The Sun.
London, England, 1842-07-01 00:00:00

FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.
GLOBE.—The inconvenience and injustice the t
must arise from the operation of the Income-tax wih
soon begin to be felt, and there can be little doubt
that experience will bringtolil
btah,
the
ostofmuenafsourereseen
Igrievances that will be inflicted
al-
luded to. Besides. the palpable evils that obviously
flow from the very principles of, the .obnoxions im-
post, there will be found an immense 'number of
oppressive cases springing from the practical appli-
cation of the new Act, which it has been
„impossible to anticipate. Though the coming
event had cast its gloomy shadow before, it is only
when the Income-tax begins to • tha t •
substance of those disagreeable
• - •
presented themselves to the it !i-4.';-4140. - c‘c;
'brought sensibly home to' he feeli •
,nity. As long as the measure was st tker:;TlN-f!#. ,
lion, the Government, who had staked' dent o 'CI - •
existence on its success, used every means in their
power to persuade the people that the scourge—for
such it is on all hands considered—should he admitshi-
tered as tenderly as possible, and that them
should be no greater inconvenience inflicted .
on the public than might be actually neces-
sary for the due collection of the Income-tax.
But now that the Premier has obtained his object, the
official tone is greatly altered, and the Impost will evi•
dently be collected with a high hand, so as to give as
little trouble as possible to the Government, without
regard to the amount of inconvenience that the public
will be made to suffer. Among the numerous an-
noyances, the prospect of which is already dawning
upon the nation from the quarter in question, we
have to notice that which will be suffered by the
holders of shares in public companies, who stand
a very good chance of having to pay an In-
come-tax twice over for the same property, and in
some cases being made subject to the impost when
the amount of their income is below the sum upon
which any tax is payable. It has been announced
that the directors of public companies will be held ac-
countable for the tax on the dividends paid to share-
holders; and as it is very possible that a party may hold
a share in a profitable concern, though his entire in-
come may be less than 1501. a-year, he will have to
pay a tax upon it in the first instance, which he can
only get returned to him by a very tedious and
troublesome process. It may very reasonably be pre-
sumed that persons of limited means will, m many
cases, not have the time at their command to obtain
the restoration of the money that will be wrongly
withheld from them ; and even if they do take the
required steps—as it is an admitted axiom that " time
is money"—they will be robbed of as much at least
as they could earn in the, time devoted to re-
covering what will have been unjustly withheld from
them. " A bird in the hand" is said to be worth
" two in the bush ;" and this saying will apply with
peculiar force when the hush, into which the bird has
got, happens to be a thorny and inaccessible hedge
planted by Government. What we mean by our
illustration is this—that where two sovereigns may
be wrongly deducted from a person's income, it would
in most cases be better worth his while to put up with
the loss of ore, rather than be put to the trouble of
obtaining the two from official clutches. We feel to-
lerably sure that scarcely a week will now pass with-
out adding some fresh reasons for discontent to the
amount of public odium already manifested towards
the Income-tax.

STANDARD.—Last night's proceedings seems to
us fully to justify the appointment of the Committee
of Inquiry, because they show—first, that such a
Committee is not necessarily repugnant to the princi-
ples of justice ; secondly, that it is fully competent to
elicit the truth, if with the truth its members will
content themselves. That the Committee has abused

its opportunities is not to be denied ; but that it has
been able to do so is the consequence of the ignorance
or timidity of those who have submitted to it. if wit-
nesses and parties had in the first instance declared that
they would not enter a secret inquisition, the Com-
mittee, it is now plain, must have thrown open its
doors. Mr. Roebuck's plea of delicacy is conclusive
of the fact that sect* is not necessary to the suc-
cessful prosecution of the inquiry confided to him
mid his brothers of the Committee. The Commit-
tee, then, as first appointed, was a proper step, and
the tyrannical usurpations of that 'body, whether
perfected or attempted, cannot make that now
wrong which was originally right. Now, first,
as to the secret tribunal—Mr. Roebuck says that
he solicits secresy merely for the .sake of the wit-
nesses. Do the principles of British law—do the
principles of eternal justice, warrant this extreme
tenderness to witnesses ? We sqe nothing of it in
our Courts. We see witnesses there not only com-
pelled to give their evidence in the face of the
accused, but subject to a severe cross-examination by
him, or by his counsel. And we know that no
man's life, or property, or honour, can be safe, if
he is to be tried upon the evidence of witnesses
veiled and guarded. Even in the reign of Nero, while
yet any vestige of the forms of old Roman liberty
remained, we find that the accuser must confront
the accused. "It is not," said Festus, " the man-
ner of the Romans to condemn any man before
that he which is accused have the accusers face to
face, and have license to answer for himself con-
cerning the crime laid against him." This, mark,
was the Roman manner, even in Nero's time ;
but it is too liberal for Mr. Roebuck's Committee
"of Public Safety," we had almost called it. Passing
from the Roman law, let us come to the law of our
own country. " This open examination of wit-
nesses," says Blackstone, " viva race, in the presence
of all mankind, is much more conducive to the clear-
ing up of truth than private and secret examination
before an officer or his clerk, where a witness may
frequently depose that in private which he will
be ashamed to testify in a public and solemn tri-
bunal. There an artful or careless scribe may
make a witness speak what he never meant,"
&c.; and again, " However convenient these
(other tribunals) may appear, as, doubtless, all ar-
bitrary powers, well executed, are the most conve-
nient—yet, let it again be remembered that
delays and little inconveniences
,in the forms of
justice is the price that all free nations must pay
for their liberties in more substantial matters." It
would be, however, burning daylight to multiply
proofs that the law of England abhors secresy in the
administration of justice. There' is but one precedent
for it, and that is the object of two centuries' detesta-
tion—the Star Chamber. Mr. O'Connell himself
must be contented with this, for the Star Chamber,
and all such unusual tribunals, are condemned both
by the " Bill of Rights" and the
," Petition of Right:"
But we are to console ourselves for the erection of
this monstrous tyranny by the assurance that Mr.
Roebuck is very courteous, and that the Committee
are unanimous.