The Sun.
London, England, 1845-02-12 00:00:00

of ell beseechers. The flattering incense of deputations, and
addresses, and memorials," and petitions, and pamphlets,
ascends before him ; and if the omens are doubtful, still omens
there are, and the worshippers are not absolutely discouraged
Mtn a further prosecution of their appeals. But it is scarcely
to be supposed that a Minister who has taken such singular
pains to collect his facte beforehand, should not have really
made his election by this time. Lord Monteagle resigns him-
self with a sigh to a further infliction of the income-tax, and,
we presume, speaks for the rest. of bis party. •
' • " Durum, sed levius.fit
" Quicquid corrigere eat nefes."
There is no help for it, and there.is an end of the question at
present. We quite agree with his Lordship that it would be
satisfactory to see a beginning of the end. But that begin-
ning is not yet in view, and is put 'still further out of sight
'by almost every speaker who ventures upon this difficult
ground, including Lord Monteagle himself. He is anxious—
so are we, indeed, and so is everybody—on the strength of
the temporary surplus, to reduce some of the taxes which
especially hamper manufactures and commerce, and so affect
the general revenue. On a survey of .the report on the
tariff, which he justly describes as one of the most important
and valuable papers illustrative of our commerce and customs
which has ever been drawn up or prepared for Parliament,
he complains that the reductions lately the subject of so
much exaggeration by friend and by foe, were chiefly
on the most insignificant items, on mere nominal heads
of duty. Out of 22;730,886/. raised upon 813 articles,
there are 585, or about three-fourths of the whole,
which produce only 42,0001. From these facts he appears
to draw, a double inference—first, that it would be a very
pretty piece of simplification to strike off three-fourths of the
list at so slight an expense; secondly, that seeing we profess
to be reducing duties, we should do so in earnest with the
weightier items.iiiethe revenue. There has, he says dispa-
ragingly, been little or no reduction upon raw materials,
upon articles partly manufactured, and upon manufactured
articles; while, on the other hand, the increased consump-
tion and increased revenue have taken place in articles of
food, comfort, and luxury. Whence he would have us infer
that the new tariff has had no great share in the improve-
ment of trade, and stability, for it is stability rather than
increase, of the regular revenue. With some qualifications
this statement cannot be denied. It is wonderful to
what narrow dimensions the most formidable bug-
bears of the new tariff shrink in the document before
us. But will Lord Monteagle, and the whole chorus
of supplicants, have mercy on that poor temporary sur-
plus, that still poorer permanent deficiency? Can we fairly
hope that the bolder reductions he urges will so improve the
general revenue as to keep things even as they are now ?
We have already dealt with timber and with wool boldly
'enough...perhaps boldly enough with the coffee. We have
attained and passed the maximum of revenue on corn, if the
corn-laws are to remain unaltered. There is' no hope from
these quarters. Abolish the duty on cotton wool, his Lord-
ship intimates. With all our heart. lint there t; oes 700,000/.
But then comes the duty on tea,for reducing which there isas
much cry, and almost as much reason. Lord Monteagle hints at
its depreciation, exclusive of duty, from 2s. 6d. to Is. 6d., as
if that sheuld be the rule far the duty. This would involve
a sacrifice of nearly two millions etsotie fell swoop in the
rather doubtful and distant hope of an equivalent improve-
ment to trade. Then he is very energetic on behalf of slave-
grown sugar. But while Lord Monteagle has his hobbies,
others have theirs. The population of London show their
hands and their garments, and ask her Majesty to fulfil her
sanitary intentions by taking the duty off soap. The window-
tax has numerous and inveterate enemies,_ among whom
we beg to number our humble selves ; but, alas ! on it
depends upwards of a million. Take off all these taxes, put
all these items together, and it is evident that, instead of
dispensing with the income-tax' we shall soon have to double
it. Lord Monteagle wishes to have a hand in the pie—to
give advice sufficiently pertinent to be adopted, and .auffi-
cientiv original to be called his own. He is not so unrea-
sonable as to think he can do this without sharing the usual
risks of legislation. A simple course is before him.- He has
alluded to the different lights in which we should naturally
view the income-tax in the various cases of its permanency
and itetemporary &erecter ; let, him propose such modifica-
tions in it as will make it just and tolerable as "part of the
permanent ways and means of the country." . This will take
the sting out of it. The professional man, and the trades-
man, whose income and property mar cease to-morrow, and
be buried in their graves, who must give all their time, their
health and strength, to their income; who must, in one way
or another, insure their lives at the loss of present means of
expenditure, will only more and more resent the gross ine-
quality of a tax which exacts the same from them as from
the landowner, or fundholder and shareholder, whose income
is indeed property, and who have their time, their health and
strength, at their entire disposal.
POST.—The report of the cattle market held yesterday
gives a pretty clear indication of what the tariff is likely to
do for the agricultural interests this year. It appears that a
large importation has taken place, 165 beasts and 205 sheep,
the quality of which is highly lauded. We remember, at the
time the tariff was under discussion, that it was urged there
could be no animals fit for our market brought from foreign
countries ; but it is now evident that foreigners are learning
how to feed their cattle, and. it is more than likely that, ere
the coming season is over, the statements which we made in
relation to the working of this measure will be more than
realised. If the agricultural interests have suffered from the
operation of the tariff in former years (and who will say that
they have not ?) how much mere likely are they to be in-
jured in the present season, when foreign cattle feeders have
acquired the knowledge that will enable them to compete
with us in point of the quality of their stock ? The subject
is a painful one for the friends of agriculture to contemplate ;
but, unless some stop be put to the importations both of corn
and of cattle, we can see no end to the depreciation of home
pr.oduce,
CHRONICLE.—The House of Commons will be called
upon, on Friday next, to sanction the continuance of the two
very dissimilar imposts which are commonly included under
the phrase "income-tax." It will be called upon to renew
the tax upon property, a tax comparatively -speaking light,
and easily collected, and unobjectionable in principle ; and
at the same time to renew the' tax upon income, a tax most
unequal in its pressure, collected in a manner which involves
innumerable hardships end vexations, and at variance with
almost every,principle of sound fiscal policy. Up to the last'
moment, we believe, -the hope has been very generally
cherished that the injustice of the income-tax, properly so
called, would not be'persevered in. People-haye clung to the
notion that so grievous a burden was not 'meant to be per-
manent. Nobody will be.so foolish as to retain this impres-
sion after a renewal of the tax, even though it should be
only a renewal for a limited period. Its prolongation, even
for three years more, will in reality make it 'perpetual,
as far as anything of the kind can be made so by an
act of the Legislature. That this must be the consequence
of an affirmation of Sir R. Peel's proposition on Friday
night, will be obviotis to any one who reflects that the rea-
sons for repealing the income.tax cannot be expected- to be
wore numerous or powerful at any future time than they are
at the present moment. Its operation cannot easily become
more grievous or mischievous than it is at present. Nor
can we fairly expect the arrival at a time when the Exche-
quer can better spare the amount. We are not engaged in
war, and we have a surplus revenue of more than three mil-
lions. The income-tax, as distinguished from the tax upon
property, produces but • two millions. In the present state of '
the country, if it be solemnly renewed, what possible expec-
titian can there be that at any future time' it will be given
up.? We do not believe that the immealurable 'annoyances
of this tax would have been borne so quietly as they have
been, if it had been looked upon as a permanent arrange- •
ment. The voice of public complaint would long before
this time have startled the Minister, if it were not hushed
by the assurance that all the . torturing apparatus of inqui-
sition into • private affairs was employed only- to
.meet
a temporary necessity, which would soon pass away.
If the House of Commons,' by its vote, • dissipates this
impression, we are convinced, that the shock to the 'com-
munity, at large will be much greater than the Government
seems to anticipate.. The various agitations which have
been set on foot for the remission of particular taxes, are
very likely to lead to an erroneous conclusion on this subject.
The soap interest would probably be willing to compound for
the removal of the soap duty, by assenting to the Continuance
of the income-tax. The glass interest might readily pay the
same price for a remission of the duty on glass. The paper
interest would give much (and what interest would not?) to
be free' from the visits of the exciseman. Westminster and
Bath might make a sacrifice to get rid of 'the window
duties ; while Manchester, with more reason, pronounces
the worst possible tax to be the tax on raw cotton, the
material of our staple manufacture. The more active
and agitating of the agriculturist., lose sight of the
income-tax in the grand, but impossible, conception of
escaping from four millions and a half of malt-tax.
The merchants trading with China think of cheapen-
ing the cup which " cheers, but not inebriates,"
rather than the beer-pot, and would barter, perhaps,
more than an income-tax, for a reduction of the tea duty to
a shilling a pound. With so many powerful parties urging
the remission of particular taxes, the Government and Par-
liament are in some danger of forgetting that the country at
large would not.consider the benefit of any one of these re-
missions an equivalent for its sufferings from the income-tax.
We are not insensible to the evils which attend our indirect
taxes, or to the great advantages which the removal or re-
duction of many of them would confer upon the national in-
dustry. The excise duties on soap, paper, and glass, for
instance, operate as prohibitions of improvement in those
departments of industry. The revenue Acts prescribe certain
processes which must be followed, and will not permit expe-
riments, or the application of the most recent scientific
discoveries. Thus, chemical manufactures are conducted
nearly upon the principles which prevailed a hundred
years ago, and are practically little better than if Davy
and Liebig bad never existed. It would be a great good to
get rid of these taxes; but' the public at large wouldfeetl_e
it
a much greater good to get rid of the income-tax. Even the
reduction of a shilling a pound in the price of tea,
greatest boon to which the continuance ?of the income-tax
the
-tax
is likely to lead, would be considered a sorry
Peel, in substitute for
Robert the removal of that tax itself.
pro-
posing his property and income-taxlf Sir
for three years more,
does not intend it to be permanent, what sound objection
can there be to confining it to income arising from
property ?
For time years the possessors of the most precarious incomes
have borne equal burdens with those entitled to incomes of
the same amount in perpetuity. Every clerk struggling to bring
up a family decently.on3/. a week, and having even thataum
diminished by some little insurance upon his life, that he may
not leave his children to starve, has already paid 101.25. 6d.
income-tax. The owner of a capital of 5,0001. in the Three-
per-Cents., or of a property in fee-simple which would sell
for nearly that sum, has paid no more. Would it be unjust
to continue the tax upon the latter parties, and to exempt
the clerk for the next period of three years ? We believe
that, at the end of that time, he would still have borne far
more than his real share of the public burdens. In fact, all
the objections that.can be urged against indirect taxation
apply with equal force to the tax upon commercial and pro-
fessional gains. The machinery for collecting it is as vexa-
tious an interference with private affairs as can well be
imagined. No tax can present so many temptations to fraud
and falsehood ; and none can press upon the majority of
those who pay it with more cruel severity and injustice. We
trust, Tor the credit of the House of Commons, that the re-
imposition of such a tax will not pass without resistance.

DONATION FROM THE DUKE or BRUNSWICK.—
Monday his Highness the Duke of Brunswick forwarded to
the sitting magistrate of Marylebone Nine-tacit thtkitAi of
au for the poor•box