The Sun.
London, England, 1856-12-09 00:00:00

erected) the Tine Art Collection and the Archeo-
logical Collection now encumbering the crowded
galleries of that great National Ark of the World's
Wonders—the British Museum llt is announced,
in fact, already—semi-officially—that the members
cf this Commission are to be as follows :—Firstly,
My Lord BROUGHTON, the highly-cultivated Whig
' Baron of '5l, with a taste in art and letters
altogether unimpeachable. And who, besides being
F.R.S., and G.C.8., and partner in the great
Brewing firm of WHITBREAD and Company,
and son-in-law of the late Marquess of
TWEEDDALB and friend of the Lord BYRON, and
annotator of " Childe Harold," and we don't
know what else, as a man of Wealth, and Family,
and Intellect, has been so much of a Party Poli-
tician all through his life, that if we wanted to

name the very type of a Whig—a Whig of the
Whiggist Whiggism—w should assuredly be
tempted to name him, the quondam Sir JOHN

CAM HOBHOUSE, ex-Secretary at War, ex-Secretary
for Ireland, ex-Chief Commissioner of Woods and
Forests, and ex-President of the Board of Control,
under successive Whig Governments ! Secondly,
as a member of the proposed Commission of the

Fine Arts in relation to the scheme of a new
National Gallery—the Dean of St. Paul's Cathe-
dral, the Rev. HENRY HART MILMAN, Poet,
Dramatist, Critic, Ecclesiastical Historian,
Editor of Gibbon, Reviewer in the Quarterly,
Author of Fazio, and altogether a very scholarly
and ingenious contributor to various departments
of Polite Literature. Thirdly on the list, there is
the name of RICEAND FORD, a remarkably able
art-critic, who is best known to the generality as
author of the. " Handbook to Spain," and one
who is, perhaps, as well " up" as any man living
(not excepting from the catalogue of competitors
the hon. member for Perthshire) in regard to
MURILLO and VALASQUEZ. Fourthly on the list
of these intended commissioners, we find mention
of one no less eminent than MICIMA.EL FARADAY,
the greatest Living Chemist and Electrician, one
of the most illustrious of our Inductive Philoso-
phers, a man of European Reputation, and one
who is recognised as among the nobles of Nature,
though born sixty years ago the son of a poor
blacksmith. Fifthly and sixthly, completing the
list of Commissioners—one Mr. GEORGE RICH-
MOND, and another, better known, Mr. CHARLES
COMEERELL, Royal Academician, not only one of
the members of the Academy, but ever since 1840
conspicuous among them as its Professor of
Architecture, an able Practical, and a yet abler
Theoretical, Architect, a mere tyro in the Gothic,
little better than a dabbler in the Mediaeval, but a
perfect master (as far a modern can be) in the
Classical order of architecture. Such are the six
commissioners. Altogether, with one exception,
capital names as names go—but How (it may be
asked) in this particular capacity as Fine Arts
Commissioners ? How, as the names of men who
will be expected by the nation to be above all
Court influences and Party predilections 2 Let
us Hope, at any rate, for the very best from them.
Let us look to have at their hands a decision as
thoroughly independent in its way as the most
memorable of all the divisions last session in the
House of Commons—a division in which a consi-
derable majority of the members, it will be recol-
lected, vindicated, boldly and strikingly vindi-
cated, the dignity of their position and
character as the popular representatives.
Clinging still, as we do, more and more tenaciously
to the conviction, that no bitter site, after all,
could anywhere be found in the Metropolis for
the new National Gallery than the present ma-
jestic site on the north side of Trafalgar-square,
looking down the broad sweep of Parliament-
street, between the Horse Guards and Whitehall,
to the grand old Abbey and the glorious new
Palace of the Legislature, in Westminster—Let us
Dope, above all things, that the proposed Com-
mission may not prove too literally its right to
the name, style, and title of a Royal Com-

mission !

The friends of fiscal and financial reform have
only to exhibit a zealous and energetic determi-
nation that the Income Tax should be repealed or
amended, to ensure a very decided amelioration
thereof during the approaching session. When
Sir CIAALES WOOD prcposed a considerable
increase in the impost, without any modification,
by which it should be rendered mere equitable
and less inquisitorial, he was met with a general
burst of indignation from every district throughout
th• length and breadth of the land, which speedily
compelled that unfortunate and incompetent
financier to abandon the experiment. At that
time we repeatedly pointed out that the objection
was not to the tax per se, but to the very oppres-
sive and unfair mode in which it was levied. Per-
haps there is no impost, which, if judiciously
applied, would be more popular, or better calcu-
lated to supply the wants of the Exchequer, with
a minimum amount of annoyance to the taxpayers.
But the determined manner in which successive
Governments have refused to recognise the dis-
tinction between income and property has exaspe-
rated the People and induced them to oppose the
entire charge, which, producing sixteen millions
to the Exchequer, cannot be surrendered by any
Financial Minister' without the substitution of in-
direct burdens that must greatly enhance the
price of articles which, if not of primary neces-
sity, have become indispensable to all classes.

It is but a matter of simple justice to the
DERBY Administration to state that Mr.
DISRAELI recognised the propriety and neces-
sity of some modification, and • that he pro-
posed to charge temporary and precarious
incomes arising from industry at a lower rate than
these derived from accumulated and realised pro-
perty. This, although not going far enough, was
a step in the right direction—the introduction of
the sharp end of the wedge, which would speedily
be followed by far more extensive alterations.
The overthrow of that Government, in consequence
of the nnwi3e and impolitic attempt to increase
the House-duty, however, prevented the sense of
the Representative branch of the Legislature from
being taken on the interesting and important
question. Had it been otherwise, there is no
oubt that it would have been carried by an
overwhelming majority, and that no Minister
could afterwards attempt to restore the nominal
equality between all kinds of income. When Lord
ABERDEEN
formed his Cabinet, direct intimations
were publicly
and gratuitously given by the
_Premier and the Leader of the Commons that a
revision of the impost should take place, and the
People contented with the satisfactory assurances
refrained from the agitation that had pre-
viously been organised throughout the entire
country, It was Mr. GLADSTONIC alone who
stood out against his colleagues. His was the
deception, his the fraud. Re well knew that he
could not attempt to stem the torrent by a direct
'ti
opposi
er'. Had he asked for a simple renewal

of the impost for three years longer, as had been
customary with his predecessors, he would have
reoeived'a direct refusal, and had he presed the
resolution would have been ignominiously ex.
gelled from office. But by the specious pretext
that the taz: should be gradually reduced until
its total :abolition in 1860, he bamboozled the