The Sun.
London, England, 1849-06-23 00:00:00

ensuing year. Just allowances would be made for
any unavoidable mistakes, and some slight modifica-
tions might fairly be tolerated ; but the general
financial policy should be placed before Parliament
within the first, or at the latest the second, week after
its assembling.
The actual statement is probably as favourable as
we could reasonably expect under existing circum-
stances. Notwithstanding the stringent monetary
code, under which the value of money has been mate-
rially " appreciated " and the burden of tax-
ation greatly aggravated, the wonderful resources
of the empire still enable us to keep our heads above
water, and to provide, without any formidable defi-
ciencies, for actual demands. The first "great fact"
demanding attention is, that last year there was an ex-
cess of expenditure above income of 269,3781. The
country is, therefore, still adding to its embarrassments
and increasing its liabilities. Sir CHARLES WOOD
explains that this deficiency is owing to certain
causes not within his control, and for which he cannot
reasonably be censured or considered responsible—
that were it not for Irish distress, Canadian
emigration, and naval excess of the former year, the
balance would have been on the right side. He had
estimated the ordinary revenue of the country (ex-
clusive of duties on corn) at 51,550,0001., the actual
produce was 51,498,689/., or 51,3111. less than the
estimate. This error was occasioned by what the
Right Hon. Baronet was pleased to term " a most
unexpected falling off in the stamp duties, which
had evidently been elevated beyond their na-
tural point by the unusual number of bill
transactions which took place in a time of
fictitious prosperity." We cannot understand
the period referred to by Sir CHARLES WOOD,
it certainly was not 1847.8, or indeed any time since
his accession to office as financial Minister. There
was, unhappily, no apparent prosperity, whether
fictitious or otherwise, to mislead the calculators ;
but there was an incessant pressure of "the screw."
During the entire year there has been a continued
reduction of the private securities held by
the Bank of England, and a restriction of

the accommodation afforded to the commercial and
manufacturing interests. On the 30th of October,
1847, the Bank held no less than 20,409,8971. worth
of private securities ; on the 16th of June, 1849,
the amount was 9,731,8251. only. As the Bank of
England returns afford a fair indication of the busi-
ness conducted by other banks, which, to a certain
extent, take their tone from the proceedings of the
Leviathan, there was every reason to suppose that
there would be " a great falling off in the stamp
duties," which should, therefore, not have been
so very " unexpected," if ordinary foresight
had been exhibited. The extraordinary revenues
had been estimated at 580,0001.; the actual produce
was 569,0421., the entire mistake being only
62,2691., which, unfortunately, was on the wrong
side of the books.

If, however, the income fell short of the estimate,
the expenditure, we regret to say, very considerably
exceeded the amount anticipated. The actual outlay
for the year amounts to no less than 53,287,1101.

Of this sum, 323,787/. is an arrear from a former
year—a debt for which the country was liable
for what is termed " naval excess," or, in
other words, the difference between the sums
voted by Parliament for the support of our
naval establishments, and the total amount expended
thereon. Another item is clearly an exceptional
case—lrish distress and Canadian emigration,
389,9201. If these sums, amounting in the whole to
713,7071., for which there is some excuse, be deducted
from the total expenditure, the estimate would be
exceeded by about 150,000/. ; or, in other words, Sir
CHARLES WOOD would have only considered the
nation in a better position than it really was
by about 212,0001. sterling. Sir CHARLES labours
hard to show that if these unexpected demands had
not taken place, there would have been a surplus of
444,3291. We fear, however, that some such casu-
alties must be encountered in each and every year for
some time at least, and that we cannot anticipate
with any degree of confidence the period when the
Exchequer will be free from demands on account of
" Naval Excess," " Irish Distress," or " Canadian,
Emigration." A wise and sagacious statesman should
make ample provisions for such very probable con-

tingencies.
As to the revenues for the current year, Sir
CHARLES WOOD estimates that they will amount alto
;;ether to 52,252,0001., while he considers that the ex-
penditure will reach 52,157,6961., leaving an esti
mated surplus of 94,3041.—rather a slight provision
to meet the various casualties and unexpected claims
that may infringe upon the national purse.
Of course, under such circumstances, Sir CHARLES
WOOD will pay no attention to the urgent demands
for the remission of some of the most onerous imposts
which press most heavily upon the industry of the
country. The state of the Exchequer presents an
insuperable obstacle to any indulgence where he is
not prepared to substitute new burdens for the
obnoxious taxes. Taxes can only be abolished when
there is either a great reduction of expenditure or a
considerable addition to the public income from new
sources of revenue. Sir CHARLES WOOD will not
practise the necessary economy, neither will he try
any experiment in the way of substitution of direct
for indirect taxation. He is the advocate of finality
in fiscal, financial, and moretary affairs, and it is vain
to look for any ameliorations or reforms in any of
these particulars so long as he retains his present
position as controller and manager of the National
Exchequer.

The adjourned debate on the second reading of the
Marriage Bill was on Wednesday resumed, and we
are happy to say concluded, in the House of Com-
mons. A division has at length taken place, and the
principle of the measure has been affirmed by a ma-
jority of 34, the numbers being for the second reading
177, against it 143. The entire strength of the op-
position was put forward on the occasion, and the
Members for the Universities of Oxford and
Dublin most ably produced every argument in any
degree bearing on the subject, whether of a religious
or of a political character. Nothing was, however,
shown that could at all affect the substantial merits
of the case, or the broad grounds on which
the repeal of the Act of 1835 was demanded.
If marriage with a deceased wife's sister
were clearly and expressly forbidden by the law of
GOD, if there were any distinct and unequivocal
Scriptural prohibition, the matter should be at once
and for ever set at rest. But if, on the other hand, it
is a merely human ordinance, resting upon no better
foundation than a comparatively modern statute, the
justice and propriety of which has been strongly con-
troverted ab initio—if the crude and hasty decision
of a single Parliament was to coerce the deliberate
and conscientious judgment of those who have been
justly described as " persons of chaste and moral
habits, and of deep religious opinions," without any
adequate reason, the sooner the impolitic restriction
be abrogated, and the most perfect civil and religious
freedelm be allowed to all, the better.
The case has been argued as if the repeal of the
existingmmen
dl law n
and
wtiow tantamountouldebnecouragement of such to
saleh marriagesgislativere;
but that is by no means the real point. No violence
can be done to
an
man will be compeylle7
ntsocieanectetnhoawneyvemr
atnennedreri---conno.
trary to what in his heart and conscience he believes
to be correct. No doctrine of any Church is in-
fringed upon, nor can any individual clergyman be
called on to solemnise the ceremony if he should en-
tertain any doubt whatsoever on the subject : all that
is required is, that those who feel no such scruples,
who believe that there is nothing objectionable in
such unions, should be emancipated from ex-
isting disabilities, and permitted to act
with perfect freedom in the most important
relation of life. They do not seek to bind others,
but they demand for themselves the same liberty and
toleration which they are willing to extend to all ;
and they insist that their innocent off-pring shall not
be branded with marks of shame and ignominy, and
subjected to social degradation. They declare "that
the law of man ought not to restrict the freedom of
matrimonial contracts in any greater degree than the
law of GOD required." By that law, and that alone
will they consent to be bound, and they will not de-
legate to others the privilege of deciding on that law,
and setting aside the right of private judgment in a
matter in which private interests and private feelings
are alone concerned.
The extraordinary differences of opinion that pre-