The Sun. — London, England, 1852-05-01 00:00:00

Venue, and that, within the merest tide, the whole of that lam had been made up by the increased consumption.— (Hear, hear.) But the Hon. Member for Huntingdon had said, that if we pat into the pocket of any one 51. every year, it was no very great matter if at the end of ten years we re ceived back a present of 101., or even 11. or 21. during the time. The Hon. Gentleman seemed to think that that was a fair representation of what had taken place. But was it so? The Hon. Member said, that since 1816 the Government had had 5 ,500,0001. of income-tax. But had the whole of that sum come to credit? It had not. 4,000,00e1. of it had been employed in making up previous deficiences. He held in his hand a return which had been obtained by his Hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool (11r. Carwwell), from which it appeared that the deficiency of the public income in 1842 Was no less than 3,979,000/., while the income-tax imposed yielded only about 5,600,000!., thus leaving only an avail able stun of I,6oo,oool.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. T. BARING.—But that was only for one year. Mr. GLADSTONE. —But that was the first year of the ' i ntern. And then his Hon. Friend spoke of these great re duCtione as if they were recently made; but the tact was, that the great bulk of these reductions were made in the earlier years of the series. The whole amount was 11 , 0 00,000/. odd, but it was found that 7,000,0001. out of t jne l l,ooo,o3o/. were reduced before 1845.—(Hear.) Then, if his Hon. Friend would compute the period of the year during Which these reductions had been in operation, he would find that this reduction of 7,000,000/. had been in operation dur ing 1815. The income-tax, too , i t must be remembered, uid not at first Come into play for the purposes of relief' from taxation, except to a limited extent. But the whole of the reduction of 11,060,000 1 . in the elastic portions of the re• venue had been replaced by the increase of the commerce and trade of the country.—(hear, hear.) In 1142, when the income-tax was imposed, the revenue of the country Was 47,000,000/. In 1845, when the new commercial sys tem had been in operation for three years, the ordinary re venue of the country bad so entirely recovered from the effects of the reduction that it amounted, without the income tax, to a larger sum than in 1842 . — (Hear.) In 1845, w h en Sir R. Peel made his financial statement, he give the House the option. lie said the income-tax had done its work, and that the system of legislation connected with it Might be abandoned. He gave the House their choice be tween either continuing the income-tax, or stopping the com mercial legislation begun by its means. The House wisely chose the former alternative, and the results they saw in the figures before them. It appeared to him that the Right Ron. Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exhequer) bad, in justly disregarding any momentary advaetage which he might have gained by attempting to meet the wishes of one class of the community, or in givi n g a re duction of taxa• tio a which the circumstances of the country uid not juatity him in making, pursued a course which had entitled him to public_ approbatio n . N othing could be plainer than that the connexion between our commercial and financial policy 'a" such that Parliament could come to nu decision upon the one without the ()thin They were now looking to the verdict of a new Parliament as to our new policy, and when we reached that full and final settlement as to our commercial policy which we expected from a new Parlia ment, the time would also have arrived to deal with our flame financial policy. - (Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gintleman not only deserved credit for the clear and able statement he had made, but the higher credit due to him for the wise and prudent course which he had adop ed, and in which he deserved every support, in supporting he re venue and credit of the country. - (Hear, hear.) He en tirely agreed with the Hon. Member (Mr. Hume), that it Was the d u t y o f t h e H ouse to se e what remissions of taxation could be effected, but that it was not the duty o l s the House to a n ti c ipate reductions in the expenditure "uich the finances of the country, would not justify. He Was sure that the House would rally round the Right Hon. Gentleman to repel any such demands, and to carry on the fi ee n eeces and credit of the country in an unimpaired, healthy, aim sound state until another Parliament should be in a con dition to give a full, fair, and impartial consideration to the aribjeet.—(Hear hear.) thelir• H. BAICLIE said it appeared that the total loss to , revenue from the reductions alluded to had only been a ;Lee more than 1,000,0001. [Mr. GLADSTONE—" No, only *""1000/. or 200,0001." j But tne Right Hon. Gentleman for got that duri ng t h a t t i me th e popu l ae i o n had increased 'oft millions, and that there bad arisen from this cause a • l etisiderable increase f consumption. For exam th ple, there had been no reduction i o n the tea duty, but during e last ten Years the amount received from the tea duties had increased Oise-third in amount.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. WAKLEY said that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had shown how aemirably the commercial policy of the coon bad worked since 1842, and he admitted he deserved credit for having done so. But there were Members on his (the Opposition) aide of the House who had through much abuse consistently, zealously, and honestly supported that lielicy.—(Hear, hear.) 'There was another party, no doubt as sincere and as honest, which had vehemently condemned that policy, and first and foremost among that party, and the'most eloquent of them all, he placed the Right Hon. Gentleman. —(Cheers.) They had now brought the Right Gentleman to acknowledge, with a candour that did !um ififinite credit, that all that they (the Opposition) had beets doing had been right, and that all that be and his party h ad been doing had been wrong. Would to God Si r R o b ert el had been alive, to listen to the elaborate and profound e t ho mage paid to hiiia by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in he eZposition of the facts that he had submitted to the tieu ee to-night. - (Hear, hear.) Homage of a more exalted t h th aracter or' more calculated to increase the admiration of 4 . country for the memory of that g reat state sman never made either in a senate or any other assembly. (Hear, hear.) The Honourable Gentleman (Mr. T. ciL in g) , it was said, was to have een the Chan ism"' of the Exchequer of the present Government; but it eitr e , a red from the objections he had made that the country p r o not have gained much from him,because be highly ap th-ell Of the do-nothing policy of the present Chancellor of „ s in th 'le ..ecluer, and the country would therefore have had Ensue R on. Gentleman a do-nothing Chancellor of the ctilts rs l , o et• The Hon. Gentleman maintained that the agri et colonial, and shipping interests were suffering, and klz e h' e would do nothing for them. Ihe Chancellor of the Pees, 'leer, after having marshalled and re-marshalled his • 111 1 .,_' gave the word "As you avert !" He had, indeed, ( 1 1 ,3 0 wed out something for the future, but he (Mr. Wakley) 41 ._not like the shadow, and fancied he shoula like the sub- Lico-7eudeestill less. —(A laugh.) The Right Hon. Gentleman to indirect taxation, but was not favourable to direct 'eX "' Now, he (Mr. \Vakley) infinitely preferred direct 1 t n • , the e • When the people were directly taxed they knew direct extent extent to which they were robbed; but when in the dazes were levied on articles of general c.tnsumption, th e s'uvernment accumulated an enormous revenue, and Pe -. I P he scarcely knew that they were robbed at all. we , i 7Ould ask of the Right Hon. Gentleman was that corod ri Pursue that odious phantom no further. He latity of him that he was mistaken as to the unpopu tles th. :a property -tax.—(Cheers.) What was unpopular . Lees," Lecome-tax, which taxed the fruits of industry in in esh-reke laseProortion as realized property, and also the manner om the ne, u law was carried out.— Hear, hear.) r haw nor • ed . wince' the Income-tax Commissioners had be trapoe: `,.‘ might be supposed their desire was to get rid o f th e sabl e s by tormenting the people until tt became intole eee ,s ireorment them they did in the most unjust manner; t el- 1 - 1 • ncome-tax were continued, it would be necessary s 'taringsome means for relieving the people from the a a i 4 Processes to which they were subjected by these 41, Lioners.—( Hear, hear.) k e h' e `v• WILLIAM a complained that the Chancellor of the ' l 6,oe ( ren had reduced the surplus of 2,100,0001. to tei sh u ,, and did not propose any reduction of taxation. He debt_ `' 'which his attention to the interest of the unfunded was at the rate of 2/. se. 7d. per cent., while ,4 4to z m the City, up on th e same t erm s, only obtained three Inu s 'r e re Per cent. The p resen t prem i um on Exchequer hwas gh . i5.. 150 per cent. on the amount of interest, and the ,e7on. Gentleman, by reducing the interest, might add 8 ; 1 )1• more to his surplus of 460,000/. ten„`f e• TYRELL thought there was no reason for the glo -'t'Oa of Hon. oeieGentlemen opposite, for the budget was t f er a provisional one.—(Cheers and laughter) The ti; e i te tt l a l t or of the Exchequer had said that the finances of kid that ry were in a prosperous condition, but he had never Colparticular classes were not suffering distress. The ings were not at all incompatible.—(Hear.) dnel SIBTHORP confessed that he bad experienced se7j,derable disappointment at the statement which the Cgmt Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer ad made to the House, and he was fully justified in cherish- l ug that disap Caine-from t.hTePio:pile)ooste side: * nil:Elea in consequence of the cheers that l anaos et don s f eren t es. " He would not place they had 'shown with Y reliance on the admiration which reritterd to the statement of the Right Hon. Gentleman. prosperity of the country.—. (t ( a C u olonel Sibthorp) denied the previnciaighter.) From inquiries he had made in various honour of consulting, he was full t'"as which he had the justified in the opinion te had ventured to express.—(e ar • fax He was disappointed thetntimation that the income-tax He to be continued. d e would almost say it was a breach of faith to continue it ; he would protest against it, and whenever he han o r as he wase could only taogPbaPoi in t . ll l[lity of voting he would vote as strongly lk (llear,) It was said at first that it 4 .Peration for a short period ; there were three years, and ` a rea 11 years, and one year, and they could not say how long it 1 8 to continue : Rustiens expectat dum defluat amnia, at ille Labitur et labetur in omne volnbilis amine." 4 kr. REYNOLDS said, comparing the speech of the Eton. stt Gallant Gentleman who spoke last, with the speech of 10 e bRon.Gentleman who preceded him, there did not appear n ee ! Perfect harmony on the other side of the House. Gen eoe te le on that (the Opposition) side of the House. Free tte'eersai had received the speech wit much satisfaction, a s se e / had a riht to do. Now, be recollected reading a 11— e su it ' of the Chancellor of the Exchequer delivered before entr"',, r. • Reynolds) had the honour of a seat in the House, o e `. se ue Right Hon. Gentleman, then taking the Right worth to task, said he ese.ponanrodnet the Member for riamwor loth clothes. the Whigs bathing and had run away with the t ges. That observation excited much laughter ten * 4g Alen fo und time, but it appeared to him that the Right llon. Api n n. the late Chancellor s t The Right god. and had run away with his budee • of the Exchequer m- entleman had order, a nd eg f a put his figures in consecut ive e. ras that went his stetet was unexceptionable. that t he 6 13 'Praise of it stopped the mes and he must say it t tsith atement was remarkable for two qualities, that d t o • er 'sa ve diminished nor increased taxation. He appeared t:de „..101lowed the pathway tracked out for him by his oti c er :" Now, it occurred to him that the Right Hon. t levee tan Plight have diminished taxation, and have re f!azt p oes 7 labouring classes without doing any injury to or th e . „1 3 sers of property. There was an item of 650,0001. ti;:arderous warfare carried on against savages at the 1 ; ( t accPunts of which no Christian could read with ,tir,e_sehamed that his country should carry on such a i r , ll aZn Rear, hear.) Then the Right Hon. Gentleman put fr uool. for the militia. He (Mr. Reynolds) had ab i;'ditia_ e - 41 'voting oaths question raised with respect to the tloi.tur,..zote i t l i nael e qe hadatlio those with whom he acted; but he should against the proposition in all its stages, and the tt ing ittseFi• Gentleman perhaps might not be so sure of car esi glter all. Before the Easter recess he had given no -17444 Zontstion. to the Secretary for Ireland, whether lie s ie r s ets of 1; "n g in a Bill this session to place the manufac 40'taettlresneens ade spirits on an equal footing with the ma- Prep' f"eign and colonial spirits. Lint the Right s t 4 glele on er nau the Chancellor of the Exchequer put a h i ske an hepe mouth of the Chief Secretary, and said that h 4 rlsw °aged to his department, and he should reserve 4 4 11 4 ristelleredtitil was making his financial statement. He ‘l l , e e ore th ° the speech, and had not heard a single sen esteo4 at question, and he now begged to repeat the h? of theue,had formerly put. There was one thing he might t alto h Right Hon Gentleman's speech—it appeared to e ,. ° elltey av e seta vexed esstpieoentaactlesreastn. Farmers in the I: t h l' i l l:gh s t Put on their d look at it, but, w ouhi e magnifying powers those sectacles possessed, ti lee f .. . not discover any passage holding out the pro ere ItProtection to one class of the unity over some theY Were to go to th e country co , mm it must be on IleekerY ; but xe. ne hoped it would not be a cry at all, but hear. 11,.." weak as the 4I GHT rgely i could honest] mulieg of an infant. ay that he participated very g a ell r tel l ere a n t c h . at . general satisfaction which had been expressed enut e to the matter of the spetech of the Right Hon. Ow ev It the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He thought, Nek t e . m i„ r ' ylu tlao ce nr ili n :l4 !lon. Gentleman had been six " W WI Nato i error from which Lis SIN, Hon. Member ought also tobear in mind that his Right Hon. Friend had spoken on this question with reference to one point only—the consumption cf sugar and its bearing on the revenue. The figures given by his Right Hon. Friend to night were these :—Amount of British sugar imported in 185 0 , :5,207,678 cwt. In 1851, 5,0e3,350 cwt., showing an increase of 114,328 cwt. Total foreign and British im ported in 1852, 7,613,144 cwt., in 1851, 7,200,159 cwt., showing an increase of 412,955 cwt. The result, therefore, was that the importation of British sugar had increase 114,328 cwt:, while the importation of foreign sugar had in creased 298,227 cwt. The statement of his Right Hon. Friend went merely to show that the price of sugar was lower in-the early part of this year than it had ever been known, owing partly to the beet-root sugar of the Continent driving slave sugar into the market of this country. Con sumption had therefore been stimulated, and the revenue had consequently been increased. He regretted that the state ment of his Right Hon. Friend had not touched upon the effect which the sale of slave-grown sugar in the markets of this country, to an unprecedented extent, would have in pro longing the distress of our sugar-producing colonies. These colonies, so tar from being prosperous, were in a ruinous state.- He had in his possession two petitions, one from Ja maica, the other from British Guiana, telling a tale of sorrow and distress, and widely different in spirit front the tri umphant tone -of the Hon. Member.— (Hear, hear.) While, therefore, he admitted that the consumption of sugar in this country had been stimulated by the means he had adverted to, he must inform the Honourable Member for Manchester that he was 110 convert to the policy of cheap sugar regard lesi of the ruinous effects which it must have on our own colonies.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. LABOUCEIERIe said, that to hold out hopes to the colonists of protection on sugar would not only keep alive uncertainty, but would be productive of injury to their colonies, many of whom had attempted--and some suc cessfully —to meet the difficulties which surrounded them. He was glad to find it admitted that the low price of sugar had not diminished the iinportetion of British sugar. The Right Honourable Member had partly accounted for that lowness of price; but when he referred to the introduction of slave-grown sugar, he ought nut to forget that a high price was the greatest stimulus to the production of slave sugar. With regard to the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he bad to express his deep satisfaction. That satisfaction was not caused by party feeling. He was rejoiced to hear a man of so much ability as the Right Hon, Gentleman, and one occupying so high an office, make the statement which the House had that night beard. He had listened to that speech with no surprise; for he believed it to be impossible for any man of a vigorous mind, and placed in the responsible position of Chancellor of the Exchequer, to come to any other conclusion than that to which the Right Hon. Gentle. man had arrived. He hoped the House and the country woule recollect that that conclusion bad riot been arrived at on garbled statistics —( A laugh.) The data upon which the statement rested had been furnished not by a free-trade Minister, but by the innocent hands of the present Pre sident of the Board of Trade. The statement of the Right Hon. Gentleman presepted a picture of material prosperity, which would give the greatest satisfaction to everyone in terested in the welfare of the country. The debate of that night might be considered as the death-blow and knell of protection, and would go far to put an end to all doubt, uncertainty, and agitation on the subject.—(Hear.) Mr. Alderman THOMPSON believed that the great consumption of sugar during the past year aroso from the extraordinary depreciation in the price of that commodity. They all knew that cheapness would increase the consump tion of any article, and he might instance the case of coffee. But it had been most unfortunate for the impor ters, few of whom had realised a profit upon sugar during the last few years. The Hon. Member for Manchester had endeavoured to persuade the House that his Right Hon. Friend had changed his opinions, and had become an advocate of free-trade principles; but he confessed that he had not heard any observations fall front him that would warrant such an interference. The Right Hon. Gentleman had distinctly stated that if the opportunity was afforded him he would consider the whole system of taxation of the country, and give relief where relief was due. He did not think that could be said to be a conversion to free-trade prin. ciples. With regard to the income-tax, he must say that he hoped that they would have heard the last of it, and that a tax which had excited such universal odium would have been put an end to. If he had the honour of a seat in the House another session, he certainly could not give his sup port to the income-tax, for although he had voted for it ori ginally, he had never intended that it should, be made per petual.- (Hear.) One other subject—the recent house-tax —he must say a word upon. He conceived it to be most vexatious and unjust; and in the City of London aloge there were no less than 800 surcharges. He believed the tax had eroduced much less than was anticipated from it, and he sincerely hoped that some modification would be made in it. Colonel THOMPSON did not wish to mar the concord of the evening by any unpleasant observations. He could assure the House that there were some persons who in that country actually called for an income tax, as they believed that it was merely an act of justice to the poorer classes. He contended that some concessions ought to be made to those who, at the lower end of the income-tax, paid propr r tionably much more than their richer neighbours. Ile com plimented the Right Hon. Gentleman upon the able and masterly statement he had made, and he hoped he would not think the less of it coming from an opponent. Alderman SIDNEY maintained that out of doors the income-tax was viewed by commercial men as a most unjust and oppressive tax. He was not there to contend that direct taxation was not the best. If a tax upon property could be levied upon a fair principle he should not object to it ; arid he hoped, if they were to have it as one of their permanent bur dens, it would be arranged upon just and equitable principles. At present it was inflicted in the most oppressive way upon men in trade, and those who were ready to prove that they had made no profits were compelled to pay large sums to the income-tax. He understood that more than 70,000,000/. of Consols were at present exempted from the payment of this tax, and he could not understand how this large exemption should be permitted. He suggested that incomes lower than 1501. per annum ought to be included in the tax, in proportion to the amount. He fully concurred in the objections that had been urged by previous speakers to the house tax, and pointed out several instances of in equality that had come under his knowledge. Sir C. WOOD shortly explained. Lord R. GROSVENOR had -a strong opinion on the sub ject of direct taxation, and his constituents were very con siderably affected by the income-tax. He would venture to repast toe commendations which had been made upon the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He confessed that he had heard that speech with unmixed satisfaction.— (Cheers from the Opposition.) He did not wish t o b r i ng forward any painful allusions to former opinions; but cer tainly the speech of the Right Hon Gentleman was in fa vour of the commercial policy pursued since 1842.--( Liberal cheers.) That policy was now acknowledged and approved by the Government, and all that remained was to carry on the application.—(Renewed cheering from the same quarters.) He. did not consider, however, that the country had shown such an impatience of the income-tax as the Right Hon. Gentleman bad represeated. He (Lord R. Grosvenor) had never presented a petition against the tax, but petitions complaining of the manner of its imposition and assessment —(Hear, hear)—aud he was persuaded that they preferred the tax, if fairly imposed and assessed, to the increase of in direct taxation.- (Hear, hear.) Still , as to the Custo ms , 20,000, taxation might be se c ured.—( Hear, hear.) Ta ke the a rticle 0001. might be l e vied,. and yet a larg e remis sion of of tea. Competent parties, supported by the statistics of Mr. Porter, contended that the duty on tea could be reduced to Is. a pound, and that the revenue derived from the duty would not, after a year or two, be lessened.—(Hear, hear.) lie never drank tea himself, but one of his labourers con sumed hall a pound a week, on which he paid Is . dut y , so that this labourer, with perhaps asmany pounds a year wages as he (Lord It Grosvenor).received thousands, paid 525. a year duty upon tea.—.(Hear.) So of many other articles, as tobaCco, for instance. The duty might be reduced, and the revenue might be retained.—(Hear, hear.) With res p ect to the Excise duties, th e i r evil effects were admitted on all hands—(Hear, hear)—inte r f er i ng w ith trade and manufac tures, and entailin g most vexat i ous res t r i c tions, involving also an amount of ta xa ti on f our t i mes t h e a mount paid into the Treasury.—(Hea r , h ear. ) He b el i eve d, however, that the Excise duties mi g ht b e safely reduce d if direct taxation were extended.—( Hear, hear.) If the poorer classes p aid more than they ought, l et t h em be rel i eve d . —(H e ar, hear.) But let there be a p r i nc i p l e i n taxation.—( H ear , h e ar. ) There were other sources of revenue open to the Right Hon. Gen tleman; for instance, the legacy duty, not now paid by landed property.—(Hear, hear.) Let the Right Hon. Gen tleman apply his powerful intellect to this subject, and re lieve the people from the Excise duties.—(Hear, hear.) He should heeded to concur in the motion for reduction of the paper duties, but would willingly leave to the Right Hon. Gentleman a longer time to consider the subject. He believed if indirect taxation were carried further, the effects would be most mischievous. Let the principle of direct taxation be fairly applied, and the Right Hon. Gentleman would be the greatest benefactor to kis country who had ever arisen. Mr. HODGSON wished his constituents shared in the prosperity of which they had heard so much that evening. He had presented a petition from them, complaining that they were handloom weavers, with average earnings of 4s. or 55., with very long hours of work.—(Hear, hear.) They prayed the House to enable them to emigrate as agricul ! tural labourerers, or to obtain employment at home.— (Hear, hear.) This distress did not support the represen tations of prosperity.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped the Go vernment, being now aware of the existence of such dis tress, would endeavour to adopt means for its alleviation. Mr. EWAR'I' referred to the statements as to the imports to Liverpool. Undoubtedly the country had suffered great losses in our imports at the beginning of the year; but the cause was previous over-trading. The London and Liver pool trade circulars showed this clearly to be the case. The merchants had discovered their error, and would restrain their imports accordingly. The reductions in Excise duties had been chiefly made by free-trade Administrations. The Right Hon! Gentleman had this evening, although he bed not expressly avowed •free-trade principles, stated facts from which people would draw inevitable inferences, and the conclusion would be irresistible.—(Hear, hear.) He was persuaded that the principle of direct taxation was the only I really sound one, and one which he believed the people were beginning to appreciate. • Mr. SAND ARS bore his testimony to the able, lucid, and satisfactory statement of the Chancellor of tee Exchequer— ! (Hear) --which would give great contentment to the coun try, especially the manufacturing districts.—(Hear.) With reference, however, to the diminution of the returns under Schedule D, be begged to say that certainly there had been great losses on imports—(Hear)—especially imports of corn. (Hear.) Not objecting to the continuance of the income tax, he yet would not have concurred in it unaccompanied by any modification—( Hear)—for 'he believed the present im position of the tax was deemed very oppressive and unjust. •t i o 2li n -V t h i e L a —(Hear.) At the same time he hoped it would be extended to incomes of 50/.' a year, and that all who paid it would have r a vote , —(Hear, hear.) b i t able, R j just, t, an couldd very not lucidhelp essinogfhtihseadßmiigrha-t Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor statement ex l)r hear.) The of the Exchequer.- (Hear, they were importance of the present discuesion was, that with the • considering the burdens of the State together prosperity of the Villiers) had been for 1 community .—( Hear .) He ( Mr. a close connexion bet a 'eag time endeavouring to establish succeed. He hoped thew.Rein h them, but heretofore could. not sidered himself rewarded byg t t h Hon. Gentleman opposite con• had been bestowed upon free meed of approbation that The country was now prospering from all sides of the House. of direct for indirect taxation. 'rheeclalrel of the substitution seemed to have become a convert to thati yhri. Gentleman fore should be encouraged in his new opinion, and The there they increased direct taxation, and relieved the • more industry of the country, the greater would be the amount of have to tax —(Hear, hear ) property t h e y would d the *- Mr. FREW EN sal result of free trade was to acres of land, in the vicinity throw 15,00 0 There on thehands of the proprietors . eild the t eveenre one statement made by his . Right 800. _ in which he (si r . not agree. The Right Hon. Gentlemanhad Frewen) could bch he expected to rec • this ewe year stated that the duty w from hops would be 150,0001. less than that received la s t e between the two amo un t s Now the exact di fference year. would be 188,0001. Mr. HUDSON was astonished to have heard the Noble I Lord the Member for Middlesex assert that his constituents 1 were in fityour of direct taxation. He (Dlr. Hudson) re. TE predecessor was not free, and that was in charging the people of this country with an impatience of taxation. The Right Hon. Getleman said it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to revert to a system of taxation on imports. He entirely agreed with the Right Hon. Gentleman in that opinion; but be did not think that argued in the least de gree an impatience of taxation on the part. of the people. The Right Hon. Gentleman made a similar remark with regard to the Excise duties, but failed entirely in proving that the people had any impatience of taxation which a Chancellor of the Exchequer had a night to find fault with. --(Hear, hear.) In 25 years, from 1790 to 1815, the taxa tion of this country was greatly increased, and increased on no principle which had reference to the real interests of commerce, - or of the people—(Hear, heat) but me one getting as much as possible, by any means wnatsoever; from any class of the people who might be made to yield taxa tion.— (Hear, hear.) And up to so recent a period as 182 J, it would probably have been impossible for the mali cious ingenuity of statesmen to have devised a system of taxation that did more to -strangle industry, to create poverty am .ng the people, or to prevent the creation of wealth, than that then in existence.—(Hear.) There were thousands of men in this country, at the present moment, who understood the principles of taxation, and who would better arrange the financial system of the country, than the men who managed its financial affairs for the period to which he had referred. Thu Right Hon.. Gentleman had shown that the result of taking elf the import duties •had been of the most advantageous character to every interest in the country—(Hear) —and if the taking off of 11,000,0001. or 12,000,000 e in taxes during the last ten years , had p ro• duced so very adv an t ageous a result, it was a reasonable con clusion that if they were to go back and begin on the old system and to re-impose the import duties, they should be putting an end to the advantages they had gained, and bringing back the evils which our miserable_ fiscal system of past times hail inflicted on them. There was no man in that House who did not see that the • Chancellor- of .the Ex chequer would not dare to stand up in his place and make —now in a time of peace, at any rate—any proposition that went to impose further duties on the im portation of articles from foreign countries. In speaking of indirect taxation, the Right Honourable Gentleman inti matel his opinion that the people were impatient, and he 1 1 (Mr. Bright) thought, the Right Hon. Gentleman spoke as if he considered they were also unreasonable. Now, he (Mr. Bright) did not believe there was throughout the country any feeling whatever against the principle of direct taxa tion to the amount involved in the receipts from the income tax.—(Hear, hear.) He represented a constituency which was, perhaps, as much affected by the income-tax as any borough constituency in the kingdom; but he had never been commissioned by his constituents to make any protest in that House against the principle of direct taxation, and be 'believed, though many people in - 1842 were exceedingly exasperated when the inceine. tax was first imposed, that as soon as they found that the receipts derived from it were , used by Sir Robert Peel with a view to introduce a new and improved system of taxation, the objections to that tax, were then almost altogether removed ; and he believed, also, from ,that time to this, they had given, through their re presentatives, their most cordial consent to the continuance of that tax.— (Hear, hear.) It was one of the most satis factory things to his mind that the Right Honourable Gentleman had in so courageous a manner proposed the prolongation of that tax to a period, at all events, when some further steps height be necessary in respect of it, arising out of the report of the Committee which was now sitting on the subject. He would, 'however, remind the Right Hon. Gentleman that there were two objections to that tax. There was, first of all, its inequality in regard to the various kinds of income, but he did not propose to ge into that at present. It was an exceedingly. difficult question, and he did not believe it wee possible to adjust it so as there might not still be inequality; but they might make some approximation to the desired end. But there was another source of grievance, and that was the body of Commissioners throughout the country by whom the income-tax e as ma naged. When the tax was levied in 1842, the Income. tax Commissioners were directed to be chosen from the Laud-tax Commissioners. Now he knew that in some parts of the country, where party feeling had been exceedingly high, the Income-tax Commissioners, from the circumstance of their being chosen entirely from the Land.tax Commissioners, had been belonging almost eXclusively to one political party. He should like to make a suggestion to the Chancellor, of the Exchequer with regard. to the mode of constituting the Income-tax Commissioners. If the Right Honourable Gen tleman could arrange a system by which the persons who paid income-tax in any given district during the last year or the last three years, might be allowed out of their own body to choose the Commissioners for assessing the income-tax for the next year or the next three years, as the case might be, he believed it would give great satisfaction, and remove one of the greatest grievances existing in connexion with that tax. With regard to the general question which had been discussed on both sides of the House, he thought they might almost conclude that, on the great questions which had been illustrated in the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman, they were pretty much agreed. But he should just wish to state to the House that the origin of that speech, and the facts on which it was based, might be ascribed .to the Committee in the import duties which sat in le4o. From the evidence given before that Committee had come all the train of grand and eventful circumstances connected with the fiscal changes in this country.--(Hear, hear) About the same time, the Manchester Chamber of Commerce took up that question, worked it with very great perseverance, and prosecuted it to so successful au issue, that Sir Robert Peel was con vsrted to their opinions; and through those conjoint cir cumstances they had landed now on a position exceed ingly fortunate for this country, when, on both sides of that House, the lea ling statesmen in Parliament admitted that those great principles which all the illustrious writers on this subject had advocated, were not only sound in theory, but had been productive, after being practically introduced into the fiscal system of this country, of the most extraor dinary advantages to the nation.—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer referred in the course 'of his speech to the question of the sugar duties, and described the remarkable gain to the country by the re duction of those duties. He recollected the Right Hon. Gentleman complimenting another Right Hon. Gentleman on the Opposition side of the House, with having converted two Secretaries of State. Now, the Right Hon. Gentleman had sitting by his side another Secretary of State—(hear, hear) ' —who had taken a great interest in the question of the sugar duties, and lie (Mr. Bright.) hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman would succeed in converting him (Sir J. leaking- J ton) to the wisimom or the existing policy in reference to the sugar duties,—(Laughter.) At all events be trusted the Right Hor. Geotleinau Would nut in future consent to the people of this country being put on a short allowance of sugar. --(Hear, hear.) He understood the Solicitor -General was to address a large meeting at Ipswich to-morrow. He did not know what was the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's brief—( A laugh)—but it he was iu the confidence of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer before he left town he (Mr. Bright) hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman gave him a hint not to expose himself in the manner he had done on a recent occasion.—(Laughter.) The Right Hon. Gentleman had shown the great increase in the consumption of tea and sugar among the people within the last few years; he (Mr. Bright) hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman would nut have cause to regret if he also found a corresponding increase in their consumption of bread ' and butter.—(A laugh.) With respect to the question of the surplus, he thought that had been underrated. There was still a surplus of 460,000/. The Right Hon. Gentleman said he assigned 350,00 for the militia. He (Mr. Bright) was glad that, the question of paying for the militia had come before the House. (here had never been two military or naval men in that House who had been agreed as to the propriety of calling out the militia. The truth was, the whole question of the militia was in a haze. The Noble Lord the Member tor London had been hoaxed in reference to . it, and the present Government, in their turn, had been hoaxed also. The House had already voted 15,000,0001. fur the defence of the country, a sum vihich none of them could conceive in amount, and equal to what we derived from our Excise' duties; and yet, atter having voted that enormous sum, they were now asked to pay 350,000/. for the militia. — (Hear, hear.) The Chancellor of the Exchequer, like his predecessor in office, had taken advantage of a most dis creditable thing, in the case of the farmers, and the mode in which they were assessed to the income-tax. The farmer was only rated on one-halt' of his rent, and in addition to that advantage they gave him a right of appeal against the sum at which he might be assessed. The late Chancellor of the Exchequer :proposed that arrangement, and carried it through the House without any discussion. He (Mr.. Bright) thought the present Chancellor of the Exchequer would lose 150,000/. in that way, as indeed he had ad mitted; and therefore the Right Honourable Gentleman had let the trading classes down to the extent of that sum on that particular point. He apprehended eventually that the Militia Bill would become a hustings question, and when it came to be worked they would find that every large constituency, • scarcely without an exception, and certainly that of every city and borough, would be op posed to such a Bill. Now he thought, out of a sum like 800,000/. the Chancellor of the Exchequer should have given some relief to the industry of the country. The principle on which they (the free trade party) had acted in their agita tion in the country and in that House was a scientific and an honest one.—( Hear, hear, and an ironical laugh.) They did not regard a man as a farmer, a landowner, a cotton spinner, or a shopkeeper, but they intended to apply that principle to the whole industry of the country. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been a little more courae geous, and had shaken off the Militia Bill, and removed the hop duty among others, he would give much greater , satisfaction to his (fir. Bright's) side of the House. Again , he would as k t h e H ouse w h et h er the repeal of the advertise ment duty or the newspaper stamp—both of which could have been done for the sum they were going to expend on the was a gr oat e ." t ( hoax,l lear which ' he had fac t been n oeun in tr ilitia—would not have been infinitely better for the s p , la t y h e a d t t o h n e militia ob g l u e e L st o io r n d which appeaeerde of the Government. Some inflated letters doubtless been nthe subject in the Times newspaper had aims of public represented to the Noble Lord its the exeres- He (Mr. Bright)t,opinion, and he fell into the trap.— (A laugh.) Gentleman the chan e c o: l th r t the speech of the Right Hon. ruble oise. It was the eca of Exchequer was sin admi- I case before him, did whpatee Speech he could a man wh o , having a great But the Right Hon. Gentleman to make the best of it. dition of the people, nor had he had not improved the con- Schedule D on the great mass of tine n c u orn f munity. The Right to that; but he (Mr. Bright) Was glad o utiately adverse ! forcible exponent of the opinions long held byfind in him a his (Mr. Bright's) side of the House, and that, ign i t e :T .. Bn on the facts bearing on those questions as they had done onlooking him, the Right Hon. Gentleman had had the e courage to face of Parliament and , stand forth in the the country, to it the policy he had so deliberately adopted • place before ~ .CON did not intend to Sir J. PAlelNee follow the He n , Member through the great variety of topics which b e had He touc hed upon. el I had, however, been pointedly ref erred ble Member with reference to the d uty to by the lionou ra on sugar, and w shed to make one observation with re gard to it. The Hon. Member had implied that he (Sir J.. a convert on the subject of the Palsiugton) had become Rig ht Hon. Friend the Chancellor of sugar duties, because his the Exchequer had admitted the remar k a ble extent to which stimulated since 1845. the consumption of sugar had been to point out that, in deal- It was hardly necessary for him th e re were various in with the affairs of this great em ire and he thought the general interests to be considered; Honourable atember would admit that there were other mein terests besides that of consumers which Government the were bound to consider on the question of the sugar duties. They were bound to consider the interest of the colonies, anu also a question—which the Hon. Member ought to be the last to disregard • the question of slavery. He confessed that the increase in the consumption of sugar during the last year had been very remarkable, but the increase was not attributable to the Act of 1846. It had so happened that of late the cultivation of beet for the manufacture of sugar had been encouraged to a great ex tent on the Continent, aid that in Germany the quantity of beet-root sugar had increased to an enormous amount. The result had been the exclusion to a considerable extent from the north of Europe of slave-grown sugar, which of late had found its principal market in England.—( - lear, hear.) That was a fact which ought to be kept in view, and the Hon. Gentleman ought to consider when he appealed to bins so triumphantly, whether, looking to the general bearing of the question, the increase in the consumption of sugar in this country wee altogether a object of congratulation. The LONDON, SATURDAY membered that when the former Chancellor of the Exche quer (Sir C. Wood) proposed to increase the income-tax from three to five per cent., these very gentlemen were loudest in their complaints, as also most strenuous in their oppmition.—(Hear, hear.) Under the free-trade policy rents had undoubtedly diminished, and he felt surprised that anybody should be found to deny such a result. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had al luded to the prosperity of the country, but had not attributed it to free trade.—(Cries of " Oh, oh," from the Opposition.) Had Hon.'Gentlemen never heard of prosperity in spite of free trade?—(Hear, hear.) In th e s hippi n g interest there was undoubted suffering, but he trusted th a t matters woald mend.. The country, however, h a d con fid ence i n the present Government, and desired to give th em ti me f or the develop ment of their policy. What he (Hr. H u dson) should like to see carried out - would be a mixed system of taxation, embrac ing both Customs and Excise. Lord R. GROSVENOR, replying to a remark of the Hon. Member who had last spoken, reiterated his assertion that his constituents were averse to any addition to the income tax. He added his regret that the Chancellor of the Ex chequer had not in `his speech held out a hope of relief to at torneys with respect to the certificate duty, and gave notice for the 25th inst. for'a motion on the subject. The 'CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could not withhold his surprise at the intimation which had just fallen from the Noble Lord.—(Hear, hear.) So the Noble Lord was to head another campaign against direct taxation. ll* (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had received deputations fr©m attorneys on the subject of the certificate duty, and many other deputations; but in all cases he thought he had sufficiently excused himself, by showing that the Ex • chequer was not in a condition to bear the remission of the taxes.— (Hear, hear.) Mr. L. HEYWORTII deemed the statement of the Chan cellor of the Exchequer most satisfactory, and thought it would confer on the Government a degree of popularity cal culated to strengthen them much out of doors. Mr. C. BRUCE said, that after having listened with the greatest attention and admiration to the statement of his Right Honourable Friend the Chancellor of the Ex chequer, he did not understand his Right Honourable Friend to have expressed any preference for direct, as compared with indirect taxation. his Right Hon. Friend had confined himself throughout his speech to a simple statement of facts, and had given no opinion that one mode of taxation was better than another. Mr. MUNTZ said he had attentively listened to the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Ex chequer, and he had no hesitation in saying that since he had had the honour of, a seat in Parliament he had never heard a more lucid and able address. There was one re mark of the Right Hon. Gentleman which he could not feel to be correct ; but when two Chancellors of the Ex chequer boasted of the extraordinary commercial prosperity of the country, he could not attempt to contradict them. He had risen, however, principally for the purpose of calling the attention of the Right Hon. Gentleman to the unfortunate circumstance of his renewal of the income-tax. He (Mr. Muntz) felt convinced that the country at large would be greatly disappointed at that renewal, and more especially as the measure was to remain unaltered. The tax operated most oppressively against small manufacturers and traders. In his opinion they ought to get rid of the income-tax al together, and adopt a property-tax. Mr.AL COCK said he thought there ought to be no ex emption whatever from the operation of the income-tax. The resolutions were then agreed to, and, the House, having resumed, they were ordered to be reported on Monday. The Highway Rates Bill passed through Committee. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at a Quarter before One o'clock. SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT. TIMES. - Mr. Disraeli has added a new chapter to the history of parties, and'a new glory to the British Constitu tion. He may almost be said to have enlarged the idea of human capability. Never was there seen to such advantage as last night that almost peculiar custom of this country, by which rival factions periodically change places; by which enterprise and disaffection occasionally undergo the ordeal of office, and power in its turn is humbled in opposition. The scourge of Peel and the opponent of Wood made a speech which either of them might have been proud of, and which in its very manner, as well as its substance, showed hew thoroughly the speaker had studied his antagonists. We have long said that the only way to extinguish Pro. tection was to put it on the Treasury bench, where it would be obliged to master the facts of the question and commit itself to a definite policy. That was the process we saw last night, and no stool of repentance, no pillory, no sheet and wax-tapers, no whip ever expelled the offending devil from any frail nature so thoroughly as the proud but arduous task which devolved last night on the Protectionist chief. The eSice made the man. He had evi dently resolved to " speak truth and shame the devil," and delivered so clear and effective an eulogy of our financial policy during the last ten years that Sir Charles Wood had nothing to add when his turn came. It is true that the cheers were from the Opposition benches, while Mr. Disraeli's own friends had evidently not yet learnt the part of triumphant converts which they were expected to play. That signified little in a House the rule of which is that the orator addresses his foes, not his friends, and has no choice but to turn his back on his party. All sides, however— from the most applauding opponent to the most silent sup porter—must have admired the appearance, as it wore, of a new Chancellor among them. It is now evident that this wonderful being need neither be dropped from the clouds, nor connected with a Russell or Grey, nor trained by a whole life of office. It may be produced ex nihilo, or manufac tured to order at six weeks' notice. No conjuror ever pro duced such a surprise from his hat or his cornucopia. We saw with our own eyes the last rag of Protection put into a red box, and when the lid was opened, a perfect Chancellor of the Exchequer appeared, who imme diately opened his mouth and made a first-rate financial statement. As to the substance of the budget it is very soon told, for it was to do nothing. Mr. Disraeli proposes to con tinue the income-tax for another year, leaving everything "noth i n g " better yi propositions. gavethat atroe often else alone for the present. But besides that this is the best, and really the only practicable course, yet never was i a a the m substance,ost elaboratea spirit, and and angr gratuitous m a a r d e e pe t t l i r t i i s on e nt m in o u r e e t s h en e si p b r l e e se o n f t them, ni knewnine-tenths t e t n h taht thes of the onl y H e o o u u s r e s , e and wa s a t l o l the more sensible of them, knew that the only course was to co pro visional arrangements, leaving to the new Parliament the i csen Probably missednothing tenthsmust hil.e 7rpetuating the income-tax .w it rit i e s rs the p have left the business of poets and indeed convinced on that point d ill .{ i ffi oiut c s i e i p l I nle task uscehd . o r uf But a o amending n tt d hh i o n ors g oeu andgn j roprii: communia dicere, Mr oftli an,alblefore. other If year's income-tax his of last year's. Instead of the brute sense that eee must • ust have the income tax for another year, like the s ere own, Disraeli t h 0 tt certainly u presentiment of a beating that even a dog might feel under certain circumstances, we lave now rational satisfaction on this p oint. The celebrated formula of "three co u r s es" was -drought to bear on the ques tion. There are three possible methods of filling up the actual d e fi c i en cy undsuff ering nuclei which we are by the lapse of the income- tax. First, new duties on customs; ex else duties; thirdly , new direct taxes. secondly, new Of these the two first were disposed of by relating the history of the war waged against them during the last ten of the direct taxes was illustrated years. The unpopularity win dow duty last year; and the only t„ by the repeal of the orm of direct tax, the re newal of which would be tolerated f income-tax, to which we are brought even one year, is the il ''' ex haustion. The proposal was so st t b Y this method of P e and obvious that had it been announced, or even intimated l earlier in the speech, we cannot answer for the etree , on the interest of the re mainder, but Mr. Disraeli's own other sphere has taught him to an reserve literary practice in an till the very last moment, till r his climax. So the hand was almost on seven o'clock, it was not perfe c tl y Would conclude—as a morning contemporary yesterday in formed with a motion certain but that he formed its readers that he would' that the surplus revenue shall b e appropriated to ways and pr means." He didlconclude with as Sir Charles Wood last year , and the same resolution Went on, the House of Commo ns and though the speaking carried by acclamation the income. virtually then and there sions and inequalities, for another tax, with all its oppres evidently applied himself to his task year. Mr. Disraeli had to do it thoroughly; and we should with the determination the pains and self-denial it must ba de not be doing justice to mit that he has done his work well cost if we did not &d -eed state of our revenue, of the temper 111 s review of the sources the difficulties of the financier, o of the taxpayer and position and prospects, and of the our present financial tied before the permanent renewal questions to be set is so perspicuous and agreeable, of the income-tax, com mend it to such of our younger eed that we can desire, with a moderate expenditure our fairer readers as get up the finances of this country, if trouble and time, to arid not too many. The Right Ron, Gentlemanbe figures are enough command, but judiciously forebore t had more at with a load too great for the memory encumber his speech hearers. We are bound to add th u4 a ., or attention of his there an exception of no great imne L with only here and agree in his views, as much as se e r a r t ?ce , we cannot but Mire the manner in which he expressed them- Perhaps we should say that he insisted too much on the lar g e e xem ptions range of the inhabited house dut y , ae and limited at which we purchased the remission Proof of the cost win dow duty, when in fact the two duties-that of the and that substituted—have much t h e and much the same range. Nothing can be jester exemptions Disraeli's remarks on the dangerous tendency juster than Mr. remitting an indirect taxation which faus n:Y of continually ling its place with a direct taxation ....,P i r all, and sup ablew° his only toler because it is made to fall on a few. But • be seen whether in fact it is practicable to ,_ it remains to taxation in a country which is always re qu i r ZeP up indirect taxation facilities and new outlets for its industry ; and wheth e , in the event of direct taxes being sub stituted, it is p r acticable to levy them on any except the wealthier, more res 3 more "come-at-able" class of persons. T his ? , ol i a n sible, and great financial problem of the age; and if 14,..Lt1... Di deed, the , sraeli, 1 with the assistance of the Com mittee now sitting , succeed in making direct taxation as fair, as _ o prairs, can palatable, and as productive as indirect taxes , ` l ' m vwer 'have solved solved a problem evidently above the genius of either ve Pitt, Peel, or Wood. HERALD.—No one will from this ti me deny t - ° he Chancellor of the Exchequer the praise of candour. :If t o do justice to a political oppone nt be a virt ue, then ha a the a Ink House of Commons seen a disp la y of this virt ue more ' - ing than it has witnessed for some time, or is likely 804 m t o witness again. To his predec essors in office, last Die :t, in the development of his budget. Mr. Disraeli was maim aally complimentary ; the panegyrist whom Sir Charles ,Wood wanted when in office, he has found in his 811 CC es" r. "e may congratulate himself that so well-timed a comp liment has been paid him, not merely by an opponent, b u t : , 5y one of great acuteness and ability; not only on tilt a spur of the moment, when hasty e xcitement, like an after dinner speech, gives a deeper colouring to langua ge vhich cooler blood is apt to condemn, but after some we eks of study and reflection. After much thought and calcul ation, the Chancellor of the Exchequer has resolved tha t it is wiser to let well alone. For the present, at all e\ et eats, he will conduct the finances of the country on the a sine principles as his predecessors, . wisely Preferring t o endure inconveniences for a time than, by mead ling with the present arrangements, on so short a warning and with so little time, introduce confusion, when he only d e .. signed a remedy for existing evils. or, by inefficient chat ages, create mischief; when his sole intention was amelit sra Li on . If any disappointment be felt, as perhaps always I et - 11 be felt where expectations have been excited, a little ref tection will convince the country that no other course was o pen to the Government, as certainly none ether was warren ted by prudence. Mr. Disraeli has at once boldly and fi rankly avowed his incapacity to re-adjust taxation until he shall have had more experience and more time to maste r the bearings of the present system. No man can withi; I the apace of six weeks devise means for the adjustment of difi i culties, nor can any means be inaugurated without int irfe r usg.with the commercial arrang emen ts of the country.. l'e ' 0 genius can play with surplus and deficiency a 3 the i torical figures. In the present state of th e nation it fire b y would be most unwise to kind Ile a re uy a new sche me t axation, or je t Ai of i the present returns of the revenue b y. any nel ff propositions which might furnish moans for exetteming,, .ap d EVENING, wake the most powerful and the most violent of popular pre judices and passions. Mr. Disraeli proposes, therefore, to leave things as th ey are f or one y ear more , to give the mea sures and financial arrangements of the late Ministry another year of grace, to sea what elastic power there is in the country in re cover i ng f rom th e e ff ec t s o f such reductions in the taxation as have characterised the last ten years. In this he is not e n ti re l y a f ree agen t. I n some measure he has been necessitated to this course by the strain laid on our sources of income. The reduction on the duties of foreign articles, introduc e d i n t o t hi s coun t r y, h as b een continuous; the repeal of the E xc i se h as b een carr i e d t o it s utmost limit No alteration is th ere f ore poss ibl e i n e ith er o f these directions.it From touching the thi r d grea t source o f revenue , th e tax on . property and income, he is precluded by the circumstance that a Committee of the House is at this moment engaged in investigating its operation, and in examining th e inequalities of its assessment. But to the multitudes espe cially of the middle and professional classes, who have sad experience of its injustice, and who yet boar it without com bination and without agitation, he holds out more than a glimpse of consolation. The words of the Chancellor of the Exchequer last night make it clearly impossible, if the pre sent Ministry continue in office, ever to revive this odious tax in its present form and with its glaring anomalies. "It is (said Mr. Disraeli) a tax having features not calculated for permanency ; if those features are removed it will exer cise an influence very different from that which is antici pated." Its doom, therefore, in the judgment of the Chan cellor of the Exchequer, is fixed; it has uo more than a probationary existence—a grievance tolerated for one year more, in consideration of the expenses to which the country is subjected by its additional military expenditure, but thenceforth destined never to be revived, or only with such alterations and amendments as will pre sent it in a very different guise to that which it now wears. But even this toleration was accorded to it by the Chancellor of the Exchequer only in consideration that the Committee of the House of Commons, employed for the last two years in scrutinising its provisions, have not been able to present their report, and it is scarcely just or decent to anticipate their decision. If the patience of the country is therefore put to a longer trial, it must not only bear in mind the present state of the finances, and the impossibility of further reductions at the present mement, but it must also remember the reiterated denunciations of our contemporaries against all the efforts of the present Ministry, all higher flights beyond what are absolutely expedient for the present Govern ment of the country. We have been told over and over again of the unconstitutional violence offered to the nation by any attempt on their part to introduce sub stantial reforms or remove crying evils until a final appeal shall have been made to their constituents. We do.not sup pose that Mr. Disraeli is withheld by such threats. There ar e more argent reasons why he should adopt the more modest course. What would be thought of a Minister who, after six weeks' experience only in office, should invade a system countenanced by so imposing authority as the present?— great, notwithstanding its motley character, and one which has grown up to its present grandeur, not by the consistent prosecution of any one distinct and definite principle, but under the hands of different Ministers, each of whom has held often different, often irreconcileable, theories. Had the present Chancellor of the Exchequer introduced any bold or striking reforms we should have had the loudest outcries and the most violent denunciations against rashnesss and arrogance. Those who will perhaps now be the foremost in condemning him for no bolder innovations on the policy of his predecessors, or who will endeavour to torture his fair and candid concessions to their industry and exertions, into a renunciation of his previous p rinci p les —these would have been amongst his loudest and most virulent accusers. Not only, however, is great credit due to him for the candour with which be has admitted the full force of hostile state ments; but he is deserving of much praise for resisting the besetting temptation of some of his predecessors, and re fusing to bid for popularity. Had he imitated their con duct, he might have gone to the hustings with a Budget framed for electioneering purposes ; how ever imprudent or impracticable the details, he would have thrust off the responsibility to different shoul ders, or at least to a distant period. His political opponents must do him justice for the moderation which he has shown, and, upon better consideration, we doubt not, that the coun try, with us, will see more hope of a fair adjustment of its difficulties in this diffident tone of humble duty than in the louder tongue of boastful profession. Confidence is to be re posed in a statesman who is resolved, before he commits himself to any measures, to ascertain rigidly, not only w hat his own shoulders, but also what theshonlders of the nation, will bear. On these, and on other matters, indeed, the de cision must rest with the people. Hitherto, as Mr. Disraeli has shown, two principles have been at work—the remission sometimes of direct, sometimes of indirect, taxation. Chancellors of the Exchequer, instead of clearly ascer taining the maxims by which they ought to beguided, have been satisfied to yield to the pressure from without, pursuing an erratic and wavering course as this or that notion prevailed. No part of Mr. Disraeli's speechand though marked throughout with the greatest ability and clearness, made a deeper impression on the House than his remarks, that we had now come to this point, when it was necessary that a clear and definite principle of taxation should be established. If that principle was direct taxation, then was it imperative (unless that principle were to be suicidal) that it should ba general in its application, equally as indirect taxation. The partial operation of the present measure was not only taxing capital, but, professing to re lieve labour, was striking at labour through the sides of capital. In the morning prints, his opponents have often twitted Mr. Disraeli for enunciating principles in his writings and failing to do so in his place as a Minister. No very modest demand, considering the short tenure of his office. Here, then, is one which we trust will prove as acceptable to them, as it is a guarantee to the nation of a fairer and more equal method of taxation. Mr. Disraeli has shown that as candour to an adversary is not incompatible with keen wit and unlimited powers of aggression, so neither are the mi nutest and clearest statistical details irreconcilable with great principles and philosophical statesmanship. DAILY NEWS.—The Tory Budget is now before the country, introduced and illustrated by the Tory Chancellor of the Exchequer. More than two hours, by the House of Commons clock, did the literary individual spend upon his explanatory oration. The House was very full —and the audience very attentive even to the last sentence of the speech, when a loud and ironical cheer arose as the labouring mountain gave forth its fiscal mouse. All Mr. Disraeli in tends to do is—to take off nothing, and to keep on the income-tax 1 Starting with the assumption of a deficiency, whilst there is, in fact, a surplus revenue, he closed with a declaration that he must have still more. " Give, give," is the cry. His speech might be almost thus epitomised : "We are in office, and in office we intend to stop. We have got the surplus of three millions left us by the Free traders and Whigs. We mean to keep it. Some people expect a reduction of one sort or other—a lightening of Excise duties, or a mitigation of the income-tax, or an abolition of some import duty. But we mean nothing of the sort. We can dispose of the surplus very quietly without:taking off any impost or making any change at all. As to plans for the future, we offer none—plans are trouble some to think about, and sometimes difficult to carry. We mean to propose—nothing; except a renewal of the income tax. We will keep all we have got—we'll take all else we can get. Carpe diem." Turn the speech which way we will, to this complexion—and this alone—does its financial portion come at last. After a sprinkling of dull truisms about taxation being levied by three methods—on imports, by Excise duties, and by direct imposts—the financier of the Protectionist 'party went into an elaborate statement of the advantages which had resulted from the policy of 1842. He reviewed the list of duties taken off, showing in detail and by figures how well that policy had worked—exhibitipnagrtya glowing picture of the benefits of the very policy his have prided themselves upon opposing. Indeed, this part of his address was a purely free-trade speech, cheered loudly by the occupants of the Opposition benches, especially when he declared it would be hopeless to expect to supply any deficiency by extra Customs duties. Indulging his hearers with a relation of the good deeds of others, he might have been expected to tell next how their bright example had stimulated him to emulate their deeds. But not a word of the sort did he say. With some skill—and with a clearness of voice and expression forming an agreeable contrast to the unintelli gible jumble of his predecessor—he dilated on the sins of an unequally levied tax on income; doing this with such an air that his hearers thought his great point must be its re form, if not abolition ; and extorting from the House a loud cheer of approbation when he said that" to a direct tax there should be no exemptions." Glancing off, however, troin this delicate ground—with a passing sneer at the sanitary reformers who took off the window-tax, and a sneer at the present house-tax—which only reaching 400,000 houses, produces much less (he thinks) than it should do—he finished his first hour's talk by depicting the unhappy fate of a Chancellor of the Exchequer, whom he declared to be a creature put in office for prey and plunder. His statements of figures were of course listened to with great attention. The expenditure for the coming year he estimated must be increased by additional payments on account of convicts and of the Kafir war. For the latter he should propose an extra two hundred thousand pounds, making a total under that Leading of 660p01. Another new source of expense would be the militia. That would require three hundred and fifty thousand pounds—the .estimated total for the year being .51,163,9791. To meet this he had Customs duties that would suffer from the forthcoming reductien of sugar duties, and an Excise to which no Great Exhibition traffic would con tribute—for which hops would pay less than had been usual, though malt might be unusually productive. He ran over the catologue of other items, amongst which he placed rather more than two millions and a half for six months income-tax that must fall into the ensuing ac count, the whole giving a total:of 48,083,500/. In this way he schemed out a deficiency between expected demands and anticipated proceeds—of rather more than two millions. To meet this he asks for property and income-tax to the tune of five millions three hundred and thirty-seven thousand pounds! the sum he estimates those taxes to produce for 1853. In estimating the revenue for the coming year, Mr. Disraeli had, he said, been informed by some of the first au-. thorities in the country, that he must count on a loss of in come-tax to the amount of 150,0001. from the landed and agricultural population. This estimate is valuable as a gauge to Indicate the precise extent of the " ruin" which tree trade has been accused of bringing down upon the heads of the country party and their depen dent& Mr. Disraeli truly characterises the national prosperity.tas cc great and sound;" but, on the other hand, this prosperi.y has been achieved by the depression, and out of thelee_ert of one particular class. What is the extent of this : cl' . . rending depression? To what amount has free trade damn' in the fied the agricultural interests? As they also general prosperity, what balance will go to the cheapness " ruin"—when their savings in consequence of deas of provisions provisions and of other advantages that free trus t theellearcecount of a a loss put ti c k ssurely tended to them in common with others —is of income represented by 150,0001. in sevenoesl ea' that is but a small price to pay d sound" national it (which is not the case) for great rid sound " h as done, it even if they have had to pay prosperity. If that is all the harm free us causecial d s i t s a a t p e: has been an unalloyed benefit. But if. ments of Mr. Disraeli were calcu late hara egue must ex pointment, other portions of In cite unmitigated surprise and no his dt-hetofinan tle gratification. In night to the deed, altogether the speech addresslieetd. the Exchequer House of Commons by the Chancellor la o st f whom he has hitherto will be read throughout the country:Ali mingled feelings of wonder and dismay by the followers led, and of triumph on the part of °those to whose principles in his adhesion. There and policy he has at length given pitiable than that of the never was a sight more ludicrously. Mi n isterial ranks yesterday evening during the elabo ra t e oration of their chosen chief. For of f w h o rta av m in o gt l hheioruprel yl political had to endure the protracted Nl' teeth extracted one by one , amid the cheers and laughter For the last six s of m.. those who sat opposite to thei r ; dd b years the u Country Party, as Mr. D israeli romantically bed them, ' t the reduction of Customs duties have been clamouring aga in st and on foreign articles of consumption, eloquently bemoaning the ruin which the system of tree trade was calculated to bring on our colonial possessions. Foremost in every cabal and loudest in every . denunciation has been the man who now occupies the ost of Finance Minister. Yet, er e two months o f P office have rolled over his head, this ve r y man rises p l ace and volunteers in his the most startling and conclusive evidence of the entire fallacy of all he had hitherto averred, and avows his abso lute conviction of the success of the policy against which he had mutinied under Peel, and pertinaciously thwarted in op- MA 1852, I position to Ru3sell. It was but the other day that Sir John Pakington, in answer to a question respecting the sugar duties, declared his officially confirmed persuasion that the giadual progress towards assimilation between foreign and colonial produce was working calamitously for our West In dian dependencies, and his unchanged determination to re store in their behalf a differential system. But now Mr. Disraeli comes forward as leader of the party in the Lower House, and exultingly demonstrates the sound and beneficial working of the Sugar Bill of 1818, and positively repudiates all idea of resorting, even for revenue, to an augmentation of our Customs du ties. Still more marvellous and edifying are the con fessions of the new convert on the subject of the Excise. With a coolness and effrontery unparalleled, Mr. Disraeli re curs to the varied assaults which he and his followers were accustomed to make during the existence of the late Govern ment upon each and all of the items from which this great branch of our national revenue is derived. Nobody can have forgotten the successive motions and divisions for the abolition of the tax on malt, on hops, on paper, &c., in all of which the new Chancellor of the Exchequer figured. Yet he now confesses with inimitable sang froid that all that was utterly unreasonable and absurd ; concluding his analysis of the state of our Excise revenue with the casual expression of his former coincidence in opinion with Lord George Ben tinsk, who sincerely desired to abrogate all such internal taxes—and his own present resolution to maintain ovary one of them. The third great branch of national tinhceoumghe by a sort t sr e a f cl eli aix ca e r te e i fu t l e ly me r ri e t ser h v e ec e l h f o o a r e tthoelavlaissiti;upaeln it in the earlier p or ti on of his spee y ch a peculiarly emphatic weed of reprobation. W e allude to the ncome-tax. Anti cipating the report of the Select Committee which he said it would be presumptuous in him to anticipate, he declared that the result of their laborious investigations was to prove that any alterations in the schedules would be to render the system, if possible, more intolerable than it is at present. No modification, iu his opinion, was at all likely to mend it ; and as for the tax as it stood, it was, he thought, deservedly most unpopular, and, by reason of the large exemptions it contained, utterly unjust in principle, and eminently dan gerous to the future welfare of the state. And therefore Mr. Disraeli sums up his whole statement by the naked proposal to continue it unmodified for another year. So this, then, is the upshot of all the pompous pro mises of a new system of taxation, which should relieve agriculture without oppresssng commerce, and equalise bur thens without endangering the income of the nation. The bubble has suddenly burst, and nothing is left but the gaping fools who have for six long years been running after the poli tical wizard, and the laughing spectators wbo were deceived by his mystical talk and conjuror's trick,. The whole thing turns out to be a miserable, shabby, and coarsely executed delusion—at the end of which the dupes find themselves or dered home, as there is no more to be seen, and the lights must be put out directly. In dumb and dogged despair, the unhappy country gentlemen listened last night to the funeral service extemporised by the great high • priest over the corpse of Protection. As each new round of scornful cheers broke from the crowded benches of the Opposition, they no doubt still consoled themselves with the fond expectation that something was reserved for them at the end which might at all events serve as a decent pretence for ac quiescing in the open apostacy of their chief—something for themselves, if not for the farmers, of whom they have been such very dear friends. But when, having rapidly uttered the sentence wherein he proposed to renew the income-tax for another year, the great necromancer suddenly sat down, the sense of their forlorn condition was too heavy to be borne, and rushing from the House they left the Chancellor of the Exchequer to receive, almost alone, the overwhelming ac knowledgments of Sir Charles Wood for the justice he had tardily rendered to the free-trade financial policy. But whi ther will the hapless Newdegates and Youngs, Tyrells and Thompsons fly? They accused Peel of having betrayed them six years ago; at Disraeli's bidding they hunted him to death; yet now they find themselves " sold" again, and by the very person who led them out against the illustrious statesman we have lost. For ourselves, we can hardly affect to sympathise in their surprise, and still less in their chagrin. We have frequently expressed our belief that six months of office would dissipate the dream of returning to protec tion. We own, indeed, that we did not anticipate so rapid and complete an annihilation of the phantom-hopes they obstinately cherished, or that six weeks would have been sufficient to accomplish the end. Neither could we have supposed that, in addition to a solemn recantation of his errors concerning free trade, Mr. Disraeli of israeli lee w t would h ee a n ve . volunteered such confessions as hi s speech tains on the general subject of taxation ; or that he should have abstained from sprinkling with some species of fiscal confectionery the dry and bitter potion he laid before his adherents. But so it is. The spell is broken, and the matchless farce is ever. CHRONICLE.—The Budget of 1852 has been more elo quently introduced and more favourably received than that of 1851; yet, word for word and figure for figure, the two will be found in every respect identical. The Government proposes no change, great or small, in the financial system of the country. For another year the income-tax is protected from reduction, andthe indirect duties from any attempt to in crease them. As the Chancellor of the Exchequer has adopted precisely the course which we have often indicated as incum bent on a Government opposed by a majority of the House of Commons, we can have no disposition to withhold the credit which is due to a prudent appreciation of existing political circumstances. We may even conjecture that, if the Minister's hands had been free, he would still have been inclined to pursue a nearly similar course ; for, after carefully attending to all the hints and general axioms contained in his speech, we have been unable to discover any theory which could become the foundation of a re-adjustment of taxa tion. It would be illiberal to deny the merit of Mr. Disraeli's speech in point of language and manner. His statement was sufficiently lucid and vigorous to command the attention of the House for more than two hours; and and the only rhetorical defect which it exhibited wasinse parable from the position of a speaker who knew beforehand that his laboured premises would necessarily lead to nothing. If he had had any novelty to introduce in practice, or to suggest in argument,the would probably have contented him self with a simpler preamble, and would have reserved his strength for his final disclosures. It is remarkable that the most successful, and perhaps the most sincere, portions of his speech were those passages in which the brilliant results of a liberal commercial policy were set forth in gratulatory language for the admiration of the House. The repeal of more than ten millions of taxation in ten years, with but a trifling loss to the revenue, is, indeed, a fact which can scarcely be too often welt upon. Mr. Disraeli must, however, have felt himself in a singular position when he was dilating so cordially on the success of a policy to which he has not even yet openly adhered. His colleague of the Colonial-office can scarcely have welcomed the cheering which followed the announce ment of the result of last year's reduction of the sugar duties. Sir Charles Wood had estimated the loss at 330,0001. —the revenue has actually suffered to the formidable amount of 3091. It is difficult to suppose that the Minister dwelt on this part of his subject either from an excess of candour or from an idle desire to call forth the applause which naturally follows any exposition of national prosperity. The history of the financial triumphs attending a liberal commercial policy was doubtless meant for' the Ministerial side of the House. The obstinate sceptics of the back benches were reminded by their own champion that the success of free trade is not a fiction of their opponents, but a proof of the soundness of the principles on which the recent fiscal legislation of the coun try has been based. We have no quarrel with Mr. Dis raeli's figures, which, indeed, are copied almost literally from 'the balance-sheet of 1851. It may be prudent to make a certain allowance for the temporary sti mulus given by the Exhibition to the consumption of taxable commodities; and although there is reason to hope that the receipts may somewhat exceed the estimate, there is at the same time a danger that the Kafir war may lead to an expenditure beyond the formidable amount at present announced. The surplus, 'as we stated yesterday, falls below half a million. Mr. Disraeli omitted to point out in detail the mode in which the actual excess is absorbed ; but the particulars may be collected from various portions of his statement. The loss of half a year's window-tax amounts to 640,0001., and the Kafir war will require at least 200,000/., in addition to the 460,000/. already voted. The militia is to cost 350,0001., to which must be added the in crease in the army estimates. About 300,0001. are allowed for:possible diminutions in the sugar duties and in the income tax; and a certain per-centage is taken off the extraor dinary receipts of the Post-office for 1851. Under these circumstances the surplus of 2,180,0001. dwindles down !to the humble amount of 460,0001. Having willingly given all due credit both to the matter and to the manner of Mr. Disraeli's financial statement, we can carry our eulogies no fur ther. The Members who so loudly cheered him have per haps, by this time, discovered that in all his sonn u dil d ig nve pe riods he really told them nothing. llalf an hour Almost every sufficedpro position to statet e read that, the with tables a of few w ap receipt eei and fi ed exceptions , expenditure v c' t f h o e r l ti samesl , figures would serve for the ensuing y p w o a s e iti o o i n th co er n u t n ain m e e d ani i e n g, thes h o ust denunciation of fiscal is not too much to say that e t ei i ly Pea irrelavent,c beyond. r e r er erroneous. ontehc siPmeprlheafpacstisi p ex an e y mp s ti i o r S in Charlesgenerwralo. Woods n that the showed that the proof we possessfurnishes t fh w e h h t x h e e a h c :o f ; n o ' n li r to the principles of s 'o g f ce its steps by in creasingefinance.nter tains l3:as Chancellor aalta re a t modifications suggested by House would not or t h e Excise. In the next that the income s - te tax was oppressive either the Customs d schsdule D . ln connexion Ina singleha nx l o nso e rdu inclin e d obpei ne : . Schedules 8., eminent ac andl)acee alleged tunpopular,actuaries eri and reiterate complain of the imprudent readiness of the House to t a mper with all the branches of the Wood was weak enough to and d th theseataopuicanpharplraocer as to would that t h e render inndi a charge which can only be described as a piece of traditional o f Commons is not reckless, nor is it • revenue, and Sir Charles parsi cant. The House of sources of income monious. The d. gr pdr. Disraeli himself fully have been scrupu lously showed that the lowly gu e . ardauties on consumption h reduction of the revenub - and as has entailed no propor tionate loss to , to the risk of losing the incomeste,, it has lasted for ten years and has just been conceded for the eleventh. virtually _ The Chancellor of the , ze h es per himself can only be exonerated from the charge of en d an gering the reven ue b y the fact that he was spea ki n g for the constituencies, without having any definite theory to propose. The fallacy of representing opposite doctrines respecting taxation as combined attack's on the national income is at once far-fetched an d transparent. Some politicians denounce the income-tax —others would reduce the indirect duties ; but it is admitted on all hands that Parliament must choose between different suggestions, and cannot adopt all simultaneously. Mr. Disraeli and Si r Ch ar l es Wood affect to think that any * doubt whether the public burdens are fairly apportioned is equiva lent to a desire prematurely to shake them off. Equally unfounded was Mr. Disraeli's assumption of an antagonism between the respective advocates of reductions in the Customs and in the Excise. It is notorious that the desire to relieve the community from both classes of imposts has been ex pressed, and partly realized, by one an d th e same school of economists. The country gentlemen will be surprised to hear that they are the natural enemies of the Excise. It is in deed easy to understand why Lord George Bentinck may have professed a dislike to taxes on domestic industry. Whenever an Excise duty is imposed on malt, hops, or pa per, a corresponding impost is levied on the foreign product., which might otherwise enter into unfair competition with the home-made article. It would be highly convenient to Protectionists to remove the domestic duty while retaining the countervailing charge at the Custom-house ; and only a few days ago such a policy was advocated by the most de voted organ of the late Government. Bat economists who understand their principles reduce taxes for the benefit of consumers, and not to confer new monopolies on certain classes of produers. The supporters of the Ministry, to do them just ice, appeared to be honestly astonished when their leader reproached them by implication for their . supposed tendency to tamper with the Excise. The landowners and farmers may perhaps con trive to extract from the statement some prospect of future fiscal favours; but it is difficult to understand by what method these are to be bestowed. The Minister who expiates so fully on the success of recent reductions ca nnot be in earne s t w h en h e announces the intention of his partyisit to allow no f ur th er di m i nu ti o n of indirect duties. . clear that Mr. Di srae li is hostile to the income-tax, notwith standing the appeals to the prejudices to which that impost is subject. Ills assertion that a majority of the House last year called it in question is scarcely true even in the letter, and and not at all in Use spirit. Mr. Di s raeli hie supporters e_. _ • formed that majority by coalescing with Mr. Hume and with a section of the House professedly attached to the principle of direct taxation. The great party which carried all the reforms in the Customs and Excise has hitherto supported direct taxation; and it is not improbable that Mr. Disraeli may still continue, as at present, to avail himself of the suc cessful policy of his opponents. ADVERTISER. —People looked forward to last night, in the House of Conanons, with an anxiety far exceeding the interest with which the proceedings in that Assembly are usually regarded. The budget was to he produced immedi ately after the time for public business had arrived. Ac cordingly the House and galleries were, by that hour, seve rally crowded with psrsons on the tiptoe of expectation to learn the leading features of the financial scheme of the new Chancellor of the Exchequer. Nor can we wondee at the intense anxiety which was felt to become acquainted with the principal points in the Disraeli Budget. The new Chan cellor of the Excqequer has the reputation of being a bold, dashing, and even brilliant man. He has distinguished himself in various walks of life. He is a popular novelist, an expert Parliamentary debater, a man of no inconsiderable ori ginality as a politician, and one, moreover, who has acquitted himself, on the whole, in a very creditable manner since ne was raised to the rank of a Cabinet Minister. It would, there fore, have been surprising had not the public felt more than the average amount of anxiety to become acquainted, at the earliest possible moment, with the contents of the Disraeli Budget. And, if these considerations had not been sufficient to work public curiosity up to the proper pitch of intensity, the morning journal which is presumed to be the organ of the Conservative Cabinet yesterday dealt in some strange and mysterious speculations . as to what the budget might be expected to be. The impression which our contemporary sought to create in the public mind was, that the develop ments of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in unfolding his financial scheme, would be of a decidedly bold character, — so bold as to dazzle, if they did not startle, men of more common-place minds than the Right Honourable Gentleman himself. Well, the budget is now before the country; or rather the :Teed' of Mr. Disraeli is—a speech which tasted upwards of two hours in the delivery, and which was one of the most elaborate pieces of financial eloquence ever pro duced in the House of Commons. Prodigious was the ieurish of trumpets, and what entered? Tom Thumb? No; not even that. The budget of the Right Hon. Gentleman is one in name only. The thing itself is wanting. Canning's knife-grinder had no story to tell, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer has no budget to bring before the public. The difference between the knife-grinder and Mr. Disraeli is this —that the former did not profess to have any story to telt. He candidly confereed he had none. mot Co with the Chan cellor of the ExchOgner. He kept the expectation of the House wound up to the highest pitch, for more than two mortal hours, and all for the purpose of telling them that he had nothing to say —n o budget to bring forward —nothing to yb li ee a fao fi rr r te w d a on r ,eabyn Anythingda c a h r am e n n co e er o el o a propose, but to ask a vo t e of 2 00,000 / . for carry i ng on t h e T i suo o pf f r et nh t l h ee e l yE i x n rc c ih o d e m i cri e uu - le t or a t x for another n w ot as eve n n ev ley er Sir Charles Wood. The mountain in labour bringing fortlt a mouse, was not a paralle I case, because here we had a financial mountain in labour i t Or more than two terrible hours, without bringing forth anything at all. Dean Swift, when ridiculing the elaborate lectures' which professors of the sur gical art were in his day, as in our own, in the habit of giving on the most simple facts in surgery, remarked that one of those learned professors would take half an hour to convey the idea that a man's leg was fractfared, whereas the unfortunate man himself would stat,l the fact in four words— "My leg is broken." Mr. Disraeli ,'ltr outstrips these wordy gentlemen. He takes more than two hours to tell the House and the country, that he has nothing %whatever to communi cate. The author who wrote fifty page.l of a preface to prove that he did not mean to write a preface at t ‘ll, because no preface was necessary, was a very good type of ou r new Chancellor of the Exchequer. For ourselves we are not disappointed, be cause we expected nothing. We have ilot attached the slightest importance to the Disraeli Budget, though almost everybody else, for some time past, has been i n an agony of anxiety on the subject. We look on the ter. 'n of existence allotted to the Derby Ministry as one which will be ex ceedingly brief, and therefore any financial pr, - pets which the present Chancellor of the Exchequer may br.'ng forward will necessarily have to be overhauled by his s nccessor in office. But, besides that, we shall, within the s,`tort space of two or three months, have a new Parliament. And that Parliament will have a will and way of its own, i a refer ence to financial matters generally. It is to the new Legis lature that we look for an enlightened financial policy. • And if the electors in the approaching contests only single out men of intelligence, integrity, and patriotism, from the host of candidates soliciting their suff rages , th e y w ill th e . 'eV ensure financial measures creditable to the Parliament tnd beneficial to the country—measures calculated to give ad li tional stability to the credit of the nation at home al Id abroad. It is on such a Legislature that our hopes are cen tered,and not doubting that the intelligence and judgment of the constituencies will select such a body of men to represent thenee-itt the coming Parliament, we attach but little importance to the financial freaks of Mr. Disraeli, or any one else. To have brought forward any grand financial scheme—one difle:ing in many essential respects from the budgets of all preceding Chancellors of the Exchequer, at a time, and under the auspices of a Ministry who can scarcely yet be said to be warm in their situations, and at a time when Parliament is notoriously in the throes of dissolution —would indeed have been an act of surpassing boldness. It would have been more. It would have been an act of superlative folly. No man with a particle of judgment would ever entertain the idea, even for a moment. Mr. Disraeli urged 4 this consideration with a force which the House evidently felt. But what we complain of, and what the country will complain of, when the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman, without a budget, wings its way through all parts of the kingdom is, that he should have allowed the politic for weeks Past to' be in a state of confident expectation of something bold and dashing in the way of financial projects. It was in the confident expectation that Mr. Disraeli's budget would contain something extraordi nary, that Mr. Milner Gibson yielded to the Right Hon. Gentleman's urgent request to adjourn the debate on his motion for the remission of the taxes on literature until after his financial scheme should be before the House. What was this but a piece of downright deception? It was a most dishonest expedient. And why, besides, tantalise the House for upwards of two hours, when he did not mean to propose a single alteration in the existing position of the finances of the country? That was a gratuitous outrage on the House, and an unwarrantable waste of the public time. It isl to our minds so countervailing consideration that the greater part of Mr. Disraeli's speech was a disquisi tion on the benefits of free trade, and a eulogg►tutn on the enlightened financial policy of Sir Robert Peel. That was, on the contrary, an aggrava tion of the Right Honourable Gentlema n ' s conduct, - for it affords au additional proof to the many before given of the fact, that the Derby Ministry is a gigantic organized hypocrisy. The public has not forgotten -the public never will forget—the ferocious personal attaeks which this very Mr. Disraeli made on Sir Robert Peel during an entire session, solely because of his introduction of free trade measures. Nor will the fact ever escape the memory of the country, that Mr. Disraeli, and the other members of the Derby Goverment, traded solely on the political capital which they acquired by systematically assailing free trade, until the very hour that they got into office. And yet Hem Right Hon. Gentleman has now the indecency to come forward and proclaim, without a blush on his countenance, that the commercial and financial policy which he had thus fiercely attacked for years, and on the character of whose author ,he sysematically heaped the coarsest calumnies, is the most enlightened and beneficial policy which ever a Minister de vised! The force of hypocrisy and effrontery could no further go. POST.—Certainly, no person with only an ordinary ac quaintance with Parliamentary politics and party divisions, would have gathered from the mode in which the Chan cellor of the Exchequr was received by the House of Com mons last night, that he was listeping to a " provisional Minister," who was only tolerated because it was a recog nised fact that his powers were limited to oiling existing mac hinery, and his duty was confined to keeping things ru bbing on till a succes sor shall be read y t o take his plac.. So general, indeed, was the cheering which greeted the Minister i a l statement, that it was not easy to d ec id e b y which side of the House the budget and its appended ob servations were received with most favour: The House was masteryevidentl under an impression that they were listening to a in his craft, and persuaded, moreover, that he was confiding to them his inmost ideas of financial policy. ;the perusal of metaphysical We never get up from essays without feeling es if suddenly stuffed with our head had become r m as e p as i u t reless information, w hich, when we attempt to into a marvellously little comp g ass. It isP a r a c e i r c i o a u l s y , p h c o e l a o lapses me non, and something of the same sensation we must confess to having experienced ;in the heari ng o f M r. Di srae li' s s p ee ch We of last night. no conception, till we endeavoured to condense and analyse what we have got, that the Minister had only made some very just remarks on systems of taxa tion, and placed before the country an explanation of its financial condition, very simply, very clearly, and very con cisely. It must be' owned, that Mr. Disraeli fulfilled this part of his task in a manner which showed that he had quite made himself master of his w tbd h ect h ; t3 and it is evident, that whatever be the basis on proposes eventually to organise our fiscal system, the newC Chancellor perfectly comprehends the characteristics of the revenue w ith which he has to de a l, an d th e nature o f t h e resource s to which he can have recourse. As we anticipated in our article of the day before yesterday, the Budget for 1852-53 is simply provisional, and its purpose limited to carrying on the financial machinery till the Government has time to mature a scheme of a permanent character. The only feasible mode in which this could be effected was evidently by taking, as the Minister proposes, for the limited period of one year, a renewed lease of the income-tax ; and it was equally evident that, under existing circumstances, any attempt to siodi'y its provisions, or to introduce any new principle of assess ment or of levy, would have been unwise and ill-timed. This is comparatively plain sailing ; but there are difficul ties a head with which the Chancellor will have eventually to contend, of the most serious character, and he is wise to do his best to bring Parliament to a temper proper for their careful and unprejudiced consideration. We have ap plied to our present means of raising revenue the term anomalous. We have said that our existing fiscal system, if system it be, is full of anomalies, which present serious and complicated difficulties to a Chancellor of this Exchequer attempting the suggestion of a Budget which' is to have about it a character of permanency. The first great difficulty is, that, for many years now, the Budget, if not of each year, at any rate of each period of three years, has been essentially temporary in its character. This bas been the case ever since Sir Robert Peel, in 1842, undertook to cure the evils which the incompetence of his predeceseeers had created. Everybody must remember that time, the hapless Whig financiers, angling in the bottomless depths of a Pool of Despond for a Budget which they nevers_ catch, appealed in their despair for advice to their kern: rival, who stood by regarding their futile efforts with I will pre and confident contempt. "Call me in, andn they scribe," was the reply of the patient .taeddthnetiunteevitapobllie tician, who for years had quietly swatted result of the bungling Administratio_a..norfehisasoppseantieanfitsed, as certain of their ultimate wfitg the inevitable of his own power tocope h: Whigs brought sop difficulty. Hisprevisions were the linaneiil disorder of the ce called upon to undertake the so sutni f i t r e e d ; to T scheme of 1842, on Robert Peel, in 1812, lution of their ditiicultwieae! • The financial the faith a its limitation, in essentials, to three years, was agreed to. It can scarcely be necessary, in 1852, to enter upon an explanation of the details of this celebrated device. The idea of its eminent author was, by a remis s i on o f taxa tion in particular directions, to give such a stimulus to con sumption as to create an ultimate increase of revenue to an extent exceeding the amount then in deficiency, while the g ap necessarily consequent, at the moment, was to be filled up by the imposition for a limited 'period, of that income and property tax with which, after successive re newals, it has become the duty of Mr. Disraeli now to deal in 1852. Events justified Sir Robert Peel's a nticipations, and the result s h owe d t h at h e had not overes timatedthe elasticity of the revenve. At the expiration of the period which he had calculated would be sufficient for the re invigoration of the vital system, and for the creation of new blood requisite to restore it to its full powers of production, his expectations were fulfilled. The ordinary resources of revenue became equal to the provision for the ee_penditure of the country, and the extraordinary resource which had been, temporarily called in to its aid might hsye safely bees c•liweTlll