The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-25 00:00:00

~ ~\

LONDON!
FRIDAY MORNING, MARCH 25, 1842.

It is evident, from Sir ROBERT PEEL'S speech, on
Wednesday, and from the proceedings of the House of
Commons, that he derives much countenance and support
from the indiscreet friends of free trade and reduced
taxation. When he wanted a witness to the excellence
of his tariff, he called forward Dr. BowßlNG—when he
required a certificate of honesty and boldness, he referred
to Mr. ROEBUCK. If he wished to heap coals of fire on
the heads of our spirited friends, Mr. COBDEN and Mr.
DoNcomnE, he had only to quote the words and the
'example of Mr. VERNON SMITH and Lord HOWICK. In
justice to the cause we espouse, and to the honest men
by whom it was defended, we feel bound to animadvert
on the conduct of those who seem to us, undesignedly
we hope, to have betrayed it.
We have in general a great respect for Lord HOWIcK,
because we believe him to be honest, and we know him
to be industrious. It is notorious, however, that the
Noble Lord is self-willed and narrow-minded, and both
these unamiable characteristics were exhibited in his con-
demnation of the noble minority for the determination to
resist Sir ROBERT PEEL'S scheme to the utmost. If a
mainority is not to exert its power to stop a noxious pro-
pet why was it bestowed on them ? That a more un-
calLtd tor and mischievous scheme than the income tax
was es ,sr submitted to Parliament, or ever attempted to
be carried through by more unwarrantable means we do
not believe. It is precisely such a case as justifies those
who object to it in using the forms of the House to
delay and defeat it. If Lord Howler( did not take
this view of it he might have been contented to vote
with the Tories, but he denounced those who did, and
threatened them with the confiscation of the privilege
of the House, because they were abusing it. His Lord-
ship thinks more of men in office than of the public
Jiberties, and is ready to sacrifice the bulwarks of the
Constitution to the convenience of statesmen. Let us
imply to Lord HoWICK'S threat that the Honse of Com-
mons would find it necessary to take away the privilege
of' a minority, as it had put an end to 'speaking on
petitions, by saying that whenever the House of Com-
snons shall carry it into execution, it will become a mere
tax-imposing tool of a despicable oligarchy, and will
soon thereafter be laid aside by the people as a public
nuisance. Tho electors of Sunderland, who are not
favourable to an income tax, and to a tax on coals,
!should give Lord HowicK a hint of their opinions.
As to Mr. VERNON SNITH, though he held some
subordinate office in the Whig Administration, his
words never carried any weight, and we shall not make
ibis folly of importance, by deeming it worthy of a com-
ment. If the electors of Northampton wish for a hol-
low and insincere opposition to the income tax, they
should praise Mr. V. SInITII for censuring the minority.
Mr. ROEBUCK takes, we have no doubt sincerely,
a very different view from ours, when he describes
Sir ROBERT PEEL'S scheme as straightforward and
honest. Sir ROBERT showed how much he needed
such a commendation by the frequency and em-
phasis with which he quoted it. The tariff is a
part of Sir R. PEEL'S scheme, and that is so straight-
forward and honest that the Right Hon. Baronet him-
self gives different accounts on different days of its pro-
bable effects. As a whole the scheme is a despotic at-
tempt to enable a large Tory majority, to whom Sir R.
YELL is a necessity, to fix a new and onerous tax on the
lyeople. Its honesty is something like that of a bold
bandit, who can plunder in safety. It is about on a par
with the honesty of BONAPARTE, when, from a love of
power; he incorporated Holland with France, or placid
his brother on the throne of Spain. As we conceive Mr.
,RoEßucK's praise to he unjust, we must insist, that for
the interest of the free trade party, it was very ill timed.
We agree in the main with him, that direct taxation
is right in principle, and if Sir R. PEEL had proposed to
substitute a comprehensive and equitable direct tax, for
.other taxes, setting trade free, he would have expe-
rienced no opposition from us ; but he proposes to in-
fiict an income tax on us, in addition to all the other taxes
which now crush the people. As Mr. T. DUNCOMBE
justly said, he meant to console the working classes,
whom he would not relieve, by reducing the middle
. classes to their level. That design, cunningly carried
obt, has charms for Mr. ROEBUCK.
He even became, in his admiration of Sir ROBERT
FEEL'S boldness, the defender of an inquisition by the
State into every man's private affairs. That between men
who deal one with another—that between bankers and their
clients, between the wholesale and the retail dealer, be-
tween the merchant and the broker—there should be a
correct knowledge of each parties' circumstances is highly
desirable ; that no man should assume any false appear-
ance of wealth, to cozen other men is to be wished ; but,
between the vigilances of individuals watching over the
conduct of one another, which is indispensable in all the
transactions of life, and is the basis of all correct confi-
dence, and the en forced prying of tax-gatherers, dragging
into public day all that men seek to conceal,
often making a temporary misfortune an irre-
deemable ruin, there is all the difference which

exists between the inevitable course of nature, and

great calamity inflicted on us by the self-will
or the ambitions of our fellow creatures. Men may
be unable to stop or guide the mountain torrent which
desolates their fields, and carries off their grain and
their flocks, but that is a poor reason for breaking down
a dam, and turning such a torrent over their land. For

it Radical, on any pretext of the advantage of publicity,

to defend the prying inquisition of the State into private
concerns, adds to our conviction that no man is to be
trusted to regulate or control the public liberties when•
ever he is the victim of a theory. Mr. ROEBUCK acted
consistently with his speech, and his name is not to be

found in the minority. He is so delighted, apparently,
with Sir ROBERT PEEL'S bold'plan, that he did not vote
to delay and defeat it.
It must have been highly gratifying to Dr. BOWRING
to hoar Sir R. PEEL quote him as " a great authority,"
as Sir ROBERT never, that we recollect, thought the
Doctor's words of any weight before. But we trust he
will have to set off against the tickling delight of Sir
R. PEEL'S flattery the rough expostulation of the men
of Bolton. Dr. BOWRING, let us say at once, properly
voted against Sir R. PEEL, and in so far served our
cause better than 11r. Rommel: ; but he was not called
on to praise the tariff. In one report Dr. BOWRING is
made to say that it was a great improvement, because it
allowed butter and cheese to come in at reduced duty ;
but in the version of that imperfect and erroneous docu-
ment which we have consulted, the duties on butter and
cheese, except when imported from our own colonies,
remain unaltered.

The tariff, considering that Sir ROBERT PEEL esta-
blishes, for the first time, a long string of differential
duties—doing what he can, therefore, to discourage trade
between England and other ce..ntries, in order to secure
a colonial trade, which, were he not to meddle with it,
would naturally, like the trade between Ireland and
England, be- conducted on the most advantageous terms
possible for both countries—is really a disgrace to

the statemanship of the age. It runs counter, with

~,