The Sun. — London, England, 1860-02-11 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS—(YESTERDAY.) The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. IRISH ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS. The Marquis of WESTMEATH asked the hon. and learned lord on the woolsack whether there was any inten tion on the part of the Government to introduce any mea sure to alter the constitution of the Irish Ecclesiastical Courts. Tho answer of the Loup CHANCELLOR was inaudilule. • SAVOY AND NICE. In reply to Lord NonmANny, Earl GRANVILLE s aid there was o correspondence n w hi c h could be considered official in the possessionßritish Ambassador at Paris, Lord Cowley, and Count Walewski. lie could not undertake to say there had been no conversa tion between the I.Nlinisters on the subject, but certainly nothing that could be considered official existed on the sub ject. u s t sat down Earl GREY s aid the noble earl who had j had said there we: no o fficial correspondence, but he should like to know whether there w as any correspond en ce at all on the subject. Lord W ODEIIO USE said he thought his noble friend had answered the question of the no ble marquis very clearly. There was certainly no despatches or correspond ence in the possession of the Government on the subject. SUNDAY SERVICES. Viscount DUGANNONof divine oned worship in the minor his motion with re spect to N ormance the perf theatres of the metropolis until Friday, the 24th inst. Lord PORTMAN suggested the withdrawal of the motion altogether. The LORD CHANCELLOR thought that if the ser vices were conducted with piety, they ought not to be inter fered with. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY said these services had been instituted by private individuals, and as they tended to the promotion of religion and piety, no difficulty ought to be thrown in the way by this house. After a short conversation, Viscount DUNGANNON refused to postpone his motion further than Friday, the 24th. Their lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF CONIMONS.—(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. The interest felt in the financial statement which it was announced, late last night the Chancellor of the Exche quer would' be sufficiently recovered to make this evening*, was apparent in the state of the house, which was crowded from the commence ment of the proceedings. The seats on the floor were occupied a few minutes after four o'clock, and the galleries appropriated to members and strangers were also filled, several members of the Upper House and distinguished foreigners being present. Exactly at half-past four o'clock the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who appeared to bo in good health, entered the house and was loudly cheered. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The following bills were read a second time :—Marl borough Branch Railway, and Northleach and Witney Railway. SILK MANUFACTURES. Mr. BRIGHT said he had to present a petition which bore on the subject to bo brought before the house this evening. It was signed by 18 or 20 of the silk manufac- re turers of Manchester , and prayed for a removal of the striations on silk fabrics introduced into this country, in conformity with the principle of free trade. (Cheers.) _ _ _ HARBOURS OF REFUGE. Sir JOHN PAKINGTON asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether it was the intention of her Majesty's Government to take any steps in the present session with a view to carrying out the recommendations of the Har bours of Refuge Commission. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that, as soon as it was possible, Government would adopt the necessary stops in reference to the subject. - - MISSION TO THE lONIAN ISLANDS. Mr. MAGUIRE asked the First Lord of the Treasury whether he had any objection to produce the papers relat ing to the mission of the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone as High Commissioner to the lonian Islands ; and, if it was the intention of the Government to produce them, at what time they were likely be laid on the table of the house Lord PALMERSTON said it was not intended to pro duce tbo papers, as such a proceeding was quite tmneces sary. (Laughter.) HOUSEHOLD CAVALRY. Sir HENRY STRACEY asked the Secretary of State for War, as officers promoted to the rank of major-general from the household cavalry receive one pound nine shillings and twopence per diem, and officers promoted to the rank of major-general from the infantry of the line received one pound five shillings per diem, why cavalry officers of the line promoted to the same rank, and who had been re quired, to attain that rank, to expend for the regulated price of their commission one thousand six hundred and seventy five pounds • more than the sum required as the regu lated price for the same commission of the infantry officer, should receive the same pay only, i.e., fis per diem ; and, the principle of higher pay for greater outlay being recognised in the instance of the officer promoted from the Household Cavalry, why it was net applicable to the cavalry officer of the line, who had been required to expend for his commission £1,675 above the sum required of the infantry officer of the 'line. Mr. S. HERBERT said that in the cues alluded to the rate of pay had no reference to the purchase money. THE TREATY WITH PRANCE. Lord J. RUSSELL laid on the table the commercial treaty with the Emperor of the French. THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT. On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the Excnr:Quxn, the Speaker left the chair, and the House resolved itself into committee upon the Customs Acts. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, who was again greeted with loud cheers, addressing the Chairman (Mr. Massey), said,—Public expectation has long marked out the year ISGO as an important epoch in British finance. It was well known that in this year, for the first time, we were to receive from a process not of our,own creation a very great relief in respect of our annual payment of interest of the national debt—a relief amounting to no less a sum than £2,146,000—a relief such as we have never known in time past, and such as I am afraid we never shall know in time to come. Besides that, other: and more recent arrange ments have added to the importance of this juncture. A revenue of nearly £12,000,000 a-year, levied by duties on tea and sugar, which still retain a portion of the additions made to them on account of the Russian war, is about to lapse absolutely on the 31st of March, unless it shall be renewed by Parliament. The income •tax, from which during the year we shall have derived a sum of between £9,000,000 and £10,000,000; is likewise to lapse at the same time, although an amount not inconsiderable will still re main to be collected in virtue of the law about to expire. And lastly, an event of not less interest than any of these, which has made public feeling thrill from one end of the country to the other—l mean the commercial treaty with France which has been just laid on the table—rendered it a matter of absolute necessity for the Government to request the House to deviate under the peculiar circumstances of the case from its usual, its salutary, its constitutional prac tice of voting the principal charges of the year before they proceed to consider Supply, and induced the Government ' to think they will best fulfil their duty in inviting atten tion on the earliest practicable day to those financial arrangements of the year which are materially affected by the treaty with France, and which, though they reach considerably -beyond the limits of that treaty, yet, not withstanding, tan only be examined by the House in a satisfactory manner when examined as a whole. (Hear.) This must be our apology, if any apology be needed, for asking the house to take into its earliest consideration the matters which lam about to submit to it. Every considera tion both of gratitude for the kindness of the house to my self and of the public duty likewise will en sure th a t, if I have an extensive field to traverse and many subjects to open and discuss, I shall not, at least, make any wanton trespass on the time and attention of the house. (Hear, hear.) The results of the finances of the last year, inasmuch as it has hot positively reached its close, can only be presented in a form founded partly on account and partly on estimate. At the same time they will be gives in figures on which the house may place reliance as being perfectly safe. It is ne cessary for me here to remind the house that, as is not usu ally and commonly the case, circumstances have occurred during the latter portion of the financial year which tend materially to influence its results. The expedition to China na has made it necessary to en lar g e the proposedmilitary naval expenditure of the year, even beyond the liberal scale of provision made in the last session ; mad the arrangements likewise accruing or coming into force under the comraer- Cial treaty with France—in case the treaty shall receive C the panction of the house—will act materially upon the us toms revenue for the residue of the year. I will, therefore, with your permission, just present to the committee the state of the account at it stood, entirely a p art from these disturbing causes, and I will then in a few words show the vommittee how, since these causes have come into action, it is likely to stand. The results of the year in a financial point of view—at least, so far as receipts aro concerned —have been eminently satisfactory. (Hear, hear.) The Customs revenue, which I estimated at £23,850,000, and which I estimated at that amount so lately as the month of July last, will:produce—apart from the causes to which I have referred—and I beg the house to bear this Parenthesis in mind—i2l,7so,ooo. (Hear, hear.) The Excise I estimated at £19,310,000 ; it will produce £19,724,000.. The stamps alone shsw a small deficit, having been estimated at £8,100,000, while they will produce only ,000 ,a00. The Land and Assessed Taxes were estimated at £3,000,000 ; they will produce the same sum. The In me-tax was estimated at £9,940,000 ;it will produce 40,894,000. The Post-office revenue was estimated at £3,250,000; it will produce that sum. The Crown Lands were estimated a i ; £280 , 000 ; they will about fulfil that es timate. The in Iscellaneoue revenue was estimated at • :£1,530,000, it will 'saoduce £1,480,000. The general result be this:—The revenue was estimated to produce £09,460,000, and i t would have produced 4 - 0 - 8, 00 (Hear, hear.) On the ether hand, lookingat — t i he 'slo side of expenditure, we should have stood as follows:—The inte 'rest of the fur ded and unfunded debt, th Miscellaneouse) estimated at Goo.ooo,will antof int to V. 8,638,000 ; and C o nsolidated. FA nd charges amount to £1,900,000 ; the Army was estimat ed at £13,300,000, and it would have cost £13,5,30,000, in cc nsequence of an excess of expendi tare from the procedin g year. The Navy was estimated at £12,789,060 ; it woula have cost £12,630,000. The Civil S erv i ce — c ailed ruisee4 -meow— e xpenses were estimated at 7,825,000 ; • they would. have cost , i7 ' 700,000. The Revenue Department W as estima ted at £4, i h 4o t ,ooo ; it would have hereas the estima c t o e s d i 44,447,000. ;The t otal result is t ckarges of th year wee a £69,270,0 a 00, w the total expenditure would have b en soraeA hat less than £65,9b3,000. (Hear, THE - SUN, LONDON, hear.) Comparing this expenditure of £6,8,958,000, with the receipts of £70,578,000, the committee will perceive that we should have had a surplus of 13100E1113 over expendi ture of not less than £1,625,000. (Hear, hear.) That sur plus would have been the result of the liberal and wise pro vision made by Parliament in the past session to meet the expenses of the year, and though it will not now - be avail , able, as it has almost entirely been absorbed for the reduc tion of the National Debt, yet, nevertheless, it may serve for ,a good example of the prudence of that rule which always induces this house, when appealed to for the pur pose, to provide ample means to meet the public expendi ture. But after Parliament had adjourned we had to encounter additional charges, and I come now to what I call the disturbing causes which have acted on the revenue. The necessity of making provision for the expedition to China—to be the bearer, in the first in stance, of peaceful remonstrances —cast an addition on the votes for military expenditure, which, together with an ex cess in the army expenditure in the year 1858-9, stands as follows .—Army, £`900,000; Navy, £270,000. Then has arrived the treaty with France. It is very difficult indeed to estimate for so short a time as that which has to pass be fore March 31 what the results and effects of that treaty will be upon the Customs revenue, more especially as a question may arise with respect to certain payments which it may be requisite to make to alimited class of persons who are affected by the peculiar circumstances of that treaty. However, we have taken what we think an ample amount, and I have therefore to deduct from the estimate which I have submitted to the committee a sum of £640,000. We, therefore, stand worse than we should have stood by £1,170,000 for additional charges on the army expenditure and £640,000 likely to be lost on our Customs receipts in consequence of the treaty with France. The total of these two is £1,810, 000, w hich, being deducted from the surplus we should have had, would appear to place us on the wrong side of the account. But deliverance has come in from a quarter from -which perhaps it would not have been expected. " Via prima salutis, Quoad minime reris, Grata pandeter ab urbe." A friendly kingdom has undertaken to pay us a debt at the very moment when she herself is engaged in war. (A laugh.) Spain is just now under peculiar pressure, but with a high sense of honour and duty—(cheers),—not wishing to avail herself of the plea which, I do not hesitate to say, she might under the circumstances have advanced for time, has remitted to us a sum in bills which will shortly come due, of £500,000, of which £250,000 will come to the credit of the revenue before March 31. If the committee will take the trouble to compare the figures, it will b us 8e that we sex ou t with a probable surplus of £1,625,000; adding to that surplus the £250,000 of which I have spoken it becomes £1,875,000, against which we have a charge of £1,810,000, a state of account which will leave the Chancellor of the Exchequer with a surplus —undoubtedly one of the narrowest on record, but still a surplus, not a deficit. (Hear, hear.) This is the state of the account for the present year. I now proceed to approach the more extensive and more difficult part of the subject— that which relates to the charge and expenditure of the coming year, 1860-61. The estimated charge for the funded and unfunded debt in the coming year is 0n1y.£26,200,000, which shows a decrease of £2,438,000—a sum considerably larger than the annuities which are about to fall in. But the reason of that greater decrease is that—as the commit tee may probably recollect—we were called on last year to make a special provision for the quarterly payment that falls into this yeas in consequence of the determination of the annuities ; whereas, if it had continued to run its full term of half a year, it would have gone into the year 1860- 61. That arrangement swelled the charge for the debt in 1859-60, and proportionately augments the relief from that charge in the year 1860-61. (Hear.) Therefore, the charge for the debt stands only at £26,200,000. The Consolidated Fund'eharges, commonly solcalled,:stand at 12,000,000, ex hibiting an increase of £40,000. The Army and Militia, including a vote of credit to the amount of £500,000, which it will be our duty to propose on account of the Chinese ex pedition, will amount to £15,800,000. The Navy and Packet Services—which I mention together for the purpose of easier comparison with former years, though the packet service is likely to be separated from the Admiralty—will stand in the Estimates at £13,900,000. These two sums, which together include the whole military expenditure of the country by land and sea, with the cost of the packet service, amount to 129,700,000, showing an increase of £3,618,000 on the Military Estimates, in the same sense of the term, which were voted last year, and an increase of £2,448,000 on the Military Estimates for the current year, augmented by the additional charge that will be brought into them if the house should grant the sum for which the Government think it their duty to ask. The Miscella neous Civil Estimates are taken at £7,500,000. That amount exhibits a decrease as compared with the Esti mates of last year of £325,000; and if the committee which the house has in some manner declared its intention of appointing should be enabled to enter on its labours at an early period, and shall prosecute them with such vigour and success as to enable us to carry further the process of re t renc hment, I assure the hon. gentleman who moved, the hon. member for Birmingham who supported, and the other members of the majority who carried the motion for its appointment, that it will be a result acceptable to her Majesty's Government. (Hear, hear.) The Revenue Department standing at £4,700,000 presents an apparent increase of £225,000 ; but do not suppose that this is a real increase of the charge ; it is due, to speak in general terms, to an increase of accommodation in the Post-office Depart ment, which I have no doubt will continua to be fully balanced by the increase of revenue in that branch of the public service. The total of the six sums which I have stated to the committee is £70,100,000. With respect to one great, but fair and legitimate head of increase, that on the Military and Naval Estimates, it is not my intention at the present to enter into any discussion, but it will be the duty of my right hon. friend and of my noble friend who represent those departments respectively, to explain that subject to the committee at the earliest date, and to lay be fore them the nature of the special, and, we may hope, in a great degree temporary, causes which have renderedit ne cessary to make so considerable a demand on the country. Now, Sir, when we look at the estimated income for the coming year, it is a matter which at the first view will not appear satisfactory. And I confess I am not sorry that the figures should be such as will draw serious attention to the whole subject. For it is well that, in addition to your annual review of the income and expenditure, there should be special junctures with circumstances so marked that you arc obliged to institute a deeper and more cora -1 prehensive examination, and to consider more at large what is the proper scale both of taxation and likewise of ex penditure for this great country. The estimated income for 1861 will be taken by me in the first instance with reference simply to the law as it stands ; but I shall assume that the committee would, of necessity, think it right to renew the taxes on tea and sugar at a rate not less than that which they deliberately adopted in 1852. Pray, understand that I am assuming the renewal of these duties at what would be called the minimum rate, but I shall assume no thing else beyond what is absolutely given us by the law, so that I may exhibit to the committee as fully and as clearly as I can the nature and the whole extent of the deficit w hich they will have to supply, hone order that they may exercise the largest and the freest choice with respect to the means which they may think proper to adopt for that pur pose. Approaching the subject from that point of view, we estimate that the Customs will yield 122,700,000 ; the Ex cise, £19,170,000; Stamps, £8,000,000; and the Taxes, £3,250,000. The Income-tax, that is, one-half year still outstanding at the rate of od. in the pound, would yield £2,400,000 ; the Post-office, £3,400,000 ; the Crown Lands, £280,000 ; and the Miscellaneous. Revenue, £1,500,00 0 . The total of these receipts -would be £60,700,000. The total charge which I have exhibited is one of £70,100,000, and the apparent deficit, I need barely state to the com mittee, amounts to £9,400,000. I am not representing a brilliant state of affairs as respects the revenue and expen diture of the country, nor do I pretend to place fan it any such colour. We have a prosperous country, a wealthy eutntry, a country rapidly growing in wealth and power ; butthe relative state of your revenue and expenditure is such of £70,100,000 we ge t th e benefit of the £2,000,000 of as I have d e pi c t e d. And pray observe that in that charge o annuitiessaywh thatichlwa 01 notf fall I in n n duringa condition th e year;to ask a y n o d u l t am o d owhat bound also t might under other circumstances have been. desirable. I frankly own that I do not feel myself in a position to propose, payment e e r f .h t o h n e d s s u i m n N of ov £ o l l o h o e o r ,O n oo ex av t. hic w h i w th il o l u b t duo as I otherwise might, that you should make provision for the Exche U 0 for such provision you have the deficit before you. And now, sir, it would be perfect l y p ossible for mo to close , were it not for the Treaty which I have to discuss ; it would, at any rate, h a ve been perfectly p ossible for the House, if such were the view which they entertained , to close the whole account by a very simple, but, 1 must say, a very rude process. £9,400,000 is wanted. I will suggest to you two modes, by either of which you might have thought fit to supply it. You might have said, or you may still say, we shall keep the tea and sugar duties at their present rates; that would supply a sum of £ 2,100,000. But £2,100,000 taken from £9,400,000 still leaves the less formidable, yet rather in tractable sum of £7,300,000. And now I beseech the com mittee to observe that if they think, with the Government, that the large and ample provision which we are about to propose for the services of the country is a necessary out lay, they will have to make g ood the deficit of £7,300,000, irrespective of any relief to the people, of any improvement of the commercial laws, of any remission whatever of taxes affecting trade or industry, even to the extent of a single shilling. And what is meant by filling up the deficit of 17,309,000 ? It means, at any rate, an Income-tax of 9d. in the pound. That would give you £7,672,000, or a sur plus of £372,000. This would certainly be a possible mea sure. But, again, supposing you were to take a more li beral view of the matter, and to say we do not think it ri!;lat that there should be no remission on articles connected with the trade and industry of the country, or that duties on tea and sugar which were imposed for the purposes of war, and have been kept on during. three or four years of peace, should be further prolonged. Well, then, abandoning the war duties on tea and sugar, and keeping on what may be called peace duties, in order to Our) the deficit of £9,400,000 you\rvould require the very neat and easily stated and easily de steed sum of an Income-tax of is. in the pound. (Laughter and sensation.) This also would be without any other remission of duty, but simply what is required for the general &minds of the revenue. Then, Sir, it may be said, and said with justice, to many members of her Majesty's Government—but most of all with justice may it be demanded of me—what has become of the calculations of 1853 ? (Hear, hear.) It is a perfectly legitimate question, and I can render to my hen. friend who cheevs it an answer so simple that the wayfarer "who runs may read" it. Our financial calculations up to 1853 are to be found in "Hansard," and from that indubitabte source I have within the last two or three days refreshed my own recollections. Those Estimates I find are capable of being presented in a very simple form. We reckoned that we should gain a revenue in the interval between 1853 and 1861 in the following proportion :—from new taxes then proposed, including the Succession-tax, £2,549,000; from lessened charges on account of the national debt, £1,264,000; at the same time we knew that terminable annuities would fall in in 1860 to the amount of £2,146,000. Adding together these three chief sources of relief, they make a sum of £5,959,000, -which is as nearly as possible the sum to which the Income-tax, at the rate of sd. in the pound, amounted for the year 1859. Its actual amount was £6,140,000, which with this sum of £5,959,000 to set against! it, we should have been able to surrender. With regard to these calcula tions, they have suffered some damage; they have suffered considerable damage from what has since occurred. (Hear.) But that damage is not the cause of our not being able to dispense with the Income-tax. I can show demonstrably that this is not the case. The succession duty failed to . pro duce what we expected of it, partly, or rather mainly, be cause it was found that by the law of succession real pro perty goes in the direct line in a much greater number of cases than personal property ; so that if £100,000,000 a year in real and settled propertycarne under the succession duty, that amount would not yield the same average of duty as if it had been personal property. Ido not now speak of a fact known to the committee, that only life interest is valued with respect to real property, but, over and above that, real property descending in the direct line from father to son and grandson pays only 1 per cent duty. And that direct descent prevails in a much greater number of instances in real than in personal property—(hear)—and consequently the revenue from this source attained its maximum more slowly than we anticipated. At the present moment, in 1660, we stand worse than we did in 1853 by £1,000,000 on account of the failure of tho succession duty. Besides this, instead of being able to apply an annual surplus of revenue towards the extinction of debt, that surplus was required by the necessities of the war, and its application to the diminution of debt was stopped for three or four years. That likewise tended to disturb our calculations. The amount of this sur plus was £320,000. But the most serious item of all was the additional debt contracted on account of the Russian war. (Hear, hear.) It created an additional charge upon us of £1,400,000. Under these three heads, therefore—the deficiency in the amount of the succession duty, the stop page of the surplus applicable to the extinction of debt, and the additional charge created by the Russian war—we stand worse than in 1853 by the sum of £2,720,000. But, Sir, that sum has been fully compensated from other sources. The experiment I commenced with a timid hand in 1853, of raising the spirit duties, was again followed up by myself in 1855 and by my successor in 1858. That increase has added a permanent revenue to the country of £1,500,000 to £2,000,000 a year; and if, along with the general produc tiveness of the revenue; your expenditure had continued to be anything like what it was, you might have done what you please with the Income-tax. (Cheere,) In 1853 the annual expenditure was £52,183,000; I add on account of the additional debt, £1,400,000, and £4,700,000 for the col lection of the revenue; this would make the actual charge £58,283,000. But the estimate of the revenue for the year 1860-61, with the tea duty reduced to the minimum as fixed for a time of peace. is not only £58,283,000, it is £6o,6oo,ooo—(hear, hear) —leaving a surplus at your dis 317 - posal, without looking to the Income-tax, of £2,,000, if your expenditure had continued what it was. (Hear, hear.) In 1853 the whole amount voted for Supply and Services of every description, including the Miscel laneous charges on the Consolidated Fund, was £24,279,000, —that was the amount of the charges under your own control, and actually voted. But in 1860-61, instead of £24,279,000, these charges amount to £39,000,000, showing an increase in your expenditure of £14,721,000, whichis the exact representative of What would be in itself an Income tax of 13.14. in the pound. (Hear, hear.) I ask now, Sir, whether I have not redeemed my pledge ? (Cheers.) This is a period of so much interest and so much importance that, even at the risk of occupying a few minutes of your time, I wish to dwell a little on the subject of publico expenditure, because I admit that my statement thus far, though true, and I hope clear, is an imperfect statement. It would not be fair to speak of the great increase in the expenditure of the country without considering the great extension of the dealings by which that increase is caused. The country is richer, than it was in 1863 in a degree really astonishing. Permit me to lay before the committee, as well as I can, a criterion by which we may arrive at some idea of the truth with respect to the increase in the wealth of the country ; and then we can institute a just comparison between the rate of increase in this wealth'and the rate of increase in the public ezpenditure. The best mcde of making an estimate of the rate of increase in the wealth of the country is to re sort to the income tax. No other criterion is comparable to it, for though it may not be an exact index of the truth in this matter, in any one year, yet, asbetween any one period , and another, I believe it is an index on which we may safely rely. But, in taking the income-tax as a measure of the income of the country, I beg to object to two out of the five schedules of the tax. Schedule C does not, I think, re present any portion of the wealth of the country is the sense of its productive power. It represents incomes from realised property, such as capital invested in mortgages. Schedule E represents the income of the fraternity to which I myself belong, including the salaries of officials, Ministers, and others supported by public allowances. But I do not take any increase in the salaries of these gentlemen as any material augmentation of the wealth of the country. (Loud laughter.) What this house has been about I do not exactly know; I believe there has been a considerable transfer of officers from D to E ; and the growth of that most respectable company of salaried gentlemen must have been viewed with delight by all who take an interest in the body. (Laughter.) But the test by 'comparison of, the wealth of,, the country must be taken principally from schedules A, B, and D. The profits derived from lands and tenements, and other property, are included in schedules A and B. Schedule D includes the profits derived from trades and professions. I will take the period from 1842, when we commenced our great career of commercial legislation, to the year 1853, when we closed it —I hope to be renewed—under the pressure of war. I will also take the period from 1857-58, because it is the last year in which the returns are made up ; and I will carry it on, assuming the same rate'of increase to have continued to 1859-60. Now the net amount shown by the three schedules of the income tax is as follows :—ln 1812, £151,000,000 ; in 1853, £172,000,000; in 1857-1, £191,000,000; and in 1859-60, £200,000,000. The increase in the wealth of the country between the first period and the second was 12 per cent. in 11 years ; the increase between 1853 and 1860 was 161 per cent. in six years. That undoubtedly shows a very large increase in the wealth of the country, and I think it will be interesting to the committee to know in what pro portions that increase has been distributed between the classes represented by three of the schedules to which I have referred ; for I must say that the statement is one which throws a very considerable light upon the condition of the landed interest, and more especially upon that of our old friend, Mr. Farmer. (A laugh.) I shall take the period from 1853-4 to 1857-B—a period of four years ; and I find that during those fouryears the income under the head of schedule D, which embraces the profits on trades and professions, grew from £64,974,000 to £70,700,000, or at the rate of 9 per cent. ; while that under the head of schedule A, which represents real and immovable pro perty, grow from £96,129,000 to £106,972,600, or at the rate of 11i per cent.; schedule B—which repre- sents the profits of the farmer, but having, also, no small reference to the rent of the landlord—having grown from £11,123,000 to £13,436,000, or at the rate of 19 per cent. (Hear, hear) That being the case, I rejoice to think that we now live in times when any hen. gentleman may, if he thinks fit, attend an agricultural dinner and congratulate his hearers upon the prosperity of their condition witheut fearing to insult them. (" Hear, hear," and a laugh.) I must at the same time observe, lest I should appear to be representing the condition of this particular class in cc:deems too sanguine, that during the period which elapsed between 1842 and 1853 the case was far different with it, inasmuch as schedule B exhibited during that time, unfortunately, no increase whatsoever. (Hear.) A change has, however, since taken place, and I am happy to say it is a change which must be satisfactory to the community at large. (Hear.) Having thus spokenof the increase of wealth in the country, the committee will, perhaps, permit me very briefly to compare it with the rate of increase in our expen diture. I shall in the first instance compare it with the total expenditure—that is to say, with the whole State as well as the whole local expenditure, as far as the latter can be ascertained ; for the local expenditure of 'the country is likewise beginning to form a very considerable item in our i fi rhtrui n ag a sh i btt c we i he a oon l rnt e gh. alculations, and shows a disposition to grow to an extent whi o e fy h ori,dae m nlet /i dnh w oothuu s geg i lh t l well worthy of the serious attention of the committee. I may, in the first place, state that my ItSecretary oobtainito tr u f go for n r o r t t h on e 1 Home contend teerut certain i Department tnh returnsa t they air ne literally accurate. Well, then, to connection with this local expenditure which are entirely proceed, the gross expenditure of the State was in 1842.3 £55,223,000, and the local expenditure in the three kingdoms £13,224,000 ; making a total, in - round numbers, of £68,500,000. In 1553.4 the total State expenditure was £55,769,000, cr very nearly the same amount as in 1842.3, and the local expenditure £15,819,000 ; making together, in round numbers, 71 millions and a half, instead of the 68 millions and a half which was the amount in 1842-3. In the year 1359.60 the gross State expenditure grew from 4'55,769,000, which it was in 1853, to £70,128,000. m e local expenditure, no doubt actuated by a spirit of honour able rivalry—(a laugh)---increased in the same period from £15,819,000, which it was in 1853, to £17,458,000—the total expenditure for the year 1859-60 having been £87,697 000, that is to say, that in the 11 years from 1842.3 to 1853-4' the expenditure of the country under the two heads which I have mentioned increased at the rate of 41 per cent., while in the six years which have elapsed between 1853 and 1859 it became much more WlCreltrial, and increased at the rate whose amount is in the main determined by public opinion, having thus in 11 years amounted to a sum of £1,874,000, or at the rate of 8t per cent., while from 1253 to 1859, a period of six years, it increased to £36,898,000, or at the rate of 58 per cent. on the entire national expenditure. Now, therefore, you have at your command a tolerably com plete comparison between the growth of the wealth of the country and the increase in its expenditure. Between the years 1842 and 1853 the increase in her wealth was at the rate of 12, and that in her expenditure at the rate of st per cent. ; while between 1853 and 1859 the national wealth grow at the rate of 162, the national expenditure at the rate of 58 per cent. (Hear, hear.) I have troubled the committee with these particulars, because I deemed it right to invite their attention to what is a subject of vital impor tance. (Hear.) The country may be right in the course which she is now taking, but, at all events, that course ought not to be pursued blindfolded. We ought, on the contrary, to have a clear knowledge of the proportion which our wealth bears to our expenditure, in order that we may be able to take a comprehensive view of our financial posi tion, and the policy which we ought to adopt. (Hear, hear.) Let me now recall to the recollection of the committee the fact that our fiscal situation—to borrow a phrase from our neighbours at the other side of the Channel—as it stands is, that there is a deficit of £9,400,000, the best means of providing for which it becomes our duty to consider, and we ought not, in my opinion, to face a question of such magnitude as that without having duly weighed the prin ciples upon which we are to proceed, and the policy on which we mean to act. Now, as I have already indicated to you a summary Budget which might have the effect of filling up the hiatus which I have mentioned, I have also sha dowed oat to you another and a more generous Budget, which, providing you with an Income-tax of Is. in the pound, would achieve the same object, and would enable you to relieve the consumers of tea and sugar to a certain extent, as well as a more niggardly Budget, which would keep up the duties on tea and sugar, and would still leave the country liable to an • Income-tax of 9d. in the pound. With what views, then, and upon what principles are we to face this state of circumstances ? I may at once tell you frankly that I am not satisfied with the rate of expendi ture. (Cheers.) I trust, therefore, that we mean in a great degree to retrace our steps. (Hear, hear.) The pro cess of retracing our steps in such a matter, however, is one which must necessarily be gradual ; for, if it be not pur sued with circumspection and with caution, it will serve but to aggravate the very evils which it was intended to remove. (Hear, hear.) I assume, therefore, whether the committee concurs with the Government in the expe diency of the Estimates which they have submitted or are about to submit to the house or not, that you can effect no radical change in the scale of that expenditure on which you have now for a series of years embarked—no radical change, I mean, applicable to the operations of the present year, or to the provision you will have to Make for filling up the gap which yawns before you, and which is represented by the figures £9,409,000. The real question with which we have to deal is whether we ought upon this occasion to say our necessities are great, our means too narrow to enable us to effect any commercial reforms. Such reforms are all very well, it may be contended, for fine weather, but they do not suit a period of pressure and alarm. That is, I know, a favourite doctrine with some classes, but against the justice of that doctrine I, for one, protest. (Cheers.) And upon the part of the Government I do not hesitate to say that, in an epoch so marked and signal in our financial history as the year 1240, it is their opinion that it is the duty of Parliament to take some steps in advance in that career of commercial improvement which, perhaps more than any other cause, has contributed to confirm the prosperity of the country and to the security of its institutions, under the auspices of the Sovereign under whose rule it is our happiness to live. (Cheers.) There are in the present year special reasons why we should pursue such a policy as that to which I refer. Are we to be told that when a sum of £2,000,000 and upwards, which we have hitherto been obliged to pay on the national debt, comes into our possession, it only remains for us to cast it into that groat gulf of expenditure, there to be swallowed up and to disappear ? (Hear, hear.) That sum is a mighty engine for the purposes of relief, while for the pur poses of expenditure it is comparatively unimportant. (Hear, hear.) Applied to the purposes of relief, you may by its means shed a thousand blessings over the land; thrown into the scale of your expenditure it represents, after all, but the difference between the £13,000,000 which you have already added to that expenditure and the £11,000,000 which you might have added. Take, upon the other hand, the question of the relief which it is in your power to afford in dealing with the duties upon sugar and upon tea, and, I may observe, in'discnssing that part of the question you must pay regard to the claims of the people as well as the claims of trade, on which the prospe rity of all classes mainly depends. (Hear, hear.) You have at this particular season a considerable remission of taxa tion by the lapse of annuities. There is another special rea son. It is my intention before sitting down to propose to the committee that they shall apply in aid of the expendi ture a sum of not less than £1,100,000, which is no part of the proposed taxation of the year, but obtained by render ing available another portion of the malt credit and the cre dit usually given on hops. That will be a salutary measure; but undoubtedly I think it marks in a particular degree the 'obligation under which we lie at this time to make the means, if we have not got the means, of carrying forward the great work of public improvement. (Hear, hear.) Sir, I am not satisfied to place this duty on narrow grounds of whatever kind. It is not simply because annuities are fall ing in—it is 'not that you have considerable funds to be drawn from this source or that ; you must look at it from another point of view, you must take it for granted that for the present you have attained to what may be called a high level of public expenditure, and that you are likely to re main on that high level for some time at least. Is that a reason, or is it not, why you should stop the process of re forming the commercial legislation of the country ? I say that is no reason for stopping (hear, hear)—l say more, it is a distinct reason for persevering in that process and carry ing it to its completion. (Hear, hear.) If we were, in the year 1860, to hold our hands, let us consider what aspect our procedure would wear. In 1860, when the people have paid war duties on tea and sugar for three years in the hope of something being done for them, in 1860 we stopped—we at tempted not in the slightest degree to carry forward the work of commercial relaxation and improvement. If, after that period of years, on a review of a juncture like the pre sent, when a particular fund of this nature is placed in our hands, . we stop in 1860, will it not be supposed that you stop for ever. (Hear, hear.) And if this be not the opportunity for endeavouring to give increased effect to the beneficial principles of your legislation, I, for one, must frankly own I know not when such an oppor tunity will arise. (hear, hear.) This, sir, is shortly the truth of the case. Our high taxation is not a reason for stopping short in our commercial reforms ; it is a reason why we should persevere in them. (Hear, hear.) It is by means of these reforms that we are enabled to bear high taxation. What, I ask, has the country done during the last six months? Paying an income-tax, which during the half-year was at the rate of Is. Id in the pound. Would that have been done had it not been for the felt belief ,that we should go on with our commercial reforms ? (Hear.) I am speaking generally. Certainly I myself had about two weeks ago a letter addressed to me, complaining of the monstrous injustice and iniquity of the income-tax, and proposing that, in consideration thereof, the Chancellor of the Exchequer should be publicly hanged. (A laugh) I don't mean to say there has not been a murmur ; but upon the whole, speaking with the necessary latitude that must attach to general expressions, I am justified in saying that this high rate of taxation has been borne throughout the country with a most extraordinary, laudable, and honour able forbearance. (Hear.) It was Lord Londonderry who complained of the people of England as exhibiting an "ig norant impatience of taxation ;" but I think, were he to rise from the dead and again take his place in this house, he would be very much more likely to complain of an igno rant patience of taxation. (A laugh.) I wish, air, to shim the connexion there is between commercial reforms, as affecting trade and industry, and the power to pay the high taxes you have imposed. These two subjects are inseparably locket the one to the other. You shall have the demonstration in figures. I again ask you for a mo ment lo attend with me to the experience of two periods. I take 10 years from the crisis of the Reform Bill down to 1841, during which our commercial legislation was upon the whole stationary; and I take the 12 years from 1842 to 1853, within the circuit of which are comprehended the beneficial changes that Parliament has made. In the 10 years from 1832 to 1841 this was the state of things :—You imposed of Customs and Excise duties, £2,067,000, and you remitted £3,385,000, exhibiting a balance remitted over and above what you imposed of £1,317,000, or at the rate of £131,000 a year. Now, observe the effect on the state of the revenue. During these 10 years the Customs and Excise increased. by £1,707,000, or at the rate of £170,000 a year; while the increase of the export trade was £15,156,000, or at the annual rate of £1,515,000. Let us now take the 12,years from 1842 to 1853. You re mitted during that period of Customs and Excise £13,238,000, and imposed . 'll,o2 9 , ooo , presenting a balance remitted of £12,209,000, or an annual average of £1,017,000. What was the effect on the revenue ? The Customs and Excise increased £2,656,000, or at an annual rate of £221,000 Wheu you remitted practically nothing, your Customs see venue, in consequence of the increase of the population, grew at the rate of £170,000 per annum ; and when you re mitted £1,017,000 a year, your Customs and Excise revenue grew faster than when you remitted nothing at all, or next to nothing at all. (Hear, hear.) I ask, is not this a conclu sive proof that it is the relaxation and reform of your corn. merciel system whia ) . 11145 giya4 to the couptryl4oth the dis position to pay taxes and the power to pay taxes? Thoforcign SATURDAY EVENING, of 22i per cent. \ nut in order to bring home to the corn • mittee the real importance of the question which is raised not so much by the gross amount of the Imperial expendi ture as by that portion of it which is under the control of Parliament, and for which Parliament is responsible, let me take the increase which has occurred during the same period in the expenditure which has been voted by this House, or which is, for certain miscellaneous purposes, charged on the Consolidated Fund. The two items which come under this head I shall call optional expenditure, and I may briefly state that they amounted in 1842-3 to £21,487,000, in 1853- 54 to £23,361,000 ; the increase in this expenditure which, as I before said, is under the control of Parliament, and FEBRUARY n, 1860. -,., e.+~ trade of the country at the same period, instead of gr o wi ng • pursue with equal 'te S. ansi t s h t e e r ncy an end that . is more bene at the rate of £1,515,000 a year, grew at the rate of firecliaatlions(Cohfeaerers,..i)t eteiumethwohnovcolrouse £4,3ol,ooo. (Hear, hear.) Well, then, I say it is the duty of Sir, there esta e bli v s as hed en b e e e tw a Govern the Government, both on account of the special circum- la tmeetslater s o t o f E ngland and France. It was in the reign of the cause stances of the juncture, and likewise, and still more, on the Arts; and it marks a dark spot in our annals, be broadam, . : . it - was an union formed in a spirit of domineering ground of general and comprehensive principle, at this thee to make considerable remissions ; and if that be so, e,u qt te m o n tl e te n r the ß o u n t e t i a d t e, andsr w as s base ot an a d vil u e io su u b o s t er t e h e e enc a y the next question is on what principle you should mak-, tions ; it was an union of the va Gov n ernm n en u ts. This is n ue; them. Of course, the subject of the tea and sugar cl- atie , to be an union of the Governments ; it ie to be an union of would naturally occur to the mind of every one as Baying a the nations—(cheers)—and I confidently say again, as I claim, at any rate, to the first con s id era ti on . T have already ventured to say in this H o u s e, th a t there have bound, never can bo any union between the nations of England however, to say that these are not the subjec'Se on which it and France except an union beneficial to the world, because has appeared to the Government that tleey might operate directly either the one or the other begins to harbour with the greatest advantage. No doubt the duties on schemes of selfish aggrandisement—(Opposition cheers)— t r h ea a o t t m a T i e t t the v jealousy of o et f hp i r t i s oro n l : te ighbour will powerfully tea and sugar are taxes most desirable to be re pealed. They are harmless and beneficial articles— itself be the toos e t rY con a c e dusiv being nnelitilrerrmoof harmony m il can f articles of universal consumption, and I trust the meditate anything which is dangerous to Europe. (Hear, hear.) There is anoth er c l ass o f o bj ections of which Ido time may arrive, and arrive a t no di stant date, when we may be able to recur to our former standard in regard to not tiio s collain, but whi c h I h ope to remove. There are wosaytha o t f a l e , o re m e m r r a ctl . tr l e v at o y ll is an rtl abandonment these taxes. But, on the oth er h an d , there never was a of the e principles time when the people were s o we ll a bl e to pay these taxes mercial treaty would b e an abandonment e o e f tal:en; ya oo m principles as now. The increase in the consumption of these articles of Free Trade, in the latitude in which we now employ is regular, and the revenue is a growing revenue. If we that phrase, if it involved the recognition of exclusive pri are to have a very large scale of expenditure and a very Ntrieleagtvesw. ou b l e d th i i f s s m e o nsc ut l d aim o it that es d ln i Pitt's commercial te on our part high income-tax, I cannot think, while the bulk of the which it was expressed, - have been teen ') a th rt e a t u erm ai l u in . burden should fall on the shoulders of those having pro- donment of Free Trade ; but, at the same ') time, I can porty, that it is desirable tho labouring classeis should bear not mention that treaty without saying that I think it was no share of the burden. But, sir, I stand more especially for the time at which it was made one of the best and one on this—the duties on tea and sugar, whatever also they o o o f uthtreas)vuitseet atm e l a e s a u s r t e sa as ve lo r u a o tep a t e e a d u b y otiaer a Parliament, a e an o cl has may be, are simply revenue duties. They entail no corn- brilliant career to the fame of the any other statesman ssg who plexity in their system of Customs law; above all, they en- concluded it. (Hear, hear.) We, however, have no ex tail none of the evils that belong to differential duties ; and elusive engagements we have not the pretence of an ex- I will by and bye invite y ou t o j o i n th e G overnmen t in elusive eneassement. France i s perfectly aware that our legislation b makes no distincti on between one nation and enacting measures whereby you will be able to counteract another, and that what we enact for her we shall at the and root out eviis of that kind, as well as give relief in the same time enact far all the world. lam surprised at the price of commodities. But Ido not hesitate to say that it number and variety of these objections which conic rushing is a mistake to suppose that the best moao of giving benefit fr h om si all l quarters. It t is like the ancient explanation of the south, h cause efa to the labouring classes is simply to operate on the articles rushing. storm—all together : consumed :n th — er a : the winds, north, east, west, P end so e u a consumed by them. If you want to do them the maximum " - Una Eurnsque Notusque ruant creberque procellis of goud, you should rather operate on the articles which " Africus." give them the maximum of employment. (Hear, hear.) Sometimes a treaty is an obsolete and antiquated idea ; What has made the great change in their position of late sometimesan abandonment i tisa o f i dangerous ree tred innovation o T reare ; o u and at others o ila class s e years ? Not that you have legi s l a t e d h ere an d th ere taking of men and those are gentl emen w ith w h om we s h a ll h ave off ld. or 2d. in the pound of some thi ng consume d by th e much difficulty in dealing. These are they who find fault labouring classes. That is not what has bettered their con- with it—and that I must say is by far the soundest objection dition as it has been bettered during the last 10 or 15 years. —because it is an abandonment of the principle of I'rotec- It is that you have set free their trade—(hear, hear)—it is tion. (ll o et f tr i,r h o e t az. t ) io This treaty is an abandonment of the that you have put in motion the process to give them the principleenga engagement which itncentaianms .m i s t t caowr-taarian?yf anyootaiocontains entanglinguox widest field and highest remuneration for their labour. elusive privilege, but it is an abandonment of the principle (Hear, hear.) Take the great change in the corn laws ; of Protection, and a means of sweeping from the statute it may be doubted whether you have given them cheaper book mai n theupo upon h i i t e f relics The f fact that t s a, se still e are bread—it may be a trifle cheaper than before—that is so, that our old friend ProteC r tion, who p used presently to change, however, is comparatively immaterial; but 'you dwell in the palaces of the land, and who was :dislodged have created a regular and steady trade of something some ten or fifteen years ago, has, since that period, found like £15,000,000 a-year ;by that trade you have very comfortable shelter and good living in holes and cor h)—and you are now invited, if you will have created a corresponding demand for the commodities of i t i h e e rs e — eoo (a dn l e a s u s g to concur in the operation, to see whether which they are the producers, their labour being an essen- you cannot likewise eject him from those holes and tial element in their production, and it is the price their corners. I told you that we are to remove the duty from labour thus brings, not the price of cheapened commodities all manufaotured goods, and there is hardly one of that that forms the main benefit they receive. That is the class of duties which is not, in point of fact, the representa tive of a strictly protective duty•, nay, more—and mark my principle of a sound political economy applicable to cora words—in many cases of a prohibitory duty. Perhaps the mercial legislation, and that is the principle on which we case will be best explained by my stating to the will invite you to proceed. I may say therefore, in passing, committee what will bo the financial results of in regard to the tea and sugar duties, we shall ask Perlin- the treaty as it stands. I will not enter into any small d mont to renew them—not to renew them for any lengthened details, and will t a k e th ree b ranc h es o f re d uc ti on on ly period, but only for one year, with tho further addition of —the reduction of d u ty upon wine that upon brandy, a n d th e abolition' the reduction of of the duties upon three months till July, 1861, because the Ist of April is an manufactured goods. The reduction of the duty upon wine inconvenient period for Parliament to consider the question. from ss. 10d. to 3s. per gallon will afford to the consumer a relief of £830,000, and w ill en t a il upon t h e revenue, after Sir J. PAKINGTON—You propose to leave the duties allowing for an increase of consumpt i on t o t h e extent of 35 as they are ? per cent, a loss of £515,000. The reduction of the duty on The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Oh, I brandy from 15s. to Bs. 2d. a g a ll on w ill g i ve t o th e consu mer a relief of £446,000, and, assuming that the consump mean to take the duties precisely as they now stand—that tion will be raised to the point at which it stood in 1850, is, ls. sd. per lb. on tea, and the duties on sugar, which aro just before the disease of the vine commenced, it will cause classified, but which may be represented on the whole as a lossof th i e 2 a2bso, O li O t O iou to o f t the lo r e d v u e t n io u s e . ou There are three ose small to being about 3e. the cwt. above the m i n i m um point at which articles postpone for a single year, in the meantime reducing Prep it by they stood fixed in 1853. Having stated to the committee ono-half. One of them is the article cork, which has been the conviction of the Government that we ought to have the subject of a great deal of debate in this House. I must remissions, and large remissions—that we ought to have say that altogether there never was a stronger apparent remissions by which we may most effectually act upon the case . h madethe a measures s f for whichr Protection, e w c tiro: adopted,, and q a u c e o n u c e . trade and commerce of the country, and upon the demand I t r .. a siderabte e shock to the trade, anca considerable change of for the labour of the people—l come now to the question of its nature and of the course which it takes, the House has the Commercial Treaty with F rance , an d I w ill con fid en tly no thi ng to repent. On the contrary, the total consumption recommend the adoption of that T rea ty t o th e h ouse , as of cork is much larger now than it was before the duty was fulfilling and satisfying all the conditions of the most bene- reduced. On account of the importannt e i e l the of l t s h t of April, present pro ficial change in your commercial legislation. But perhaps, 186n0,gefei r , the T edu cwti o f e on f propose e to gyduty v e uon cork, and of these sir, as the committee has not yet had an opportunity of affecting two other trades, on the simple ground that they reading the Treaty, it may be convenient that I should state are t ra d s carried on almost entirely by diffused rural la to them very briefly its principal contents. (Hear, hear, bour, to which it is not desirable to give a sudden shock. and a laugh.) First, I will take the engagements of Franco. Those a m re ea t u h t e it g o l o ovj lo tr d a u d t L a a w il ll the i r t e n c r u e oe ir ci i s a t u ra d w u p ex la t iting r . France engages to reduce the duty on English coal and coke they will be taken off. The amount of duty on manu y f e ki n c. from the let of July, 1860 ;ou bar and pig-iron and steel tured goods, which will be abolished, amounts to no less from the Ist of October, 1860 ;on tools and machinery from than £432,000. The principal articles are silk manufac the Ist of December, 1860; and on yarns and goods in tures—£27o,ooo ; gloves, subject:to a short delay, £48,000; flax and hemp, including, I believe jute, in which a great artificial flowers, £20,000 ; watches, £15,000; cert a i n o il s £10,000; musical instruments, £9,000 ; le a th er , £9,000 ; and very just interest is felt in some important die- china, £8,000; glass, £7,001. There are also a great num tricts—from the Ist of June, 1861. That is the first im- ber of minor articles of industry produced largely abroad, portant covenant into which France enters. Her second especially in France. The total relief to the consumer, that and great engagement is postponed to the Ist of October, is the amount of duty remitted, under the French treaty, 1861, it being, I think, in the knowledge of the committee will bo £1,737,000 ; the loss to the revenue for the first year that that is done under a pledge by the Government of will be £1,190,000. Now, Sir, the objections which are France to the classes who suppose themselves to be inte- taken to this treaty in the interests of free-trade will not, rested in the maintenance of prohibition. On the Ist of I am quite sure, be very long alive ; but there is one ob- October, 1861, France engages to reduce the duties and to jection which turns upon another point with which I take away the prohibitions on all the articles of British pro- must endeavour to deal. It is that which tells us that duction mentioned in a certain list, in such a way that no the duties we are about to repeal are, forsooth, revenue duty upon any of those articles shall exceed 30 per cent. ad duties, and duties which are levied upon luxuries, and valorem. Ido not speak of provisions, which flo not mate- do not affect the poor man. Compassion for the poor rially enter into the Treaty ; but those articles, Sir, include man is a very fine thing, and I should be very sorry to say all the staples of British manufacture, whether of yarns, an ything that a pp eare d t o d e p rec i a t e or un d erva l ue so sacred flax, hemp, hair; wool, silk, or cotton—all manufactures of a sentiment, but I must say that it is entirely out of place skins, leather, bark, wood, iron and all other metals, glass, here. There is not one of these duties that is a revenue stoneware, earthenware, and porcelain. I will not go duty—no, not one of them. How they work with respect through the whole list, but lam not aware of ary great or to poor men, how they work with respect to those not rich material article that is omitted. France also engages to men, we will presently inquire. But if these are revenue commute these ad valorem duties into rated duties by a duties it is very curious to see who are the people who are separate convention; but if there should be a disagreement alarmed at the treaty. Are the manufacturers of British as to the terms on which they should be rated under the brandy the guardians of the British revenue ? Are the ins convention, the very maximum chargeable on every class porters of Cape wines the guardians of the British revenue ? will be 30 per cent. Then the duties will be levied at the Have the manufactures of British wines a peculiar interest proper period upon the value, which will be determined by in the wellbeing of the exchequer ? The manufacturers of the process now in use in the English Customs. That is Spitaltields and those of Coventry, who have an incorn to say, the importer will declare the value, and it will be in parable organ in my right hon. friend (Mr. Ellice), are the option of the Custom-house authorities in France to most excellent citizens, and no doubt contribute their share appropriate the article upon paying the price which he has to the revenue, bat my right hon. friend won't tell me that declared, with a percentage added. (Cheers.) And I must their great activity in rushing up to London and making say that I hold it to be a signal proof of earnestness and representations upon this subject has arisen from their in- liberality on the part of the French Government that it has terest in the Briti s h revenue. I t has arisen from something introduced an administrative regulation into its code for very different. They don't come into my room and tell me the purpose of disarming suspicions and insuring the effica- that they are there as the guardians of the British revenue, cious execution of the Treaty. (Hear, hear.) There is a they tell a much more simple and a much more intelligible further provision, Sir, that the maximum of 30 per cent. tale. They say this—that the duties which now stand upon shall after a period not exceeding three years be reduced your tariff are, and it is perfectly true, levied upon articles to a maximum of 25 per cent. And I may be permitted to consumed by the rich. But why are they not levied upon remind the committee that this rule of 30 per cent., to articlesconsumed by the middle, the lower middle class and which France is nominally about to pass from a sys- the poor ? Because they won't let thorn in ; because they tern of prohibition, is the very rule which was are prohibitory against those articles. (Hear.) That is the adopted nominally by the British Parliament when Mr. solution of the whole case. Our manufacturers give over to Huskisson was our Minister for Trade, and we first set France the highest qualities under cover of duties which about snaking important commereial changes. But there is, are as good for them as prohibitions, aid reserve for thorn lam bound to say, this difference between the two cases— selves the making of the lower qualities, and the power of that the rule was accompanied in England with such modes exacting from the British consumer a higher price than of operation that duties far exceeding 30 per cent, were in they will be able to get if this treaty is confirmed by Parlia a multitude of instances kept alive; whereas as far as the ment. (Hear, hear.) I took th e lib er ty o f say i ng t o one o f terms of this instrument go, France has, I think, given us a the deputations, "It seems to me this is much the case of security that 30 per cent, will really be the maximum, the corn law over again." Don't let there be any mistake. and that, from the nature of things, in a great multitude of What is wanted is, a higher price than that at which you instances the duties will be much below that rate even on can get goods from France. That is the Alpha and Omega, manufactured goods. (Hear, hear.) I come next to the the beginning and the end of it. I said, ' Is not this the English covenants. England engages, with a limited period case of the corn law ?" "Ohl dear, no ; not the least like of exception, to be exercised with respect only to two or thecorn law." In fact, there is generally, on the part of the three articles, to abolish immediately and totally all duties most respectable classes, a desire for the protection of their upon all manufactured goods. There will be a sweep, clean, awn business. They show that though they are without entire, and absolute, of manufactured pods from the face exception adherents of free trade they are not adherents of the British tariff. She engages to reduce the duty on of free trade without exception. (A laugh.) Let brandy fi•orn 15s. a gallon to the level of the colonial duty us now consider the circumstances which render it viz., Bs. 2d. She engages to reduce immediately the duty necessary to make a special arrangement. I entreat the on foreign wine. In the Treaty it is of course French wine committee to look at the present state of the trade between which is specified ; but it will be perfectly understood that England and Franco; it is not a little instructive. Con we proceed with r egar d t o th e commodities of all countries eider in the first place, the relative positions of England and alike. England engages, then, to reduce th e d u ty on w i ne F ranco . It i s per f ect l y true t h at F rance i s a f ore i gn coun from n early ss. 10d. to 3s, per gallon. She engages fur- try, but she is a foreign country absolutely separated ther to reduce that duty from the Ist of April, 1861, to a from you by a narrower channel than that which divides scale which has reference to the strength of the wine as you from Ireland ; and while nature, or prov idence rather, mea sured by the quantity of spirit s it con t a i ns. Th at scale has placed you in the closest proximity, it has given to is as follows :—Onallwine s inbottle, whatever the strength, these two great countries such diversities of soil, climate, and on all wines having 26 degrees and upwards of proof products, and character, that Ido not believe you can find, spirits, 2s. per gallon ; on wine having lo an d un d er 26 on t h e f ace o f t h e world, two other countries which aro so degrees of proof, Is. ed. per gallon ; and on w i ne w ith l ess cons tit ute d f or carrying on a beneficial and extended corn than 15 degrees, Is. per gallon. A power is reserved to us pierce. Cheers.) I believe, indeed, that the prohibitory ‘,f increasing our duty on wine in case we should increase system subsisting between Lngland and Franco is no less our Excise on spirits. And if, upon due fiscal considera- unnatural as to every commercial —I think I may add as to tions, we should find it necessary on that account to increase every moral and political—result than if you were to revive our duty on wines, we also engage to charge on any French those prohibitory systems which formerly separated Eng articles which are subject to Excise in England a duty cor- land from Scotland, and Great Britain from Ireland. (Hear.) that our system . is not prohibitory responding with the Excise duty, together with extra and I shall be told, perhaps, articles it is not, for fin ther charges to which the English producer may be put and certainly in respect manyof from France; in consequence of the regulations of our Inland Revenue have considerable importations. I but when I Department. These, Sir, are the chief covenants on the part remember how much we still prohibit, have no hesitation of England. Both parties reserve to themselves power to in saying that, although our system is far bettor th an th a t place Customs' duties anew on any foreign articles whatso- of France, yet, on the oth er hand, it is far indeed from being ever, provided they place the same duties on the like articles what it ought to be. ._(Hear, hear.) . Let us look at the n eet tvh g aee l i a rl s n ot: drr but t ugi :it articles :Tr have origin;-was vela, are of domestic production. They likewise agree to treat question on the French side. The doctrine is that we should each other on the same terms as the most favoured nations. attend to our own interests, and leave France to manage All the articles of the Treaty are to continue in operation hers. What, o t t l a t l en, is the f state;o t f trade ro as regards France ? o f f whatever a E fd t for a period of ten years, with a provision as to giving notice In 1858 tet expovratls7huot exports e s of any desire for their revision, These, then, asse the prin- —not British £llooo. Of that amount the home. consumption in cipal stipulations of the Treaty with France, which may ,1000. cannotA g p e o t rt a i t o n the have been seen by hon. members in one form or another, Fra:in but which have not collectively, or upon authority, as yet une . u ee rne w ra a t s ed llq a'n 4 d 6s b d the ' o f met the public eye. I will not affect to be unaware that etatne l9 9 0tI particularsaefthe wh ole . articles to thevalue of £9,819,000, many objections have been stated to this Treaty. It has about - Of Observe how they are die even been said that its terms indicate a subserviency totributes.the goods sent to France in 1858, amounting sacrifice of British to those to £9,819,000, raw materials, upon which no labour whatever France, and involve a interests I was passed, and the great bulk of which of foreign nations or of a foreign Government. Sir, am but were not of British thankful to think that no Ministry, be its merits or bo the origin,merely passed through our warehouses, were and half-•manufactur • distinction of its chief what they may, can in this countryed articles, £160,000. The totalamount £B,7oo,ooo, of hold office for a single session upon terms of subserviency . manufactures which we send abroad every is here a per- year is about £130,000.000 • but in to any Power whatever. (Cheers.) There , lB5B our exports of the two of manufactured feet security in the nature and in the traditions t goods to France were only £688,000. It hat is meant is worth while to t Houses of Parliament. But, sir, I knowanrtoic w les of a Treaty £68,000, £ 2o B,ooo g w o e a re s el) further in the analysis. Of that by eubserviency to France as regards thefor Cashmere shawls, which merely by this Treaty, carne h er e in like this. We have given France nothing . y, transit, and £217,000 fir machinery; which sacrifice which we are to our friends over the water if. I except some very trifling fiscal of bra nd y. Inotion of mean some make with respect to the single article advantage. The value of all the other that it might not be necessary to (Hear, hear. r educe the duty to quite manufactured arti c l es was £263,000. hear.) I want therefore there might boa to know wh e th er t h at so low a point as we take, and is a state of things so satisfactory that ladvantage may not be when question whether some infinitesimal that adsoli- we have an opportunity of amending it we should surrendered in that form. But, with . small refuse to do so. I understand the statement of the moderate given nothing to Franco by this Free-trader who says tary exception, we have . with that half a loaf is better than no bread, liberal handthat all have not given as ato Treaty which webreaking down of restrictions is good, and that it is the changes here proposed are wiser to break ourselves. (Cheers.) And down our own restrictions and leave those of c hanges every one of which deserves the acceptance of f this our neighb our if we cannot touch them than to perpetuate house on its own merits , i n conformity with al the prin- both. That is true and reasonable ; but I cannot under ciples and acted upon for many stand those that have been recognised Years past. Sir, as to the charge of subserviency . to France come from other quarters, who, I must say, know little of I know that this Treaty may be said to bear a political cha- what they talk about, and who say it is a positive evil to rector, The (mam m a l ' relations of England with France induce our neighbours to break down their restrictions. have always borne a political characte r . What is the history Tkey do n o t see what they condemn is a doubling of the of the system of prohibitions on the one side and on the benefit. They think there is a chivalry in free trade, which other which grew up bet ween this countr y an d France P It is de gra d e d if i t b ecomes a matter o f b arga i n , whereas it waesimply this—that e n ai n gyeerseneee iu political estrange- appears to me that bargain is really at the root of the whole scent from her at the time of the Revolution, you followed thing. The only reaeon why we have not made bargains and continued that es trangement both on the one side and similar to the present in former years was simply because the other by a system of prohibitory duties. And Ido nod we could not make them. It was not for want of trying. deny that it was e ffectual for its end .I don't mean FON four or five years such was thechief business of several for its economical end. Economically it may possibly e have departments of the State, and yet no progress could be made. been ruinous to both countries. lint ee r lie political 'Kid it Why ? Because they set out upon a false principle—the e ve s effectual. AO beta} se i wee ofeetuel T i Call upon you principle that the concessions, which each party made to the t o legislate mow by the reaerse of that premiss, And if yon other were not a benefit beet an injury to itself. (Hoar, hear.) desire to knit toseethee la amity those tw o great nations We have not proeeeded upon that principle. We never p re whose oolithete have often shaken the world, undo for your tended en leeeneo that we were going to inflict injury upon purpose that which your fathers did for their purpose, al 1 A oWsclyce. 'We have offered Franco tar t)tet akl in. breakizg , . . down her own vicious prohibitory system. In doing so, we may have given a greater benefit to France than to ourselves. I shall not attempt to measure it on one side or the other. What we have done is good—nay,doubly good ; good for our selves if France had done nothing at all, doubly good because Franco has done a great deal. (Cheers.) One word upon our exports to Franca at a former period. About 20 years ago there was a trade in:English manufactured goods with France. It was in linen and linen yarns. In 1842 we greatly reduced our duties, not by treaty, but independent of France. How did that country reply to us ? France was under a very friendly Government at the time, but how did she meet the immense benefit we had made in favour of her commerce ? She met it by smiting this single branch of trade in British manufactures with prohibitory duties. She raised her duties upon linen yarn, which before 1842 had been from 9to 12 per cent., to from 13 t o 27 p er cen t. H e r duties upon linen cloths, which before 1842 had been from 15 to 23 per cent., wore increased to f rom 20 t o 36 per cen t. The result may e anticipated. In 1841 we sent to France linen and linen yarns to the amount 0f.£1,000,1/7, whereas in 1858 we sent only £151,483. Such is the state of trade between England and France, and I confess I am not so well satisfied with it as not to think that it admits of some improvement. As an hon. friend whom I see opposite said the other day with respect to our wine duties, so I say of our trade with France, it is not in the best " possible" state, but, on the contrary, might be amended with advantage. (Hear, hear.) I have promised, however, to show what the real meaning of the doctrine is, that we are hero dealing with revenue duties. Take the article of brandy. I pre sume nobody will pretend that a duty of 15s. upon French brandy, compared with a duty of Bs. on British spirits, is a revenue duty. There is an article manufactured in this country which some of us may have been happy or un happy enough to taste. It is called British brandy. (A. laugh.) In consequence of the immense price to which ' French brandy is raised by our duty, which has the effect not only of raising the price of the best French brandies, but of excluding entirely everything but the best French brandies, our middling and indifferent British brandy comes into the place which is left empty for it by means of our pro hibitory duties. As far as brandy is concerned, therefore, we are not dealing with revenue duties. Can we regard the duties upon silk and wine as revenue duties ? The mystery of the wino duty is a very deep one. Here especially we are met by the cry that wino is the rich man's luxury. It is the rich man's luxury, but I shall show presently that those who are not rich are making desperate struggles to get at it—(a laugh)—and that, too, with some limited and qualified success. But wine, forsooth, is the rich man's luxury. Is tea the rich man's luxury ? No. It is the poor man's, and, above all, the poor woman's luxury. But 1 speak in the year 1860. In 1760 tea was the rich man's luxury. In 1760 there was no more tea consumed per head of the popu lation than there is wine now. In 1760 there were 4,000,0001 b. tea consumed ; now the annual consumption its 76,000,0001 b. The price of tea which is now sold at 3s. per lb. was then advertised by the chief houses at £1 per lb. (Hear.) Wine is the rich man's luxury, and you may make tea, or sugar, or any other article of consumption the rich man's luxury if you put on duty enough, by which you will not only effectually bar the access of the poor man to it, but reserve to yourselves the proud satisfaction of saying " Our taxes are paid by the rich ; none are levied upon articles consumed by the poor." (Hear.) Let us consider now the necessary operation upon an article like wine of a uniform rate of duty. Wine, I suppose, more than almost anything else that is produced from the earth by the labour of man varies in quality and price. It is not too much to say that the price of wine runs from 1 up to 100. Upon all qualities we lay the same rate of duty. What is the effect ? That we tax even the highest wines somewhat heavily ; the next to the highest we tax very heavily indeed, and all except those limited classes we totally and absolutely prohibit. Let me give one illustration from a simpler case than that of wino, which very clearly explains how this matter stands, and dispose, once for all, of the notion that we are dealing with revenue duties, laid upon the luxuries of a class, and not upon articles wanted for the consumption of the poor. It is the very simple case of gloves, which was stated to ma by a most intelligent and respectable deputation, who, as became them, made no secret at all about the matter. Our duty upon gloves is 3s. Bd. a dozen. We imported in 1859 about 300,000 dozen. The value of the gloves we import is about 245. a dozen wholesale • the retail price ranges from3os. to 365. Our duty is something like 15 per cent., which seems very moderate, and enables those who aro so dis posed to say, "Ah we do not discourage the importation of French gloves; we merely lay upon them a duty of 15 per cent. for the sake of revenue." How does this work ? It works in this way, that it causes the French to furnish us with the finer qualities of gloves, while they leave to us the supply of the poorer qualities. Abolish the duty, and you will find that a quantity of gloves would be imported from France, Naples, Germany, and Belgium. They will not be gloves at 245. a dozen, but gloves at 18s., 15e., 10a., and Os. a dozen. The lesser-priced gloves cannot pay the duty, for the duty, when applied to gloves of 10s. a dozen, is 37 per cent., and when applied to gloves of 61. per dozen is 58 per cent. ; and those gentlemen, whose words I heard with implicit belief. told me dis tinctly that if this duty were removed a large quantity of gloves would be imported here at 10s. and 12s. the dozen. Therefore the duty is not a revenue duty, but it is a:protection duty on the higher qualities as regardsthe bulk of the trade, and as regards the bulk of the British consumers it is a duty not of protection but of prohibition. So it is with the wine duties. Is that doubted ? Let us se* how the wine duties operate as a system of protection. We have heard of Cape wine, and if we visit places much fre quented by the lower and middling classes we see advertise ments representing largo tuns surrounded by jovial people,. with the words Cape Port and African Sherry written on them. In all probability that is not Cape port or African sherry. Those who import African sherry know how to make a better use of it. There is a system of promotion and preferment. (Laughter.) The African wines are used for mixing with foreign European wines, and to empler language familiar to my right hon. friend the Secretary for War, v tee the African wine promoted somenew composts are brought forward and delivered to a discerning public, with what result it is not for me to say. (Laughter.) The African wine has a differential duty in its favour of nearly 35. & f gallon; from wine, nd if he I be t see r c e h ra t e ho l b e se w h o this f e. g r l that eta caance anxiety theyt o g oalo revenuealong with us reforming the wine duties ; for they will see that the decrease in the receipt duty from year to year would, apart from any treaty with France, but from fiscal con siderations, compel them in the course of a few years to reform the wine duties. I take for each period of year° during the last nine years the consumption of foreign wiT f a o n r d ei C gn ap w e i w ne ine co i n a su th m e ed in Unite( t i he t K ia lfr d er Yea T rs h , e lB a s v l e - r3s,gyr""- was 6,225,000 gallons. (Hear, hear.) During the sa me period the ave rage consumpt i on of colonial wine 0"" 254,000 gallons. In the period of 1854-56 the average COI . sumption of foreign wine was 6,393,000 gallons, being . increase of 168,000 gallons over the previous period. Thu' increase took place when the disease of the vine was at its worst ; and I mention this particularly be"" cause, as this represents the consumption of foreign wille during the disease, it shows that the increase which has taken place in the consumption of Cape wine cannot be owing to the disease in the European grape. When that disease was at its worst the consumption of foreign wine increased, as I have already stated, by 168,000 gallons ; the average consumption of Cape wino during the same period-1854-56—rose from 254,000 gallons to 298,000 gallons. During the last term of years-1857-59--the die' e Ise of the vine was very much mitigated, but the average consumption of foreign wine showed a decrease of 500,00 0 gallons as compared with the consumption of 18.54-185 6 . The average consumption of foreign wine in 1858-59 Tag 5,893,000 gallons, while the consumption of the colonial wines had increased by 357,000 gallons, the average eon. gumption in that period being 655,000 gallons. The cob). nial wine is, in fact, rapidly displacing the foreign. The present duty is purely a protecting and differential duty, and is hostile to the revenue of the country. But there 4 another element affecting the wine revenue, and that 4 the manufacture of what is called British wine. While the consumption of foreign wine has fallen from an average of 6,225,000 gallons to 5,893,000 gallons there has been an in* oreaso in the manufacture of British wine. British I mean that in the hands of small respectable manufac. hirers, and am not referring to what is sold for fraudulent purposes—is made very much with raisins, sugar, and brandy. The duty paid on these materials is reckoned ass amounting to ls. 2d. a gallon. Therefore you have a dutf on foreign wino of ss. 10d. a gallon —on colonial wino of 2s. 11d. the gallon, and on B.itish wine of ls. 2d. the gallon. The result is that the consumption of foreign wine dimi nishes, the consumption of colonial wine has increased, and the consumption of British wine has trebled within the last 10 years. This has all the essential characteristics of * trade carried on under the influence of differential duties, therefore say that the present wine duty is a protective and differential duty with respect to the three classes Which enter into our consumption, namely, foreign, colonial, and British wines, they all paying different rates of duty to the revenue. (Hear, hear.) Out of the enormous quantity of foreign wino manufactured abroad no doubt it is true that only a small fraction would become available for this coun• try. The great bulk ie a wine which an Englishman would not take in exchange for his beer; but it is also true that between that common and coarse wine and the fine wines there are 10,000 intermediate shades, and there is an ins• mense capacity for producing wines fitted for the English market and for the taste of the middle and lower middle classes in this country, which capacity is at present en. tirely stifled by the operation of the wine duty. There ie a notion that there is something fixed and unchanging hi an Englishman's taste with respect to wino. You find wt great number of people in this country who believe, like an article of Christian faith, that an Englishman is not born to drink French wines. (Laughter.) Do what rat will, they say; argue with him as you will; reduce your duties as you will ; endeavour even to pour the French wine down his throat, but still he will reject it. (A. laugh.) Well, these are most worthy portions of the community - but they form their judgment from the mirror circle of their own experience, and won't condescend to look beyond that circle for any consideration whatever. What they maintain is absolutely the reverse of the truth, for nothing is more certain than the taste of English people at ono time for French wine. (Hear, hear.) In earlier period/ of our history French wino was the great article of cow' sumption hero. (Cheers.) Taste is a mutable thing. If you go back to what an eminent living poet has called " the spacious times of great Elizabeth," you will find that the most delicate lady in the land did not scruple the& to breakfast off beefsteaks and ale. Down to the Revolution French wine was very largely consume° here. I have seen it stated, and have no reason to doubt the assertion, that in 1687 there were imported into this country 3,800,000 gallons of French wine, or about two. thirds of the whole quantity of foreign wine which w e n ee/ consume. How was this consumption checked and dis couraged ? By the influence of prohibitive duties. The prohibitive system grew up by degrees, and by degrees the English people were positively beleten and starved eut of their taste for French wine. Bizt for 100 years after that the taste itself remained, for when Mr. Pitt made tlte treaty of 1786 what was the result ? According to the interesting paper written by L or d Ch e l sea, i n t h e 70 front ; precedine . l7B6 the import o f F renc h w i ne i nto E ng l e n o was under 100,000 gallo ns . I n t h e s i x years om 17f f to 1792 the import grew t o 683 , 000 ga l lons. -Then with the war two or three years afterwards a nearly prohibitiv e s at all events a high differentiai, duty was imposed, and the average import fell to 161,000 ga ll ons, At that average', remained till 1824, when th e diff erent i a l d uty, insteaLt 4s. 5d., became 2s. 5d., an d th e consumpt i on rose to 372,u_7 4 gallons. I must admit th a t w h en the duties were equsinr" in 1830 the consumption of French ine did not inereasoei It seemed as if by that time, after the pressure ,_, heavy duties f or a contra.), and a half, th e taste for it was nearly f orgo tt en, and it became the luxury of a f i fe_ limited clas s i n th e conernunity. But it is remarka bl e t ir ; in conjunction with the very changes of taste which, h e 1„ been proceeding of lute years, we may likewise perceiv . 0 7 r the operation of the present wine duties proofs of gro , v o rt so taste for French wino ; for whereas from 1825 to 18° that only consumed 379,000 gallons a year, ' and after 183 .0 0 0 or consumption was reduced to somethince like 310, 00 315,000 gall ons . on th e average o f th e last ten Ye ar . on of , have co nsume d 584,000 gallons, so that the imports ti o ge French wino is absolutely increasing, and the 'wel l of the total consumption is rapidly increasing. Taste,_, ol d is mutable. It is idle to talk of the taste ifor port", ini e sherry and the highly brandied wines a s fixed_oll_lll---• _,..,-.-•.'"""- diatenei (Hear.) wine is si on board Same tin Majesty' happenei ho was r wine do him the cannot g lie insisi was with a glass. and pay entire tri expensiv tain a soi I don't 1 Governn posals w] duties. the print] I do not are maxi( provisior that you an imme more fru which Nr, well that about in on manu ♦alue. lity of pe changes that intai withdrav are now f from the tribute of main aut' this witn French— sincerity a work m alliance, and to th (Cheers.) a time wl help expr at no snit. which he EWVOS to 1 achieved. who, hay portant a fortune o ing no ni the peopl cause for (Cheers.) tio n , to9# s ottli . Ctonl , have The c