The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-18 00:00:00

S UEIIMARY OF NEWS

AND
Vtibitt Optnion.

" Who runs may read."

PORMIGN.
The financial announcement of Sir Robert Peel forms the
leading feature of the original columns of Our Paris contempor-
aries. They are nearly agreed in praising the skill and energy
of the English Premier, although some of them profess to con-
sic; r the posdion of England to be such as to set. palliatives, or
even what would be under other circumstances radical and
heroic remedies, at defiance. •
The Journal des Debuts says :—" The Prime Minister of
Great Britain has just affixed his name to an event, without
contradiction, the most important that has for a hang period oc-
curred in England. Sir R. Peel has just signalised himself by
an attempt the must bold, and, in the philosophical sense of the
word, the most revolutionary, that any ministry has dared to
make in England for half a century. The measure is a general
tax on all revenues of the nation—a tax striking at property,
and industry—indtistry in its extended sense, as signicative of
all the productions of human intelligence.
" Great Britain is attempting at this moment one of those
last and awful efforts which men and nations alike strive at
when they are sinking. But whatever she may do, and if we
are to meet her again as an enemy, on every continent and on
every sea we mast respect the courage she displays at so mu..
mentous a crisis, and, without either t nvy or dread, bestow un
her the raced of our unqualified admiration."
The National admits that Sir Robert Peel has shown ability
in bringing forward his plan, but disapproves much of the plan
itself. It says :—" Will this plan of the Tory Ministry, com-
bined with care, prepared with precaution, and brought forward
with great solemnity and real ability, be adequate to
the position of the country ? Will it make up the deficiency ?
Will it re-establish the equilibrium ? This is what we take
permission to doubt. What strikes us is, that Sir It. Peel
touches everything but with a timid hand. He attacks pro-
perty in principle, but in his acts he surrounds it with care and
respect. He desi:es to diminish the taxes, and he has recourse
to tariffs, to duties on articles of consumption ; he leaves no
industry at peace ; he does not satisfy thoroughly any neces-
sity; he has all the inconveniences, all the dangers of boldness,
without reaping any of its advantages. He is a revo:utionary
theorist, who disturbs, but who does not destroy; he is a Tory,
who, forced on by circumstances to the verge of Radicalism,
stops short, and only produces a powerless juste-milieu."
The Presse says it is impossible to deny that the financial
plan of sir Robert Peel is bold and capacious, exhibiting en-
larged political views, and a vigour of Government which recals
to mind the most famous periods of English affairs. It is, with-
out comparison, adds this journal, superbr in conception to the
plan which the Whigs put forth last year.
The Quotidienne admires the patriotic manner in which Sir
Robert Peel has laid before Parliament the reverses of England,.
arid the means of repairing them. This, says the Quotidienne,
is true representative government, both as to dignity and
nationality.
The Commerce doubts whether the English minister will be
able to weather the storm, but admits that in the present
emergency the aristocracy shows patriotism and wisdom in
behalf of the interests of the country.
In a more generous mood than it displayed last Monday, the
Courrier Francais says:—." What is most remarkable is that
a system which, after all. impases new charges in England,
not only excites no opposition in Parliament, but has been sig-
nalised by a rise in the public funds. Happy the nation that
can display such energy in political difficulties, and whose
courage revives in the midst of danger."
PAIILLI.A.MENTATLY.

The Peers were almost exclusively . occupied by Lord
Brougham's motion on the Income Tax. His Lordship made
a long and eloquent speech. in explanation of his views.
• The Earl of Ripon objected, not to the resolutions, but to
the mode and tone of bringing them forward, and moved the
previous question, which-was carried without a division, and so
ends Lord Brougham's exertions for the present against the
Income Tax.
Their Lot dships adjourned at Eight o'clock.
In the Commons the Hon. J. K. Howard was ordered to be
taken into the custody of- the Serjeant• at-Arms for not being'
present in his place in the House when he was appointed one
of the Select Committee to try the return for Wigan.
Amongst the petitions presented was one from the General
Shipping Company against Sir Ito'..ert Peel's proposed duty on
coals.

In answer to Lord John Russell, Sir Robert Peel said that
he had considered it necessary to re:nforee the army in
England, and he should lay on the table a supplementary
estimate,

Mr. Lindsay moved a resolution that the House would, on
April 7th next, resolve itself into a Committee. to consider of
an Address to her Majesty, to compensate the merchants and
others for their losses in sacrificing opium in China, to the ex-
tent of the sum received from the Chinese Government. Sir
George Staunton, Sir G. Larpent, Lord Paln:erston,
and other Members, supported the motion. The Chancellor of
the Exchequer and Sir It Peel opposed it. Lord J. Russel
while approving of investigation, recommended the lion. Gen-
tleman not to press the motion to a division. The Minister,
however, declining to give any pledge on the subject, Mr.
Lindsay divided, and the motion was lost by 87 to 37.
The House subsequently discussed Lord G. Somerset's
motion for a Bill to provide for the more effectual inspection
of Licensed Houses for the reception of the Ins..ne. Mr.
Wakley and Mr. Hawes wished for delay, but in the end leave
was given to bring in a bill.
Mr. Duncombe s motion for a Committee to inquire into
the administration of relief to the Poor,. under Gilbert's Act,
was after some discussion, negatived by 108 to 41.
The House sat till lialf.past One o'Clock.
PUIII.IO OPINION.
The Chronicle says :—" We know what we are, but we
know not what we shall be,' says the poor crazed Ophelia. And
the sentiment may be echoed by those not very sane consti-
tuencies who returned Sir Robert Peel's majority in the pre.
sent Parliament. They little thought they were polling for an
income tax. We should like to know how many of them there
are who would not, at the time of the election, have resented
the suggestion as an imputation upon their principles and their
intellects. They would, most of them, have started from the
future effect of their votes, as a well-known character in Scrip-
ture history did from his future crime. 'ls thy servant a dog
that be should do this thing ?' But the dog did it ; and they,
not less unexpectedly, have saddled themselves and others with
an income tax. Yes, this is what their achievement comes to.
As a resistance (supposing it so Intended) to commercial re-
form, the effort is a failure."
The Adeertiser, speaking of the Income Tax, observes :
" To an income tax, objectionable as it is in many respects,
we should nut object, in lieu of indirect taxes upon articles of
ordinary consurnetion ; but when these are already taxed, as Sir
R. Peel is obliged to confess, to the utmost possible extent,
and no reduction is to be made in the duties they bear—with
one exception—that borne by Coffee—then such a tax becomes
most odious, as well as - most oppressive, and canna fail to
lead, if it be attempted to enforce it, to very serious and alarm-
ing consequences."
The Morning Herald makes the following remarks on the
subject of the income tax :—" Why should Sir Robert Peel
persist in legislating„ for the immediate possession of a surplus
or reserved ft.nd of 500,(X)0/. in a period of great distress and
suffering ? A surplus is undoubtedly desirable, but the Go-
vernment plan will, on Sir Robert Peel's own showing, in the
course of a few years, " have the effect of reviving commerce
and improving the manufactures of the country in a way that
must reach every other interest," and by augmenting the reve-
nue derived from other sources, give to Parliament " an oppor-
tunity of putting an end to the income tax at an earlier period
than at the close of five years.". Why then, we reiterate,
must the country he burdened by an additional 500,0001.
annually for five years, with a prospect of so early an abandon-