The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-15 00:00:00

LONDON:
TUESDAY MORNINQ, MARCH 15, 1842.

We see with much satisfaction that Lord BROUGHAM
announced last night that he would, this evening, bring
before their Lordships a series of resolutions on an in-
come tax. No man is so well qualified as Lord
BROUGHAM to do justice to this important subject ; hr
will treat it, we have no doubt, with dignity, and make
it impressive. Lord BROUGHAM cannot fail to remember
the bitter complaints which were urged against the pro•
perty tax till it was abolished in 1816, and he
will be convinced that it is of more importance to a Go-
v ernment to preserve the affections and respect of its
subjects, than to increase its revenue.
We insert elsewhere a communication " On the in-
justice of an income tax," from a commercial traveller,
the spirit of which is embodied in one of Lore.
BuoucuAles resolutions. It is expedient, says his Lord-
ship, to make a distinction between incomes derived
from capital, and incomes derived from labour; between
incomes for a term of years, and incomes for a perpetuity.
Everybody sees at a glance that it is unjust to tax an ,
income of 2001. a-year, derived from labour, and which
ceases with the labourer, at the same rate as an income
of 2001. a-year de► ived from land or from funds, which
remains after the owner is gone, as a provision for those
who have shared it with him while in life. A similar
rule applies to those whose situations ensure pensions or
annuities of any kind, not saved from their incomes to
their widows, in comparison to those whose situations
secure them no such advantage. Again, every-
body sees at a glance, that if it be unjust to
tax an income of 1491. because it is barely enough to
support a family, it Tust be unjust to tax an income of
1501. at the same rate as an income of 20,0001. a year.
The remission of the tax on all incomes below 1501. in-
volves the establishment of a sliding scale for all in-
comes above that sum. We shall not now say a word of
the amount on which such a scale ought to be adjusted,
for we repudiate the scheme of an income tax altogether;
but we insist on the principle, and assert that its absence
from Sir ROBERT PEEL'S plan convicts it at once of

gross injustice.
Sir ROBERT PEEL has accompanied his obnoxious
proposal with a considerable number of alterations and

improvements in the tariff, which in his speech he held
- -

forth as boons to the manufacturing and commercial
classes. We see with no little surprise that the journals
of his party, taking their cue from him, have all at once
found out that the cheapness which he is to promote will
be wonderfully advantageous, and that he is a great
benefactor to the people because he proposes to lower
several of the duties on provisions. Far be it from us
to deny the great advantages of such reductions, but
why did not he, and why did not our Tory Contempora-
ries apply a principle to wheat and barley which is true
as to beef and pork ?

We rejoice very much in behalf of the working classes
that the duty on potatoes is reduced from 2s. to 2d.
per cwt. that all kinds of fish, much of which has hitherto
been prohibited, may henceforth be imported at mode-
rate duties ; that the duties on bacon are reduced from
U. Bs. per cwt. to 145., and on salt beef from 12s. to Bs.,
while the duty on corn-beef, before prohibited, is
fixed at Bs. Such -alterations win be of great
public advantage, and will allow, we believe, of
various kinds of provisions being imported from Eu-
rope and America. But though Sir Robert Peel has
joined these remissions and alterations of duties with an
income tax, they are not necessarily connected with it. The
country now derives no revenue from the duties which
he proposes to lower, and the substitution of duties for
prohibitions, will add to the revenue, not diminish it.
The alteration in the tariffs, therefore, afford no pretext
for an income tax. He has cunningly joined the two;
but there is no reason whatever why we should give three
per cent. of our incomes because the men now in office
—thanks to the perseverance of Messrs. HumE, VIL-
LIERS, TIORNELY, and the other promoters of the Im-
port Dutios' Committee—have at length opened their
eyes to the incongruities of our tariff, and have
set about correcting some few of its monstrous inequali-
ties. There is no necessary connexion, we repeat, be-
tween these alterations of the tariff, which are highly to
be approved of, and the imposition of a new and inqui-
sitorial tax, except that both are proposed by the same
inconsistent Minister.

Be it remarked also, that Sir ROBERT PEEL'S tariff,
whatever be its merits, is based on the vicious principles
of bounties and protection. It is a mass of dis-
criminating duties, not levied for revenue, but to
divert labour and capital into particular chan-
nels, and put property into the pockets of certain
individuals and classes, Contrary to all political science.
Sir ROBERT PEEL seeks, by regulations, to raise profit
in one place, and lower it in another ; and so he gives a
bias and direction to the employment of capital. His
discriminating duties on wheat, on beef, on potatoes, &c.
will lead foreigners to cultivate and prepare certain pro •

visions which they will be able to introduce into our
markets with a profit, their industry being directed, I
not by natural circumstances and advantages, but by our
discriminating duties. In all that we see nothing re-
commendable, though Sir R. PEEL'S tariff may be less
injurious than the one which it is to supersede ; for it
gives a false, a political, and a comparatively unprofitable
direction to industry and capital.
Let us also for one moment dwell on the injustice, to
one class, of indirectly lowering prices by there various
reductions in the tariff. The Corn-law is maintained
to keep up the nominal price of wages which it will do
because wages, in subordination to the supply and demand,
are in some measure dependent on the price of bread.
But the permitted importation of meat, potatoes, rice,
lentils, &c., &c., will to some extent beat down the price
of a portion of the farmer's produce, who will have still
to pay high rents and high wages, while he will get
a reduced price for his commodities. A total
repeal of all the Corn and Provision-laws which
would adjust wages, and rent, and prces,[by one and the
same rule, would be, in comparison, an, inestimable
benefit to the farmers.

Now that we have pointed out some of the inequalities
and injustices of Sir R. PEEL'S proposed income tax, now
that we have shown that his plan of fastening it on to
alterations of the tariff, which have been recommended
by Reformers, is no better than a cunning trick, un-
worthy of a statesman, let us put it to our readers and
to the middle classes generally, will they, in time of
peace, tolerate such an imposition ? The Hants Chronicle
declares that all the tradespeople in that neighbourhood
are against it. A communication which we publish from
a Northern Correspondent informs us that, on the banks
of the Tyne and the Wear, Sir R. PEEL'S proposal has
been received with astonishment and indignation. Such
feelings may be set off against the satisfaction felt on the
Stock Exchange, the gentlemen who frequent which are,
in general, so much interested in taxation, that they see
those measures with placidity, we are afraid, which, at the
sacrifice of the public liberties and the public
happiness give, as they suppose, security to the public
funds. On this great question, however, affecting the
self-respect and personal dignity of the middle classes,
outraged as much by their circumstances being pryed
into as if their homes were violated, we are persuaded
that no class of persons, interested in any way in taxa-
tion, will be allowed to give the tone to public senti-
ment. We shall be surprised if public opinion, before
the week come to an end, be not so loudly and indig-
nantly expressed as to make Sir R. PEEL stand aghast
at his own presumption.
It is a good augury that Lord BROUGHAM, who cannot
yet have forgotten the art of kindling the public enthusi-
asm, has taken up the question. He will know how to
make the blood boil in the veins of our long-enduring and
much suffering people. He may, possibly, remind them
that WALPOLE, at the height of his power, was defeated
in his attempt to establish a system of excise which was
infinitely less objectionable than an inquisitorial tax on
income. Lord BROUGHAM will not forget that a be-
sotted scheme for levying an obnoxious tax separa-
ted the United States from England. He will, probably,
remind the people, that it will be unworthy of them to
accept from the mere tool of the monopolists a whole
series of indignities, which neither the Elder nor the
Younger PITT, which neither CASTLEREAGH, with his
impurturbility, nor CANNING, with his frank courage,
ever dared, in a time of peace, to perpetrate on the
public liberties. He will, or lest Lord BROUGHAM
should not, we:will, call on our high-spirited people
who have struck down the eagle in his loftiest flight, and
hunted the lion to his den, not now to submit to
be humbled and plucked by a carrion crow. They will
declare that they did not put an end to the despotism of
BONAPARTE, to offer their hands to the fetters
of the sordid landowners of England. The
townspeople, the middle classes, and the ten pound
householders; have been, it is said, enfranchised
and they will make a scandalous use of their liberty and
their power, if they do not arrest at once the success of
the meanest and the hungriest political faction that ever
cursed a country.

Let them not be deceived by the statement that the
income tax will fall on the aristocracy as well as on them-
selves. The Tories recently expended 1,500,0001. to secure
seats in Parliament, and they will willingly pay their share
of the proposed taxes as an insurance for the continuance
of their power. In their hands are all the emoluments
and all the offices of Government, and they enjoy all the
taxes of which they only contribute a part. For them
it is a good pecuniary speculation to pay another
1,500,0001. in order to secure the supremacy of the aris-
tocracy, and the distribution amongst themselves of an
additional revenue of 5,000,000/. The income tax will
go to preserve the landlords in their station, and pull
down the aspiring democracy. For the aristocracy this
is worth a large sum; and if their nefarious scheme be
not defeated it will be owing to the undue veneration
for them yet nourished by the middle classes, and to the
unfounded and unjust apprehensions which the latter
yet entertains of the working classes. By their apprehen-
3ions the aristocracy are now profiting, and the palpable
object of Sir ROBERT PEEL in uniting his tariff with an
income-tax -is to separate the middle from the lower
classes, and obtain the support of the latter for the Aris-
tocracy and the Government. He bids for popularity. If
the middle classes allow him to succeed they may at
once reconcile themselves to be for ever the landowners
slaves.

Now that it is proposed to increase the taxes, a Corre-
spondent appropriately calls public attention to the fact

that no small number of ships are annually built only to
lie and rot. He mentions two cases which fell un,ier his
own notice, and the public will, on this occasion, re-
member that the Queen Charlotte, after lying in ordi-
nary for a few years, cost the country 15,000/. or 20,000/.
to repair her before she could go to sea. When it was
proposed to make use of her, she was found eaten up
with the dry-rot. There are, no doubt, many other sin ti-
lar cases, and were the people less preyed on by their
own fears, or by the designs of those who seek to pro fit
by their fears, they might spare half the sum annually
expended, to prepare against an attack which can nevi in• be
made. It was Sir Jour/ SINCLAIR'S opinion, that aone
of the nations of Europe would have been ineuml ered
with a national debt had they not fitted out fleets. T b ere
is much probability in that opinion, and England is at
this moment suffering under a vast load of debt, becx use
shewould always maintain, under the name of a navy., an
immense number of useless hulks. But, if that opin ion
be probably correct, when limited to navies, it beccg nes
completely true when extended to national fears and stu
eions. Nearly all the danger one ration is subject to- fi nm
Others, and nearly all the expense it occurs on their ac-
count, are the consequence of idle and unfounded re: trs
Nations under the advice of interested politicians, s üb-
ject themselves to enormous certain evils to avoid'. an
imaginary danger. They are now paying a great in ice
for their mutual distrust, and of that, a part is coy n-ed
by the expense annually. incurred of building men-of- v var
to lie and rot.

By command of her MAJESTY papers have been 11 re-
sented to Parliament relative to the moneys received by
that most original of diplomatists, Captain ELLIOT; by
way of ransom for the city of Canton, taken by • the
British troops on the 27th of May last. These p: tp ars
are so entirely in character that we regret we can not
publish them at full length, instead of making extil.cts
from them. The most ludicrous feature of the case s 'as,
that when the Convention between Captain ELLIOT : and
the Chinese authorities relative to Canton was rat if ed,
the British Officers on the spot could not understai2d . it,
and after the money remitted to England reached the
Treasury, neither the Lords of that department, _nor
the Noble Foreign Secretary, could tell for what, p ur_
pose it was received or remitted. Upon the first of
these points, we beg to quote a letter addressed to C ap-
tain ELLIOT, by the justly lamented and gallant Ca p 1 ain
SENHousn. It is dated the heights above Canton, A.lay
28, 1841
Sir,—l have the honour to acknowledge your Excel', !They's
joint letter, of the 27th May, to Sir Hugh Gough and in ynelf,
transmitting the arrangement yonr Excellency has cone lu ded
with the officers of the Chinese Government, and' also a .copy
of the full authority given to Kwang-Chow-Foo to act
. for
the Chinese Commissioners.
In perusing very attentively the document your Excel le ncy
has been pleased to transmit, I cannot avoid considering "that
the terms of the arrangement must appear to an unpreju. arced
person, ignorant of local circumstances, more as a settle m ent
for a general peace rather than conditions proposed, discu es ed,
and agreed to, for the sole purpose of delivering the ci ti fof
Canton, from the penalties of actual occupation. In the at tiho-
rity given to the Kwang-Chow-Foo by the Commissio err;
they clearly state that the, English Plenipotentiary, being to ill-
ing to observe a truce and make arrangements for peace. 'they
therefore, appoint the Kwang-Chow. Foo to conduct the eel :ails
of the pacific arrancrement and settlement. Now it was nat the
British Minister who applied for a truce, for it was the Ch it .ese
officer who came with a flag of truce to the walls, declar, s d to
Sir Hugh Gough and myself that they were not willing to .4 ght
any more, and, therefore, wished to seethe British chiefs.
The articles themselves make no mention ofthe money be ing
paid as a ransom for the town, nor is any mention made of th ese
conditions being confined to the province of Kwangtung.
On the contrary, it is well known that the Chinese aurbrori-
ties extended your Excellency's former declaration, tha t the
English wanted nothing but trade on the old footing, t o the
further settlement of a definitive peace, although in your Ex-
cellency's own understanding the arrangement was limit, id to
Canton; and the Commissioner Kwang in his private I enter
said, that you have stated that your nation wanted nothing; but
trade oa the old footing, and invited you to commence n ego-
tiations for a definitive peace.
The sum to be given up being similar to the sum offered to
be given for opium,
Bilbaino, unite in indorsing to an unprejudiced and uninfor.twed
person, that the and. the introduction of the affair of tb e
an. angement is more intended for a gene cal
pacification,
the insults which -would appear a very poor compensation.. for
all and njuries we have received, than an ackno, W-
ledgment of the vanquished to the conqueror in the hour of
victory. I therefore beg, for the information of my Comma n-
der-in-Chief and. their Lordships of the Admiralty, to kilt )w