The Sun.
London, England, 1860-05-18 00:00:00

PAPER DUTY.

In all discussions on the paper duty no one has
yet suggested how the amount that will be sacri-
ficed by its abolition is to be made up. But it is on-
this that the whole matter should turn. Grant
everything that may be said against it, the neces-
sity remains for some new tax to take place ; and
when that is mentioned we shall be able to weigh
if the new evil will be lighter than the old. It is
vain to look only at one-half of the argument,
When Mr. Gladstone brought in his budget he
showed art estimated surplus of £464,000; but it is
known that the greater part of this, if not the
whole, has since been lost in remissions and modi- '
fications which have been forced upon him. That,
however, constitutes a very inferior item of the
difficulty to be considered. The £464,000 was not .
a surplus of legitimate revenue. By new arrange-
ments with regard to the periods of payment of the
malt and hop duties Mr. Gladstone obtained,a sum
of £1,400,000, which will never again figure in any
annual return. Then there was the wonderful re-
ceipt of £500,000 from Spain. At the same time he
declared himself unable to provide for the £1,000,000
of Exchequer bonds falling due in November. In-
stead of a surplus, therefore, he showed, as far as
fair yearly income is concerned, a deficiency of
considerably more s than £2,000,000. Since that
period the country have been informed that
£7,000,000 will be required during the next
three years for dockyard fortifications ; the
probable expenditure for the China war has
assumed greatly increased proportions ; the san-
guine anticipation of elasticity to be imparted tothe
revenue by the French treaty has subsided ; there
are signs in the money-market that the interest on
Exchequer Bills may have to bo raised ; and the
political affairs of the Continent have become more
threatening in their bearings on England than at
any period in modern memory. Under these cir-
cumstances, to fancy that we can let the paper duty
go without providing for the gap it will create
would-be to display a degree of recklessness perhaps
unparalleled in English finance. Next February,
even supposing this source of revenue to be allowed
to remain undisturbed, the personage who may hold
the unhappy position of Chancellor of the Exche-
quer will have to face a positive deficiency of
£12,400,000. The income-tax expires in April ;
for Mr. Gladstone announced that for 1861 he
" wished to reserve to Parliament the fullest arid

freest aisCretion ;" while at the same time he pre-

pared the way for a renewed agitation againsethe
present scale of the tea and sugar duties, by holding
out a prospect that they would be lowered at " no
distant date. There'will also be the question as to
the money required for fortifications, and the extra
bills from the East will then be dropping in. It is
to be hoped Parliament will not only appreciate the
privilege reserved to them of dealing with this po-
sition untrammelled by a single act of foresight on
the part of the present Chancellor, but that they
will be-able to see their way through it. The in-
quiry for the moment is simply whether their re-
sponsibilities are to be increased by an extra mil-
lion or two. In 1858, when our fiscal prospects
were comparatively free from complications, Mr.
Milner Gibson deemed it indiscreet to venture be-
yond a theoretical condemnation of the tax. To
posterity it will seem almost incredible that the
sacrifice which was then admitted to be imprac-
ticable should have been made amid the anxieties
of 1860, and in the face of the obvious, fears of both
Houses of Parliament. That the Commons would
have thrown odt the measure but for their desire
to avoid causing embarrassment to Lord- Palmer.
ston, in whom there is undiminished confidence,
had been plainly evinced. That the Lords dread
nothing more than that their, party should
tit this moment be made responsible for
a Ministerial crisis is also evident. The much-
needed million of revenue coveted on all sides must
therefore apparently be sacrificed, like the Spanish
King, who was roasted to death, because it would
have outraged Court etiquette to remove him, ex-
cept by the hands of an absent official, The aqmrt