The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1885-06-13 00:00:00

POSALS.-GREAT EXCITEMENT IN THE HOUSE.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in moving the
second reading of the Budget Bill, made some brief re-
marks - first in reference to the suggested repayment
of Is. to those who had paid the 2s. increased duty on
spirits. This, he maintained, was contrary to prece-
dent, as the increased duty had been sanctioned by the
House, and in all probability it had been paid by the
ccnsurner immediately. He went also at length into
the effect cf the increased duty on spirits, showing that
in England the revenue was 51- times larger than in
Scotland, and 43; times larger than in Ireland.
Sir M. Hicks-Beach moved an amendment con-
demning the proposed increase of the beer and spirit
duties in the absence of any corresponding increase of
the wine duties, and declining to increase the duty on
real property while the resolutions in regard to local
taxation passed in 1883 and 1884 remain unfulfilled.
Dealing with the first branch of the amendment, he
preferred some article of more general consumption,
and dissented altogether from the suggestion that wine
could be substituted for beer as a popular beverage. If
a reduction of the wine duties were to be proposed
as part of a bargain, he complained that the Go-
vernment had taken altogether the wrong course,
for both Spain and France knew they had nothing
to fear, and the best course to compel Spain to
grant us commercial facilities would have been
to make a change disadvantageous to her wines. He
pointed also to the danger of adulteration. As to the
second branch of the resolution, he argued that the
proposal to increase the succession duties did not take
into account the capacity of real property to bear them,
and that if the taxation of real property was to be dealt
with at all, it should be by way of a complete equilisa-
tion. A time of agricultural depression was not oppor-
tune for increasing the burdens on land, and as the
new duties were estimated to produce so small a sum
this year, he urged the Chancellor of the Exchequer
to postpone the matter until he could deal com-
prehensively with the duties on real and personal pro-
perty.
Sir 0. Dilke animadverted in a sarcastic vein on the
predilection shown by Sir M. Hicks-Beach for an in-
creased duty on tea, remarking that, however un-
popular the present Budget might be, the Opposition
Bu4et would be more disliked. AS to an increase in
the wine duties adverse to Spain, he pointed out that
it would interfere with a growing colonial trade, and
he characterised as claptrap the argument founded on
a comparison of the beer duties with the duty on wine
regarded as a beverage of the rich. As to the succes-
sion duty, it was an act of justice as between landed
and personal property, and there was no reason why it
should be delayed. The Government, he said in con-
clusien, regarded the Budget as a whole as a matter of
life and death, and if the amendment were carried its
supporters would have to form a Government of their
own to carry out their own financial policy.
Lord G.llamilton, referring to a preference expressed
by Sir 0. Dilke for "Radical teetotallers" as against
" pothouse politicians," twitted him with having
attended more pothouse meetings than any other
metropolitan member, and commented at length on the
proposlls in the Budget to suspend the, repayment of
the Debt. _ _ _

111 r. 0 Sullivan, in an animated speech, maintained
that the proposed increase of the spirit duty would
have the effect of relieving taxation in England at the
expense of taxpayers in Scotland and Ireland.
Mr. O'Beirne, Mr. C. S. Read, and Mr. Coope joined
in the discussion, and Dr. Cameron who strongly
objected to an increase in the duty on whisky, contended
that taxation should fall equally upon the different sec-
tions of the community, which, as regards the duty on
alcohol, might be attained by imposing a duty of 4d. or
6d. on every gallon of proof spirit in either beer, wine,
or whisky.
Mr. Arnold contended that there was a decided un-
reality in the amendment, which, he maintained, was in
effect playing the working-man argument for the ad-
vantage of the wealthier classes.
Mr. Orr Ewing dwelt on the injustice to the agricul-
tural interest which would be caused by the increase in
the spirit duties, and on its demoralising effect in
stimulating adulteration. _ _

Mr. Whitbread criticised the proposed increase of
the beer duties, especially if they were to be per-
manent.

Mr. A. O'Connor referred to the returns illustrating
the falling off in various British industries and the in-
crease in foreign trade, contending that the Budget
would strike a blow at home industry while benefiting
the foreign producer.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer declared that the
right hon. baronet opposite had set up tho proposition
on behalf of the party to which he belonged that tea
was a proper article on which duty should be increased
instead of duty on spirits. The Government were dig.
tinetly of opinion that duties on liquor, such as beer
and spirits, were preferable to increased duties on tea,
sugar, or any of the articles of necessary consumption.
He contended that it was better to adopt his gradual
plan of dealing with the death duties than to postpone
it to a time when the more drastic plan of at once
putting real property on the same footing as personalty
would have been adopted. In having recourse to taxa-
tion on liquor for partial payment of expenditure
necessitated by warlike preparations, the Government
had followed the sound principle of making articles of
consumption share with property the burdens which
had to be borne upon an emergency, and had followed
a precedent set upon a previous occasion, when brandy
was taxed.

Sir S. Northcote expressed the hope that the decision
on this subject would be taken on purely fiscal grounds.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer had given as a reason
for taxing spirits and beer that the revenue from those
articles had decreased. But he thought it was a
financial maxim not to tax a falling revenue, because
the expectation of further revenue was not likely to be
fulfilled. Instead of apologising for such a financial
solecism, the Chancellor of the Exchequer took credit
for it. If, however, the reason given by the right hon.
gentleman for putting a further tax on beer and spirits
was a good one, it would apply equally to wine. (Hear,
hear.) If the matter were to be dealt with on purely
fiscal principles, beer and spirits would not be selected
for further taxation. His right hon, friend gave tea as
an illustration of articles to which resort might have
been had, and did not make the proposition which
the President of the Local Government Board seized
upon so fiercely and flung at him. (Opposition cheers
and counter cheers.) That was altogether a mis-
representation. If the object were to punish those
who were thought to support war and what was called
Jingoism, there was a fallacy in the proceed-
ing. Who was it who had the power to bring about
all the evil things which were referred to as "Jingo-
ism?" Why, the Government of the day. And who
supported them? The hypothesis was that it was those
who were to be punished by this legislation; whereas,
it was the Government who had brought about this
state of things, and they were supported by what the
President of the Board of Trade called "Radical tee-
totalers." (Opposition cheers and laughter.) This
was a year when they had a right to expect a very
carefully arranged Budget. The conditions of trade
and agriculture, and of the country generally, made it
necessary to have a careful diagnosis of the causes of
those conditions. He believed that, taking house tax
and land tax into account, houses and lands bore their
share of burdens equally with personal property, with-
out going into matters of local charges at all. (Oppo-
sition cheers.) The Government were not fortunate in
their commercial treaties—he did not indeed know
that they were fortnnate in any of their undertakings.
(Hear, hear.) The financial failures of the Govern-
ment had arisen from their fidgeting, and not dealing
with questions on broad principles, so that there was
an uncertainty as to what the Government intended, and
as to what they would do. In the present case nothing
could be more unsatisfactory and injurious than their
action. If the beer and spirit taxes were to be educa-
tional, to educate the people to temperance, why did
. the Government forget their morality as soon as they


had a few millions to spare? (Opposition cheers.) The
real point of the Government was to get over a
difficulty—to carry over the beer duty to the next
Parham( nt, just as it had been suggested to carry the
Crimes Act over and let the next Parliament deal with
it. (Opposition cheers and laughter.) He did not think
that would redound to the credit of the Government.
His own view was that they ought to raise the money
they required in the form that would be least for the
disadvantage of the country as a whole, and that as far
as possible they should keep their taxation steady,
though, of course, he admitted that it was not possible
to do so absolutely. With respect to the two modes of
paying off debt, the Prime Minister was contemptuous
of his (Sir S. Northcote's) plan, and said that the real
way was to establish terminable annuities. (Mr.
Gladstone: I never said so.) Well, he had a recollec-
tion of having something like a fight across the table
over it, and of the right hon. gentleman treating his
proposal with some amount of contempt. But the
course taken by the Government destroyed entirely the
effect of their terminable annuities. He hoped the
House would accept the amendment of his right hon.
friend, and he was sure that there would be no difficulty
in readjusting the Budget to meet the contention which
he had raised. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. Gladstone, who was loudly cheered on rising, said
there was but a moderate connection between the
speech they had listened to and the motion on which
the judgment of the House was invited. (Ministerial
cheers.) The motion of his right hon. friend only
appeared in the speech by fits and starts. The speech
of his right hon. friend (Sir Stafford Northcote) con-
sisted of a criticism of the Government, and a highly
laudatory review of the finance he himself conducte I
(Ministerial cheers) —an exposition of general
principles which some might call truisms and
others platitudes (laughter) with cnly an
occasional reference to the subject before the
House. The right hon. gentleman said he found
nothing in the finance of the Government but a series
of the most miserable failures—(Opposition cheers)—
and he thought the present year was eminently
favourable to a general review and exposition of all
matters connected with the financial state and prospects
of the country, with a view to preparing the way for the
new Parliament. The right hon. gentlemen said there
had been nothing but a series of failures on the part of
the present Government in regard to finance. He drew
a comparison between those who came into office in
the year 1874 and the present Government. Then the
right hon. gentleman (Sir 3. Northcote), with a surplus
of i:6,000,600 presented six Budgets to the House, and
out of those four were deficient. (Ministerial
cheers.) What had been the case of the present
Government? For four years, although they had had
to meet great emergencies, they had presented a
surplus of revenue over expenditure. (Cheers.) The
right hon. gentleman who moved the amendment
made a most candid speech. He found fault with him
(Mr. Glad: tone) for describing his amendment as a
vote of censure. It was not a vote of censure—it was
simply a Government question of life and death.
(Laughter.) That it was an error, he admitted, but it
was more in form than in substance. (Hear.) While
he agreed with the right hon. gentleman opposite (Sir
S. Northcote) that it was a very bad thing to have
unsteady and fluctuating taxation, he was very glad
his right hon. friend proposed to make the
beer duty terminable next year, because it could
not fail to have the effect of inducing the new Parlia-
ment to consider seriously what he hoped it would be
inclined to consider on many other grounds—namely,
the general scale of the expenditure of the country. A
certain amount of charge had been sanctioned by the
House, and that amount of charge presented a sum of
V. 3,000,003 to be provided for. The first question was
as to whether that sum ought to be provided by taxa-
tion, by borrowing money, or by arresting payment of
payment, or in what proportion those different methods
ought to be applied to meet the exigencies of the case.
Well, had the Government submitted to the House an
extreme or an unreasonable place in that respect? When
his right hon. friend first produced his Budget he pro-
posed to take one moiety by taxation and to make no
provision for the others, but to allow it to be taken out
of the sums which were applied to the reduction
of debt. He did not think that that was
an unfair proposal. It certainly was net an extra-
vagant amount to be asored in the shape of taxa-
tion—at least, if the House did consider it an extrava-
gant amount, it was very desirable that that should be
plainly and unequivocally examined. The next ques-
tion was the apportionment of taxation between direct
and indirect taxation. The right hon. gentleman oppo-
site had been good enough to say he recognised that
the entire burden should not be laid on property, and
that a portion should be raised from articles of con'
sumption. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, then, had
been EC) far fortunate in attracting the approval of the
right hon. gentleman. But he (Mr. Gladstone) could
not compliment the Opposition upon the prudeece of
the course they were now pursuing. The motion would
be a severe blow to Chancellors of the Exchequer
who should attempt to act upon the prin-
ciple that part of this increased taxation
should be levied indirectly. (Hear, hear.) The
Chancellor of the Exchequer, in proposing a budget
which affirmed the principle that taxation ought to be
divided between direct and indirect taxation, was met
by the party opposite not with a motion re-
fusing some of tho proposed taxes, but by
the most obstructive of all methods of proceeding
—by an adverse motion to the second reading of the
Customs Bill. He believed that when the time came
for an Administration to be formed out of the ranks of
the party opposite they would repent of the step they
were taking to-night, and as Ns ell as of many other
steps they had taken. (Cheers.) Sir M. Hicks Beach
offered a counter budget to-night, but the leader of the
Opposition did not seem altogether to support it, for
he described the proposal for a tax upon tea as a mere
illustration. (Laughter.) One illustration was as good
as another. (Laughter and cheers.) What was the
cause of all this tremendous opposition to the budget
of his right hon. friend, and what was the reason the
Opposition did not raise their point in committee? He
believed the secret of this adverse motion to the second
reading was not to omit the beer and spirit taxes, was
not through any compassion for the beer-drinker—
(laughter) —the reason was to be found in the
death duties. (Loud Ministerial cheers.) The Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer had invaded the
sanctuary of landed property. (Cheers.) Although
the reference to the death duties modestly retired
to a sec •nd place in the motion of the right hon.
baronet (Sir M. Hicks-Beach), it constituted the ground
and basis of the whole of the opposition. The proposal
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was a mild one. It
was not the fact that the whole of the revenue on this
head would be drawn from realty; a considerable por-
tion would be drawn from personalty. But the duty
undoubtedly tended to the removal of a distinct anomaly
as regarded the incidence of the death duties upon real
property. Besides that, five years was allowed for the
payment f the succession duties, and supposing another
death occurred in the five years, then the duty fell back,
and a new life commenced to run. It was therefore a
total mistake to suppose that the very modified proposal
of his hon. friend came anywhere near the point of
equalising the death duties between real and personal
property. With respect to the non-taxation of wine,
he did not deny that upon the surface of the case that
was a very tempting object of criticism. The real
question was whether it would have been prudent to
tax wine. Hon. members said this was an attempt to
favour the foreigner. (Hear, hear.) There was no
article in our tariff which 'had done so much to
'promote the interests, not of the foreigner but
of trade and industry at home, as the article
of wine. The reduction of the wine duties in 1860 had
not only had the effect of enormously cheapening wine
at home and putting an end to all the worst kinds of
adulteration, but it had had the effect of securing an
opening for British industry to the extent of millions
of pounds per annum. It was a delicate machinery
upon which these results depended, and it was a serious
matter to touch. He did not say it never ought to
be touched, but the question was whether it would
be wire to do so now, especially considering the
small amount, say £20),000 or £300,000, which it
would bring in. The tax upon wine was already
heavier than upon beer. Then the House was asked
to refuse a tax of is. a gallon on spirits, and is. a barrel
on beer of little more than one year. lie did not think
it had been well considered how very strong, he might
say how very mild, certainly how very unusual, such a
request was. A great necessity had come upon the
country, and, apart from the question of who was
responsible, they had had a great danger impend-
' ing over the country. Although they now hoped
that the danger might pass away they were
not at that moment in a position to say it had
passed away—and it would be premature to do so.
The preparations to meet that necessity had
been sanctioned, the charge had received the unani-
mous support of the House, and now the House was
asked to provide a moiety of it by taxation and the
regular Opposition, the loyal Opposition, the national
Opposition, the patriotic Opposition—(loud Ministerial
cheers)—and the Constitutional Opposition—(renewed
cheers)—refused the Government the money. (Loud
Ministerial cheers.) This was an unprecedented pro-
ceeding, as the Opposition on both sides usually shrank
from and abhorred the idea of withholding money
for military preparations which had been recognised
as required for the honour of the country. (Cheers.)
The right hon. gentleman the leader of the Opposition
not only refused the money, but suggested no other
means of raising it. The leader of the Opposition now
proposed to deny to the Government the means 4c) meet
the charge and proposes no substitute for those means,
but said that the Budget might easily be readjusted.
Was that a course worthy of the position held by that
right hon. gentleman—(cheers)—who claimed still to
perform .the functions which in other times were per-
formed by Sir Robert Peel and by the late Lord Derby?
(Cheers.) He wished to appeal to the people
of the country and to have judgment passed.
(Opposition cheers.) All the ancient and approved
modes of Parliament were to be abandoned, and that
by a party sometimes calling itself Conservative and
sometimes a Tory democracy. (Laughter and cheers.)
He meant the right hon. gentle man who had just sat
down, for the mover of the amendment was per-
fectly intelligible; he said, "You should cast
your net wider and Oover a broader surface,"
and he showed his meaning when he said,
"You should lay a tax upon tea." He said that the
tax upon tea was moderate. The tax now of 20 per
cent, upon beer wee not moderate, and the tax upon
tea was not less, he believed it was more than 48 per
cent. at that moment. (Hear, hem.) To obtain the
requisite sum from tea you must put OD an additional
tax of not less than 3d., thus raising the tax to 75 per
cent.—(cheers)—because they would not add 3 per
cent. upon the back of a 20 per cent. tax on beer.
(Cheers.) . .

Mr. O'Sullivan: 400 per cent. upon whisky.
Mr. Gltu?sedie : He spoke of beer. (Laughter.)
Mr. O'Sullivan: I spoke of whisky.
Mr. Gladstone : His speaking was orderly, and
the hon. gentleman's was not. (Laughter.) As long
as he could recollect it had been uniformly held that
it was desirable to lay upon spirits as much tax as it
would bear. In conclusion, he -would say that a
fundamental objection lay to a tax upon tea.
The right hon. gentleman said that it would
be easy to readjust the Budget ; but why
did he not tell them how ? (Cheers.) Were
they going to tax the raw materials of industry, Or were
they going to reimpose protective dut'es ? (Cheers).
If not, what was open to them? Was it to be alcoholic '
liquors, or tea or sugar? And that was the issue upon
which they were attacked upon a question of life and

death. As such the Government accepted is; and he
did not envy those who, if they gained the victory,
would have to bear the consequences. (Loud cheering).
The House divided—
For Sir M. Hicks-Beach's amendment 264
Against 252
Majority against the Government —l2
The result was received with loud and long continue :1
Opposition cheer. Lord R. Churchill and several other
Conservative members stood on the benches and waved
their hats. Amid the cheering, which lasted for two or
three minutes, some cries of "Buckshot " and" Coer-
cion "were heard from the Irish members.
After the excitement had subsided,
Mr. Gladstone, who was received with loud Minis-
terial cheers, said: In going through the remainder of
the orders of the day the proceedings in most of them
will be merely nominal.. No real business would be
taken to-night, though I will not absolutely pledge my-
self with respect to every description of business with-
out taking an opportunity of looking over the list, but
I think as nothing would be gained by that, the best
thing would be for me to move the adjournment of the
House. (Cheers.)
The motion was at once agreed to, and the House
adjourned at ten minutes to two.