The Sun.
London, England, 1834-10-30 00:00:00

depend upon the manner of sweating the leaf, and dry-
ing and preparing it for use. In this respect it is our
own fault if we are not at least equal, if not superior,
to other producers of the article, and where superiority
depends upon observation, care, and skill, we never
yet have been wanting. We might not only grow enough of
tobacco for our own consumption, but we might
supply the whole world. There is no article of such
universal demand, or that can be more easily transported
to meet the demand. The passion for the use of it is
found among savage as well as civilized nations, and
among the higher as well as the lower ranks of the
latter. The sacrifice of industry to revenue is here
most apparent, but the manner in which we deal with
it in the way of revenue is not less absurd. We levy a
duty of 3s. upon every pound of leaf tobacco imported,
and we allow a drawback of 2s. 7i-d. upon every pound of
shag, roll, or carrot tobacco exported, while upon cigars
the duty upon importation is 9s. per pound without any
drawback. From the amount of the drawback allowed
upon shag, roll, or carrot tobacco, we admit that the
article as it arrives to us in its raw state does not ex-
ceed 40. per pound, but where grown, it does not
amount to half this sum, and we could grow it for still
less. Is there any one so childish as to believe that
tobacco is not smuggled in a raw state, and still more in
cigars? The duty on the former exceeds a thousand per
cent., and the latter is up wards of three thousand per
cent. Can a temptation to smuggle so great as this
be resisted, and can we prevent individuals from raising
it in small quantities for their own consumption ? Our
absurdity in imposing so heavy a duty is only surpassed
by the greater absurdity of preventing the growth of
the article. If, in our present situation, we cannot
afford to part with this plant as a source of revenue,
we would do well to deal with it as we did with hops,
which we imported from Flanders before they were
raised in England, and we transferred the duty levied
upon importation to a duty upon the article when
grown at home. It is at all times against sound
policy to levy any duty upon the growth of any raw
material ; but of two evils it is well to choose the least,
and though by levying a duty upon the growth of to-
bacco we offend against sound policy, the offence is
venial compared to that of preventing the growth of it
altogether. With a duty of 3d. per pound upon all
tobacco raised at home, and of 6d. per pound upon all
tobacco imported, we have not the least doubt that
we shall receive a larger revenue through a small duty
so levied, than is now derived, with the prohibition
of home growth, through the heavy duty now imposed.
All the tobacco consumed at home would then pay
the low duty, which now evades, through smuggling,
the heavy duty. The revenue would thus not only
benefit in proportion to the consumption of the article,
but would further benefit by the other taxes paid by
all the persons deriving employment from the growth
of tobacco at home. An excise duty upon any article
of home industry should be avoided, for it never fails
to injure its quality, and prevent improvement in the
process of production and manufacture. This result
may be exemplified by the great improvement we have
made in the manufacture of earthen-ware of all sorts,
particularly china, and the little improvement we have
made in the manufacture of glass. No excise duty has
been imposed upon the former, but the excise duty
levied upon the latter is so high that there are
only ten companies making glass in Great Britain,
and two in Ireland. We thus pay for glass not
only a high price by reason of a high duty, but a still
higher price, by rzason of the monopoly thereby given.
The duty on glass, from its excess, has this further
consequence. Nearly one-third of the duty is drawn
back upon exportation. We thus incur a heavy ex-
pense in collecting a duty, of which the revenue does
not profit to the amount of more than two-thirds
of the net amount of the duty collected. If the glass
exported be for the purposes of smuggling, that is, if
the manufacturer gets back nearly one-third of the duty
upon glass exported, which glass is smuggled back
again, the revenue is not only defrauded, but the ma-
nufacturer is beat down in his price by the smuggler.
If the export be not for the purposes of smuggling, but
to supply a foreign demand, and this demand exists to
nearly one-third of the whole manufacture, how much
more would that demand be increased, if our manufac•
ture of glass were to become as much improved as our
manufacture of earthen-ware has been improved? It is
singular that the exports of our glass, the quality of
which is surpassed on the Continent, should be very
little larger than the exports of our earthen-ware of all
sorts, in the quality of which we are surpassed by few.
The official value of glass exported last year amounted
to 122,2991., while the official value of earthern-ware
• of all sorts exported was 119,1551. According to de-
clared or actual value, the latter was the larger of the
two, the amount in declared value having been of
earthen-ware 496,1881., and of glass 437,5411.
Though glass be the most beautiful manufacture we
have, yet the materials of which it is composed are of
little value. But it employs a. great number of work-
men, and if there were no duty, for one person now
engaged in the manufacture of glass, perhaps there
would be not less than one hundred. The heavy duty,
then, which we levy upon glass affords another in-
stance in which we sacrifice industry to income.

Erratum in our Article upon the French Tariff
yesterday. For silk tveavers, read silk growers.

Fanaticism, the twin sister of superstition and igno-
rance, and the offspring of guilt and fear, has re-com-
menced her reign of gloom and terror in England.
Her worshippers are not confined to any one class—
they are scattered through all the grades into which
society is divided, and may be found among peers and
peasants. For them religion wears no smile on her
heavenly countenance—no robe of beauty enwraps her
celestial form. Their God is a being full of vengeance,
ever delighting in the punishment of his creatures ; and
for themselves, instead of an arm out-stretched in
mercy and paternal love to receive, save, and cherish
them, they behold the arrows of his wrath—the
red lightning of his power—ready to fly against, and
utterly destroy them. The Holy Scriptures are read
by them as the flower is crawled over by the wasp—to
collect poison with which to feed their own dark and
morbid imaginations. We repeat that such votaries
of fanaticism are now to be found in almost
every village ; and the letter to which we are
about to give insertion, will chew the ingenuity
with which they torture the most sacred things,
into justifications of their own conduct. The
present is not the only instance in which the deca-
logue has been quoted to justify the performance
of an unrighteous or uncharitable act. Satan endea-
voured to confound the SON of GOD with Scriptural
quotations, and, following so great an example, the
foes of true religion have always armed themselves with
the Sacred Volume, when determined to make a