The Sun. — London, England, 1852-12-04 00:00:00

ions necessary for the protection of the revenue. I will not say anything about the use of molasses in breweries, or the reduction of the duty on rum, for the same reason which induced me not to enter into discussion respecting stamps or charterparties and marine insurances. They are not questions of pecu liar burdens, but enter into the consideration of the means by which the general revenue of the country shall raised ; and this is not the moment to make any ob ervations on that point. There is one other subject hich it is necessary for me to touch upon before enter ng into the consideration of the general question—l al ude to the local taxation of the country. (Hear.) It is quite unnecessary for me to enter into any of those ar guments with which we, all of us, are familiar as to the character of our local taxation. It is quite .unnecessary for the any longer to enter into arguments to show that there are objects of universal interest to this country which are, in fact, sustained by taxation imposed, not on the general property of the country, but on a portion of that property only. (Hear, hear.) The whole question has been met so ingeniously by one who, though opposed to the policy I sometimes recommended, is a master of the subject—l mean Mr. Cornewall Lewis—that lam perfectly willing, as far as any reasoning on the subject is concerned, to rest it ,on the evidence given by that gentleman before a committee of the House of Lords on the subject of local taxation, and sub sequently revised and printed by him in a pamphlet when in office, and, of course, with the sanction of the Government to which he belonged. As far as prin ciple is concerned, there can no longer be any con test upon this point. Take the case of the tax for the support of the poor. Is there, in the world, an obliga tion so generally binding as that of supporting the poor ? Yet, it cannot be denied that the poor are not supported by the general property of the country. (Hear.) It is unnecessary, therefore, for me to enter into any discus sion upon the subject. Some years ago the real property of the country—namely, the agricultural portion—being suffering under great distress, was extremely sensible of the great injustice of being called on to pay exclusively local rates for universal obligation, and the agricultural interest naturally called the attention of Parliament to the incidence of this unequal taxation. After the divi sions which took place in this house, and the progress of opinion on the subject, I think I may assume that we shall have no dispute upon principle, and we have now to consider what course we shall take with respect to taxa tion which is mainly levied for purposes of general obliga tion, but is not levied on the whole community. The local taxation of the country is a subject with which the house is so familiar, that I saall be able to treat it more succincly than I probably should have been able to do a 'short time back. This local taxation resolves itself into three principal rates. The highway rate has been discussed in this house chiefly with refer ence to its improved administration. The county-rate, though not very considerable in amount, has excited pub lic interest from the attempts which have been made to establish the representative principle in connexion with its management. The third great rate, which has long engaged public attention, is the poor-rate. I will not say anything on the subject of the highway rate. Six bills have been brought into Parliament, with the view of establishing a better administration of the highway-rates, and it was my intention not even to have adverted to the subject, were it not that my hon. friend, the Under Secretary for the Home Department, who presided with singular ability and unwearied industry over the commit tee on turnpike trusts, and who on several occasions has, as the house has recognised, proved himself to be a master of the subject —has, though having quite enough to do in his own office, been kind enough to assist me in the pre paration of a bill on the subject of highway-rates. I hope that this bill will, after six experiments, win the confidence of the house and the country, and have a beneficial effect, both administiatively and financially, on the districts affected by the highway-rate. The county rate, although the smallest of the three, has, from the peculiar circumstances to which I have already adverted, excited a good deal of interest in this house. With re spect to the administration of this rate I will state gene rally, on the part of the Government, that we have not the slightest objection to the representative system being carried into any portion of the management of the affairs of this country into which it can be introduced with advantage to the general interests of the community. (Cheers.) I therefore see no reason to object, at the first blush of the thing, to the proposition that the rate payers should be introduced into the immediate manage ment of the fund produced by the county-rate. At the same time, I must observe that the fund is a small one, and that it comprises some important items of expendi which certainly ought not to be too much under the control of popular assemblies,--I allude to the expendi ture on account of gaols and lunatic asylums. (Hear, hear.) The gaols and lunatic asylums have hitherto been under the superintendence of the magistrates, and it is admitted that those gentlemen have, on the whole, discharged their duties in a satisfactory manner, though, speaking a priori, it might be objected that the control of establishments of this kind ought not to he vested entirely in them. It cannot, I think, be doubted that the prisons of this country ought to be very much, if not entirely, under the control of the executive Govern ment. (Hear.) I think the time is approaching—and it may be rapidly—when we shall have to consider the whole question of punishnients as one of the most press ing questions of the day—(hear, hear)—and an occasion will perhaps arise when the Government may feel that they ought to act with more directness and decision with respect to the management of gaols than the house would now be prepared to sanction. However, at present, tak ing a limited view of the local taxation, let us see what burden it imposes on that portion of the property of the country which has suffered most by recent legislation ; and if we be of opinion that that burden is unjust, let us consider what remedy we can apply to the case. In the first place, let me remind the house that the incidence of the country-rate on the property of the country is ex tremely slight. The rate amounts to 800,0001., subject to a deduction on account of contributions from the con solidated fund and other sources, to the extent of 200,000/. Taking this deduction into account, the rate amounts to 3d. in the pound on the property assessed. Admitting the incidence of the-bounty rate to be unjust, what can we do that will produce any sensible effect ? If we should throw half of the amount of the rate on the consolidated fund, it would relieve the ratepayer to the extent of three-halfpence in the pound ; but, at the same time, it would enter into an undertaking of such an amount as would sensibly embarrass us in dealing with the general taxation of the country. There are many taxes that do not produce more than 400,000/. a-year, and - yet are extremely injurious to the community, and injurious, of course, as a conseque nce , t o th e great b ody of th e agricultural community. I say, then, frankly, as far as the county-rate is concerned, that lam not prepared to recommend any change in that portion of the local ta xa ti on. (Sensation, andsome interruption caused by conversation among hon. members.) I mu s t rem i n d hon. g e n tl emen that they were so ki n d as t o inti mate that th ey would not decide up ( o h n ear m l pro posal until it was altogether before them— and that they would let me state my case. (Cheaeerrs)—.) Now, sir, I come t o t h e consideration of the poor rates. I do not in any way change' my opinion that the abso lute incidence of all local taxation is perfectly indefen sible in point of principle ; but, looking to that which is most expedient for the ceuntry generally, and most ex pedient for that class which I think may be injuriously affected by the present arrangement--taking that view of the case, I will now for a moment examine the poor rates. We must, sir, remember, in the first place, that a very great change has taken place in the burden of the poor rate since, at the commencement of 1849, I first brought under the consideration of the house the inci dence of our local taxation; and especially and mainly of the poor rate, upon realized property, and particularly upon that portion of realised property which was pecu liarly subjected to this tax. Between the last official return describing the amount levied for the main tenance of the poor, which was on the table when I ad dressed the house on that subject in 1849, and the last official return which is now on the table of the house, there is a difference of nearly 25 per cent. (Hear, hear.) When I look into the expediency of the course I am to take, that is a most important consideration. There is no proposition I ever brought forward—at least, there is no - practical proposition I ever brought forward with any chance of its being carried—(the right hon. gen tleman was here interrupted, by some derisive laughter from the Opposition benches)—l mean a proposition which had any chance of being carried—a proposition supported by a large party in this house, because a pro position that is not supported by a large party in the house is not one that has any chance of its being carried ; but there is no proposition I ever brought forward with respect to the establishment which, if it had been carried, would have effected so great a relief as the gradual diminution of the poor -rates. (Hear, hear.) Now take, for example, the establishment charges. The establishment charges for the salaries of officers con nected with the administration of the poor are s omethi ng lik e 430,000/. a year. Well, since 1848-49, Z a n " pi the l as t return upon the table was made, you have Your average, on an a, diminutionegual to the amount of establishmeiitcharges. Te return of the expen diture for the relief and maintenance of the poor, which was not i t : t o table when I a dd resse d the house in 1849 —and r eturn for 1849, b u t f or 1848—( hear, hear) ment, and the of course, the basis of my general argu this subj ect. ,pgin of the feeling in the country on amount expeadeT_camount was 6,180,000/. Now, the year r i ; the relief and maintenance of the poor in the the table of the hou s s , l—a ccording to the last return on which I shall refe; though o I h ave a more recent one, (3,180,000/., was 4 ,962,o l pseque n tl y —i nstea d of being Opposition.) I am afraaut(Loud chee rs from the on account of the diminution tohfa f au p eri sm. (Laughter t is r ea ll y no t a c h eer from the Ministerial benches. a cheer for recent legislati on. (a 1Z am afraid it is Laoughter, and some cheering from the Opposition.) ..4r, I don't want to disturb "recent legislation"— your cheer is a very illogical one--. 1 lauatehear)—but must show you—what I should not otherwise liara)— ve a c lid I because I don't want to raise any controversy : d e m ' subject—that-recent legislation may not have h ad at thing to do with this result. (Hear, from the MinisteriYal side.) Now you (addressing the Opposition) think recent legislation 'is the cause of the poor-rates in 1851, having been under 5,000,0001., and upon that you cheered, but then it so happens that in 1846 the rates were rathe r less. (Laughter from the Ministerial side. Mr. BRIGHT " Wit h the same price of corn ?" followed by cheers and laughter from the Opposition.) I think, though I don't want to do it, I could produce some returns of the prices of corn which would shwhat the fact—one return, for instance h . ce, w ow was which, when I quoted it, the late Sir R. Peel said ought never to have been printed , • but there are greater subjects for us to consider than the triumph of obsolete opinions. (Laughter from the Opposition.), ition ) jlooked upon one-sided free trade as an obsolete opinion, ust as you look upon protection, d amlost the great principle of the day--that ' and I in unrestedcompeti tion. (Laughter and c h eers.) Now, I must put these 'ets before the house, because they are very I have shown you that there has been a diminution of poor -rates from 1848 to 1851 of nearly 25 per cent.—a very important point for me to consider as regards the expediency of dealing with those rates • but, though there has been, from 1848 to 1851, a CliminutiOn of nearly 400,0001. a year in the poor-rates, I have here' the return for 1852 ; and I am sorry to say that that rate of dimintition has not only ceased, but that very little diminution has taken place. (Hear, hear.) The returns of the Poor-law Board, which I have in my hand, are very contradictory to the popular opinions that are held, and it is of the utmost importance that we should have correct ideas upon this subject, not only with reference to the condition of the people, but also with reference to that important question which is agitating the public mind—namely, as to the influence of emigration upon the consuming power of the country. One would suppose, from what we are told, and from what we read every day, that an able-bodied pauper was not in existence, and that a time has arrived in which the common business of the country cannot be carried on. Now the fact is, + 1 in that wonderful period of 1851-52, in we heard all these stories, and when I, for one, was prepared to see certainly an equal diminution of pau perism in the country, there has been no such result. The amount of the rates for 1851 was 4,962,0001., and for 1852, 4,894,000/. ; and I find, from the return for the half-year ending in Michaelmas, 1852, that the amount - is 2,432,0001, which being doubled would give 4,864,000/. for the year.; but you must remember that the half-year ending at. Michaelmas is the mild half year, and, therefore, I do not' think we can believe that any sensible reduction of the pauperism of the country ought to be relied on. I confess myself, not withstanding this return, I believe that the country is in a most prosperous state, and I will not relinquish the belief that pauperism will yet be sensibly diminished ; but it is my duty to place these facts before the house. Still the great fact remains that the charge for pauperism in this country upon realised property, and es pecially upon the agricultural interest, has been reduced by the amount of 25 per cent. since I first drew the at tention of the house to the subject—(hear, hear)—and there is no doubt, notwithstanding the somewhat dis appointing return I have just placed before the house, that there are circumstances in operation at this mo ment which, if human judgment can lead us with any advantage, must considerably affect the amount of pau perism in this country. I have no doubt the counteract ing causes that, for a moment, have arrested the rapid diminution of the rates might be discovered, but I my self still believe there are circumstances and causes in operation that will progressively, and even materially, diminish the pauperism of the country. Well, then, sir, I have to consider, under these circumstances, whether it will be expedient to deal with the sum that is raised by local taxation for the maintenance of the poor. I have to recollect that, since I brought this subject for ward, there has been such a diminution that four times the establishment charges of the board have been saved to the realised property of the country. (Hear, hear.) I have to recollect, also, with regard to that peculiar portion of the realised property of the country whose claim I urged, that since the period of 1849 the relative proportion between that property and the other realised property of the country has undergone a change, and that from both these causes the incidence of this taxation is less severe. Thirdly, Ido believe that all the influences in operation, notwithstanding the return I have quoted to the house, tend to the diminution, and the consider able diminution, of th a t b ur d en . (Hear, hear.) Well, sir, as my me ans are li m it e d—l oo ki ng, as have anxiously looked, for means by which I might assist every suffering class every class which I thi n k h as a f a i r c l a i m t o t he consideration of the house, in a manner which would con tribute to the general welfare of the community—believ ing that the measures which, on the part of my col leagues, I am about to propose to-night have that ten dency, and that they will greatly assist those who, I think, have been subjected to a very severe trial, and who, in this respect, I conceive, are liable to a taxation which, on principle, cannot be defended,—l am not pre pared to recommend any change whatever in the present system of raising the local taxation of the country. (This announcement was followed by loud cheers from the Opposition benches, and the right hon. gentleman having paused for a few moments, a very animated con versation was carried on in the interval by hon. mem heirs on both sides of the house.) I have now, Sir, (the Chancellor of the Exchequer, continued), considered three instances of peculiar interests that have, in my ()Onion, suffered by recent legislation. I have placed before the house the general views of her Majesty's Go vernment with respect to those interests. I have offered, with regard to the shipping int eres t, mea s ures w hi c h, as far as lcould judge of the feeling of the house, were, I think, considered moderate but satisfactory. (Hear from the Opposition.) I mean moderate so far in their concep tion that they have not been framed with an ad captan dant purpose ; satisfactory, because I believe this house and the country will take them as a final settlement of that controversy. I have endeavoured on the part of the Government to view the claims of the sugar colonies in, a just and fair spirit. lam sure that those who are connected with that interest must be satisfied that it would be quite impossible to propose a differential duty —i(cheers from the Opposition)—that that claim could only have been urged by those who were not masters of the facts ; and they must see, from the course taken on thp part of th e Government as to encouraging emigra tiOn to the colonies, and permitting them to carry on the manufacturing processes without the restrictions which before existed—a boon which has been described to me by an eminent member of the West India body as equal itself to a differential duty of 18d., they must feel, when the Government have taken upon themselves the respon sibility, for it is a grave responsibility, of recommending that step, besides others to which I shall have to advert, that there has been an anxious desire on our part to place them in as good a position as present circumstances and the temper of the public mind would per mit. I believe, Sir, that the measures we have re conimended with respect to the West India body will sensibly improve the condition of that interest. I shall not touch any further upon the subject of local taxation. I now approach the more important topic of viewing the taxation of this country under the new circumstances in which all parties and conditions of men have now agreed to be placed. So long as there were two great parties in this country who questioned the principle upon which your commercial code ought to be established, it was impossible to attain any general adhesion to the prin ciple upon which your financial policy ought to be constructed. As long as a man thought that his industry ought to be protected he was prepared to endure a heavy burden of taxation. As long as a man thought that his industry should be free from all restriction, of course he demurred against the sy s t em which imposed res t r i c ti on up o n the financial arrange ments of the country, and raised the prices of the arti cles which he consumed. But from what has occurred it is obvious, generally speaking, that unrestricted com petition is not consistent with unrestricted industry, and in a word, if you decree that the community are to re ceive low prices, your policy ought to be one which will put an end as soon as possible to high taxes. (Hear, hear.) Well, Sir, after the general election, and after the solemn verdict of the country, I had to consider the general system of our taxation, and to apply it to the principle of unrestricted competition. I had to ask my self what were the measures which it was best to recom t men to Parliament. Now that this principle is formally and definitively established, what were the measures most consistent with that principle, and which would enable the community to encounter that competition which it must now, in every form and in every sense, be pre pared to meet ? Well, Sir, when I took that subject into consideration, giving it the utmost thought I could command, it appeared to me that we must arrive inevi tably at this result,—that you will best enable the people to engage in that competition to which they are now for ever evesrudsteasintinsetdhebir lives. by cheapening enr i f ea a r s much as eers) possible lo t o ht which therefore, to articles that are of prime necessity—(loud cheers from the Opposition benches),—and if I find that those articles of prime necessity are subjected to some of the heaviest takes in our tariff, then I say that these are arrangements inconsistent with the new system we have established, and the new principles of which we have approved. It is the boast of honourable gentle men opposite that they have given cheap bread to the community, but the principles upon which you have given cheap bread to the community are prin ciples which ought to make you cheapen the sustenance of the community in every form—(cheering from the Opposition benches),—and I think I shall be able to show to the house, that if they adopt that principle of finance, they will, in a legitimate manner, with out going out of their way, and without any arti ficial means, be giving the greatest possible impulse to every branch of the industry of the country, and espe cially to those very branches that have most suffered by recent legislation. (Cheers.) The house, therefore, will not be astonished that her Majesty's Government are prepared to recommend Parliament to deal with the malt tux. (Loud cheers.) Here is a prime necessity of life subject to a very high tax, and a very high tax levied under circumstances which greatly restrict industry. (Hear, hear.) lam not called upon to recommend the change I am about to propose to the house to hon. gen tlemen opposite on any other plea than that which they have always declared to be sovereign plea—namely, the benefit of the consumer. Hon. gentlemen opposite have sometimes told friends of mine, when they, have pro posed dealing with the malt tax as a means of assisting the agricultural interest, that it was only a con sumer's tax—(hear, hear)—but I am sure hon. gentle men opposite will not oppose the plan of the Govern ment on that plea—(cheers .from the Ministerial benches)—that they will not get up, and tell me I whicl am about to proiose a change in the law which wit only benefit the consumer. (Cheers and laughter.' It can hardly be the effect of the dissolution of Parlia: ment, it will hardly be the effect of the triumph of un restricted competition, that I am to be told by hon. gentlemen opposite, on the first occasion when I pro pose the remission of a tax, that it can only benefit the consumer. On the contrary, I give hon. gentlemen opposite credit for the consistent and sincere conviction that the interest of the consumer is the interest which We ought first to consider. I have never disguised my which n opinions on this subject. I have always told my friends thatat though it was certainly the interest of the consumer Chit malt tax should be dealt with, still it was my t f hat" there was no tax with which we could deal I hope hon. rn roperly dealt with, would more benefit the nervianti°cnlo4se eonnectio agricultU interest. '(Cheers from the Ministerial side.) gentlemen opposite will not grudge me a few l o ) b ee s question of the malrteptaeax:h those with whom I have so long as alstsua,mpepdmarsttootamllye different t re th n e t g ß re j a u t stly of aspect since the. of the corn laws. I know it was said by one who wa great authority in this house—one of very oriity with me—that the :moment you repealed and coarniltrts the repeal of the malt tax was inevitable ; , ter, h6nk there will be t difficulty in demonst t' no gi - ea va ing the soundness of that .opinion. But it is quite clear, ~,,,%en Ministers of State take every opportunity of informing the cultivator of the soil that he must grow as little wheat as,possible, that the difficulty of maintaining the policy of a law which restricts the production of the next generous grain is proportionately increased. There is no doubt, when the tendency of your recent legislation is to diminish the production of wheat, and, in fact, to limit its pro duction to those soils which are eminently and na turally qualified for it, that the tendency of your legis lation should be, if not to encourage those produc tions which would be natural to the soil, now that wheat is to be relinquished, at least not , to main tain laws which would discourage the production of them. (Hear.) Even as regards wheat, it is impos sible that any legislative means can be devised which would more tend to the encouragement and support of the wheat land than in fact, diverting those soils that were improperly employed in the cultivation of wheat back to their original purpose. The more you produce barley upon the soils qualified to produce barley, the more you are improving the market for the production of those soils eminently qualified to give us wheat ; and the indirect influence of any change in the malt-tax upon the production of wheat will be, in my opinion, very considerable. (Hear, hea r .) Well, sir, we now have to consider, in the first pla ce , h ow we shall deal with this tax, in what manner and to what degree. If we deal with it in a small manner, we shall probably accomplish none of those objects to which I have alluded. (Cheers.) The consumer will not be benefited—the cultivator of the soil will not be benefited—you'll neither have cheap beer, nor will you have a free r c u lti va ti on o f th e land of the country. (Hear, hear.) What you want is. that you shall have as much as possible unrestricted industry, and its consequences, as far as the cultivator of the soil is concerned, and that one of the consequences of that unrestricted industry should be that the con sumer should enabled to procure one of the main causes of his expenditure, and one of the principal sources of his health and strength, supplied to him at a reduced price. Those are the objects we wish to attain, and they appear to us to be objects which cannot be a tt a i ne d if we deal in a small manner with this great subject. (Cheers.) The existing duty upon malt is 2s. 7Ad. and 5 per cent. on the bushel. The consumption is increas ing. In 1849 it was 38,935,000 bushels; in 1850 it was 40,744,000 ; and in 1851 it went a little back, and was was 40,377,000 bushels. But, though increasing, there is no article of counsumption which has less propor tionately increased, and the diminution of the con sumption of which can, I think, be more clearly attributed to the large tax levied on it, and to the restrictions which that tax occasions. (Hear, hear.) I know there are gentlemen who have endea voured to maintain at times that the reason the con sumption of malt has not increased is, that the taste of the country has been directed to other sources of sustenance and excitement ; but I think I could show to the house, by a reference to general statistics on these subjects, that that is a position which cannot be maintained. Well, sir, under these circumstances, her Majesty's Govern ment think it their duty to recommend to the house that the reduction of the malt tax should be considerably diminished—that we should diminish by one-half the amount of the present duty on malt. (Hear, hear.) The sum which we have to deal with, is a sum which exceeds 5,000,000/. as regards the revenue, and we propose that we shall diminish the dtity exactly by one-half; we pro pose that there should be paid an uniform duty, of ls. aid. and 5 per cent. per bushel upon barley, and also upon bere and.bigg; we propose to terminate the difference in the duty which has been injuriously and improperly maintained between malt rais od from barley, and from bere and bigg: and we propose also to do away with the draw back in Scotland upon spirits produced from malt. That drawback has already been renounced by Ireland as unnecessary. It was recommended by the commissioners on excise inquiry as one which should be terminated whenever any considerable reduction took place in the duty upon malt ; and I think I shall have no difficulty in showing to the house, when we come to points of de tail, that this is a change which ought no longer to be postponed. (Hear, hear.) Now, allow me to read to the house, the recommendation which was made, in the year 1831 I think, upon the subject of the malt duty, by a distinguished member of this house, Sir Henry Parnell, who was, I believe, at the head of the Royal Com mission to inquire into the Excise, and to whose la bours we are indebted for some of the most valuable documents in our Parliamentary library. (Hear, hear.) Now, these words are very interesting when we remember the circumstances under which they were written. Having entered into a general statement of the grounds to show that the most effectual mode of sup pressing illicit malting would be by a reduction of the duty on malt, he went on as follows : " But if the importation of foreign barley be not per mitted, the tendency of a reduced duty to increase the con sumption of malt would be counteracted by the price of British barley becoming higher in consequence of the new demand for it, which would arise from the duty having been lowered ; and thus the consequence of a reduction of duty would be, not such an increased consumption of malt as would keep-the revenue up to its present amount, but a higher price of barley, and a certain loss of revenue. As, therefore, there is no probability of a reduced duty being followed by such an increased consumption of malt as would prevent a loss of revenue, so long as the importa tion of foreign barley is restricted, we are of opinion that it will be preferable to endeavour to check illicit malting by the enforcement of kthe Excise laws, however inadequate they may be to iproduce a complete remedy, rather than to try the experiment of stopping it by a reduction of duty. If there were no factitious cause for elevating the price of barley, arising from the direct effect of a duty on foreign barley, or from the indirect effect of duties on other kinds of foreign corn, we should not feel any hesitation in saying that the proper way of dealing with the malt duty would be to reduce it one-half." Those were the words of Sir Henry Parnell. Practically, he said that, if your corn laws were repealed, he recom mended you to reduce your malt duty one-half—(hear, hear)—that, too, is the opinion of a gentleman as tender of the revenue as any gentleman who ever spoke in this house. Those circumstances, which he possibly did not contemplate, have occurred ; you have repealed your corn laws, and I ask you now to sanction the recommendation made by Sir Henry Parnell at that time. " For," says he : Nothing, in our opinion, can be more unwise than to re duce duties on articles which aro fit subjects of taxation, without at the same time taking care to secure the most abun dant supply that is possible to be secured of the materials which arc necessary for their production." Well, you have done that. The circumstances which he anticipated have occurred ; and now I ask you to adopt the measure which he recommended. (Hear, hear.) Mr. CAYLEY—Is that the report of the commissioners that you have quoted from ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Yes ; the report of the commissioners on the Excise Inquiry, of which Sir H. Parnell was the chairman. The repo r t of the commissioner s a l so recommen d e d terminating the draw back on malt in Scotland. That is at present 8(1. per gal lon ; and, of course, if there were a reduction of the duty by one-half, it would only be 4d. per gallon. But here is the report of the committee on the Spirit Duties in Ire land : " That it is the opinion of this committee that the repeal of the malt drawback in Ireland will not be prejudicial either to the trade in spirits, or to the revenue, in that country." That was in 1842. In consequence of that, the drawback in Ireland was terminated without a murmur. It has given general satisfaction, and I am certain that the repeal of the drawback in Scotland will prove equally successful. (Hear, hear.) There are many points in the report of the commis sioners of Excise Inquiry as regards malt which are well worthy of the consideration of the house. They particu larly dilate on the length of credit which is given in that trade. They show the vicious principle on which that sys tem has been established, and they recommend that the credit should be limited to the sameduration which applies to all other excisable articles. I confess I am not prepared to give unqualified adhesion to that recommendation. I princi plest u b e changes iasilittle tl ultimatelytacountryled t as s e opwns particular t nb we diminishte;h that stnhdo rshould trades tplhdo ort tul ho involved ogehakrelas stsh i systemmus nhnukodeu think it is of the greatest importance that in all these' d s o th d at be th d e is of long asprinciples, credits,possibleand n r c e o su m l m t, er l ce thi i nk s ,coonfdupactpeedr currency penrecysenatn,dbwuta which which is not adapted to the principle on which our speculation —still, unqualifiedly and sametime,entirely I to thiadnokptittreoulredcommnot recommendation e da tse n of the commissioners in this respect. We pro pose, then, that on th e 10 th of October next the malt duty shall be reduced one-half. We have fixed on that period, of course, after due examination into the question when the change could take place with the least incon venience to the trade, and, as we believe, with the most general benefit to the community, and the 10th of October is the day on which we have fixed. On that day we pro pose to take the stock on hand throughout the country, and of course we shall guard those who are then possessors of malt from the competition, as far as the one-half in the amount of the duty is concerned to which they will be subjected, and for that stock in hand they will receive a drawback in proportion to the reduction of the duty. I • do not know that this is the convenient moment at which I should attempt to place before the house the effect of these changes upon the revenue. It will probably be more convenient that at a subsequent part of my state ment I should place the effect of those changes before the house. (Hear, hear.) I will, then, once m ore , merely re capitulate, for the sake of clearness, what th e c h ange is. We propose to reduce the duty on malt one-h a lf ; we pro pose that there shall be no difference between the duty on malt raised from barley and from here and bigg. Thi s w ill occasion some accession to the revenue, though it is notfor that object, but in order to simplify the subject as much as possible, that I recommend it to the house. We propose to put an end to the drawback allowed in Scotland on spirits raised from malt; and we propose that the reduction shall take place on the 10th of October next, on which day the whole stock in hand throughout the country will be taken, and 'a drawback allowed to the holders of that stock pro portionate in amount to the reduction of the duty. (Hear.) Well, sir, following the principle which I have laid down, that in the present state of affairs we should consider our taxation mainly as it regards the great body of the con sumers, believing that that - policy will afford the most legitimate, the surest, and the most efficient means of relieving the industry of the country, I proceed now to another branch of the question. I have shown you that by the manner in which we propose to deal with the malt tax we benefit largely, as we believe, the consumer ; but in doing that we think that incidentally—and that was only a secondary purpose—we are giving great facilities to agri culture. Nov, Sir, I come to another branch of the sub ject. I come to deal with an article as popular with the people as malt, as much a necessary of life, and subjected to a much heavier tax. lam about to recommend to the house to deal with the tea duties. (Cheers.) Sir, I know the prejudices that exist among a certain class of persons on the subject of the tea duties, but, having had occasion to look very much into this question, I haye been as tonished to see the rise of opinion, the gradual forma tion of opinion, on this subject, now almost one of para mount interest in this country. (Hear, hear.) I hardly know anything more amusin g than o open " Pepys's Diary," where we see it stated—" Took a cup of the new China drink—very pleasant"—(laughter) —and to remember that not two centuries have passed, and that exotic novelty which pleased one evening thaif antastic gentleman is now the principal solace of every cottage in the kingdom. (Hear.) Well, sir, the great objection which has been urged at different times and by persons in authority—for I think it right to state a case of this kind as fairly as pos sible—is, that in dealing with tea we deal with an article of limited production. True it is that Mr. Pepys had his cup of the "now China drink" —true it is that since cer tainly the commencement of the last century, when only 500,000113. of tea were imported into this country at a very =WWII THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 4, 1852. high price, we have ended in importing mere than 70,000,0001 b. in one year, and every year at a cheaper rate. (Hear, hear.) These would seem t o b e f ac t s i n th e f ace o f which it is very difficult to believe that the production of tea can be limited. A production so immensely increased, and always imported at a lower price, appears to be one the supply of which cannot certainly be likely to fail. But in the year 1834, I think, or shortly after the passing of the Reform Bill, when the trade with. China was opened— when the charter of the East India Company was about to be, or had become, matter of discussion—it was always urged by persons of authority, against opening the trade with China, that we should be greatly disappointed in what would occur, because, the supply of tea being limited, it was quite impossible that there could be any reduction in the price. The supply of tea was then, I think, about 30,000,0001 b, per annum. Now we had, last year, im ported the unprecedented amount of 71,466,0001 b., our consumption being, in round numbers, 54,000,0001 b. It is quite clear, therefore, that the importation of tea is still greater than our consumption • and it is also quite clear that the duties which exist, whi c h are nearly 240 per cent. per lb. check a consumption e qua l t o th e i m p or t a ti on . (Hear, Well, sir, when we look to the gradual increase in the importation of tea ; when we look to the broad fact that 30,000,0001 b. under the restricted trade have increased to 71,466,0001 b. under the freer trade, though subjected to a colossal duty • when we look to all the evidence before us, and t o th e gradual elimina tion always of price, we have a right, I think, primd facie, to conclude that there will be n o diffi cu lty in supplying the demand for tea in this country. But, Sir, her Ma jesty's Government, in dealing with this important subject, have not deemed it consistent with their duty merely to depend upon their own conclusions, formed from books, and their observation of what occurs around them. They have an opportunity of conaultingthose who are great autho rities on the subject, who, by their foreign residence, their particular study of the matter in question, and their na tural aptitude to form conclusions on such subjects, should be entitled to guide the judgment of .any Administration. They have applied to those who, locally, were the best ca pable of forming an opinion —though, of course, to form an opinion on a subject in a country like China is much more difficult than in some other countries. Nevertheless, we have now some knowledge of China ; nevertheless, there are individuals who are very competent to guide even a Government on such subjects ; and, after bestowing upon this question the most laborious investigation, and having omitted no efforts to obtain the most accurate information : having suggested every means and every test by which that information could be brought to bear, having even personally had the honour and satisfaction of conferring with some peculiarly qu a lifi e d t o offer an opinion on the subject—her Majesty's Government have arrived at the conclusion which, to use the most moderate language I can command, may be thus expressed—that ,there can be no prospect of any w an t o f a supp l y o f t ea t o thi s country. (Hear, hear.) It is under these circumstances, sir, that we have examined this question. We must remember some facts of importance ; we must remember that since the year 1841 the annual increase in the consumption of tea in this country has been 1,727,000 lb. There has been a gradual increase from 1841 of the consumption of tea, even at a duty of 240 per cent. That increase durinc , the last few years has b een much lar g er. During the last six years, without any re d uc ti on of duty, it has been nearly 10,000,000 lb. In 1851 the consumption in round num bers was 54,000,000 lb. ; in 1844 it was 44,000,000 lb. In considering this subject, it was impossible to shut our eyes to what has occurred in respect to the consumption of sugar. (Hear.) The consumption of sugar in the year 1844, the year immediately preceding the great reduction of duty, was 4 ,129,000 cwt. ; in 1850 it was 6,200,000 cwt. —(hear, hear)—and in 1851 it was nearly 6,600,000 cwt. —(hear, hear)—showing an increase in the first six years of about one-half, and in seven years of considerably more than one-half, the duty having been reduced in the proportion of 25 to 10. In dealing with tea we are of opinion that it would be perfectly vain to attempt to make any difference either between black and green, or between any qualities whatever. (Hear.) We are persuaded we should only involve ourselves in great trouble ; we should not attain the object we all de sire, and in this question, as in malt, or any question of a similar kind, b o ld ness i s the wisest course. (Hear, hear.) I mentioned before, we were not of opinion that the reduc tion of duties on articles so far of a similar character that they both tend to the sustenance of the people in the form of beverages, at all interfere with each other. I do not know any more striking case than the case of coffee. I think that in 1808 there was little more imported into this country than 1,000,0001 b of coffee. The duty was then considerable. It was changed—it was much lower; and, in 1809—and remember what our population then was, as compared with what it is at present—the importation was nearly 10,000,0001 b. But simultaneously with that in creased consumption of coffee, the consumption of tea has increased, and we are now consuming 37,000,0001 b of coffee, while, as I have just s hown, last y ear we consume d 54,000,0001 b. of tea, and probably we shall not, consume much less than 57,060,0001 b in the year ending the sth of January, 1854. Under these circumstances, availing our selves of the experience which dealing with the sugar duties has given, following a precedent which I thi n k h as b een so successful—(hear)—we think the proposition that we ought to make to the house—a proposition which I believe in every way is a safe proposition—should be one in its cha racter of a complete and comprehensive nature. The pre sent duty upon tea, with the 5 per cent. added, is 2s. 20. a pound. Without making any distinction in the qualities of tea, we propose that we should reduce that duty is a pound—(loud cheers)—and we propose that, following the example of the sugar duties, that reduction should take place during the term of six years—(cries of " Oh, oh," and laughter)—that in the first year there should be a reduc tion of 4id. (Laughter.) I think hon. gentlemen, when they have reflected f or a momen t, w ill fi n d that they are too precipitate in their laughter, because we have to consider two things, —we have not only to consider the revenue, but also the consumer . who seems to be quite forgotten. (Hear, hear.) There is not the slightest doubt that if the state of the re venue allowed you at once to reduce the duty to is. a pound, you would probably find the greater proportion of it would not be to the advantage of the consumer ; because, although I have great confidence in the produc tion of tea in China, although I know that China is the most populous country in the world, without stating how many hundred millions may be there, and although I know that tea is used in every part of China, and that the quantity exported is comparatively a very small part of that which is produced and consumed in China, and although I know very well there is a surplus left of that quantity in China, still I am perfectly aware that if there is a sudden demand in this market, and you have not taken the usual and prudential care and consideration upon which all trade must be conducted, you will not find the consumer benefitted in the manner you desire, while at the same time the revenue must suffer. (Hear, hear.) It takes three or four years to make a tea tree, and that is a point to be considered iu dealing with these duties. If you want to increase production, especially of such an article as tea, you cannot suddenly go with a demand for which they are not prepared ; but, if you take the scale which her Majesty's Government propose—a very mode rate scale I admit, but I believe a very safe one—l think, with very slight injury to the revenue, you will ultimately obtain that cheap and superior article which you would desire. Of course, immediately dealing with an article of tea is not like dealing with ar ti c l es o f ° domestic produce, which are subject to different conditions. But what we prOpose is, that there should be an immediate reduc tion of 4id. a-pound in the duty on tea, reducing it, from 2s. 2id. a-pound to is. 10d. I myself put the .in creased consumption at a very slight figure. Instead of 54,000,000 lb., upon which the last January revenue was put, I only put 60,000,0001 b. for the first year of the reduced duty, being an increase of 6,000,000 lb., but virtually not much more than 3,000,000 lb. ,• because, as I have told the house, the consumption of t ea h as so much increased on the quantity at which the revenue was last taken in January, 1852, that probably the amount of the consumption of tea for this year will be 57,000,000 lb. Th ere fore, virtually, I only calculate upon an in crease o f 3 , 000,000 lb. at the re duced rate for the first y ear. I thi n k w h en w e tak e th e average of a great many years, we shall naturally arrive at an increase of 2,000,000 lb. a year. This is not an exces sive calculation. I think the reduction we propose is one that we could make with perfect safety to our finances, as I will show to the house when I sum up the changes which the Government have determined to recommend. I pro pose, then, in regard to tea, that we should immediately reduce the duty 44d. a lb., an d th at every y ea r it thould be reduced 2d. until it a rr i ves a t l s . I believe if you adopt that system you will very little injure the revenue, —that you will gradually enable the people of this country to have a supply, at a very reasonable rate, of a very favourite beverage ; and that you will do more than that —that you will give a great stimulus to the commerce, the shipping, and the manufactures of this country. (Hear.) Ido not know of any measure more calculated to give a great stimulus to the commerce and shipping of this country than dealing largely and extensively with tea —(hear, hear)—and althou g h I m i g ht h a ve been glad to offer to the house a project with regard to this duty which, upon one branch, might be of a more favourable character, yet, considering that the financial year is not closed, and ether circumstances, I am pe rsua d e d we have taken a prudent as well as a bold course ; an d th a t, if the House accepts our proposition, th e y w ill h ave cons ented to one of the most i m p o rtant operations, and sanctioned one of the most important measures ever brought forward to stimulate the commerce of this country. (Hear.) There is one duty I am about to deal with, which is connected with this branch of the 'subject, and which, perhaps, I ought to have adverted to before, and that is the hop duty. (Hear, hear.) We are unwilling to make this effort to give cheap beer to the people without dealing with one of the important ingredients of that beverage. (Hear, hear.) The house is aware ther e are two d ut i es now l ev i e d upon hops. There is the old duty of the time of Queen Anne, and there is the war duty unposed during our great struggle. Those duties are almost equal in amount ; in round numbers, without the fractions, they amount nearly to about ld. each—(a laugh)—and what we propose is, that the old war duty—a very unpopular duty—a duty which ought never to be continued, should be remitted. (Cries of " Oh , oh!" and laughter.) At present we do not propose to take off all. Something must be left for future statements of this kind. (Great laught er ) Still, I think, in reducing the hop duty one and ing the tea duti es i mmediately cons id era bly i n th e p oun d , and establishi ng machine ry which will bring it down to ls. a lb, it cannot b e said wehave been unmindful of the claims of the community, acting on the principle of unrestricted com petition. Now, sir, there is one point of some i m p ortanc ewhich I think I ou g ht t o touch upon. We are ra i s i ng th e revenue of this country, and r ecomme nding all these measures on the principle that the revenue of this count r y shall mainly depend on th e consuming p o wer of the people. But it has been s a id o f late, it - has been rumoured about with considerabl e vehemence that the consuming power of the people is rapidly diminishin , Some modern economists— I speak of th ose statements which meet my own eyes i n many quarters an d i n many Places — s ay that the consum ing power o f th e people is in a state o f rap id re d uc ti on ; and I think I am only doing my duty in calling the attention of the house to that subject, for it is one that very much agitates the public mind ; and it is the duty of the house to instruct itself upon a subject of so much importance ; for, if that is true, certainly the principle upon which I am now recommending these measures is erroneous and mistaken. Now, sir, no evidence reached me which in any way m a k e s me believe there is the slightest foundation for sa yi ng the consum i ng p o wer of the p eo pl e i s diminishing. (H ear, hear.) I appre hend the state men t , that the consuming power of the people is diminishing, is founded upon the emigration that has taken place from this country; and that is a subject to which the hen. and learned member for Wolverhampton called my attention the other night. There is no doubt that, if we look to the returns of emigration, there is a greater amount of emi gration from this country than is counterbalanced by the births that take place in England and Wales. In the year 1840 the emigrations were in round numbers 300,000; in 1850 they were 280,000 ; in 1851, 335,0 00 ; and on the Ist of October, 1852, th e last return I have, that is to say, in three quarters of a year, they are in amount nearly equal to the whole of the year 1851—namely, 332,000. There is no doubt also that the births of this country, in 1851, were in round numbers little more than 600,000, and the deaths were 400,000. So it would seem from these returns that our births exceeded our deaths by 200,000 in the year 1851 ; and that our emigrations exceeded the superfluity of our births by considerably above 100,000 ; but, if these facts are a little examined, —if they are a little analysed, it will be found there is no foundation for the conclusions that have been hastily drawn from them. In the first place, the re turn of our births, marriages, and deaths is confined to England and Wales ; in the second place, the amount of our emigration is small—two-thirds of it is from Ireland, a country which does not figure in the returns of our births and population. Then we have to consider the different causes that have produced emigration from Ireland and emigration from England. Emigration from Ireland is pro duced by a social system that has broken to pieces. (Hear. It is produced, I may say, by the misery of the people. The emigration from England is produced by causes exactly the contrary. The people here were never better off, but they have foreign inducements that act upon their spirit of energy and enterprise, and they are determined to seek even better fortunes than they experience. That is the first point—that is the great difference between the causes that have produced the emigration of the two countries. The emigration from England is, in fact, only 100,000 a-year, while there is an addition of 200,000 to its population. There is nothing, it would seem, excessively apprehensive in the fact that our emigration, stimulated by the higher aspirations of man, and not occasioned by a sense of misery, so far affects our population that 100,000 persons quit us, while the natural increase of our population is 200,000 ; but even if there were 200,000 or 300,000 quitting England, I could not view emigration, under such conditions as those under which the emigration from Great. Britain takes place, as a source of weakness to the country—(hear, hear)—or in speaking of the finances of the country, as a source of the diminution of its consuming power. (Hear.) One shrinks from paradoxes upon a subject so grave ; but my own opi nion is that it has a tendency to increase the consuming power. (Hear, hear.) Every emigrant from England generally becomes an English colonist—(hear, hear)—and an English colonist becomes an English customer—(hear, hear)—and our markets are stimulated, our people are em ployed, and their wages are improved by the very circum stance which some regard as the source of our diminished power of consumption. (Hear, hear.) But even if I look to the case of Ireland, where emigration takes place under conditions so contrary to those of England, I am still obliged to arrive at a similar conclusion. Have hon. gen tlemen remembered what the state of Ireland was a few years ago?—have they forgotten that memorable document the Devon Commission ?—have they remembered ' that description, which circulated throughout Europe, of there being in Ireland 2,400,000 paupers—that more than one third of the people were receiving no wages of any kind— that they were living in hovels, littered on straw, feeding on dry roots, and often on seaweed ? That was the description given by Royal Commissioners, under a Royal Commission, of a great part of the people of Ireland. Well, then, you have got rid, in a certain de gree, of that population. It is no doubt a dark passage, a gloomy chapter, in the history of any coun t ry , th a t such events should occur ; but I am only looking at in a financial point of view to-night. I am bound, in bringing forward measures, such as, on the part of the Government, I am bringing forward, not to omit a matter of such vast interest, upon the truth of which the whole of this subject depends. It is of the utmost importance—the whole ques tion is the consuming power of the people of this country. But, although we have lost in Ireland more than one million and a-half of the population, has the revenue of Ireland suffered a diminution in proportion to that loss ? On the contrary, the revenue of Ireland never very sensibly diminished. (Hear, hear.) Between the year before the famine and in the present year there has not been a difference of anything like half-a-million. I believe in the former year it was very little more than 4,7000,0001., and—l am sorry lam trusting my memory on the point—it is now, I think, 4,000,0001. and upwards. But it is in a very buoyant state. I take the case of Ireland because we are there apparently in a state of disadvantage ; and all this shows that the consuming power of the people does not depend on their numbers, but on their condition (hear, hear), and lam persuaded that if the exodus, as it is called, of Ireland continues, it will end even in' Ireland being a much richer and wealthier country, and that the consuming. power of the people will not only remain, but will increase. (Hear, hear.) But, as regards Great Britain, the emigration th a t t a k es place, instead of be ing a source of disquietude and alarm, is, in fact, the means by which the wealth of this country will be greatly increased • it will have a m os t b ene fi c i a l e ff ec t upon t h e people that remain ; it will develope their resources, and give opportunities to many who never before enjoyed them, and the general result will be beneficial to the re venue. And not only will the consuming power of the people increase, but also the population. There is one point connected with this subject of great importance. There is an apprehension entertained by some persons that there is an unnatural rise in the rate of wages. Great authori ties, I believe, are of opinion that the rate of wages is increasing so rapidly that the rate of profits will not only be diminished, but destroyed. Now, lam bound to say, that in pursuance of my duty, I have made inquiry into this subject ; but I have not received any evidence of the extraordinary rise of wages of which I have heard. (Hear, hear.) I believe that there has been a rise in wages, and I believe, moreover, that it has been very much to the publi c benefit ; and that, if it continues, the public will be still more benefited. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) One thing, I think, is clear—that the consuming, power of the country has not been diminished by the rate of wages rising. But, sir, although the rate of profit depends upon the rate of wages, that is not the only element in this great question. There is another element still more important in its solu tion, and that is the rate of interest. (Hear, hear.) The employer of labour may pay more for his work—l hope he does ; but the employer of capital is obtaining that capital at the present day at a lower rate, and with a facility which no employer of labour ever before enjoyed. (Hear, hear.) Sir, the hon. gentleman the member for Wolver hampton (Mr. Villiers) said to me the other night that the discovery of gold, like any other article, had given activity to commerce, but no more than any other article ; and he called upon me to meet him upon that point. I did not think that that was exactly the night to go into that question, but I deny the position of the hon. gentleman that the discovery of gold, like the production of any other article, has given activity to commerce, but no more than any other article. I maintain that it has not only given increased activity to commerce, hut that it has influenced the commercial operations of this country to an extent which no other article ever has done. (Hear, hear.) I say that the discovery of gold, considering the currency which we possess, has established credit in this country in a manner which no political econo mist could ever have imagined. (Hear, hear.) I say that it has increased and confirmed credit in this country, and that that increase and confirmation of credit has, of course, immensely increased the employment of the people. In my opinion, it is a mere blind and obstinate prejudice to shut our eyes to that conclusion. (Hear, hear.) But there is another question to be considered in regard to our pros oerity at this moment, and that is, will the present low rate of interest last ? I hope it will. My opinion is 7 .--though it is, perhaps, imp ru d en t i n me t o g i ve it — m y opinion is that , whatever imprudences may occur, and I need not say that I deprecate them, but, notwithstanding some imprudence the present rate of interest will con tinue. (Hear, hear.) I believe that it depends upon conditions and circumstances which have never before prevailed in this country —upon natural circumstances and. Permanent conditions—and that, if we only act, with to lerable prudence, with such advantages as we derive from a low rate of interest, arising from natural causes, this country has an opportunity before it of material progress such as never occurred before to the vision of any states man. (Cheers.) The committee will remember that, by the remission of taxation which I have proposed on the part of Government through the measures which I have attempted to place before them, there will be a reduction of revenue to the amount of between 3,000,0001. and 1,000,000/. sterling. I shall have occasion hereafter to Place the items more particularly before the house ; but in the meantime, I desire not to involve you immediately in any large amount of figures. But, by the remission which I propose in the malt tax, there will be a reduction of income to the extent of 2,500,000/. ; by the reduction on the tea duties an immediate loss of 400,0001., and ultimately much more—probably 1,900,0001., and by the redu c ti on i n the hop duty, the reven ue from which, as you are aware, is fluctuating, but the average of which I think may be taken at 300,0001. I have in fact proposed a reduction to the amount of something between 3,000,0001. and 4,000,0001. sterling. But I must remind the committee that although this is only December, in a few months one of the princi pal sources of the revenue of the country will terminate; and that if they support the propositions of the Government they must not only encounter this great remission of taxa tion, and, consequently, some great diminution of revenue, but they must likewise be prepared to deal with the consequences of a law expiring which now gives us more than 5,000,0001. sterling per annum,—l mean the property and income-tax. (Hear, hear.) It will become the duty of the house, then, to decide what they will do with the property and income-tax. (Hear, hear.) Now it has always been to me, as I am sure it must be to any gentleman, exceedingly disagreeable to read to the house anything I may have said on a previous occasion ; and I am quite sure that nothing would ever induce me to do so by way of authority ; but it is absolutely necessary that on the present occasion I should presume to call the attention of the house to some remarks which I made on the subject of direct taxation when I laid before the house last session my financial statement, more especially as many gentlemen are now in the house who were not then members. (Hear, hear.) I then called the attention of the house to the difficulty with which the revenue of the country was raised. I reviewed the objections which were made to indirect taxes in the shape of Customs' duties and Excise duties—and I at last showed that, although there had long prevailed an abstract opinion in favour of direct taxation, yet all attempts that had hitherto been made to apply it to the raising of our revenue had only led to the conclusion that it was contrary to every principle of science and justice. (Hear, hear.) I then said, speaking of the committee of the House of Commons then sitting, and whose opinion I naturally referred to with reserve, as they had not then made their report to the house,--I then said ! prop er ty l fra h n a k ve ne n s o s t in pr r e e s f u e m re e n a c , e a t n o a th w e ill ta n x ot up p o r n esum " There is anoth er po i n t on w hi ch I can speak with more opi nion upon the j us ti ce or i n j ust i ce of a change in the mode by which th e assessment of permanent and temperate incomes e, o giveand income. is effected. But there is a point, I believe, on which the committee is so unanimous that their opinion need not be a secret ; and it is also, I believe, the unanimous opinion of the House of Commons, as I am sure it is of the country—namely that if taxes of this character—if measures of direct taxation like the income-tax—are to form not temporary but perma nent features of our system of finance, they cannot rest upon a system of exemptions. Well, but if they are not to rest upon a system of exemptions, do you augment the methods to which a Chancellor of the Exchequer may successfully ap peal for the purpose of raising revenue ? No doubt direct taxation is in its theory an easy, a simple, and a captivating process ; but, when you wish to apply that direct taxation generally, it is astonishing the objects you encounter and the prejudices you create. Sir, to my mind—and I think it is a principle - now pretty well established—direct taxation should be nearly as universal in its application as indirect taxation. The man who lives in a palace and a cottager, as consumers, are proportionally assessed. It is not perhaps, possible that in direct taxation you can effect so complete a result—per haps it is not necessary; but that, if your revenue is to de pend mainly, or in a great degree, upon direct taxation—if it is permanently to depend upon direct taxation, you must make the application of the direct tax general, is to me a conclusion which it is impossible to escape. No doubt, by establishing a temporary measure of direct taxation based upon a large system of exemptions you may give a great im pulse to industry ; you may lighten the springs of industry very effectually for a time ; but —not to dwe:l upon the gross and glaring injustice of a system of finance that would tax directly a very limited portion of the 'population—but look ing only to the economical and financial consequences of such a system, who cannot but feel that, in the long run, industry itself must suffer froth such a process ? For, after all, what is direct taxation founded on a system of exemptions ? It is confiscation. It is making war upon the capital which ulti mately must employ the very industry which you wish to re lieve." I Veg the House not to suppose that I have read this as any other authority on the subject, but I feel that is neces sary that the sentiments which I uttered in the financial statements I made to the House six or eight months ago should be kept clearly before them. I also said " We deem it our duty to impress upon the committee and upon the country the dangerous course upon which they have embarked—to impress upon them the absolute necessity, now or in another Parliament, of arriving at s pme definite under standing on what principle the revenue of this country ought to be raised. They deem it their duty to denounce as most pernicious to all classes of this country the systematic reduc tion of indirect taxation, while at the same time you levy your direct taxes from a very limited class." Now, sir, I cannot say that subsequent experience has changed or modified my opinion on this subject. (Hear. hear.) lam clearly of opinion that, if we have recourse to direct taxation, that direct taxation should be as general, at least in theory, as indirect taxation ; that, however, we may in practice, find it expedient in some cases to make exemp tions, the theory that a plan of direct taxation can be based upon a large system of exemptions is one which is most pernicious, and ought to be avoided. (Hear, hear.) Well, then, sir, I venture, in offering to the house the views which her Majesty's Ministers entertain with respect to the property and income tax, to lay it down as a general prin ciple that,. in considering this question, we ought to make our direct taxation in theory at least as general as indirect taxation. And, sir, when I consider the very large exemp tions which are connected with this tax, there is one which I am bound at once to notice, and take into consideration, and that is the exemption of Ireland. (Loud cries of "Hear, hear !") Now, sir, when in the early part of the year I proposed, on the part of the Government, that this tax should be continued for one year, I made no reference whatever to Ireland. That was avowedly a mere tempo rary arrangement, and it was therefore quite unnecessary to enter into the discussion then. But, having now come to consider the question more widely, I do not think it consistent with my duty to evade expressing the opinion of her Majesty's Government on the subject. (Hear.) Sir R. Peel, in his financial statement of 1842, when he first introduced the property and income-tax, proposed to im pose on Ireland, as an equivalent for the property and in come-tax, two other measures—the one was an increase of the duty on spirits, which, I remember, he estimated would produce 250,000/. a year, and the other was an increase of the duty on stamps in matters affecting property, which he estimated would produce 160.000/., making altogether 410,000/. a year. That was to be the contribution of Ireland to the revenue in another form, and as an equiva lent for the exemption from the property and income tax. Now, one would naturally like to be always taking off taxes, and never reminding any gentleman that he had not perhaps paid those which had been expected of him— (a laugh)—but it was necessary to inform the house that the measure for increasing the duty on spirits had since been rescinded, in consequence of its having been found to have stimulated illicit distillation ; and that in 1841, before the passing of the Property and Income-tax Act, the aggre gate receipt from the stamp duties was 470,000/. per annum ; while in the year 1852 they produced only 486,0001., so that Ireland had contributed, as an equivalent for the Property and Income-tax, instead of 410,000/. per annum, as was expected, only 16,000/, (Hear, hear.) Well, Sir, but notwithstanding all this, it is impossible to be insensible to what Ireland has gone through. (Hear, hear.) When Sir Robert Peel brought forward the Income-tax, in 1842, it was impossible for him or the most experienced statesman, to have foreseen the long catalogue of calamities which awaited Ireland. (Hear.) Almost every cause that could exhaust and every process that could debilitate a country and society has been brought to bear on that unhappy land. I freely admit, to use—not a classical, but a frequent epithet—that as regards its financial condition, Ireland since that period, or at least during many years, has been in a very e x ce pti ona l s t a t e . But the state o f Ireland is happily not now without a ray of hope. (Laughter, and cries of Hear, hear.") As far as I can form an opinion —and I can assure my Irish friends that I have taken the utmost pains to make myself acquainted with its condition—and I think I may venture to speak of Ireland without using the language of de spair or the accents of desolation—(cheers)—you have had a crushing poor-law ; but what is your present position with regard even to that overwhelming evil ? Is it not more endurable? (Hear, hear.) Permit me to place before the house a return of the present incidence of poor-law taxation in Ireland. I don't want to insult any gentleman by showing him that his country is not ruined. (Laughter.) lam only anxious, in fulfilment of my duty, to convey, as far as I can, a cor rect view of the st a t e o f h er M ajes t y ' s dominions -Co " her faithful Commons." (Hear, hear.) Now, I have here a " comparative summary, in provinces, of the expenses in curred in the poor law unions of Ireland during the finan cial year ending September 29, 1850, 1851, and 1852 re spectively." I find from that document that the poor law expenditure in 1850 amounted to the enormous sum of 1,320,000/. ; that in 1851 it was reduced to 1,129,000/. ; that in the year ending the 29th of September last the ex penditure, which in 1850 was 1,320,0001., had been re duced to 855,000/. I also find that the decrease of ex penditure in 1851, as compared with 1850, amounted to nearly 200,0001., or at the rate of 14 per cent.; that the de crease of expenditure in 1852, as compared with 1851, was in amount 274,0001., or at the rate of 24 per cent.—that the decrease in the expenditure of the year 1852, as com pared with 1850, was in amount not less than 465,000/., or at the rate of 35 per cent. lam sure, when one has this authentic return before him, he is justified in mot altogether despairing of the condition of Ireland. (Hear, hear.) In Connaught alone I find that the diminution of expenditure in 1852, as compared with 1850, was no less than 116,0001. — or at the rate of 48 per cent. (Cheers.) Now, sir, in looking to the condition of Ireland, I must call the attention of the house to a document before me, because it completes the picture of the incidence of poor law taxation, of which we have heard so much. I don't deny that our friends in Ireland have suffered from the severe incidence of taxation. I admit that they have gone through a terrible ordeal • but I say to them, as I say to the West India interest, " What I mean to do for you is with reference to your present con dition, and not with reference to the past. (Hear, hear.) Now, here is a document which reached me just before I came down to the bongo, and which completes the picture of the state of Ireland with reference to.the poor law, of which we have heard so m uc h, an d f rom w hi c h Ireland has suffered so severely. It is addressed to me officially, and is as follows : " You may remember that, in September last, the sum of 30,0001., being the greater portion of the balance of the Irish Rate-in-Aid Fund, was appropriated by the Treasury to the liquidation of the debts of certain unions in the west of Ire land, subject to the condition that any union assisted in this manner would thenceforth be considered as excluded from the list of distressed unions, and that previously to such re lief being recommended, the Poor-law Commissioners must be satisfied that proper provision would be made by rates for the future requirements of the union. A report has been this day received from the Poor-law Commissioners describ ing the proceedings taken by them under the above instruc tion, from which it appears that all the unions affected by this arrangement, except the -- Union" (I forbear men tioning the name) " have given the assurance and struck the rates as required, and that the reluctance of the guardians of the Union to comply with the prescribed conditions does not arise from inability, but from a desire to transfer a greater share of the bm-den of their rates to the public." (Laughter.) I don't wonder at the laughter of hon. mem bers, and that is the reason why I did not read the name of the union. (" Hear, hear," and cries of " Name.") " This declaration of solvency, in respect to all the re maining unions of Ireland about whose power of maintaining their poor any doubt remained, is a fact of great importance, and you may think proper to advert to it in your financial statement. The object of establishing a comprehensive and complete Poor Law in Ireland has been finally accomplished, and the whole of Ireland is now able to maintain its own poor, without external pecuniary assistance from any quar ter. There is still a balance of the rate-in-aid left of upwards of 12,0001., which will be more than sufficient to meet any more than usually distressed cases of particular electoral divisions." (Hear, hear.) Such, then, is a picture of the condition of Ireland. I don't say it is perfect. Don't let my hon. friends from Ireland suppose that I am malignantly mis representing them, and that I am n o t d o i ng j us ti ce t o their calamities. All I ask them to admit is, that having gone through great difficulties and borne them like men, their position is very much improved. That is all I ask. (Hear, hear.) But there are other reasons why there has been some discontent evinced that Ireland has not been subjected to the income-tax. People are discontented that instead of getting 410,000/. from Ireland, as was originally expected, when the property and income-tax was imposed on this country, they have only got 16,0001. (Hear, hear.) People, too, have been not disin clined—although I confess it is churlish—to forget the sorrows and calamities of Ireland ; but there are other complaints of a very different character, with re gard to not extendin g the income-tax t o I re l an d. (H ear. ) The Governor of the Bank of England has made an official complaint to me that at the present moment the Bank of England is prepared to purchase terminable annuities, but that it is impossible for him to contend with the Governor of the Bank of Ireland, in consequence of Irish funded property not paying the income tax. He says; " I have no doubt the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be receiving deputations from injured interests, but there is really no body more unjustly treated by recent legislation than the Governor and Company of the Bank of England by the property tax not being extended to Ireland." There is another point of view in which the subject ought to be considered. The amount of public funded property in Ire land is increasing yearly, and has for a long time increased, in consequence of its not being liable to the tax which the same description of property has paid in England. I mention this to show what a difficult thing an income tax is based upon exemptions. (Cheers.) Now, Sir, I shall venture to treat this great exception in the following manner. Ido not think that it would be wise to treat with any harshness the landed proprietors of Ireland. They have suffered severely from the late famine, and I should be sorry to pounce on Ireland and to say " You shall pay your quota." I think 1 we ought to do everything that is possible to assist that " wise, just, and beneficial" change that has taken place in Ireland. (Laughter and cheers.) And Ido not think that it is expedient that we should throw any ob stacles at the present moment in the way of the regenera tion of that country. (Hear, hear.) But I must sa y thi s , that, remembering what her Majesty's Governments have done for that country, I shall feel it my duty, when I lay before the house my schedule, in which I intend to recom mend them to undertake the reconstruction of the new income tax—l shall recommend them to extend the income tax to funded property in Ireland, and to salaries in that country. (Sensation.) Sir, an hon. gentleman a friend of mind, with reference to this subject, asked me the other night whether her Majesty's Government were pre pared to carry into effect the recommendations of the House of Lords with regard to consolidated annuities. I have the opportunity to-night of stating that the amount of consoli dated annuities is 240,0001. per annum, or something like that sum. Sir, the house will recollect how the consolidated annuities came into existence. There was a loan made to Ireland of nearly 10,000,0001. Subsequently that loan was reduced in amount to about one-half. I was always one who believed that that loan was in a great degree advanced for an imperial calamity, and that it ought to be consi dered in that light; and I d o no t o bject to the arrangement then made in any sense whatever. But the house will understand that the balance of that loan, on being re duced by that amount, was thrown into the form of Con solidated Annuities, which were calculated with reference to the peculiar circumstances of each case. I must refrain from entering into the discussion of this question, but I think lam not free to avoid all allusion to the subject. I have shown to the house to-night that in 1852, as com pared with 1851, there has been a diminution in the charge of poor-rate in Ireland. of 274,0001., and that this is a sum considerably greater than the whole amount of the Conso lidated Annuities. (Hear, hear.) And I must beg my hon. friend who asked me the question to recollect what I have said with reference to those persons who in England are suffering from what they consider the unjust incidence of local taxation. I have show/ that the reduction in the amount of pauperism is this year greater than the whole establishment charges, and I tell him also that in con sidering this question he must remember that the state of Ireland is much improved since the recommend - made by the committee of the House of Lords. (-- Vr i f f; hear.) Let m e no t b e misinterpreted. It is the in ters of her Majesty' s G overnment to consider the subjec t e f.a Consolidated Annuities, but they are not prepared to ' s o % themselves in any way by the recommendations of tin' ee , mittee of the House of Peers. The Government will e° Bider that question enti re l y on i ts mer i ts ; an d I haver •` „ ; 0 . self prepared, and I w ill su b m i t to the house, sore, e r i t - I tions which I have carefully considered, and wt e he believe are justified by the circumstances, and th r ea / beneficial in their operation ; but I beg my hon• ; the not to go away ander the carry r that the Government is prepared to carry into operation of recommendations of the committee of the 1 101 s et Lords. With • regard to the income and propeAylo I have laid down - one principle—that direct tas l ' oe , should be as general as indirect taxation, and that 3 of sure of direct taxation, founded upon a large Schell exemption ought not to be tolerated. With resPe,,.% . l that importa n t measure , th e property an d inconlr vo - 7 0 . have ment stated prepared to assert, and that i errinciple which hers to ac Majesk nowie tY's duo difference between p ermanen t an d precar ious int eli ts (Loud cheers.) Sir, I will not enter into any argn, 4 l upon that subject at present. • Although I have c 11 7 0 0 my observati ons as th ey h ave occurre d upon the °there topics which I have had to encounter, and a lthough it it is much that I must still a d ver t t o I feel th • a go would be impossibl e that I should on this ne "b „ ,blf discuss a s u bj ec t w hi c h d eserves, an d will Pr° e o v no oit d receive on the p ar t o f th e H ouse of C ommons , pro and mature d e lib era ti on. M y d uty i s to nr k eat exposition of th e p o li cy th a t h er Majesty ' s Governor e to are prepared to recommend ; and all I h a ve s do is to place that before the house in clewso manner as I. can. Viewing the property and interne with reference to the two principles I have laid down' ` l,O that direct taxati on oug ht t o b e i n i ts na t ure as gene,, s hel indirect taxati on , an d th a t it ought not to b e estabnif upon a system of exemptions ; and, secondly, thattaweea Terence should be recognised by the Legislature he ic , the realized and prec a ri ous i ncome, I will n ow offer en t house the rate of duti es suc h as h er M a j es t y ' s Governor est. are prepared to recommend t o the adoption of Parl ia Tor (Cheers.) Sir, not w ith s t an di ng the large remission oTildod, ation which her Majesty's Government have recornL e o ool., a remission of taxation immediatelyamounting to 3, o u"' to 0 and eventually relieving the consumer of this country greater extent, it is n o t th e i n t en ti on o f th e Goverthe to recommend any in crease i n any o f the -schedule_ i s 0 0' w property and income-tax. (L ou d c h eers. ) I w ill first eh sider and state to the committee the exemptions " we think it is expedient to recognise and sanction• ip shall recommend th a t on all industrial incomes the 818 0 tions shall be limited to incomes below 1001. a-year, iDto being the point at whi c h we cons id er t h at wages e nter e the calculation ; and w hil e we asser t th e pr i nc iple just, we are prepa re d to recommend that the exei n E t ipt °, o should commence at industrial incomes below 1001. ia ir incomes arising from property, we take the point of exT eit , i l tion at 501. a-year. (H ear , h ear. ) I h ave now t° i d to the house the rate of difference which we recorrol should be establi s h e d b e t ween sc h e d u l es B, D , and -'-'„' t o ld the two schedules of realised property. I have already ra te the committee that we d o no t propose t o i ncrease tu` 0.9 payable in schedules A and C. That will be take D ' t ho heretofore, at 7d. in the p o und. W e propose that hrt . e rate on the other schedules shall b e es ti ma t e d at t fourths of that rate, and therefore it will be do o (which will be exac tly th ree -f our th s ) , on se b , e /(1., B, D, and E. The produce of schedule A, a" 4 ,1, : )3, will be, as before, 2,649,0001. Th e produce of schee'' the farmers' schedule, will be estimated in this mann el oh e We take the estimates o f th e p ro fit s o f f armers, n ot a' 4. 0 ,) half the rent, as heretofore, but at one-third. (C h ! e ver We have investigated that subject, and find that, be" 00 active trade may be, the whole tendency of late year. s „ 4 0 ,1 been to a diminution o f p ro fit s , and we are quite s s i t ih. that the test of the farmers' profits has been taken too t 0 (Cheers.) We have taken, therefore, one-third the r en t iy, the measure of profit, and not one-half ; and conselle ch is under schedule B, the f armers w ill pay 156,0001., vnate, exactly one-half what th e y p a y un d er th e p r esent . 04 1 From schedule C, I calculate that there will be rec e :the 746,0001. at 7d., as at present. Unde r sc h e d u le re• mitigated rate, the estimate is that 1,162,0001 will be ceived, and that under E, also, under the mitivfifo rate, 248,0001. will be received. The total of the schedules will be, it is estimated, 4,061,00 04 ; a . estimate the increase—if the exemption is limited to comes under 501. upon property, and under 1001. uP ell ad. dustrial incomes—l estimate the increase at about 430,p0 But I think it right t o sa y th a t i n th a t estimate who taken into consideration the position of the clergyman he has not more than 1001. a-ybar. The position in wn le • o l. is placed, in the manner in which the duty is now r s i. l o .) is extremely severe, and I may say unfair. (Hear, f e reo o He is rated under schedule A at the highest scale, we e tol a Dissenting minister who has 100/. a-year, being retail the scale of s a l a ri es i n th e m iti ga t e d schedule, ''!,49 $ have an advantage. The p os iti on o f a clergyman let, fact, the position of a person working for a salary, t he from the nature of the property from which he derive s o ge sources of his maintenance, he is d e p r i ve d o f th e a dvan of the mitigated schedule. And, therefore, it is nece?,l' he to make special provi s i on f or hi m , b ecause h e mus t stni t io assessed under schedule A. I have estimated probable diminution from thi s source un d er sc hedlli an y t , at 30,0001., bnt I have taken th a t i n t o ace° , it t and it will not affect the figures w hi c h I have 4 %• down, of 5,361,0001., as the prod uce o f th e income" e I add for Ireland the modest sum of 60,0001. (Langb t ,i;. The total sum will be about 5,421,000. Generally sP:„iiat ing, I think I may s a y th a t th e general result will be , ; 40 probably the property and income-tax will about prou"ot, the average that is produced by th e p resen t ex isting 3 for Perhaps it may be advisable f or me t o ma k e provisionthe some slight diminution ; but, generally speaking', 00 average will be about that of the last three years of oat present tax. And, if the house should adopt Ai proposition, I think the result would n o t materin, affect our fiancial income. Assuming, f or th e moniec)„ that the property and income-tax as I h ave now l a id it . fore the house will not affect o u r B u d ge t o f the year, 1, ig ' pi now necessary- for me to approach the ways and means which the diminution of the revenue occasioned by the 0 . 1 ,,, e „" sures that I have recom men d e d on th e part of her P-4.0"; jesty's Government may be met. It is necessary 0 me, however, before I enter upon that, to make 0 ; 0 reference to a subject of great interest, and in which 0 have increased the public expendit ure . (H ear .) Sill ) , will be my duty on a very early occasion to place 0 . fore the house a supplementary estimate for the exPe a l diture of the coming year with reference to the nat ie t v he defences. (Cheers.) It will, of course, be necessary in a te usual financial statement f or 1853-4 t o ma k e an e stini lo which I shall have to pla ce before the house, and to t :1 into consideration the whol e ex p en dit ure o f th e year; 4 . to therefore that will be the more c onven i en t mo men" n il advert to that subject. I know the great difficulty is delicacy of touching on a subject of this kind, 19 11 ; 01 1. my mind the difficulty is much increased, and the 400 cacy becomes much greater, by a p ru di s h affectnio of reserve than by speaki ng t o th e h ouse w ith the nese frankness with which I should address them upon 3 s 0 formal occasion. (Hear, hear.) Sir, we are about to preP e 4 no inconsiderable increase to the estimates, and we Tot be met with the question of peace or war. Now the r. is, that the measures which we are going t o l a y before ' O , liament, and which we have the confident hope that F ar o. ment will adopt, have nothing to do with peace or l oo f (Hear.) We should have b roug ht th em forward njire• any circumstances, and I believe that those who have , t he ceded us, or those wh o ma y succee d us, wou ld ac t in foc e same manner. (Hear, hear.) When w e came into ° p ; we found the estimates for the year already on the t* de r we accepted them; and, as there was a general 11-11 4 0, standing that they were the estimates of onr predeces s t he they were passed without being canvassed, and thus t he the progress of public busine ss was facilitated, and o pt appeal to the people hastened. But the subject was a it that necessarily engaged the atte n ti on o f th e na ti o n, O a r was one also that must engage the att en ti on o f the a1)V.,11 ment. There was no question what dynasty wa n d the throne upon the other side of th e Ch anne l. -" be ta not turn upon what may hays been sa id or d one e lset that the attention of the nation wa s d rawn t o the sta'"Of the national defences. That attention was drawn orig,„' n t of by the highest military authority of th e l an d. Th e eue f e the being so long at peace was brought to the attention o ,he ir most industrious people in the world. It was drawn be attention while all the tendencies of th e age see med those that secure tranquillity and happy repose . ; 0 ~ ,w,° a• that there was no panic or precipitatio n , b u t, on tbe,„tri trary, a prejudice against what the p eo pl e o f thi s COu - ....af supposed to disturb the dreams of repose and prosp e : o - 40 in which they indulged. But sooner or later the idea o cl afloat, and seized the public mind. It was taken mor e .0 1 more into consideration, and, totally irrespective of ext el iot circumstances, the nation arrived at the conclusion this country was not in that state of defence that wa s ~,,r1 sirable. They arrived at the convicti on th a t it was o f prim"„ r o. importance that the shores of this count r y s h ou ld be ear, tected, and that its defence should b e complete. ("-"Go' hear.) If I were asked, on the p ar t o f h er m a j es ty's : 0 vernment—in no other way would I presume to g ice ,,eat opinion—what I thought was the tendency of the Pr e i T ti a. age, and what the general course which present ciricjoog stances indicated, I should say without reserve L sPe„,o4, from the bottom of my heart in all sincerity, that I be' - '„" i . the predominant feeling of the present day was in fav e .;,; he y peace. (Cries of " Hear, hear.") But I believe the to sures her Majesty's Government are going to reconone e ar " Parliament will tend also to the prese rva ti on of Pe s the hear, hear)—and, on considering this subject aft,e r se ee general election, we felt it to be o ur d u ty to n 3 if it time in recommending the necessary measures. sa it be a fact—and I assume it to be a fact, heel° a lf is our opinion—that this country is not Pr e P de' defended, and that it wants to be properly 00 fended, let due preparation, we say, be made fo r the defence. On considering the question, we though t the best thing was to do it com pl e t e ly. We thoughv o tti best thing to do would be to put the navy of this °lid to in the position which we believe all Englishmen wisli e re cl, see it in —(hear, hear)—and the plans we have mat ' w ig and which, if the house will support our propositions, w ill be carried into complete effect, will be plans which ice settle this question of national d y ef u en wi ce n fo for haveev aer— (loud crar, of (hear, hear)—that is to say, you ll yo ur v on d senals and strong points in the kingdom defended, an; its will have a real Channel fleet, which can assemble fro , 1 . 0 . different rendezvous when necessary , and which is tb 3 4ve per garrison and protection of the country. It vvoula, t he been convenient for her Majesty's Government to doe - 1 08 1r r iel question, as they would, if they had no t felt Ato be t ee par a mount duty to bring it at once before the the of Commons. They were busied with measures 0 0 tendency of which, they believe, will be in 00 0 time to reduce the expenditure and the establishilo of the country. But they felt th a t it was ° oaf impossible to mix up a question of this importanc e, f . f ro m its nature, of such u rgency, w i t h ques tions wer e ministrative reform. They felt that, if the count! ! t o be n ot properly defended, an d if the p e ople wished It at properly defended, th e quest i on was one whicb,,l„' have once to be completely an d d e fi nitively settled. " D iet° taken those steps whi c h we b e li eve will insure the eeT t ; asIC defence of this cou n t ry. I t will be necessary f o r m° b e of for a supplement ary es ti mate. I hope there will n ot the difficulty rais e d on the part of the house. The state of „. a , finances, as I s h a ll s h ow i n a few minutes, will perfectly . t thorise me in asking a supplementary grant for the p i year, to be supplied from the ways and means ; .01! year we shall ask your approval of an estimate told increase our general etimate about 600,0 001 . H . avin ' the committee that it s will be my duty to ask it„sAt i : 3 ' p ear,: a supplementary estimate of the exenditure of it. flo sen, which has occurred since the Appropriation Asec-beor_ot I think it will be convenient if I give some for io the state of the finances, so that the committee rav_, the an opinion as to what our fr s o u m rpl i rt v be present financial year, g hi w ch l t b ll a s t u t p h P e lY e l u c :ii . for the expe ur e afforded for the supplementary estimate . „ t wee ".,1 of the year since the appinrompr:katiniognt.haeFloe,_ _wohoe,oczn recollect that in the early part of the y to estimate what would be the surplus, B :: c lid m l l 3 l : T , Bo—f i fe i tTn: would nou ne e be d m 4 6 y o , w ill perkisP ° ol. , ti b on ut' of asking a vote 1-2 collect that on a subsequent occasion I cam down tional for the Mi K nt a e fi ln. r war. The committee e an