and inventions did not form the
head and front of his offending. lle had committed
disl‘pilleasSui:elLoLfintEhEe
the deepest crime known to Excise law. He had
actually dared to differ from the Board in their con-
struction of the statutes—and, horribile dictu, he was
actually in the right I 1 They were compelled to
disgorge a portion of the duties they had erroneously
demanded, to repay a portion of the taxes they had
improperly levied. Every person carrying on the
business of a postmaster was materially benefited by
the acts of Mr. SHILLIBEER, but he was an offender
that should be taught how dangerous it was to ques-
tion the dictates of a body clothed with such
enormous and such despotic powers. Accordingly
when he demanded " information and instruction"
from the department as to the nature of the returns ,
which he was required to make, under circumstances
altogether different from those contemplated when the
statute was originally enacted, the reasonable ap-
plication was superciliously and contemptuously re-
jected, and with that urbanity and courtesy for
which public functionaries are so remarkable (civility,
it appears, not coming within the scope of official
duty) was informed, that " it was his own business
to prepare his returns, not theirs." This application
and denial were distinctly proved by the most unim-
peachable testimony for the defence, which the counsel
for the prosecution looked upon as so much matter of
course, that they did not think it worth their while
either to explain or to deny.

The obnoxious SHILLIBEER was thus placed
on the horns of a very unpleasant dilemma. If he
took an erroneous view of the law, if his construction
of the statute was incorrect, he would be not only
liable for enormous penalties, and for the costs of pro-
ceedings, where the Attorney-General and the Soli-
citor-General, aided and assisted by two coun-
sel learned in the law, being retained, would
materially increase the expenses ; but were it
even otherwise, and that notwithstanding the disad-
vantages to which he was exposed, and the opposition
of four gentlemen well qualified to make " the worse
appear the better reason," his interpretation should be
adopted by the Court, he would still be no trivial
sufferer, for he would have to bear the entire expenses
oCfr on to f
pay costs defence, "
it being beneath the dignity of the
oste ein any case in which it
may be concerned. Whatever be the result of the
proceedings, the
due punishment of his audacity was
ce,
thus secured in either event.
We have witnessed the result. Mr. SHILLIBEER
made the returns according to his own views. An
action for no less than twentyone cumulative penal-
ties was forthwith commenced. If the object had
been merely to obtain a judicial exposition of these
obscure and contradictory enactments (however
unjust it might appear), to settle the practice at the
expense of Mr. SHILLIBEER, it would surely have
been sufficient to have sought for a nominal penalty,
or even to have enforced the consequences of one
infraction of the law. But that did not suffice. The
rebellion against the despotic authority of the Board
was to be punished, and these harsh and vindictive
proceedings
were accordingly resorted to.
The verdict of the jury, although returned in ac-
cordance with the charge of the Lord Chief Baron,
and convicting
the defendant on two penalties,
amounting together to 701. sterling, was a virtual ac-
quittal. They declared " that it was their unanimous
opinion that the defendant had taken every means in
his power to obtain the information necessary to
enable him to make his returns orrectly," thus
completely exonerating him from that which consti•
tuted the gravamen of the charge, the desire to evade
payment of the fair duties to which he was
liable, to defraud the Crown of the taxes
to which it was justly entitled.
Under such circumstances, we cannot conceive that
these penalties will be enforced. The error, if error it
could be called, was occasioned by the acts of the Excise
authorities, and for such Mr. SIIILLIBEER should not
be punished. We may, however, ask, how long will
the public tolerate a system under which such pro-
ceedings are even possible ? how long will they
sanctioe the existence of a code that inflicts enormous
pecuniary sacrifices on pereons who have not erred
intentionally or deliberately, but who have been led
into mistakes by
the difficulty of rightly interpreting
an obscure and contradictory Act of Parliament ?

The retrospective report was most encouraging.
" Four years ago,"
The fifth annual meeting of the Ragged School
Union was held on Tuesday evening, at Exeter Hall.
said Lord ASHLEY, who officiated
as chairman,
"they numbered their schools by tens
and their scholars by hundred-, but now they main-
tained eighty-two schools, and ' there had passed
through them, receiving more or less instruction ac-
cording to circumstance 3, nearly 15,000 of the most