The Sun.
London, England, 1851-04-05 00:00:00

question of the income-tax will be brought substantially
1-wore the House of Cornmomi on Muuday night, and we
have rtsson to believe that the result will achieve the
of the nation—the dissolution of the Whig-Radi-
cal Ministry, and the advent to power of a Governalent
able to serrimpiLli the demands of the British empire.
ADVERTISER,—Tire new edition of the Whig
Budget waq published last night. We are much mis-
tllieu if it be not received by the country rvith nearly
the same mingled emotions of disappointment and deri-
sion, as the first edition ushered into the world some

wceiss ago. We see in it the satno little-mindness—the
same financial incapacity—the same genius for bungling
fiscal legislation, as that which characterised the Budget
which the Right Hon. Gentleman brought before the
public amid the jeers and laughter of the louse and the
public, more than a month ago. The window-tax is at
last to be givai up in name, but is to be retained, in a
somewhat modified form, we admit, under the name of a
tax on houses. " What's in a name?" What matters
it to the payers of the impost, whether the collect-or
calls for the money under the designation of a win-
dow, or of a house-tax? It will be just as incon-
venient and as oppsessive to pay the amount under
_

the latter, as under the form- er designation. Why
did not the Chancellor of the Exchequer endea-
vour to retrieve, at least partially, his character as a
financier, by sweeping away the obnoxious impost, root
and branch—leaving not even a trace of it behind? But
vve reproach ourselves for asking such a question. Sir
Charles is a man of no mind. He has not the ca-
pacity to do anything which would command the com-
mendation of the country. Those provisions in the Whig
Budget which relate to the reduction of the timber and
coffee duties are to be retained, as at first proposed.
rile only parts of his former scheme which the Right
Lion. Gentleman abandons entirely aro these which re-
lated to the reduction of the taxes on seeds and lunatic
atylums. These he now proposes to retain. The an-
nounuincnt was received with laughter and jeers.
And to it well might. It is really lamentable to
see a man fining the
.ornee of Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, with matters of national
thus gravely
finance. " But worse remains behind." The income-
taxits enormities. The
Plightighis to
Plight
Hon.obe n. pde er puteittuchataead, with call,sofromseeing
anything in-
quisitorial, oppressive, or unjust in this impost, holds it
up us a perfect model in its way. Ile proposes no modi
deaden, no alteration, .any of its provisions. It is
true, he does not crown the nonchalance with which he
speaks of this impost as the very perfection of taxes, by
saying in so many words that he means to perpetuate it
for an inciefinite period; but there can be no question
whatever that such is his intention. It LOW remains
for the country to have its say on the subject. The
financial oracle of Downing-street has spoken.
.
voico has been heard in Parliament, and reach the
ears of the entire nation before forty-eight hours have
elapsed. It is for the nation now to speak. It is right
(hat its voice should be also heart, and heard forthwith.
Are the myriads of persons who are the victims of this
iaiqutous tax, to submit tamely to its re-imposition? It
will be their own Inuit if they do. They have only to
raise their voices against the monstrous meditated in-
justice, and Loth the Budget and its bungling author
will be utterly swept away—never more to re-appear on
the financial stage.

CHRONICLE.—The Chancellor cf the Exchequer
had not an easy task last night, and it is not wonderful
if he accomplished it with but moderate success. The
great change in the Budget consists in the substitution
of a house-tax for the modified window-tax which wee
originally proposed. The alterations of the coffee and
timeer duties are to be the same which were announced
two months ago; but the abolition of the duty on seeds,
eed the transference of certain charges for lunatic
asylums from the ceunty rate to the Consolidated Fund,
are struck out of the amended Budget. We regret the
levity with which Sir Charles Wood announced his reasons
for these comparatively unimportant changes. He had
met with no gratitude, he said, for his original proposals
on there two points, end therefore he assumed that those
concerned attached no value to the relief which was
offered thorn. Yet the plan was originally either just or
unitise The Chancellor of the Exchequer surely did
not look for extravagant gratitude for a boon of
130,000/. a yeer, divided among the landed
interest of the country; and whatever reasons existed
for the offer two months ago continue to the
present moment with undiminished force. But in
the rceanduae Lord Stanley has become a pro-
fessed candidate for office, and there is no longer any use
in attempting to buy the votes of the Country Party.
Mr. 'Terries' rt?solutions on Monday would not be with-
drown for the sake of bringing in seeds duty free. These
ore not the reasons which would influence a wise and
grave finale:lel Minister. Sir Robert Peel never sought
to buy utf opposition by the repeal of some petty impost
on a special interest. Ile knew that such en attempt
could not succeed—and he would not have done it if he
could. By deelaiming against protective duties and the
sponge, the Chancellor of the Exchequer thought that
he had met all the objections which were so universally
raised against his first tentative Budget. And yet all
the terioue objections with which it was mat had equally
little to do with Protection and with repudiation. He
came nearer the truth when he complained that his op-
ponents had raid that his scheme contained no principle
whatever. having often veatured to make some remark
of the kind, we confess that we are not satisfied with.
the answer. My principle, says Sir Charles Wood, is to
look principally to the interests of the labouring masses;
and, provided we cheapen the primary necessaries of life,
we may he indifferent to the reciamations of property. But
we never said that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was
incapable of enunciating a principle; we only complained
that his notorious Budget involved no such element. The
labouring classes can only be relieved by the removal or
reduction of that indirect taxation of which they pay so
disproportionate a share. When we turn from Sir
Charles Wood's speech to his Budget, we find that just
400,0001. is the sum devoted to the carrying out of this
vital principle. With a surplus of 1,900,0001., some-
what more than a fifth part is applied to the purpose
which five-sixths of the Minister's speech is meant to
recommend, if it means anything. We cannot hesitate
to approve the refusal of the Minister to squander the
whole amount of the surplus on the removal of direct
taxes on property. He has gone as fur as was justi-
fiable, and perhaps even farther, in the amount to which
he has reduced the tax on dwellings. The relief, as
he says, is not equal; nor would it be easy, by any just
change, to mitigate an unequal tax in an equal ratio.
The new house-tax will, in a few cases, increase the
burden—but only where it ought to be in-
creased. Even if Belgrave-square should have to
pay 10/ more than at present, few will he the un-
fashionable mourners for the new afflictions of Bel-
gravia. Tines is, however, one feature in the
house-tax which makes it unjust, and which
we warn Sir Charles Wood will eventually render
it untenable. The exemption of houses below 201.
a year is no boon whatever to the labouring classes.
Whatever is taken off the direct charge on a house, is
inevitably added to the rent. A house of 20/. a year.
with 15s. of house-fax, will let, in the event of being
exempt rd from the duty, for exactly 20/. 15s. When the
Chancellor of the Exchequer boasts that three millions
of houses will pay no duty whatever,
the proposal wnich he makes for continuing a
oc
of direct taxation. Why should fifteen-se
he utterly condemnstan
j y vbetnutarbitro
Five" hundred
house ues et the theam :awe; the lawise Property of the
d ea"sysear of email house
i'v'raniiluo,.ttele than large
ate rental in
or oven exemption? Small houseskairaegldeosT
Oar,!; hut the owners. are nott n
pro-
bably, poorer.
b productive theaetxi;
and th
Property
Belgravia.
ought
abundantlymight furnish trileen‘mjeerniu.t:/°)frelieving the springy of elastic
I there are now 4:00,000 houses
ear, r edciraaninaissm Sirh a Charleslarge
year teem the adoption of his proposi-
swohuirechespyf ta'nereantitor.ci,nuirn2re.
ra
Will
20/. is the minimum of taxable rent,
proposi-
tion. good
h‘t h%rahitet tihne2
go/. 193. will become a common value of houses. In-
justice will necessarily loud to contrivauces to imitate it
and to evade the burdens which it imposes. The Mi-
nister enthely misconstrues Mr. Mill. An impartial
house-tex is an impost on income—in its exceptional
form it is a burden on a certain hind of house-property.
This single error will be found hereafter to vitiate the
whole scheme of the new house-tax, which otherwise
would obtain approbation, and which, as compared with
the window-tax, is even now entitled to support. As
against Lord Stanley's schemes, the Ministerial policy
mutt, with all its faults, be defended. It is bad enough
to do nothing in support of sound principles; but ,it is
worse to deny and renounce them. The issue to beten-.
ten-
dered to the House of Commons on Monday is thata of
justice or injustice—progress or decay
property or of industry. We cannot decay—taxation
galet the
majority will agree with Lord Robert Grosvenor in the
poor to reject the burdens upon the rich,o h
poor man pays twenty times the, per-tentage,
mteis.
his tobacco, end his beer.
DAILY NEWS.— rhe Chancelalhordwoirll
has at least simplified his Budget,
lion and a quarter which he gives up Exchequervery
will still
quarter, s
sensible pecuniary relief in any
ino3E clamorous of com-
silence in some measure the
of old-fashioned
plainants. Whether the oselrei
edifices in towns which
coun-
try houses, or of those
folramg
that class. of the comma-
happen to contain shops'
nity which most requirede
doubt •alleviation in the way of taxes,
one may be inclined CO but Sir Charles Wood by
his first Budget had Bung the country into such a slough
of embarrassment and despond,
that any mode of extri-
cation was likely to be welcomed and accepted. If the
Chancellor's gadget was somewhat better digested than
his previous one, so was his speech. It had warmth in
it; and the wan, being an amiable person, appeared to
advantage, making an effort to vindicate his plans and
repaired shattered reputation. In this he partially
c with the House, which received his appal
with indulgence and even with favour. And yet that
speech does not impress us with any higher idea of Big
Charles Wood's capacity as a financier. His theories were
often erroneous, his eloquence, or what he intended to
ho such, was clap-trap, and his admissions highly imprue
dent. And we strongly counsel the Whigs to take ad•
vantage of Sir Charles Wood's little gleam of success, to
remove him to some less responsible office,beattner Chan-
they can, amongst them, or beyond them, a
prefaced the
cellor of the Exchequer. Sir Charles pr
finatrcial items of his new Budget
by
expatiating on the
prosperity of the country, and upon the
his demands. andincreased
s. He
et the tax-payers to
aanswere;r hand in the character
depicted the income-tax as a tiie
of a gentleman of 5,000/. a year
i he declared that 150/
it.
income-tax was a small eon
t bution. We
-tax of a struggling admit
man
But the 301. incomeend
.14ea
yn ition e
of business, or earner of , 07
sno treat, i add to som y
ifle. We deny utterl
60/. or 70/. of other
taxes,
ms'
that the country, token man by men, is better able to
pay there taxes than
ke
it vies ten years ego. We denythat capital produces the Earn° retarus, that person
exertions command the same income, that speculation irt-
commerce or
investments in manufactures produce thee-
same or enYt}nee-like the same results. Sir Charles Woad
sage, if t
big bl the case, then
free trade is a failure.
A foolifh 94°14310U this to make to afoe. Lle shouldoga,