The Sun.
London, England, 1851-02-21 00:00:00

lleged object of which was to produce low prices.
The public caught at the idea, and lent him a
favouring gale. In 1847, that gentle and favouring gale
was changed into a roaring tempest, the winds blew,
and the waves beat against the sand-founded system.
It fell, and great was the fell thereof. The income-tax
has been termed a war tax, and the fact of our being at
peace is one of the great objections that has been urged
against its continuance. This is an ill-founded objection
enough; the real and only sufficient excuse for the im-
position of this objectionable impost is, no matter from
what circumstance or combination of circumstances
arising, national necessity—the proved impossibility of
maintaining national credit, and the national establish-
ment by any other means. There was little doubt that,
in 1848, after the bursting of the Peel Prosperity
Bubble, and the occurrence of the Irish Famine, that
this necessity bad a bona fide existence. But where
is the necessity now ? How is it that now,
in 1851, with a progressively increasisig revenue, with
general prosperity, and a recurrent and increased
surplus revenue, we are again asked, as if it were a
matter of course, to consent to the extension of this ob-
noxious tax for a further period of three years? We
are the last people to run a-muck against taxation,
or to exhibit what Lord Castlereagh once called an igno-
rant impatience under its influence; but we do object to
being paltered with in this manner, and we have a right
to ask whether there is any bond fide inteation of en-
deavouring to administer the finances of the country in
such a manner as to put it in the power of the Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer really to relieve us of the burden of
this particular tax or not? We own that we look with
considerable alarm upon the-present mode of administer-
ing the financial affairs of the country, and we believe it
is destroying the basis on which the revenue has hitherto
rested. How does the case stand? Sir Charles Wood,
since his accession to the office which he now holds, has
bad through his hands a sum sufficient, if it had been
judiciously nursed, to have enabled him now to dispense
with the income-tax. Well, what has he done with this
sum? Why, he has allowed it to dribble through his
fingers, watering, or rather barely moistening, each dry
and gaping interest in such infieitessimal quantities, that
theeigh he has himself been drained in the operation, the
sprinklings have not been sufficietit to impart freshness
or veality to auybo iy. If Perliament acquiesces in the
pr-sent Budget, future Finance Ministers will have no
spring left at wnich they can fill their pitchers but that
of direct taxation. It may be asked of us—Well. what
course do you, who pick holes in the Chancellor's coat,
r, Com nr'n,l ? you resuse the income-tax? To
this war reply—We would not at the nre,ent moment.
We would not cre-xte a deficiency. We would give the
Chancellor of (11, Exchequer. at any c0.:4, the means of
maintaining the public credit But in return we would
require an assurance—and by that we du not mean
ps-,,znivr merely, but isturaric4 by something done—
that eventually the country shall be relieved f rho bur-
dee of this of-j, caw:able f:.. The Chancellor of the
Exceeiner may provide fur this in two ways. He m
keep toe surplue in his pockef till it grows it/ u sum suffi-
clew, to turd np t.,e. void which the anolidon of the inc:ane•
to i woui(t occasion, refusing, fur the present, any remis-
sion or taxatioß, or he may eventually place himself in a
position to disvnse with is by the adoption of the principle
of rsisirig, incense by a moderate and well-adjusted
scheme of import diries. The latter appears to us the
only s:.fm :and sound f,randation on which to build a na
tienal finaueial system; but as we have so recently
placed bei'ore our faders the grounds on which we
have forrne, that opinion, we shsil not at this moment
ent;: firth :,,r upon its consideration. The income-tax
never low been, and never justly can be, re,.tarded, as an
orAinary and pk-rmtment source of revenue. or otherwise
th Lu e% an aid iu times of pressuate. In his essay, 't Ds
l'IMPo‘," M. Thiara thus speaks of it "Los Anglais,"
353:; 3 M. Thiers, "us.. l'ianpluienc,l none' la designation
d' incoine-tax, qu'a titre de supViSrerit, dins les temps
diffioiles, en cyan: coin cr uxemptur tong .I,s petits rave-
Las. eernme qui dirait une torte de souseription, de-
rn,.ty'es aux ,c!asses aise!s, pour venir secours du
t? -mar en a•sresse."

COMPLAINTS AGAINST THE NEW .11 OUSE,

TAX.

TO TEL EDITOR OF THE SUN.

San,—*• leeets hrt: euohurn things." and the following
true stlA,..inent will :how you how I shall be affected if
th 4: Chancellor of the Exchequer carries hie house•tax
iaiotion:—l live in a court where there is but little air,
and for the :ight which is shown in at my windows, I
have, in fifteen years, paid 150/. window duty. Through
living in my old house, I shall have toipay 81 per cent.
more than those who live in a new one as the same
rout, or 10 per cent. more than my neighbour who is a
sh,,pke.vpar. There is also another evil—l shall have to
pay, as at present, for my workshop, which forms part
of my dwelling. I believ,; such a measure was never be-
fore proposed, sal that thousands like myself feel indig-
nant at the injustice.—l am, Sir, &c..
J. AKED, Bookbinder.
1, Peisgravt-place, Strand, Feb. 20, 1851.

SlR,—Will you be kind enough to allow ma to call
public attention, through the medium of your powerful
journal, to the following injustice connected with the
new arrangement of the window duty?
Fur the home I live in I pay rent 401., and window-
tsx about 6/. per annum. Directly opposite my house
there are seven new ones, nearly fit for occupation;
they are to bo let at 401. a year each; therefore, accord-
ing to the Budget, each otathese houses will pay 40s. per
a,,aum house-tax, while I shall have to pay 41., via., two-
thirds of the present window-tax.
Will the Chancellor of the Exchequer be good enough
to point oat the consistency or justice of this arrange-
ment ? I am, Sir, &c.,

6, Cljdc-torraco, CaLffioni.an-road,
161Ington, Feb. 19.

H. LAW.

Sxa,—l am quite at a loss for a reason why the Chan-
cel', ,r of toe Exe'lfquer should want to Li:l old houses
so much more he vi,y than new ones.
lam an old house, wilt long i..effire the present win-
dow-tax was though: of, and, though I cuntain not more
windows than neceie,ary, I doubtless have many more
than it is agreeable for a man with a moderate income
to h- taxed for at anything like the present rate.
There is now a black-mail levied on me (120 per cant.
on the rent 3.1 !or window-tax alone, and it is proposed to
ssddle me in future with two-thirds ,:f the present
amount, or nearly 13 per cent of my value. Why should
I:have to pay that, and a new huuse only pal 5 per cent.?
Pray take up the cudgels for us, and save us from this
mitigated iniquity.
I am, Sir, your obedient sorvant,
THE OLD HOUSE AT HOME.
Hackney, Feb. 18.

SIR, —Will you allow me to point out one case of the
unflir operation of Sir Charles Wood's proposed scheme
of a house-tax as a substitute for the obnoxious window
duty ?

The rent of the house which I occupy is 1051. per an-
num; the window duty is 151. If Sir C. Wood's scheme
should receive the sanction of the House of Commons
I am condemned to pay a permanent tax of 101. per an-
num, being two•thirds of the existing window duty; and
this, because my house is an old one.
But a fri;:nd who i, about to occupy a house in course
of erectioa, and charged with a like rent, will pay only
51. 5.!. per annum for hothe.tax; and this because his
house is a new one.

Can you explain the principle of this arrangement?
I am, Sir, your very obcdient serv,:at,
Feb. 12. A CONSTANT READER.

~m—With a vie to
(Owes
iflustrate the working of Sir
c„es wo,d i's n.)1(11o;13 schema of increased taxation,
we beg to lay before yp
nits rs:stilt in our own particular
case. Our present winnow-tax on the house in which
we carry on our business amouu:a to 1/.10. 8d per an-
num, and the proposed house-tax of ninepence in the
pound on two-thirds of the rental will amount to 3/. 15s.
It is needless to say that wo aro strongly adverse to a
proposal which we feel convinced would raise a con-
siderable lar4er sum that the existing tax, and, in
our own case, considerably more than double our pay-
ment.----We inclose our card, and remain, Sir,
YOUR CONSTAN T SUBSCRIBERS.
Aldgate, Feb. 20.

Sia,—l live in a house practically my own for life,
which is assessed at 211., and for which I pay :6/. 4s.
9d. window duty. On Sir Charles Wood's new sliding
scale (:f it become law, unmodified) I shall pay as
house-tax 31. 9s. 10d., while my next door neighbour,
assessed at 20/, r. pay nothing, and the tenant of a
house aboni, to be lrtiit, precisely like mine, will pay
11. ls. a year. What is the equity of this? Why the
exemption up to 900 Most exemptions stop at cot-
tage;. And wiay not charge old houses a shilling in
the pound as well as new ones, when two-thirds of their
present window-t-.-.z would exceed that rate?—Yours,
YORKSHIRE.

~_ Mr, Brat Faired off against Mr. Locke King's Bill
for the extension of the franchise with Mr. Pigott.
Mr. Rik Currie paired (till ten o'clock) in favour
of Mr. Locke King's motion with Mr. Baring.
We are
who so
roqu•st,d to state that the name of the gen-
tleman
Mr, delivers the Descriptive Lecture
accompanying
iTaarles Marshall's Diorama of the Tour
of Europa, nwale.
in the flaymarketx.isibli,ltining. at her Majesty's Convert Room
erro-
neously stated in our notice of athnedirt Woody, as was i
rama.
THE GE kAT 1-,,,z pi ,r
.. 4.,,0LET-STREET.—The pre
,
at Messrs. WiAan's premises, in ro I
smoulder throughout ale o ey-strefft, continued to
Whooflethoef
brigade men
night, and,
notwithstanding the labours
daybreak
men were conti-
nued without in emission, at
alarming. In the
the appearance of the flames
course of the day 3lessrs. es Was
succerededin extricating an
iron ch:st, containing an en irmous amount
y of men, in
perty in bills and other securities. A. large body
fdvaluable pro-
to
No
the employ of Mr. Cubitt, the contractor, are
o further
pulling down the shattered walls this morning
clue is to the origin of the fire has been arrived. at.
ANOTHER G&aAr FIBB IN THE CITY. Last
night, at a tew minutes before eleven o,clock, another
te
sive conflagration broke cut in a large warehouse, No.z
8n-
East-cheap. The lower part was occupied by Mr. Joseph
Prime, a cheese-factor, and the upper part was in the tenare
of Mr. John Roberts, wholesale spice merchant. Owing to
the combined exertions of all present, the fire by one o'clock
this morning, although not wholly extinguished, was so far
got under as to allay the fears of the inhabitants as to any
further extension. The total damage must reach some
thousand pounds. The building is not what is usually termed
gutted; but every floor from the ground story has been on
fire, and the goods therein must have been partially, if not
wholly destroyed.

THE Pow or STBAM.—The explosive power of
stelin is forcibly illustrated in the case of the explosion of
the steamer Anglo-Norman, when the boilers of that boat,
30 feet long and about 30 tons weight. w,re hurled to the
distance cr. three hnadred feet, and landed on the Levee. An
iron safe was also projected trom the boat in like manner.—
Buffalo Advertiser.
_

MANCHESTER MARKET, THIMSDAY.—The business
done at Manchester to-Lty et an improved character
bout as to price and exteLt.