New-York tribune., 1876-04-21
BRITISH AFFAIRS.
THE STATE OF THE REVENUE.

EERLf-DISCUSSION
NANCEs.
IFRoM THE REGULAR CORRESPONDENT OF THE TRIBUSE.l
LONDON, April 4-From time to time during the
last few years, theoretical economists have enter
tanned the public with proposals to abolish the In
come Tax. The tax has more than once been re-
duced but its financial convenience and political
convenience are alike too great to justify hope of
its permanent abolition IN England. The Budget Of
last night is an illustration of both. The reckless
spending which is the usual characteristic OF Tory
Government, has brought up the estimates for the
next year to the sum of over seventy-elght
millions sterling (f7s,0ii,000l, or almost
800, 100000; a sum quite out of prece-
deut in peace times. The anticipated revenue
is Ell 27O 000 and the deficiency f774 0O0sterling,
nearly s 900. 000 The question which the Chan
celor of the Exchequer had to face was, How this
deficiency Of -, 900 600 is to be suppliedY There
were at least three ways First, by suspending the
process begun only last year. of paying off the Ma
tional Debt. Second, by increasing the duties on
spirits. Third, by increasing the Income Tax. 1t
is the last which he has adopted and the reasons for
his adoption of it Of practical convent
ence and expediency which, in this country, habitu-
ally override the most conclusive demonstrations of
the theoretical unsOuBdncss of the tax in question. To
suspend a scheme adopted only last year which,
though very minute IN its actual proportions, bears
so big n name as that of paving oil the National
Debt would bring deserved reproach on the Govern
ment. To increase the spirit duties would array
against them at once the organized hostility of pow
erful trade interests, not TO speak of the Irish men,
bers who sink all political differences and vote to-
gether when whisky is threatened. To increase the
income tax irritates, indeed a numerous body of
people But they are not distinct class, they are
not organized, and they are not capable of acting
ont in
So on goes the extra penny.
Nor is this all. The income tax is middle-class
tax, paid grudgingly by ALL but really falling most
heavily on the lower middle classes. whose incomes
are small and who cannot bear being taxed twice
over-for that is the practical operation of an in
come tax-without pinching of painful kind. To
relieve the most intolerable distress which the in
cideuce of such tax would cause its incidence
caual a discrimination has been made in favor of the
smallest incomes. On incomes below $500 year
there has been tax at all while incomes between
$500 to 81 800 have been entitled to deduction Of
800 before assessment and 80 have paid taxes only
on the differences between 500 aud the actual IN
come Now the Chancellor OF the Exchequer, while
raising the general tax from two pence in the pound
10 three pence has also extended these exemptions
IN favor of the former class. He proposes that in
comes mp to 800 year shall IN future be wholly
uu,axcd, while the limit at which incomes are al
lowed deduction is enlSrpcd from $1,000 to $1,000
a year. and the deduction Itself increased from Sl0O
TO $500. With all these allowances the extra penny
will produce about S7.400.O0O.
This is plain bid for popularity with the small
shopkc. ping class which is powerful in the bor-
ong;.s Ti.o great majority of the working classes
have never been touched by the income tax. Their
average wages did not up to the line at which
taxation on incomes began. With the general rise
Of wages during recent years. their income was no
doubt rapidly approaching the sum at which the
tax would begin, and It is quite possible that Mr.
Disrael who first discovered the conservative
workinprnan has had the future interests Of his
prot6g6 in his eye in arranging that the point of eX-
emptIon should rccedc as Tie artisan income ap-
preached 1t. But the immediate political object OF
such an arrangement beyond Gonbt, was the benefit
il confers on the lower middle class, and the benefit
the lower middle clas, are expected in return to con-
fer on the party to whom they are indebted for so
considerable a boon. This is all very clever but if
the Liberals had done It our ears would have been
deafencd with Tory outcres about the proligacy of
political fnancle-ing and the danger of relieving
from the burden # taxation the majorties who con-
tro expenditure.
Lord Shaftesbury's motion for an address TO the
Queen praying her not 10 assume the title of En-
press has been rejected by majority af l6 only.
No less than 81 peers supported II. The Liberal
whips were confident OF about SO-"if they all kept
their promses"-and hoped AT most for 100. The
Tories mustered only 1877, and their majority bears
but a small proportion to the actual majority of
Tory Peers over Liberal Peers. But it is enough,
and it was of course certain from the beginning that
Lord Shaftosbury's resolution must be defeated.
Lord Canaryon told the truth. The Government
could not afford to be beatcn-could not afford TO re-
Int
not strong enough to acknowledge that they have
made mistake. Ii is whispered that Mr.. Disraeli's
advice to the Queen has been of very singular kind
that he has assured her the country is in favor of
the change and that the opposition to 1t is all of
party kind, persisted in for party purposes. can
auite believe that Mr. Dsrao believes His habit
of imputng low motives to mems actions Is an old
one and he is not the only man capable OF sincere
disbelief in high ones. But from his own point of
view ho is making blunder-which seems due to
iil-temper and that probably to lll-health-in
his treatment of the subject in the House,
or rather in his treatment Of the House it.
self He has lately taken to answering
questions put to him about this matter in style
which the House does not like, and will by and by
find means of resenting-answers thai are curt III
manner and that give no real information. This Is
spoken Of as an imitation of Palmerston's manner,
but IL IS only an limitation ol hone VI ohc tAt'ihu
peculiarities which it suited Lord Pamerston at
times to put on The House did not like them, but
they tolerated them, partly because of Palmer5ton's
position of authority, which Mr. Dsrac has not at
tanned and Will never attain-parly because at bot
tom there was always in Palmerston fund of good
hum0r which Mr.. Disracli does not posses.
The most you can predicate of Mr.. Dsrae is an
absence of ill humOr His present style is much
more like Mr. Ayrton's than like Lord Pamerston's