MORE ANTI-FREE-TRADE OBJECTIONS 43 



net income the State revenue decreases in the exact proportion 

 to the decreased income. If landlords' and farmers' income 

 has decreased to the extent of -t'44,000,000 annually, it is clear 

 that a great shrinkage in the taxable area of the country must 

 have taken place, while the Government revenue from income- 

 tax must also have decreased with it. This means, at one 

 shilling in the pound, an annual loss to the State of £2,200,000 

 {tivo millions two hundred tlumsand pounds sterling). 



It has already been pointed out that the first shock of all 

 this falls on the people, who feel it in the form of shortage 

 of work, reduction of wages, a lowering of the standard of 

 comfort, followed by distress and increasing poverty. It then 

 falls upon the tax-payer who is and must be ultimately re- 

 sponsible for every penny lost by mistakes in fiscal policy or 

 inept imperial or municipal administration. 



Shrinkage of Taxable Area 



Some writers who defend the present system maintain that 

 if the taxable area has shrunk in one direction, the general area 

 is larger than it was by several hundreds of millions. This is 

 true, but the argument applies to every country in Europe, 

 because of the growth of the population, the increase of wealth, 

 and the natural expansion of the taxable area ; but this, as is 

 pointed out by anti-Free-traders, is an altogether fortuitous 

 circumstance which cannot be used to serve the purposes of 

 Free-trade, since it applies equally to Protected countries. It 

 has been shown elsewhere that Germany, for example, which 

 has not sacrificed her agriculture, has, during a similar period, 

 increased her taxalile area by 71 per cent., while Great Britain 

 has only increased hers by 27 per cent. 



The working-classes bear the first shock of this terrible 

 reaction ; afterwards it reaches tlie tax-payer, and ultimately 

 assumes the proportions of an intolerable burden. The tax- 

 payer, in many instances, displays phenomenal ignorance of the 

 question, and is such an anomaly that he does not really know 

 that what the State spends comes out of his pocket. How 

 often it is said, " Oh, it does not matter, the State will have to 

 shell out " ! as tliough the State derived its income from sources 

 altoc'ether apart from the direct and indirect taxation of the 

 people. 



The Patient Tax-payer 



He is, however, forced to realise at last that this attitude 

 of indifference has induced the building up of a system of 



