The Sun. — London, England, 1861-04-16 00:00:00

faith enough in free trade to believe that an increase in our I exports must have accompanied an increase in cur importa tions. (Hear, hear.) The importation of silks is generally associated with the deep distress in particular districts of this country, but it singularly happened that, as far as re gards the trade of the season of 1860 , the article of ribands in which the manufacturers and weavers of Coventry are interested, is one of relatively few that exhibited an abso lute decrease of importation. I may likewise say in refer ence to the treaty, that it is not the riband manufacturers of France, as I am informed, with whom the people of Coventry have to cops, but the thrifty and industrious wee. vers of Basle, who are the producers of the cheapest ribands and the moat formidable rivals to our manufacturers. Of course, we have no means of knowing what is the con sumption of English ribands, but the statement I have obtained from private sources, from persons at the centre of the manufacture, who have the best means of information, is this,--that in 1860 there was a decrease in the importation of French ribands of about 121 per cent., and in the use of English ribands of 26 2-3ds per cent. ' (" Hear, hear," from Mr. Newdegate.) My hon. friend'is cheer refers, no doubt, to the fact that there was a greater decease in English than in French ribands. The change of last year, while beneficial in its general character, aggra vated, I have no doubt, but certainly did not cause, the the distress in Coventry. (Hear, hear.) I much regret the coincidence in time of the two circumstances ; but it was, I believe, partly the change of fashion and still more the sad weather, which almost destroyed the spring e mma, which was the cause of those elifficulaes and cala mities. (Hear.) lam deeply sorry that a change which was absolutely demanded in justice to the people and every class of producers should for a moment and in a particular instance have been accompanied by any distress! We heard last year in this house a woful tale of the destruction im pending over I know not how many millions of the pro perty of .our British fellow-subjects in North America. Notwithstanding the terrors of that prophecy we perse • vered in our legislation, and I must record it to the honour of the colonists, that, as far as I am aware, not one word has escaped from them in complaint of the just and expedient measures adopted by Parliament for the benefit of the country. (Hear, hear.) lam happy to say that they are not ruined, and that their property is, to all appearance, in a very satisfactory condition. There has been an immense increase in the importations of foreign timber, but colonial timber has not disappeared from the British market, and has been more in demand than it was before. (Hear, hear.) In 1859.60 colonial timber and deals were imported to the extent of 1,262,000 loads. In 1860-61, after the perpetra tion of the act of destruction to the trade, as we were told it would be, the import of colonial timber and deals rose to 1,276,000. (Hear, hear.) The objection taken last year to the measures adopted by the house was that the duties reduced and abandoned were of moderate amount, useful for fiscal purposes, and without any ten dency to restrain trade and consumption. I will give the import of four leading :articles cf food set free from duty last year—butter, cheese, eggs, and rice. In 1859-60 butter was imported into this country to the extent of £2,362,000 in value; in 1860-61 the import rose to £4,122,000. In 1859-60 cheese was imported to the amount of £1,097,000, and in 1860-61 to the amount of £1,592,000. The import of eggs rose from £345,000 in 1859-60 to £497,000 in 1860-61, and the import of rice in the same years from £890,000 to £1,142,000. In the importation of these four articles there was a total increase of from £4,694,000 in 1859-60 to £7,300,000 in 1860-61. It cannot fail to awaken a senti ment of wonder in the mind of every one who hears me when I exhibit by itself—because it is an exceptional article, excess in the importation of which must tend, if it has any . effect, to restrain the importation of all other articles, and to displace them for the moment—the import of corn. In 1859-60 the importations of corn amounted in value to £17,384,000, but in 1860-61 they rose to no less a sum than £38,159,000. (Hear, hear.) We must, of course, regret the diminution of the resources of producers and the in creased tax on consumers within our own shores which those figures imply ; but, on the other hand, it must in spire every man with a deep and cordial sentiment of thank fulness to the Almighty disposer of events, that in the day of our scarcity no barrier was interposed between our wants and an abundant supply, and that the ships of England came over every sea, almost bursting with the cargoes that made up the enormous amount I have stated. (Cheers.) The figures I have quoted represent, I believe, from 23,000,000 to 24,000,000 quarters. The importation in the' financial year just ended was more than double that of the previous year, the percentage of increase being 1191 per cent. (Hear, hear.) I take next a very small class of articles on which a duty was imposed in 1860. In what may be called the simplification of the Customs' Tariff cer tain articles, particularly limited branches of the wood trade, were brought under a duty, and the result is rather singular. I believe the measure was a sound one and for the interests of commerce, but the result shows what the working of these things is. The total value of the impor tations of these articles, principally chicory and certain woods in 1859-60, was £2,906,000, and in 1860-61 it was but £2,405,000 being a decrease of £501,000, or IT per cent. I crave the particular attention of the Committee to the figures which lam now about to give. Without any selec tion of articles, I will give in three classes the whole of the duties which we have now before us. First of all, always excepting corn, I will give you the whole of the articles forming th...l , Jeetb yr British trade In the way of imports which were left untouched by the legislation of last year. I will then give you those on which Parliament last year re duced the dutiee, and lastly, I will give you the articles on which the duties were wholly repealed. The imports of those articles the duties on which were left untouched last year amounted in 1859-60 to £138,158,000. In 1860-61 the value was nearly the 5ame—£137,406,000, being a trifling decrease of 1 per cent., showing us, in point of fact, a sta tionary condition—always excepting corn—as to the general condition of trade. I come now to the articles on which the • duty was reduced last year. In 1859-60 the value of the imports of those articles was £11,316,000, but in 1860-61 the value was £13,323,000, showing an increase of £1,976,000, or 17 . 1 per tentage, while the rest of the trade of the country was stationary. (Hear.) Next come the articles on which the duties were repealed in 1860. The value of the importation of those articles in 1859-60 was £15,735,000, while in 1860-61 it was £22,062,000, being an increase of £6,327,000, orno less than 401 percent. (Cheers.) The principle I take it on which we have proceeded through out in our operations on these classes of articles has been this —that the true basis on which to consolidate the revenue of this country lies in the extension of its trade. The ex perience is narrow and the time is short ; the treaty with France is still a one-sided instrument ; the French legisla tion is not in operation, except as to some two or three heads, which are not amongst the most weighty or im • portant. You have not got nearly the benefit which is to arise from it; but in this year, when we needed increased means of employment for the people, wo are able to show that by means of the reductions made by that treaty and the accompanying measures an addition has already been made to the trade of the country of nearly £9,000,000. (Cheers.) For my own part, I believe that the merits of this instrument, considered with reference to its commercial consequences, may well stand on the results of such a statement. (Hear, hear.) I will now pass from the retrospective part of my duty to that which concerns the future, thanking the house for the indulgence which they have shown me (cheers), and assuring them that I shall not have to make such extravagant demands on their time in the portion of my task which still remains. I come now to the financial year which has already begun-1861-62, and I have first to present to the Committee the estimate of the expen diture of the country for that year. Much of it is already before them, and the whole will very shortly be in their hands. The interest on the Funded and Unfunded Debt in 18G1-62 will amount to £26,180,000. I may say on this head that there are various modifications of minor points in it ; the interest of the Unfunded Debt is increased, and the interest of the Funded Debt diminished, in consequence of the lapse of certain annuities; but it is not worth while taking up the time of the house by going into these matters at present. The Consolidated Fund charges is £1,930,000, the Army and Militia £15,256,000, and the Navy £ 1 2,029,000. I may say here that it will be our duty to ask the house for a further vote of credit on account of the war be China, which will probably amount to £1,000,000. The total charge for military operations under these heads, ordi nary and extraordinary, will be £28,285,000, without in cluding the packet service, which is now removed to a sepa rate vote. The Miscellaneous Civil Services charge is £7,7 .7,000. Upon this particular head of expenditure I will just venture to say that there is an apparent increase in the gross sum to be voted this year for the Miscellaneous Civil Services amounting to £203,000 ; but I have the satisfaction of assuring the Committee, on the other hand, that there is no general increase in these estimates. I can very readily account for more than the £203,000 which represents this apiirent increase. Tho main part is a real charge, although it is a charge which is occasional, and a charge in respect to which we obtain value far what we pay. The censtie which is now going on will cost the country, I,believe, £127,000. A sum £37,000 will be charged in the estimates for the salaries of the district registrars under the Court of Probate; but more than a of r e sponding sum, £56,000, w ill b e received in the shape tec_seterieeps representing th e f ees w hi ch are paid to those c ps representing that increase represents an economy. "Z • l :e2fs ee an h extra charge of £40,000 f or th e Mi nt connected c;37 xecution of the co pp er co i nage, but that charge 00,01: 7 0 t !acted in a satisfactory manner by the set-off of of to.3,olt.lae,iedscellaneous revenue, showing a net profit which deserve there are several charges in the estimates whi ch is connected are attention of the house, one of in Western xortZlawith the drawing of the frontiers line and the United staZr" between the British territory , h a a nd for which I am afraid a con ever, leave it to toy right Zito be incurred. I will, how . friend the Secretary of the Treasury to explain the additipornesteonthese estimates in detail at the proper time. For the justified in say arges ..o u r ing that, while both in foineer years and eara year we have l iscellaneous somewhat retrenched the ch the Standing Estimates by the use of balances which werefl‘o to the credit of respective items, the • provision we make Will be amply sufficient for the expenditure, and t h e fl I have laid bef;ire the Commit tee, though they may pr gli ese ls t Lorne apparent increase, do not represent any real or g eneral increase. (Hear, hear.) The Revenue Department charge is 4780,000. That is a diminution, as compared with last rear. A considerable part of that clialhattical—not less than £BO,OOO, represeLts the reductions of estat lishments, as far as they have gone, in the Customs' Department, which are among the beneficial results of the legislation of last year. Ido not by any means think that the limits of those useful retrenchments have been reached, but in all reduc tions of this sort there are always superannuations to be provided, and the charges for superannuations will fall upon this estimate. The packet service is £995,000. That is an estimate which always fills me with some jealousy. (Hear.) This year there is a diminution in it, which is mainly due to the receipt of certain colonial payments in aid of the colonial packet service. The total estimate for the expen diture of the year is £69,900,000—in round numbers, £70,000,000. The vote of credit for the Chinese operations has been calculated on the same principles as heretofore. It is impossible to be quite precise with regard to a small ex cess or a small diminution, but I do not doubt that sub stantially it is likely to correspond with such demands as will be made upon us. The house will be asked also to vote a certain sum—£2oo,ooo —for army excess in the year 1859- 60. That is a matter into which Ido not enter. I know there is a controversy going on which another set of com batants have all to themselves, but it has no bearing on the statement I have made, because it is asked for a charge .which has received Parliamentary sanction, which has been incurred and met, and it does not enter into the balance sheet of the year. £69,900,000, then, is the sum at which we estimate the expenditure of the year. I come now to the estimate of the revenue for the year. (Cheers.) And in stating the amount of the revenue I will take the liberty of incluclingcert tin small sums which will be propoied through some minor'financial adjustments which we are about to make. The whole extent of them is very small, if we ex cept those sumps to which I have just referred. They will not be perhaps more than £50,000 a year, but it is more convenient to include these items than to bring forward substantive details with regard to them. In the Customs revenue we propose to double the duty which was laid last year upon the article of chicory, and, including that small sum, the Customs will yield £23,585,000. Of course that includes the augmented duty on spirits, which is now in frill operation. The revenue of the Excise will be £19,463,000. The revenue of stamps will be £8,460,000. Under those heads are included some further small changes of which I will now take cursory notice. We propose to reduce the amount, which has long been felt to be high, for hawkers' licences. The payment is now £4, which we know is a severe payment. We propose to reduce that which is a £4 licence, if taken for a year, to £2, and at the same time to allow licences for half a year to be taken for £l. (Hear, hear.) That change, it is expected, will be made without any loss of revenue. With regard to the Refreshment Houses Act, we propose to declare more clearly the law, and in so declaring to enlarge the meaning of refreshment houses with respect to their liability to duty when kept open at night. Tho effect of legislation last year was to con fine the imposition of duty to those houses which were kept open at night ; but it was the clear intention and desire of Parliament that all classes of those houses should be em braced. I propose to clear the law and likewise to declare that a particular class of shops shall be taken—that tobacco shops, where they are kept open for the purpose of amok - ing, shall be included. (Laughter.) That change will pro duce, as we estimate, about £20,000. There is another change which we are about to make, which I must say is one of the clearest in the policy on which it is founded ever submitted to Parliament, and it is a matter on which con siderable interest is felt by many members. I refer to the state of our law with regard to the sale of spirits. Probably many gentlemen have not inquired into the method by which, when there is a necessity for the use of a small quan tity of spirits in their own household, that demand is usually supplied. I am afraid that if the proceedings of hon. mem bers, as heads of families, were investigated, it would turn out that probably nine-tenths of them were breakers of the law. (Laughter.) But the law is so irrational that I cannot refuse to submit the alteration of it to Parliament. The law is this, that unless a man wants for the purposes of his house or family as large a quantity of spirits as two gallons, which most probably would not be consumed in most of our houses, or in many of them, in a twelvemonth—unless he wants two gallons of spirits, which must be left in the keep ing of servants, with the temptation incident thereto, he has no choice but to send a servant for it to a publichouse. I really must say that law is a discredit to society. I think the condition imposed on the whole middle class disgraceful —that all who do not keep men servants, but have women servants, should, when they have occasion to send for a small quantity of spirits for a sick child or a sick wife, have no choice but to send a woman- servant for it to a public house. (Hear.) What we propose is, that on payment of £3 3s. a-year the wholesale spirit dealer, who now pays £lO 10s. a-year, may acquire the right of selling retail. By that:change we expect to obtain a revenue of £5,000 a-year ; and my picture of the present state of the law is completed when I say that it is the constant practice of the Board of In land Revenue, when breaches are made known to them, not to press for penalties, the law being one which it is clearly impossible to carry into effect. (Hear, hear.) Then there is a change in the stamps at present applicable to agreements for furnished houses let for less than a year. At present they pay the same ad valorem duty as a conveyance. The principle in other cases is to tax mush lower agreements of a fugitive character, and we propose, instead of 10s. for every £lOO of value, to require a stamp duty of 2s. 6d. on every part of an agreement—that is to say ss. for the whole, whatever may be the amount of letting. That will yield a small revenue of £5,000 a-year. We shall take care that the duty is enforced and paid, which is not so at present. We also propose that house agents in all cases shall take out a £2 licence, so as to keep them under the view of the Revenue Department with respect to these stamps. There will also be an alteration of the law with respect to foreign bills of exchange. Instead of having jumps as I may term them, of considerable amount, the stamps will increase by Is. for every £lOO, and in that way we shall economise and render more convenient the operation of the law. Those small charges, with the transfer of £50,000, the fees of the district registrars of the Court of Probrate, will raise the revenue of the Excise to £19,463,000 ; the stamps will give, as I have already said, £8,460,000 ; the revenue from taxes will be £3,150,000; and the revenue from the income-tax will be £11,200,000. Of course, the committee will have perceived that in making this statement I am assuming the continuance in state quo of all taxes which exist; and that is obviously the most convenient mode. (Laughter.) The revenue from the Crown lands is expected to be £295,000, and the mis cellaneous revenue £1,400,000. Upon that I will say that although the miscellaneous revenue has lost the benefit this year of £250,000 received in payment from Spain, yet on the other hand it profits very considerably by a new arrangement with the East India Company with re ference to the payment of non-effective services. It had becomelittle . more than £60,000. It will be now £150,000. That bringsthemiscellaneousrevenue to £1,400,000. Lastly, we estimate theindemnity from China to be received by the 31st of March, 1862, at £750,000. That is more than a year's receipt of that indemnity. I hear an hon. member say "the occupation will cost more." I look upon money from a Chinese indemnity as unhappily representing a much larger sum which we have spent. (Hear, hear.) But this £750,000 must be taken as representing about a year and a half's indemnity. Twosums have beenpaid. Nothing has been brought to account. Although we cannot regard these payments minutely and precisely as if we were deal ing with payments at home, yet on the whole I think the two payments already made and five quarterly payments will give a sum of £750,000 in China; which will come to credit and be available for expenditure up to the 31st of March, 1862. [An hon. member.—" How much from the Post-officer'] Tho Post-office will yield £3,500,000. The total of those items is £71,823,000, and if not the very largess it is oneof the largest, estimates of revenue which has ever been presented to this country in a time of peace. (Cheers.) It remains to compare this sum with the estimate of expen diture. The estimate of expenditure is £69,000,000, so that on the face of the estimates there is a surplus of estimated revenue over estimated expenditure to the extent of £1,923,000. (Cheers.) And, Sir, I must say I cannot pro nounce that sum without hearing a great crash. I hear somewhere in the distance a great downfall of prophecies, predictions, forebodings, lamentations, sympathies, remon strances, and regrets, of which the crop last year, though it was a bad season for other products, was most abundant. (Cheers and laughter.) We come now to - the question of the proposals of the Government with regard to the balance. It is now time that I should repeat the observa tions which I have just made as a matter of form, that it is not a balance which we possess, but which, if we are to have it, we must ask you to give it. The Income-tax Act has expired. The act levying the tea and sugar duties expires on the 30th of June. Between the two they repre sent a sum of £22,000,000. We shall have to ask you to re new bills, of which I shall say more by and by, but the authority for renewing which we shall have to obtain from you. Her Majesty's Government have come to the conclu sion that they cannot reasonably expect to be allowed to keep in hand a balance so large as that which I have named. Independently of the circumstance that it does not grow out of existing laws, but depends on grants to be made in Committee of Ways and Means, it would, in p o i, of fact, be an amount which no Chancellor of the Each;;. quer for the last 30 years—since the present arrangement of the Sinking Fund—has ever'presvmed to ask or has ever had the smallest chance or hope of obtaining. I therefore presume, sir, that I shall carry with me the approval of the committee when I say that we think this is an occasion on which we may dispose of a portion of this balance by the remission of taxes. When I have got thus Err it is obvious that four subjects, all of them important, will occur to the mind of every man who considers the question. Two of them are the duties upon tea and sugar—(hear, hear) —and these subjects are connected together by the fact that the duties were imposed together and have been handled toge ther for the purpose ogwar and for the purpose of meeting an extraordinary expenditure. (Hear, hear.) It is quite true that the duties now leviable upon tea and sugar are what are called war duties; that is to say, that it was in conside ration of a war that Parliament consented not absolutely and in fact to raise them, at least as regards [tea, but to allow them to remain at a higher point than had previously been contemplated : and I think that no one can fail to feel than they are duties the reduction of which is greatly to be desired: (Hear, hear.) At the same time, while the duty upon tea is more than 100 per cent, and the duty upon sugar is over 50 per cent., the supplies of both articles are abun dant, the consumption of them both in ordinary years and in ordinary states of the country, shows a decided disposition /.4 i " T e 4 4O) azul there is ue such great dituculty atteuclin THE SUN, LUNDON,] TZESDAY EVENITIG, APRIL 16, 1861. them as to give them an urgent, imperative, and para mount claim upon the attention of Parliament. The other two subjects which must occur to the minds of the commit tee are those which were likewise associated together in the legislative proposals of last year and in the debates of this house; I mean what is called the tenth penny on the in come tax and the repeal of the paper duty. (Hear.) When her Majesty's Government proposed the repeal of the duties upon paper the issue was raised by my hon. friend the mem ber for Sdmersetshire (Sir W. Miles), representing the Op position, of course, in the form which he thought was most favourable to himself, but which undoubtedly involved no unfairness and could not be complained of—viz., that the 10th penny of the income tax was imposed in order to bring about the repeal of the duties upon paper. These are the subjects upon the discussion of which I wish to enter at this moment, and to which I invite the particular attention of the committee. And here we are faced by the old question between direct and indirect taxation. I take some credit to myself that I have never entered into the debates upon that subject. I have always thought it idle for a person holding the position of Finance Minister to trouble himself with what to him is necessarily an abs tract question—viz,, the question between direct and indire,lt taxation, each consi dered upon its own merits. To many people both appear sufficiently repulsive. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) As for myself I confess that I entertain quite a different opinion. 1 never can think of direct and indirect taxation except as I should think of two fair sisters who have been introduced into the gay world of London, each with an ample fortune, both having the same parentage—for the parents of both 1 believe to be necessity and invention—having somewhat different manners, one being more free and open, and the other more retiring and insinuating. (Laughter.) I cannot conceive any reason why there should be any unfriendly rivalry between the admirers of these two damsels ; and I frankly own, whether it be due to a lax sense of morals or not, that, as a Chancellor of the Exchequer or a member of this house, I have always thought it not only allowable but even an act of duty to pay one's addresses to them both. (Laughter.) lam therefore perfectly impartial as between direct and indirect taxation; but this I must say, that with regard to the remission of indirect taxes, I hope that the memorable history of the last 20 years will never be forgot ten, for I do not scruple to state that if you look to its eco nomical, and then to its political, social, and moral results, it is difficult to know which to prefer. (Hear.) If we had not gained a shilling by the remission of indirect taxation, it would have been worth having for the sake of the manner in which it has knit together the intereets and feelings of all classes from one end of the nation to the other. (Cheers.) If, on the other hand, it bad had nothing to do with any question of moral and social results, still the merely econo mical results in promoting the material well-being of the people have been so signal and extraordinary, that we may well rejoice to have lived in a period during which it has been our happy lot to take part in bringing about such changes. (Cheers.) But, Sir, there cannot be a grosser de lusion than the supposition that the work of Parliament has been to destroy indirect taxation. The business in which Parliament has been employed has been the business of pruning the tree—not to destroy it, but in order to streng then it and give it greater size and vigour; and the conse quence is that at this moment, when indirect taxation has been destroyed and undermined in the public mind, as the phrase is, not once but four or five times over, indirect taxa tion is larger and more productive, I do not mean in this particular year, but upon the average of the last two or three years, than at any former period of our history. This recalls to my mind the tree of golden leaves which has been described by Virgil, from which his hero was ordered to pluck a branch, and on which the moment one branch was plucked another took its place. The poet says : Primo avulso non deficit alter " Aureus ; et simili frondescit virga metallo." And he goes on with advice which we shall do well to fol low : "Ergo alto vestiga ocalis, et rite repertum " Carpe menu." I believe that Parliament has done much of what is to be accomplished in that matter, but yet something may remain, and I trust that the House of Commons will not hold its hand when favourable circumstances shall offer, but will from time to time carry on so good a work within the limits of prudence and justice. But, Sir, in speaking thus of indi rect taxation I cannot deny that remissions of direct taxation are just as desirable, and las fully feel as gentlemen op posite may feel that our direct taxation has reached a point at which it is most desirable that we should if we can, begin at least to apply to it the process of reduction. (Op position cheers.) Ido not think that the condition of this country with regard to its finances can be wholly satisfactory when, in time of peace, the income-tax stands at 10d. in the pound. (General cheers.) I know very well that lam sup posed to be under a special responsibility not only for the amount, but for the existence of the income-tax. (Hear.) It has often been charged upon me, and I believe is to this day alleged that it is my duty, whatever be the circum stances, and whatever be the, expenditure, to find means of abolishing that tax with or without a substitute. I must confbss that I think that is a hard imposition. I should like very much to be the man who could abolish the income •tax. I do not abandon altogether the hope that the time may come (A laugh, and hear, hear.) I can assure 'hon. gentlemen that I am:not going to be too sanguine. I was going to quote the Rev. Sydney Smith, who in his admirable pamphlet upon the ballot, speaking of soma rcry - i om oto result, says, I think we had better leave the care of this subject to those little legislators who are now receiving a plum or a cake after dinner." lam afraid that that course may be I necessary with regard to the incomeetax. But in point of 1 fact this is a question cf expenditure—(cheers)—and I will not speak of expenditure as a thing that can be suddenly and rapidly dealt with. Upon all sudden attempts to re duce it, and upon all promises to make sudden, extensive, and sweeping reductions in it,l should look with great sus picion and disfavour ; but, if the country is content to be governed at a cost . of between £60,000,000 and £62,000,000 or £64,000,000 a-year, I do not believe that there is any reason why it should not be so governed without the in come-tax, provided that Parliament so wills. (Hear, hear.) If, on the other hand, it is the pleasure of the country to be governed at a cost of between £70,000,000 and £75,000,000 a-year, it must be so governed with the aid of a consider able income-tax. That I believe to be the whole case, and I really cannot conceive that my responsibility to abolish the tax is so absolute as it has been represented by some gentlemen. I think that it would be a most enviable lot for any Chancellor of the Exchequer—l certainly do not entertain any hope of itr—but I think that some better Chancellor of the Exchequer, in some happier times, may achieve that great accomplishment, and that some future poet may be able to sing of him as Mr. Tennyson has sung of Godiva,—although I do not suppose the means employed will be the same,— "He took away the tax, " And built himself an everlasting name." What we have now to do is to deal with a moderate surplus, and her Majesty's Government think that, looking at all the circumstances of the case, they may in the present year propose to Parliament to remit from the income •tax the penny which in 1860 they asked Parliament to impose. (Cheers.) The cost of that change if it be accepted by the House of Commons will be as follows :—Each penny of the income tax now yields about £1,100,000 a-year, and the remission of this penny will in the course of the financial year cause a loss of £850,000. The tax will then be levied at the rate of 9d. in the pound upon incomes of above £l5O a-year, and of 61. in the pound upon incomes below that amount. The 9d., it will be recollected, was imposed upon the country without any reference to remissions of duty. It was imposed in 1859 to meet the necessary charges of the year, and it stands totally disconnected from the financial and legislative mea sures of the country. The fourth of those subjects to which I refer is the duty on paper; and her Majesty's Govern ! ment feel that happily the time has now arrived when they may approach the consideration of that question without awakening adverse feeling, and when they may hope not only that there will be no revival of a painful and arduous controversy, hut that by so doing they may seal and bring the controversy to a final close. (Hear, hear.) I have heard but few members of this house object to the repeal of the paper duty on the merits of that proposal. My right hon. friend the member for Coventry on the third reading of the bill for the repeal of that duty gave expression t , ) sentiments which certainly did not accord with my own feelings at the moment, but which I admit were felt by many members of this house. On the Bth of May, 1860, —and his observations will spare me the necessity of enter ing again into detail on the question—his words were : " With respect to the tax which we are now ellseassing, I have not a word to say in its defence. It is about as odious a tax as one can well imagine. It is not only a tax which interferes, as all Excise taxes do, with an important branch of manufacture, being almost the only tax"— My right hon. friend might, perhaps, have gone further. and said the only one— "Of that description now left in our fiscal system, but it also impedes the circulation of information and of know ledge. Upon all these grounds no man is more disposed to repeal this tax, whenever we can do so without robbing the Exchequer. But when we are called on to repeal it at the risk of leaving a large deficit, or when we are called on to impose other taxes equally odious to the people, I think we should wait until some more favourable time presents itself." My right hon. friend laid down two conditions. He said, "I will not repeal this tax whilst there is any risk of a de ficit." I do not raise any old controversy, but I have shown you on the figures that there is no risk of a deficit now. He also said, "I will not repeal it when we are called on to pro-pose other:taxes equally odious ;" and Ido not think I am misrepresenting his speech when I say that his mean ing was—" I will not repeal the duty on paper if that re peal is to be purchased by the augmentation of the income tax." I now invite the right hon. gentleman and the house to concur in that repeal in conjunction, not with an aug mentation, but with the commencement of a diminution. (Cheers.) When we consider the subject on its merits, every man, I am sure, will admit the powerful considers.. tions that must concur in recommending the measure we propose. There is the yet unredeemed pledge c o n vo y e d b y the resolution of this house. (Cheers.) There is the in- creased and increasing difficulty of executing the law; there is the conscientious and impartial declaration of the department intrusted with the duty of collecting the tax ; there is the important fact that the repeal of this tax received the. sanction of a large majority of this house last year; and though that majority dwindled on a subsequent occasion, it dwinaled only in the face of the fact that new demands for public purposes had come into view, and it was obvious that new - haol, =mum allot be taken, t4OI I PPIY the yirailt4 of the Exchequer. Under these circumstances we are con vinced that we are waking a proposal which will receive, not the acquiescence only, but the approval and sanction of the house. I trust there is no one here who thinks this an improvident measure—what is called a sacrifice of the en tire source of revenue, and that the repeal of this tax leaves behind it no reproductive powers. I have in my hand an ac count of the Excise duties. In 1844 these amounted to £14,469,000; since then we have repealed £2,355,000, and assuming that'll° reproductive power exists in measures of this class, there should now remain of Excise £12,114,000, instead of which they amounted, in 1859, to £20,224,000 (Hear, hear.) Of course, in that sum was included a cer tain amount—perhaps about £2,000,000 —arising from the. augmentations in Scotland and Ireland, but the great bulk of that increase was derived from the augmented strength and consuming power of the country, arising from the ex tension of its trade, industry, and enterprise. Let me give the committee the financial results of this proposition. We have a balance of £1,923,000. One penny taken off the in come-tax will deprive us for three-fourths of the year dur ing which the change will be in operation of £850,000. We cannot propose the repeal of the paper duty from the 15th August, the period which was fixed on last year, because that would trsnch rather too sharply on the balance at our command. 'We propose to date its remission from the Ist of October. The loss on Excise revenue by repealing the paper duty will be £675,000; and there will be a loss of Customs' duty from the same cause of £15,000 ; making together £690,000. There will be, however, a saving by reduction of the vote for stationery of about £ls,ooo—a sum representing but a very small proportion of the direct saving which the public will make by the repeal. Adding to this £lO,OOO, the amount of the saving by reduction of the establishment charges for the half-year, the total saving will amount to £25,000, leaving a net loss on the repeal of the paper duty of £665,000. Coupling this with the reduc tion of income-tax, the total remission will be £1,515,000, which, when deducted from the balance of revenue, will leave a residue of surplus to the moderate amount of £408,000. (Loud cheers.) On the part of the Government I must make an appeal to the house. I venture to express a hope that they will give us their support in resisting any attempt at invading this very moderate surplus. (Hear, hear.) The Government have selected what they thought great and important items of remission, which it was their duty to make for the benefit of the community at large, and of the trade and industry of the country; and. with respect to other demands, even though they should appear reasonable in themselves, we feel it an absolute obligation, in which we trust the committee will give us its support, to decline, in the absence of further means and a fuller Exchequer, to listen to any such un due excess of demand. But I must not finally dismiss this subject without referring to a matter of consi derable importance—l allude to the minor charges on trading operations. (Hear, hear.) In my official capacity I have received memorials from several Chambers of Com merce, expressing the desire of the mercantile world to be relieved from those charges, and I should be very sorry to leave them under the impression that the expression of any wish of theirs had not led to the most respectful examina tion:of the subject on the part of any Chancellor of the Ex chequer, and particularly on the part of one who like my self is closely connected by origin and association with their class. The yield of these charges is about £310,000 or £320,090 a year; and it is obvious that the Exchequer is not in a condition to make a surrender of that sum. But further, I am bound to say thetas regards the greater part ofj these charges I cannot admit that any case has been made out to justify such a surrender. In all there are six of them. The charge on dock warrants, the charge on de livery orders, and the charge on contract notes are the three first. These three are stamp charges, and I believe them to be as unobjectionable as almost any charges to be found among the stamp duties of the country. Two others have reasons for their maintenance entirely apart from their fiscal results. One of them consists in an imposition of a stamp duty of ls. 6d. on the bills of lading of commodities expor ted from this country, and yields a sum of £40,000 or £50,000 a year. But it was imposed for a purpose beyond the mere collection of revenue—viz., with a view of obtain ing accurate and trustworthy instead of inaccurate statisti cal information. That object we have been enabled by its instrumentality to attain ; I am bound to say that I think it one of great public value, and I cannot admit that a case has been made out against the continuance of the tax. In the same way, with reference to warehouse charges, an im portant object was effected in their imposition, a limitation being thereby imposed on a source of enormous expendi ture, which was formerly made in extending warehousing privileges to small places with small trades ; and the effect of the tax was to put on these places a portion of the charge of the establishment. I confess I think that a very valuable tax, and I am not prepared to admit that it is attended with serious disadvantages, or with any great imposition of labour in its collection. The remaining charge is one with respect to which I must say that I cannot go the same length. I refer to the charge of id. on goods imported into this country. I frankly admit that although the tax is attended with con siderable statistical benefit, I think there is a good deal of labour connected with its collection imposed on the mer cantile classes ; and labour, after all, when it is imposed on the taxpayer, is in itself an additional tax. (Hear, hear.) If that cannot be got rid of by any arrangement, I am quite willing - chub rarnament, at an early perma, um recon sider the subject. But with respect to the demands ad vanced by certain Chambers of Commerce, 1 think I have shown that the Government, with such a moderate balance as £408,000, would not be justified in acceding to their demands. I only propose to re-enact the income-tax and tea and sugar duties for a single year. There is an advan tage in a more permanent legislation, but we feel this diffi culty—if we were to ask for the re-enactment of hose duties for three years, that it would be said that such a proposition implies a certainty that they will not be re duced before the end of three years Our object is to leave these questions open, in the hope that we may see some reductions of expenditure which it may be beneficial to apply in that direction, and therefore, on the whole, we think it fit for the moment, though admitting that the pro ceeding is not without inconvenience, to propose the re enactment of those taxes for one year. With respect to the levying of the income tax, the operation of last year, which brought into the compass of twelvemonths one quarter of the former year and three-quarters of another, now gives place to the normal condition, and the collection for the year will be one-quarter at 10d. and three-quarters at 9d. I shall, however, ask leave to introduce a clause into the bill to facilitate the collection of the tax on ecrtain dividends which fell due since the Ist of April, and escaped payment of the tax. (Laughter.) This is not an ex post facto legislation, for the gentlemen who received these dividends would be bound to return them in Schedule D ; but, possibly one or two might forget to do so, and, to prevent any accident of that sort, the Bank and paying bodies will be required to supply lists, so that the law may be fairly and uniformly applied. (Hear, hear.) I shall ask the committee to vote immediately, in the usual form, without prejudice to the ultimate decision, a resolution enabling me to charge double duty on foreign chicory. That resolution is the only one on which I shall ask the house to vote to-night; but I shall propose that the house should again resolve into a Committee of Ways and Means on Monday, in order to decide on the proposals of the Government, as it is very desirable, in reference to the col lection of the income- ttx and the making of the new assess ments this year, that the proceeding should be as expedi tiously effected as is conformable with the convenience of the house. As to the mode and order of proceeding, we in tend to adopt that which we think will at once give the house the greatest convenience in discussing the measures of the Government, and be best suited to its position and office as a branch of the Legislature. As our proposals are all strictly financial, and as they are intended to form one single plan, we shall present them all in proper connexion with one another by a series of resolutions to the committee. The income-tax resolution will be taken first; then the resolu tion for the renewal of the duties on tea and sugar, and afterwards the repeal of the duties on paper. Some minor resolutions will follow, and when all are reported to the house I shall ask leave to bring in a bill to give effect to them. Having taken a financial survey of the affairs of this country, I must now tender the expression of my gratitude .., - for the kindness and patience with which the committee have followed me through wliat I may call a wilderness of details. As respects the connexion between the general condition and the financial state of the country, the result is satisfactory. We have seen this country in the last few years of European war under a burden of taxation such as, out of a European war, i tnever could have been called on to bear; we have also seen the country under the pressure of a season of blight sttch as hardly any of us recollect ; yet, on looking around on the face of England no one can perceive any signs of decay, least of all in those attributes which perhaps are the highest of all, and on which depend our national existence—the spirit and courage of the country. (Hear, hear.) It is needless to say that neither the Sovereign on the throne, nor the nobles who have descended from the gallant chieftains of tue Agee, nor the citizens who represent the invincible soldiers of Cromwell, nor the peasantry who are the children of the sturdy bolt men that drew the crossbow on the fields of France,— none show the slightest inclination tc depart from the tradition of their forefathers. (Cheers.) If there be any danger, I confess it seems to me to lie in our reeent policy and tendency to unbounded excess in expenditure. Without referring to any particular charges, I think that when we perceive the rate at which we have been advancing for a certain number of years, we must say that there has been a tendency to break down all barriers and all limits. (Hear.) s , For my own part I am deeply convinced that all excess in the public expenditure beyond the wants of the country is not only a pecuniary waste, but a great political and moral evil. (Hear.) It is a characteristic of the evils which arise from financial prodigality, that they come on with a slow and surreptitious step, being unseen and unfelt until they have reached a magnitude absolutely overwhelming, and then we see them, as perhaps they now exist in the case of one among the European countries, so fearful and menacing of danger that they seem to threaten the very existence of the nation. (Hear, hear.) Ido trust that the day will come when a check will be put to the movement in this di rection ; and I think, as far as I have been able to trace the sentiments of the house duriog the present session, that the tendency to which I have adverted has begun to be weaker. It is certainly true that sweeping and rash reductions of ex peAditure are 0 In cleprocatod aluacit B 5 WWI; tifl cum 1144 prodigality, but at the same time many an one who shares that sentiment yet feels that it is demanded by public expe diency and public duty that we should endeavour to bring about a movement forgrappling with the public expenditure. I trust that that may be the case. For my own part, I say that if this country will but steadily and constantly show herself as wise in the use of her treasure as she is unequalled in the production of her wealth and moderate in the exercise of her strength, then we may well believe that England will for many generations yet to come continue to hold her fore most position among the nations of the world. (Cheers.) The right hon. gentleman concluded by putting into the hands of the chairman a resolution to the effect that the duty on foreign chicory should be doubled. Sir S. NORTHCOTE, while bearing testimony to the ability with which the right hon. gentleman had submitted his financial statement to the house, observed that it clearly proved he and those who in conjunction with him objected to the Budget oflast year as not making sufficient provision for the wants of the country were perfectly right in the opinion which they then advanced. (Hear.) He might further re mark that when that Budget had be en brought forward in February the remission of the paper duty formed one of the principal proposals of the right hon. gentleman, and that the house in discussing its merits could not proceed on the assumption that that impost would be continued, or that the duty on spirits would be raised from Bs. to 10s. a gallon. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman, therefore, was not justified in supposing that the opposition which was offered to his scheme last year was not based on a sound basis, and he trusted the Committee would be so far warned by the experience of the past as to sift very narrowly the proposals which, on behalf of the Government, had that evening been submitted to their notice. So far ae the finan cial prospeets of the present year were concerned, he under stood the right hon. gentleman to say that he expected the loss to the revenue caused by the repeal cf the paper duty and the remission of 13. in the pound of the income-tax would be compensated by certain reductions in our military and naval expenditure, but he seemed to forget that £1,000,000 in the shape of Exchequer Bonds would be fall ing due in May, 1862, another million in the year follow ing, and, if he was not mistaken, a third in the ensuing year. Now, when it was taken into account that such was the case, that we had been borrowing money for the pur pose of erecting fortifications, that we had been drawing heavily on our balances, and that we had not yet ascer tained the full cost of the war with China, the house was bound to weigh well the effect which the right hon. gentle man's scheme was calculated to have upon our financial position for the next twelvemonths. (Hear, hear.) Mr. DODSON thought the right hon. gentleman would have pursued a more prudent course than he had adopted if he had simply proposed either the reduction of the in come-tax by ld. in the pound, or the repeal of the paper duty, and not both. If he had acted so, ho would have been in a position to remit the hop duty, and would have a larger surplus in hand. • Mr. HADFIELD expressed his regret that no diminu tion was proposed by the Government- of the duty on fire insurance. Mr. HENNESSY regretted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not proposed to equalise the duties on coffee and chicory, though, at the same time, he thought the pro posal to increase the duty on chicory was a step in the right direction. As long as the duty on chicory was lower than that on coffee traders would be tempted to make an exces sive use of the former article ; whereas an equalisation of the duties would at once benefit the trader, the consumer, and the revenue. Mr. P. URQUHART thought that the hon. baronet the member for Stamford, in criticising the financial statement, had not made due allowance for the unforeseen loss arising from the bad harvest of last year. Former deficient harvests had been followed either by loans or by increased taxation, but the b ad harvest of last year would long be remembered as having been followed by a remission of taxation. Mr. GLYN had no doubt that the statement of the Chan cellor of the Exchequer, which turned into a surplus what all the world feared would be a serious deficiency, would give satisfaction to the country. The proposed remissions of taxation were precisely those which the country desired. The reduction of the income-tax would be regarded as a great boon, while the House of Commons was in some sense bound to deal with the paper duty. (Hear, hear.) He re gretted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not able to announce a further payment from Spain, and he regretted still more that nothing seemed to be expected from the Go vernment of Greece. About three years ago a committee ap • pointed to consider the subject reported that they saw no reason why Greece should not resume payment to the three guaranteeing Powers. Since that time the debt due to us had not only not diminished, but had actually increased, although the Government of Greece, so far from being in a state of poverty, appeared both able and willing to spend large sums of money in the purchase of war steamers. (Hear, hear.) Mr. E. BALL believed that the agricultural interests had suffered most from the bad harvest of last year, and yet the Chancellor of the Exchequer, while boasting of a surplus, did not propose to touch the malt-tax, which was most op pressive in its nature. By requiring prompt payment of the tax last year the Chancellor of the Exchequer had seriously affected the manufacture of malt, and in fact had lost some thing like £BOO,OOO of revenue. Ho trusted the right hon. gentleman would still consider the propriety of abolishing GL uiau auLy . Mr. W. E WART, as an advocate for many years of the repeal of the taxes on knowledge, begged to express the pleasure he felt at the proposal of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to abolish the paper duty—a measure dictated alike by good faith and policy. He did not entertain so confident a hope as his right hon, friend that the light wines of France would be largely consumed in this country, nor could he coincide with his right hon. friend upon the pro priety of retaining the alcoholic test. It would be better to admit the more alcoholic wines of France, which, if they came in under a shilling duty, would sell in this countryfor Is. a bottle. He regretted the size of the new coinage, and should have preferred a copper coinage more resembling that of France. Mr. CAVE thought the country would be disappointed to find that the Chancellor of the Exchequer continued the very objectionable penny taxes which possessed the qualities of giving the least return to the Exchequer and the greatest trouble to the taxpayer. The public would also be sorry that the reduction of the tea and sugar duties should be postponed to the repeal of the paper duties. (Hear, hear.) This was the best time for repealing these war duties, be cause there was now a great accumulation in the stock of these necessaries of life to the poor man, and a reduction in the duties would not go into the pocket of the importer, but into the pocket of the consumer. The continued imposition of these war duties was injurious to the revenue, because it gave a premium upon adulteration. The price that the poor man paid for French wine at 14s. a dozen was, thst he had to use sugar that would not sweeten his tea, and tea that was too often adulterated. Mr. J. EWART was glad to hear the Chancellor of the Exchequer promise to reconsider the penny duty on packages, There was no tax more unpopular among the trading com munity. Mr. B. OSBORNE—The Chancellor of the Exchequer is such a great magician on these subjects that he must be a bold man who would attempt to criticise him ; but this I must do him the justice to say, that when he talked of hay ing led us through a " wilderness of figures" it was nothing but a garden of flowers. (A laugh.) lam rather amazed at hearing the hon. member for. Shoreham taking such small exceptions to- a great scheme. For myself, I have always taken exception to the repeal of the paper duty under the financial circumstances of the country, and never voted for it, but I think the right hon. gentleman has acted with great wisdom in proposing to remove this fruitful subject of controversy between the two houses and in taking off the paper duty. (Hear, hear.) Under other circumstances I should have preferred the reduc tion of the tea and sugar duties, but I cannot resist the conviction that the paper duty was a most dange rous subject to be left open after the course taken by the other House of Parliament, and I congratulate the right hon. gentleman on the great nerve and wisdom he has shown in dealing with it. (Hear.) That penny on the in. come-tax thrown to us country gentlemen will float his budget. He has wrapped up the paper very well (a laugh), and if the penny does not float the budget through, it will be very unwise of us not to take the compromise he offtrs us. I think, too, the right hon. gentleman has acted wisely in placing these matters in one bill. (Hear, hear.) I, of course, reserve my right to look into the details, and I admit I was rather surprised to hear of this surplus. (Hear, hear,) I expected rather to hear of an increase of the income-tax than of a penny being taken off. Reserving my right to look into these matters in the name of my constituents, I thank the right hon. gentleman for his condemnation of the profli gate expenditure sanctioned by this house. (Cheers.) That expression will do good service, not only in this house, but also in the country. Lord R. CECIL said he also wished to say a word about this " profligate expenditure." Nothing would be more calculated to injure the character of that house and of the Government than if the right hon. gentleman persisted in using language of this kind. (Hear, hear.) If any one was responsible for the expenditure of the country it was the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The right hon. gentleman was bound to protest in the Cabinet against any expenditure that he believed to be profligate, and if his remonstrances were not attended to it was his duty to curry out his views in the manner usual to recalcitrant Ministers. if the right hon. gentleman did net think proper to take this course he was bound not to discredit the Estimates that he himself moved. The right hon. gentleman was at present asking the house to save him from the effect of his own measures. A Minister ought not to sanction that which he did not approve, and the Finance Minister ought least of all to say ho disapproved the way in which the finances of the coun try were carried on. (Hear, hear.) Colonel SYKES hoped that the vexatious penny duty on packages would be abolished. Mr. HENEAGE believed that the reduction of the paper duty would be very acceptable to his constituents. Mr. CROSSLEY said that the hon. member for Cam bridgeshire (Mr. Ball) has spoken of the bad harvest and the malt duty as if it were the agricultural interest, and not the consumer, that paid the duty. Considering the diffi eulties that surrounded the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he thought that the reduction of a penny on the income-tax and the abolition of the paper duty would give satisfaction tV the MVP. Wheil relief was asked 1r the interez,t, he could not help recollecting that bythe tax of Is per quarter on corn they already enjoyed a virtual protec tion of £2,000,000 or £3,000,000, which it would be well for the community to abolish altogether. Mr. LONG believed, if the Chancellor of the Exchequer knew a little better the extremity of distress which the bad harvest had inflicted on a large and deserving portion of the community in the agricultural districts, he would not have smiled as he did when the hon. member for Cambridgeshire suggested some measure for their relief. He should be glad to obtain from him a practical expression of sympathy in the repeal of the hop duty. Sir J. PAXTON highly approved the repeal of the paper ditties. There was a large consumption of paper in Coventry, and great advantage would arise from the remise sion of the duty among his constituents. He thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer had very much understated the productiveness of the revenue next year. There were only two causes which could interfere with it—the possi bility of another bad harvest, which he trusted a kind Pro vidence would avert, and our being drifted into a war which ho hoped the good sense of the country would take care to avoid. • Mr. BENTINCK did not participate in the surprise which had been expressed by some of his hon. friends that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had done nothing for the agricultural interest. Since, in 1846, the right hon. gen tleman seceded from the party which was more particularly connected with the agricultural interest, he had done his best to show that, however great might be the zeal of the convert, it was far exceeded by the bitterness of the apos tate. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member for the W est Riding talked of a protection of between £2,ooo,oooand £3,000,000 as enjoyed by the agricultural interest, but he should like to know whence it came, as the actual produce of the tax of ls. per qr. on corn amounted to only £BOO,OOO. As the hon. gentleman was disposed to open the question as to the amount of protection enjoyed by the agricultural interest, he begged to say that he believed it would be found that the balance at present was greatly in favour of commercial industry. Mr. CROSSLEY explained that, if Is. per quarter were levied on corn imported, the same duty 'should apply to all corn grown, and then £2,000,000 would come in. Mr. MALINS felt great satisfaction that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been enabled to reduce the income tax, and he took the reduction of ld. in the pound as an earnest of the necessity of getting rid of it at the earliest opportunity. From the pledge the right hon. gentleman gave in 1853, that the tax should terminate in 1860, he was bound to take it off at the earliest period. The advocates of the repeal of the paper duty raised the claptrap cry that it was a tax on knowledge, but it was a duty very insigni ficant in amount. He admitted that there was at one time a strong feeling in favour of the reduction of the duty in that house, but the majority gradually dwindled down, till at last it only amounted to nine. (Hear.) The country would be suprised, after such a division, and after what had occurred last year in another place, where a course was pursued that gave the greatest satisfaction to the country, at the decision which the Government bad arrived at. The Prime Minister came down to the house, after the bill for the repeal of the paper duty was thrown out in another place, and expressed himself with great moderation on the subject. The Chancellor of the Exchequer took a different view from himsof the question, and spoke in strong terms, and at least one of his colleagues participated in his views. He (Mr. Malins) could understand, therefore, that there had been a great contest between the right hen, gentleman and some of his colleagues on the subject. The right hon. gentleman seemed to have carried the day, and accordingly the duty was to be taken of. At the same time, though he regretted that the right hon. gentleman had selected this particular duty for remission instead of the hop duty, yet, as he had done so, and as the remission of the paper duty would*get rid of a very troublesome question, he, -for his part, would offer no further opposition to it. (Laughter.) He hoped, considering the troublesome nature of the ques tion, and that the repeal of the duty would be satisfactory to a large proportion of the community, that the house would not stand in opposition to the Government. Mr. NORRIS said the hon, and learned member for Wallingford spoke of the paper duty as a very insignificant tax—but he wished to state that every time the hon. and learned gentleman gave a sovereign .to any education in stitution for the purchase of books 6s. Bd. of it—a sum with which he was, no doubt, familiar—(a laugh) —went as a tax to the Government. (Hear, hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER acknow ledged the great candour with which hon. members had spoken of his financial statement. He wished to say a word or two to what had fallen from several hon. members, and among others from the noble lord the member for Stamford. The noble lord misunderstood some expressions that fell from him on the subject of the expenditure of the country, and said he had no right to discredit the estimates, for which he was responsible. Now, he had made no reference to the present estimates. (Hear.) He spoke of the great expenditure of the country in the past, and deprecated large and unnecessary expenditure in the future. He had spoken, in short, retrospectively and prospectively. (Hear.) No one would be more ready than himself to acknowledge that it would be cowardly and contemptible for a Minister, especially a Minister of Finance, to attempt to shift from himself the resn...ihnity or the estimates passed 'lacier his auspices ; and certainly he had no such intention. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member for Kendal had referred to the debt incurred by Greece to the three protecting Powers. He wished to say on the point that Greece was now ready to pay the sum of £12,000 a-year to this country as interest on the loan. (Hear, hear.) The Commissioners who had reported on the subject stated, if he recollected rightly, that Greece was now able to discharge in full her obligations to the three Powers, and he confessed he thought it would be for the benefit of that country if she were to pay her debts rather than apply the money to some purposes to which he feared it was applied. (Hear, hear.) In accepting the quota of £12,000 from Greece, he begged to say that that implied no surrender of our right to demand at any proper time a larger payment of the amount she owed us. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member for Dumfries spoke of our new copper coinage, and complained that it was not so small as that of France, The difference between the copper coinage of the two countries was, however, very small, and the mixture of the metal was almost exactly the same in both. He wished to state to the house what he regarded as a rather curious circumstance. The Mint had been hard at work for a considerable time, and up to the last account sent to him about 30,000,000 of pieces of copper money had been sent out ; but the whole of that mass of copper had been added to the circulation of the country with out a single old copper piece being returned. (Hear.) As to the subject of the penny on packages inwards, he could not defend the charge as it now worked, and admitted there was evidence of the trouble and inconvenience caused by it. Whether those inconveniences could be removed or not he would not now give an opinion ; but, if they could not, it might be desirable, when Parliament had the means, to reconsider that subject with a view to the remission of the tax. With respect to the comparison, that had been made between the remission of the paper duties and that upon tea and sugar, he must observe that, although those were subjects in pari materia, they were not equal in ex tent of revenue. In giving up £670,000 upon paper, he had given the extreme of what he thought was likely to be the balance at his command, but the reduction of the duty upon tea to Is. 2d. per lb., to say nothing of that upon sugar, would, according to the estimates of the Customs, entail a loss of £850,000. The hon. member for Norfolk had made a remark which he (the Chancellor of the Ex chequer) had heard without the least irritation, that he had always been a bitter enemy to the agriculturists. But, although he had not been angered by the observation, he could not help feeling surprised that a member of Parlia ment should have made such a charge, especially as the lapse of years might have been expected to allay all ex treme feelings, such as prevailed in former times. He might differ from the hon. gentleman as to the best mode of serving the agricultural interest, but he had a conscien tious belief that the removal of the paper duty would be of the highest benefit to rural districts. (Hear, hear.) He had been asked whether he had ever considered the possi bility of levying a penny tax upon railway tickets, which one hon. gentleman seemed to think would prove a substi tute for the malt-tax and other duties. He had frequently considered the subject, as he was daily receiving sugges tions of such a tax; but he could not see his way to deal safely with them, and he could not but regard such a tax as a most unjust ono. (Hear, hear.) Even if it were adopted it would not produce one•sixth of the present amount of the malt duties. In conclusion, he thanked the committee for the patient hearing it had accorded him, and especially the hon. and learned member for Wallingford, whose candid declaration would, he trusted, be the har. binger of a harmonious settlement of a vexed question, (Hear, hear.) Mr. BENTINCK assured the right hon. gentleman that the remark which he had male, and to which the right hon. gentleman had referred, was made without irritation ; but when he expressed surprise that the lapse of time had not allayed passions which existed at a particular time he adopted a singular and untenable ground. He (Mr. Ben tinck) had ventured to say that it was impossible to expect anything favourable to the agricultural interest from the right hon. gentleman, whose public and financial career since the period alluded to had been one of unvaried hos tility towards that interest. (" No I") Hon. gentlemen might cry "No," but he would like them to justify their denial by arguments. Mr. CAIRD denied the right of the hon. gentleman to constitute himself the sole representative of the agricultural interest. As himself representing a constituency largelyin terested in agriculture, he felt bound to say that the Chan cellor of the Exchequer, following up the policy of the late Sir R. Peel, had done more to promote agricultural pros perity than any one else. (Hear.) Even taking the price of corn as a test, if the prices for 10 years before the abolition of the protective duties were compared with the prices for 10 years succeeding, it would be found that there had been very little difference; but the real benefit to the agricultu ral interest had been the enlargement of trade and the en couragement of every other kind of agricultural produce, which had led to the present state of prosperity among that class. (Hear, hear.) Mr. BUTT reminded the committee that when a motion was made, about 10 years ago, for a committee to inquire iut9 the §iibicct 2f agricultural cli§trosi the ChauccU9r the Exchequer voted for that motion. Since then nothing more had been heard of agricultural distress. (Hear.) The resolution was then agreed to, and the house re• sumed. BIRTHS,DEATHS, AND MARRIAGES (IRELAND) BILL. Mr. CARD WELL moved the second reading of this bill. Lord NAAS objected to the manner in which the bill proposed that the information as to births and deaths should be obtained. He had no objection to the proposal to refer both bills to a select committee. The bill was, after some discussion, read a second time. Mr. SCULLY moved that it be referred to a select com mittee. Colonel DUNNE also urged the propriety of sending t he bill to a committe upstairs. Mr, CARDWELL took occasion to say that he believed the expense of the plan which he proposed, taking the scale of expenditure a t th e same rate as that which prevailed under similar circumstances in England, would be abou t £21,000. Lord NAAS said ho calculated the expense likely to attend the operations of his bill at 228,000 a-year. The house then divided : Ayes Noss lOO Majority in favour of sending the bill to a select committee SUPPLY. The report of the committee of supply was brought 1113 ' Lord ENFIELD com pl a i ne d t h at the Admiralty had °t given sufficient encouragement to the naval volunteer' There was at present very great difficulty in obtaining w e ! to fill up the vacancies that occurred in the Naval COes' Volunteer ranks ; but he thought a system might be d e ' vised, by the employment of gunboats, which would prop / advantageous for drilling th e men , accepta b le to t h em , and beneficial to the interests of the service. Sir J. ELPHINSTONE, before the question that 03 report be received was put, said he could not but compla in that the noble lord the Secretary to the Admiralty had , few nights ago, hastily pushed the navy estimates through a thin house, by whom, in a few minutes, millions of moral had been joted away. He should move that the debate be now adjourned. Lord C. PAGET assured his noble friend (Lord Enfield) that the Admiralty had taken into their consideration al e question of providing greater facilities than at present existed for the naval volunteers to learn their drill, and gul l batteries were being prepared along the coast for that Pr' pose, which he trusted would prove eminently us eful , With regard to the statement by his hon. friend opposite (Sir J. Elphinstone), that he (Lord C. Paget) had pushed the naval estimates with undue haste through the housa the other night, he could assure him that he had no such intention. Mr. LIDDELL, from what he had heard, very muc h apprehended that,in the arrangements respecting the volun" teers for the naval reserve, the interests of the reserve would very much suffer. The labours to which the men were or posed were very arduous, and caused them to feel very s° ll and dissatisfied ; and the house might depend upon it, less the causes of dissatisfaction were removed, the intere Eta of the service would be materially injured. The question that the debate be now adjourned was then put. The motion for the adjournment was negatived without a division. Mr. LINDSAY complained that votes were taken (r ; Friday night, after the understanding that none would taken till after the Budget on this evening. 4 r J. ELPHTNSTONE made a similar complaint. Mr. KINNAIRD defended the course pursued, by th e noble lerd (Lord C. Paget). Mr. CONINGHAM said the establishment of an efficielz . t police in the docky ar d s h a d h ad the effect, he understood of nearly ruining the marine-store dealers. The report was then received and agreed to. ADMIRALTY COURT JURISDICTION BILL. This blll, as amended, was considered and agreed to. lIARBOURS BILL. This bill was read a second time, as was also the trade Marks Bill. STATUTE LAW REVISION BILL. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved the second read' ing of this bill. The object of the bill was the consolidation of all the statutes on this subject between 1858 back to the 11th of George the Third. If the house agreed to the second reading of the bill, he would then move that the bill bo referred to a select committee. Mr. WHITESIDE thought that the Government ought to deal with this question themselves rather than referring it to a select committee. Mr. HADFIELD supported the bill, which was rea d 11 second time. QUEEN'S PRISON. Mr. CLIVE moved the second reading of this bill, the object of which was to maintain certain debtors in the Queen's Prison. The Burford Charities Bill, the.Guildford Hospital Bill, the Reading Charities Bill, and the Temple Balsall lioe: pital Bill, were respectively read a second time and ordersa to be committed. • CHARITABLE USES BILL. This bill passed through committee, as did also the Voters (Ireland) Bill. LAW .01". 0 0PVELIGIIT 'Dr wORKs OF FINE ART. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved for and obtained leave to bring in a bill to amend the law of copyright 1 1 : works of fine art. The bill, which the hon, and learned gentleman said he would explain the objects of on a future evening, was then brought in and read a first time. The house then adjourned at half-past twelve o'clock. COUNTRY MARKETS. COLCHESTER—APRIL 13. A short supply of wheat, but equal to the demand, with a dull trade. Other articles much the same as of late. Wheat, white 6os t o 68 s ; b eans, Mazagan..32s to 308 red 44s to 60s I Middle & small 38s to 4 6 ° Barley 4os to 48s I White peas 44s to 4 86 Oats — 8 t o —s Cirrey.. 3Bs to 44 CHELMSFOI • A fair supply of wheat, in wheats barely maintained la slight advance took place in b Wheat, white.... 38s to 66s I LO-APRIL 12. . trifle better condition. Bel Lte rates. Business dull. 41" . red 47s to 63s Barley 29s to 42s Chevalier 32s to 453 teas, Partridge 44s to 45 8 White 43s to 46 3 Boiling 43s to 41 8 Dun 398 to 42 8 Beans, Tick 36s to 449 Harrow Ticks 37s to 47 8 Mazagan 30s to 419 Grinding 26s to Malt 61s to 67s Chevalier 64s to 69s Oats 26s to 31s STAMFOR] Wheat 56s to 62s White do ..60s to 66s Barley ....30s to 44s --APRIL 13. Oats.. 26s to 310 Beans 4os to 45s Ditto, old . . . ..: . 6Bs to 600 KIRKALDY—APRIL 13. Very small supplies of barley and oats. Sales quick, sit La advance. Wheat in good sukply, but sales slow. Wheat Barley Oats First. ... 36s Od 32s Od 24s Od Second.. 56s Od 40s Od 29s Od Third .. 64s Od 43s Od 33s Od ADVERTISTMENT.]—Nothing can be more interesting tlin the numerous extraordinary cures without Medicine by Du Barry's delicious Health Restoring Revalenta Ara him Food. We give a few :—Winchester, December 3, 1847.—Gentlemen,—I am happy to be able to inform you, that the person for whom your Revalenta was procured has derived very great benefit from its use; distressing symp toms of Dropsy, Dyspepsia, and Constipation of long stand ing have been restored, and a feeling of restored health in duced.—James Shorland, late Surgeon, 66th Regiment. Cure No. 48,314—Miss Elizabeth Yeoman, Gateacre, neat Liverpool : a cure of ten years' dyspepsia, and all the hor rors of nervous irritability. Cure No. 46,814—Mr. Samuel Laxton, Leicester, of two years diarrhoea. Cure Ne; 52,612—The Dowager Countess of Castlestuart, of many years nervous irritability, bile, and indigestion. Avoid Pills and Medicines : they invariably aggravate and perpetuate diseases ; their annoyance, disappointment 2 and expense may be avoided by us i ng D u Barry's FOO4 which, at a few pence per day, saves 50 times its cost in other remedies, removing effectually, without purging; constipation, indigestion (dy s p e p s i a ) nervous, bil ious a n liver complaints and all their consequences. Certificate No. 36,418. We find it the safest remedy. Andrew the. MD., F.R.S. Dr Harvey, Dr. Wu rzer , Dr. Shorland, Dr. Campell. Let invalids avoid the fearful dangers of spu rious and injuriou,4 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 must expect to be distrusted in all others. Packed in tins 11b. 2s. 9d.; 21b. 4s, 6d. ; 51b. lls. ; 121 b. 225. ; 241 b. 40s. The , 121 b. and 241 b. canist ers are sent carriage free on receipt of Post-office order by Barry Du Barry and Co., 77, R e ' gent-street, London ; Fortnum Mason, and Co. ; Abbit. 60, Gracechurch-street ; 4, Cheapside; 63 and 150, Ox" bard-street ; 330 and 451, Strand ;49 and 60, Bishopsgats. street ; Batty, 16, Finsbury Pavement ; Philli s and Cs' tea-dealers; Petty, Wood, and Co., King Wilhatu-street City; at 127 Hirh Holborn; and all frrocers. BIRTHS. CRAVEN.—On the 12th:inst., at Homerton, the wife of DI Craven, Esq., of a son. ROUTLEDGE.—On the 14th inst., at Brixton, the wife 0f Joseph Routledge, Esq., of a son. MARRIAGES. PRICE—EDWARDS.—On the 13th inst.; , at St. Georg? ° ' Hanover-square, Thomas Price, Esq., son of Jno. Pric e ' Esq., of the Waterloo-road, to Eli za b e th Edwards, Oriii daughter of William Edwards, Esq , of Lambeth. DEATHS. ANDERSON.—On the 4th inst., in London, Sir Tames C. Anderson, Bart., late of Buttevan t C as tl e , coun ty Cor aged 68. - - - COURT.—On the 11th inst., very suddenly, at 8, Rag lan- 34. villas, Folkestone, Stephen Court, Esq R N a"" .9 • .9 i e . FOREES.—On the 14th inst., a t Ch es t er H ouse , IN 1112- don, Surrey, at an a d vance d age , th e Dowager Lady Forbes, of Newe, Aberdeenshire. • GIBBES.—On the 14th inst., at 36, Tavistock-place, Th ad ' Gibbes, Esq., of the St oc k Exchange, aged 76. NOEL.—On the 12th inst., at Cronkhill, near ShrewsburY , the Right Hon. Richard Noel, Lord Berwick, of Atting' ham, in the county of Salop. LONDON : Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at TILE SUN Office, No. 112,Strand , in the Precinct of the Sttyoy, In the County of Mildleses Wueficlay, April los On. 21 1 33 M: • - th . 411 • de St , Dl to la nE dE an . 11 'in Al de so