The Express.
London, England, 1848-12-22 00:00:00

Walt—Duty abolisbei
800 P— 9P 99

0.1800000
416,000
WON
...
. 9t ...«.•«••• ......

rotenone ca Maw
seam
Windom Tax—Aballisi £1,110,000
Advertisement Duty—Aboilebsd . ........ 110,000

Z 1.770,000
Total of Tales

Tetanus' upon seskena excise, and tams A 14477,0011
I repeat that I do sot propose this u a complete financial
scheme. Many artieles are omitted which I should not wish-
to be considered to have willingly excluded, or be thought to
have overlooked. I have gout again and spin through the
dismal catalogue of our fiscal burdens, and if there be any item
of the customs or excise duties which you are sorry to inn
from the above table, be amund that the omission has clamed
me equal regret. Bricks r,oght especially to stand one of the
first on the list for a pmpective budget. Tobacco is a try
strong case, but it invciives so large an amount of revenue that
I could not include it.. The wine duties also call for a revision ;
not to name others. Then there an some duties and Wee, the
modification of w.nich does not necessarily involve • less of
revenue, and we Inch may be dealt with indepeadertly of the
present plan. fin duties on foreign end colonial coffee ought
to be forthwf' equalimed; the property and income tax should
be revised., .nd alas, discrimination made between fixed and
precarious Incomes. For the stamp upon new spapers.asteanned
envelope might be substituted, bearing upon those only
which trio transmitted by poet ; and the stamp duties, gene-
rally, tall loudly for an equi•able revision. I mention those
sense plea to show that, by adopting the proposed " National
Bu?,get," you would rot be precluded from effecting other
fin social reforms. ois the contra-y, I believe if the industry
the country were further disburthened to the extent I
have named, there would be an scenting surplus revenue
from the natal-oil' Ag sources of taxation which would afford
the means of ca Ainually making farther modifications and
reductions of d, riles. Me would have been the case in times
past, notwithe' ,anding all the restrictions upon our commerce;
it the increas Ad income had not been swalOwed up by go-
vernment er .travagance. For instance, had not the go-
vernment
been screamed sines the time of the Duke of Welling-
ton's lona' .nistration in 1830. then, notwithstanding the very
large err .00nt of taxes and duos since remitted, there
would r ow have been a surplus revenue, without the in-

Cooed tr .x,
val.:,
ithaoperdtadiyoertuartftw,
huotauthbtoz
In she year 1835 our armaments cost us 11,557,0001.; for the
tw she months ended on the sth of April lest, they reached
,
nthammepooumnnotdtheoefblryt wdyin.,:na4l,
rawneodattol
idi
an..nreduceid.
idc
ee:
iiemvolumene exclusive of the interest of the debt, was
axepealudinFthogartlth,tlhremn,chooo.:le.tifmotrzthththeeeKpwerftteenwetux7pe,eirin9a,r34tullrertoilbe.
01;
mane
udatT
26,747.0001.,' and deducting 19,341,0001., the cost of our war-
like establishments, Moines only 7,406,0001. to cover the
• whole of the civil expenses of the government. It will be
• writ-evident, then, that if any material retrenchment be
effected, it must be mainly upon our armaments, the ocet et
which bee been increased. 7,000,0001.; end this dazing a
II period et profound peace, and in the dimes of all
• revolutionary convulaioos, and whilst each suocinflve
from the throne enured the assembled per-
t =ehnt of the peaceful disposition of all foreign
, powers. But if we take into calculation the present reduced
value of commodities, it will be found that 10,000,0001. ex-
i waded upon our armaments will now go much farther than
1 11,667,0001. did in 1836; and I suggest that you propose the •
• former sum as the maxi am expenditure forth@ army, navy,
and ordnance, by which you will gain about 8,600,0001. of the
proposed saying of 10,000,0001. I by no means, however,
wish to commit your smociation to ten millions as the mini-
mum cart of our armaments, for I have a strong belief that
'. you will live to see the wute reduced to less than halt that
• sum. The abnvonansed amount will be three times as great
ae that of the United States ; greater than that incurred for
the more purpose by Russia, Austria, or Prussia ; and, judg-
ing by her prouised reductions, nearly, if not quite, as large
• as that of France.
The remaining 1,500,0001. to complete the proposed nduc-
lien of 10,000,0001., you will have little difficulty in saving
from all the other loads of expenditure, including the cost
of collecting the revenue and the management of the craw's
lain&
I repeat, emphatically, all hope of any material relief from
taxation hinges upon the question of a large reduction in the
cost of our army, navy, and oedemas. It it be objected that
Ido not specify the particular regiments or ships which I
propose to reduce, my answer is, that the only way in which
i the public can restrict the government at all, in its warlike
expenditure at • time of peace, is by limiting amount of
money. Disband a regiment, or pay off a ship today, and
the amount saved may be spent tomorrow upon steam
' basins, or for fresh fortifications at Gibraltar, Labuan,
or HonoKorig. This was the view entertained by Sir
Henry Parnell, • great whig authority, who, in his
work upon Financial Reform, written when the Duke of
• Wellington was at the had of affairs, whilst arguing for a
• reduction in the expenditure of our military &pertinent',
says, w Fix upon a much smaller sum, and tell them that
they must make it answer." There lianother good reason
for this course. Some influential persons, who are opposed
to any diminution of the strength of our armaments, yet
contend that the present force mu be kept up at a very re-
duced cast. In their eye& your maximum sum may repre-
sent a much larger establishment than you contemplate.
These parties, probably, would be u willing as myself to put
an end to the crimes and cruelties imported into the slave
trade by the interference of our costly fleet of cruisers upon
the African coast; or there may be other savings contem-
plated by them ; so that, perhaps, in their opinion with en
expenditure of ten millions, nearly as large en "festive force
as at present may be maintained.
But I un prepared to contend for changes in oar foreign,
colonial, end domestic policy (though I will not attempt
to do so at length now), maculated to facilitate a re-
duction in the amount of our armaments. First and
foremost, we meat insist that the principles of non-
iaterfermsee in the affairs of foreign countries, so
loudly professed by politicians of all parties, shin; be
carried into practice in the policy of our government.
During the whole of last year, a fleet, as formidable as that
required by the Americans to watch over their comm ree it
all parts of the globe, was maintained in the Signs, out of
the taxes of the British people, for the service of the court
and government of Portugal. At this moment we have as
lug' a fleet in the Straits of Meseina. eagesed in an armed
interference between the King of Naples and his Sicilian
subjects, with no more interest or right en oar part than the
government of the United States would have to send •
squadron off Holyhead, and serum the character of an
armed mediator between England and Ireland. For three
or four years we have bad a fleet in the River Plate, inter-
fering in the endless and inexplicable squabbles sf the Monte
Videaris and the Basses Amens, and which has at last
ended in a ridiculous failure. I would wish to see our go-
vernment spare the people this useless expense., by simply
knew* the rule observed by individuals of leaving other
matins he settle their quarrels, and minding its own busi-
ness Meffier.
I am also aware that any great reduction in our military
establishments must depend upon a complete change in our
solosial system ; and I consider suck a cheap to be the no
emery einsequenee of our recent commercial policy. I am
prepared to Carry out logically the principle of fees trade in
our future relationship with our colonies. Nay, more, I
always contemprated that the prectieal application or that
principle would so simplify the question that it would not
be possible afterward to continue the ruinous colonial ex-
penditure which we have hitherto sustained. So long as
protection Ina our ruling policy, the nation believed that
the exclusive trade with our colonies onispensued us tor the
expenses of governing and guarding them I did not, of
course, share in that opinion ,• but there was consistency, if
not wisdom, in thou who did. But we have now declared
that for all commercial purposes, they shall is future
stand in precisely the mane reladonahlp towards us u
foreign countries. For seventy years we have do
hied ourselves the right by statute to tax them for im-
perial purposes. Under these altered eireuessteaces, wal
anybody be found, even amongst the protestionists, ay,
even Lord Stanhope himself, who is to maintain
that henceforth the only exclusive sionnPir="we are to pro
serve with our colonies is the monopoly of the expense of
governing'
protectioniststradeisanit berur=eirrotheelvos wiMth"Lieinjelinm°3l.einthirealweaud Demandingthtliat
an exemption from the expense of the 40 little *maw,
which (exclusive of the troops in *tar, fa-
tresses of Gibraltar, &a) areir4 • I this
country in all parts of the ",• little
army always afloat for the fully
••••••e ..• -,: ---.. ,rr- ,i•
'S e:;V:' •••I'. ' ..4
rev ; , .„.;:,:, • . env
-6
,•,..... t: • -.... ~,,, ..,,,
c..v•.•._ .. y