The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-21 00:00:00

rig
444 ~
4g,
)4

LONDON?
MONDAY MORNING, MARCH 21, 1842.

Almost all the country papers have now begun to dis-
cuss the income tax, and few or none, we are happy to
say, approve of it. One dilates on its injustice to
tradesmen and professional men ; another expostulates
against the hurried manner in which Sir R. PEEL is forc-
ing it through the House ; and a third, shows very forci-
bly that it has-been constructed to favour the landowners
who will take advantage of its provisions to evade pay-
ment altogether. As far as we have seen, they all ob-
ject to its inquisitorial nature, and condemn it ye-
hemenently, more on account of its intrusion into do
mestic life than of its pecuniary burdens.
We are, however, surprised tc, find that some quasi-
liberal Journals of the metropolis praise Sir ROBERT
PEEL'S scheme as tberlargest and " most judicious bud-
get .that has ever bren brought forward." They com-
pensate for their praise, indeed, by showing that he pro-
poses to bring into use an odious and complicated ma-
chinery, in order, to raise 3,700,0001., employing which
in 1816 to raise upwards of 14,000,000 L, shook the
strong and then popular Government of Lord LIVERPOOL
IO its centre. We cannot conceive any thing more un-
statesman-like, more injudicious; or more unskilful, than
to run the risk of offending the bulk of the middle classes
in order to raise 1,700,0001. a year.

The projector described by SMOLLELT, who had in-
vented a very cumbrous machine for cutting down
cabbages was merely absurd, but Sir R. PEEL, who- in
introducing his cumbrous machinery, is dealing with
the mighty interests of humanity, is not merely absurd
—he is mischievous and cruel. The lower classes are
one and all set against the Goverimmt. They demand
more political power. His proposed great change will
not benefit them, nor in the least degree soothe their
irritated minds, while if it be carried into effect, it will
infallibly vex, disgust, and outrage the middle classes.
Without. considering time and circumstances, Sir
ROBERT PEEL has blindly followed Mr. PITT'S device. In
answer to the objection that this was only a war tax,
he replied that Mr, PITT adopted the tax to meet
financial difficulties, that the country was now in
financial difficulties; and therefore the tax now was as
appropriate as in a time of war. But when Mr. PITT
first laid on the property tax, and when the Whigs after-
wards extended it, the country was engaged in a war
for its very existence, which kindled "the enthusiasm of
the people in favour of the Government: The bulk
of the community were heartily and enthusiastically
opposed, first, to revolutionary France, and afterwards
to BUONAPARTE. There is no such enthusiasm now to
make the people submit cheerfully to privations, and
carry the Tory Government successfully through its
present difficulties.
Nor can that enthusiasm be awakened by the cold
formal orations of Sir R. PEEL. He has no heart—he
wants sincerity, and his present project is unconnected
ith any sentiment but that of the duty of preserving
the Government from financial difficulties. But the bulk
of the people already complain' of its enormous cost, a::c1
already speak of it more as a curse than a blessing.
For Sir R. PEEL now to kindle an enthusiasm which
l• will make the public submit to the inquisition of an
income tAx, is as hopeless as an attempt to breathe life in
the dead.

The public will look also at the different objects of the
two Ministers. Devoted to his country, Mr. PITT
thought only of maintaining her independence and
adding to her greatncBs. He was bent on subduing
France, and no man doubted his sincerity or his p.:triot-
ism, whatever might be thought of her policy. What is
Sir ROBERT PEEL'S object ? Has he any similar noble
plan or view ? Dot:s his policy contemplate an exten-
sion of dominion, or the vindication of the national
honour ? No. He is only content on maintaining the
dominion of the landlords. He proposes an income tax,
in order that he may keep on the Corn-law, by which he
personally profits ; and he expects the people to
submit to the same sacrifices for a purpose which
they detest as for one they admired. Both in
the circumstances of the times and the policy of
the Ministers there are such essential differences, that
now to adopt an income tax because Mr. PITT had re-
course to such a ckvicf.) is TM ft more judicious imitation
than that of the Chinese tailor who copied the patches
and the dames of an old coat given to him for a nioclel.
The spirit of imitation in a statesman is a sign of a little
mind. He should create, not follow precedents ; and
that Sir ROBERT PEEL could find nothing more suitable
to the present position of the country than a hateful
income tax, shows that he is a man of very limited
resources.

The difference we have adverted to in public sentiment,
suggests at once a great probable difference in the results
of the tax now and during the war. Hundreds and
thousands of men who would have disdained to evade a
tax honestly imposed for such a purpose as the defence
of the country, will think it a duty to evade it when
imposed only to enable Sir ROBERT PEEL
to preserve the Corn-law. From several quarters
we hear that _landlords and their tenants will
conspire to evade it. Men with families will make
over part of their incomes to their children for their sup-
port, and honestly swear that their income does not
amount to 1501. a year. Persons holding property. in
the funds will divide it
„amongst several parties, as trus-•
tees, &c.—each of, whom shall have less than the
required 1501., and so the tax Will be avoided. Trades-
men will take their children or foremen into a nomi-
nal partnership, and the divided profits of their trade
will appear below the required standard.

.The tax, then, will be very generally evaded, and the
responsibility of all the immorality which will ensue
will, properly belong to that unthinking statesman, who
by imposing a tax when it is unwarranted by popular
feeling, sets the duty of individuals to themselves',
and their duty towards the Government in opposition.
Looking on such a tax as the consequence of those mo-
nopolies which Sir ROBERT PEEL is carried into power
to support, we are ready to declare that the duty of men
towards their country, as Well as their duty towards
themselves, requires and commands them under present
circumstances, to evade and defeat such an odious and
•
inquisitorial law.

Far from looking on Sir ROBERT PEEL'S, speech as
judicious, we regard it as one of the wildest that could
be fallen on by a Conservative stat'.sman. It is a
cunning contrivance, which, pretending to promote the
public welfare, serves no interest, and satisfies no party.
It unsettles a great:many branches of trade without
setting any free, or placing any on a permanent founda-
tion. With the words of freedom on his lips he
introduces a great number of new restrictions, and he
whets the appetite for further change both by what
he gives and what he withholds. His conduct is at the
same time a complete tacit admission, that Conservatsm,
or holding fast ay institutions as they are, is an impossi-
bility. It he— - ~; . tO
tin what institutions ougiit to be, awl on that model

attempt to reform them; not go on patching and cobling
an old garment that is falling to pieces and can no longer

be-held together.
Besides its injudiciousness, Sir ROBERT PEEL'S scheme
has the demerit of plea Sing no great class. 'lt was un-
called for, and is unpopular. He has borrowed some
suggestions from the Import Duties' Committee, and on
them he has engrafted an income tax. A most favour-
able opportunity is offered to the Whigs to regain their
lost hold of the public mind by a firm, spirited, and un-
ceasing opposition to this odious tax. .We 'trust, that
they will stick to their opinion that this tax is not
necessary; that by a proper system of commercial reform
and economy in the public expenditure, the revenue and
expenditure might be equalized, and pointing out the
social, the moral, and the pecuniary evils of an income
tax, they will in spite of the insolent taunts of Sir
ROBIT.RT PEEL make use of all the forms of the House
to delay the progress of hii measure till the public have
had full time to consider it. The tax will be a . curse to
the country, and our representatives will neglect their
[ duty if they do not prevent Sir ROBERT PEEL from im-
posing it.
____

Sir R. PEEL ascribes to his proposed income tax the
merit of not falling on the wages of Labour, but this is
a fallacy which Lord BROUGHAM happily exposed on
Thursday night in the following passage :
A very great delusion prevailed in the country—at least
amongst that large class, the labouring populati .n, for whom
he felt. so Strong an interest—as to the operation of the income
tax on them. It was a very common thing for them, or for
those who instructed them, and who should know better, to say
that the income tax could in no way affect them. There was
no greater delusion than this. It. required but little argument
to show that the labourer was affected by the diminution of
the :und out of which he was paid. When the capital accu-
mulated, the fund of the labourer was increased; when, it
became diminished, the fund to pay the labourer decreased in
the same proportion. The manner in which the income tax
was levied shrmed its effect on the Tabourer. You levy so
much on men possessed of income ; ad that you withdraw
from their capital supposing them tradesmen. farmers, or
manufacturers—came from that accumulation which they had
made this )ear, and would probably spend next sear. The
money which they paid ks an income tax was no longer an ex-
penditure from which they could derive any direct advantages,
for it was taken from *ern to be applied in another way—to
support labour of another kind, which was not praductive.
If that amount were not taken from that class it would be an
accumulation, which would be spent in the same or the next
N ear.

Their Lordships would remember that there was an essmt:al
difference between a tax upon incomes and a tax upon c, n-
sumable commodities, inasmuch as the former was una,om-
partied by any extens:on oldie supply given to labour, whereas
the other, at the same sime that it put something into the
-Trousury, of necessity also put something Into the fund out of
which the productive labour of ihe country was rewarde.l. A
tax of 1,0001. upon incomes added nothing to the labour of
the country, whilst a tax of the same amount collected upon
articles liable to the duties of the excise or the customs of ne-
cessity caused an expenditure of I,OOC/., or it might be of
2,000/. or 3.0001. mare, which went to support the trade and
commerce of Englun,+.
In confirmation of this view, we must state that Mr.
PORTER shews in his work on the Progress of the
Nation, that the condition of the people, judging
by the produce of taxation, improved much less
between 1801. and 1821, involving a long period of
war, and of necessary taxation, than in the subsequent
years when taxes were reduced :-
4, Although," he says, «the amount of taxes received in
1811 was greater than the computation made, from the duties
imposed by the sum of r,663,3201., it was smaller than the
amount which should have been received, by 5,663,401/. when
we take into account the increase which ban been experienced
'n the numbers of population. In 1821, the amount actually
collected was 5,786,345/., beyond the compound amount, but
8,810,902/, below the sum that should have been
received, considering that the population was then
greater by 29 per cent. than it was in 1809. Between 1821
and 1831 taxes were re;.caled beyond what were imposed,
amounting to 17,321,4041., and the effect of this reduction Was
immediately seen in the proportionally greater consumption
of ankles on which the 041 or modified duties were continued.
.The amount received into the Exchequer in 1831 was greater
than the amount by computation to the extent of 14,705,7821.,
and was within 550,3251. of the sum which it should have
reached, considering the immense number by whom it was con-
tributed. In 1836, when the public hurc'ens had been still farther
reduced by 4,981.261/. the amount of duties and taxes received
was greater than it should have been by computation, to the
extent of 22,072,8041., and greater, also, by 6,320,3991. than
the remaining taxes would have yielded at the same rate of
consumption by the increased numbers of the people.
Thus, it is clear, that es long as the Government went
on adding to taxation so long did the condition of the
people go on deteriorating, and. it was only as the Go-
vernment aboblished taxation that their condition
was improved, and they came up to, or even
went beyond the mark which. they had reached
when the computation began. . The bulk of the people
then haVe a strung and even an intense interest in re-
cluing all kinds of taxation to the lowest possible level.
Sir R. PEEL'S scheme proposes to add at least 3,000,0001.
to the taxes, and the burden will fall, and must fall, on
industry, which produces all the wealth of the commu-
nity'. For the 'labouring classes to look quietly on, be-
guiled by Sir B. PE7.l.'s and Mr. Goux.rema's • honied
words, while they are despoiling the middle classes
by an income-tax, will be most injurious to their
Own welfare. They must • not allow any grudge
on account of previous • ill-treatment, which Ave
have always admitted they have received, to betray
them into a criminal indifference to. increased taxation,
On the contrary,. their interest is the same, on this point
at least, as the interest of the middle classes, and they
ought to make•eornmon cause with them in resisting the
imposition of an income tax.

We wish to direct the special attention of the public
to a recent correspondence, which we have elsewhere
inserted, between the deposed Baja of SATTARA and his
agent, and the Directors of the East India Company-
This correspondence forms another chapter in the his-
tory of the disgraceful conduct of the Directors towards
a high-minded and innocent native Prince, placed by the
fortune of war in a state of dependence upon them. We
cannot conceal our indignation at the treatment
which the agent of the Baja, a gentleman of
rank and worth, has received at the hands of
the twenty-four irresponsible oligarchs of Leaden-
hall-street. Every act of the majority of these
men proves their perfect sympathy with those by whom
the descendant of SEEVAJEE has been cast down from his
hereditary throne, and plundered of character, property,
and power. Those of our readers who remember the
facts we published in connection with the return of the
Baja's Agents in July last, will see the paltriness and
dishonesty of the reasons assigned for refusing to recog-
nize the accredited Agent of the Raja now in Lon-
don. To deny to this gentleman copies of docu-
ments, so important to. the interests of hiS master
is cruel and inhuman. The artifice, however, can
avail but fur a short time. It is in the power of
the friends of the Baja at the India House to bring
these documents to light, and still further to expose the
scandalous injustice to which the. Directors have become
parties. As the friends of truth .and justice, we hope to
see this done speedily. We desire to see British supre-
macy upheld in India ; but we see in conduct such as
9. that 7f i"
towards the Baja of SATTARA, the seeds
"
"e
and the source., those troubles and disasters
'"
which entail upon us 4.4: of wealth and human
life, and what is more _than either, of
‘.
British honour, and moral influence. A 4-..-.4trse of
undeviating justice Is the only method of permanen.4..if
retaining our possessions in the East. We cannot too
soon adopt this course. Let a commencement be made
in the case of the Raja of SATTARA. Should our past..
policy be much longer persisted in, England will be
ruined by taxation, and India will be lost by the tyranny
and exactions of the Court of Directors.

Lied Gut SOMEKSET's Lunatic Asylums' Bill
is one of those measures which are always favourites
with the House of Commons. It is a remedy falling
confessedly short of the evil to be removed. ‘.‘ In pro-
posing.this measure," said the Noble Lord addressing
the House of Commons on Thursday night, do not
propose to CIO nil that I could do, or that . ought
to be done; but I do think that what I propose
will be accompanied with very beneficial results,
and will lead to broader and more comprehensive
legislation on the subject." After such a state-
Milt, was it td IR Medea that the House could
refuse leave to bring in the Bill Assuredly not. True
Mr. WAKLEY, and Mr. HAWES demanded a more exten.
siVe melfslire bht the House, true to its character, de-
olitt@ti to entertain such a propOittl, What would become
of jobbing in legislation—or the tinkering branch of the
noisy basil-was of ilarliattlent, if laws were made as com-
prehensive and as perfect as even the limited capacity
of some of their framers could make them ? "Any Dots
and kettles to mend;" eries the perambulating renovator
of wa natitieptiil6 "oily Mere latii tit Miller." shouts in
chorus the statiotlars collective wisdom of three king.
doms. Now ill pPOportion it tilt illagilitildt Of the subject
of legislation is our vexation that it shotild be tip+
proached by legislators not prepared with com-
prehensive, and, so far a.° human judgment can devise
final measures. The bitaby•lit syACM Of legislation
unsettle.: every thing, puts the country to constant ex-
pense,little real good; Now tile clues- and effects very
tion of the management and gOvehlinent
asylums is a very important one ; and one at the same
time which more than any other calls for the application
of a gener4 rule. That most dreadful disease, mental
alienation, does not call for a different course of treat-
ment in a different district. So far, then, as the Legis-
lature assumes the guardianship of lunatic asylums its
nsdhPiunekiludbee
i i superngd o visionm
evceqr-yexetesntasbivlieshimvietnht, tphteiblUienited
and
private, in which lunatics are, or may hereafter be
confined.

There is one class of the community whose interests
is lycriQlatierl are r.ovcr overlookA by the IlLar,,e of
',:;
...file lawyers. ENery 1-3111-
sure to Provide some jab for them. Lord G 7 so.