The Sun.
London, England, 1849-02-24 00:00:00

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.

FROM THE MORNING PAPERS OF THIS DAY.

CHRONICLE.—Mr. Cohd,n's proposal to agitate
for a repeal of the Malt-tax, has had nearly the same
effect as if he had flung an apple of discord amongst
the agriculturists. The Pretecti,)n Society is divided
and in confusion. The magnates of " the country
party" are at issue with the farmers, and the farmers
with one another upon the point. But they all agree
that they are an oppressed race, and that an intoler-
able amount of local taxation has been unfairly imposed
Upon the landed interest, for the benefit and through
the baneful influence of the manufacturers and the
monied class. This, or something very like it, will pro-
bably form the groundwork of Mr..Disraell's motion on
the Bth of March. Now, we dispute the assumption.
We assert the groundlessness of the complaint. We
maintain that the landed interest pays very little (if
anything) more than what, upon any conceivable prin-
ciple of apportionment, could be deemed its fair share
of the local taxes ; and that every method hitherto
suggested for shifting the burden, would inevitably end
by aggravating it. In the first place, let us come to a dis-
tinct understanding as to the meaning of the term "landed
interest ;" for it strikes us that "the country party" now
habitually resort to a vice analogous to that practised
by the Roundheads when they employed the King's
name and authority against his person. Suppose it
should turn out that the Free -traders and the Man-
chester school actually pay more than half of the poor-
rates as occupiers of land technically so called ; is it
open to Sir John Tyrrell and Mr. Bankes to mix up such
a payment with their own, and take credit, as against the
Free-traders, for the whole ? For the sake of the pre-
sent argument, the landed interest should be taken to
comprise merely those who were, or supposed themselves
to be interested, in maintaining the corn laws. The sum
raised annually under the name of the poor-rate is be-
tween eight and nine millions a year, of which rather
loss than five millions is applied for the relief of the
poor. How much does the landed interest, so de-
fined, contribute towards it ? We have no means
of forming an exact estimate; but we can prove to de-
monstration that their quota is far less than is commonly
stated or supposed. It appears from the Parliamentary
returns, that the annual value of property rated to the
poor-rates in 1847, in England and Wales, was rather ,
more than sixty-seven millions. The annual rateable
value of three of the most exclusively agricultural coun-
ties
stands thus:—Dorset, 789,342/.; Bucks, 706,2651.;
Bedford, 433,3471. That of the three counties in which
146,2811 ; det manufacturing and trading interests most prevail,
the
I▪
t --Lancashire, 6,463,3631. ; West Riding, 1
3,.., Middlesex, 7,584,8681. Take whatever
Bounty
you will, its rateable value will be found to I
depend
principally upon the towns. This is
curiously
illustrated by other tables, in which nine-
teen of the largest agricultural unions are compared
with twenty large towns. The rateable value of
the agricultural unions (including some small towns)
1,494,3821., and that of the large towns 6,265,971/.
Did our space allow, we might attempt a more detailed
analysis; but it would be utterly impossible to draw a
strict line of demarcation between town and country, or
between the agricultural and the monied classes. They
mingle and blend with each other like the shades in shot
silk; and it would be difficult to name a family, or even
an individual, possessed of property, that did not, in point
of fact, belong to both. So far, however, as the pure
agriculturists (the class who thought they derived
a direct and positive advantage from protec-
tion) can be distinguished from the community,
We should say that their contributions towards
the poor-rate are nearer two millions than eight.
We refer peculiarly to the poor-rate, because it is
the local tax, of all others, which, although the ob-
ject is general and national, is supposed to fall almost
exclusively upon the land. The entire local taxation of
4'73Rlend and Wales may be taken in round numbers at
twelve millions, but this includes borough rates, light-
house dues, turnpike tolls, and other rates, which are
either not levied upon agriculturists at all, or, by com-
mon confession, are fairly and properly imposed upon
Ithem.... The exception that occurs to us is church-rate,
"nit!' amounts to more than half a million. It may be
Plausibly contended that the expense of maintaining the
churches should be equally defrayed by all classes. But,
before arriving at any conclusion upon the point, it may
as well to ascertain what property is liable under the
chief local rates, and whether any groundless or
undue exemptions have been allowed. The original impo-
sition and apportionment of the poor-rate was deter-
alined by the statute of 43 Elisabeth, in 1601. The I
church-rate is raised in the same manner, by analogy.
That statute
,directs the churchwardens and overseers,
°c-, to take orders from time to time to raise " by taxa-
tion of every inhabitant, parson, vicar, and others, and of
every occupier of lands, houses, tithes impropriate, pro.
Mations of tithes, coal mines, and saleable underwoods
.11,1.1,he said parish, in such competent sums as they
"ad think fit, &c., to be gathered out of the
"same parish, according to the ability of the
same parish." It will be observed that the
liability is not limited to land, nor to any spe-
teed description of property. " The words of
statute (to borrow the expression of Lord Mans-
"
ceta) are very loose and general, and they may be
construed into any latitude, even to make all a man
iTtes la any way, the measure of his ability; for truly and
rowedatantially it is so; but usage has explained and nar-
bu it." Personal property was expressly held liable,
.„ usage, resulting from a common sense of conveni-
ence and utility, has given rise to some important exemp-
tions, and the threatened attempt to abolish these, simply
indicates an utter ignorance or culpable forgetfulness of
the
lessons taught by experience. For example, the
landed interest in the south and west of England insisted
that the woollen manufacturers should be rated for their
stock in trade. They were rated. The immediate
feffect was, to prevent the investment of capital in
the very parishes where it was most needed and most
eager to come ; namely, those where labourers were
Most abundant. The ultimate result was, to drive the
trade to other parts of the kingdom, where more en-
lightened views of self interest prevailed; and a sense of
the inexpediency of such an extension of the rate led to
the statute which expressly exempts the woollen trade.
An inhabitant has been held liable in respect of funded
Stock, which clearly adds to his " ability;" but a diffi-
culty arose as to whether it accrued within the parish,
and it was also felt that every rate levied on such a
Principle would subject the entire parish to some of the
Worst annoyances of an income-tax. Here, again, 'the
!111 is modified by usage; and when it is remembered
that a fundholder (such as certain finance reformers,
Who shall be nameless, have made up their minds to
/legalize) is a rare animal, and nine-tenths of the
public funds belong to small holders of the middle class,
do not think that usage in this instance will be very
Ivehemently condemned by any party. As for capitalists
11 general, two large and wealthy sections of them, the
railway and canal companies, complain bitterly that
ths are paying pounds in respect of the self-same land
which,
, in the unimproving hands of an agriculturist,
Paid pence. With regard to proposed measures of
e9u;lization the only comprehensive and effective one
hitherto proposed, is to abolish the taxes in question al-
t9gether, provide for their various objects out of the na-
2_?nal revenue, and invest our local, as well as general,
~:lutninistration in the Government. But the ob-
ectiens, political and economical, to such a plan
are obvious, and (in our opinion) insurmountable.
A
" Central Board of Control seems to be as
duch centralization as the English public can be in-
aced to endure without wincing; and every thinking
man
will see that, to entrust our whole provincial ex-
penditure • and management to Government officers,
e'uld imply (or soon induce) a hopeless incapacity for
self-government,
and destroy or neutralise the only
available checks on malversation, negligence, and waste.
that
subject is one of first impression; and it is our wish
4t our present remarks should be regarded simply as
i,akto inquiry and reflection. We recommend them,
eft"" all fitting deference, to Mr. Disraeli iu that cepa-
l
an We are as anxious to abolish all unequal taxes,
d A:
discontinue all class legislation, as he can be; but
will• aite him fair warning that rhetoric and sophistry
will hardly strengthen his present position by foster-
,,cg the false hopes and vain delusions e hick undermine,
!tnpair, and must eventually destroy all spirit, energy,
enterprise and self-reliance in the agriculturists.
DAILY NEWS.—Surely the very extraordinary ob-
iection raised by Mr. Hawes to the production of a paper
relative to the negotiations between the Hudson's Bay
Company and the Colonial-office about Vancouver's Is-
land,„ will not be allowed to pass without further com-
ment in Parliament. Mr. Hume moved to have the
ginion of the Queen's Attorney and Solicitor-General
to:Pecting the competency of the Hudson's Bay Company
ale
give a grant of land from the Crown
laid upon the
011° of the House. Mr. Hawes stated that the Colonial-
„Tee would not produce the document if it were in their
possession; and abet moreover the opinion in question
:_5ll the private property of the Hudson's Bay Company,
and that he doubted whether it were in the power of Par-
liament to compel its production. The first thing in this
!Ply that strikes every unprejudiced mind as offensive
Ind objectionable is the part played by the Colonial-office,
le accepting and acting upon such an opinion. By call-
_ t for it the Colonial-office showed that they entertained
Kra,
doubts of the legality of a grant of lands to the
i,(01/1PanY- This being the case, the Colonial-office ought
4e have consulted the law officers of the Crown as public
t0r°47:48. Instead of doing this they allow the company
th Produce an opinion which they have obtained from
et: Crown counsel upon payment of a fee, and on the
eete,ngth of a private confidential ex parte statement. In
Ing upon an opinion thus procured, without attempt-
e„ to obtain an Unbiassed opinion for the Crown, with-
tv._ allowing the other parties competing for the grant
efierlow its nature and offer objections to it, the Colonial-
lste,,e have seriously compromised themselves and vio-
their public trust. The next objectionable feature
efneuis extraordinary transaction is the conduct of the law
retjra of the Crown. These officials are permanently
ere 'aell and well paid to act for the interests of the
aedwrh Is it to be tolerated that they shall receive fees
Priengira opinions upon an ex parte statement to
from parties who have an interest seate
tani, and, it may be, adverse to that of the Crrown?
the f, it will be remembered that the Crown holds
ie t waste lands of the colonies and dependencies only
erorust for the nation. The responsible advisers of the
theswa, have counselled it to convey a large extent of
t,eeF latds to a Company whose legal competency to
ixel" such a grant has been doubted by the Colonial-
le, a, and is still doubted by many of our most learned
poYer to
and experienced statesmen. And when called
n
opiui ° produce the document which contains the
1e,.,.°11 that has dispelled their own doubts as to the
1141:1137 of the transaction; they deny the power of Par-
t°
ttertuLto compel its production. Are. Ministers entitled
ne r such a matter upon an opinion which they can-
tea„ThP oduce in their own vindication ? 'The matter
gn t rest here. The public interest, the legality of the
conductall of the Colonial-office and the Crown counsel are
svhieh_ mixed up in this question. And the transaction
pea. an attempt is made to conceal from public ex-
-18 'lre by the extraordinary declaration of Mr. Hawes,
-.Hier more nor less than an attempt to perpetuate