The Press.
London, England, 1854-03-11 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

The answer of the Government is that we ought not to
take that course. (Cheers.) But, at the same time, while
I give that answer on my own behalf and on the part of
my colleagues, with the clearest conviction of its justice. it
is impossible to put out of view the contingencies which
must necessarily attend upon the prolongation of the war
on which we have now entered. I cannot hold out to this
committee any reasonable expectation that if, which God
forbid ! the struggle we are now entering upon should be
prolonged for years, it would be in our power to secure to
all those articles recently relieved from duty permanent
continuance of that immunity. I fear all we can say with
respect to those objects of indirect taxation, as compared
with direct taxation, is that which the Cyclops said to
Ulysses, when he gave the promise of this privilege, that
he would" devour him the last. (Cheers and laughter.)
This is a matter which the committee cannot put out of
view. I speak strongly, and with the sincerest conviction—
we cannot and do not advise you to add one farthing to the
indirect taxation of the country. We have entered on a
great struggle; but we have entered upon it under favour-
able circumstances. (Hear.) These circumstances—
although 1 am not sanguine—although it would be the
wildest presumption in any man to say, when the ravages
of war have once begun, at what point they will be stayed—
yet justify us in cherishing the hope that possibly this may
not be a prolonged struggle. (Cheers.) As lung as
that possibility remains, the committee will agree with me
in thinking it not wise, in the endeavour to supply the
wants of the country, to do it by a series of measures which
shall worry different classes and different interests, different
trades and different industries, disturbing everybody's
calculations and operations, adding 100,0001. to income
here, 200,0001. there, and 300,0001. somewhere else. (Hear,
hear.) I am sure the committee will agree with the
Governmentthatit is not the course which the present exi-
gency requires. And, whatever we do, I take !t further for
granted that we are to endeavour to do it with a minimum
disturbance to trade and industry. There is another great
question which it is impossible for me to pass by without
notice. Is it right that we should ourselves make a reso-
lute endeavour to meet the charges of this coming war, or
would it be just, would it be manly, would it be worthy of
the wealth and power of England, that we should charge
those burdens upon our posterity ? (Hear, hear.) 1 ant
convinced that at the present moment there is, both in
this house and throughout the country, a strong opinion
that to resort to the money market for a loan would be a
course not required by our necessities, and therefore un-
worthy of our character. (Loud cheers.) It is impossible
for the Government—it is impossible for the house—to
give any absolute pledge or to record any immovable reso-
lution that the expenses of the war shall be borne by addi-
tions to taxes; hut yet it is possible for UR to do this—to
lay down a set rule upon the matter, and to determine
that so long as those burdens are compatible with the
principle, and so long as the supply necessary for the
service of the year can be raised within the year, for so
long not to resort to any loan. (Loud cheers.) Irrespective
of other considerations, it is perfectly true to say of the
system of raising funds necessary for wars by loans, that it
practises wholesale, systematic, continued deception upon
the people—that they don't really know what they are
doing. (Hear.) What is desirable is, that they should
know the price they are called upon to pay for the benefits
they expect, or the sacrifices they think fit to make in
order that that which they do they may do on intelligent
and reasonable grounds, not deluding themselves at the
cost of a charge on posterity. (Cheers.) Ido not hesitate
to say that it seems to me that, if the political reasons are
strong for the adoption of that policy, not less strong are
the moral reasons. (Hear, hear.) The expenses of a war
are the moral check which it has pleased the Almighty to
impose upon the ambition and the lust of conquest that
are inherent in so many nations. (Hear.) There is
pomp and circumstance, there is glory and excitement,
about war which, notwithstanding the miseries it entails,
invest it with charms in the eyes of the community, and
tend to blind men to those evils to a fearful and dangerous
degree. The necessity of meeting from year to year the
expenditure which it entails is a salutary and wholesome
check, making them feel what they are about, and making
them measure the cost of the benefit upon which they msy
calculate. It is by these means that they may be brought
to address themselves to a war policy as rational and intel-
ligent beings, and may be induced to keep their eye well
fixed both upon the necessity of the war into which they
enter and their desire to realise the first and earliest pros-
pects of an honourable peace. (Cheers.)

WHAT THE OOVERNMENT DO PROPOSE.
Having stated what, under existing circumstances, the
Government do not recommend, and what I am sure the
committee will not do, there cannot be much doubt re-
maining in the mind of any one as to that which the Go-
vernment will propose and the committee will approve.
(" Hear, hear," and laughter.) I have told the committee
that the sum I anticipate from the income tax i5t1,276,0001.
I propose to increase the tax by one-half, and to levy the
whole of the addition for and in respect of the first moiety
of the year. It may be thought, perhaps, that the more
obvious course of proceeding would be to raise the rate of
the income tax for the whole year ; but I have already
stated that, in the circumstances in which we now stand,
it is impossible to form any rational estimate as to the fu-
ture cost of warlike operations, on the scale at present cal-
culated, in the event of the contest being prolonged. Not
being able to look forward to a long period, we thought it
best to propose that the addition to the income tax should
be levied in respect of the first portion of the year. Seve-
ral reasons justify this course. In the first place, it is the
only means by which it is in our power to raise the whole
of the additional sum required within the year. Direct
taxation cannot usually be levied until six or nine months
after it is imposed. When we enact an increase of the in-
come tax the increase does not become chargeable until a
period which commences on the 6th of April, and it will
not be leviable until the quarter between the 10th at Oeta•

221

bee and the Oth of January. It is only, therefore, by laying
the increase of the income tax on the first moiety of the
year that we shall be able to levy the increase within the
year. That, however, is not the only reason which has
impelled us to the course we have resolved on. I have al-
ready stated that we have determined on leaving open the
question as to the augmentation of taxes in the event of
the duration of the war rendering such a proceeding neces-
eery. Now, if I were to propose increasing the income
tax for the whole year, we must necessarily expose our
to one of two objections. On the one hand we might
be asking for more niouey than we should want, or, on the
other, it might turn out that we had not askew. fur more
than would be necessary to cover the present •Artnamtnts,
and we should be compelled to come again to the house
and ask it to alter the rate of the income tax, which it had

already altered once. The mum I propose, therefore,
appesrs to he the simplest and heat calculated to give ef•
feet to the principle of levying the taxes required within
the year, while, at the same time, it reserves to the House

of Commons its control over the expenditure of ti.e coun-
try. Under these circumstances, it will be my duty to
propose that the rate of the income tax granted by the act
of last session be raised from Id. to told., as respects the
first half of the ensuing year. 44 •

THE ACCOUNTP SQUAIIED.

I will show what will be the fiscal results of this propo-
sition. I estimate the produce of the income tax from
April, 1854, to April, 114515, at 6;275,000/. The half of this
sum would be 3,137.5001. ; but, in reality, the increase of
the tax will produce a larger amount than that. The ex-
pense of collecting the larger antohnt was little more than
for the smaller, and the effect of adding to the income tax
will be to give, instead of 3,137.6001., not less than
3,307,0011. This sum, added to the sum at which I have
estimated the income tax for the ensuing year, namely,
3,275,0001., will yield a gross sum of 9,582,0001. The ex-
penditure, on the other hand, for the same period, stands
at 58,189,0001., and therefore it is evident that by the ar-
rangement I propose not only shall we provide for the
services of the year a sum equal to the whole estimated ex-
penditure, but we shall likewise have a surplus in hand
amounting to 467,0001.
CHANGE IN THE STAMP DUTY.
As the only alteration which he proposed to make
in other it'nis of taxation, Mr. Gladstone indicated
his intention of bringing in a bill to modify the stamp
duty on bills of exchange. The new tariff would be so
adjusted that the charge would amount to 3d. on every
251. value of the bills at short dates, and 4d. per 251.
for those of longer dates. Bills drawn abroad were to
be subject to this duty, as well as those of home pro-
duction. The public would be further accommodated
by the adoption of that convenient invention the
" adhesive " stamp. A present loss of about 110,0001.
might accrue from this change, but he expected that
the receipt would ultimately almost recover its former
amplitude.
THE UNFUNDED DEBT.
Mr. Gladstone then informed the committee that
he intended to ask for their sanction to an issue of new
Exchequer Bills to the amount of lg millions. Those
bills he assured them were only intended to fill the
vacuum caused by current outlay before the en-
hanced product from die income tax could be realised,
and would be then punctually discharged. On this
subject he afterwards embarked into somewhat vol t-
minous computations designed to show the process and
result of his schemes for converting the South Sea
and some other public stocks last year. The schemes
he admitted had been altogether abortive.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then moved
a resolution empowering the Government to issue
1,750,0001. of Exchequer Bills, announcing that the
income-tax resolution would be proposed on Monday.
The close of this speech, which had lasted precisely
two hours, was followed by &miscellaneous conversa-
tion, commenced by Mr. Home, who expressed a
general satisfaction with the finance propo-itions of
the Minister, and continued by Sir H. Willoughby,
Mr. Williams. Mr. Henley, Mr. Glyn, and other
members. Various queries and criticisms were-
thrown out in the course of the discussion, to which
Mr. Gladstone briefly replied.
Mr. DISRAELI acknowledged the necessity of pro-
viding ample resources for the war, and promised to
offer no opposition to any of the ways and means now
proposed. He protested, however, against the doctrine
that all the coming exigencies should
.be met by
enhancements in direct taxation. Inquiring into the
position of the Treasury as regarded ready money, be
remarked that the national balance had dwindl* d from
nine millions to less than one-half the amount since
the late Administration quitted office, and that in April
next there would be nearly 10 millions required on
account of dividends and other necessary payments,
with probably not 4 millions in hand to meet. the
demand. Thus the Exchequer would have to com-
mence the financial year with a heavy debt, which
must be stopped by deficiency bills. This drain of
cash from the Treasury be attributed to Mr. Gladstone's
experiments in conversion, into the history of which
he entered at some length, contending that the prin-
ciple whereon they were based was most unsound,
and the results, financially speaking, most disastrous.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in replying,
followed the train of events alluded to by Mr. Disraeli,
controverting some statements as to matters of fact,
and contending that if any difficulty occurred in

4

■

'~

I

222

carrying out the operations in question they had arisen
from subsequent events which occasioned a rapid rise
in the price of corn and money, accompanied by a
drain of bullion and a fall in the quotations of the
public securities. Mr. Disraeli's general conclusion,
he observed, was to assert that the Exchequer would
be 8 millions behindhand in April, and he ought to
cover the chasm with a loan. Both positions he
disputed, declaring that only 44 millions, at the
utmost, need be raised on deficiency bills in the coming
quarter, and that the operation could be completed
without any serious embarrassment.
Mr. DISRAELI rejoined, repeating his warning against
the policy of carrying on the public business by deft •
ciency bills instead of ready money.
Sir F. KELLY said that the conversion of the South
Sea Stocks had cost all those who relied upon the re-
presentations of the Chancellor of the Exchequer no
less than from 20 to 25 per cent. upon their capital in
thoso stocks, and had only gained in the whole about
15,0001. per annum, By the remainder of his scheme
he had lost no less than 800,0001. to the country.
The resolution was agreed to.
MANNING THE FLEET.
In moving for returns of the number of men
entered in the navy from the coast guard, in the
House of Peers on Thursday, the Earl of ELLEN
BOROUGH expressed some apprehensions as to the
efficient manning of the fleet, and urged the Govern-
ment to take effectual measures for competing with
the merchant service for supplies of able seamen.
A sum of 500,0001. might be obtained by postponing
certain items in the ordnance and miscellaneous
services, and applied to this purpose, and thus in
three weeks the navy would be manned with the most
efficient sailors in the world. It was absolutely
essential that the British navy should be manned with
British seamen—with men who could go aloft and
fight as their forefathers fought at St. Vincent, the
Nile, and Trafalgar. Cost what it might, this object
ought to be secured, in order that Sir Charles Napier
might have the most efficient means of maintaining
the interests and the honour of the country.
The Earl of ABERDEEN had no objection toproduce
the returns, but protested against the observations
which bad preceded the motion. He entirely denied
the justice of the implied accusation, that the fleet
about to sail for the Baltic was inadequately or imper-
fectly manned. On the contrary, he believed, on tes-
timony which he was bound to respect, that the fleet
was adequately manned for the great purpose for
which it was about to be employed. There was not
a pressed man on board it. This alone was a favour-
able feature, compared with former times ; and he
was further authorised to say that the proportion of
men not regular seamen was not greater than on
former occasions. Taken altogether, a more efficient
fleet had never left these shores. The noble earl
added that he could not see the advantage of such
observations as had been just made, nor how they
could possibly promote the efficiency of the service.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH explained, and the
returns were ordered.
SUCCESSIONS TO RE AL PROPERTY.

The bill for assimilating the law of succession to
real property in cases of intestacy to that which re-
gulates personalty under similar circumstances—
that is to say, for providing that landed estates should
be divided among the family of the deceased, instead
of descending to the eldest son—stood for second
reading on Wednesday. The motion to that effect
being made was resisted by
Sir J. PAKINGTON, who commented upon the de-
mocratic tendencies of the measure. The principle
which it embodied was, be considered, unjust, un-
wise, and totally at variance with the spirit of the
constitution. He moved that the bill be read a
second time that day six months.
Mr. BRIGHT supported the bill, whose operation he
thought would often prevent dissensions in families,
and which was designed to free the land from some
of the trammels still left upon it by the feudal
system.
Lord LOVAINE disliked the measure, as being the
first step to a total repeal of the law of primogeniture.
It was the thin end of a wedge which might here-
after introduce into England the French law of suc-
cession.
Mr. M. MILNES felt no peculiar reverence for pti
mogeniture, which even in England was rather a
eustom than a law. The division of property had
produced more good than harm in France and Bel-
gium. Without wishing to see the English law assi-
milated to theirs in all respects, he contended that
real estate should be regulated in the same manner
as personalty in cases of intestacy.
Sir F. TREsIGER argued that the measure must
prove either useless or mischievous, and apprehended
that it would too often turn out to be the latter. If
passed, he (lid not see how they could stop short of
enacting a law for the compulsory distribution of pro-

perty.
Mr. W. 0. STANLEY supported the second reading,
which was opposed by Mr. Packe, Mr. Ingham, Mr.
Henley, and Mr. Drummond.