The Sun. — London, England, 1861-04-23 00:00:00

mud savings and wealth of the people, or a great increase of revenue. There were difficulties with regard to Turkey as well as the United States, and no one can say there was a present prospect of their being overcome., If they are not, what will be the prospects of next year's trade no o h l e can tell ; what are the prospects of the next harvest no one Anows. It is wise to be prepared for a diminished revenue. Without touching on the constitutional question, I think the decision in another place last year was a godsend to the Exchequer. (Cheers.) Had the paper duty been given tip the revenue would have been diminished by a million. But what do you say now ? You say you are quite safe; that you have a large surplus, and that you m a y g i ve up t h e paper duty. But if you do gi ve it up, recollect that you cannot put it on again. (Hear, hear.) And why dcs you give it up ? I s it th a t the duty is oppressive ? I admit there are inconveniences in every Excise tar that is an in terference with manufacture. But what are the testa of a duty that is oppressive ? Either that the revenue derived from it is diminishing, or that it does not keep pace with an increase in other branches. But I have here a return of the amount derived from the paper duty, which was made in another place. It is for the three years 1858-59-60, and it shows that in 1858 the amount was £1,200,000; in 18.59 it was X 1,258,000; and in 1860 £1,231,000. No one can say that an increasing tax is a tax that is pressing on the resources of the country. (Hear, hear.) But it is said the House of Commons has declared this tax to be inexpedient, and has promised to take it off ; and that nothing releases us from the obligation to remove it when we think we can remove it fairly. But let me ask the house have there been no other pledges given ? (Hear, hear.) Has this house made no other promises ? I be lieve that, on financial measures, this house hr given pledge after pledge, an d ma d e prom i se a ft e r promise; e;and that not by r eso l u ti ons on l y, b ut b y f orma l Acts Parlia ment. An act was p asse d f or the gradual reduction and removal of the income tax; where is the tax now? An Ad VMS passed for the reduction of the war duty on tea and Sugar ; where is it now ? (Hear, hear.) A n A ct Was passed creating a Sinking F un d ; w h ere is the Sinking Fund ? (Hear, hear.) There have been no end of pro mises. Do I blame Ministers and Governments for not ad hering to these resolutions ? Np; because my conviction is that the great pledge, resolution, and promise this house h as made is to keep faith with the public creditor, and pro vide the means of carrying on the public service, with the least pressure on the resources, means, and comforts of the people. (Hear, hear.) That promise we must keep, and as long as we adhere to this resolution we may dispense with the removal of a particular tax ; this house is not bound to repeal a tax if it sees it is not wise to dispense with it; or if there is a surplus it should apply it to the reduction of a tax that would reproduce itself by an in crease of consumption. But we shall perhaps be told we are not in the position of a Chancellor of the Exchequer, and have not his knowledge of our resources. He tells us we have a surplus, and that we can dispense with a duty amounting to nearly •X 2,000,000. If so, T say apply it where you may by a remission, best promote the enjoyment of the people, and yet retain a power of raising a future taxation, if necessary. (Hear, hear.) With regard to the income-tax, I believe we underrate its pressure. When I think it is to be made our only source, or our only great source for patching up our wants in time of peace, I confess I do not see how it is to be applied in time of war. I should think any surplus would be best used to make a remission of the import duty on tea, because the temporary loss of . revenue might be turned into an increase. I have said that our trade to other parts of the world is not in a prosperous condition. We have now a new source of trade open to us, having, by arms, forced an entrance into China. We have gained the opening of various ports in China, and increased facilities of access there. Well, then, what will you do for China ? You expect to extend your trade with her. How will youenable her to pay for the manufac tures which you hope she will take from us ? The natural answer is—by taking more of her tea—(hear, hear) ; and _remember that in so doing you not only increase your com merce with China, but your manufacturers at home, who thus find a greater demand for their products, will be able to employ more labour. (Hear, hear.) By reducing the tea duty I believe we shall benefit to a far greater extent than by the remission of the paper duty to those whose welfare I am sure all here are anxious to promote, although some may arrogate to themselves the peculiar merit of considering it— I mean the welfare of the poorer classes of this country, (Cheers.) There is no doubt that our consumption of tea ' might be greatly increased. It has generally increased, ex cept during - last year, by about 5,000,0001 b. annually, and with a reduction of duty our consumption might be still further extended. (Hear.) There is now brought within our reach another country with which we have recently commenced a trade, and which produces tea to a great extent —linean. Japan. Well, if we really have this surplus, and if it be not a deceptive surplus (hear), let us applyit in such a way as will stimulate trade with these countries, benefit emir manufactures, and improve the social condition of the people. (Cheers.) I confess, Sir, I have a strong opinion that the course proposed by her Majesty's Government for the abolition of the paper duties is neither wise nor safe, and I beg the Ministry to reconsider the matter; I beg them to ascertain whether their future position is so secure that they can afford to wipe off at once and completely this source of revenue. (Hear, hear.) I say this from no wish to disturb their position on the bench, for there is no calamity which at present I should more deeply deplore than a suc cession of weak Governments. (Hear, hear.) I desire a strong Government ; but I am convinced that neither this present Ministry —strong as they may be in talent and in the majority at their command in this House —nor any other can be strong unless they possess a strong financial position. (Cheers.) lam convinced that, unless you give evidence to the world as well as to this country that your finances cannot be embarrassdd, you cannot exercise that influence and that power which it is desirable you should possess abroad, nor can youwith safety carry on the Govern ment at home. (Hear, hear.) While the country is in a state of comparative prosperity, direct taxation may be-as sented to; but in a knoment of reverse and of trial public opinion may pronounce against the income tax. (Hear.) We have heard from the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the only made of removing or reducing the income-tax is by reducing the expenditure. That is an admission that there are no other taxes to which we can resort. Now, re duction of expenditure, as I said before, is not only desir able, but it is the duty of this house, when it can, to en force it. Let the strictest economy prevail, but do not let us, under the plea of economy or reduction of expenditure, move a stone in the fabric of the Government or jeopardise the safety of our trade. (Hear, hear.) If the apprehensions which I have expressed, and sincerely expressed, may be thought to possess any weight, I beg they may be consi sklered by the house and the Government. Let me ask the Government to remember that whatever may be the feeling of the country, whatever the pressure brought to bear upon them far the removal of a tax, it is their duty to weigh the consequences of such a remission, and upon their shoulders rests the responsibility of jeopardising the national interests and the national finance. (Hear, hear.) I beg pardon of the house for having troubled them so long, but I am bound to say that, if the question be put to me whether the pre sent financial measures are safe, wise, and politic, or even (I may say so without offence) honest to the country, I cannot, if I am to decide aye or no, answer this question otherwise than in the negative. (hear, hear.) I trust, however, that both the Government and this house have still time for reflection, and I trust that upon this matter they will come to such a decision as will show that they are determined to act more wisely and to consult more surely the safety of the national finances than by carrying out any temporal+ engagements into which they may have en tered. I,trust that they will feel the responsibility which rests upon them of providing against every danger, instead of acting from jealousy of any supposed interference with their privileges. Such a feeling ought not to influence the House of Commons, and I hope will not influence them when they have to decide on measures which involve the credit of the nation and the interests of the people. (Loud sheers.) ~. Mr. WRITE understood the hon. gentleman who had just sat down to recommend in lieu of the proposed remis sion of the paper duties and the reluction of the income-tax a reduction of the tea duty from ls. sd. to Is. per pound. Now, it was wise policy in e ff ec ti ng any remission of duty tomake such proposals that the whole amount remitted would go into the pockets of the people. But on this point he would remind the house that when the duty on tea was 2s. 21(1., the price to the consumer, from 1849 to 1852 in clusive—taking the common congou as the staple of value— was 9/d. per lb. in bond, while- the average price for four years ending in 1860, with a duty of ls. 5d., was ls. 3/d., so that tlAcre had been a remission of duty to the extent ol 3.5 per cent., wltl.. gain to the consumer of only 17 per cent. Nor were the last four yevarg exceptional ones as regarded the amount of imports, for, white during the first period selected by him the average import was 59,225,000. b., from 1857 to 1860 it was 75,000,0001 b. (Hear, hear.) Until the new ports were completely opened, and our intercourse with the Chinese was more extended, and until some progress had been made in the pacification of the country, a reduc tion of duty would not be followed by such a reduction of Vice as would justify the Chancellor of the Exchequer in Proposing it. (Hear, hear.) turd IL MON I'AGU said the speech o f th e Ch ancellor T o f t t i lle ci Exche quer was on Monday evening full of words and of b e ending periods, which kept out of sight the real view the hopes tin, and which ought to have been placed before gentleman I te did not mean to say that the right hon. no doubt taket ii't'uti°na"Y misled the house, but he had country. No._4‘tou sanguine v i ew o f th e f i nances of the inovnio tax, it`rvvlaen he sp o k e o f rem i tt i ng a penny of the always plea sant Pleasant sound to the hou se . It was t o bk. • ,r r ,tf,a rcinission of taxes. But what wa3 really the case? i ncQ uie tax, and therefore t e h was in fact no such thing as an h c .e right hon. gentleman could net remit i ho ld., but What r d sed to do was to impOse sound so well to th e for the next year an income tax Port? ho that way of putting the case did not year Avu 1 : The magnificent right .fi hon. 'a budget of last behold at the gentleman ati)intmt,bu s t gii cent ebxle plosion, beautiful to to the eye when they came to walk over the rains rgreea .ic rams caused by if. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman h a d how _ daties—tbey had proinced nothinr, uver, last year no less than four budgets, an d What has th , ey pro duced ? Take the penny but trouble, obstruction, and • - delay. Then the right hon gentleman c o u n t e d upon sa ving a large sum in the collec tion of tit(' revenue, but later in the year he coufel,a4 that his hopes had been too sanguine. On the Customs ana r, Excise there had been a considerable falling off, and the right hon. gentleman had borrowed £1,000,000 on Exche.• quer bills. Now with a failure of the right hon. gentle; man's e x pectations of last year before them, they were jus tified in saying that he had not made sufficient provision for the year. The tight_hon. gentleman proposed to dispense with half the paper duty this year, and the whole of itnext year, and he would bi so doing compromise the income of the country need year to the extent of 21 millions, and at the Same time he would have to provide a million of Ex chequer Bills in 1E62, and another million in 1863. Upon the conduct of the right hon. gentleman he would deliver no judgment of his own, but in the words of himself, and in 1857, he said it was the duty of the house to see that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be able to pay his way. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman proposed to re impose the income tax for one year only, and thus next year he would have a deficit of £10,000,000. But in 1857 the right hon. gentleman protested against this mode of dealing with the taxation and expenditure of the coun try, and said that the voting of the income tax from year to year took away from its solidity and character. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman in 1853 condemned the , income tax because it tended to cause immorality, , and he now proposed to reimpose it for another year. With regard to the paper duty, he altogether objected to the term that it was a tax upon knowledge. That was begging the question. It was no such thing, and the returns lately presented to the other house would show that this a l tax did not in any way hamper or interfere with trade, while, on the other hand, the tea and sugar duties were fiscal regulations which did press heavily upon the importations of the country, which was shown from the falling off in the revenue this year. It seemed to him (Lord R. Montagu) that the repeal of the paper duty was the only one that could not renew itself, while the reduction of the duties on tea, sugar, and tobacco would cause so great an increasein consumption as that there would be no loss to the revenue. The repeal of the paper duty was for the purpose of benefitting the newspapers which misinformed, misguided, and misled the million. (" Hear t hear,"from Mr. Hennessy.) The right hon. gentleman, in 1857, said that the war duties on tea and sugar were granted on the express condition that in time of peace they should be taken off, and he then said he should invite the house to declare that they ought not to impose taxes on the articles consumed by the working man. (H ear, hear.) He (Lord R. Montagu) thought that it would be much more acceptable to the working classes to reduce the duties on tea and sugar than to take off the paper duty, for on his return home the poor man would be refreshed by a good cup of tea; while he would only doze over a penny newspaper. (Hear, hear.) The abolition of the paper duty would not benefit the working man, it would not affect his interests in any way; and not only so, but when once taken off, it could never be re-impo se d. There would be no recovery to the revenue, and no corresponding benefit to the country. If that were so, they should reduce the income-tax another penny, and provide for the gradual abolition of a tax which the right hon, gen tleman said in 1857 was a dangerous instrument in time of peace. After all it might be asked whether the right hon. gentleman would have a surplus next year, and were they certain that no extraordinary circumstances would arise to cause further expenditure to this country ? Let them look to what was taking place on - the Continent. Since the war in Italy France had lined the southern shores of Geneva with her army, and taken up a position in Syria and on the Red Sea. She sat on the Seven Hills of Rome,ready at any moment to crush the rising liberties of the new-born king dom of Italy. She had created dissensions in Hungary, Schleswig-Holstein, and in Poland, and it might be asked what new aggrandisement would the present Emperor next undertake against the other powers of Europe ? (Hear.) Let them look at the United States, or rather the disunited States, which were in a condition of commercial disorganisa tion. Oar trade with the North was impaired; our imports with the South were diminished. Was that a time when the busy note of preparation for war was heard, when last year they were called upon to patch up a budget which was confessedly inadequate to the wants of the country, to Ills perm with any source of revenue which should be nursed and husbanded to meet the coming strain?; (Cheers.) Mr. BAXTER said he would not attempt to follow the noble lord, but he would make a few remarks upon what fell from the hon. gentleman opposite. They must all feel that there was no man in that house more competent to give an opinion on matters of this nature than the hon. gentleman. But he (Mr. Baxter) could not forget that the hon. gentleman was one of those representatives who went a long way in resisting those free-trade measures which had since met with universal adoption in this country. He was sorry t., hear the hon, gentleman take exception to a budget which he believed to be based on the true principles of financial legislation, They all knew that a leading organ of public opinion had foretold a deficit of £3,500,000. Many hon, gentlemen who had not a prejudice against the financial policy of the ;hon. gentleman must admit that the vote for the China war of £3,800,000 was a special and extraordinary vote, and could not of course be included in the account/ of the expenditure of the year 1861-62. That was the great error in all these calculations. But he felt certain that every hon. gentleman Ndho had all along been a warm advo cate of the principles of free trade must have listened with mingled feelings of gratification and surprise, netwithstand • ing what had fallen from the noble lord to the triumphant vindication of the policy of the hon. gentleman as declared last year. (Hear.) It was not difficult to prove that all the idle prophecies which they had heard with respect to that policy had been scattered to the winds; and its success was more and more a proof of the wonderful results of the great principles of free trade, which the hon. member for Huntingdon had so steadily opposed, and for the inaugura tion of which they were indebted to the sagacity of Mr. Cobden, and the high-minded patriotism of Sir R. Peel. The honourable gentleman no doubt was entitled to speak on behalf of those men in the City who disapprove of the policy of the right honourable gentleman, who preferred what they called a " safe" Chancellor of the Exchequer. (" Hear, hear," from the opposition.) But what did these objectors mean by a safe Chancellor of the Exchequer ? A Chancellor of the Exchequer who would do nothing ; a:Tory Chancellor of the Exchequer who would be quite content to preserve accounts on the square, a book-keeper of state, and without adapting, as the right honourable gentleman had frequently done, his financial arrangements to the wants and fair requirements of this great population. Two main objections he (Mr. Baxter) had heard taken out of doors to the budget of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, one of which only had been glanced at by the hon. member for Huntingdon. The hon. gentleman admitted that the estimates of the right hon. gentleman for the ensuing year were likely to be correct. He (Mr. Baxter) understood the hon. gentleman to say he believed they were not founded on any over sanguine view of the resources of the country. But, then, in a subsequent part of his speech the hon. gen tleman went to advert to the prospect of diminished trade, arising from the prospects of Turkey and the United States, to show that the revenue for next year would not be so large as had been anticipated by the Chancellor of the Ex ebrequer. These statements appeared to his mind some what contradictory. Mr. BARING—What I said was that I thought these ' were safe calculations in a time of ordinary prosperity. Mr. BAXTER begged the hon. gentleman's pardon. If that were so, the hon. gentleman did not admit that these were times of ordinary prosperity. In that respect, no doubt, he did but re-echo the sentiments held by a consi derable party oat of doors. But he (Mr. Baxter) could not *it that the budget was open to these criticisms. These objections of the hon. gentleman were quite contrary to the views of the hea is of the different departments, who were competent to form correct opinions" on the subject. He (Mr. Baxter) found that the actual yield,of customs for 1860-61 had been £23,305,000; and all the right hon. gen tleman calculated for from the same source for 1861-62 was £23,585,000, being an increase of only £280,000, which he maintained to be a very reasonable amountof increase when they considered the bad harvest of last year, the exceptional state of things, the resources of the country, and the in crease of population. On the excise the Chancellor of the Exchequer only looked for an increase of £28,000; and on stamps of £112,000. These were calculations which wholly exonerated the Chancellor of the Exchequer from the criticisms of the hoh. gentleman. He (Mr. Baxter) thought the right hon. gentleman had even under estimated the yield of revenue. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Baring) then said that these estimates would be all very well in time of peace, but he called upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer to provide for the possibility of an impend ing war and a defective harvest. He (Mr. Baxter) however thought that a Chancellor of the Exchequer ought not to be called upon to take into account such remote contingencies: Before concluding, he must express his gratitude to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the remarks with which he concluded his speech the other night regarding the expen diture of the country. That was a subject which could not too frequently engage the attention of the t louse of Cora • mom, as there was a growing conviction in the public mind that the expenditure should be' considerably but gradually reduced. If they continued their present enormous expenditure in time of peace, they might de. pend upon it, not only would serious discontent arise amongst the ratepayers, but it would ultimately lead to a more sweeping reduction at some future day than the most prudent man was prepared for. The whole expenditure of the United States for 'general purposes was not more than £20,000,000, with a population of 33,000,000. He must observe that nothing could exceed the good faith, liberality, and good feeling of the Emperor of the French in carrying out the details of the treaty. The merchants of this country-were beginning to find out the advantages they were likely t 3 Obtain ; and before a dozen years had elapsed ho felt persuaded all would look back with astonishment to see how little commercial intercourse there had been be tween the two countries before Mr. Cobden undertook his ruo,t beneficent but difficult and laborious task. (Hear.) Mr. B. STANHOPE said that if the hon. gentleman would allow him he would point out his - objections to that portion of the budget which - related to the remission of duties. He did so because he did not believe the right hon. gentleman had any surplus to deal with. The right hon. gentleman claimed a surplus of £1,900,000, out of which he proposed to take -050,000 for income tax, and £665,000 for the paper duties. Now what he (Mr. B. Stanhope) had always been told was, that a real surplus was the balance between the expenditure of the country and thoso• taxes which already existed, which had been given by parliament, and were at the disposal of the C4an t'eilor of the Exchequer. Th..t was a surplus which did of public business that I make this observation, for I am quite convinced that if hon. members are prevented from availing themaelves of this opportunity for a general discussion, we shall not 'make thtit rfrogre§s committee which the noble lord contemplates. On each resolutions instead of a discussion confined t) its particular merits, there will be a discussion, not strictly reglaarf but of Parliamentary practice, on the whole plan of the Government. Therefore I- have ad- vised, as far as I could influence the course of business here, that this opportunity should be taken for a general discus elost,. The discussion to-night emanated, not from bench, but from from what are called the independentra ew hers of the house, represented on this occasion by One ofthe most eminent of their number. (Hear, hear.) It is'iol - for the committee to form an opinion on any of the resolutions without further information on various 1 0111- of the scheme. I hav e , i n d ee d, no t ma d e up my ruic4;lo- 4 to what course I shall t a ke i n comm itt ee. M uc h will '; pend on the tone of the d e b a t e an d th e exp l ana ti on s witle we receive from the Government. For instance, it is esse r tial to a clear appreciation of our financial position that SrB should know how the last deficit has been providecti br ' what is the exact surplu s u p on w hi c h we can rea lly coo" t whether we may legitimately assure ourselves that the.o, l of money will arrive f r om Chi na , an d so on. I men tion.lli ls because the noble lord, from the t one o f hi s remar k s , set O ea to think that it is an unusual course to take this opportt ate of discussing the propositions of the Government. If th debate is continued in the same spirit and Manner in wir e ; it has been pursued to-night, I have no doubt we sb arrive at suCh a result that when the house goes into sol ar mittee we shall transact our business with greater flail and effect. (Hear, hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I anig l it was not the intention o f m y no bl e f r i en d to comictisi3., the course which has been t a k en . I thi n k th a t i t i s a legiv‘ mate and desirable one, for it gives to every one an opporl,lr 51, nity of asking for information on th e var i ous p o i n t s of scheme, in their relation to each other. I share, howeveri the anxiety of my noble friesd that the discussion withO w , being in the slightest degree unduly abridged, shoul& proceeded with as rapidly as possible. There are motiO standing for to-morrow, which prevent us from restunifig the debate till Thursday. It is-imp o rta n t, on account, °f the very complicated promedings in the revenue depse ment, which are connected with the renewal of the incovs r tax in a year when a new assessment is made, that the discus' sions on this subject should be taken at as early a date . 05 possible. We shall think it our duty, in case the debs does not terminate on Thursday, to ask for leave to go Oi l from day to day with the financial proposition until el e main subjects are disposed of, and we earnestly trust fe shall receive the approval and support of the house. 0 1 making that request. (Hear, hear.) The debate was then adjourned. SCOTCH PARISHES. Mr. DUNLOP obtained leave to bring in a bill to mac e provision for the dissolution of combinations of parishes io Scotland as to the management of the po or , w hi c h was reed a first time. On the motion of Mr. COWPER, Colonel French and Col. Dunne were added to the Select Committee on the Public offices Extension Bill. The house adjommed at 12 o'clock. COUNTRY 111ABABTS. COLCHESTER -APRIL DLO. A fair supply of wheat, and best samples made fornler prices; inferior sorts lower in price. Malting barley .mor e inquired for, but the supply is nearly over. Beans 2s P er qr . dearer. Peas much the same as of late. Wheat, white 6os to 68s I Beans, Mazagan..32s to 3 65 red ~ 44s to 608 Middle & small 38s to 46 0 Barley , 4os to 48s I White peas 44. to 40 0 Oats —s to —s Grey, . 3Bs to 4,48 CHELMSFORD—APRIL 19. A fair supply of wheat, in a trifle better condition. Bes t wheats barely maintained late rates. Business dull. ~ Wheat, white 38s to 66s I cas Partridge ..44s to 4 0 I red 47s to 63s White 43s to 46 3 Barley 29s to 42s Boiling 43s - to 47 0 Chevalier ....32s to 45s Dun 40s to 43 3 Grinding 26s to 37s Beans, Tick ....37s to 46 3 Malt 61s to 67s Harrow Ticks 38s to 43 0 Chevalier 64g to 69s i Mazagan 31s to 4 35 Oats 26$ to 31s r • STAMFORD-APRIL 20. There was a tolerable show of wheat at market, and late prices were exceeded is per qr. Wheat ....563 to 62s 1 Oatg., ~ 26s to 31s White do 60s to 66s I Beans 4os to 46 3 Barley .....30s to 44s 1 Ditto, old ........58s to 6O KIRKALDY—ApRm 20. Wheat Barley Oats First—. 36s Od 32s Od 2ys Od Second.. 56s Od 408 Od 298 Od Third .. 64s Od 43s Od 33s' Od .ET—APRIL 22. the close of the market Walls End. South Heti on ...19 8 Hartlepool.... lB Heugh Hall 16 6 Cassop .. l7 Brt - ddyll's Hetton 17 or Franc wellgate .... : 10 g Harton Edon Main ...17 0 Eden 16 9 Thorpe Triinclon Thornley....ls S Whitworth.. ..... ....16 0 Kelloe South Hartlepool...... 17 0 Hedley 16 3 Tunstall 70 ; sold, sg, THE SUN, 'LONDON,'" TUESDAY EVENING, APRIL 23, 1861. not depend on existing revenue, and o'er which the Chan cellor of the ExclSessuer hrsl.no control at all: qCheert.)\ If he might ivieit t fi e to quote:an authbrity for thig, he might cite the opinion of - the Chancellor of the Excliequei himself, in 1860. The right honourable gentleman then said, "I must have recourse to those taxes to which I am by law entitled, and if I do so, I find I have a deficiency of £7,000,000." Now the same argument would hOld good this year. The 'right hon. gentleman had pre cisely the same figures to deal with, the same amount of tea and sugar duties, and the same income tax. The right hon. gentleman said in 1860, " I take the very tax as by law established, and I have a deficiency." This year he said, "If you reimpose these taxes, you will give me a surplus." If that deficiency were made up by the re— imposition of the tea and sugar duties and by an income tax at Bd., the right hon. gentleman would have a small surplus of £200 • 000 If he (Mr. Stanhope) w as r i g ht, an d that Bd. income tax was all that was required, they would, by the resolution now before the house, be asking for an un necessary additional Id. upon the income tax of 1861.62. As one of those representing the taxpayers of the country, he (Mr. Stanhope) would not vote another penny to the income tax in order to provide for the removal of any per manent tars whatever. (Opposition cheers.) He certainly was puzzled to discover why they were called upon to take off the paper duty. The resolution of 1858 was to the effect that in the opinion of the house to retain the paper duty, as a permanent source of revenue, would be unjust and im politic. To that resolution he (Mr. Stanhope) fully ad- hered. He should be quite prepared in 1862 to say that the paper duty ought not to be a permanent tax; but did that compel him to throw an additional Id. on the income tax, in order to take off the paper duties ? (Opposition cheers.) In 1858, when the income tax was only 3d, in the pound, the house unanimously rejected a resolution that financial arrangements should then be entered into to take off the paper duty; and he asked now, was it consi s t en t, or was i t fair towards the taxpaye rs , at the present time, when an in come tax of Bd. was necessary and inevitable, to call upon the house to accept that very resolution which, under more favourable circumstances in 1858, they refused ? The income tax had been spoken of as a non-existent source of revenue at this moment, the act having expired ; but the tea and sugar duties were in nearly the same position, for they would expire in June. For his own part, he would will ingly give the Chancellor of the Exchequer the extra penny of income tax if the right hon. gentleman would modify his budget so as to dispense with the tea duty. The additional duties on tea and sugar were among those burdens which the people of this country cheerfully consented to bear for the expenses of the Russian war, and it would be making them a bad return for that willing sacrifice in time of war if these burdens were not to be removed now that the war was done. Let the tea duty be at once reduced, and then he was sure that, if a time of war or danger should again arrive, the English nation would readily permit their Parliament to re-impose 2d. or 4d. or 6d. on the same arti• de, as it. might be required. The same remark would ap ply to the income tax; for if any disaster should occur, or if it should be requisite, on account of a bad harvest, or the state of foreign affairs, or the state of trade, the Chancellor of the Exchequer would only have to come down and ask for an increase of the income tax to meet that emergency, and he knew it would then be granted. It was upon such extraordinary occasions that he ought to avail himself of an augmentation of revenue from those particular sources. But in the piesent state of things the tea and sugar duties were sufficient to cover the actual deficiency, with an Bd. income tax, and the other penny of income tax was not therefore required. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, however, al lowed the House of Commons to grant him a ninepenny- in come tax, and then he pretended to console the income tax payers, by telling them that he would give away that extra penny to somebody else. It was like the story of two gen tlemen who went to the opening of a church, where, after the sermon, there was a collection, and one of them, who happened to owe the other a pound, said to his friend, "My good fellow, I've owed you a pound fer some time, and now I'll tell you what I'll do, I'll put it into the plate for you." (A laugh.) The remarks which he had now made were not dictated by any hostility to the occupants of the Tree sum y bench, for he did not think a change of Government was desirable. But he could not permit a system of finance to go on which, he believed, must put the country some time or other in one of two most dangerous alternatives— either that they would be trusting entirely to the income tax as the mainspring of their finance, which would have a fatal effect both on the industry and real property of the country; or else, which he looked upon with yet greater dismay, that some day, goaded by the severe pressure of direct taxation, they would be driven hastily and inconsiderately to wholesale retrenchments of expenditure. The people would perhaps make what the right hon. member for Oxfordshire once called " an ugly rush" against the estimates; and yielding to that impulse they might, by four or five years' false economy, undo all the prudent preparations of the last few years, and the re sult might be to compel some other Minister, perhaps in the middle of a war, to make violent efforts for repairing the public service. By such a course we should weaken those material guarantees for the peace and honour of England which it was indispensable for us to maintain, in the shape of an efficient army and a great naval force. He hoped such a course would not be pursued by the house. (Cheers.) Mr. DODSON agreed that the budget of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was characterised by much audacity, but equally, as he thought, with foresight. Starting with a defi ciency he had shown that, if he assumed the expiring taxes to be oontinued, he should arrive at a surplus of .£1,900,000, which he had no sooner told the house than he proceeded to annihilate it by reducing taxes to the amount of £2,500,000 a-year, but as the reduction of the income tax was only to be for three querters of the financial year, and the paper duty for the last half-year, the full effect of the reduction was thrown on the year 1862-3, so that the right hon. gen tleman, by his estimates, would have a surplus for this year of £400,000. Hon. gentlemen opposite cavilled at the re duction of the paper duty, but did not distinctly propose anything of their own. They insinuated that they would like to strike off another penny of the income tax, or the war duties on tea and sugar ; but as that would be equivalent to taking off the paper duty, they would make as large a gap in our finances as they accused the right hon. gentle man of doing. He (Mr. Dodson) saw rio reason to distrust the right hon. gentleman's calculations for the next year. There was, indeed, the chance of a bad harvest again this year. The £750,000 of indemnity from China might be relied upon as safely as any other source of revenue. The right hon. gentleman's calculations for last year had proved remarkably correct, except so far as concerned three large items of Excise, which altogether fell nearly two millions below the estimates, but from accidental causes, the un favourable season and the bad harvest, which could not be helped. Those items were the malt duties, which fell short by £BOO,OOO ; the spirit duties, which fell short by £900,000; as that was a superfluous article of luxury, its consumption was checked at such a time ; and lastly, the hop duties, estimated at £300,000, had entirely disappeared. It was satisfactory that the consumption of other articles, such as tea, coffee, cocoa, raisins and currants, and tobacco, all belonging to the comforts of the people, had increased during the year, and the decline in sugar was but very small. The hop duty, as he had said, had entirely failed, and this showed the folly of levying a tax on an article so exceptionally uncertain and unreliable as hops. The crop of wheat or barley might vary from one season to another, but only within certain limits which could be reckoned upon. It was very different with hops. He saw no reason tesques tion the calculations of the right hon. gentleman with re gard to his estimate of income. As far as he was aware no one on either side of the house found fault with the remis sion of the penny income tax. There was a greater variety of opinion with respect to the proposed remission of the paper duty; and however desirable that remission might be in itself, it was a question whether other interests had not a greater claim for consideration. He should reserve to himself full liberty tp discuss that question when it came specifically before the committee. Mr. BLACKBURN said there were two questions for the consideration of the house ; first, was the estimated surplus likely to be realised ; and, secondly, whether the" proposed modes of disposing of it were the most proper. No doubt the Chancellor of the Exchequer was in the best position for forming a correct opinion on the first point, but when the right hon. gentleman was found to be in error to the extent of £2,000,000 in one year's anticipa • tions it was not altogether safe to trust to his estimates. The right hon. gentleman calculated upon an increase of £1,000,000 in the ordinary revenue of the year, but if he did not get that increase what became of his surplus of £1,900,000? He thought it would have been much safer and wiser to have the money in hand before proceeding to repeal taxation. With regard to the disposal of the surplus, he entirely agreed with svhat had been said by the hon. member for Lincolnshire. The proposed repeal of the penny income tax was in reality an addition made to that tax, for the purpose of repealing the paper duties. He considered that the remission of the tea and sugar duties would have been much more acceptable to the people. (Hear, hear.) Mr. POLLARD URQUHART believed that the propo sition of the Government would be most beneficial to Ire land, which possessed a large undeveloped water power by means of which the manufacture of paper could be carried on to an immense extent. (Hear, hear.) It was said that the proposal of the right hon. gentleman was ill-timed, but if there was a deficiency of tlan harvest, the very best mode of counteracting such a calamity was to afford the means of employment to the people. Sir R. Peel acted oa that prin ciple in 1842, and with the most decided success, for it ap peared by the last census returns that whereas the entire population had increased only 12 per cent., those classes whose industry had been freed from the pressure of excise duties had increased from 40 to 80 per cent. He believed the same result :would follow the remission of the paper duties. He hoped to see a considerable reduction in the expenditure, because enormous taxation would do what the Milan decrees had failed to effect—check the consumption of their products. (Cheers.) Mr. BAILLIE said the Chancellor of the Exchequer pro posed last year an unusual method of finance—that of pro posing a large remission of tixation in the face of a deficient revenue. The right hon. gentleman took a different course now, for he said he had a surplus of £1,900,000, and be pro posed to divide his favours between those who were anxious to see a repeal of the paper duties, and those who were desir ous to have a redti3tiOn of the income-tax: At first sight that appeared a fair proposition, and if there walla large surplus to dispose of, it might be made not is'itluut Unfortunately, however, that was not the case. The surplus rreVenne Wei Pfaeticallk a dellsion. Tie eight ho& gentle men seemed to have adopted that system of finance which was common imongst certain classes of traders—that of rais ing money by bills in order to pay debts, and renewing those bills when they became due. With such a mode of finance no Chancellor of the Exchequer need ever fear a deficit, or be in want of a surplus. Ile had a great objection to the repeal of the paper duties under existing circumstances. There were only two ways in which the repeal of the paper duties could be advantageous, the price of newspapers, and the price of books. IV ere not the penny papers at present in a prosperous state, and were driving the old papers out of the field ? Why, it was only the other day that the great organ, as it had once been, of the Whig party, the Morning Chronicle, had been reduced to a penny paper. Then as regarded the price of books, that would not be affected in the least,or in the most inappreciable degree. Then,as to the paper trade, it was at present in a most flourishing condition. It might be said would no one rain by this repeal of the paper duties ? Yes, there was one, a small but a powerful class,the proprietors of the penny newspapers, who were represented in that house and in the Cabinet, and had succeeded in forcing this measure upon the Government. It was only a short time ago that in reply to a deputation who waited on the First Minister of the Crown to ask for the repeal of those duties, they were told that in the present critical state of Europe the repeal of those duties was not advisable. What could account, then, for the change which had taken place in the sentiments of the Government ? The aspect of Europe was net much changed in the interval, and yet they had the Chancellor of the Exchequer coming down to that.house proposing the repeal of the paper duties, and at the same time denouncing the extravagant increase in the public expenditure. The right hon. gentleman had come down to the house last session, and in a most vituperative speech denounced the conduct which had been pursued in another place as the most gigantic innovation of modern times. He (Mr. Baillie) believed that the course which the right hon. gentleman was now pursuing was actuated by a desire to obtain popularity ; and that was a course not cal culated to raise in the country either the character, the sincerity, or the political reputation of public men. Mr. W. E WART believed that tea and sugar had very strong claims to a reduction of duty, but so had paper. Every duty taken off articles of consumption had the effect of increasing the quantity consumed. It was so with soap, glass, and other articles ; and while he admitted that pub lications like " Macaulay's History" would not be got cheaper, it would have a very different effect on cheap lite rature. He was for a judicious mixture of direct and indi rect taxation, and was fully of opinion that the present ex penditure could be materially reduced. Mr. LONGFIELD said that, notwithstanding the puffs direct and the puffs indirect which had been lavished on this budget, he felt the utmost abhorrence of the whole budget. He believed this budget had been produced for the purpose of gratifying the vanity of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in consequence of the collision between the two Houses of Parliament last session, and to gratify the selfish wishes of a few proprietors of penny newspapers. It was said the paper duty was to be repealed for the benefit of Ireland. Well, he view something of paper mills in that country, and, with all! the fostering and cherishing care of the Government, they would not thrive there. It would be idle to suppose that by means of the paper manufacture Ireland would be regenerated. The beUefit resulting from the repeal of the duty would be of an infinitesimal amount, and no boon whatever to the people. He knew there were many cants in and out of the house. There was the cant of liberalism, and the cant of reform, but the greatest of all cants was that about taxes upon knowledge. They all knew that the paper ditty was so small upon books that it prevented no man frees being just and generous if he desired to be so. The hon. and learned member then read a long extract from M'Culloch's "Principles of Taxation," show ing that although theipaper duty operated somewhat un fairly, yet that it was tie last tax that ought to be repealed, and that instead of tbatbeing done there would be no great objection to its being raised to 2d. a pounl, seeing that it was a tax raised with so little inconvenience to the people. There was no ground whatever for repealing it. It was not enough for the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer to say that he expected a surplus at the end of next year, but to show the house that he could afford to take off this tax. He admitted that the right hon. gentle man had, by the brilliant oratory for which he was so much distinguished, made it appear that he would have a surplus next year, but they must all remember what were his ideas about the duties on Irish spirits and the Chinese war —(hear, hear)—and his estimate of the probable amount upon the production of dock warrants, and contract notes and notes of delivery; and in truth not one of the right hon. gentleman's anticipations had proved sound. He would not say the right hon. gentleman knew this would he so, for it was proverbial that sanguine temperaments were short-sighted, and all his beautiful promises had turned out scanty performances. Whether he regarded the budget as brought about from temper, or more truly in reference to the course taken by the other house, he could not give his assent to it. There was no possible mode of dealing with this imaginary surplus, but if there were then the right hon. gentleman ought to give the people of Ireland cheaper malt, sugar, and tea, or take another penny off the income tax. He thought the budget was objectionable in its tone and in its details, and he never heard a statement, when laid befere the house, and separated from the imagery of the right hon. gentleman, which was more deceptive and unstatesmanlike. (Hear, hear.) Mr. NORRIS wished to correct a statement made by the the hon. gentleman the member for Inverness-shire, viz., that the manufacturers of paper were not themselves anxi ous for the remission of the duty on that article. The con trary was the fact. The trade never for one moment lost sight of the benefit the public would derive, and the advan tage the trade would gain by the repeal of that tax. At a deput ition of paper manufacturers, amounting to 60 or 70 members, who paid nearly one-half the entire amount of duty, there was the greatest unanimity, not only for an equitable arrangement suite the export duty on rags, but in favour of a repeal both of the excise and customs duties on paper itself. Amongst all classes of people throughout the country there was the greatest feeling of satisfaction and delight at the budget of the right hon. gentleman, and a determination to give it every possible support. Mr. LONG said .L- h p e treo h lt a oen d staeid ng, listened with great attention t o the able, lucid, and straightfor war d speec h o f the hon. gen tleman, the member for Huntin g d on; an d , as a very young menSber, he could not but expre ss hi s surprise that in the present state of feeling in Ragl an d w ith regard to taxation, the hon. gentle havemn as he did, to the mercan til e regre t a t w h at appeared s against a remission of taxa tionwhich produced th e revenues o f body—should a t o on one the him t country. o of h be h the fe t r e a het felt rashness of th e Chancellor of the r , (Ii considerable he felt, on the other hand, great gratification that there was sufficient independence and sufficient earnestness of conviction on the part of the hon. member for Hunt ingdon to induce him to stand up and oppose the repeal of such a duty. He also felt considerable surprise that the speech of the hoe. gentleman was not followed up by a more active conclusion, and that he had not moved an amendment which would have expressed the opinions held largely on ono side of that house and largely out of doors. If he might be permitted to hazard a guess why that speech was not followed up by an amendment, he should day he feared hon. members opposite would act with regard to the paper duty as they did last year with regard to the Reform Bill. But what would be the result of the budget now proposed for the adoption of the house ? Was it of a nature that they could give it their support ? He believed it to be of a nature the very reverse. Was it not a natural conclusion that the repeal of this indirect tax would make the case f"r the repeal of other indirect taxes still stronger. No argument could be given f or the repeal of the paper apply with t en f o ld f orce to the case —or to th e repeal of the duty on hopsr—ewi(hnhisecuahrra)wn—ocaue—lddu(nhtyoetawra)hich was most unfair and arbitrary. In his opinion the Government were taking a rash and un wise course in repealing the paper duty this year. The Chancellor of the Exchequer in his eloquent speech, whieh charmed both sides of the house, apologised for leading them through a wilderness of figures. Ho had no intention of following the example of the right hon. gentleman ; but the right hon. member went on to say he had been paying his addresties to two fair ladies whom he represented as newly introduces into the world, well dowered and with great charms. He thought, however, the Chancellor of the Ex chequer had not given the whole of that transaction. The right hon. gentleman whispered his confideneeto the house, but he stopped at a point which he (Mr. Long) would ven ture to pass. The Chancellor of the Exchequer went into the wilderness with two millions' and a half, but he came out a poor man, one fair lady having wheedled one million, cash down, out of his pocket, and the other a promise to pay, to be redeemed after October next, to the tune of £1,300,000. (A laugh.) He thought tho result of the Ludget was that they were making it more difficult to meet the just claims of the country and to maintain its proper commercial standing in the world. If any hon. member would move an amendment in condemnation of the principles and of the details of the budget, he should record his vete wi th.sat isfaction and pleasure in favour of that amendment. Mr. BLACK said it vas not his intention to have spoken en this question, but the hon. gentleman who had just sat, down had thrown out A challenge, to the effect that hon. members onthe ministerial 'side of the house were dis posed to conceal their opinions on matters of reform, and with regard to the paper duty. They must not forget that it_ was not alone on books and writing-paper the duty pressed heaUy. The coarse wrapping paper that was sold at 345. the cwt. paid 14s. duty ; and this had to be levied on the small tradesmen and consumers. It also pressed enormously on books, in which the chief elements of cost were printing and paper. The fact was, that if the tax produced £1,200,000 to the revenue, it cost two millions to the country. . Mr. WARNER. believed that the budget had been re ceived with satisfaction by the largo constituency which he had the honour to represent; and that if the Chancellor of the Exchequer fond himself with a surplus he could not do better than repkal the paper duty. With respect to the income .tax, he regretted that the right hon. gentleman had merely reduced the autiountwithout changing the incidence of the tax. He hoped_ thnt . :next year they might have a revision of the tag,*and that it would be collected on the only sound priviple--Dainely, on income derived from property. Mr, )3 ENT INQR, haying complimented the Chancellor of the gachequer e on the eloquence, of his budget speech, saicilefe was anCither feature of it Which he admired quite as much, namely, its sophistry. The right hon. gentleman had drawn a remarkable picture. He had told them that he found himself called on by inclination and dirty to pay at tention to two fAir sisters, :the daughters of necessity and invention. But this was not the worst. Ha' century since he (Mr. Bentinck) had been taught that neeessity was the mother of invention. (Laughter.) He would not large so painful a subject further, but would proceed from the social to the financial morality of the right hon. gentleman. He was at a loss ,to understand how a one-sided treaty could be beneficial to this country. The right hon. gen tleman talked of the country having elected to be governed at an expense of £75,000,000. As if the -country were guilty of extravagance as a matter of choice. No man in that house lamented more sincerely than he (Mr. Bentinck) did the amount of their expenditure; but he should like to ask the right hon. gentleman, had it ever occurred to him to consider what had been the principal causes of their present expenditure ? Had the right hon. gentleman ever dotted up the cost of the Russian war ? Had it ever oc curred to him to consider what were the causes of that war ? He did not wish to use stronger language than the circumstances of the case deserved, but he contended that few men would rise either in the house or out of it and deny that one principal cause of the Russian war was the helplessness of the Government of which the right hon. gentleman was a prominent member. (Hear, hear.) Could the right hon. gentleman recall a single circum stance betokening foresight or energy on the part of that Government ? The right hon. gentleman was party to an arrangement to send 10,000 men to Malta in order to intimi date the Emperor Nicholas, at the same time allowing him to understand that measures were about to be taken for withdrawing these self-same troops. This was the notable arrangement which was to deter Russia from going to war. (Hear, hear.) But what had the right hon. gentleman him self said ? He had declared on one occasion, " You ought not to repeal the paper duties if by so doing you ensure the perpetuity of an odious tax." Could any argument be more apposite than that to the present occasion, when the result of repealing the paper duties would be the perpetuity not merely of one odious tax but of two ? (Hear.) Then there were the gentlemen below the gangway who called them selves the "friends of the people," They professed to defend the rights, the liberties, and even the pockets of the people. Where were those friends now? How would the masses of the people of this conntry be benefited by the repeal of the paper duty ? (Cheers.) The penny newspapers would not come down to a halfpenny ; the whole thing therefore was s a humbug (cheers) they would not be putting a fraction into the pockets of the people. Then where was the benefit- to be ?—and if there was to be no benefit from the repeal of the paper duties, would they be told that no benefit was to be derived from the repeal of the duties on tea and sugar? Would not that be a great boon to the labouring population and to the work ing classes ? (Hear, hear.) What, then, were the friends of the people about ? Who would reap any advantage except the man-who had an interest in a penny newspaper ? The present tea and sugar duties were a war tax—(hear, hear) — but the friends of the people mado no effort to have them lightened. That was a kind of friendship he hoped he should never receive from any man. But there were other classes of the communir y who deserved to be considered. Why, in all these financial questions, did the right hon. gentleman deal with the rural districts of this country precisely as the hon member for Birmingham did in the question of reform, that is to say, ignore their existence? There were the hop duties, and the duties on malt. (Hear, hear.) Why did it never occur to the right hon. gentleman that the rural dis tricts had any existence ? He hoped before this debatewas over they should hear so many voices raised as to convince the right hon. gentleman that there were such interests as rural interests, and such persons as county members in the house. (Hear, hear.) Ho took that opportunity of warning every hon. member in the house that by supporting the pre sent financial proposal of the right hon. gentleman he would be doing a 1 he could to injure the interests and sacrifice the pockets of those he represented. Every member for a rural district was bound to give his most strenuous opposition to the proposal of the right hon. gentleman. (Hear, hear.) If then no benefit was to be derived from this scheme by the large masses either in the towns or in the country, what was its object ? It was impossible to say .what the real ob ject was; but two possible objects suggested themselves to the mind. One would seem to be an attempt to reclaim the wavering allegiance of a certain portion of those hon. mem bers who sat below the gangway—(cheers)—who no doubt up to a very recent period used to make very eloquent and able speeches—speeches; however, anything but flattering to the occupants of the Treasury bench. (Hear, hear.) No doubt there was some secret spring at work—whether it lay in the repeal of the mystical paper duty or not he did not know—which • induced those hon. members now to give theirltrong support to her Majesty's Government. He regarded this also as an attempt to defy, he would not say to insult, another branch of the legislature, (Hear, hear.) That was a branch of the subject which he hoped would be fully discussed ; for such he believed to be the object and intention of the right hon. gentleman in departing from the Course of last year, and embodying his measures in one bill, by which the Lords would be debarred from dealing with them in any way. The right hon. gentleman should be called upon to explain and offer some justification for that course. It might be said there were some precedents for it, but they were so few as to be merely the exceptions to a general rule. He (Mr. Bentinck) must use rather strong language to characterise this budget as it deserved. It was an act of bad faith on the part of the right hon. gen tleman, after his financial opinions expressed in former times, because he had been for many years pledged over and over again in the most solemn manner to make the repeal of the income tax his great object. This budget was founded, besides, on a total misconception of his position. The surplus on which ho reckoned was to be derived from half a million of Exchequer Bonds, which was borroWed money, and £750,000 from China, of which we should probably never get cne shilling, for that country was in a state of revolution, and the Emperor's throne was not worth a fortnight's purchase. But even if the surplus for this year existed as he said, where should we be next year, when the Chancellor of the Exchequer, after repealing the paper duty, and keeping up the war duties on tea and sugar, would have nothing to fall back upon but, a large increase of the income tax 1 After quoting the'speech made by the right hon. gentleman in 1852 on the financial proposals of the right hon. member for Bucking hamshire, the hon. member said that he who made such eloquent speeches, and then brought forward snchfinancial schemes as these, might be described in the old well-known verses as the man " Who never said a foolish thing, And never did a wise one." Sir J. PAXTON observed that the hon. gentleman op posite was mistaken when he said that the only persons to be benefited by a repeal of the paper duty would be the pro prietors of penny newspapers. He could not know much of the manufacturing interests of this country if he believed that paper was only used for purposes of liter;ture. (A laugh.) He (Sir J. Paxton) must say that the repeal of the paper duty would be a great boon to his own constituents. There was not a yard of ribbon made in Coventry that did not consume a yard of paper. It was important to other manufacturing towns, such as Nottingham, where a great quantity of paper was used in packing up parcels. The paper manufacturers were, he believed, as a whole, opposed to the repeal of the paper . duties, as the manufacturers of glass had been opposed to the repeal of the glass' duty. A great deal had been made of the difficulty of obtaining rags, but a friend of his told him that he imported a large amount of rags from India by which he made 30 per cent. He claimed the support of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Dis raeli) in favour of the repeal of the pap( r duties, because he said in 18:50 that he looked on the tax on paper as one which, when a favourable opportunity arose—(hear, hear, from the Opposition)—it was desirable to repeal on com mercial, literary, moral, and educational grounds, and he should be glad if it was in his power to repeal the tax. It wos now in the power of the right hon. gentleman to settle this vexed question. The hon. member for Huntingdon adopted a very doleful tone in speaking of th. flnannial . prospects of the country; but if that was the real opinion of the hon. gentleman, he was surprised that he should be one of the persons to sanction the large expendi ture to which the Exhibition of 1862 must give rise—an expenditure which directly and indirectly could fall little short of £1,000,000 or £1,500,000. (Hear, hear.) Sir S. NORTHCOTE said that the budget of his right hon. friend might be viewed from many sides. It had a political and a financial side, and with the last alone he should venture to deal. It was with great diffidence that he rose to impugn the calculations of so high en authority as a cabinet minister; but he was somewhat encouraged to do so by the fact that the calculations of his right hon. friend last yen. had not been realised. His right hon. friend the member for Huntingdon (General Peel) called in question during the last session the sufficiency of the army estimates, but the noble lord the e ,Secretary for War (Lord. Herbert) expressed his conviction that the estimates of the govern ment would be sufficient. But it turned out that his right hon. friend was right to the extent of £450,000, and the Secretary of State was wrong. (Hear, hear.) No less than £250,000, which had been allotted to the navy, was trans ferred to the army ; and they heard, on Monday last, that another sum of £200,000 was to be taken for the army excess of the year. (Hear, hear.) Again, his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in his supple mentary budget of last July, t )1d them that he was going to take out a certain sum from the balances of the Ex chequer—he believed £1,286,000; he told them that the balances were in a satisfactory state—that theyamounted to a certain sum in March—that they had fallen in June—that they amounted to £6,500,000 ; but that it was expected they would be in a more satisfactory state in September than they were in June. It turned out however that they were much less satisfactory, for they were lower in September than they were in June. He thought these facts justified him challenging the calculatiohs now before them. He was astonished t , e) hear it said that the predictions or rather the calculations made on his side of the house had proved to be groundless, the fact being that the calculations were lite rally justified by the result. They stated last year that the provision made for the year was not sufficient. It was not sufficient. (Hear.) His right hon. friend said he had a sur plus of £1,900,000, but in truth if the house declined to vote the taxes which his right hon. friend asked them to vote there Would be a deficiency; of X 8,500,000, [The CILANCEIe, Lon of the EXCHEQUER—£2O,OOO,OOO.) If they declined to renew the tea and sugar duties the deficiency would be 20 millions; but he referred only to those extra taxes which his right hon. friend said should be open for the considera tion of the house thii year. They had therefore a large de ficit to deal with. He might be told that they had predicted last year that it •vc ould be very much larger. Well, that was true—(hear)--they did predict that it would be larger, and they were quite justified in doing so ; for at that time the spirit duties stood at Bs. instead of at 10s. per gallon, t which they were ultimately raised, and the paper duties were not repealed as they were at first to have been. The raising of the spirit duties made a difference of £1,500,000, and the paper duties were another £43)0,000, making together a sum of £2,800,000, which would have raised the deficit. to £11,000,900 or £l2 000,000, which was what they (the Op position) said they would have to deal with this year. (Cheers.) He congratulated the right hon. gentleman in some respects upon his policy. No doubt there were por tions of it which had proved very satisfactory; but at the same time they must look at it as a whole, and not let their gaze rest upon a single bright figure, when there was so much of gloom in the picture. (Hear, hew.) Last year the deficit had been about £2,500,000. The right hon. gentleman said that there was a sum of £300,000 which really belonged to the previous year; but that on reflection was a mode of calculation on which he would hardly care to insist, because if he took credit for that £300,000 he must be prepared to give credit for the £750,000 which was outstanding on the vote of credit for the China expedition. (Hear, hear.) The deficit last year, then, was £2,568,000; and how had that been met ? The right hon. gentleman said he had taken £1,450,000 out of the balances in the Exchequer, and had added £460,000 to the unfunded debt of the country. But the first observa tion that 'suggested itself on that statement was that £1,450,000 and £460,000 did not make £2,568,000. (Cheers.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I never professed .to state how the deficit was met. (Hear, hear.) Sir S. NORTHCOTE—Then the right hon. gentleman ought to have done so. (Cheers.) But the only figures he had given the house were the two sums which he (Sir S. Northcote) had quoted, and like many other hon. gentlemen he had ever since been puzzled to make out the difference. He would state to the house how he supposed the matter stood. In the first place, it was absolutely necessary to take into consideration an item which the right hon. gentle man designedly and deliberately told the house he should omit—the vote for the fortifications. This year the loan on that account had amounted to very little. Only £200,000 had been borrowed, of which only £50,000 had been ex pended ; but though the item was now a small one, it would probably be larger in subsequent years, and he must protest against its omission from the account. Besides the two sums he had mentioned—the £454,000 addition to the un funded debt and £1,300,000, the diminution of the balances in the Exchequer reckoning the fortification vote—he found a third item, repayment of advances, £627,000. Now, he wanted to know what these were, for he believed that a good deal would turn upon them. He supposed that they were repayments of the loans advanced for public works. If that were so, this was another addition to the debt of the country, for though the money had been borrowed many years ago, it had originally been raised by loan, and what was now paid in ought to have been lent out again. If, however, it was now used for the services of the year, it was virtually a new loan ; and he did not think it ought to have been so used without the sanction of Parliament, or without explanation to the house. (Chee:s.) It might be that he (Sir S. Northcote) was in error in the ca:kclusion at which he had arrived; but if so, he could only rep,?at that the right hon. gentleman ought to have :informed the house how the deficit of last year had been made up, and then he (the hon. baronet) should have been in no danger of drawing a false dedUction. At present it appeared to him that they had made an addition to the debt in the year of no less than £1,257,000, besides largely drawing upon the balances in the Exchequer; besides which he ought to add another million for Exchequer-bills not paid off; and then the addition to the debt in the course of last year would stand at two millions and a quarter. (Hear.) There was, moreover, an army excess of £2oo,ooo—how was that to be paid ? Was it also to be taken out of the Exchequer balances, or was it to be thrown upon the revenue of the coming year ? in which, by the bye, there was no provision for it. He could imagine hon. gentlemen exclaiming, " What in the world are these balances ?" No doubt they were partly made up of accumulations of surrendered ser vices ; but to a very large extent they consiste3 of sums already appropriated. It might be a very pleasant thing to have a large balance at one's banker's, but if against that balance there were large claims and cheques outstanding, it would be less gratifying. It certainly seemed to him that if ever there was a time when it was desirable to have the Exchequer balances strong - it was now ; whereas the right hon. gentleman admitted that they were £700,000 less than they were this time last year. (Hear.) They were told that there was a surplus of £1,900,000 ; and he (Sir S. North cote) supposed that had been very fairly calculated. Of course there was always some risk of such failures as those which they had last year, and which had undoubtedly re sulted from the unfortunate harvest, on which they could not calculate; though it might, to be slue, have been cal culated upon at the time the right hon. gentleman produced his supplementary budget. The only point on which he felt doubt was the £750,000 of China money. He really could not understand the explanation which had been given by the noble lord (Lord J. Russell) on that score. At one time the noble lord seemed to think there would be £600,000 ; while at another he spoke of only vocyro ; and there appeared to be some, uncertainty in his mind as to whether the merchants were to receive their compensation in the first year. It was most important that with so small a surplus the house should receive more explicit informa tion, for at present the explanations which had been given were anything but satisfactory. (Hear, hear.) Last year they were asked for £3,80.',000 for the extraordinary ex penses of the army and navy. They granted that sum, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer told them he had no occa sion to pay more than a little over £3,000,000, and conse quently there was a balance of £750,000 still unspent. lie asked the right hon. gentleman if that sum was now avail able if called for, but the right hon. gentleman was obliged to tell him that it was not in his power to say, but that it still remained good for the service of the year; therefore that £750,000 was as good as gone. It was possible that this £1,000,000 which they were about to take for the ser • vice of the year might not be required for this year, but there was the money in the Exchequer, liable to be drawn Out He did' feel that In all the provisions of the finan • dal arrangements this was the one which required the most careful scrutiny, and was the least satisfactory. (Hear, hear.) He thought, therefore, the house Ought to have more full explanations of our financial position than they had yet had. (Hear, ,hear.) With regard to a provisional budget, he thought if there was any pro position upon which financiers were fully agreed it was that it was very undesirable to live upon a system of pro visional finance. It must, for instance; be very disadvan tageous to those who were dealing in tea -and sugar not to know from year to year what the taxes on those articles were to be. (Hear.) The Chancellor of the Exchequer told them that with regard to two articles, tea and sugar, the duties had been stationary during the last two" years ; but did not the right hon. gentleman know the stationary character yf those imports ? The merchants looked for the estimates of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and about the middle of July next they would look for a considerable reduction in the tea duty ;' but when they had imported their teas they would find the reduction had not been made, and they would be obliged to keep them in bond. (Hear.) It was true there might be conditions in our trade under which we might be content to vote some of our taxes for one year. Last year our exports were £136,000,030; for the first two months of the present year they were only £3,570,000, being a reduction of 164 per cent., which was lower than any year since 1857. They were told that our import trade was going bn satisfactorily, but they did not import many of those articles because the taxes had been taken off, but because there was a deficient harvest in this country, and they were obliged to buy food in other coun tries. He connected that with the very remarkable decline 011 r traria will, 4ho TTniforl Rfo+oo, for ho foun d that those first two months there was a total decline on various articles amounting to 37 per cent. (Hear, hear.) He thought that was another proof that there might be a necessity for a provisional budget, and to vote the taxes foe a short time only. But if that was so, should they at the same time withdraw a large sum from the permanent sources of the taxation of the country ? (Hear, hear.) They had, moreover, to see what would be the working of the treaty with France. He believed that working would be satisfac tory. (Hear.) They had also got to see what would be the working in the alteration of the spirit duties. On the sugar and tea duties they might, if necessity required, re-impose a duty of a penny a pound, but if they repealed the paper duty it Was lost altogether. He therefore entreated the house to 'muse before they committed themselves irrevocably to the repeal of this tax. He was satisfied with the proposal as to the income tax. He believed that Bd. in the pound would be sufficient to balance the account, but as they did not know what might happen it was as well that the rate should be 9d. The Chancellor of the Exchequer might reply that he hoped to reduce the expenditure, but that was a hope they might indulge in tco long. The right hon. gentleman had been in office near two years, but be had not done much in the way of reduction. He did not blame him. The feeling of the house, the feeling of the country, and he dared say the feeling of his colleagues, had been too strong for him. He hoped that the house would not part with the substance for the shadow Mr. S. FITZGERALD moved the adjournment of the debate. , Lord PALMERSTON—At this hour of the night, when so many members probably wish to speak, we shall not object to an adjournment. I hope, !'rowever, that the ani nouncement of an hon. gentleman opposite that the debate will last for a great many nights before you, Sir, leave the chair, will not be fulfilled. i trust that on Thursday, when we shall resume the debate, you will bo allowed to leave the chair. There will be many opportunities in tho course of the committee for members to deliver their opinions. ' Mr. IMSRAELI—The noble lord says very justly that there will be many opportunities in committee on th• different resolutions for members to express their opinions ; but we must remember that this is the only occasion on which, according to the strict rules of the house, we can have a discussion on the whole project of the Oovernment. (Hear, hear.) It is not from any wish to delay the progress COAL MARK. (Prioes of Coal per Ton at S. d. Walker Primrose 12 9 Lambert's West Hart ley..., Tanfield Moor 13 0 Carway and Duffryn. Malting Do. An thraci te 21 6 West Hartley 16 9 Holywell 16 6 Hastings Hartley l6 9 Bylss's Bebside West partley ....16 9 Virylam l6 6 Wnl Is End. Acorn Close 16 9 Belmont 17 0 Ships at market, THE MAILS. MAILS DUE. Australia, Ceylon, and Mauritius (via South ampton) .. .• .. • . May lg. Do. (via Ma rse ill es ) M ay 13. Brazil and Cape Verds .. • .. May 4.. Buenos Ayres, Monte Video; &c. Cuba and Mexico .. • . April 29'. Canada, &e. (via L'derry) .. April 24. Cape of Good Hope, &c. .. May 3. China, Nnang, and Singapore (via S'ampton) May 2. - Do (via Marseilles) April 26. Gibraltar (via Southampton) .. .. April 25. India(Calcutta), Ceylon, &c. ( v i a Southampton) May 2. Do. (via Marseilles) April 26. India (Bombay), (via Southampton) .. April 25. Do. (via M arse ill es ) .. May 5. Lisbon .. April 21. Malta, Egypt, and Aden (via Southampton) April 25. Do. ' (via Marseilles) .. April 26. Vigo, and Oporto .. April 21. United States, California, &c. April 25. Western Coast of Atrica, Madeira, Teneriffe .. May 10.. West Indies and Pacific, Carthagena, Cuba, &c. April 29.. [AnvEnnsENIENT.]—We extract a few out of the many • thousand expressions of gratitude from invalids cured with out medicine by Du Barry's delicious Revalenta Arabica Food :—Cure No. 71. The Right Hon. the Lord Stuart de Decies, of many years' dyspepsi a an d a ll it s h orrors.—Curs No. 49 , 832. " Fifty years' indescribable agony from dys pepsia, nervousness, asthma, cough, constipation, flatu lency, spasms, sickness at the stomach and vomiting, have: been removed by Du Barry's excellent Food. Maria Joly, Wortham Ling, near Dies, Norfolk."—Cure No. 47,121. Miss Elizabeth Jacobs, of Nazing Vicarage, Waltham Cross, Herts, a cure of dxtremeaervousness, indigestion, gatherings, low spirits ; and nervous fancies.—Cure No. 48,314. Miss Elizabeth Yeoman, Gateacre, near Liverpool, a cure of ten years' dyspepsia, and all the horrors of nervous irritability. Avoid Pills and Medicines : they invariably aggravate and perpetuate diseases ; their annoyance, disappointment and expense may be avo id e d b y us i ng D u B arry ' s Food , which, at a few pence per day, saves 5C times its cost is other remedies, removing effectually, without purging ! constipation, indigestion (dyspepsia) nerv ous , bili ous an d liver complaints and all their consequences. Certificate No. 36,418. We find it the safest remedy. Andrew Ure„ MD., F.R.S., Dr Harvey, Dr. Wurzer, Dr. Shorland, Dr.. Campell. Let invalids avoid the fearful dangers of spu rious and injurious imitations offered under a variety of false pi etenCeS. Nevill's imitations are prohibited by the high Court of Chancery under a penalty of £5,000 against Alfred Hooper Nevill and his agents ; and the pretences that Nevill has a patent for Arabica Food and that Da Barry's are connected with such patent are utterly fake. No canister is genuine without the name Barry Du Barry and Co., 77, Regent-street, in full, on theseal and wrapper. Shopkeepers who attempt imposition in one article must expect to be distrusted in all others. Packed in tins 1113. 2s. 9d.; 21b. 4s. 6d. ; 51b. 11s. ; 121 b. 225. ; 241 b. 40s. The 121 k. and 241 b. canisters are sent carriage free on receipt of Post-office order by Barry Du Barry and Co., 77, Re. gent-street, London; Fortnum Mason, and Co.; Abbia, 60, Gracechurch-street ; 4, Cheapside; 63 and 150, Ox bard-street ; 330 and 451, Strand ; 49 and 60, Bishopsgate street ; Batty, 16, Finsbury Pavement ; Phillips and On. tea-dealers; Petty, Wood, and Co., King William-street City : at. 127 Hie-b Holborn : and all eroe,ar• B I It T H B. _ . CUTLAR.—On the 20th inst., at 63, Gloucester-place, HyTo-park gardens, Mrs. Edward James Cutler, of a daughter. KENYON.—On the 20th inst., at 6, Lower Berkeley-atm*, Portman-square, the wife of J. It. Kenyon, Esq., of a daughter. MARRIAGES. EDWARDS—LITHGOW.-011 the 18th inst., at Weymouth, the Rev. Edward Edwards, 8.A., to Elizabeth, eldest daughter of the late Andrew Lithgow, Esq., of Wey mouth. EIAY—RAmsAv.--On the 20th lint., at Edinburgh, Major R. J. Hay, R.A., second son of the lata Admiral Hay, of Belton, East Lothian, to Georgina Harvey, youngest daughter of the late Sir Alex. Ramsay. DEATHS; FITZCLARENCE.—On the 20th inst., at Edinburgh, the Hon. Arthur FifzCiarence, fourth son of the Earl and Countess of Munster, aged six months. NicorsoN.—On the 19th inst., at 15, William-street, Lowndes• square, Augusta, wi e of Captain Sir Frederick Nicolson, Bart., RN. PUGII.—On the 20111 inst., at his seat, Ll anerc hydol, Mont gomeryshire, David Pugh, Esq., M.P., aged 72. REPINGTON.—On the 19th inst , A at Amington H all, War wickshire, General Charles 'she a Court Repington, C. 8., Colonel of the 41st Regt., aged 76- LONDON : Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, of No. IQ, Strand, Printer, at Tug SUN Oftce, No. 112,Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the County of mi l di esez Tuesday, Apra 230801. SOT: NOM Ltronol of £1 10s, Its ° (m b l e n j Bank, So Interes allow e d Otilitere 17, Du] MR. ~RA tO-NIGPTI area, 28 "en°ic, an( fr 'larch 2 . EVAT Gei 'leZant.E Dart Son, Erin ain ' t A R re( troin pen Pply !II such q 3 esty's L; I St June 1. Bror 2 . Rea( Barracks 3. Well and St. ( t. Tow Hon 6 , Ham 7 . Win, 8. Brig] 9 . Cm\ 10. s an i Seara ' it ch of t rat ely gr Forms obtained between 'rendez an sitzt Under el( Cornraiss De p u,New-s it 0m ea rnestly Omitth 14, Joh lianko %lid Co. ROY This I Pitiable disease, its su =Ls w ard Areal rn 600 beds most wr tousi y of Average, Contra Than, Es Itansom zarelay tayne, Co.; Or street ; a nd Co. Eigli spi3i tory, R'estt Port' near nerv, timb lung Sl] !erre 128, h , 10lb. Post atm Lon, And and stre4 cr' 1~ "T] 'tedie n(4 A Nf VOR TA! DE: AS FEI D'