The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-26 00:00:00

tttnn

LONDON:
SATURDAY MORNING, MARCH 26, 1842.

We insert elsewhere a communication from
Dr. BowarNo, and honour, as we ought, his de-
sire to do homage to truth and justice. We
think;however, that what he says of Sir ROBERT
PEEL'S tariff is incomplete, and the report which
we saw of his spetch, unfortunately omitted much
of the condemnation which his letter says he
threw on the tariff. If Dr. BOWRING, out of regard
to truth, felt himself.constrained to praise Sir R.
PEEL'S tariff, the same regard to truth should
have made him condemn the principle intro-
duced by Sir ROBERT PEEL for the first time
of establishing a discriminating duty on all
the possible products of our colonies. Much,
too, as Sir- ROBERT PEEL has done ac-
cording to Dr. BOWRING'S description, he has
acted up to no-one good principle. We excuse
many of the existing enactments of the tariff,
because they were the offspring of ignorance, we
acquiesce in them because we would not
disturb existing interests, but Sir ROBERT
PEEL, by his tariff, disturbs existing interests,
and now re-enacts laws, the principles of which
science has long ago repudiated. For this we
censure; and:we think Dr. BOWRING ought to
have censured Sir. ROBERT PEEL'S tariff. Laws
which were a- disgrace to the 17th century,
are enacted by Sir ROBERT PEEL in the 19th;
and we cannot praise a slight departure from
ancient errors which at the same time gives to all
that remains of them the solemn sanction of this
generation. _

- But admitting all that is good in the tariff, was
it not palpable—from the mode in which Sir R.
PEEL brought it forward, dwelling, very much
on the great benefits it was to confer on trade ;
deluding the working • classes, by a statement
that he was about to confer great benefits
on them—that he coupled his tariff with an in-
come tax, in order to bribe and • humbug the
people into submission into that odious impost ?
If his tariff was much better than it is, and were
it coupled with an inquisitorial and unequal in-
come tax, it would deserve to be scouted; but
considering the whole as a mere piece of political
clap-trap, we cannot applaud those free-traders
who approve of the tariff.

We were rather struck in Sir R. PEEL'S speech,
by his admission, that he was not altogether pre-
pared to state that it would not be wise to act
on Mr. J. D. 1-lumE's recommendation, and
set trade free without regard to what may be
done by foreign nations. But how does he
carry out that principle ? Our colonies being
offsets from us, speaking our language, having the
same wants as us, will, as a matter of course, if
statestrien will only let them alone, carry on with
us the most advantageous trade possible. They
will be integral parts of our empire, and our
traffic with them will naturally be like the traf-
fic between England and Scotland. But our
traffic with countries under different go-
vernments, is subjected to interruption,
and perversion from political causes. We are
never able therefore, to carry on with foreign
countries tire most advantageous trade possible.
Political considerations check or destroy the
happiness of mankind. Under such circumstances,
a wise and enlightened statesman would create
no factitious advantage for the colonies with which
the people arc sure to have the most advanta-
geous trade possible and no factitious disadvantage
for those countries with which trade may pos-
sibly, from other causes, not flow into the most
profitable and useful channels. Sir R. PEEL
does the reverse. He creates by a whole series
of new discriminating duties factitious advantages
for the trade with the colonies, and factitious
disadvantages for the trade with other countries.
That whole proceeding is so adverse to scientific
truth, so contrary to the lessons of experience,
that it is a disgrace to the Legislature of Great
Britain for one Moment to entertain a tariff, of
which the principle of discriminating duties, fa-
vourable to colonial produce, is found in every
line. With all deference, therefore, to Dr.
BOWRIN4I, we still hold his praise of the petty
alterations made by Sir ROBERT PEEL, for a pur-
pose, to have been injudicious and ill-tin:ed.
The eagerness with which Sir ROBERT seized
hold of his admission, ought to have convinced
him that he had given a weapon of offence into
the hand of his and our opponent.

It is generally asserted that the breaking up
of an administration in this country, turning out
a great number of.offiCial men, bringing others
into their places, and perhaps changing the
whole policy of the State, is a serious public
evil. If that be the case at any time the evil
must be tenfold greater to turn out an Ad-
ministration recently formed, which has- come
into power expressly because its predecessor
could not carry on the Government successfully
and advantageously. Now to break up Sir
110 BERT PEEL'S Government would seem to
offer no alternative but a long series of con-
fusions. Tt is doubted whether the Whigs or
Radicals or any third party be just now com-
petent and ready to take the Government with
any chance of carrying it on quietly and
successfully. Under these peculiar circum-
stances, Sir ROBERT PEEL has brought for-
ward
a measure which several of his own
followers declare to be unjust, which he is
quite aware is extremely unpopular, which he
knows he will have great difficulty in carrying,
and yet on carrying. which he has staked his
existence as a Minister. This may be very cun-
ning in Sir ROBERT PEEL, very artful, some
rersons say very bold and manly, but we cannot
call it patriotic. He places his personal gratifi-
cation on the one hand and the public peace on the
other, and he says; if you do not give me my own
v ay, I will resign, and confusion will be the con-
sequence. Hance Mr. ATTWOOD, while he de-
nounced the income tax, declared that he would
vote with him. Sir B. PEEL, tries, therefore, to
terrify the public into submission to his income
tax, and leaves them to choose between bowing
themselves to his yoke, or risking great public
confusion.
We apprehend, however, that Sir R. PEEL on
this point 'very much overrates his own value;
perhaps he overrates the utility of Government.
There are an immense number of branches in
society which it has not yet, 'with all its dili-

gEnce, managed to get hold of, and it
tiispt theretty
plain to every man of discernment, that
I branches which have escaped its authority are
much better regulated than those which it con-
trols. But whatever may be the utility of the
Government, the nation can go on without Sir
ROBERT PEEL. In the ordinary course of
nature he must be removed in a few years,
and no person supposes that society will be
dissolved at his death. But that event
may happen in the course of a few weeks or
days, and society will not then come to an end.
Sir ROBERT PEEL overrates his own value, when
he estimates his loss as more than equivalent to
an income tax. The nation can rub on without
him now, as it must rub on without him by and
bye ; and to his threat that he will resign, the
nation echoes, resign ; we can do without you.
With the monopolists, we admit the case is
different. For them be is a necessity. He is
the keeper who is to supply hungry/wolves with
their accustomed food. Without him they must
be scattered, and will lose their provender.
They will support him, therefore, in inflicting an
income tax on the people, and would equally
support him, though he bring ruin on the em-
pire. But for them, Sir ROBERT PEEL'S threat
of resignation would be merely farcical. If they
were not united with him in an unholy league,
every man would at once perceive that his un-
patriotic and insolent announcement of throw-

ing up the Government, and throwing af-
fairs, as far as he can, into confusion, un-
less he be allowed to have his own way,
would be of no more importance than the
threat of a pouting child. As the instrument
and head of the monopolists, his threat of re-
signation to induce them to support him at
whatever risk, and at whatever cost, becomes a
symptom of the reckless daring with which he
is resolved to inflict the curse of an income-tax
on the people.

In that threat, however, lies much hope. It

mplies on his part a fear that many of his

troops will desert him. It betrays a con-
sciousness of defection. He is like an officer
preventing his men from leaving their co-
lours by threatening to run them through.
He has already taken the most extreme measure
in his power, and has no resource but to resign if
he be defeated. He has sought to inspire his fol-
lowers with the courage of despair by cutting
off all hope of escape.
His arbitrary and unconstitutional method of
forcing, by the help of his monopolists, his favo-
rite impost on the country, should rouse both the
indignation and the hopes of his opponents.
There are symptoms in various quarters of alarm
in the agriculturists. They already repent
that they have placed in office a man who
has abated, as they say, their protection
on grain and on cattle. Deputations from the
agricultural districts are going up to Tory Mem-
bers, to get them to remonstrate with Sir ROBERT
PEEL. They like the income tax not much bet-
ter than the townspeople. A little exertion, then,
now on the part of the townspeople, whose con-
cerns will all be forced into day, may
stop Sir ROBERT PEEL. They must profit by the
recess to hold meetings and get up petitions and
remonstrances. It is possible that no inconsider-
able number of Tory Members may stay away,
for a few days after the re-assembling of Parlia-
ment. It is even possible that several of them,
disregarding Sir R. PEEL'S threat, may vote against
his income tax. A strong muster, therefore, of
the opponents of the measure, on Monday week,
may suffice, if not to defeat Sir R. PEEL, to give
him so serious a check as to convince him that

be will be unable to carry his measure. We at
once, therefore, remind all the opponents of an
income tax, that it is necessary to be at their
post on that day, wherever they may go
in the mean time, and, however energetically
they may assist their constituents in hold-
ing public meetings and embodying public
sentiment in one overwhelming mass. One ex-
ertion now on the part of the constituencies and
the Members will save months of labour here-
after. We trust, therefore, that will be made,
and that the Minister, who is at once one of the
weakest and inconsistent that ever was placed at
the head of affairs, will hasten to carry his
threat of resignation into effect.

We learn from the Chelmsford Chronicle, that

the Braintree and Rocking Farmers' Club de-
clared at their monthly meeting, held on the
23d instant, that they view with serious alarm
the proposed alteration in the Corn-laws; and
they further declare, that. the proposed altera-
tions in the tariff will tend materially to depress
agriculture, " inasmuch as the importation of
cattle, meat, starch, &c., will necessarily greatly
diminish the value of home produce." A
deputation from this club is appointed to wait
upon the County Members, to request their ear-
nest and immediate attention to the subject. The
same agricultural journal is convinced that fo-
reign agriculturists will now fatten hogs and cattle
for our market, instead of sending corn hither;
and that sheep will be imported in great num-
bers under the proposed alterations. To lower
the price of beef,pork, and mutton, permanently,
it sayt, one penny per pound, would probably take
4,000,0001.—as large a sum as the whole income
tax is calculated to raise—outofthe pockets of the
farmers and time graziers. This journal complains
bitterly that—
The principle of protection is broken through in a new
direction, and oxen, and cows, and sheep, which were be-
fore altogether prohibited, are to be admitted at the duty
of I/. 15s. and 3s. respectively; the duty on carraway seed
is reduced from IL 10s. to 55.; on coriander from 15s. to
55.; on clover from 11. to 10s., and this, too, at a moment
when forbearance was peculiarly colleCtor, from the
farmers being not only required to consent to an exten-
sive sacrifice of their property, but in common with the
other classes to contribute three per cent. from their in-
come to the exigencies of the State.
So the farmers begin to taste, at least in
imagination, some of the miseries to which they
have doomed their fellow countrymen by return-
ing to Parliament a Tory and monopolist ma-
jority. The honesty of these gentry is made
apparent by their complaints. If lowering the
duties on meat, so as to reduce the price one
penny per pound, would take away from them
4,000,0001., what would be the effect of abolish-

ing altogether the duties on meat? It would
lower the price at least threefold, being a posi-
tive reduction of another penny per lb. and a
penny for annoyance, vexation, and interference,
making on the statement of the farmers at least
12,000,000/. a-year, which they take from the
other classes for meat alone. We cannot place
the total abolition of all duties on foreign
agricultural produce at a less figure than
three times the amount of the duty on
cattle alone, whence it follows, from
the complaints of the Essex graziers, that the
agricultural classes take, at least, 36,000,0001. a
year from the rest of the community by the
corn-laws and provision-laws. We are thankful
for the admission. The Essex agriculturists in
quarrelling with their protector are restoring to
the community its rights.

Again,'we learn from the cork Southern Re-
porter that a meeting was held in that city on
Monday last, consisting of .the leading export
and other merchants of the city, for the purpose of
considering Sir R. PEEL'S tariff, at which his new
taxes on lard and cured provisions excited great
dissatisfaction, and a memorial against them was
adopted. Sir ROBERT PEEL will thus find him-
self thwarted by this own petted interests, as
well as by the interest he has trampled on in
every part of the kingdom. 'We rejoice to see
him caught in his own net. He has preached
up the necessity of agricultural protection, and
the cattle-feeders of .England and Ireland will
not allow him to escape from his own princi-
ples. The intense folly of pretending to adjust
the rival claims of all classes ofproducers by any
other means than " the higgling of the market"
will soon come home to Sir R. PEEL, and he will
fall a just sacrifice to the 'just delusion he has
fostered. So be it.
We do not go along with these people in de-
manding more protection, nor do we justify their
complaints, but they have a good case as against
Sir R. PEEL, and against the Tory journals
which have advocated protection to native in-
dustry. He and his journals have flattered them
into the belief that prices were to be kept up,
and have probably encouraged them to renew
leases, and enter into engagements on that be-

es* _
m o
, s?"
.4.