The Sun.
London, England, 1851-04-08 00:00:00

Olmeninit t

LONDON, TUESDAY, APRIL 8, 1851.

In the House of Lords last night,
The Mutiny Bill, the Marine Mutiny Bill, and the
Apprentices and Servants Bill, were respectively read
a second time, and their Lordships adjourned.
In the House of Commons,

A new writ was orderad for the Leith Boroughs for
the election of a Member, in the room of Mr. RuTuEn-
FORD, who had been appointed a Lord of the Court of
Session, Scotland.

On the requisition of the Chairman of the St. Alban's
Election Committee the SPEAKER issued warrants for
the apprehension of EDWARDS, HAYWARD, and WAG-
GETT, who had been guilty of contempt.
On the report of the Committee of Ways and Means
being brought up,

Mr. HERMES rose, in pursuance of the notice he
had given, to propose an amendment to the resolution
which had been read, and which was to the following
effect :—" That it is the opinion of this House that the
respective duties in Great Britain on profits arising
from property, professions, trades, and offices, and the
stamp duties in Ireland, granted by two Acts passed in
the sixth year of her present Majesty, and which have
been continued and amended by several subsequent
Acts, were granted for limited periods, and to meet
temporary exigencies ; that it is :highly expedient to
adhere to the declared intentions of Parliament when
these duties were granted and continued ; and, in order
to secure their speediest practicable cessation, to limit
the renewal of any portion of them to such an amount as
may be sufficient, in the existing state of the public re-
venue, to provide for the expenditure sanctioned by Par-
liament, and for the due maintenance of public credit."
The Right Hon. Gentleman entered at great length into
the financial history of the country during the last ten
years, and explained the reasons which had induced Sir
ROBERT PEEL to propose the imposition of an income-
tax in 1842. He then proceeded to quote at great length
from the speeches of Lord JOHN RUSSELL, Sir F BA-
RING, Lord HOWICK, Mr. LABOUCHERE, and Sir
CHARLES WOOD, against the imposition of the income-
tax when proposed by Sir ROBERT PEEL, and culled upon
them to explain the reasons which had induced them to
change their opinions.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied that, in
1845, the income-tax had been renewed not in conjunc-
tion with, but as a substitute for import duties, and as the
basis of the great experiment of free trade. He there-
fore, following the example of Sir R. PEEL, proposed its
renewal for three years, in order that they might continue
and carry out free-trade principles. He denied that he in-
tended to make it a permanent tax, but he would
rather see it permanent than consent to a re-imposi-
tion of the duties on core.

Mr. PRINSEP supported the amendment.
Mr. F. PEEL supported the re-imposition of the in-
come. tax for the purpose of carrying out the principles
of free trade; the proposition of the Hon. Member for
Stamford was a retrograde_ step.
Mr. T. BARING, Mr. BOOKER, Mr. SPOONER, Mr.
REYNOLDS, Lord CLAUD HAMILTON, and Mr. SHARMAN
CRAWFORD supported the amendment; and
Mr. J. WILSON, Mr. SLANEY, and Sir H. Limas were
in favour of the original proposition.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the original proposition ... 278 -
For Mr. HERRIES'S amendment ... 230
Majority for Ministers ... —4B
The Designs Act Extension Bill was read a third time
and passed. _ _

The Apprentice Sea Service (Ireland) Bill went
through Committee, and the House resumed.
The House then went into Committee, when the AT-
TORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND moved a resolution to
give compensation to certain officers of the Exchequer
Chamber (Ireland).
After a short discussion, Mr. KEOGH moved that the
Chairman should report progress, when the House di-
vided, and the numbers were—

For the motion . . ••• •• ... 50
Against it... •• ••• ••• 85
...
Majority against the motion ... —35
Mr. REYNOLDS moved that the Chairman leave the
chair.

After some discussion the Committee divided, when
;hexed appeared—
For the motion ... 35

Agairazt it...
Majority

-42

• _
Mr. KEOGH protested against proceeding further at
that late hour, and moved that the Chairman report pro-
gress.
The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and the House
adjourned at a Quarter past One.

The discussion and division of last night on Mr.
neaaxas' amendment, cannot be received as fairly in-
dicating the state of public feeling on the important
question of the income-tax. A false issue has been
raised; the real point has been carefully avoided on
either side. The people of England, while approving
of a direct tax on accumulated and realised property,
strongly objected to the unfair and unequal assess-
ment of the impost which placed the precarious earn-
ings of industry on the same foundation as the
dividends, interest, or annual produce of real or per-
sonal property. They desired an equitable adjustment
of the impost, not its removal ; they ap-
proved of the principle of direct taxation, but
not of direct taxation in the existing form.
The of last night could only be regarded,
therefore,debate
te
as a
species of sham fight, got up for the
purpose of diverting attention from the real
subject. Mr.
HERRIEs made it to a cer-
taind
extent a question of protection or no
strongly as we object to
protection ; and, r
CHARLES
WOOD,
the resolution proposed by Ol
D Gentleman the
able than that of the Right Ho .
we must confess that we consider it as less objection-
,
Member for Stamford—the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer la posse of the agriculturists. It is true
that he spoke of
" the inequalities, fraud, and in-
justice" of the tax, but he did not, on that account,
endeavour to render it more equitable, to remove that
portion of it which was objectionable, and retain
that which rested on a broader foundation. He
did not propose to remit, or even to diminish,
the rates payable under Schedules D and E, but he
applied all the surplus to the reduction, not of the
charges on profits or earnings, but of all classes, with-

SUN,

out exception, of property as well as of income. We
cannot, however, suppose that as he has been so deci-
sively defeated on thatpoint, he will not ne prepared to
vote on future occasions in favour of its modification.
His own words will remain on record against him.
He declared that " if Sir BonExer PEEL had any idea
that the impost would have been made per-
manent, no doubt he would have felt it his
duty first to have it entirely remodelled and recast."
This vindication of the departed and lamented states-
man, by his former colleague, from one of the few
blots remaining on his memory, must be regarded as
highly satisfactory—first, as showing that if the
Minister who introduced the tax were now living, he
would, under the altered circumstances of the case,
be one of the first to insist upon a revision of the
assessment—and, secondly, that the support of the
great financier of the Protectionists may be looked
for when the question is fairly raised, as it must be
some time before the measure has passed through all
its stages in the House. Sir CHARLES Wool) may be
disposed to look upon the division of last night as
conclusive, but he will fins that many such divisions
must take place before the country is again subject
to the incubus from which it has just escaped, al-
though that escape may be but for a brief period.

As to Sir CHARLES WOOD himself, all we
can say for him is, that he still blindly and
obstinately adheres to the " conclusion" he bad for-
merly arrived at. We confess that we had not much
expectation of any improvement so far as he was
personally concerned, but we did hope that the good
sense of his colleagues would have induced them to
interfere so as to remove the chief cause of the loss of
popularity by the Government during the present
session. He would blunder on recklessly ; but some
of those who had the misfortune to be associated
with him might have interfered to arrest
his progress on " the road to ruin." They have not
done so, however, and on their own heads the conse-
quences must fall. Of him we may adopt the lan-
guage of Blackwood, who in the number for the
present month truly remarks—

" This i❑veterate Buiget-bungler has more than once
ere this led the Whigs to the very verge of destruction.
We might apply to him with strict propriety the lines
which Dryden has placed in the mouth ut the Prince of
Dulness—

Shadwell alone my perfect image bears,
Mature in dulness from his tender years;
Sbadwell alone of all my sons is he
Who stands confirmed in full stupidity.
The rest to some taint meaning make pretence,
But Shadwell never deviates into sense.
Some beams of wit on other souls may fall,
Strike through, and make a lucid interval;
But Shadwell's genuine night admits no ray,
His rising fogs prevail upon the day.'"
Yes, the " genuine night" of the Ministerial SIIAD•
WELL "admits no ray," but we might have looked
fur some dispersal of the fogs from his coadjutors, who

" To some faint meaning make pretence."
They have, however, disappointed the reasonable ex -
pectation, and we must therefore prepare ourselves
for the contest that is thus forced upon us—and the
once Liberal Ministry can only blame themselves for
the result, whatever it may be.

The lion. Gentleman the Member for Leominster
was the only person who placed the subject in the
true point of view. His was unquestionably the
speech of the evening, and he enunciated the soundest
principles put forward during the debate. He
clearly pointed out the objections to the amend-
ment and to the resolution, showing that he
was obliged to dissent from the former,
and that he could not approve of the
latter. He declared himself favourable "to
the principle of an income-tax, because it combined
that system of direct and indirect taxation, which
was the means of making the wealthier classes con-
tribute in a manner proportioned to their means to the
revenue required for defraying the public expenditure
of the country," but he showed a just appreciation of
the evils of the present system, and put forward the
strongest argument for considerable alterations
in Schedules D and E. " Many a man," said the
Hon. Gentleman, " might have a nominal amount
of income, the whole amount of which he was not
able to dispose of ; and no one would venture to deny
that there was a difference between a life income and
a permanent income, between an income which a
man enjoyed as long as he lived, and after his
death left to his descendants that came after him,
and an income which he held on a tenure so frail and
fleeting as his own life. And if there WB3 a distinc-
tion between a life income and a permanent income,
there was a still broader distinction between
either of those incomes and incomes which were
held on contingencies more precarious than life itself,
such contingencies as fortune, health, reputation,
and employment. A man in that position was
bound by every consideration of duty, by every
dictate of prudence and foresight, not
►nerely to lay by a portion of that income for the pur-
pose of assisting those who came after him to make a
start in life, but for the support of his own deelin•
ing years or decaying health." These are
opinions to whicti we have often given expres-
sion, and which must be responded to by the
people, which must find an echo in every unpreju-
diced mind—an echo which must disturb the " con-
clusion" at which Sir CHARLES WOOD has arrived
with so much self• satisfaction—considering that "as
the tax was so unjlust to all, it might happen not to be
so very unjust to any one."

A satisfactory sottlement of the Ministerial diffi-
culties appears to be altogether impracticable until
after a dissolution. With the House of Commons as
at present constituted, there really cannot by possi-
bility be any stable t adjustment of an Administration.
To adventure upon any such extraordinary step to-
wards the elucidation of the problem would, however,
be just now, to say the very least of it, in the highest
degree inconvenien t. Therefore it is that the matter
is for the time,be ing procrastinated. Therefore it
is that the Legish iture is disposed to accept the
return of the pre sent Administrators to office in
preference to wl Lat would be yet more un-
satisfactory—name hy, a reference of the ques-
tion at this par ticular moment to the opinion
of the electors tb roughout the United Kingdom.
Rather than jeop a rdise the whole of the gigantic
scheme of the Iu dustrial Exposition, the people
themselves are prep ared to submit to the perpetuation
in power of a Calaki iet so effete as that presided over
by Lord JOHN Rut ;SELL. Until the autumn, conse-
quently, it is antici! pated that the affairs of the nation
will be allowed to remain in their present lamentable
state of confusion-- when, the impediment prei iously
standing in the way of an appeal to the
country being rem oved, the constituencies will again
have the privil tege of selecting the most
eligible of their re spective candidates. For a while,
therefore, many of the most cherished plans of im-
provement must re main in abeyance, the multitude
exercising that:pati ence which is alone left to them as
a duty, coupled wi th the consolation of an implicit
confidence in the eh aracter of the next Parliament.

Under existing c ircumstances, of course, it can-
not be matter of surprise to find the various
parties and sect ions of parties among poli-
ticians flattering ti hemselves with the anti Ipation
of an overwhelming triumph over their antagonists.
The Finns chantei 1, already in expectation of those
hypothetical victoria es are only the rational result
of the illusions hod!' Igad in for so long a period by
the majority. Deno ,onstrations have been made so
noisily by the Pro I ,ectionists throughout the United
Kingdom, that it is but natural to find the organs of
the agriculturists ?already exulting in the looked-for
acquisition of the : reins of government. The Free-
traders, on the'co atrary, satisfied with the complete
success of their r agitation, have for a considerable
period indulged in , what to their leaders must have
appeared a deli tious as well as an unwonted
tranquillity. Ha ving witnessed the re-organi-
zation of the no ercantile system of the empire
upon the basis of their principles, they
which proved to ti kbee
Severally shrunk back
mdaolluybly
dinetlioghtftubleafterquthieetude
ar-
duous struggle wi th the advocates of monopoly.
The Anti-Corn-lm v Rhymer played no more on that
oaten pipe whose b. n eathings had thrilled to the hearts
of even the most ignorant and the most prejudiced.
The Catechist of P 5t otection put forth no longer those
posers of inquiries v vhich helped as much as anything
to lay bare the pia a dozes and the sophisms of the
sticklers for impos on the national provisions. The
orators of the Lea g ue, the eloquent Member for the
Tower Hamlets, ;b a impassioned representative of
Oldham, and, conspii :uous among all, the plain-spoken
genius of COBDEIC, and of his principal colleague in