The Sun.
London, England, 1857-02-23 00:00:00

LC NDON, MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23, lEt7.

The debate on the " Precious Budget" will be
resumed this evening, and probably again ad-
journed. It will be no easy task to reply t) the
brilliant and convincing orations of Messrs. Dis-
RAELI and GLADSTONE, which so utterly confounded
poor Sir G. C. Lzwis. Indeed the Ministerial
journali abandoned the attempt in pure despair !
The Times laboriously endeavours to prove that
the Tlouse should not look beyond the present
y car—declares that the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer "lira not to adjust revenue and expendi-
ture for ever and for aye ; he has not to guarantee
those reductions which, in the course of
the j.ext three years, the House of Commons
may perhaps have the opportunity of making
at its leisure ; he has not to lay down any
reverse any policy. lle has
grand principles, or
not done, or attempted any of these things ! "
We differ toto cceio on these points from the
Levi:,than. The whole !Amour of his financial
scheme distinctly points to the future, and so his
Henchman of Printing-House-Square understood
him, for in commenting upon his speech it said,
"In three years we have now one more pledge
that even the remaining 71 will come to an
end ! ~—.(Times, 14th Feb., 1857.) To achieve
this great desideratum it called on the people to
submit .t,) the additional 2d. in the pound for that
limited time, to break faith with the importers
and dealers in tea, and to saddle the people

with an addition of 4d. per pound duty

this year ; sd. per pound the following year, and
3d. per lb. in 1859-60. For this, and this alone,
it required the community to pay a portion of the

extra war duty on the " corn of the tropics ! "
Every effort was to be made by those whose re-

sources had been exhausted by the war pressure
—and all because we had an additional pledge
that in these years " the remaining "rd. will come
to an end." Surely, then, it is Sir G. C. LEWIS
himself that has conferred a prospective character
on his financial scheme, and the question before
the House is whether he has been raising delusive
hopes and misleading the people.

The facts and figures which he has himself re
lied on, however, show that this pleasing antici-
pation can never be realised under his auspices.
He takes credit during the present year for four

-
millions and a half which std.' remains unpaid o:

the war Income Tax, over and above the 7d. in
the pound which he intends to retain—that is to
say he estimates the receipts from the Income Tax
for the next year at 11,450,0001., while he only
looks for 7,000,0001. in future years. He also
pays off Exchequer Bonds to the amount of
2,000,0001. and 250,0001. for the Sinking Fund.
But in each successive year he will have to meet
Exchequer Bonds to a like amount, and will also
have to pay 1,500,0001. for the Sinking Fund. Here
then is an additional charge of 1,250,0001., making
with the Income Tax a deficiency of 5,750,0001.
There will also be a loss on tea and sugar
of more than 900,0001. in 1858-9, and double
that in 1859-60, so that there will be in the
former a loss of 6,650,0001., and in 1859-60, of
7,550,000/. This is from the showing of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer 'himself, and is quite
sufficient to prove the hopelessness of his plan
without adopting the calculation of Mr. DISRAELI,
which points to a deficiency of 10,000,0001. in
1859-60, at the very time that the 7,000,0001.
additional is to be relinquished ! Never was there
a greater mockery, a clearer delusion attempted
on the country ; and the country should
feel truly grateful to the eminent financiers who
have so unequivocally exposed the blundering
incompetence of the Ex-reviewer, who was pitch-
forked into the head of the financial department
without possessing the qualifications essential for
the efficient discharge of the arJuous and impor-
tant duties of the situation.
The Times also acts on the principle of the pet-
tifogging lawyers, whose instructions to counsel
are—" We have no defence ; abuse the plaintiff's
attorney." It accordingly makes a virulent attack
on its once-favoured protegee, Mr. GLADSTONE.
It pronounces his speech on Friday evening "as a
perfectly incomparable specimen of vituperation."
It says, "The conjuror can put an egg into his hat,
and bring out flocks of pigeons, geese, and turkeys ;
but that feat is nothing compared with Mr.
GLADSTONE'S speech on his right hon. friend's
budget." It also speaks of that speech as " a
series of dissolving views." Everything, in
fact, to mystify the subject, and throw dust in
the eyes of the people, and divert attention from
the real point at issue.
It strikes us, however, that it is Sir G. C. LEWIS
that has attempted to enact the part of the
wizard, but in so terribly bungling a manner that
his detection was inevitable. None but the wil-
fully blind could be deceived for a moment. He
tried to produce "pigeons and geese," but the
transformation could not be effected. The in-
tended dupes were too sharp for the would-
be "conjuror," who has consequently been
covered with ridicule, a largo portion
of which falls on his obsequious daqueurs,
his thick-and-thin supporters. What, pray, has
been Mr. GLADSTONE'S offence ? What has ho
done to merit the reproaches of the Times? Ho
showed that the Income Tax was "grievous, in•
quisitorial, and unequal," and that Parliament
only agreed to tolerate it for a limited time—for
special purposes. Why the Times has repeated
the same over and over again. He complained of
the gratuitous and uncalled-for observations which
ho thought proper to make on " the paper duty,"
the " wine duties," and on " the scandal of Eng-
land," the " stamp on fire insurances." What
was there worthy of censure in this ? Let the
Times, if it dare, adopt the views
of its patron on these subjects. It is not
that any prejudice against tergiversation
would affect it. Its views on that point aro too
well known, but it could not march through that
Coventry with the ex-reviewer. The next point
that Mr. GLADSTONE touched on was the absurdity
of the announcement that nearly twelve millions
of taxes (11,970,0001.) were remitted when the
war taxes on malt, sugar, tea, and coffee would
lapse on the 6th April, as, but for the " pettifog-
ging quibble," would lid. in the pound of the
Income tax, so that the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer was virtually increasing in place of di-
minishing taxation. He also showed an increase
of 6,000,0001. in the permanent expenditure of
the country, and proved that there would
be a large deficiency, of 8,600,0001.
in 1860, so that there was no chance
of the abolition of the Income Tax in that
year. He also eloquently vindicated the policy
that reduced or remitted indirect taxation, albeit
opposed to the views of the.defunet economist, the
sapient ARTHUR YouNG, whom Sir G. C. LEWIS
had disinterred as an authority t.) which the House
should at once and unhesitatingly succumb. This
was the " head and front of his offending ;"
this the grievous offence for which Tho Thun-
derer reserves the brightest bolts, the most tren-
chant weapons. We should, however, prefer a
sober matter-of-fact answer to the " facts and
figures" with which the statement is charged,
and which can either be laughed at nor railed
away.

Another morning contemporary, that takes
Ministers under its special protection, abandons
the vain attempt to sustain the defective Budget,
but tells us that " the mere financi d merits of
the question are of comparative unimportance."
It attempts to get up the bugbear of a French
conspiracy to oust Lord PALMERSTON. It really
requires no French intervention to procure such
a result if Lord PALMERSTON chooses to permit
the national exchequer to be exhausted by a
blundering financier ; if he was willing that the
Bank Charter Act should be renewed without modi-
fication or amelioration to please Sir G. C. LEWIS, he
must abide the consequences. We wish to sup-
port the PALMERSTON Administration, if per-
mitted to do so ; but the fiscal, financial, and
monetary policy promulgated will not permit us to
do so without a total disregard of the just claims
and interests of the commercial, manufacturing, and
industrial classes generally. We have pointed
nut what he should do to conciliate popular sup-
port- If he disregards the obvious necessity, he
has only himself to thank for the untoward con-
sequences that may ensue. We never shall har-
ness ourselves to the chariot wheel of any Minis-
ter—to support bad measures because they ema-
nate from Downing-street—or reject sound
and wholesome propositions because ventilated
by her MAJESTY'S Opposition. We call on
the independent and liberal members to discharge
their duty b their respective constituencies, and
to the community at large, without fear or favour,
prejudice ur affection. Let thew deal aiith the

financial scheme solely on its merits and demerits.
Thus will they obtain efficient measures, and in-
duce Ministers to respect the popular wishes,
when clearly and unequivocally expressed.

There is no mistAke as to the vigorous grasp
with which the City Solicitor, Mr. C. PEARSON,
handles the subject of prison discipline. More
so he lays hold of it as something to be disposed
of at once and effectually, and if he is not per-
fectly successful, it is his misfortune, and not

his fault. Ono whose character for humane
feeling was not so well established as his,

would be liable to misinterpretation after writing
as he has done. There is no room, however,
for doubt or misapprehension in his case.

Energetic and laborious himself, and in a position
to acquire an extensive and practical experience
of men and things he is devoutly impressed with
the capabilities of labour. Like the alchemist

who would transmute base metal to gold he sees
no reason why the primeval curse may not, under
given circumstances be converted into a blessing,

and he finds occasion to say so. Having wit
nessed the futility of the existing system o

prison discipline, the perplexity of our

.aw-makers and tho necessity for some-