The Sun. — London, England, 1861-04-30 00:00:00

THE ART UNION. DRAWING OF PRIZES—(THIS DAY.) The annual meeting and drawing of prizes in the Art 'Union took place this day at the Royal Adelphi Theatre — R. T• Hope, Esq., in the chair. Ur. GODWIN, the honorary secretary, read the usual report, which stated that the whole amount of the sub scriptions for the year was £10,882 is. The reserve fund 310 N7 amounts to £10,026. The sum set apart for prizes is 4 ) 61 0, which has been divided as follows 34 at .. ..13 .. .. £lO each. • • 15 „ • • 20 ~ .. 25 ~ .. 30 ~ .. 40 „ 60 „ • • 7 5 ~ ;. 100,; 2 : : • • • • • • 150 1 200 „ and 20 Bronzes, " Caractacus." 30 Silver Medals of Wilkie. 10 Chromolithographs. 250 Porcelain Busts of " Apollo." 164 Sets of Photographs of Rome. and 200 Volumes of 12 Photographs. faking in all 830-prizes. The report having been unanimously adopted, the draw ill,!of the prizes was then proceeded with. The first nuin *awn from the wheel by Misses Henderson and Mks was : 6 ,782-Major Murray, Army and Navy Club £2O 5,566-Miss Graham, Nowtonbury 6O 2,791-4. C. Hancock, Devonport - 1 , 3 75-G. Dyke, Farringdon .. 60 7.979-Mrs. H. Collier, Dalston-rise 7,224-R. Baker, Sydenharn 75 9 , 5 14-Dr. Tuke, Albemarle-street l5 10 , 3 97-Roberts and Co., Adelphi 2O 2,9)3-Dr. Marsh, St. Ives 7,991-F. C. Barry, Birchin-lane 1 ,151-F. Casebourne, Hartlepool 8 ,340-M. J. Mumford, Minories lO 6,164-J. W. Long, Clapham-rise 7,810-R. Coleman, Wandsworth 5,602-Heil. Mrs. Biteson, Grosvenor-place 30 3 ,578-Rev. W. Metcalfe 1 ,377--G. Judd, jun., Farringdon 9,116-D. Lawrie, Kilmarnock 3O 864-Lady Brigg, Brighton 5,719-Miss F. Fraberne, Bridge-end 4O 5,316-W. Mecklehobson, Berbice 25 443-R. Saunders, Exeter 2O 1,166-J. Jobson, Hutton-le•hole 6,222-J. Hutt, Moorgate-street 4,871-M. Dittinger, Hague lO 1,011-C. Holdroyde, Dewsbury .. 20 2,090-G. Gibson, Leeds 5,234-B. Homer, Smyrna 1 0,169-R. Loydd, Gracechurch-street 2O 10 ,063-W. Brankil, Shepherdess-walk 10 7,763-Mrs. Col. Wilson, Head Quarters 10 9,922-Mr. Hatfield, Cumberland-street 3O 7,872-Mr. Harrison, Wandsworth .. 10 7,258-J. Wells, Percy-st., Bedford-square 40 8,420-W. Ward, Hull 2,784-Mr. Harper, Plymouth l5 7,223-Rev. W. C. Powell, Hereford 2O 8,913-J. Nicholson, Westbourne-terrace lO 9,767-D. Robert, Old Kent-road 8,869-J. Dell, Coventry 9,983-Cleland, 9th Lancers lO 555-Dr. Tesmaker, Exeter 4,123-W. Purdon, Kelso lOO 746-S. Dobson, Cardiff 2O 8,980-Walker, Croydon 6,288-J. M'Donald, Antigua 2 ,211-J. Johnson, Liverpool 3O 3,633-Mrs. Memton 1,280-J. Green, Plymouth 9,594-W. Morris, Chester 1 ,920-J. C. Grundy, Manchester 6,982-N. H. Clifton, Islington 2O 1,379-H. Taylor, Bampton 1,013-R. Crichley, Dewsbury 1,873-W. Whittacker, Manchester 6 ,736-4. Sloper, Grosvenor-street 1 ,926 -Sadler, Mansfield 7,201-3. Gossett, Mayfair 578-J. Stannley lO 6,057-3. Homerton, Bengal-place 8,637-3. Ford, Wolverhampton l5 9,159-Dr. Small, Boston 9,100-G. Hoare, Todmorden • 262-W. Pearce, Bristol ' 25 t7,638-R. Hussey, Brixton • 2O 432-R. Berwick, Derby l5 9,347-Mackintosh, Inverness.... 9,419-G. Horsley, Alfreton 1,492-W. Banner, Blackheath 5,727-Capt. Best, Bryanston-square .. 10 5,069-Plato, Oporto 1,494-J. Dearden, Deptfoi4.- , lO 8,987-A. Starry, Swansea .. 10 5,014-W. Townshend, Halifax, N. St . 10 1,746-M. B. Callander, Birkenhead- 100 1,223- l5 6,711-Mr. Jones 6,139-H. Coles, Thrapstone l5 1,881-W. Blinkhorn, Manchester 7,565-3. Kirby, Hyde-park lO 1,061-J. T. Burrows, Lea 8,221-Mrs. Thurloe, Bank of England 25 7,443-G. Willey, Islington 3O 383-G, W. Gibson, Chester-le-street 15 5,105-11. Gernan P. ... . 6,560-3. D. Maitland, Camden-road-villas 2O 1,893-3. Hogden, Warrington 8,109-Capt. Black, Madras 6O 10,301-Mr. Spreckley, Wood-street, City 3,506-De S) lvester, W. Bromwich 25 707-S. E. Belton, Ancoats 8,906-H. W. Mason, Bermondsey lO 7,667-F. B. Moseley, Liverpool 4O 10,455-F. Toole, Dublin 2,762-F. Davis, Pershore lO 4,239-A. T. Pollock, Norwood .. lO 1,264-X. Y. Z. .. 15 211-3. Horsfall, Thirak 2,578-G. Smith, Middlewiek 5,295-E. R. Gerditch, Antigua 4O 8,125-Captain Deans, Kilmarnock 1,315-W. Proctor, Clifton 4,999-M. Sinclair, New Zealand 6,298-T. Hughes, Antigua lO 6,411-J. Grove, Wandsworth 2O 3,636-E. Jones, Wolverhampton .. 10 1,129-J, White, Hartlepool l5 8,183-Mrs. Thompson, Regent's-park 20 4,611-H. P. Machin, Montreal 7,729-Captain Barber, Leadenhall-street 3,357-Mrs. Dytes, Torquay l5 9,914-L. B. Morley, Liverpool 8,025 4,767-G. Hazleman, East Indies 6,268-Mrs. Yeoman, York 1,251-W. G. Cork, Blackburn 824-Ayscough, Birmingham 4,824-Simpson, Madras 9,368 6,236-Galloway, " London Gazette" Office 25 10,507-A. Wilson, Vigo-street. l5 9,093-T. Lord 2O 6,909-W. Hall, Tottenham . lO 9,183-J. B. Gegg, Halstead, Essex 9,373- 4. Hodgen, Sheffield .. „ 20 1,216-R. Dobson, Birkenhead 5 ,747-Capt. Boultby 2O 1,0604-J. Swan, Lincoln 8,676-C. J. Jeake, South Australia 7,167-W. Moore, Drury-lane l5 6,427-S. Younghusband, St. John's-wood 30 9,279-H. Brown, Cheltenhem • 10 2,201-J. Lupton, Leeds.. 25 8,454-D. Hadfield, Blackburn l5 9,298- 7 3. Symons, Helston, Cornwall .. 40 10,582-G. Wells, Birmingham 75 3,711-J. Parsons, Yarmouth 4O 9,874-Miss Jackson, Carshalton. lOO 78-B. Little, Bath 25 434-M. George, Derby l5 3,013-S. Markham, Salisbury 75 3,160-P. Beck, Shrewsbury 8,626-11. Gilham, Chepstow 7,543-A. Blundell, Cornhill 25 449-It. S. Moore, H.M.S. Impregnable 3O 6,442-G. Lester, Bayswater The drawing for the bronzes, medals, and other minor Prizes was then proceeded with, at the conclusion of which the proceedings terminated. THE WEATIIER. METEOROLOGICAL REPORTS. ...... , This Day, between 8 mi d a E. U. D. F. C. I. S iy. 3 7 0. Nairn ...... 30'18 49 46 7 ,,-'w- 3 9 0. Aberdeen .. , 30 . 15 49 44 ''',. 2 ' w * 2 2 b. Leith. . 30'22 52 46 '' " • 3 2 Berwick Ardrossan Patti.. sh Shields Galway ... . Scarborough_ 30.22 48 45 N.W. g c. 2 4 C. Liverpool.,,, 3012 50 47 W.N. 11” • ..i b V alentia . 1 4 b.h Queenstown._ 30•31 47 40 N. W. 5 1 L . Yarmouth 3O 29 45 43 L0nd0n,,...... 30'31 47 41 W.N.W. 1 ,.. Doer.,,, Portsinouh .. 30.33 150 47 S. E. 3 5 ni. Portland .... 30 84 50 48 W. 1 1m• plymonth .... 30.32 h 50 45 N.N.W. 3 1 i ''' 1 1 reuzanCe .... 30'39 ,50, 18 k N. 1 6b. 1 furnished him with a most decisive ground of attack, actu- the exact. amount of the duty paid stock, and this being ally charged our deficiency twice over upon our backs. really large the consequence was that scarcely any /Jilts , (Laughter.) "First of all," he said, " you have taken so was paid for 12 months. In point of fact, we are now start much out of the b a lances o f th e E xc h equer , a nd sccondie'. big afresh. For 12 months the duty paid was only £2,875 you have a deficiera yof 21 millions," evidently adding thy' whereas for two mouths this year it has made £9,:.;65, and two sums together. My hon. friend did not fall into that if it continues at that race it will make an annual tett error, bal he dwelt on the point with needless detail. He nue Of £56,000, which would be more than 1 eetimated. was very anxious about the state of the balances, and he eon- (Cheers.) But at the same time I must tell my hon. friend tended they had fallen more than we expected them to sill that, it would be imp.eeeible to get exactitude in minute towards September. Of course they did. But I should like items ; what I rely upon are the general results. My hon. to know how I was to tell what drafts would be made upon friend alluded to another subject—namely, the customs the Exchequer for China by the officers there, who desired t) duty on paper, and complained that I had debited myself make thentselves. very strong in funds in order to prepare with only £15,000. Now, the duty received the last quarter themselves against the contemplated expedition in that comes on paper was £14,000, consequently I took £56,000 for Ihe try ? To my hon. friend's inquiries as to the health of the year, and debited myself with £15,600. I cheered when my balances, 1 have every short answer to give. They are not hon. friend approached this subject, but, it was a friendly only as well as can be expected, but. they are in a state very cheer, something like the warning one wou ld g i ve t o a friend satisfactory to their friends. (A. laugh.) I cannot give a if he saw him going on very dangerous ice. (A. laugh.) It better description of them during the past financial year is perfectly true that in the last two quarters we received than by stating that, during the whole four quarters, the £26,000 customs duty on paper, and in the two first £14,000, entire sum paid as interest upon deficiency bills amounted the last being open trade and the two first under the old to no more than £1,850, and in the quarter which is now system. I say that what I did was entirelyjust. I had two passing not one shilling has been paid for that purpose. quarters open trade which yielded £26,000, and two close (Hear, hear.) My born friend seems to think that some giving £14,000, and therefore I was fully justified in making strange trick has been performed in applying the repay- an estimate of between £lO,OOO and £50,000. We are, in ment of advances to meet the deficiency of the past year's fact, now receiving the duty at the rate of £lO,OOO or revenue. This is neither the place nor the time to enter £50,000. These, however, seem small matters. My hon. upon a consideration of the provisions otour law, but surely friend went also to the great heads of revenue, and attacked my hon. friend ought to have known that when advances my surplus of £1,923,000. My hon. friend boldly grappled are repaid, they become part and parcel of the consolidated with it. In toy customs he questions £300,000 ; inland, fund ; and that it would not have been in the power of the £300,000 ; China he strikes out, which is £700,000; the paper Government, even if they had wished to do anything so duty he says we shall not get., and from the whole he makes absurd, to draw any distinction between those repayments £1,950,000, so that instead of a surplus he hands me a deli and any other money paid into the Exchequer. (Hear.) ciency of £23,000. Then my hon. friend said he was sorry that I omitted the Mr. MOFFATT said that what he had stated 'was fortification loan from ray consideration. I omitted it not £1,200,000 certain to be had, and £700,000 doubtful. because my responsibility was one whit less than that of the The CHANCELLOR, of the EXC HEQUE It—With re. gentlemen who sit near me, for it was a common responsi- spect to the £600,000 excise on paper, the hon. member said bility of the Government, but simply because the sum which that the trade would stagnate, and that nothing would be had been required was so exceedingly small that it was not received. If my hon. friend had an intimate knowledge of worth while in my opinion to call the attention of the house the working of the trade and the working of the drawback to it in any great detail, when I was dealing with sums on on paper, he would not h ave ma de this calculation. By the the one side or the other of £70,000.000. My hon, friend wa y, i s it not odd that last year, when the duty was to be was also very much alarmed at the idea of there being repealed on August 15, there was no alarm, and this year another drop under the French treaty, or, at all events, if there is none when it does not cease until the 15th Oct.? not my.hon. friend, one who spoke near him both in time The truth is that by means of the drawback taken in con and place. But there is to be no further drop. The lowest junction with the nature of the trade, you can scarcely wine duty is already in operation, and it has turned out mark, if not completely, the full activity until the very apparently to be no drop at all. (Hear, hear.) My hon. moment of cessation. It is now only April, and £200,000 friend wanted to know how I provided for the army excess out of the £600,000 has been received. (Cheers.) The of 1859-60—for everything, you see, is pressed into the China indemnity is £750,000. My hon. friend says it will service. I did not provide for it at all—(hear, hear)—and be nothing. Now, in my original statement, I took a mil the reason I did not is because it has already been paid. lion for China, besides half a million more on the naval and (Cheers). What we have to do is simply to apply to military estimates. That was a large expenditure for China this house to obtain its recognition, and to give form to be supplied from the taxes of the people, and yet lam and regularity to transactions which require to be told that when asking that sum I ought to have kept back watched, because they interfere with the regu- the question of how much we were to receive in the way of larity of our finance, but which have no bearing whatever 'indemnity. My hon. friend says that the merchants must upon the budget, for they will not make the Exchequer one be paid first, but to that I demur—that is not the view of sixpence poorer. (Hear.) My hon. friend next said that. the Government. If the property of the merchants had been. the effects of the bad harvest were not exhausted. Cer- taken for military purposes their claims would have stood tainly they are not exhausted. If they were, 1 should have in a different position, but if they have suffered losses from had to present you with a better estimate of revenue. the Chinese, whilst the people of England have contributed. (Cheers.) A great part of the deficiency of the malt revenue five or six millions to the war to protect these merchants, goes into the estimate which is before the house ; but all the view of the Government is that the people of England that has been fully considered. lam the last person to de- should be considered, and that the payment should be made preciate the effects of the bad harvest, f o r I consider it pro rota. The sums were distinguished in the treaty—six would be a moderate statement to say that it has made a millions of taels for the war, two millions for the merchants, deduction from the revenue equal to two millions of money. which, after the deduction for the families of those who That I think is a statement susceptible of reasonable de- have suffered, would leave £950,000. Even if we gave the monetration, but at the same time I believe two things con- merchants £650,060, there would remain £300,000; different, cerning it. First, 1 believe that h a d it no t been for the it is true, from what I anticipated, but very different also powerful stimulus which freedom o f t ra de h a s given to the from my honourable friend's exaggerated statements., agriculture of the country, the harvest would have been far This would be about £250,000, leaving to the Government worse than it was. I believe it also a fact that, though the about £750,000. That is the basis of the calculation. With exceedingly bad weather, both during the harvest and in regard to the £960,000, lam told by the hon. member for the months which succeeded, and the early months of this Horsham thathe has looked into the customs receipts for year, has made. us dependent in a very unusual manner 1858, and that ha finds them not to amount to so much as upon foreign corn, the quantity o f En g li s h corn in the we have estimated, overloiking the trifling difference that country is much more considerable th a n it wo u ld under or- there are new ports to be added to the old ports,. and that dinary circumstances be ; and that will form a better fund that was a year of war, whereas these are times of peace. I on which to draw than under ordinary circumstances we can only say that I greatly prefer the reports of the British should have at this season of the year. (Hear.) Then and French ambassadors, who made their calculations oa with reference to thefinancial state of the year 1862-3, on the spot iu the expectation that these payments will be what does my hon. friend depend to prove the improvidence made in the course of four years. I do not deny it is of our arrangements ? If it be true that we shall lose three quite possible that we may fall short of the estimate by quarters of a million on account of the repeal of the paper £lOO,OOO, but it is just as possible that we may exceed it., duty and the remission of a penny i ncom e t ax , it must be All I can say is, that there are plans which have been sug remembered that by that time we hope the extra charges gested, and certainly, if they are feasible, may be advan for China will be 'altogether cleared off, and they at present bageously adopted, of anticipating all these payments by amount to a much larger sum. The whole case of my hon. means of an arrangement with the merchants, and thereby friend depends upon the fact that there are a million Ex- s hortening the terms of the occupation. I only refer to that chequer-bonds which will fall due in the year 1862-3. But pat tof the subject because these are matters which do not if he thinks that that is any reason why we should ask for a a dmit of precise statement, and lam bound to say that I million extra taxes in the year 1861-2, he has yet to master think it possible that on the one hand we may fall short of the principles by which the finances of the country ought the sum of £750,000, and I am likewise justified in say. to be guided. Not only is the doctrine strange, but I am ing that it is at least e as likely that we shall fall short on the astonished at the source from whence it comes; for if Ex • other side in the very large sum of a million. I. have asked chequer-bonds are put by, from whom did we learn that the House of Commons to provide for meeting the expen lesson? From the right hon. gentleman opposite. In diture. Then my hon. friend swept away two items of 1808, when the right hon. gentleman had to provide not for £1,350,000. He went to the inland revenue, and he says, £70,000,000 but for £63,500,000, he presented to the house « I question £300,000 on account of the probable diming an estimate in which he made no provision whatever for the tion of the income tax." Now, lam a little sun' rised at two million Exchequer bonds which were falling due. On that statement of my hon. friend, but lam not at all sorry that occasion, though I should have been very glad if the that he has given me the opportunity of referring to the right hon. gentleman had made an effort to pay them off, I matter. I only wish I could have placed my hon. friend did not think:.tnya©l eallad upon to prenounee,any censure on ate uuh.ide of the Glass 800 Hive, and in the inside, upon the course which he pursued. My opinion is that that he might have the opportunity of seeing the Chan whatever might leave been tho case 'at the b e ginning, these caller of the Exchequer and those he had to consult, and of Exchequer bonds stand now as part of the public debt, to h ear in g everything that passed with regard to this matter , be paid off if you have a surplus, and it is not more favour- because if I have an interest in making a surplus there are able to the public service to renew them, but otherwise they others—not my lion. friend—who have an interest in un have no claims to preference. They ought to be dealt with ma ki ng them, and I am subject to the advice and expe simply with reference to what is the best arrangement for rience of most experienced servants of the Crown, and the public service. I won't go into the history of their never was the Crown better served than in the offices to issue—(opposition c heers)—or to expectations which were which I refer; and great indeed would be the responsibi formed concerning them. It is a very simple matter. They lity of that Chancellor of the Exchequer who for any poli were issued in anticipation of income tax ; and I expresse I tical object, or for any object whatever, would place his an opinion that that tax at the end of the war would be opinion in opposition to theirs. Never but on one occa liable to redeem them. The House of Commons, however, sion did I propose to the house an estimate which had not. did not adept that opinion, and the matter was at an end, theirsanction, and that was a very peculiar case, It was on the It is the greatest of all errors to suppose that the good faith imposition of the income tax on incomes of between £lOO of Parliament is in any way pledged to redeem them. They and £l5O a year. They estimated the produce at £210,000. are not in the hands of the public : they are simply a finan- I thought that too low, and I placed it at £250,000. It pro cial instrument passing between the Bank of England and duced between £300,000 and £400.000. That is the diffe the Commissioners of the National Debt; but if they were, rence between those who make and those who unmake sur that would be no reason for saying that, because they ought pluses. The Chancellor of the Exchequer may be wild, to be redeemed in the year 1862-3, the government have a precipitate, profligate—for that is the word—but he cannot, right to ask for an additional million of taxes in the year except in concurrence with those gentlemen, make these 1861-2. (Hear, hear.) lam glad the hon. member for estimates, or else if he departs from them he departs from Itoniton (Mr. Moffatt) is in his place, for I am going to them incurring a responsibility that no finance minister I pay him the compliment of making him the hero of the ever heard of would willingly incur. If I could give my first question which I will now discuss—namely, have we hon. friend information of what takes place in the private a surplus ? (Hear.) It is said that we have an interest in rooms of ministers it would be better information than the making out that we have. That may be true. I admit agreeable gossip retailed by my hon. friend to-night in the that it is satisfactory to every Chancellor of the Ex- House of Commons, as an authentic account of converse chequer to be able to dispense with imposing fresh taxes, tions and discussions in the Cabinet. (Hear.) With regard and to be able even t) propose a partial remission of texa- to the income tax it. is a tax that may be said to be in the lion. I will admit, too, that I have a special interest in the course of varying, but still not very irregular and progres existence of the surplus this year. But if we have an interest sive increase. My hon. friend thinks that last year was in showing that there is a surplus, there are others who bad year for importers, and that therefore in all probability have an equal interest in showing that there is none. (Hear.) the income tax for this year will yield less by £300,000 than There are the prophets of last year, and the friends of the I calculated upon. Schedules A and B are progressive. prophets, who are as much committed to prove the negative Schedule D does not depend entirely on importers, but on as I can be to prove the affirmative; and if the opposition the whole mass of trades, professions, and dealings of every will assume the duty of the Government, by all means let kind in this country ; and so far from admitting that She them bear some of its responsibilities. (Hear.) My hon. dale Dis likely to present a diminution, I think there is friend the member for Stamford endeavoured to get rid of every probability—nay, except in extreme circumstances, I the matter very glibly, for he said that the whole of his 1 venture to say there is a certainty—it will present a con prophecies would have held geed if the paper duty had not siderable increase. Schedule Din 1860 was put on the basis been retained and the spirit duty raised. But when I re- of an assessment, beginning with the year commencing ferred to the "dismal crash" I flew at higher game than my- April 1855-6, and ending in the year 1857-8. That is to hon. friend. I had the great authorities of his party in my say, it was on the average of three years-1855-6, a year of mind. Thus the language of Lord Monteagle was that there war ; 1856-7, a year of war expenditure ; and 1857-8, a year would have been a clear deficit of 11 or 12 millions, which of great commercial crisis. This year we shall drop two of he sought to cure by retaining£7oo,ooo or £BOO,OOO of paper these years. We shall take in 1858, a most flourishing duty. (Hear.) Lord Derby was much more cautious. He year—l beg pardon, we shall drop the whole three. Our old only said that thera would be a deficiency of at least assessment was from April, 1856, to April, 1859. This will £2,700,000, and very probably much more. But that be from April 1858 to April, 1861. We shall take in 1859- £2,700,000 was entirely independent of any increase in the 60, a most flourishing year for trade, and we shall take in China expenditure. The China expenditure was, however, 1860-61, which, although it might have been a bad year for increased by above £3,000,000 ; but our deficit last year was commerce,was on the whole ayear of great trade and business. only two millions and something more, and this year there There is no doubt from the progress of the duty that is a surplus of two millions. (Hear.) the assessment of the year will cause a considerable increase Sir S. NORTHCOTE made a remark, in the tax. I asked the Chairman of the Board of Inland The CHANCELLOIt of the EXCHEQUER-1 he lion. Revenue whether he had allowed for the increase in schedule baronet says there is a deficit of 8 millions, but the D that was to take place in the new assessment. He said, noble lord was assuming that the income tax would be "No." I said, " Why, did you not expect it ?" Yes, he renewed. (Cheers.) My hon. friend, therefore, is only h a d ex p ec t e d it. " Th e n, why was it not allowed ?" " Oh," flinching, and flying from the question. (Cheers.) . Is said he, "if there was a war in America, and a war in it not a fact that all the organs of the opposition pro- Europe, and an universal revolution, there might be a fall phesicd this deficit down to the latest moment ? Is it not ing off." Now, that is the extreme of caution with which a fact that, whenever we have h a d a fi nanc i a l di s cussion, the estimates have been framed. (Hear.) My hon. - friend if any allusion was made to the possibility of there being a adverted to the Customs receipts.' lie brought under notice notice surplus a Utter ran through the opposition benches ? The a sum of I think £300,000 for corn.revenuefrom e mis right hon. and learned member for Dublin university aske d stated it, because the revenue from co rn is £360,000. Now, me what was a budget. The simplest exp lanation would I h ep e my r i ght hon. friend is right, and that we shall lose the revenue front be that it was an estimate of income and expenditure ; but the revenue from corn. Why, if losewe e hs lose thath for many reasons it may be a very serious grievance and corn, there is not a pound o t t h he a r t wsheat shape. But the we cus s to all disappointment. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member for not get £2 or £3 for inan another gentleman. I rias Iloniton has summed up all that would he safe in matters of revenue was questioned by admit d e t a il against the surplus, and certainly he has performed that w hen we look at the customs revenue we have come his work with zeal. N othin g was too g reat or too small for through a bad year. The spirit duty is £200,000 or £300,000 his examination, so that he reminded me of a nation which more than in the past year. The main reason for the dif was said to work with the strength of giants, but at the ference is the increased duty on foreign spirits in the year same time with the fine handling of jewellers. Sometimes that has just expired, but the increased duty w as only in taunting me on the item of paper, on which he says I shall operation for a part of the year, whereas it will tow b e i n get no income. Then he goes to China, where he insists I operation for the whole year. The bon. member for Hun shall receive no indemnity, and then follows me into the tingdon was facetious even on the subject of the remarks I smallest nooks and crannies, and tr y in g to catch me out on made, perhaps in excess of anxiety, about Good Friday and such small matters as £15,000. To begin w ith th e sma ll E as t er Sunday, and he said that taxable articles were con items first, I would remind him that he t oo k a ll hi s cons- surne d on Good Friday and Easter Sunday just as much as parisons from the original statement that was laid bef o re on other days. But I tell my honourable friend that helos Parliament by me on the 10th of February, and made no entirely misunderstood the statement. The statement allowances for the deductions that were subsequently made. was this, that the last days of the financial year had been The fact is, that the yield has been nearly what was to have day s . on w hich business was suspended, and t he cense been expected according to the reduced cslimate. I esti- quence was not th a t th ere was nothing cocooned on those mated dock warrants at £lOO,OOO. My hon. friend says they days, but that what was brought into tho c ountry on those produced only £12,000, and that contract notes and other days was not taken for consu mp tion• Well, I went into items estimated at £BO,OOO produced only a few thousands. the Glass Bee Hi ve, and we disc ussed this question True, but he should remember that very early objection was among others. I put ta.g notion to my honourable friend taken to the contract notes, and they were abandoned before the chairman of custom on the subject, and he said we the discussion was over. I trust that now we are in for the might add ZlOO,OOO to the estimated revenue on that score. discussion of this question of surplus. I trust that the house And as a criticism on the remarks of my hon. friend the will forgive me if I attempt to exhaust it. My hon, friend member for Huntingd", I may state that I hold in my assailed me on the question of chicory, saying that whereas hand a return showing the receipt from customs for 28 I anticipated a duty of £90,000, the product was only days from the bat of April, 1860, and for 27 days from let £22,000. Now thereasonof that was that the trade of chicory of A pr il, 1861, and the 27 days of 1861 yielded. more to re being in very few hands, it Ras quite impassible to mertain ~suns by klO,OOO than did the 28 day* 9f 18" (Hear.) , r •'y "SORBS OF ART. Ines done I AIPE RIAL PARLIAMENT. EXPLANATION.—B. Barometer, corrected and reduced to 32 deg at mean sea level; each 10 feet of vertical rise 'causing about 1-100th of an inch diminution, and each 10 deg above 32 deg causing n ear l y 3-10 0ths i ncrease. E. Exposed thermometer in shado. M. Moistened bulb (for evaporation and dew-point). D. Direction of wind (true—. not magnetic); F. Force (1 to 12—estimated). C. Cloud (1 to 9). I. I n i t i a l s :—b , blue sky; c., clouds (detached) ; f., fog. ' • h., hail ; 1., lightning ; m , , misty (hazy) ; 0., overcast (dull) ; .r., rain ; s., 'now ; t., thunder. A letter repeated augments—thus, r,r., much rain. S. Sea disturb ance (1 to 9). WAYS AND MEANS.—ADJOURNED DEBATE. Mr. HORSMAN, in resuming the adjourned debate for going into committee of ways and means, Fetid — The Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed to remit ld. on the income tax ; but suppose, instead of taking off the duty on paper, he reduced that tax by another ld., or by removing the duty from tea and sugar, would he not be acting more in conformity with the sentiments of 99 out of every 100 in the whole community. (Hear, hear.) He denied that the conclusions as to a continuance of peace on the continent were justified by events, and described all Europe as a vast camp, and referred to the statement of the Prime Minister at the commencement of the session to show that that noble lord did not partake in the feeling of security in the maintenance of peace throughout Europe, of which some honourable members were so very sanguine. He contended that in the present state of Europe no one was desirous of removing the Government at, present; and that their defeat on a single resolution of this budget did not necessitate their resignation. He did not wish un necessarily to draw the attention of the government to their misfortunes, but he could not help reminding them that they had already sustained a defeat. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) There never was an occasion when it was more necessary to follow the prolific principle of Sir R.Peel, and to try by a reduction of duties 20 to stimulate consump tion as to derive a greater revenue from lower duties, and when they got into committee he should require a better reason than any which had yet been given to induce him to agree to a course which did not recognise the interests of the poorer classes. (Hear, hear.) There was one class of gentlemen whose attention would be devoted to this task. Those who had for years I een employers of labour, many of whom have given noble instances of benevolence and patriotism by their practical efforts to improve the condi tion of the working classes, and he would ask them if, con sidering the additional comfort which would be given to the people by the reduction of the tea duties, they would support the repeal of a tax which could in no way be to the advantage of the poor—(hear, hear)—and to continue those duties which infringed specially on the comfort of the ope rative classes. (Hear, hear.) To talk in figures, which would be more comprehensible to the working classes than to talk of millions a year, and thanks to the energies of a cheap press the working men of England would be able to see those figures, he could inform the house that the pressure of the duties on tea and sugar amounted ta about £1,15G7 a day, and therefore he could not but rejoice that the House of Lords had last year prevented a boon being given to the paper-makers which should be especially given to the poorer classes. (Hear, hear.) He was aware that to the middle class the sum he mentioned appeared inconsiderable, but taken off tea and sugar, it would add enormously to the comfort of the people. (Hear, hear.) Last year, when the House of Lords rejected the bill for the repeal of the paper duty, the operative classes did not know the boon it would be to them if the duties were taken off tea and sugar, or of the wrong which would be done them by the repeal of the paper duty ; but he believed that they had grown in know ledge since then, and perhaps it would he found that at the next general election their knowledge would be complete. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) As regarded the paper dutyper se, everybody, he believed, was quite ready to repeal it, if it could be done safely and justly, and if it could be vindie ' cited on sound principles of finance. (Hear, hear.) He had come down to the house 10 years before, when the repeal of the paper duty was proposed, and he had always been anxious to support it since, but he had always been induced to vote against it by the speeches of the re spective Chancellors of the Exchequer. Tn the present in stance he believed that the proposal arose more from a poli tical than a financial motive, and he wished to point out to the house the various classes of objections which had been or could be urged against the measure. The hon. member for Huntingdon pointed out one class of objections. He re ferred to the state of India, the condition of affairs in the Levant, and the general unsettled state of Europe, as rea sons for fearing a diminution of trade, and he asked if under these circumstances the Government were so sure of their revenue that they could afford to give up a most prolific source of revenue. As regarded anticipation of a continental war, they had received great confirmation in what fell from the noble lord at the head of the Government on Friday night, for he said that, looking to the state of Europe, Prussia might soon require the support of England. (Hear.) With regard to the second class of objections they had been gone into in detail by the hon. member for Stamford. He pointed out tho non-fulfilment of various calculations of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and remarked that the ba lances in the Exchequer had been reduced •C 1,500,000 added to the debt, and £1,000,000 of Exchequer bonds issued to perpetuate a debt which we were pledged to pay last year — (hear) —and the repudiation of which went to reduce the deficit of last year, and, to assist in making this surplus for the coming year.. It appeared also that lest year there had been anexcess of expenditure of £2,558,384, and with re gard to that item the right hon. gentleman informed the house that he did not intend to offer any Information on the subject. He did not complain that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had done anything wrong, but. he contended that our whole system of finance had been unsound in principle. The hon. member for Huntingdon added hiS testimony to the nen-existence of a surplus, and the hon. member for Horsham had requested some explanation with regard to the £750,000 expected from China, and presented the alternative either that that sum would not come into the hands of the Government at all, or, if it did, that it would be swallowed up in the indemnity to British mer chants. Now he was not quite sure that that cir cumstance was unsusceptiblo of explanation, but there was no doubt that the merchants should, as soon as possible, be paid their indemnity—(hear, hear)—the President of the Board of Trade had volunteered some ex planation on the subject, and the lightness with which he promised it could only be equalled by the adroitness with which he evaded it; for, after some explanation on another point, he said that on second thoughts he should leave the matter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, which no doubt was a very prudent course. (A. laugh.) He should re commend the right hon. gentleman to held in his hand while giving his explanation the paper of figures of £1,900,000 of Exchequer bonds, £1,500,000 added to the debt, and the reduction of the balance's in the Exchequer; and if at the conclusion of his address those figures remained the same, he would ask hon. gentlemen to believe their eyes and not their ears. (Hear.) He believed that any one regulating his private affairs, or any mercantile establish ment its business, on the financial principles on which the affairs of this country were conducted, would, in a very short time, if the former, find himself in a prison, while the latter would be in the Gazette. (Hear, hear.) A nation could not go to prison or into the Gazette; but that was no rea son why they should not place their financial position on a sound and secure basis, and ho must say that although every one looked up to the high and brilliant qualities of the Chancellor of the Exchequer with respect and admiration, there were many who did not think him safe in matters of finance. (Hear, hear.) They were told that this year the resolutions were to be embodied in one bill, in order the more easily to arrive at a settlement, but it appeared to him to be a blow at the independence of the House of Lords. If two friends fell out, and one took the other unknowingly and gave him a knock-down blow, that he could not con sider a satisfactory settlement. (A laugh.) There were some settlements which might be more precarious than any contest, and more losing than any defeat. (Hear.) He trusted that the House of Commons would resolve to resist any motion which should make a victory of one of the Houses of Parliament the means of destroying the indepen dence of the other. (Loud Conservative cheers.) Mr. BRIGHT then said the house will not, I am sure, be astonished if I say at the beginning of my speech that I do not intend to follow the right hon. gentleman into all the details of his somewhat discursive speech. (Hear, hear, and Oh, oh.) I could not help thinking of the right hon. gentleman, as I have had occasion to think of him before, that he indulged in many remarks alarming to persons of weak nerves and gives utterance to prognostications calcu lated to alarm us all. Did ho not also feel that it is his wont occasionally to wander from the 'realms of fact, and in a manner that I think hardly compatible with the usefulness of debate, to the regions of imagination ? (Hear, hear.) It is only two years since the right hon. gentleman alarmed tho house by a most fearful statement with regard to the chances of war breaking out. He spoke of the probability of the occurrence of ono of the greatest calamities that could occur, namely, a war between England and France, and indulged in such forebodings that everybody must have expected an immediate descent upon our shores, whereas they were in point of fact followed by the conclusion of a most important commercial treaty which itself was fol lowed almost immediately afterwards by a measure on the part of the French Government which indicated the greatest anxiety that the people of the two countries should comprehend each other, and that the interests of both—l mean the abolition of the passport system as regarded English visitors to France. (Derisive cheers and hear, hear). The right hon. gentleman also, s. not thinking it sufficient to chill the souls of some of us who were present, went further, and attempted to chill the 2 bodies of a not very remote posterity by telling us that our 2 coals were about speedily to be exhausted. (A laugh.) An , 1 2 hon. member, however, on this side of the house fortu nately was able to derhonstrate, so far as science could de -3 monstrate such a position, that if the country could endure 5 for the future as long as it has since the dove returned no F , more to the ark, the supply of coals under this island will, 1 in all probability, not be exhausted. ( Hear, h ear.) L ast 1 y e ar again, the right hon. gentleman dre w a pi c ture of a 3 very fearful character. He wished to persuade this house that they were not to be trusted with the regulation of the 1 finances of the country, and that it had been absolutely ne -21 e mery for the House of Lords to do that whi ch for 400 2 years they had never done, namely, to step in and correct what they deemed an error in the calculation of the house of Commons with regard to supplying the means for the service of the year. He has now presented his Budget in a very imperfect aspect, and ono in which' it ought not to be regarded, and has introduced topics which he could have wished would not have been imported into the present discussion. He complains as if the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Government were about to do some-. thing of a very fearful character in proposing that the reso lutions of this house should go to the other House of Par • liament in one bill instead of in separate bills. Now, I ha 1 not because it may come up again at a future litage prtNeWings, but I Will go into any discussion on the subject " worse Than fable yet hath feigned or fear conceived, Gorgons and hydras and chimeras dire," that presented it4clf to his imagination ? According to the general tenor of the statement of the right hon. gentleman, he should, I think, not complain that £70,000,000 was not a sufficiently large expenditure, or indeed that £80,000,000 was not sufficient ; but he should, uncle; the state of affairs which he describes, refuse to consider in any way the remission of any tax whatever. (Hear, hear.) Let me ask the house to go back to that memorable night, a fortnight ago, when the Chancellor of the Exchequer fascinated the house by his brilliancy. (Hear, hear.) I have sat opposite to gentlemen on the other side of the House for more than eighteen years, and I have not done so without taking notice of their mode of thought, of their op;nions and of the effect produced on them by statements which they may hear. (Hear, hear.) I recognise their cheers when some thing occurs to gratify or surprise them. I will leave out the gentlemen who sometimes expect to return back to office, but I will take the main bulk of their followers. As the Chancellor of the Exchequer proceeded with his speech, the faces of those hon. gentlemen betrayed a species of relief. They did not expect, although it had been hin ted aloud, that further taxation would not be required, that so lane a surplus would be clearly made out (hear, hear), and I apreal to the consciences of hon. gentlemen opposite, when the right hon. gentleman came to the reduc tion of income-tax, to show whether they had not reached a perfect state of enthusiasm. \ Hear, bear.) When he came to that portion of his scheme you, the country gentle men possessing incomes of from £5,000 to £20,000 a year, displayed more satisfaction than would, I believed, have been shown by an equal number of London clerks with salaries of an average of £2OO. (Oh, oh.) I have no doubt that it was on account ol your constituents (a laugh), and I do not at all wish to give an improper interpretation to your feelings ; but it was obvious that there existed great excitement and pleasure on that side of the house. When the right hon. gentleman came to the paper duties, there was an expression, not quite the reverse of pleasure, which seemed to pass through both sides of the house, as it was felt to be desirable that a settlement should be arrived at. I ask hon. members opposite whether they ever had a doubt of a surplus ? Was it not their impression that the budget was a successful one, and that the house might reasonably adopt it. (Hear.) I do not include in these observations the right hon. member for Bucks and his friends, because they only saw the prospect of an opposition without anything to oppose, and were, in fact, like the frozen-out gardeners who had "no work to do." (A laugh, and " oh.") Just in the nick of time, and by lucky accident, an independent mem ber on the other side—the bon. member for Huntingdon— . .. turns up to attack the surplus, Now, Ido not regard the hear. member as an authority on those matters. (" Oh" from Opposition.) For the 18 years I have been in the house I have always found him to be wrong, and an authority which is always in the wrong can be no authority. Moore's almanack was sometimes right, but the hon. member never was. (Oh.) I know that those who disagree with me will not agree in these observations. The hon. member having been so conspicuous in his failures was the last man to attack the Chancellor of the Exchequer. (Hear, hear.) I dare say on the other side there are 50 members, who as pire to be Chancellor of the Exchequer in case the right hon. gentleman vacates his office. Now as to a surplus I give him credit for it, and I here state that I shall always believe in a surplus when a Chancellor of the Exchequer declares one. (Hear, hear.) I shall have nothing to do with those who are opposed to a surplus but refuse a remission of taxation which a Chancellor of the Exchequer is willing to make. (Hear, hear.) Assuming a surplus, I ask are the proposed remissions fair to the various interests of the coun try ? (Hear, hear.) Last year the house granted an addi tional penny of income tax for the phrpose of having the paper duty repealed. Now we are to get back that penny— the paper duty is to be repealed—and what can be more un grateful or indefensible than to reject the proposal ? The Chancellor of the Exchequer proposes that one-half of the surplus shall go towards the repeal of certain indirect taxes, and the other half to the repeal of certain direct taxes. I want some hon. gentleman opposite to state on what ground it is that his party bear their hostility to the repeal of the paper duty. (Hear, hear.) There is nothing in the trade to justify such hostility. Paper was a great article of manu facture—much used for books, and for the transmission of news. If there be cheaper pal er—no stamp and a free press, power will be given to the weak, and light will be given to those who sit in darkness. (Oh, oh, and cheers.) When I see you pursue your opposition almost to vindictiveness, I have a right to suspect that there is something more in your opposition to the repeal of the paper duty than there is to your repeal of any other tax. (Hear.) In 1858 the right hon. gentleman the member for Bucks did not simply allow the resolution of the President of the Board of Trade for 1 the repeal of the duty to pass, but he stated that it would be impolitic to maintain it as a permanent source of revenue. (Hear.) One great journal of the metropolis did not wish the paper duty repealed until other taxes were abo lished. If that be your project, you will make it a perma nent tax. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman also said that many Customs duties were not worth collecting, and that that must be considered in making remissions. Now, these Customs duties are all swept away. I have, therefore, a right to expect the vote of the right hon. gentleman on this occasion. The right hon. gentleman went even fur ther, and said that he was not prepared to say that the tax leasto n ago. paper riliwe (Hear.) g er°. )n n a l o i d t a : pr n ap e tei a w oln h t. which h . required, eoagr ,h) t hr That a. ntowtasgentleman.th immediate, ree yN. With , years at trhs powers to occupy the throne in itvws.tare, the righthon hon. I gentleman had abdicated it for what he thought. more use ful sphere, and for a wider field in which to display his genius. Was it worth while, for a party triumph, that books, and tracts, and the all-knowing and all-teaching newspaper, should be subjected to the burden of this tax. (Hear.) The hon. member for Lincoln and others gave the pre ference to the tea and sugar duties eve r paper. (Hear) When I recollect that the five best years of my life wore spent in trying to get for the poor man's breakfast table — in opposition to bon. gentlemen opposite—untaxed bread and butter, I am slow to believe that their sympathy for the poor man is greater than what I m y self feel. (Hear.) I can understand the anxiety of those who have large stocks of tea and sugar in bond, to have some modification of those duties. But I cannot understand how their sympathy for the poor man's breakfast table is greater than mine. In the present case, I think I shall be giving the greatest relief to the working classes, in repealing the paper duties. (No, and cheers.) It is obvious, that if you remit a million of the tea and sugar duties, it may remain in the pockets of the consumers, but it will do nothing in the opening up of any new trade. (Hear.) Tho speeches of the hon. member for Edinburgh, and of the hon. member for Dungarvan, were conclusive as to the grievance of the tax and of the injury —it might be ruin—which it would inflict on paper manu facturers, if allowed to remain another year. The right hon. gentleman who spoke to-night assumed that the mil lion remitted by the paper duties would go to the manufac turers, but that a million remitted of tea and sugar duties would relieve the poorest classes. Mr. HORSMAN—I said it would go into the pockets of paper dealers—namely, bookseller s, paper makers, and cheap newspaper proprietors. Mr. BRIGHT—I think the benefit in that case will be as widely spread as the benefit from a reduction of the sugar and tea duty. I find, between 1838 and 1856, the number of paper mills sunk from 416 to 314 in this country, and in Ireland from 60 to 28. In Scotland there was no material change. True, the manufacture of paper has in creased, but it is one great evil of this excise duty that it strangles all the thriving little men, gives the monopoly of the trade to a few great manufacturers, and destroys that free competition which would otherwise exist. (Hear, hear.) I do not think the right hon. baronet the member for Hert ford likes to appear on the other side when the paper duty is before ns. In 1855, the right hon. baronet objected to the tax, and said that it placed an important manufacture in the hands of a wealthy and irresponsible oligarchy. (Hear.) I should not have spoken of the House of Lords if the hon. member had not referred to it. I am sure that he is the Lest friend of the House of Lords and to the Constitu• tion, willo seeks to have this question speedily and without irri tat:on settled. (Loud cheers) The right hon. member for Horsham called this a political and not a financial Budget. The right hon. gentleman said it was intended to conciliate me. (Hear, hear.) When the right hon. gentleman was in office I found him as anxious as any gne, consistently with his duty, to conciliate me. (Cheers.) The right hon. gen tlemen talked of a noisy section—l will not say an influen tial or non-influential section—on this side to whose clamour concessions were made. Ono thing I may say, we never clamoured for office. (Cheers.) If we clamoured at all it was for a public benefit. I admit that it is my Budget. (Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) I adopt it, and there-, fore it is mine. (Hear, hear.) In a few days it will be the Budget of this JAQWSe2 beeme it will In adopted by Its. Tfib' SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, APRIL 30, 1861: venture to tell the right hon. gentleman that if he ventures to look for precedents he will find that, no longer age than 1801, 1802, and 1803, the House of Commons repeatedly— nay, almost constantly—took that course; and in February, 1801, the House of Commons ordered a bill to be prepared and brought in pursuant to resolutions of the house—no fewer than 143 in number—resolutions referring to the duties on tea, on paper, upon stained paper, upon books and maps, the drawbacks on books imported, the Excise Ilion linen stuffs, the drawback on the exportation, and other matters; so that the house is now only asked to do what, at one time in its history, it was in the constant habit of doing. (Hear.) If, however, the right hon. gentleman is alarmed, let me refer him to the right hon. gentleman the member for the University of Cambridge, who was chairman of the com mittee on precedent last year. That right hon. gentleman certainly showed no disposition to be hostile to the House of Lords, but he prepared the draft of a report for the commit tee in which occurred the paragraph. He said in one of those paragraphs that the power of the House of Commons in matters of supply was very much weakened by the man ner in which the bill was founded upon resolutions of the house. Now I will undertake to say that although those paragraphs were not printed in the report of the committee, the members of that committee, I believe, unanimously con curred in the spirit of them. That is my answer to the right hon. gentleman, so far as I am concerned, to discuss the question at present, I must say, with all respect for the right hon. gentleman, that he is not a man I would like to take advice from on a matter of that sort. Listen to his speech to-night. Has he not crowded into it every possible horror over the affairs of Europe, (Hear, hear.) For the I;tst eighteen years the Budgets have been mine, inasmuch as I have given them ray support. What reason have I, or the majority 'of PirliamPnl, to be ashamed of the course we took. One of the most respected of *he county members who had resolutely opposed free trade, said.to me, ° How much good you have done us, but we did not know it " (Laughter.) The hon. member for Huntingdon. referred to the state of Turkey,'Austria, and Italy, as warning us how we shall proceed. It is true that political convulsions,rend the air, and that political earth quakes shake the ground. But in this country you are in secure enjoyment of your estates. If the Queen can wield her sceptre over a peaceful realm—if Great Britain can hold its course with all the majesty it ever did—l ask you if all this is not to be attributed to the Budgets of the last few years--Budge is which 1 have always supported, and which you, unfortunately for your reputation, have always op posed. (Loud cheers.) I have no objection to party con tests, when for a public good. If I Loa to be remembered hereafter, it is for having had my name associated with measures which I conscientiously felt it was just for Par liament to pass, and beneficial for the country to receive. (Cheers.) I have looked at the Budget with, I believe, an impartial and honest eye, and it is one which it will be bene ficial for Parliament to pass and for the people to accept, I shall give it my hearty support. (Loud cheers.) Sir .1, FERGUSSON said that the hon. member for Birmingham had hardly done justice to the motives of those who opposed the Budget. He would call their attention to some observations of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Glad stone) in 1857, on the Budget of the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, the present Home Secretary (Sir G. Cornewall Lewis), who did not propose the remission of the paper duty, entending that to call it a tax upon knowledge was illusory, inasmuch as it pressed more heavily on other articles than on paper used for printing, and that it would not afford any advantage to the ordinary purchaser of newspapers and books. For those reasons the right hon. baronet (Sir G. C. Lewis) postponed the repeal of the paper duty to a more convenient season, and similarly rejected the proposal to remit the duty on fire insurance. He (Sir G. C. Lewis) quoted a declaration which, though laughed at at the ;time by the present Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Gladstone), had certainly not been shown to be erro neous, that taxation was less oppressive when spread over a number of articles, than when by the process called sim plicity it was made to press on a particular interest. (Cheers from the Opposition.) He proposed reductions to the extent of nearly £12,000,000, including a reduction both of the income aim and also of the tea-duty. The hon.member for Bucks (Mr. Disraeli) took exception to this on the ground that it would, in subsequent years, leave the Treasury in want of funds, and it remained for the house to consider whether that prediction was sound or not. But the right hon. gentleman, Mr. Gladstone, took a different and much more violent view. While it had been the fashion very much to quote the past convictions of the right hon. gen tleman, he thought somewhat vainly, he still believed there would be some advantage in considering the grounds on which the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) had op posed that Budget. He first of all objected to its general features, and denounced the surplus as illusory, and the entire measure as showing a tendency to depart from sound principles of taxation. He denied the reality of the remis sions, and laid down the remarkable doctrine, that as ac cording to past plans, of which he was the author, in 1853, these taxes would have partially expired in that year, the so-called deduction was, in point of fact, a re• imposition. The hon. gentleman proceeded to quote at considerable length from Mr. Gladstone's speech of 1857, laying especial weight on the declaration that the change of circumstances since 1853 did not release the house from the promises then made, and the expectations then raised, to which he (Mr. Gladstone) was especially pledged ; and on the prediction that in 1861-2 the deficiency would amount to above eight millions. The right hon. gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) was now carrying to the extreme the policy which he then de nounced. As these taxes would expire in the present year, their continuance was not a remission, but a reimposition ; and even what was called the " unnecessary penny" was imposed in order to relieve a wealthy interest. The righ hon. gentleman had had the face to lay on the table las year an estimate for the China war of £500,000, the same sum which Sir R, Peel had given for a war of less than one fifth its magnitude, and he now counted on a sum of be tween £400,000 and £500,000, contingent on' the payment of an indemnity which by all prospects would net be paid this year. He asked the house whether it was not their duty to adjust rightly the balance of taxation for the year, and whether they were not wilfully falling into error if, with the experience of last year before them, they aban doned sources of revenue which might be absolutely needed hereafter. The President of the Board of Trade had spoken of prospective finance, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer had dealt more than any other man in pro phecies which had been more unfulfilled than was ever prophecy before, and was now most singularly turning his back on his policy of former years. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was not responsible for the bad harvest, but he was responsible for the excess in the ex penditure in the Chinese war, which, with his experience of 1854, he ought more than any other man to have foreseen. To make up the deficiencies of last year he had anticipated future years, by taking more than £4,000,000 from the- ca pital of the Country. The President of the Board of Trade had not answered the question put to him by an hon. mem ber with respect to that emiloaa item, repayment and ad vances, which looked very like a further encroachment on capital. A very slight difference on the price of tea and sugar pressed heavily on the poor, an assertion he was pre pared to stand by at the risk of imputation of motives. If it . were not that, it .was beneath contempt to attribute to gentlemen advocating the interests of a large class of the community motives by which he could not conceive it pos sible they could be influenced, the imputation might be re torted by the observation that there might be newspapers which did not pay their expenses set up in the interest of a certain party, and that except such an interest, he did not tee who would be benefitted by the repeal of the paper duties. If the question were submitted to a jury of working men, he was sure they would laugh at the proposition that they could'be benefitted by the repeal of the paper duty at the - cost of continuing the tea and sugar duties at their pre sent rate. The hon. gentleman might, if he chose, have reduced the duty on tea by 4d. per lb., and no fairer issue could be raised than the question which of the two taxes it was better for the poor to remit ? He wished to call atten tion to a pamphlet recently issued by M r. Bohn, the pub lisher, who would be generally admitted to be an authority on the subject. The hon. member proceeded to quote ar guments from the pamphlet alluded to, and a statement of the amount of the paper duty on several works. There was no doubt that- the paper trade, so far from being crippled by taxation, was being greatly extended, and Mr. Glad stone contended last year that English paper makers could compete successfully in foreign markets, even when at a disadvantage in taxation. The wholesale price of the cheap papers was id., and the amount of paper duty on each copy was about half a farthing ; so it was not likely the public would get any advantage from the reduction, besides which, it was well known that they were not supported by any profit on sale, but by the advertisements. The whole advantage would fall into the hands of the printer and pub lisher. Considering the budget as a whole, he did not won an artf u l moan o f preven ting the Lords from exerc i s in g der that the right hon. gentleman (M r . Gladstone) had taken the right of supervision —not that he thought the Lords would think of rejecting it if sent up a second time by the Commons—the insult was gratuitous—but there never was a budget more unfit for supervision. It looked as if it had been prepared by two different authors—one of whom had prepared the estimates, the other the ways and means. The estimates for the army and navy certainly bore the con struction put upon them by the hon. member for Stroud. They were prepared with a view to the safety of the coun try in case of war, while the revenue seemed calculated in the expectation of the most piping times of peace. The re peal of the paper tax, and the falling off of other sauces of revenue, would leave nothing but the income-tax to fall back upon for any emergency of war ; and this tax, unwill ingly granted in time of war, was being made the main source of revenue in times of peace. He approved of the foreign policy of the Government, who had rightly inter , preted the feelings of the country in that policy, and espe cially in the Syrian question, in which they had acted on a bold and manly policy, which became them as English Ministers—(cheers) —but in fiscal matteis they were taking a course opposed to the tradition of their own party, and to their policy in former times. He regretted that the Chan cellor of the Exchequer should use the great talents which had raised him to a position, perhaps unknown in the case of any man of his generatton, to carry out a policy opposed to his former pledges and conviction, (Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) Mr. GREGSON was ready to take the Chancellor of the Exchequer at his word that there was a surplus, and had no desire to force on him money which he said he did not require. (A. laugh.) He would rather keep the hon. gentleman " short," in order that he might be more anxious to carry out the economy which he had declared to be necessary. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) At the same time he thought the reduction of the tea duty would have been preferable to that of the duty on paper. He would have preferred to have seen a reduction on tea and sugar, but when he considered what would be the con sequence of a refusal to adopt the present proposals of the Government, he felt it his duty to give a reluctant support to the proposals of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Mr. B. CO CHR A.NE regarded the present as an impor tant epoch in finance, and declining to discuss in detail the figures of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, proceeded at some length to compare the revenue and expenditure during the last 30 years, Pointing out the enormous in crease which had taken ph ce during that period, and more especially since the year 1837. It was to meet the great deficiency of revenue which Sir R. Peel had inherited as a legacy from the Government of Lord Melbourne, that the income tax was proposed, and if ever such an impost was justifiable it was upon that occasion, and for such a pur pose. But at that time thee no b le lord was at the head of the Government, and several of his colleagues were to be found among the strongest opp on ents of that tax. The hon. member procee ded to quote from the speeches o f L or d P a lmerston, Lord T. Russell, Sir George Grey , and ot h ers, passages condemnatory of the policy and justice of impos ing the income tax. If, he said, those members of t he Govern m ent then entertained s uch opinions, how could they reconcile them with the fact of their now supporting an income tax at Po high a rate as ea, i zz t h e retuv i ? The Chancellor of the Exchequer had indicated in his financial matters a desire to diminish the amount of indi rect taxation and increase the direct taxes, and the wry ing out of that policy he proposed to hand over to a new reformed Pas liament, which would more completely re present the wishes and opinions of the people, and there was no doubt that the expression of such wish had tended very much to prevent the passing of the Re,- form Bill last year. On the present occasion the same prin ciple had been expressed, and direct taxation was about to be imposed for the purpose of taking off indirect taxes. An income tax of Sd. in the pound, according to the Chancel lor of the Exchequer's own statement, would give a surplus of £lBO,OOO, and he could not understand on what prin ciple the tax was to be levied at 9d., merely for the pur pose of abolishing an indirect tax on paper, which could not be reimposed, while an income tax of Sd would produce an adequate surplus for the financial year. (Hear.) Mr. O'BRTEN said that if there was one feature more than another which he admired in the progress of the de bate, it was the freedom and ability with which some hon. gentlemen, who seldom ventured upon public attention, came forward and expressed their opinions on the present occasion. Into the question of the paper duty he should not enter at length, because it had been frequently discussed with ability. There was no doubt that that duty seriously interfered with the due dissemination of knowledge. Lord Brougham, when examined before a Committee of the House of Commons in 1834, said that a sound system of government required that the people should inform them selves of the system of legislation ; that they could only be well informed by having recourse to useful publications; and that the danger lay, not in the people learning too much, but in knowing too little. (Hear.) He (Mr. O'Brien) thought that the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer would do well, while repealing the paper duty and reducing the income tax, to bear in mind that his anticipations regarding the spirit duties in Ireland had not been realised, that illicit distillation was on the increase in many parts of that country, and that' in some of the large towns great quantities of spirits were being sold at prices I ess than the actual revenue derived by the Exchequer. if that were so—and he believed his information upon the subject was substantially correct—then was it high time for his right hon. friend to_retrace his steps on the subject of the spirit duties. Still he believed that the right hon. gen tleman was carrying out in every way the principles of Sir Robert Peel, because, while in the first place he had as sisted in repealing the duty on corn, he was now leading the way to liberate paper from taxation ; and upon that ac count, he for one would give the budget his cordial support. Mr. LIDDELL said grave doubts had been thrown on the accuracy of the surplus ; but with regard to that he could not say anything, but he wished to refer to the pro mise of the harvest during the present year. It was beyond the wildest speculation to look forward, however favourable the season might be, to a large crop of wheat. The result would, therefore, be a large importation of wheat, the gene ral effect of which was to interfere with trade. '1 hen as re garded America, war was declared, and the Americans had never conceded the right of privateering, and that might lead to various difficulties. It, seemed impossible that our ships should escape collision with American privateers, and that was a subject worthy of the highest consideration. He believed that if for one night the ballot-box could be intro duced into the house, a large Majority would vote in favour of the retention of the tax. (Hear.) He trusted that an op portunity would be afforded to those who shared his opinion to record them on this subject. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Sir, I rise at the close of rather a long debate, not very much concert- trated, but rather diffused in its purpose, to address, I am afraid, an exhausted house—(" No, no") —and what is worse than all, to address them—bad under any circumstances — in a defensive speech. I think it my duty, in the remarks I shall have to make, to deal principally with those state ments which appear to me to be, of all portions of the pre sent discussion, the most deserving of detailed notice—l mean those statements which impugn the particulars of the figures which I have laid before the house. There are many matters that have been importel into this debate which I will venture to pass over. All that relates to myself per - sonally, all that relates to the danger which may arise from a conflict between a British merchant ship and an American or other privateer, all that relates to more general and vague political aspects in which the question has been re garded—all that I will pretermit, not because I presume to say they are insignificant, but because I feel it my duty to address myself to those points of the debate which touch most directly and most practically on the matter 4 hand. (Hear, hear.) At the same time I cannot help Observing for a moment on the strange constitutional novelty in the duty which has been assumed by the Op position on this occasion. The Government having com puted the expenditure and revenue of the year ask the re presentatives of the people for £70,000,000 of taxes, and they show that if all the laws which were enacted during the last financial year should be re-enacted, the produce of those taxes would probably amount to 72 millions, and they pro posed to sarrender outof the surplus what in round numbers amounts to 2 millions—they propose to surrender 1 million in the repeal of taxes ; and strange to say, it is against this proposal a large number of the representatives rise up in arms. Now, sir, I must say that, according to the doctrine of the constitution, and according, if I may presume so to speak in addressing gentlemen opposite, to the wisdom and the practice of our ancestors, it is the duty of the euvern ment to see that not too little is asked for the public service and it is the duty of those who oppose the Government in particular, and of the entire House of Commons, to see that they do not grant too much. But the fear of granting too much has become a motive singularly operative among a large portion of those who are opposite to me. While, on the other hand, there appeared, by the state of nervous and feverish expression, a fear of possibly granting too little. Now, I must confess, without looking into the details of this matter—without looking into the strictness of this course—a difficulty in finding a precedent to sustain it. I must observe that I think very little good is, under the cir cumstances, to be anticipated to the country from an ex change of duties between the Government and Opposition. But then, sir, after the debate, I think any impartial spec tator cannot but notice that there isa singular want of unity in the sentiments of those who have entered into this debate on the opposite side of the house. The ground that most have asserted is that there is not a surplus. If there is any one proposition which appears to be agreed on it is that, but there are many most important dissentients to that proposi tion. The hon. member for Huntingdon has not asserted that there is not a surplus, but he has said, in speaking of the great estimates of the year—l mean the estimates of the customs and excise, of those estimates which are deemed to be the greatest sources of revenue—he said he believed if the circumstances of the year should be ordinary circumstances, those estimates are fair and moderate. The hon. member for Stamford has said the same thing in substance, but he has questioned, and he was justified in questioning, from his position and views, certain accounts, and scrutinising important items which 1 placed to the credit side of the ac count ; but those are two gentlemen, who, without dispa ragement to others, I may call the most considerable financial authorities on that side of the house, and one of whom introduced the diamuadon adverse fa the Government —neither 'of those gentlemen asserts or insinuates that which all the rest seem to be agreed upon, namely, that. there will not bo a probable surplus of revenue over ex penditure. But though they are not agreed on the ques tion of whether there will or will not be a surplus, still there is a greater disagreement as to the mode of disposing of it. Undoubtedly amongst a number of rival claims, the tea duty appears to be the favourite. There are some gen tlemen of such large generosity, and unrestrained by to rules of arithmetic, that they propose, in lieu of the paper duty, to bring the tea and sugar duties to a peace levy. (Hear.) That is to say, when it is proposed to dispose of a fund amounting to between £600,000 and £700,000 a year, their plan of good husbandry is to lay it out by making a remission which will cost the country 2i millions. (Cries of " No, no.") No doubt gentlemen made that proposal. (Cries of " Name.") The right hon. gentleman the mem ber for Stroud did to-night. (Hear, hear.) He asked that the sugar duty should be placed in the position of the paper duty. Tea, I grant, was the general favourite, but there was a party of gentlemen for a reduction of the income tax ; and the hon. gentleman the member Mr North Lin colnshire (Mr. B. Stanhope) made a speech which I had great pleasure in listening to, as others, and he spoke strongly for a remission of the income tax. The hon. mem ber for Cambridgeshire (Mr. Ball) spoke as earnestly and energetically for a remission or a diminution of the malt tax ; and a forlorn hope was led on behalf of the distillers of spirits by the hon. and learned member for the Univer sity of Dublin. Well, under these circumstances, perhaps it is not wonderful that there has been a certain tardiness, at any rate, on the part of the leaders of the powerful body of gentlemen opposite in putting their views and sentiments in an amendment which might be submitted to the house. But I am bound to say, while I speak of the opinions of those who differ from me, that more than one gentleman on ,the opposite aide have recognised the spirit in which the proposal of the Government has been made, and have declared their opinion that this is a fair proposal and that they will support it. (Hear, hear.) Now, it is very difficult for a minister who is principally re sponsible—it is very difficult in a debate of this kind to seem to pay due respect to the speeches and arguments so ad verse as those which have marked the opposition to the financial plan of the Government, and at the same time not to weary the house. If I seem to omit any matter of im portance I trust it will be believed that it is only from my desire not ) render absolutely intolerable the trespass which I have to make on the attention of the house. I will confine myself therefore to the two main questions : first, is there a surplus; and secondly, how it should be used. But there are certain questions to which I must briefiyolludo in the first instance, because of the largeness and comprehen siveness of their views some gentlemen opposite have referred to the matter as if they thought it of great importance that the transactions of last year of a financial character, and not at the same time immediately connected with the taxation of last year, were an experiment. I refer particularly to my hon. friend the member for Stamford. He referred to the mode in which the deficiency of last year had been met. And sir, I am bound to say he did not fall into the egregious error which characterised the speech of the right hon. gentle man the member for Stroud, who, to the perfect astonishment of all who knew anything of the matter, but without the slightest consciousness of what he was about, and in a simple child-like belief that 14 4f41 wade a grot cligovery which Es.