The Sun.
London, England, 1869-05-20 00:00:00

LONDON, 211U1?SDAY, MAY 20,1 1869.

It must have been an enviable moment in the life
of Lord SHAFTESBURY, well earned by years of un-
wearying labour and self-devotion, when on Saturday
last he inaugurated the Bradford Memorial to his
fellow-labourer, RICHARD OASTLER, and received the
hearty and heart-felt acknowledgments of grateful
thousands of that factory population with whom his
own name NI ill be for ever associated. It is not
given to every labourer in a good cause to wit-
ness the triumphant issue of his ambition. That a
c lase, being good, must ultimately prosper
is a matter of faith which upholds the supporters of
many an apparently forlorn hope ; but the cause may
prosper when its advocates have passed away. Hap-
pily, it has not been so in this instance ; and we are
confident that one unanimous sentiment of congratu-
latory sympathy will be felt by all who read the ac-
count of the proceedings at Bradford on Saturday,
the 15th of May, 1869, commemorative of the
triumph of that Tea Hours' Bill, which
some five and twenty years before had been
peremptorily rejected by a large majority of the
House, obedient to the autocratic dictates of the
Minister. That defeat in no wise abated the confi-
dence of the Operatives' Friends, and a few years
afterwards the short-time measure became law. It
has now been in operation for more than 20 years,
and experience has more than justified the expectations
of its supporters, as the improved physical condition
of the factory operatives can testify. Representatives
from all the factory districts of Yorkshire and Lan-
cashire crowded the streets of Bradford on Saturday.
A procession of 30,000 persons marched to Peel
Park, where the statue of RICHARD OASTLER was
uncovered by Lord SHAFTESBUR' amid earnest and
heart-felt acclamations. In his speech at the Public
Meeting new Iu ale evening, t 1.4 Ou. ova 6G-it! ""U,
the noble lord paid a.fitting tribute to the memory of
RICHARD OASTLER :—" They could remember that
man, and his rough, his masterly, and his racy elo-
quence, and knew how he brought it to bear upon the
woes, the wants, and the miseries of the human race,
and with what self-denial, with what total disregard
of his own interest, and animate& cnly by principles
of humanity, and thinking he was performing the
work assigned to him by his LORD and MASTER, he man-
fully achieved the work." Lord SHAFTESBURY alsotook
occasion to pass in review " the names of the excel-
lent and distinguished men who bore the brunt and
heat of the day, who were the first to commence tha

great operation, and without whom, he did not hesi-
tate to say, it wou'd have been impossible for him
not only to achieve what had been achieved, but

even to sustain the conflict against the mighty mass
of opposition that was raised against them." On
concluding the very nb!e address, in which he
exhorted his hearers to be true and worthy sup'

porters of the cause which they bad gained'
the noble lord, amid cries of " GOD bless you" and
" Long may you live," said that " that might be, and
probably was, the last time he should ever be able to
address them from a platform such as that. Time
was creeping on, and years were accumulating on his

head, and if his life were spared his powers migh
have fallen into decay. His ambition was very simple

he had already in his ancestral mansion a magnified]

bu.st, the gift from the operatives of the counties o

Lancaster and York to his wife, as a memorial o,

their esteem and approbation.

This was his desire

he prayed, and be should labour, that he might be

able by GOD'S blessing to retain so long as he lived
the affection and gratitude which they bad shown
him. He trusted that he should be able to retain

that, and that his name might be associated not only
in history with the gratitude of the operatics for the

small work he had been able to achieve, but also that

it might be associated with the honour and happiness

of the industrial classes of the British empire"— a

prayer and a desire that must inevitably be realised.
For ourselves, as having at the time been foremost

among the few to sympathise with and support Lord

AULEY in his clays of anxiety and exertion, we can
.-cc.any and the more heartily unite
with the rejoicing multitude to congratnlata Load
SHAFTESBURY in this his hour of triumph.

THERE are signs that before long the question of
the taxation of charitable funds will become pro-
minent. It is six years since Mr. GLADSTONE pro-
posed, as a part of his financial scheme for the year,
to extend the income tax to those funds. One of the
ablest speeches which be ever made was spoken in
defence of that proposal. But so great was the
pressure brought to bear upon him, so influential as
well as numerous was the deputation which waited
upon him at the Treasury, that he abandoned the
proposal with reluctance. Mr. Lown has said
that he would be willing to tax the charities
if the House would give him the necessary power.
There is reason to think that if he were to ask for
the power he would no longer find the same reluc-
tance to grant it which Mr. GLADSTONE experienced.
This alteration in the tone of public sentiment is due
in no small measure to the exposures which have
been made of the mode in which charitable funds are
administered. There is no doubt that a large num-
ber of them are shamefully abused, and diverted from
their original purpose. But this is not the sole,
nor the chief, accusation against them. Far more
important is the objection that the funds, even
when rightly applied, are most mischievous. An
instance has been lately mentioned in which £3O a
year was spent in education, and £BOO a year was
given away in doles, the year 4 distribution being
accompanied by the debauchery and demoralisation
of the greater part of the village. It is clear that in
such a case the people would be benefited by
the absolute suppression of the dole, or its appro-
priation to the relief of the national debt. Certainly
there was no good claim for immunity from taxation.
In fact it was a downright injustice that the indus-
trious, hard working man who got no portion of this
dole should be taxed, while those who spent it in
rioting and wantonness should go untaxed. Un-
happily such cases are not exceptional. Mr. GLADSTONE
mentioned many nearly as bad. Of course there
are some charities well administered and doing a vast
amount of good, such as the hospitals and infirmaries
in all parts of the country. Yet, even taking these
into consideration, we can see no good reason why
charities should not be taxed.

When a man bequeaths a legacy to a charitable
institution he is withdrawing from the total of tax-
able property. lie hands over to the poor—to that
portion of the community which already, pays no
income tax—say, £20,000, and thereby imposes upon
the hard-working clerk, who has a salary of £l5O,
the duty of paying so much more income tax.
Doubtless the additional burden is not felt
directly, and being borne by so large a number
of persons is not felt sensibly. But it is not
the less real, and _not the less does the multiplication
of such bequests involve a diminution of the tax-
paying fund, and a heavier charge upon the residue.
Thus the persons who benefit by the charity not only
enjoy the amount actually given to them, but im-
pose a fine upon the rest of the community. If the
fund from which they receive were liable to taxation
they would still benefit, but not at the cost of any
one save the donor. In fact, this is so
obvious that such funds are already taxed
to a certain amount. The bequests to charitable
institutions are liable to legacy duty ; it is only the
yearly income arising
,out of those bequests which
are not liable.teauconle-tax. The principle of taxa-
,
ton is already admitted ; the sole question at , issue