The Sun.
London, England, 1841-12-21 00:00:00

CORN-LAW COMPENSATION.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

Sia,—l proceed to fbllow up the subject of my
letter in your paper of Tuesday evening, .Dec. 14.
In settling the form in which compensation
for the manufacturing and commercial interests
ought to be demanded from the landowners, the
object is not to determine what would be the
snuggest, cosiest, and on the whole the most
politic mode, if an Act of Parliament entitled
"An Act for Retribution on the Landed Inte-
rest" were sent down to us from the Lords, with
blanks which we were invited to fill up according
to our own choice and 'judgment of what we
should like best. This would be the error of the
Chartists, who say " What would be so comfort•
able as the Charter ? Therefore let us gd for it
and nothing else." But it is to 'determine what
is the tbrm of demand, which carries with it the
greatest probability of practical effect; the effect
being after all, to a considerable extent, like that
produced by the artilleryman, when he points his
gun to a given star, less with the expectation of
hitting it, than of hitting something else which
lie has set his heart upon demolishing.
When the proposal is made to tax the land-
owners twenty millions a-year, it may be the
justest thing in the world, but people do not see
it to be so. It may be the most exact measure
of retribution, weighed out to an ounce in the
nicest scales of political economy, but it does not
carry the proof and evidence upon its face. The
argument also by which it has been accom-
panied—that it would still leave the landowners
the richest in Europe—is of an unfortunate com-
plexion. It is the counterpart of the argument
which states, that because Mr. Strutt rides in a
carriage, and Mr. Evans is understood to give
claret, it is clear they have not been robbed more
than they ought to be. It is, in fact, an ar-
gument for a Prime Minister. The demand
for a bounty on foreign corn, in duration and
magnitude equal to the past duties, bears, on the
contrary, the justice of its own dimensions on the
face of it. It is as difficult to object to on the
score of justice, as levying a simple restoration
from a thief.

Another objection to the proposal for levying
twenty millions a-year by a land-tax, is that the
payment of a land-tax (notwithstanding what
nas been lately done by Mr. Scott upon the
question, which, however powerful, cannot have
had the effect of removing all prejudices from all
minds) is one of the strongholds of the land-
owners, rather than what they count a weakness.
It would, therefore, be running directly upon
what they consider as their point of strength.
"We are paying one land-tax already," would
be their answer, "and you come to tell us we
ought to pay another. We think the public in
debt to us for what we do, and you choose this
for an argument why our burdens should be in-
creased." There is no use in saying this defence
cannot resist the examination-of a searching and
impartial mind. The question is not -of whether
an enemy's defence ought to be effective, but
whether it will be.

If the landowners object that a bounty on
foreign corn is not, per se, in the first style of
political economy, but is to a certain extent a
throwing away of the natural resources of a
country on the same principles as a duty, one
answer is, that whenever the landowners shall
propose to remove this damage to the community
by offering a commutation into a tax on land or
rent, there is no doubt that fair terms would be
accepted, or even that something would be done
towards meeting them, in the way of allowing
them a favourable bargain. But the offer must
come from the landowners.
But another answer is, that it may be main-
tained with great appearance of justice and of
ultimate success, that a bounty. of the nature
and character described, though in one direction
uneconomical or a source of national loss, would
more than compensate for it in another direction,
by the tendency it would have to recover such
portions as might be recoverable, of the trade
and commerce of the world, which pains have
been taken to cut out of the hands of English-
men, and a premium given to foreigners for being
the instruments. There is nothing like being
distinct. The position advanced is, that though
a bounty on foreign corn is undeniably a national
expense and an outlay, it is an outlay it would
be most wise to make at the present moment,
for the. sake of the trade and commerce
now in the act of expiring, which might be
rescued from destruction. A dram may be in
a general way a needless or harmful expense
but if pouring a dram down the throat of a man
apparently drowned, will save him and all the
posterity that may be in the loins of their
father, it can hardly be said to be improvidently
expended. The manufacturing and commercial
interest demands justice in the shape of this dram.
And there is an amazing difference in point of
popularity, between a tax to bring corn in, and a
tax to keep it out.
Note here, that all intelligent advocates on

Le side of the manufacturing and commercial

interests, know that whenever the change comes,
it must be by some kind of gradations. But
they know too, that this is no impediment to
compensation being afterwards made by a bounty,
by gradations of the same kind.

Allow me to notice further, that there may
be suspicion of a mistake being abroad, on the
subject of the necessity or desirableness of coming
to a fixed duty as a preliminary to abolition. It

looks like the bad start of some not very clear
mind, which saw distinctly that to get a duty of
10s. and then remove it by two shillings a-year,
was one way to remove the Corn-laws, but did
not see that the end might be obtained with equal
certainty by deducting annually from each grade
of the existing scale; which might with equal
ease be changed into a bounty by corresponding
steps. Why are we to encounter all the prosing,
and all the chances of disappointment and trickery,
which may arise out of insisting on fighting a
bye battle for a fixed duty as a preliminary? If
anybody can show good reasons, let the thing go
on; but let the reasons be shown.
Yours very sincerely,
T. PERRONET THOMPSON.
Blackheath, Dec. 21, 1841.

UNITED 'SERVICE CLUB.
THE HORSE GUARDS.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.
Sin,—lf it be true that " coming events cast
their shadows before," the late articles and letters
in the Times would lead us to suppose that the
present Government had in contemplation to
make some inquiry into the patronage of that
nest of ultra-Toryism, the Horse Guards. Why
the present system has endured so long can
only be accounted for on the supposition that
civilians take no interest about military matters,
whilst the unfortunate officers of the line, pos-
sessing no Parliamentary influence, and passing
the best part of their lives in the Colonies, are
obliged to " grin and bear it," since "suffering
is the badge of all their tribe." For this reason
it is that the officers of the three regiments of
Foot Guards are still allowed to retain their un-
just privilege in jumping t 3 the rank 'of Captain
and Lieutenant-Colonel after ten years' service
in St. James's-street, whilst an officer of the line
may be twenty years before he attains even the
rank of Major, then frequently at the expense
of his constitution. I can answer for. it, that no
soldier envies their position as Guards, but why
maintain this unnecessary and unjust distinction?
Why not place the officers on the same footing in
iobliged
bye
.
ebv:
rank with their younger brethren of the line ?
There are also sundry abuses committed under
the head of " Staff appointments," by which
young men of interest and family.
(byen tswhilsteo
these are synonymous terms) are permitted the
to
absent themselves from their regiments
the "Smiths" and "Thompsons" are obliged to
do the duty of the absentees, and are, moreover,
deprived of their own leaves of absence • xepli
gratia—the present Lord Lieutenant of
Ireland
has twelve officers on full pay on his Staff and
Household, whose sole duty consists in wearing
aoffiliceeteersoagnendetohueslautneifi‘oirrm. uniform, between
Ast-
ley's amphitheatre, in which theynl are called
upon to carve at the Viceroy's table, whilst
their less fortunate companionseie
are mounting
guard the Colonies
tomenies or elsewhere as oin
ways appeared
thatseer e ; indeed
o ffi ce ofe
Led 0
ridit
Lieutenant was continued for the convenience of
certain officers; any on
must feel that the Viceroysbipho
vehicle for patronage. With regard to the bare-
facedanything be more derogat:ry to
system of trafficking in commissions, can,
knows Ireland
e w.
is nothing, but a
the high feeling
which should belong to an officer ? The Regu-
lation Price for a troop in Dragoons is 3,2251.
No officer can buy a troop.under 5,0001., or gui-
-2251.
neas! The consequence is, this branch of the
sweirivoicaerebpelloacriegds
ienxeitlust monied
Ifmaenny,
isioeldiers.
Military M.P , not having the fear of the horse
ioreplylaytoat
Cluards befor.e
his eyes, would lay the whole
Parliament,the public would be
system before
EMERITAS.
the gainers. EMERITAS.
We understand that an inquiry is about to take
bill fraud
in which the late Exchequer was per-
place, under a Royal Commission, into so much of the
manner
similar frauds in future. The peteated, as may elicit information tending to secure the
public against
Commis-
sioners named are Lord Ashburton, Dr. Nichols; John
Esq., and George Glyn, Esq.
LefevSErLeECT PREACHERS FOR OXFORD.—The
gentlemen who have !nen designated Select Preachers, to
succeed those who will go out of office at Michaelmas i 842,
are, we believe, all anti-Tractarians, with the exception
of Archdeacon Manning, ,the apostle of INseyisna in the
diocese of Chichestere—Oxford Chronicle.