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

Venue, and that, within the merest trifle, the whole of that lam had been made up by the increased consumntion.— (Rear, hear.) But the Hon. Member for Huntingdon had !aid, that if we put into the pocket of any one 5/. every year, it Was no very great matter if at the end of ten years we re ceived back a present of 10/., or even 11. or 21. during the ti t"- The Hon. Gentleman seemed to think that that was a fLir representation of what had taken place. Bat was it so ? The lion. Member said, that since 1846 the Government had b ad 5 ,500,000/. of income-tax. But had the whole of that /outcome to credit? It had not. 41,000,000/. 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 (Mr. Carwwell), from which it appeared that the deficiency of the public income in 1812 !es no less than 3,979,000 e, while the income-tax imposed raided only about 5,600,0001., thus leaving only an avail able sum of 1,600,000/.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. T. BARING.---But that was only for one year. Mr. GLADSTONE. —But that was the first year of the s ystem. And then his Hon. Friend spoke of these great re dactions as if they were recently made; but the fact was , that the great bulk of these reductions were made in the earlier years of the series. The whole amou nt was 11,000,000 e odd, but it was found that 7,000,0001. out of the 11 ,000.000/. were reduced before 1845.—(Hear.) Then, if pia Hon. Friend would compute the period of the year during R etch these reductions had been in operation , he would find that this red uc ti on o f 7 , 000,0001. had been in ope ration dur ing 1845 - The income-tax, too, it must be remembered, did not at first come into play for the purposes of relief from taxatiou, except to a limited extent. But the whole of the reduction of 11.060,000/. in the elastic portions of the re venue had been replaced by the increase of the commerce and trade of th e country.—( Hear, hear.) In 1842, when the income-tax was imposed , th e revenue of the country 'Way 47 000,0001. In 1845, when the new commercial sys "oe had been in operation for three years, the ordinary re ve,ue of the country had so entirely recovered from th e e ffects of the reduction that it amounted, without the income tar; to a larger sum than in 1842.—(Hear.) In 1845, when Su R. Peel made his financial statement, he gave th e ... ` 4lBO the option. Ho said the income-tax had done its 'Work, and that the system of legislatioa connected with it ll:tight be abandoned. He gave the House their choicceobe tween either continuing th e income-tax, or stopping the neercial 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 Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exhequer) had, in justly disregarding any momentary advantage which he plight have gained by attempting to meet the wishes of one class of the community, or in giving a reduction of taxa• tion which the circumstances of the country did not justify hi m i n m a king, pursued a course which had entitled him to Public approbation. Nothing could be *plainer than that the connexion between our commercial and financial policy was such that Parliament could come to no decision upon the one without the other. 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 ay to our commercial policy which we expected from a new Parlia ment, the time would also have arrived to deal with our future financial policy.- (Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman 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 adopted, and 1 4 which he deserved every support, in supporting the re venue and credit of the country.-- (Hear, hear.) He en tirely agreed with the Hon. Member (Mr. Hume), that it WAS the duty of the House to see what remissions of taxation could be effected, but that it was not the duty tf the House to anticipate reductions in the expenditure 'which the finances of the country would not justify. He :!,a 1 sure that the House would rally round the Right Hon. e/augernan to repel any such demands, and to carry on the "aecee and credit of the country in an unimpaired, healthy, utd mind state until another Parliament should be in a con dition to give a full, fair, and impartial consideration to the 84h iect.—(Hear, hear.) % li r. BAILLIE said it appeared that the t otal loss to e revenue from the reductions alluded to had only been a li ttle more than 1,000,000/. [Mr. GLADSTONE —" No, only uy,ooo/. or 200i0001."] But toe Right Hon. Gentleman for- Lurest during that time the population had increased millions, and that there had arisen from this cause a niderable increase of consumption. For example, there „‘u been no reduction in the tea duty, but during the est ten ," 111 1 the amount received from the tea duties had increased we-third in amount.—(Hear, hear.) eitte WABLEY said that the Chancellor of the Exchequer shown how admirably the commercial policy of the coun 1Y had worked since 1842, and he admitted he deserved ?edit for having done so. But there were Members on his ' i ' s u a Opposition) side of the House who had through much ;et" consistently, zealously, and honestly supported that ` 1 9 7 -- (Hear, hear.) There was another party, no doubt euicere and as honest, which had vehemently condemned 4:at policy, and first and foremost among that party, and 0 4 e most eloquent of th em a ll, h e p l ace d th e Ri g ht Hon. Utleman.—(Cheers.) They had now brought the Right Vit ue gentleman to acknowledg e , w ith a can d our th a t did eetri infinite credit, that all that they (the Opposition) had eetti doing had been right, and th a t a ll t h at h e an d hi s party ZAti been doing bad been wrong. Wo u ld to G o d Si r R o b er t reel had been alive, to listen to the el a b orate an d pro f oun d nnage paid to him by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in j,, e exposition of the facts that he had submitted to th e °tele to-night.— (Hear, hear.) Homage of a more exalted ir erecter, or more calculated to increase the admiration of . 4 . 1, country for the memory of that great statesman " 4 never made either in a senate or any other assembly. Hear, hear.) The Honourable Gentleman ( Mr. T. te iV i 4), it was said, was to have been the Chan k,s"r of the Exchequer of the present G overnment; but it ;Mired from the objections he had made that the country 14 (1111 d not have gained much from him, because be highly ap -11,11.°.„ed of the do-nothing policy of the present Chancellor of i 4 °- tachequer, and the country would therefore have had E a t hat Hon. Gentleman a do-nothing Chancellor of the s ei kesluer. The Hon- Gentleman maintained tha t the agri tttieral, colonial, and shipping interests were suff erin g , and '0 would do nothing for them. 'I he Chancellor of the in n e eequer, after having marshalled and re-marshalled his ah 7. gave the word "As you were !" He had, indeed, flea O wed out something for the future, but he (Mr. Wakley) ne enot like the shadow, and fancied he should like the sub 7;e less.—(A. laugh.) The Right Hon. Gentleman se.zu‘roitichreet taxation, but was not favourable to direct te e Z t u• Now, he (Mr. Wakley) infinitely preferred direct the When the people were directly taxed they knew eirecieect extent to which they were robbed; but when .in te b la zes were levied on articles of general consumption, te e erevernreent accumulated an enormous revenue, and t?whPeeopwleoulsdcareely knew that they were robbed at all. ask of the Right Hon.. Gentleman was that ool d (1111 d Pursue that odious phantom no further. He htlit as . E tre him that he was mistaken as to the unpopu -1418 Z k o .. f a property-tax.—(Cheers.) What was unpopular Plc+ saelo" income-tag, which taxed the fruits of industry in i n h* • P r nPOrtion as alized property and also the manner hia,: v u o - e l r il . the law was c re arried out.—(Hea , r, hear.) From the !laved, to which the Income-tax Commissioners had be linpoet 1 t might be supposed their desire was to get rid of the htlee_ e 1 .1 tormenting the people until tt became intole eim „for torment them they did in the most unjust manner ; to (I:,,the income-tax were continued, it would be necessary e terte r l e l ► 4 Berne means for relieving the people from the uor nin g processes to which they were subjected by these iss ioners.—(Hear, hear.) kstei ie .W - WILLIAMS complained that the Chancellor of the 460 0 finer had reduced the surplus of 2,100,000/. to *447, 1•, and did not propose any reduction o f t axation. He deb t ` 4 ,l2 : direct his attention to the interest of the unfunded Me n ' e euieth was at the rate of 21 . 5 5. 7 d. per cen t., while %a e, 111 the City, upon the same terms, only obtained three w r ° Per cent. The present premium on Exche q uer- Right ass 150 Per cent. on the amount of interest, and the 130,0010 n. Gentleman, by reducing the interest, might add si r `. 4 1 . Ino_re to his surplus of 460,000/. rie ea ,."• TIRELL thought there was no reason for the g100e13,."°4 oe1 3 ,."°4 of Hone Gentlemen opposite, for the budget was Cle w t„ Provisional one.—(Cleeers and laughter ) The th e c e so euor of the Exchequer had said that the finances of eaid o th ntry were in a prosperous condition, but he bad never tw o „at particular classes were not suffering distress. The things were not at all incompatible.—(Hear.) tes Vouel SIBTHORI' confessed that he had experienced iti",-,iderable disappointment at the statement which the e s sut Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer z_l?lttde to the House, and he was fully justified in cherish ;lthat "glee disappointment in consequence of the cheers that frem the opposite side : Timeo Danaos et done ferentes." not place any reliance on the admiration which -;',9 Would eY had sh own w i th regard to the statement o f t h e Righ t non. Prosperity ofth Gentleman.eo He (Colonel Sloth ) denied the orp had made in untry,_... (Laughter.) From inquiries he honour of various eensulta e 'e ro vnicial towns which he had the he had ventured to sipsp was fully justified 'en the opinion by the intimation that theai—(Hear.) He was disappointed He would almost say it was ne° a retax was to be continued. and of faith to continue it; he would protest against it, whenever he had an oppor tunity ofvoting he would vote as strongly as he could against it—(10 14 ) It was said at fi t r h s e t ;Teco tit was only to be in t hre e oation for • a short ear, and were three years, and ain d i n n o a,m t va s t ay m h ? o , w long it hre years, and one year, and the 'Wee to continue Ruaticus expectat dum deflaat sir. Labitur et labetur in omne volubilis comparing the ep eee r with the the Hon. ee e tr- REYNOLDS said, p e appeare speech o f "e,, d Gallant Gentleman. who spoke last, t he Bon. Gentleman who preceded him, there di:n a t t ? be perfect harmony on the other side of the Him:: Gen tleman on that (the Opposition) side of the House, Free traders, had received the speech with much satisfaction, a 'ney had. a right to do. Now, he recollected reading a Pesch of the Chancellor of the Exchequer delivered before 8o the Reynolds) had the honour of a seat in the House, then taking the Right Right Hon. Gentleman, h /t ° , l Baronet the Member for Tamworth to task, said he th e l:found the Whigs bathing and had run away with 4 - ' l. °talus. That observation excited muc Hon. Gentleman time, but it appeared to him that the Right Hon. ei le ' e rman found the late Chancellor of the Exchequer . v`ng► and run away with his budget. The Right o n. Gentleman had put his f igu res in consecutiv e order, pd aS far as that went his statement was unexceptionable. e praise of it stopped ther f e • and he must say that ti lith e , :te d u ih elt is z e a ci s hrhermiLrkeraebasleed ' r two qualities, that it °taxation. He appeare.d pee ll a a je followed the pathway tracked out for himhyHohn". leetleeenB.,"l. Now, it occurred to him that the Right -,erveet the might have diminished taxation, and have re 'he r ,„..wee labouring classes without doing any injury to for C h veseesors of property. There was an item of 650,000/. Ca, - e Murderous warfare carried on . against savages at the ent re 'b ei ' t he accounts of which no Christian could read with- Rarnu that his country should carry on such a dee eL rear, hear.) Then the Right Hon. Gentleman p ut atei nee ° o .oool, for th e militia. He (Mr. Reynolds) had ab - Mie ti ee from voting on the question raised with respect to the e hl lead also those with whom he acted; but he should llish,`",e_vote against the proposition in all its stages, and the tyclig'sitton. Gentleman perhaps might not be so sure of car ttee o f . 4 fteh - aIL , Before.the Easter recess he had given 130- keitutnneStiOn to the Secretary for Ireland, whether he t Uree s 0 . "!. brbeg in a Bill this session to place the manufac thfic, home -Made spirits on an equal footing with the ma 110e. 'Alorers of foreign and colonial spirits. But the Right pedin.‘enotlernan the Chancellor of the Exchequer put a eae e 'Je 4 le the mouth of the Chief Secretary, and said that his att e'n belonged to his department, and he should reserve had i is s !rer , till he was making his financial statement. He 'eric a ' c l!ed to the speech, and had not beard a single Ben cleeetioee that question, and he now begged to repeat . the sa y Of t 7,nlyid formerly put. There was one thing he might en to Right Hon, Gentleman's speech—it appeared to ce entr uave s a vexed question at rest. Farmers in the With ill ightfPut on their spectacles and look at it, but, they wo the magnifying powers those spectacles possessed, tee, e ti old not discover any passage holding out the pro ther. TrotectiOn to one class of the community over ano other _IL' Uley wereto go t o th e cou ntry, it must be on some Vonidl e n . but lie hoped it would not be a cry at all, but e. B R a sweak as the muling of an infant. Atgely eeeeT could honestly say that he participated very eyeeee that general satisfaction which had been expressed geriti;e a tiee- to the matter of the speech of the Right Hon. hp man the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He thought, Weeltil r ' though the Right Hon. Gentleman had been sts ".1 9154 S 11414 El f 41161 1 4. ma - error which bis SON, Hon. Member ought also to bear in mind that his Right Hon. Friend had spoken on this question with reference to one point only—the consumption of 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 1852, 5,207,678 cwt. In 1851, 5,093,350 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 th e 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 far from being prosperous, were in a ruinous state. He had in his possession two petitions, ono from Ja maica, the other from British Guiana, telling a tale of sorrow and distress, and widely different in spirit from 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, be must inform the Honourable Member for Manchester that he was no convert to the policy of cheap sugar regard less of the ruinous effects which it must have ou our own colonies.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. LABOUCHERE 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 importetion 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 not 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 had 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 bad that night heard. He had listened to that speech with no surprise; for ho 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 would recollect that that conclusion had not 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 presented 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 arose 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 from 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 alone there were no less than 800 surcharges. He believed the tax had produced 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 proper tionably much more than their richer neighbours. He 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 p ro p er ty c ould be levied upon a fair principle he should not object to it ; and 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 the 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 to bring forward any painful allusions to former opinions ; but cer tainly the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman was in fa. your 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.—(Renewedcheering 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 had represented. He (Lord it Grosvenor) had never presented a petition against the tax, but petitions complaining of the manner of its imposition and assessment —(Hear, hear)— an d he was persuaded tha t they preferred the tax, if fairly direct taxation.— (Hear, hear.) Still , a s to the Customs , imposed and assessed , to the increase of in -20,000,000/. might be levied, and yet a large remission of taxation might be secured.—(Hear, hear.) Take the article of tea. Competent parties, su pported by the statistics of M r . Porter, contended that, the duty on tea could be reduced to Is. a pound, and that the revenue derived from the duty would net, after a year or two, be lessened.—(Hear, hear.) He never drank tea himself, but one of his labourers con sumed half a pound a week, on which he paid Is. duty, so that this labourer;with perhaps as many pounds a year wages as he (Lord R. 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 respect to the Excise duties, their evil effects were a dmitted on all hands—(Hear, hear) —interfering with trad e and manufac tures, and entailing most vexatious restrictions , involving also an amount of texation four times the amount paid into the `treasury.—(Hear, hear. He believed, howev er, that the Excise duties mi g ht be safely reduced if direct taxation were extended.—(Hear, hear.) If the poorer classes paid more than they ought, let them be relieved.—(Hear, hear.) But let there be a principle in taxation.—(Hear, hear.) There were other sources of revenue open to the Right Hon. Gen tleman ; for instance, th e l egacy d u ty, not now paid by landed property.--(Hear, hear.) Let the Right lion . Gen tleman apply his pow er f u l i nte ll ec t t o thi s subject, and re lieve the people from the Excise duties.—(Hear, hear.) H e should be glad to conc ur i n th e mot i on f or 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. lIODGSON 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 41. 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. EWART 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 had 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 really sound one, and one which he believed the people were beginning to appreciate. Mr. SANDARS bore his testimony to the able, lucid, and satisfactory statement of the Chancellor of the 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, he 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. —(Hear.) At the same time he hoped it would be extended to incomes of: 501. a year, and that all who paid it would have a vote.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. VILLIERS could not help expressing his admira tion of the able, just, and very lucid statement of the Right lion. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer.— (Hear, hear.) The importance of the present discussion was, that they were considering the burdens of the State together with the prosperity of the community.—(Hear.) He ( Mr. had elu been d hinl Villiers) had been for a long time endeavouring to establish a close connexion between them, but heretofore could not a _ t . i .,e 4 er 'l e ed• He hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite con• of direct for indirect bestowedelf rewarded h by i m the o from weed l sidesof approbationof the lo t na h that The ceuutry was now prospering because of the substitution have become a conve rt to taxation. The Right. opinion, seemed to t . n. Gentlemanand there fore should be encouraged in his new . belief. The more they increased direct taxation, and relieved the industry of the country, the greater would be th they would have to tax.—(Hear, hea r .) amount of property Mr. FREWEN said the result of ) free trade th r ow 15,000 acres of land, i n the vicinity_ofHastwas to o n the hands of the proprietors. There w as one itatementmina by his Right Hon. Friend that evening, in which he (Mr. Frewen) could not agree. The Right Hon. Gentleman had stated that the duty which he expected to receive this year from hops would be 150,000/. less than that received last year. Now the exact difference between the two amounts would be 188,0001. Mr. HUDSON was astonished to have heard the. Noble Lord the Member for Middlesex assert that hi s constituents were in favour of direct taXattell. VA (Dir t klucl49o TI4E 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 he 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 right 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, hear) —but OR one getting as much as possible, by any means whatsoever, 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;, 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 among 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. The Right Hon. Gentleman had shown that the result of taking off 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/. in taxes during the last ten years, had pro duced so very advantageous 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 th e ev il s w hi c h our miserable fiscal system of past times had 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- . portatiospeaking' mated indirect taxation, the Right Honourable Gentle man inti nof articles from foreign countrie s. In s p eakin mated his opinion that the people were impatient, and he (Mr. Bright) thought the Right Hon. Gentle man s p oke 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 he believed, though many people in 1842 were exceedingly exasperated when the income-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 might 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 go into that at present. It was an exceedingly difficult question, and he did not believe it was 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 was ma naged. When the tax was levied in 1842, the Income-tax Commissioners were directed to be chosen from the Land-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 on 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 leasing 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 he (Mr. Bright) hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman would succeed in converting him (Sir J. Peking ton) to the wisdom of the existing policy in reference to the sugar duties,—(Laughter.) At all events he trusted the Right Hon. Gentleman would not 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 if he was in the confidence of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer betore 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 not 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 460,0001. The Right Hon. Gentleman said he assigned 350,000/. for the militia. He (Mr. Bright) was glad that the question of paying for the militia had come before the House. There 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 for 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. for the defence of the country, a sum which 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-half 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 150,0001. 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 to the whole industry of the country. principle lf the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been a little more coura geoue, and had shaken off the Militia Bill, and removed the hop duty among others, he would give much greater satisfaction to his (DI:. Bright's) side of the House. Again, he would ask the House whether 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 militia—would not have been infinitely better for the country.— (Hear.) The fact was, that the militia question was a great hoax, which had been played on the Noble Lord l ately at the head of the Government. Some inflated letters which doubtless appheeaer been donthesubj t e o ct in the Time s newspaper had Gentleman represented the Noble Lord as the expres sion of public opinion, and he fell into the trap.— (A laugh.) admi rable one. He (Mr. case before himvfaad Bright) thought the speech of the Right Hon. But the Right him, the It was Chancellor of the Exchequer was an admi .the speech of a man who, having a great dition of the people, Gentleman had not improved the con what he could to make the best of it. Schedule D on thenor had he modified the operation of Hon. Gentleman's to that; but he (Mr. Zi t le great osti mass of the community. The Right had been unfortunately adverse his (Mr. Bright's) side of the forcible exponent of the opinions 9 -was i long held by gentlemen on glad to find in him a 4ww e i r, and that, on looking at ofna.ceGoefntiPetnarA hail as 'l ament and —a the country, to they h had done before the facts bearing on those the courage to place before it the policy he had so deliberately h st i a m nd t f ile orth ßi i g n ht th il e Sir J. PAKINGTON did not intend to , adopted. Member through the great variety ee topics follow the Hon. touched upon. He .had, however, been pointedly he had referred to by the Honourable Member with reference to the duty be w shed to make one observation on sugar, and Hon. Member had implied that with re gard to it. The t he (Sir J. become on. a convert on Pakingtou) had the subject of the because his Right Hon. Friend the Chancellee nf sugar duties, d "tted the remarkable ext t • en to which. the Exchequer had a mi f sugar had been stimulated since 1845. the consumption o for him to point out that, in deal- It was hardly necessary . at empire that, various various in with the affairs of this e gr 'clered ; and he thought the general interests to be considered; admit that there were other Honourable Member would hich the Government in terests besides that of consumers v. tion of the sugar were bound to consider on the ques duties. They were bound to con sider the interest of t he n. Member colonies, and also a question—which the Ho the estion of ought to be the last to disr e g ard qu 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 the manufacture 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, and that in Germany the quantity of beet-root sugar had increased to an enormous amount. Tile 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.— ( Hear, hear.) That was a fact which ought to be kept in view, and the Hon. Gentleman ought to consider when he appealed to him so triumphantly, whether, looking to the general bearing of the question, the increase in the consumption of sugar in this eeuntry wa4 altogether a s ubject of cougrattilation. 'The LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, 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 louderit in their complaints, as also most strenuous in. their opposi.tion.—(Hear, hear.) Under the free-trade policy diminished, and he felt surprised that ranybod y ents had should undoubtedly b e 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?-(Rear, hear.) In the shipping interest there was undoubted suffering, but he trusted that matters would mend. The country, however, had . cOnfidence in the present Government, and desired to give thein time for the develop ment of their policy. 'What he (Mr. Hudson) 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. e we a eo x lDul ec rdr : 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. Ha (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had received deputations from 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 WORTH deemed the statement of the Chan cellor ear.) —(Hear , the Government a degree of popularity xchequer most satisfactory, and thought it cal culated to strengthen them much out of doors. Mr. C. BRUCE said, that after having listened with the greetest 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 latge 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. ALCOCK 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 chan g e places; by which enterprise and disaffection occasiona ll y u ndergo 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 how thoroughly the speaker had studied his antagonists. pillory, offendin g devil no sheet an d We have long said that the o nl y wa y to exti nguish Pro tection was to put it on the Treasury b e nch , where it would be obliged to master the facts of the q uestion and commit itself to a definite policy. That w as the p rocess we saw last night,wax!t wax-tapers, s n , no stool no w h o i f p repentance, ever expelled n from any frail nature so thoroug hl y as the proud but arduous task which, d evo l v ed last night on th e t Protectionist chief. The office 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 were, 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 else alone for the present. But besides that this is the best, and really the only practicable course, yet never was " nothing" better done. Mr. Disraeli gave to his nothing a substance, a spirit, and an originality that are often missed is the most elaborate and gratuitous propositions. Probably nine-tenths of the House, and all the more sensible of them, knew that the only course was to continue the present pro visional arrangements, leaving to the new Parliament the difficult task of amending and perpetuating the income-tax if it pleased. But those nine -tenths must have left the House much more thoroughly convinced on that point than before. If it is the business of poets and indeed of all other writers proprie communia dicere, Mr Disraeli certainly made this year's income-tax his owe, though only a repetition of last year's. Instead of the brute sense that we must have the income tax for another year, like the sure presentiment of a beating that even a dog might feel under certain circumstances, we have now rational satisfaction on this point. The celebrated formula of" three courses" was brought to boar on the ques tion. There are three possible methods of filling deficiency under which we are suffering b y t h e lapse of the income-tax. income-tax. First, new duties on customs • ,secondly, new ex cise duties; thirdly, new direct taxes. Of these the two first were disposed of by relating the history of the war waged aga inst them during the last ten erY years. The unpopularity of the direct taxes was ill ustrated by the repeal of the win dow duty last year ; and the only form of direct tax, the re newal of which would be tolerated for even income-tax, to which we are brought bythisone year, is the ex haustion. The proposal was s simple and method of o . vious that had it been announced, or even intimate earlier . in the speech, I we cannot answer for the effect on the interest of the re• mainder, but Mr. Disraeli's own literary practice in an other sphere has taught him to reserve his climax. So till the very last moment, till the hand was almost on seven o'clock, it was not perfectly • --- y certain but that heemporary would conclude —as a morning cont in formed its readers that h e would conclude—" with a motion that the surplus revenue shall be appropriated to ways and means." He did co ncl ude with precisely - - the same resolution as Sir Charles Wood last year, and though the speaking went on, the House of Common s carried by acclamation the income tax, then and there ax, with all its oppres sions and inequalities, for anothe r evidently applied himself to his taak Year. Mr. Disraeli had with the determination to do it thoroughly; and we show the pains and self.denial it must haved not be doing justice to mit that he has done his work well. His cost if we did not ad and state of our revenue, of the temper His review of the sources the difficulties of the financier, of the taxpayer and position and prospects, and of the f our present financial set tled before the permanent renewal questions to be is so perspicuous and agreeable , that of the income-tax, mend it to such of our younge r a that we can com desire, with a moderate expenditurend our fairer readers as get up the finances of this country. of trouble and time, to The figures are enough and not too many . The R ight Hon. ry G com mand, but judiciously tbrebore entl em an had more at with a load too g reat fo r the memo encumber his speech h e arers. We are bo un d to add theft or attention of his there an exception of no great at, importancew ith only here and agree in his view s, as much as weadmire, we cannot but the manner in which he expressed them. Perhap s i ns isted toe much o n the large exemptions should say that he and limited range of the inhabited house duty at wh ic h we purchased the re * al a proof of the cost in fact the mission of the win dow duty, when two duties—that repealed and that substituted — hav e much the tions and much the same range. Nothso, can b besame aster ex t e h m a P n Mr . Disraeli's remarks on the dangerous tendency of continually remitting an indirect taxation which falls upon all, and Y sup plying its place with a direct taxation which is only toler able because it is made to fallon a few. But itremains to be seen whether in fact it is practicable to keep indirect taxation in a country which is always requiri uP facilities and new outlets for its industry; and _, . n e f new of direct taxes being substituted, it i' s 4 eth , ie l i rl f e he t event practicable them on any except the wefalthier, more responsible, levy "come-at-able" class o persons. more This i$ indeed, the great financial problem of tie! age ; and if AL.. t , Disraeli, with the assistance of the Committee! now satin,. taxation as 5 upstairs, can sueceed in making direct fair, as universal, as palatable, and as productive indir ect above the taxes, he will have solved a problem evidently genius of either Pitt, Peel, or Wood. HERALD.—No one w ill from this time er thepraise deny to the Chancellor of the Excheqn . of candour. If to political opponent be a virtu' do justice to a l of th' e, theme has the House. f Commons seen a disp ay t . is virtue m strik ing than it has witnessed for some time or i 3 likely soon to witness again. To his predeceSsore_Fl office, last night, in Mr. Israeli e e the development of his budget' h e) a 8 unusually paned Sir om Sir complimentary ; the p , __,, in . Charles Wood wanted when in office, he has touuu a 11 his successor. He may congratulate himself that so we -timed a compliment has been paid him, not merely by an °PPebent, but by one of great acuteness and ability ; not.only on the spur of the moment, when hasty excitement, like an after dinner speech, gives a deeper admiring afternguage which cooler blood is apt to condemn, but some weeks of h tht A study and reflection. After much has au. calculation, the Chancellor of the Exchequer resolved that it is wiser to let well alone. For the present, at all events, be will conduct the finances of the country on the same principles as his predecessors, wisely preferring to than, endure inconveniences for a time by meddling with the present arrangements , on so short a warning and with so little time, introduce confusion, when he only de.. signed a remedy for existing evils. or, by inefficient changes, create mischief, when his sole intention was amelioration. If any disappointment be felt, as perhaps always will be felt where expectations have been excited, a little reflection will convince the country that no other course was open to the Government, as certainly none ether was warranted by prudence. Mr. Disraeli has at once boldly and frankly avowed his incapacity to re-adjust taxation until he shall have had more experience and more time to master the bearings of the present system.: No man can within the space of six weeks devise means for the adjustment of diffi culties, nor can any means be inaugurated without interfer ing with the commercial arrangements of the country. No genius can play with surplus and deficiency as rhe torical figures. In the present state of the nation. it would be most unwise to kindle a fire by a new scheme of taxation, or jeopardise the present returns of the , revenue h -Y -any new propositions which might furni§li. gleans for excitement, and MA. Y wake the most powerful and the most violent of popular pre judices and passions. Mr. Disraeli proposes, therefore, to leave things as they are for one year more, to give the mea sures and financial arrangements of the late Ministry another year of grace, to s ee w h a t elastic power th ere i s i n the country in recovering from the effects of such reductions in the taxation as have characterised the last ten years. In this he is not entirely a free agent. In 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, introduced into this country, has been continuous; the repeal of the Excise has been carried to its utmost limit. No alteration is therefore possible in either of these directions. From touching the third great source of revenue, the 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 the 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 bear 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 tbat which is anticf patad." Its doom, therefore, in the judgment of the Chan cellor of the Exchequer, is fixed; it has no 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 moment, 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 are more urgent 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 principles-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 he 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 what his own shoulders, but also what theshoulders 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 taining the maxims by which they ought to be guided, 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 speech, 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 be 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 ! 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 f-s. "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 oar, showing in detail and by figures how well that policy had worked -exhibiting a glowing picture of the benefits of the very policy his party 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, trom this delieate 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 heading of 660,000/. 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 reduction 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 48,983,5001. 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 free trade has been accused of bringing down upon the heads of the country party and their dependents. Mr. Disraeli truly characterises the national prosperity as " great and sound ;" but, on-the other hand, this prosperity has been achieved by the depression, and out of the pockets, of one particular class. What is the extent of this heart rending depression? To what amount has free trade damni fied the agricultural interests? As they also share in the general prosperity, what balance will go to the account of " ruin"-when their savings in consequence of the cheapn of provisions and of other advantages that free trade has loss tended to them in common with others-is put ag of income represented by 150,000/. in sevenpencetlis lied to pay that is but a small price to pay even if they haye ? national it (which is not the case) for " great and sound" Surely that prosperity. If that is all the harm free trade has d on e, it has been an unalloyed benefit. But if the fincaaasuceial s tat e - ments of Mr. Disraeli were calculat ed to m ion us . t e l x n- - pointment, other portions of his baranstese t In cite unmitigated surprise and no little gra In deed, altogether the speech addressed last night to the House of Commons by the Chancellorof the Exchequer with m ingled feelings of will be read throughout the country wonder and dismay by the followers whom he has hitherto led, and of triumph on the part of those to whose p. There and his adhesionere and policy he has at length given ipitiable than that of th e never was a sight more ludicr - ously. Ministerial ranks yesterday evening during the elaborat e oration of their chosen chief. For twhoavminogrtatlhehioruproslitthiceayl had to endure the protracted p teeth extracted one by one, For the last six amidaithoefcheers and laughter those who sat opposite to them.years the bemoaning the Country Party, as Mr. Disraeli romantically dubbed them, have been clamouring against the reduction e i l o o n qu o en u t u ly st b o de em w o as st calculated to bring on foreign articles of consumption, the ruin which the system of tree trade on our colonial possessions. t. in every cabal and loudest in every denuncia ion has been the man who now occupies the post of Finance Minister. Yet, ere two months of office h ave ro ll e d over his head, this very m an rises in his place and volunteers the most startling and conclusive evidence of the entiro 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 reel, and pertinaciously thwarted in op- iB2. position to Russell. 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 gradual 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 Custom 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 tinck, who sincerely desired to abrogate all such internal taxes —and his own present resolution to maintain every one of them. The third great branch of national income Mr. Disraeli carefully reserved for the last; al though by a sort of Quixotic temerity he chose to lavish upon it in the earlier portion of his speech a peculiarly emphatic meed of reprobation. We allude to the income-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, in his opinion, was at all likely to mend it; and as fur 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 who w ere d ece i ved by his mystical talk and conjuror's tricks. 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 tt?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 =wed 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 would have volunteered sach confessions as his speech of last night con 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, and the 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 was inse 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,!he 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 et 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 dwelt upon. Mr. Disraeli must, however, have felt himself in a singular position when be 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 309/. 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, i n d ee d, 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 640,000/., and the Kafir war will require at least 200,000/., in addition to the 460,000/. already voted. The militia is to cost 350,000/., to which must be added the in crease in the army estimates. About 300,000/. 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 460,000/. 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 sounding pe riods he really told them nothing. Half an hour would have sufficed to read the tables of receipt and expenditure for 1851, and to state that, with a few specified exceptions, the same figures would serve for the ensuing year. Almost every pro position contained in the speech, beyond these simple facts, was either unmeaning, irrelavent, or erroneous. Perhapssel is not too much to say that the just denunciationc of fiscal exemptions in general, and especially of those which theaccooomly pany Sir Charles Wood's house-tax, furnishestheE 1 1 entertains a single sound opinion as proof we possess that the Chancellor to showed that the finance. In his exordium he elaborately i ts s teps by in creasings or the Excise. In the next of the prin x c n ip h l e e q s n o er f come-tax was oppressive House woeuitlhdetnotthebecoinatcolimned .to retrace . and unpopular, and that ifications suggested by ' would render place, he alleged that th t e he in mod eminent actuaries Schedules A., 8., and C. Schedulecomplain of the i c m o n p n r Il e d x e i o n n t 1 with these a t a npopuicshoproceeded a a to a w rea diness of the House to tamper aswithwek enough to reiterate the branches of the reve nue, and Sir Charles Woo d a charge which can only be described as a piece of traditional cant. The House of Commons is not reckless, nor is it pani risk Chancellorof monious. The great sources of income have been scrupu lously guarded. Mr. Disraeli himself fully showed that the reduction of duties on consumption has entailed no propor income-tax, it has lasted for ten years, and has just been propor tionate loss to the revenue; and as to T t h h e e the fact that he was • elf can only be exonerated t the he Exchequer h.uns ya:ernicengdedfor the eleventh.. h the revenue nerated from the charge virtually spu id ag for the constuenereys, 'without having any theory to propose. The fallacy of representing definite respecting taxation as combined °wood would ti c hd t doctrines d e n s ua national income is at once far-fetched reduce the indirect duties; but it is admitted an d transparent. Some politicians denounce the income-tag on all hands that Parliament must choose between different opposite attacks —others suggestions, and cannot adopt all simultaneously. Mr. Disraeli and Sir Charles Woodaffect 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 between the resp ec ti ve 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 and the . 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 un d ers t an d w h y 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. But 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 justice, 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 Ware 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 cannot be in earnest when he announces the intention of his party to allow no further diminution of indirect duties. Nor is it clear that Mr. Disraeli is hostile to the income-tax, notwith- standing theapp ea l s t o th e p re j u di ce s to which that impos t is subject. Hi s asser ti on th a t a ma j or ity of the House last year called it in ques tion is scarcely true even in the letter, u pporters and not at all in th e spirit. Alr. Disraeli and his s formed that majority by coalescing with Mr. Hume and with that Mr. eupppisorrateledi a section of th e H ouse pro f esse dly a tt ac h ed to the principle of direct t axa ti on. Th e grea t p ar t y which carried all the direct reforms taxation; a x in a t t i h o e n C ; u a s n t d o m its i and oExcise`tim prabl hitherto,improbable that, may still continu e , as at present, to avail himS If o f th e suc cessful policy of his opponents. ADVERTISER —People looked forward" to /aSt night, in the House of Commons, with an anxiety far exceeding the interest with which the proceedings in that Assembly "are usually regarded. The budget was to be produced immedi ately after the time for public business had arrived. Ise cordingly the House and galleries were, by that hour, seve rally crowded with parsons on the tiptoe of .ekpectation to learn the leading features of the financial scheme Of file new . Chancellor of the Exchequer. Nor can we wonder 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 hold, dashing, and even brilliant man. He has distinguished himself in various walks of life. lle is a popular novelist, as 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 he 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 expectedto 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 speech of Mr. Disraeli is—a speech which lasted upwards of two hours in the delivery, and which was one of the most elaborate pieces of financial eloquence ever pro duced hi the House of Commons. Prodigious was the flourish 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 tell. He candidly confessed he had none. Not so with the Chan cellor of the Exchequer. 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 —no budget to bring forward—nothing to propose, but to ask a vote of 200,0001. for carrying on the Kafir war, and a renewal of the income-tax for another year ! Anything more supremely ridiculous was never before done by a Chancellor of the Exchequer—not even by Sir Charles Wood. The mountain in labour bringing forth a mouse, was not a parallel case, because here we had a financial mountain in labour for 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 hourto convey the idea that a man's leg was fractured, whereas the unfortunate man himself would State the fact in four words— "My leg is broken." Mr. Disraeli far 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 pages of a preface to prove that he did not mean to write a preface at all, because no pref ace was necessary, was a very good type of our new Chancellor of the Exchequer. For ourselves we are not disappointed, be cause we expected nothing. We have not attached the slightest importance to the Disraeli Budget, though almost everybody else, for some time past, has been in an agony of anxiety on the subject. We look on the term of existence allotted to the Derby Ministry as one which will be ex ceedingly brief, and therefore any financial projects which the present Chancellor of the Exchequer may bring forward will necessarily have to be overhauled by his successor in office. But, besides that, we shall, within the short space of two or three months, have a new Parliament. And that Parliament will have a will and way of its own, in 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 suffrages, they will thereby ensure financial measures creditable to the Parliament and beneficial to the country—measures calculated to give addi• tional stability to the credit of the nation at home and. 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 them in 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 difieiing 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 ,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 public 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 is! to our minds 110 countervailing consideration ,that the greater part of Mr. Disraeli's speech was a disquisi tion on the benefits of free trade, and a eulogiuna on the enlightened financial policy of Sir Robert Peel. That was, on the contrary, an aggrava tion of the Right Honourable Gentleman's conduct, for it affords an 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 attacks 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, tr aded solely on the political capital which they acquired by'systematicaUy assailing free trade, until the very hour that they got into office. come d y e t th e Right Hon. Gentleman has now:the inde cenc y to forward and proc laim, without a blush on his countenance, that the commercial an d financial policy which he had thus fiercely attacked for years, and on the char ac t er of whose author he sysemat i ca lly heaped the coarsest ca lum nies, is the most en li g htened and ben eficial policy which ever a Minister de , I vised! The force of hypocrisy and effron tery 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 listening to a " provisional Minister," who was only tolerated because it was a recog nised fact that his powers were limited to oiling existing machinery, and his duty was confined to keeping things rubbing on till a successor shall be ready to take his place. So general, indeed, was the cheering which greeted the Ministerial statement, that it was not easy to decide by which side of the House the budget and its appended ob litshteantinhg serva tions were received wit h most favou r , ' The House wa s evidently under an im p ression that they were to a master in h is craft, and persuaded, moreover, was confiding to them his inmost ideas of financial policy.e We never get up front ',the perusal of metaphysical essa ys without feeling as if our head had become suddenly stuffed with measureless information, which, when we attempt to gr asp it into a marvellously little compass. It i practically, collapses 3a curious phenome non, and something of the same sensation we must confess to having experienced on the hearing of Mr. Disraeli's speech of last night. We had no conception, till we endeavoured to condense and analyse what we have got, th a t th e Minister had only made some very the ow remarks on systems of taxa tion, and placed before th 3 financial condition, very country an explanation of its It must be ow simply, very clearly, and very con cisely.ned, that Mr. Disraeli fulfilled this part of his task in a manner which showed that he had quite made himself master of his subject ; and it is evident, that whatever be the basis on which he proposes eventually to organise our fiscal system, the new Chancellor perfectly comprehends the characteristics of the revenue with which he has to deal, and the nature of the resources 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 modify 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 plild 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 the Exchequer attempting the suggestion of a Budget which is to have about it a character of permanency. The brat 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 has been the case ever since Sir Robert Peel, in 1842, undertook to cure the evils which the incompetence of his predecessors had created. Everybody must remember that time, when the hapless Whig financiers, angling in the bottomless depths of a Pool of Despond for a Budget which they never could catch, appealed in their despair for advice to their skilful rival, who stood by regarding their futile efforts with calm and confident contempt. "Call me in, and then I will pre scribe," was the reply of the patient and astute poli tician, who for years had quietly awaited the inevibt: r esult of the bungling Administration of his opportahel as certain of their ultimate failure i easnrvitable of his own power to cope with the difficulty. Ilis previsions were justified. The W.hi ' g aid Sir s brought the iinansial disorder of the country to a crisis, Robert Peel, in 1812, was called upon to undertake the so lution of their difficulties. The financial sche h me of 1842, on the faith of its limitation, in essentials, to L e m rs B e s y 2 ea t r o s,was agreed to. It can scarcely be .necessary, 1 lb tdd • enter upon an explanation of the details of thins remission e ra e evice. The idea of its eminent author was, by s. remission of taxa tion in particular directions, to give such a stimulus to con sumption as to create an ultimate increase of revenue to an imposition emoment, period,t v o a t s t t h o at b i e he filled income exten t e xceeding the amount then h in deficiency, while the gap necessarily conseq uent, at up by the t a x with which, after success i ve re newals, for a limited and property newels, it has become the duty of Mr. Disraeli now to deal in 1852. Events justified Sir Robert Peel's anticipations, and the result showed that he had not over-es timated the elasticity of the revenve. At the expiration of the perm • d which he had calculated would b e su ffi c i ent f or t h e re invigoration of the vital system, and for the creation of new bl oo d requisite to restore it t o i ts full powers of pro d u ction, his expectations were fulfilled. The ordinary resources of revenue became equal to the provision for the expenditure of the country, and the extraordinary resource which had been temporarily called in to its aid might have safely been