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

dual 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 no t, what will be the prospects of next year's trade no one can tell ; what are the prospects of the next harvest no one knows. 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 up 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 may give up the paper duty. But if you do give it up, recollect that you cannot put it on again. (Hear, hear.) And why do you give it up ? Is it that the duty is oppressive ? I admit there are inconveniences in every Excise tax that is an in terference with manufacture. But What are the tests of a si a's - the i 3 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 anether place. It is for the three years 1858-59-60, and it shows that in 1853 the amount was £1,200,000; in 1859 it was £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 rel ea se s us f rom thosobligation to remove it when we think we can remove it. fairly. But let me ask v ? (Hear, the house have there been no other pledges given hear.) Has this house made no other promises? I be lieve that, on financial measures, this hone has given pledge after pledge, and made promise after promise; and that not by resolutions only, but by formal Acts of Parlia ment. An act was passed for the gradual reduction and removal of the income tax; where is the tax now? An Act was passed for the reduction of the war duty on tea and sugar; where is it now ? (Hear, hear.) An Act was passed creating a Sinking Fund; where 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? No; because my conviction is that the great pledge, resolution, and promise this house has 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. (Bear, 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 £2,000,000. If so, I say apply it where you may bra 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 iniport 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 drily I believe we shall benefit to a far greater extent than IT the remission of the paper duty to those whose welfare I ant sure all here are anxious to promote, although some may arrogate to themselves the peculiar merit of considering it— 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 —lmean Japan. Well, if we really have this surplus, and if ' it be not a deceptive surplus (hear), let us apply it in such a way as will stimulate trade with these countries, benefit our 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 bev 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 et:ong 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 cannel be embarrassed, you cannot exercise that hill uenee and thatpower which it is desirable you should possess abroad, nor can you with safetycarry 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 moment 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 c cinomy or reduction of expenditure, move a store 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 sidered by the house and the Government. Let rae ask the Government to remember that whatever may be the feeling of the country, whatever the pressure brought to bear upon them for the removal of a tax, it is their duty t ) weigh the consequences of such a remission, and upon their shoulders rests the responsib lily of jeopardising the national interests and the national finance. (Hear, hear.) I bog pardon of the house for having troubled thorn 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 temporary 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 cheers.) Mr. WHITE understood the hon. gentleman who had just sat down to recommend in lieu of the proposed remis- Aionof the paper duties and the re auction of ineome-tax a reduction of the tea duty from Is. sd. to is. per pound. Now, it was wise policy in effecting any remission of duty to make 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. 21d., the price to the consumer, from 1849 to 1852 in clusive —taking the common congou as the staple of value— was 91d. per lb. in bond, while the average price for four years ending in 1860, with a duty of ls. 5d., was is. nd., so that there had been a remission of duty to the extent of per cent., with a gain to the consumer of only 17 per cent. Nor were the last four years exceptional ones as regarded the amount of imports, for, while during the first period selected by him the average import was 59,225,000. b., from 18.57 4 to 1860 it was 75 ,C00,0001b. (Hear, hear.) Until the '° We Chinese were completely op ene d, an d our i ntercourse with was more ex t en d e d , and until some progress e n made in the pacification of the country, a reduc pr' ee a 44 tY would not b e f o ll owe d b y such a reduction of ' would proposing it. justify th e Ch ance ll or of the Exchequer in Lord I' (Hear, hear.) " 31.° Nr A.GU of the E xchecraer said the sp eec h o f t h e Chancellor w lon.q; sounding was on Mond a y even i ng full of words and of the que s ti on, and zhich kept out of sight the real view the house. He did not rh ought to h ave b een placed before gen tl eman h ad i ntaitioli m i c i an to s a y th at the right hon. ja rnislea the h ouse , b ut he had Ruin no doubt taken a t oo san a country. Now, was wh aen he epiokevioew of ti e fi nances of the incom tax it pleasant B,,uftir ci emitti ng a penny of the e , to the house. It was always pleasant to hear of a r em issio n cot' taxes. But wh a t was really the case ? There \vas i n fat no Ruch thi ng as an could to income tax, and therefore the right hon. gentlemano w not remit the Id., but what he propos e d to for the next year an lucerne tax of 9d.d. T hat Iv ,a Oi Putting imp ose the case did not sound so well to tho house. The right h gentleman's budget of last year teas like a magnificent :XlL plosion, bea u tif u l t o b e h o ld at the moment, but dihe greCabie to the eye when they came to walk over the ruins caused by it, (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman had, however, last year no less than four budgets, and what had they pro duced ? Take the penny duties—they had produced nothing but trouble; obstruction, and delay. Then the right hen gentleman counted upon savhig a large sum in the collec tion of the revenue, but later in: the year he confessed that his hopes had Ilem too oangniOle, OA thQ customs and Excise there had been a considerable falling off, and the right hon. gentleman had borrowed £1,000,000 on Exchee quer bills. Now with a failure of the right hon. gentle man's expectations of last year before them, they were jus tified in saying that he had not made sufficient provision for the year. The right hon. gentleman proposed to dispense with half the paper duty this year, and the whole of itnext year, and he would by so doing compromise the income of the country next 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 in n o 857, judgmenthe saido f it his was ONVi ti i n ebut duty in of th the house of t o himsel f, ace n th words Chancellor of the Exchequer would be able to pay hi s way. t and (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman proposed to re impose the income tux for one year only, and thus next year he would have a deficit of £10,000, 00 0. Ent 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 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 Be 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 t ,bacco would cause so great as increase in consumption as that there would be no loss to the revenue. The repeal of the paper duty was for the purpose of 1 benefitting the newspapers which misinformed, misguided, and misled the million. (" Hear, 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 than said he should invite the house to declare that they ought not to impose taxes on the articles consumed by the working man. (Bear, 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-imposed. 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 undertrke 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. Our 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 dis• pense with any source of revenue which should be nursed and husbanded tr 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 te 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 vvhohadnotaprejudice 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 who hail all along been a warm advo cate or use principles or free traae must have listened with mingled feelings of gitification and surprise, not withstand 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 itt success was more and more a proof of the wonderful results of the i 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 boak-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, 1 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 ho believed they were not founded on any over sanguine view of the resources ef 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 anticipat3d by the Chancellor of the Ex chequer. 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 out of doors. But he (Mr. Baxter) could not admit that the budget was open to these criticisms. These objections of the hon. gentleman were quite contrary to the views of the heals of the different departments, who were competent to form correct opinions on the subject. He 1 (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 amount of 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 hon. 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 an Chancellor im p impend d o - f the Exchequer to provide f or th e possibility of ing war and a defective harvest. lie (NIL-. 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 House of Com • mons, 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 tr.o3t 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. Ho must observe that nothing could exceed the good faith, liberality, and goDd feeling of the Emperorof the French in carrying out the details of the treaty. The merchants of this country were beginning t find out the advant - Iva they were likely obtain ; and before a dozen years had elapsed he 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 most beneficent but difficult and laborious task. (Hear.) Mr. B. STANIIOPE said that if the boa. gentleman would allow him he would point out his objections to that portion of the budget which related to the remission of duties. Ile 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 proposed to take 050,000 for income tax, and 16655,000 for the paper duties. Now what ho (Mr. and those taxes Was t ,; 11 : 1 °13e) had always been told was, that a real surplus the balance between the expenditure of the country which ardeyatetxhisetdedis, disposal l ic o h f t h h a e dbeen given by parliament andalwree Chan cellor of the Exchequer. That was a t i :urplua which did • , of public business that I make this observation, for I ar 3 quite convinced that if hon. members are prevented from availing themselves of this opportunity discussion, we shall not Liaise that progress in commit tee which the noble lord contemplates. On each resolutions instead of a discussion confined to its particular merits, there will be a discussion, not strictly regular' but of Parliamentary practice, on the whole plan of the Government. Therefore I have au wised, as far as I could influence the course of business beret that this opportunity should be taken for a general disells;; don. The discussion to-night emanated, not from ill bench, bat from from what are called the independenta levi ; bers of the house, represented on this occasion by one °f most eminent of their number. (Hear, hear.) It is 1 7: 0 po:sible for the committee to form an opinion on allY° f , t resolutions without further information on various r ai d f" a general of the scheme. I have, indeed, not made up my mind to what course I shall take in committee. Much will De• pend on the tone of the debate and the explanations " ch we receive from the Government. For instance, it is est: tial to a clear appreciation of our financial position that should know h ow t h e l ast deficit has been provided Pr' what is the exact surplus upon which we can really W il t whether we may legitimately assure ourselves that thes n ; of money will arri ve f rom Chi na, and so on, I mention 6:4 because the noble l or d, f rom t h e tone of his remarks, sesll3„ to think that it is an unusual course to take this oppertunly of discussing the p ro p os i t i ons of the Government. Ifthhe debate is conti nue d i n t h e same spirit and manner in whichit has been p ursue d to - night, I have no doubt we s hy arrive at such a result that when the house goes into corn' mittee we shall transact our business with greater fla il and effect. (Hear, hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I amain / r it was not the i n t en ti on o f my noble friend to compisin,f. the course which h as b een ta k en. I think that it is a le' . mate and desirabl e one , f or i t g i ves to every one an oPlVl ttr. nity of asking for information on the various points of th e scheme, in their relation to each other. I share, howeve r ', the anxiety of my no bl e f r i en d that the discussion w ithal' being in the slightest degree unduly abridged, should be proceeded with as rapidly as possible. There are modes° standing for to-morrow, which prevent us from resuraillg the debate till Th urs d ay. It is important, on account of the very complicated proceedings in the revenue depar t ' ment, which are connected with the renewal of the income • tax in a year when a new assessment is made, that the (HOW sions on this subject should be taken at as early a date as possible. We shall think it our duty, in case the debate dues not terminate on Thursday, to ask for leave to go On from day to day with the financial proposition until the main subjects are disposed of, and we earnestly trust via shall receive the approval and support of the house in making that request, (Hear, hear.) The debate was then adjourned. SCOTCH PARISHES. Mr. DUNLOP obtained leave to bring in a bill to mak e provision for the dissolution of combinations of parishes Scotland as to the management of the poor, which was read a first time. On the motion of Mi. COWPER., Colonel French and Col. Dunne were added to the Select Committee on the Public' offices Extension Bill. The house adjourned at 12 o'clock. COUN2'.IiY MARKETS. COLCHESTER —APRIL 20. A fair supply of wheat, and best samples made forma t prices ; inferior sorts lower in price. Malting barley mor e inquired for, b u t th e supp l y i s nearly over. Beans 2s per qr. dearer. Peas much the same as of late. Wheat, white 6OB to 68s Beans, Mazagan.. 32s to 3 6 2 red 44s to 608 l Middle & small 38s to 4 68 Barley 4os to 4Ss I White peas 44- to 48 0 Oats —s to —s Grey 38s to 40 CHELMSF—APRIL 19. A fair supply o f wheat, i O n a l trifle better condition. Best wheats barely maintained late rates. Business dull. Wbeat, white 38 s t o 66s 1 I Las, Partrid ge ..44 s t o 4 5 ' , red 47s to 63s White 43s to 4 6 ' Barley 29s to 42s Boiling 43s to 4„li i Chevalier ....32 s t o 45s Dun 40s to 4 0 Grinding 26s to 37s Beans, Tick ....37s to 46 6 Mat 61s to 67s Harrow Ticks 38s to 4 91 / Chevalier 64s to 69s Mazagan 31s to 4 34 Oats 26s to 31s STAMFORD—APRIL 20. There was a tolerable show of wheat at market, and lath prices were exceeded is per qr. Wheat ....56s to 62s Oats.. 26 s to 31 4 White do ..60 s t o 66s I Beans 4os to 459 Barley 30s to 44s I Ditto, old ........68s to 609 KIRKALDY—APRIL 20. Wheat Barley Oats First.... 36s Od 32s Od 24s Od Second.. Mg Od 40s Od 29s Od Third .. 64s Od 43s Od 33s Od COAL MARK (Prloes of Coal per Ton at S. a. Walker Primrose 12 9 Lambert's West Hart ley 16 6 rantield Moor 13 0 Carway and Duffryn Malting Do. Anthracite 21 6 West Hartley 16 9 Holywell 16 6 Hastings Hartley 16 9 Byass's Bebside West Hartley _ ..16 9 Wylam. ... .ET—APRIL 22. t the close et the market Walls End. South Hetton .. 19 0 Hartlepool.... lB 3 Heugh Fall 16 6 Cassop ..... ... 17 6 Brf ddyll's Hetton 17 ( 6 , Frays wellgate l6 Harton ' l6 ° 0 Edon Main 17 Eden 16 ~6 v Thorpe • 6 Trinidon Tho rn l e y.... 15 Whitworth 16 ( 1 Kelloe South Hartlepool...... 17 0 Hedley 16 3 Tunstall ....1G 6 , 70 ; sold, 58. Walls End. Acorn Close 16 9 Belmont 17 0 Ships at rriarke TILE MAILS. MAILS DUE. Australia, Ceylon, and Mauritius (via South ampton) •• • • • May 19. Do. (via Marseilles) May 13. Brazil and Cape Verds May 4. Buenos Ayres, Monte Video, &c. Cuba and Mexico .. April 29. Canada, &c. (via L'derry) .. April g 4. Cape of Good Hope, &c. .. May 3. China, Penang, and Singapore (via S'ampto • n) May 2. Do Gibraltar (via Southampton) (via Mars e ill es ) A pr il 26. April 25. India (Calcutta), Ceylon, &c. (via Southampton) May 2. Do. (via Marseilles) April 26. India (Bombay), (via Southampton) .. April 25. DO. (via Marseilles) .. May 5. Lisbon .. . • • • • • .. April 21. Malta, Egypt, • and Men (via Southampton) .. April 25. Do. (via Marseilles) .. April 26. Vigo, and Oporto .. .• .. April 21. United States, California, &c. .. April 25. Western Coast of Africa ' Madeira, Teneriffe May 10. West Indies and Pacific,Carthagena, Cuba, etc. April 29. [An- THE SITN,-140NDON,1 TUESDAY EVENING, APRIL. .23; 1861: -.upend on existing revenue, and over which the Chan cellor of the Exchequer had no control at all. (Cheers.) If he might venture to quote an authority for this, he might cite the opinion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself, in 180. 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 sane 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- I 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) was right, and 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 ld. 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 tax 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 Huse unanimously rejected a resolution that financial arrangements should then be entered into to take off the paper duty ; and he asked now, was it consistent, or was it fair towards the taxpayers, 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 188, 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 Englislination would readily permit their Parliament to re-impose 2d. or 4d. or 6d. on the same arti cle, 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 present 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 t 3 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 for 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 slily 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 ef f icient army and a great naval force. He hoped such a course would not be - pursued by the house. (Cheeis.) 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 quarters 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 no 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 altogcther 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 13800,000 ; 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 to ques 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 grater claim for consideration. He should reserve to himself full liberty to discuss that question when it came specifically before the committee. Mr. BLACKBURN said there were two questions for the consideration of the house; firtt, 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 4000,000 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?'Ile 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 what 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 trim 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 the harvest, the very best mode of counteracting such a calamity was to afford the means of employment to the people. Sir It. Peel acted on that prin ciple in 1842, and with the most decided success, for it ap•• peered 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. lie 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 taxation 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 he 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 reduction of the income-tax. At first sight that appeared a fair proposition, and if there was a large surplus to dispose of, it might be made not without plausibility, Unfortunately, however, that was not the case. The surplus revenue was practically a delusion. The right hon. gentle man seemed to have adopted that system lef finance which was common amongst 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. He 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. Were 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 b a penny paper. Then as regarded the price of books, that would not be affected in the least,er in themost inappreciable degree. Then,as to the paper trade, it was at present in a most flourishing condition. It might be said would no one gain 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 not 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 b the house last session, and in a most vituperative speech denounced the conduct which had been pursued he 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 auger had very st. ong 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 worth' 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 utmos: - , 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 censequence of the collision between the two Houses of Parliament last session, and togratify the selfish wishes of a few proprietors of penny newspapers. It was said the papereuty was to be repealed for the benefit of Ireland. Well, he knew something of paper mills ire 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 benefit resulting from the repeal of theduty 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 kndwledge. They all knew that the paper duty was so small upon books that it prevented no man frombeing just and generous if he desired to be so. The hon, and learned member then read a long extract from M'Cullech's "Principles of Taxation," show ing that although the paper duty operated somewhat un fairly, yet that it was the last tax that ought to berepealed, and that instead of that being done there would be no great objection to its being raised to 2d. .a pun], 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. lie 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 bon. 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 before 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 deputation 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 as to 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 he had listened with great attention to the able, lucid, and straightforward speech of the hon. gen tleman, the member for Huntingdon; and, as a very young member, he could not but express his surprise that in the present stets of feeling in Eagland with regard to taxation, g, as he did, to th e mercan til e articlesbrceolto en liderable reg re t a t w h at appeared d n against a remission o f taxa ;vihich prod uce d th e revenues o f the e dny h e o—o o nun should oht g nor e eyu n .lo t df l hfm theahavo n e f — e p:t n to him to be the rashness of the Chancellor of the Exche quer, 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. ingion to induce him to stand up and oppose the repeal of such a duty. ele also felt considerable surprise that the speech of the bon. 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 one 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 say 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 F He believed it to be of a nature the very reverie. Was it not a natural I- conclusion that the repeal of this indirect tax would make the case for the repeal of other indirect t txes still stronger. No argument could be given for the repeal of the paper duty which would not apply with tenfold force to the case of fire insurance —(hear) —or to the repeal of the duty on hops—(hear) —a duty which 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 thehouse, apologised for leading them through a wilderness of figures. He 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 addresses to two fair ladies whom he represented as newly introduce I 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 confidence to the house, but he stopped eta point which he (Mr. Long) would ven ture t) 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 the result of the budget 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, ho should record his vote with satisfaction and pleasure in favour of that amendment. Mr. BLACK said it was 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 on the 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 ors books and writing-paper the duty pressed heavily. 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 large constituency which he had the honour to represent, and that if the Chancellor of the Exchequer found himself with a surplus he could not do better than repeal the paper duty. Witii respect to the i ncome he regretted that the right hon. gentleman had merely reduced the amount without changing the incidence of the tax. He hoped that next year they might have a revision of the tax, and that it would be collected on the only sound principle—nawely, on income derived from property. I►Lr, DENTINCK, having complimented the Chancell9T of the Exchequer on the eloquence of his budget speech, said there was another feature of it which he admired quite as much, namely, its sophistry. The right hon. gentleman had drawn a remarkable picture. Ile had told them that he found himself called on by inclination and duty to pay at tention to two fair sisters, :the daughters of necessity and invention. But this was not the worst. 1 - 1 le' century since he (Mr. Beutinck) had been taught that necessity was the mother of invention. (Laughter.) He would not urge 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 sineerely than he (Mr. Bentinek) did the amount of their expenditure; but he should like 10 ask the right hon. gentleman, had it ever occurred to him to consider whit 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 ruen 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 ? Ile had declared on one occasion, " You ought not to repeal the paper duties if by su 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 country 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 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 t 3 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 made 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 community 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, tbat 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.) He 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 el he could to injure the interests and sacrifice the pockets of those he represented. Every member fora 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 pb ject was ; but two possible objects suggested themselves to the mind. One would seem to be au 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 their strong support to her Majesty's Government. He regarded this also as an attempt ti 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. gehtiernan 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 past 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 tix his great object. This budget was founded, besides, on a total misconception of his position. The surplus on which he 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 woith a fortnight's put chase. 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 liar duties on tea and sugar, would have nothing to fall back upon but a large increase of the income tax ! 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 such financial schemes as these, might be described in the old svelleknown 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 ho saia that the only persons to bo 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 literature. (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. lie 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 1850 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 the financial 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. NORTIICOTE 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 an 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 ye ir 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 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 ext3nt of £150,000, and the Secretary of Stete was wrong. (Hear, hear.) No less than £250,000, which had been a:lotted 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 )1,1 them that he war 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 ; Lut 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 Juno. He thought these facts jueffied him challenging the calculations now before them. lie was astonished to hear it said that the predictions or rather the calculations made on his side of the house lead proved to be groundless, the fact being that the calculations were lit;- rally justified by the result. They stated last year that the provision made for the year was not sufficient. It was nc4 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 then) would be A defieleAcY of X 8,500,000. [The cluzicEk. LOR of the EXCHEQUER—X2O,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 this year. They had therefore a large de &it to deal with. He might be told that they had predicted last year that it le 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 £1,330,000, making together a sum of £2,800,000, which would have raised the deficit to £11,000,000 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 seine 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, hear.) 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 wonted state to the house how he supposed the matter stood. In the first place, it was absolutely necessary to t eke into consideration an item which the right hon. gentle man designedly and deliberately told the house he should ornit—ehe 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 £451,000 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. (Cheers.) It might be that he (Sir S. Northcote) was in error in the conclusion at which he had arrived ; but if so, he could only repeat 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 P" No doubt they were partly made up of accumulations of surrendered ser vices; but to a very large extent they consisted 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 ealculate ; though it might, to be sure, have been cal culatsd upon at the time the right, hon. gentleman prodeaced 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 £600,600 ; while at another he spoke of only £200,00; 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 hou§e 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 £3,80J,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. He 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 net be required for this year, but there was the money in the Exchequer, liable t ) be drawn out. He did feel that in all the provisions of the finan • cial 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 Excheqner told them that with regard to two articles, tea and sugar, the duties had been stationary during the last two years ; but did tot the right hon. gentleman know the stationary character yf those impel is ? 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 £136,000,00; for the first two months of the present year they were only £3,570,000, being a reduction of 161 per cent., which was lower than any year since 1857. They were told that our import trade was going on satisfactorily, but they did not import many of those artie.es because the taxes had been taken pff, 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 in our trade with the United States, for he found that dur ing 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 for 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 sug ar 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 pause 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 8(1. in the pound would be sufficient to balance the account, but a, 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 too long. The right hon. gentleman had been in office near two years, but be had not done much in the way of reduction. Ho 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, 7lowever, that the an 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 be allowed to leave the chair. There will be many opportunities in the course of the committee for members to deliver their opinions. Mr. DISRAELI—The noble lord says very justly that there will be many opportunities in committee on the 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 Government. (UM ) hear.) It is avt Irma say wish t 9 delay the progreso A 8. d WERTISEMENTd—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' dyspepsia and all its horrors.—cure 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 JolYt Wortham Ling, near Diss, Norfolk." —Cu re N o 47 , 121. Miss Elizabeth J aco b s , of Nazing Vicarage, Waltham Cross, Herts, a cure of extreme Nervousness, 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 avoided by using Du Barry's Food which, at a few pence per day, saves 5C times its cost is other remedies, removing effectually, a .thout purging, constipation, indigestion (dysp e p s i a ) nervous, bi lious and 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 pretences. 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 Du 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, ontheseal and wrapper. Shopkeepers who attempt imposition in one article m ust expect to be distrusted in all others. Packed in tins 11b. 2s. 9d.; 21b. 413, 6d. ; 51b. Ils.; 121 b. 225. ; 241 b. 40s, The 121 b. 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.; Abbic, '3O, Gracechurch-street ; 4, Cheapsitie ; 63 and 150, Ox bard -street ; 330 and 451, Strand; 49 and 60, Bishopsgate street ; Batty, 16, Finsbury Pavement ; Phillips and ( 10 . tea.dealers ; Petty, Wood, and Co., King William-street City ; at 127 High Holborn ; and all grocers. BIRTHS. CUTLER.—On the 2Cth inst., at 53, Gloucester-place, Hyde-park. gardens, Mrs. Edward James Cutler, of a daughter. KENYON.—On the 20th inst., at 6, Lower Berkeley.sireet, Portman -square, the wife of J. H. Kenyon, Esq., of a daughter. MARRIAGES. EDWARDS—LITIIGOW.—On the ISth inst., at Weymouth. the Rev. Edward Edwards, 8.A., tl Elizabeth, eldest daughter of the late Andrew Lithgow, Esq., of "Wey mouth. :AY - RAMSAY.-Oil the 20th ina, at Edinburgh, Major R. J. Hay, R.A., second son of tho late Admiral Hat! of Belton, East Lothian, to Georgina Harvey, youngest daughter of the late Sir Alex. Ramsay. DEATHS. FITZCLARENCE.—On the 20th inst. at Edinburgh, the lion. Arthu r Fitzelarence, fourthson of the Earl and CountessNicolNon h so. CP_ f M unster,te9t l a h ge i d u s s i t., x months. a t 15, William-street, Lowndes-squa re , A ugusta, w if e o f Captain Sir Frederick Nicolson, Bart., R.N. PUGII.—On the 20th inst., at his seat, Llanerchydol, Mont gomeryshire, David Pugh, EFT, M.P., aged 72 . REPINGTON.—On the 10th inst., at Amington Tlall, War wickshire, General Charles Ashe a Court R e pi n gton, C. 8., Colonel of the 41st Regt., aged 75. _ __e_----- LONDON : Printed and Published by , A WRDo YOUNG, °( No. 112, Strand, Printer, at THE SUN °f l ee No. 112, In the Precinct of the sa voy, In tllc Ctddlel" wueoclay, April 23,_1801 , Strand, QUII7 of KI point e condin band, -Jntrod drille nom Bawn looms tornfol Poli, the Se Persor Fill al have t I lab] ally of ( Aces ton, loom. This the II revenn 41,260, The class ( /ling c rnous 1 the the Aary, fihe mdcliti( Systerr of par arnoun the Ins certain are int LoNnc Annua t7A7 The Every flable Venien U. Sir MI Henry Charge Charge l'ranci sir wa Thom s John I John ( John I Lewis John I Thom LTV ACT Rimers Profits Since Amour cash va tsoullSl Afte Assura amoun Brancj exceed LOC .Extra Zniums LOA Values, ASS Ceived MEI for Po Loss Comps Wren c h Comm obtain Addre Promo With a Off AE from r BUPPIY !II sucl Jesty'e du 1. B 2. R Marra 3. W and S TO-N wig lit *rep Are, n ; :Rare . Ith eleve n Ita liar Vona at N in CL TH M 4. T 5. 1 6. 11 7. 11 8: 9. C 10. S Sep e nch ( lately For obtain betty( Ten and Under eomn 5, Ne,l came ANC the li Bai and R Th ritia disu uat, its urea 500 t moll tousi aver: Co man Ran Payi Par( Co. ; atm( and k ed FOR