The Sun.
London, England, 1848-02-26 00:00:00

Yesterday, in pursuance of a requision, signed by
about 140 members of the Corporation, a Court was held
to take into consideration the propriety of petitioning
Parliament against the proposed increase and continuance
of the income-tax. The Lord Mayor, upou entering
the court, which was filled with members, was loudly
cheered.
The Loan MAYort, upon taking the chair, said, he did
not know that it was necessary for him to make any
other observation than that he was most happy to com-
ply with their request, and most glad to see them
assemble in such numbers.—(Loud cheers.)
Mr. NORRIS congratulated the Court upon the prompt
manner in which the Chief Magistrate had attended
to the requisition upon the large assemblat,e of the
representatives of the warsis, and upon the una-
nimity which he anticipated would be perfect and
complete.—(Cheers.) The state of feeling which mani-
fested itself upen the declaration of the Minister that
the income-tax was not only to be continued, but to be
increased, and the resolute opposition made to so ob-
noxious an impost, proved that there was no necessity
fur dilating upon the question of the propriety of peti-
tioning against it. He should therefore read the reso.
lutions upon which it was his intention to found a peti-
tion to the House of Commons, and then make a few
observations which naturally suggested themselves to
him. They were as follows:
" That this court have obsefved with surprise and
dismay that her Majesty's Ministers have made a pro-
position to renew the income-tax for a period of five
years, and to increase the said tax for a period of not
less two years, from sevenpence to one shilling in the
pound.
" That a tax on income is unjust in principle, and was
submitted to in the first instance on the distinct under-
standing, that it was for a temporary purpose, and for a
limited period only.
" That it is unjust to levy the same amount of tax on
precarions and uncertain incomes, wising from trades
and professions, as from landed, funded, or other ac-
cumulated property.
That it was thus made a direct tax on the industry
and skill of those engaged in trade or professional pur-
suits, and imposes on them an unfair proportion of the
public burthens.

" That this Court do not hesitate to declare that if
the Honourable House of Commons should agree to per-
petuate this system of taxation, it will no longer deserve
the confidence of the people of the United Kingdom.
" That, amid unprecedented commercial difficulties,
and with trade and manufactures in a state of the most
extreme depression, any increase to the taxation of the
country would be impolitic, and the inquisitorial cha-
racter of an income-tax renders it at all times peculiarly
obnoxious.

"That this Court are of opinion, and submit that
it is the duty of the Honourable House of Commons
to limit the expenditure for the public service to the
sums already accruing from the ordinary sources of
taxation. _

" That your Honourable House should not anticipate,
by lavish expenditure, a revenue to be raised by additional
burdens, and that the country regard with the most serious
apprehension the annually increased expenditure for the
public service, and submit to the Honourable House of
Commons the necessity of a strict revision of our unjust

and unequal system of taxation."
The Court loudly cheered at the conclusion of every
sentence of the resolutions, particularly when the mover
read that which stated that if the attempt succeeded
the House of Commons would no longer deserve the
confidence of the people.
Mr. Noxais continued—ln the resolutions it was
stated that the Court heard of the intention of Ministers
with surprise and dismay, because in describing their
feelings on the occasion the strongest terms that could
be used were unquestionably the best. It was impos-
sible to contemplate the fact of an annually increasing
expenditure at a time, and after so many years of pro-
found peace, without perceivingithe necessity of inquir-
ing for what purposes these enormous sums were de-
manded, and why such a constant increase of taxation
took place. They found not only that a large portion of
the income tax had been most unjustly and unfairly
raised from the classes least able to hear the imposi-
tion, but with a lavish hand the Government framed
commissions through the country, at a vast outlay,
to inquire into the necessity of draining, and doing
other things, for interfering in which there could
be now no excuse, whatever justification might have ex-
isted centuries ago, as the people were well qualified to
judge and amt for themselves in such matters without
anSlirliamentary sanction at all. The commissions thus
appointed superseded the medical men of most eminent
charecter, and passed over the country under pretence
of benefiting the public health, and averting the conse-
quences of dangerous disorders. It was the duty of
Government, instead of establishing such costly bodies;
to show the people how to cultivate their own prosperity,
and to derive advantage from the arts of peace; but
under the establishmeut of peace it appeared to have been
the object of administrations to provide for the numerous
henget s-on to whose assistance they owed the success of
their speculations upon the pockets of the people, in-
stead of giving encouragement to useful enterprise.—
(Cheers.) Mr. Norris then went back to the poriod at
which the income-tax was imposed, and commented
upon its renewal by the same Minister who had intro-
duced it. He ridiculed the intense eagerness with which
the latter,upon the dangerof an invasion from France, was
referred to as authority for the necessity of preparations
calculated to supply the Government retainers to whom
he alluded with places or profits, and he asked whether
France, if she was indeed desirous of conflict, did not
seem more disposed to expend her fury upon herself,
than to commit any outrage upon this country ? France,
he was convinced, was aware of the expediency and of
the blessings of peace, and contemplated no rupture.
He called the attention of the Court to the condition of
the clerk with 2001. a• year, who naturally adopted the
step of insuring his life to provide fer his widow. The
insurance would cost him 20/. a year, which, together
with the local rates, reduced his receipts to 1651. a year,
and then came on the income Act, which taxed him upon
his original 2001.—a cruel imposition, inflicted to main-
tain the Government in its course of prodigal expendi-
eure.—(Cheers.) Upon reviewing the career of Perlis-
inent, he must say that, after what had been done in
this country to relieve Irish distress, a sense of justice to
England should prevent the Irish Members from sup-
, posting the Administration in imposing so atrocious a
tax.—(Load cheers.) That tax was not to visit Ireland,
and the wealthy men of that country received the
amounts of their dividends without incurring a farthing
of deduction, and could go down to Parliament to vote
for the measure from which the Minister ingeniously
eeempted them.—(Cheers.) Mr. Norris concluded by
expressing an anxious wish that the Court should be
unanimous in making an indignant remonstrance
founded upon
,the resolutions ho proposed, and was
cheered upon sitting down with great acclamation and
clapping of hands.
Mr. R. TAYLOR felt great pleasure in seconding the
motion. With regard to the defalcation in the revenue,
that was an inevitable national misfortune which must
be met. He would not enter upon that subject, neither
a ould lie enter upon the subject of the increase of taxa-
tion. He was for revising the whole system of taxation
from first to last, and placing it upon au equal footing.—
(Cheers.) When, in 1842, Sir Robert Peel brought in
his Bill for imposing a new income-tax a surprising
apathy seemed to exist. The country submitted upon
receiving the promise that the obnoxious tax would not
exist beyond a stated period, and being told that it was
only to answer an emergency.—(Hear, hear.) Now,
what was the language which the present Chancellor of
the Exchequer used in speaking of the proposition for
sit increased income-tax ? He would read an extract
I thentw as
said as,
'sExsepheeecqe hur
fforrowsth:_e
The Chancellor
CHhoann.ceGlloerntolef.mthane
with regard to the income-tax as it at present stands, it
is quite true I have indirectly expressed an opinion
that there was no prospect of its being taken off. I did
consider the 3L per cent. as a permanent part of the taxa-
tion of the country. I knew it was not imposed as a
permanent tax, but when it was voted, iu 1845, I do not
eelieve any man really believed that there was any
prospect of its being taken off.—(Great laughter) I for
one voted for it with a perfect conviction that it would
never be taken off, and 1 do not think any one was san-
guine enough to hope it. I think it right to declare that
I do not see any chance of that part of our taxation,
amounting to 5,000,0001., being taken off; this applied
w the 3 per cent. With respect to the addition of 2 per
cent., now proposed for a period of two years only, I
will make no promise, as I do not wish to be taunted
with it hereafter."—(Laughter.) Now (proceeded Mr.
Taylor), no man believed there was one word of truth or
sincerity in the protnises made with respect to that tax.
lie considered, as the present Chancellor of the Exche-
quer considered, that there was no reliance to be placed
in assurances of this kind, and he could not at all see
why more credit was to be given to Ministers at the pre-
sent moment than had been given to Ministers of a former
day.--(A laugh and cheers.) The Right Hon. Gentle-
man, however, had, by his speech just quoted, made it
evident that he had no intention to remove the
tax at the conclusion of the time to which
it was pretended to be limited. Mr. Taylor repro-
bated the whole system of taxation as directly the
the
reverse of what it ought to be, inasmuch as
poorest individuals were the most heavily taxed. He
asserted that Government might easilyo raise all the
s upon those
money they required by throwing the nu
What but the ex-
caused the revolution in F rancetion?—(Cheers.) The
who were best able to bear it. He asked what had
emption of the rich from taxa
blame He did not the pre-
sent or any other Government—no Government was
strong enough for
disguised.—(Bear, hear.)
same evil existed in this country, but it was more
the aristocracy, who stood between
poor.—
said he recollected the opposition
Mr. PEWTRESS
the poor and the good intended for thepoor.—(Cheers.)
made to the income-tax when ten Castles cent. was the
Upon that occasion Lord eagh spoke
amount.
of the ignorant impatience of the people, and declared
it was impossible that the Government of the country
could be carried on without the produce of that tax.
The people, however, by compelling the repeal of the
tax, which
then produced 16,000,0001., taught tho Mi-
nisters that they could do without it.—(Cheers.) The
present N,linistry, when they should find that they could
not accomplish their object, would find a way to cut down
the heavy national expenditure, to make reductions
adequate to the necessity of the case, and to accomplish
such reductions to the permanent advantage of the
cotnumnity.—(Cheers.)
Mr. WIRE was anxious not to detain the Court when
they were so unanimous in their determination to go at
once to the House of Commons with their remonstrances;
but he could not refrain from expressing his surprise
that Ministers should, after a lapse of thirty-three years
peace, venture to propose the obnoxious tax, the evils of
which had been so forcibly pointed out by Mr. Norris.
' A tax of that description could only be intended for