The Sun.
London, England, 1842-04-01 00:00:00

BELGIUM.

BRUSSELS, MARCH 28.—The Moniteur published a
Royal ordinance, dated Lacken, March 26, and signed by
the Minster of War, to- therNtiraing eff<sct CO-n:4
sidering that the military sub-intendent, Parrys, has been
guilty of great negligence in his duty, by maintaining
an intimate acquaintance with the avowed enemies of the
State, and by not informing the superior authorities
of the proceedings, (which, to say the least, were sus-
picious), of Vandermeere and Vandersmissen, the said
P. J. Earrys is placed on half-pay. The four persons
condemned to death by the Court of Assize of Bra-
bant, have appealed to the Court of Cassation. They
have been permitted to remain in their respective apart-
ments, and to receive the visits of their families.
BRUSSELS, MAncir 29.—The King and Queen set out
this morning at eight o'clock for Paris, accompanied by
Baroness Stassart, the Count d'Aerschot, Count d'Hane
de Steenhuyse, M. Van Praet, and Dr. Baikern, their
Majesties' physician.
In consequence of the verdict declaring M. Crehen
m and
df i,
agreed
grt a
guilty in the affair of the conspiracy, but entitled to his
wounded acquittal
of
fecause Septemberhe ha v
had had given information
a meeting,
on a protest addressed to the Minister of the Interior,
requiring that the said Crehen shall be deprived of the
right of wearing the uniforms of commandant and of
conservator of the monument in the Place des Martyrs. •

SELMAN r (INDS—Exams , MARCH 29.
Actual Del;t, 2% per Cont.
Rothschild's Loan 5 per Cent
Loan of Thirty Millions, 4 per'Cent.
Sper Cent.
...... 723,
(1840) los%
Loan of City, 1932, 4 per Cent. ........ 1.7
Society of Commerce, 41; per Cent Fe2
Bank of Belgium, 5 per 79%
National Society
Exchange on London (short)
—Brussels Papers, March 29.
AUSTRIAN FUNDS.VIRNNA, MARCH 21.
five per Coats. Metalliques •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Four per Cents. •1101•••••••••••••0••••••••••••••••••• .......... I°°%
Three per Cents. ........ 16%
Bank Shares or••••••••••••••••••••••••••.••••••••.........••••• 1612

EDINBURGH MEETING ON THE
INCOME TAX.
(Abridged from the Scotsman.)
A meeting of the Aggregate Liberal Committee
was held yesterday afternoon, in the Merchants' Hall,
the Lord Provost in the Chair. Several hundred
members were present.
Sir JOIIN DALYEL addressed the meeting in refer-
ence to the gross inequalities of the income tax, which
he illustrated by reference to the situation of mer-
chants and professional men, as compared with landed
proprietors.
Sir JAMES GIBSON CRAIG, after illustrating the op-
pressive nature of the tax at some length, and main-
taining that no man of proper feeling could ever
quietly submit to such a degree of injustice as he
described, Sir James proceeded to deny the truth of
Sir Robert Peel's statement, that the tax was neces-
sary, and therefore the country must submit to it.
There was no necessity for injustice.—(Great ap-
plause.) With regard to the amount of the tax he
thought it dangerous from being so little, because an
attempt would thereby be made to reconcile the peo-
ple to it, until it might at length be looked upon as
one of the ordinary ways and means of raising money.
Were the tax necessary, he for one would not
object to it; but Sir Robert Peel had in effect ad-
mitted, in the strongest manner, that it was not ne-
cessary by the reductions he made in the tariff. Sir
James concluded by moving resolutions condemning
the tax.

Mr. BLACK seconded the resolutions. The in-
equality and injustice of the income tax, he said, had
not been brought out more forcibly than by a speaker
in the House of Commons, who stated that when the
tax was in force previously, Glasgow paid 600,0001.,
while Manchester, with double its amount of capital,
paid only 300,0001.—(Hear, hear.) Upon a prin-
ciple of equal justice, Manchester ought either to
have been assessed to the amount of 1,200,0001., or
Glasgow at 150,0001. Another great objection to
the income tax was the facility with which, when first
imposed, it could be screwed up. Whenever there
was any shortcoming in the revenue all that the
Government had to do was to add another per cent.
But there was nothing more odious about the tax
than its inquisitorial character. In this respect it
was quite worthy of a despotic Government. It had
been well said by a clever periodical writer that the only
war at present was a war by the landlord against the
community at large—(Cheers)—and it was in order
to enable them to carry on this war that the tax was
laid on. Sir Robert Peel told the landlords that it
was their interest to put down discontent and disaffec-
tion. Well did Sir Robert know the source of this
disaffection ; and therefore he told them that it was
better for the landlord to pay the tax and put it down.
Sir Robert proposed to exempt all farmers under 3001.
rent. Now, the great bulk of the farmers in Eng-
land were rented under 3001., so that the farmers
would, in this way, be almost all exempted, and so
much money put into the pockets of the landlords.
There was, altogether, something mean in Sir Robert's
whole scheme. He sought to conciliate the House of
Lords by maintaining the Corn-laws, and to disarm
the Irish Members by exempting Ireland from the
income tax. Why should not that Church which was
wallowing in wealth contribute its fair -share to the
evenue ? Then, in order to conciliate the work-