The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1899-10-16
How VIII England Pay for Her South
African War?

When Mr.. CHAPLIN, member OF the
Salisbury Cabinet, suggested, two months
ago that it might be well to reimpose the
former duty OF one shilling per quarter on
imported grain, he defended the proposal
on the ground that the proceeds Of the tax
would be needed to defray the cost OF an
Old Age Pension act. At that time. few
persons supposed that war in South
Africa was inevitable. The war has come,
however, and the question now arises, How
will England foot the bill 1t has been an
nounced that, even before %, 900 reserves
were called out, no less than $25, 900, 900
had been expended in preparing for the de-
spatch OF single army corps to the Cape. II
the war lasts six months, that expenditure
will be more than Occupied. The money
required can be furnished in two ways,
either by additional taxes, or by the issue
OF new loan, which itself would involve
some additional taxation to provide inter-
est and sinking fund. Should the taxation
he direct or indirect? There is reason to
believe that the present Ministers are con-
sidering the expediency OF increasing the
revenue by a small duty on imported grain.
This mode OF solving the now urgent prob
lem Of ways and means has been advocated
by the London Times and the Financial
Neirs, but the most cogent plea in its
behalf Is put forward by Mr.. ERNEST f.
WILLIAMS in an article contributed to the
October number OF the National Repier.
Mr.. WILLIAMS begins by recalling the
fact that, in 1s4e. in pursuance OF the
| act passed three years before, ali duties on
imported grain, coming from foreign
ptrIn or hn nnlpniaa
| by a registration fee OF one shilling a
quarter and four and half pence per
| hundredweight In 1894, for convenience.
the equivalent Of three pence per hund red.
weight was substituted for ON shilling
per quarter. Five years later, Mr.. LOWE,
| then Chancello. OF the ExcheGuer. sue
ceede-l in passing an act abolishng alto
! gether the duties on grain and meal.
His real motive WAS his avowed de-
sirc to get rio o. the last rag Of Pro-
tection," but the reason which he gave
officially WA that the nominal duty
was not worth the expense OF collec-
! tion. Mr.. WILLIAMS shows that this
official reason was ill-founded. for in
| the last year when the registration fee
was levied, the cost OF collecting it was less
than $50, 900 year, while 1t brought in an
annual revenue OF nearly 81, 500, 900. The
figures for 1898 prove that the registration
fee would now yield more than S12, $780,
| 900. even II 1t were levied only on foreign
grain; II the colonial contribution were also
taxed, the yield Of the registration fee
would be greater by nearly 81 400, 900. It
Is obvious that even the revenue first
named, derlvable from foreign grain alone,
| L. .r1a 81. ,l.;.,
large loan.
Now, 1t is certain that registration fee
Of one shilling per quarter would help the
British farmer, because he would have just
that much advantage over his foreign COM
petitor. But, while British producers Of
food staples would be slightly benefited
| by the new tax, would not harm be done to
the consumers, who constitute a great
majority OF the British populations This
question must be answered in the negative;
it Is acknowledged on all hands that the
registration fee, abolished in 1859, did not
affect the price OF bread in the least. Ac-
cording to the advocates OF a reimposition
OF it, a registration fee Is the only mode OF
taxation from which nobody would suffer,
except, possibly, the bakers, whose profit
on the so-called quartern loaf might be
in small degree reduced. The income tax
is already very onerous; the excise ia exces-
sively high, the death duties can hardly be
augmented for any purpose beyond the
high level attained in 1894. Anincrease Of
the stamp duties will be vehemently OPP
posed on the ground that Englsnds CON-
merce would be hampered and some OF its
financial business driven to the Continent;
at all events no endurable extension OF
stamp duties would yield an additional
SIP, 75O, 900 OF revenue. Evidently, there
is much to be said for Il revival OF the regis
tration fee on imported grain for the
urgent purpose OF meeting the cost of the
war on which England has embarked.
The real objection to the revival OF a
registration fee on imported grain is that
the duty might not stop long at one shil.
ling per quarter AS Englands necessities
increased. the fee would be gradually
raised. until it amounted. let US say. t.