The Sun.
London, England, 1859-06-27 00:00:00

THE INIQUITOUS INCOME-TAX.

There seems to be very little doubt that Mr.
Gladstone, to whose lot it -fell to provide for the
gradual extinguishing of the Income-tax under
Lord Aberdeen's Administratioin, will have the task
of renewing it, of course losing by the latter pro-
cedure whatever honour and
.glory he might have
hoped to gain by the former. Not in this session,
perhaps, the small remnant of which will be de-
voted only to indispensable matters, but in that
which, in all probability, will meet before the ordi-
nary time, we shall know our fate in this regard.
We, therefore, warn our readers now in time to be
on the look-out. If the Income-tax is to be re-im-
posed upon the old principle, we warn them, in the
first place, that the probabilities are a hundred to
one in favour of its being increased to an amount
hitherto unknown, and in the second, that no
amount of odium hich the tax may bring along
with it, will be sufficient to enable the people to
shake it off.
In whatever form this impost is re-imposed, in
that form it will remain. The reduction of the war
ninepence, the diminution in the tax according to
the expiring scale on which Mr. Glodstone had
placed it, and, above all, the fact that the process
of expiry was to terminate next year—all these
considerations have succeeded in withdrawing
attention from this scandalous impost, and making
its grievance less felt. People, knowing that it
would not last much longer, have put up with the
injustice, paid their money, and said nothing about
it. ..This is quite the English fashion, and it is a
wise and sensible fashion, issuing into good practi-
cal results. But now, when a new Income-tax is
talked of ; now, when the feelers are' put out
through what may be considered the Government
organ ; now, when we are just admitted to a side
view of what is in store for us—it behoves us to
be upon our guard, in order that it may really be
a new tax, and not simply a re-imposition of the
old one.

There never was a tax more dishonest, more op-
pressive, more iniquitous than the Income-tax. To
speak of it in plain language, it is a mixture of
robbery and despotism of the most flagrant charac-
ter. It proceeds upon the assumption that income is
income, and that the source from which it is de-
rived ought not to affect its taxability. It is true
that income is income, but it is not true
that all incomes are under equal obligations to the
State. We have gone over this ground so often,
and it has been so thoroughly canvassed wherever
the Income-tax has been the subject of conversa-
tion, that we need not enter into it here at any
length. It is confessed that the assessment is un-
equal ; but it is pretended that it cannot be
equalised. We admit at once, that to make it so
fair to everybody that nobody shall be a stiver more
or less taxed than the nature of his income strictly
demands, might be difficult—no doubt, indeed, it
would be so. But between such a nice and scrupu-
lous weighing of taxability in the different classes
of incomes and the law which says that all shall
pay the same tax, there is a wide difference. It is
perfectly possible to reduce the monster injustice of
the tax, though it might be very difficult to equalise
it so that it'should never press a cent in the pound
more than it ought to do. It is to this point that
our readers must address their attention. Income
produced by labour and income arising out of
realised property must be taxed differently. This
is a sine qua non to the re-imposition of this impost.
It is not for a moment to be questioned that
the new Chancellor of the Exchequer will require
Hew sources of income; and though our position
with reference to the great events which are pass-
ing in Italy is one of neutrality, it is, as far as
armament goes, one of war. We aro increasing our
forces, multiplying defences, adding to our navy in
ships and men, and encouraging volunteer corps;
and much as we have done on these several scores,
we must do yet more ere we can say that the coml•
try is in a satisfactory position for its defence. No
doubt it will be possible, as long as we are not
touched, to maintain our neutrality ; and we doubt
if there is any continental interest which could
induce England to draw the sword, unless her own
interests were manifestly concerned. But as long
as a French army is operating off its own soil, it
will be impossible for us to dream of returning to
the attitude of unconcern. We may not be at-
tacked. The next few days may materially alter
the aspect of the war in Italy. The Austrians may
gain signal advantages over the Allies, or the
latter, who thus far have had the best of it, may
achieve such successes as will make the Austrian
case a desperate one. Either of these events would
expedite matters, and bring us nearer to the end.
But if the latter should be the case, and if Austria
should be so crippled as to be unable again to make
head against France, Louis Napoleon and his victo-
rious army, backed by a Russian alliance, might do
what he pleased in Europe, and might even make
the rash experiment—to which he believes that his
destiny will one day lead him—of attempting the
invasion of these shores.
With such prospects or probabilities before us,
with what show of discretion can we think of dis-
arming or of pausing in those preparations which,
with the unanimous approval of the country, the
late Government were makiig, and which the pre-
sent Government is determined to persevere in.
No, we must go on. We can as little stand still
as go back; for we are yet far from that condition
in which we should wish to appear either in the
cou.icils of Europe, if the differences of France
and Austria should fall into the hands of diplo-
macy, or on our own shores repelling the force of
an invader. We may rest assured that we shall
have to bear the brunt of increased expenditure,
wisely incurred. Of course means must be found
of defraying that expenditure ; and though we are
not at war, yet the new Chancellor of the Exche-
quer will be able to claim the re-imposition of the
Income-tax in some sort on the score of war.
Though we are not arming to fight, we are arming
to be ready to fight if war is forced upon us. The
argument, then, that the Income-tax is a war-tax,
and ought not to be imposed in times of peace, will
lose a portion of its force, in addition to all that it
has already lost during a 19 years' existence, during
15 of which we were in a state of profound peace.
The argument of inequality is stronger, inasmuch
as it is more widely appreciated, and exercises a
greater influence on public opinion than ever. Upon
this point, therefore, let us make our stand, and let
it be promptly declared, whenever the subject is,
officially mooted, that the industrial wad, Mercantile