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

PUBLIC OPINION.

The Morning Chronicle contains the following re-
marks :—" When did the mind of Sir Robert Peel first
become impressed with the stern necessity of resorting
to that odious measure, an income tax, for the extrica-
tion of the country from its financial difficulties ? Was it
before or after the late general election ? The question is
not one of idle curiosity. It involves his character as a
statesman, and his claims on public confidence. The
proof of the alleged necessity Is repeated in Sir Robert
Peel's speech of Thursday night. It consists of the state
.ofsthe public revenue, as compared with the amount of
public expenditure during a period ofsix successive year.;.
'He had proved that there had been an increasing deficit
during the last six years ; a rapidly increasing deficit du-
ring the last four years,' It was on this ground that he
asked the country maturely to consider whether he did
not establish such a position of financial necessity as called
upon him at least to propose some vigorous stely?' Any
defence from a mere temporary emergency is disclaimed.
We have had two years of cheap postage ; but' that is
not it. Nor is it the increased outlay occasioned by our
operations in the East. 'He thought that the great
majority of the Committee would admit that he had
proved the necessity, the existence of which he had
asserted. He had not proposed an income tax on account
of the war in Affghanistan, or the war in China.' The
six steps in Sir Robert Peel's demonstration of
the financial necessity are six years. Only thus has
he arrived at • that seventh of sabbatical rest on which
he bestows his blessing of an income tax. The ex-
perience of that long period of time constitutes his pre-
mises ; of which an income tax is the inevitable conclu-
sion. In this fact there is nothing to fix the date of his
conviction. It may be new born ;or it may be of long
standing. It may be more than three years old, or less
than three months old. All is uncertain beyond the
alternative that he must have come to it either before or
after the late general election. We will take each side
of the alternative to reason upon. Rive out of the six
demonstrative years had fulfilled their course before
the late contest. They had done their duty we as-
sume, on the mind of Sir Robert Peel. In that
case he knew last year that the question of an in-
eome tax was to be virtually decided by the division
on the Whig budget. lie was fully aware that
there was no other alternative. He knew that he was
leading on his unconscious party to the vote for an in-
come tax. The elections were, in his mind, a struggle
for and against the imposition of an income tax. His
talk of inquiries and consideration was mere pretence.
He was only keeping close the secret of his determina-
tion till a convenient season for the disclosure. Voters
and candidates were doing his work like puppets. By
undeceiving the people he would have changed the
whole face of things. Be reserved the word that would
have done so, and would then have scattered like a
routed army his ignorantly zealous supporters, until he
should be safely ensconced in Downing-street. Now all
this may be vastly clever. We impeach not its ingenuity.
We only ask whether the trickster who is. capable of it
can ever again, as long as he lives, deserve to be an ob-
ject of public confidence ? Has he not played false with
a whole people ?".
The Times thus alludes to the Income tax :—"lf every
income depending on persOnal skill and exertion were
considered as. a certain life annuity, if a business were
always considered, without reference to its actual pro-
mise, as equivalent to an estate for a given number of
years—set that number as high as you please—strict
justice_ indeed would. not be obtained—this of course is
impracticable under any law--but very much injustice
would be, avoided.; and that in the case of a business,
without any additional complication of the bill or in-
vestigation of circumstances—in the case of profes-
sional incomes, by. merely denianding the age of the
holder, and referring to a table of the value of life.
But most persons . would be satisfied ,with even a
looser attempt at fairness. Mr. R. Palmer—the Member
for Berkshire, a strictly agiicultural county—and him-
self, as a landed proprietor, interested against this sug-
gested reduction of the tax, proposed,,in a speech which
did much credit both to his sense and t.o his equity,, thlit
a tax of only, 2, per, cent. should be, levied on, all incomes
coming under the schedule of trades and professions. We
have very little doubt that such a concession as this—
involving no change of principle in Sir Robert Peel's
Bill—no one additional clause in its enactments, or in-
quiry in its administration—would satisfy those who at
at present conceive their interests arbitrarily set aside."
The Post remarks that Government is determined to
stand or fall by the income tax, observing :—" Upon the
general principle of the measure—as a measure of finan-
cial necessity—the Government is resolved to stand or
fall. For so far there can be no mistake. Either the
country will have the proposed income tax or another
Administration. This also is a bold, honest, and useful
declaration. During the existence of the late Adminis-
tration no one could calculate upon what was to happen,
for when the Ministers could not carry what they pro-
posed, they. were in the habit of submitting to whatever
the Opposition might dictate, and of still continuing to
be in appearance the Government, though ceasing so to
be in reality."
The Herald makes the following observations suggested
by the income tax :—" To apply the principles of equal
justice to the ease so strongly, and, we will add, so un-
fairly drawn, a graduated scale is the only expedient ;
under that process the small fundholder' would con-
tribute from his poverty in a ratio conformable to the
large profits' of the largetnanufacturer.' We do not
advocate, and we know no Conservative who does, that

the entire amount of the deficiency should be levied on
dormant capital ; but we do protest against any taxation
of the business of production, at a time when industry is
oppressed with innumerable difficulties, to such an ex-
tent as will repress production ; and we confidently assert
that to levy three per cent. on income derived frOm re-
tail trade and struggling profession, will bo to afflict in
dustry in the middling classes with a one-sided
paralytic stroke."
We quote the following from the Advertiser :—" Sir
Robert Peel's justifimtion of tht resolution he has coma
to of maintaining unimpaired the principle of an equal
rate of taxation upon every species of income, whether
for life, or in perpetuity— whether fixed or variable—
whether certain or precarious—must have. been felt by
all who listened to it, as a most lame and impotent
affair. He did not pretend-L-adept as he is in plausibi-
lity, and skilled as he is in sophistry—he did not pretend
to argue that the principle of his income tax is a just
principle. He evidently felt it to,be otherwise ; but he
felt, also, the trammels in which the landed interest hold
him, and lacking the courage to be just, lest he should
incur the hostility of these marauders upon the public
interests, he descends to the miserable expedient of
trying to sustain a great measure by a piece of special
pleading that would disgrace a third-rate practitioner at
quarter sessions."