The Sun.
London, England, 1857-01-28 00:00:00

G')NDON, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 23, la

Tt requires no extraordinary amouni, of pre-
science to pred.ct the intentions of the Chancellor
of the Exchequer with respect to the iniquitous
Income Tax. From the brief hints which the
Right Hon. Gentleman let fall to the deputation
representing the association which waited on him
on Friday last, it is manifest that he will, if per-
mitted, follow in the steps of Mr. GLADSTONE, and
maintain the quasi equal rate on all incomes, pre-
carious or permanent, fluctuating or certain,
without reference to their actual value, or the
sources from whence they may be derived. He
says that these obkictions "go to the very being
and nature of the tax itself—to its very essence—
and they would apply as much to sd. in the pound
(a significant rate, as we shall hereafter show), as
to 163., or to any other number of pence."
Adding, " I do not myself believe—And I have
stated so elsewhere in reference to the proposed
differential duty—that, as between Permanent
ind pr carious incomes, the difficulties which would
7)eaet any such plan have been sufficiently esti-
mated by the public." This is a sufficient indi-
cation of his bias, or rather, we should say, his
determination, unless he is satisfied that the
cation will no longer endure the monster grievance,
and that any attempt to sustain it will be speedily
followed by his own disgrace and downfall, and
the overthrow of the Cabinet of which he is a
member. It is true that he retains a locus pent-
tentim—a loophole for evasion. He announces that
he is prepared to listen to reason, is " perfectly
ready fully and carefully to consider any facts
and arguments which may be laid before him
bearing on that question, and then to take iato
consideration any detailed plan that may be
submitted for the purpose of carrying these views
into effect." Or, in other words, that he will do
nothing himself but criticise severely any sugges-
tions that may emanate from other quarters.

His trusty hanchman of Printing house square,
once so eloquent on .the subject of the gross ine-
quality and oppression of the existing apportion-
ment, follows up the hint.. In the leading article
of the Times of Monday we find the following
passage :—" However objectionable the Income
Tax may be, it is evident that the objections lie
against the tax itself, and not against any parti-
cular augmentation of it, and that they apply
just as much to an Income Tax which takes 7d.
out of the pound, as to the one that takes 16d.
* * The relief from the War Income Tax,
then, for one year sooner, would only be a relief
from the augmentation of the tax, Lot from the
tax ; it would only affect the productions of the
tax—it would not touch the character of the tax
itself. The machinery of tho Income Tax would
go on all the same whether it raised 7d. or 16d.
in the
pound ; it would be just as inquisitorial,
just as partial, just as trying to men's consciences,
just as provocative of evasion. It is not the
amount, but the nature of the tax, which con-
demns it !"

And this is the same Times that once so un-
sparingly denounced the gross and palpable injus-
tice, that issued such thundering philippics
against the unfair assessment ! Alas, "Quantum
mutatus ab illo Heetore." It is now as route as a
whipped hound. The possibility of modification
or revision does not apparently enter into its con-
templation. It quietly acquiesces, without resis-
tance, or even remonstrance, in the conclusion of
the Financial Minister respecting the difficultie3