The Sun.
London, England, 1852-12-17 00:00:00

' in that recommendation, was I justified in recommending
that the repayments should take their place in the ways
Ind means ? These are the two issues in this matter be-
fore the committee ; I trust I have stated them fairly.
I must advert briefly to the origin of this department of
the Public Works Loan Commission, which on the former
occasion I adverted to cursorily. I observed then that this
department had its origin in circumstances exactly the re-
verse of those under which it now exists, and was occa-
sioned by causes which now no longer operate. At the
Peace, there being a surplus population and a deficient ca-
pital, the labour-market throughout the country being sud-
denly disturbed, and the labourers let loose on society, the
amount of unemployed labour being aggravated by a body
of 200,000 seamen and soldiers all at once disbanded, the
Government of that day felt it necessary to take some ef-
fectual and artificial means of employing that surplus
population. It is not necessary for us to enter into any
discussion as to the policy or impollcy of such a proceeding.
Probably political economists might not approve of it—
probably statesmen under circumstances so urgent, though
they might not approve of it, might have been forced to
have recourse to such a measure. But under that impres-
sion that establishment was founded, which, by the credit
of Exchequer-bills issued by the State, raised money and
employed that money in what is called " public works."
That system went on for, I think, nearly 15 years. Nearly
3,000,000/. of Exchequer-bills had been issued, and those
which had been so issued for that purpose were not *of so
favourable a character in the market as the usual sup-
ply of Exchequer-bills ; and it was found necessary
or convenient to terminate the system. In the year
1842, the point from which we depart, the account was
taken of that fund. It appeared at that time that in round
numbers the sum of 3,000,0001. had been raised by Exche-
'quer-bills thus issued ; that of that sum 2,000,0001. had
been paid off, and that 1,046,0001. remained at that time
" unsettled," if I may use the expression ; and to close the
transaction they were funded. From that period, by act
of Parliament, it was arranged that instead of loans raised
on Exchequer-bills, the same commissioners, for the same
purpose, should receive a sum of money to the amount of
360,0001. a year from the consolidated fund. The sum
which we have to deal with is 300,0001., for by a subsequent
arrangement 60,0001., a portion of that sum, was transferred
to the use of Ireland only for public works ; and with that
I do not propose to deal. I hope to put before the com-
mittee clearly these dry details. Well, now, sir, the right
hon. member for Carlisle has dilated in almost moving
terms upon the benefit of that fund, especially to the coun-
try gentlemen. He has eulogised its good administration
by the unpaid commissioners, whose respectable and re-
spected names he read to the committee ; nor should he
have forgotten, though he omitted it I am sure only from
inadvertence, to have recorded, also, the names of the re'
spected officials connected with that fund, whose perform-
ance of their duties should not, I think, be overlooked at
this moment, whatever our opinion may be upon other sub-
jects. I am willing to admit that as far as those unpaid
commissioners and those sedulous officials are concerned,
there are few blots in the administration during a long pe-
riod of that fund by them. On the contrary, I think they
have deported themselves with unimpeachable assiduity
and care. Sir, the right hon. gentleman passing on, has
dilated upon the importance of this fund, especially to the
country gentlemen. With this fund, according to him,
bridges were built, union workhouses were erected, lunatic
asylums And public gaols arose—
Sir J. GRAHAM I said " workhouses enlarged," not
" built."
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—NV ell, en-
larged ; the right hon. gentleman may have the benefit of
the correction. (A laugh.) Certainly he talked of that
fund circulating to the constant advantage of the landed
interest, and he asked, " If that assistance is withdrawn,
what are they to do ?" "Why has he touched it," said the
right hon. gentleman ; "not a single shilling has been lost
- why has he touched it ?" Now, sir, of a fund of this
nature there is one observation to make of an abstract cha-
racter, which should not be omitted. This fund proposed
to offer to lend money at a higher rate of interest than the
rate prevailing in what is called " the money market."
According to the right hon. member for Halifax that was
in order that the money market should not be disturbed.
(A laugh.) The rules of the loan fund were these—that

ashamed to say that I have been a member of Parliament
during the time in which this instance occurred, and I
dare say a vast majority were. Its date is from 1847 to
1850, and it makes me blush even at this moment. (A
laugh.) Now, this is well deserving the attention of the
committee, because there is no reason why almost this very
night or the next night the same operation may not be
going on—there is not the least reason why under this ma-
chinery we may not every week be voting 100,0001. of the
public money without a single member being cognizant of
it. The case which I will now call your attention to is that
of Battersea Park. (Hear, hear.) Now, Sir, lam far
from saying that it may not be the duty of the Govern-
ment to establish parks for the community. Ido not want
to enter into that great question now ; but I think it is a
question whether the inhabitants of the district should not
at least contribute their quota, and whether it may not
be perfectly legitimate, in a great metropolis like this,
that the central authority should aid in a purpose which
contributes to the ornament and health of the general
population. (Hear, hear.) It is perfectly legitimate for
the Minister to come forward and propose a vote of
150,0001., or even more, to make a park at Battersea or
anywhere else. The house in such an event has the ques-
tion fairly before it, and may consider it in all its details,
and if it sanction it, although the speculation may be im-
provident, and the object not worth the investment, yet
no one can complain or the result. Let me inform the
committee what occurred in the case of Battersea-park.
A bill was brought into Parliament, as usual, empowering
certain individuals to buy land at Battersea, and to make a
park. A clause was put into the bill—not compulsory, mind
you, but permissive—to enable the Lords cf the Treasury,
if they thought fit, to advance from the Public Works Loan
Fund such a sum as they might think proper for the ad-
vancement of the object in question. The projectors of Bat-
tersea-park, with that bill which nobody had ever seen, and
that clause—(a right hon. member, " It was a public bill")
—yes, a public bill, of course, but it does not follow from
that that five persons in the house knew what was going on
—(hear, hear)—they go the Treasury, and what occurs ?
They have an advance from the Treasury of 150,0001. I
don't ask who was the Chancellor of the Exchequer that
sanctioned that, notwithstanding the interruption that
was raised. That is a statistical fact ; and, of all the
speculations that man ever engaged in, no speculation was
ever so absurd as that of Battersea Park. The persons
who undertook the enterprise were totally ignorant of all
the circumstances with which they had to deal. They
purchased a great deal of land, and made arrangements by
which they left so slight a margin to the Government as a
return that 20 years must elapse, even if they are success-
ful, before they receive any rents ; and the slight margin
that is left will never defray the sum that is already due
for accumulated interest ; for, mind you, they must be
paying 5 per cent. to the Public Works Loan Fund all the
time—that is to say, acknowledging a debt which they
never pay. The interest is added up every half-year, and
it now amounts, I think, to 12,0001. (Hear, hear,) Now,
Sir, I will not go further into any details of other instances.
I have only done my duty in bringing them before the
committee. I have here in my hand, from the year 1824
till 1840, a catalogue of parallel instances, and the whole
additional amount is very little short of 100,0001., every
shilling of which has been lost to the country. (Cheers.)
"Not a single shilling has been lost," said the right hon.
gentleman. "Why has he touched it?" (Renewed cheers.)
Well, I've given him now the " reason why "—(cheers)—
and I think the committee will agree, whatever they
may think of the further merits of the question, that
in stopping a system so iniquitous I was only doing my
duty as a guardian of the public purse. Yet this is the
system which, according to the right hon. gentleman, is
administered by Lord Overstone and lent to the country
gentlemen—(loud cheers from the Ministerialists)—all for
building lunatic asylums at 4 per cent., which the Secre-
tary of State tells you the county of Worcester can build
at 3 per cent. In fact, irrespective of the flagrant circum-
stances which I have brought before the committee, time
had virtually done that for the Public Works Loan Fund,
which an indignant Chancellor of the Exchequer ought to
have done long ago. A loan fund lending at 5 and 4 per
cent., founded upon the assumption that there was surplus
labour and deficient capital in an age when there was a
deficiency of labour and a plethora of capital, really had
come to its natural end ; and that is the cause of those
large balances which must necessarily be swollen each
quarter by the increment from the Exchequer. They have,
in fact with these rapidly accumulating funds, been led
almost to force their loans upon the Irish railways. But
here the Commissioners come into play, and take care that
the security shall be of the best description. And that
which has happened within .a very recent period will per-
haps astonish the house; but such is the effect of the pre-
sent, and I believe the permanent state of the money mar-
ket, that an Irish railway company that had asked for
the assistance of a very large sum indeed, have announced
they will not take the loan, because they find they have
a good security, and can receive assistance in the way of
an ordinary loan. (Hear, hear.) Under these circum-
stances, I felt it my duty to bring before the attention of
my colleagues the state of this department—(hear)—and I
called to their notice, that not only was there this waste of
public money, but that there was no security against its
continuance. That waste, too, has taken place during a
period of several years when you have not been able to
screw up your courage to vote 150,0001. for a National
Gallery—(hear, hear)—and we came to a conclusion that
it would be a good thing to relieve the consolidated fund
from this annual charge, and stop the machinery by which
such a ruinous and unprincipled waste of the public money
took place. (Hear.) Then the question arose, what were
we to do with the repayments which every year came in
when the issue was stopped, and which repayments I
placed in my estimate at 400,0001. The right hon. gentle-
man the member for the University of Cambridge seemed
to correct me as to the sum paid being 360,000/. ; but he
confused the issue from the consolidated fund with the
repayments in a way that, with his experience as a Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, I was astonished to hear ; but the
fact is that the annual amount issued from the consolidated
fund is no measure of the amount of repayments.
But the question arose, what were we to do with
these repayments? Were we to pay this 400,0001. into
the balance of the Exchequer ? that was the first
question. It is of the utmost importance that the
balance of the Exchequer should be high. That is a
very great principle. But, after all, the balances in the
Exchequer are nothing more than balances of the nation
with its bankers, and the same rule must apply with a
nation and its banker as with a private individual and his
banker. (Hear.) Whether you bank with Messrs. Drum-
mond or with the •Bank of England, neither would allow
you any interest on those balances. It is necessary. there-
fore, for the nation, as for a private in4ividual, to-have a
good, ample, and sufficient balance ; but it is inexpedient
to have an excessive balance, and the consequence has been
that the highest authorities, those most favourable to re-
taining a sufficient balance in the exchequer,have laid down
what may be considered even as a rule and regulation for
the amount of such balance. There is a certain point
which it is considered most inexpedient your balance in the
Exchequer should surmount. The state of your balances
in the Exchequer is this :—They had long ago arrived at
that point, at present they exceed it, and have done so for
some time. Ever since 1842, with the exception of one
year of great, startling, and unexpected vicissitudes, the
balances in the Exchequer have been very high, and higher
than recommended by the highest authorities. The proof
of that is that certainly, with the exception of 1848 and
1849, never, from the period I have mentioned, has there
been any occasion to borrow money to receive any ac-
commodation from our bankers—that is to say, at the
the end of every quarter, when the dividends were
about to be paid, there has always been in the Bank a
balance sufficient to discharge the claims of the public cre-
ditor, and leave a sum ample enough for all the contin-
gencies of the nation. Since 1849, with one exception,
when I think a sum of 4001. or 5001. was paid for deficiency
bills, and that only from a technical mistake, we have never
been under the necessity of appealing to our bankers. The
committee will then understand, that if the 400,0001. had
been paid in to the balance of the Exchequer, it would in
the present state of affairs have been just the same as
locking up that sum in an iron chest—(hear)—it would
have been immovable and unprofitable. (Hear, hear.)
I must ask the indulgence of the committee while
I enter into these details. Treasury finance is a subject
with which the house is not very versant, but I hope
the house will not think me presumptuous in attempt-
ing to instruct them upon it. I was not born and bred
a Chancellor of the Exchequer—l am one of the Parlia-
mentary rabble—(hear, and laughter)—but I trust, after
all the observations I have made, it will be seen that I
do know something on this subject. (Hear, hear.) I
of
fnr
thefua
gv he
tu favour
Exchequer,not
of
he4oobEe
Exche-
quer, es
think it is quite clear that the right hon. gentleman the
member
ashifdoo rwi
in to
ya loiuftahxteh
wat balanceasw hneont
1.
being ehinagvep
says,quer The i s u n
pp
rr
oo p
efi t
ra b n
gb n tt tho
it rwht h hon.itag etnhtilae,m—aint
th reduce
eme
mtbheer dfeobrt .''
the Andun ivtehrseityright
f
hoe.
t getnotlegmo
ante
Cambridge echoes that—and I am glad to hear
that admission, because the Government think the same.
(Hear, and a laugh.) In a recent transaction, 1,000,000/.
debt was created by funding Exchequer-bills in 1842, and,
therefore, say theright hon. baronet and the right hon. gen-
tleman, you ought to reduce the debt, both being against
this sum being paid in to the balance of the Exchequer.
Now, let us examine this question of the reduction of the
debt. Upon this subject there is very great ignorance Pre-
valent in this house. I have been asked myself, " What
do you leave for the reduction of the debt ? In your finan-
cial statement you have left nothing." The mode, method,
and means by which the sinking fund is acted upon, and
the public debt of the country is liquidated, does not de-
pend on the will of the Minister, or a vote of ^the House of
Commons :it is provided for by Legislature. The law
has prescribed the method by which you reduce the public
debt of this country. There is only one way to reduce it,
and the law has prescribed this—l beg the attention of the
house, because this is a vital point—(hear, hear)—the law,
I say, prescribes that every quarter an account shall be
taken of our income and expenditure at the Treasury, the
surplus shall be ascertained, and one-fourth of that surplus
shall be instantly devoted to the liquidation of the public
debt, or to the action of the sinking fund. It is nothing in
the discretion of the Minister, or of a single House of Par-
liament ; the law is inexorable and imperative. It is
totally impossible one can act on the debt and reduce it,
unless you bring money into the ways and means. (Hear,
hear.) It is only in such a way it can enter into the bal-
ance struck of income and expenditure, and that the sur-
plus can be ascertained, and one-fourth of the surplus ap-
propriated to the reduction of the debt. (Hear, hear.)
And now I will show you how I have acted on the debt in
the way in which I have recommended Parliament to deal
with this 400,0001. of repayments. The house will assume,
annual one. I will show the house how that
year is an
for the sake of my argument, that my surplus for the com-
ingsurplus will stand. The account or income and expendi-
ture is taken at the end of the first quarter of the financial
year. The surplus is 400,0001. One fourth of that is im-
mediately devoted to the reduction of the debt. The
same ceremony takes place every three months—the same
action takes place on the surplus of 400,0001., and at the
end of the year the whole of the 400,0001. is devoted to
the reduction of the debt. (Hear, hear.) And in three
years' time, all things remaining the same, and the repay-
ments entering into the Treasury, the whole of that sum
of funded Exchequer-bills of 1,000,0001., and the accumu-
lat ed interest, will be liquidated, and the public debt
reduced by that amount. (Hear, hear.) There is no other
way of acting on the public debt or reducing it. By the
course I have recommended I have put an end to a disas-
trous waste of public money. In the second place, I have
relieved the consolidated fund from an annual payment
of 300,000/. ; and, in the third place, I have laid the founda-
tion of a reduction of the public debt by that 1,000,0001.,
and:all its accumulations. (Hear, hear.) Then the ques-
tion assumes a very different character when this is ex-
plained ; but this is only an account of what I have done.
Lets us see what great authorities have said on this subject.
Hitherto, as I have put the case, the house may be of
opin ion that I have acted discreetly or wisely, but unpre-
cedentedly. After the criticisms I have been subjected to
before, let me inform the house what was the opinion on
this subject of the highest authorities. In 1822 a select
committee was appointed to inquire into the public ac-
cent its, and to recommend the means by which the keeping
of ti tose accounts might be improved ; and to 'that-commit-

'or all undertakings in which profit was concerned 5 per
cent. was to be charged, and for all undertakings in which
nrofit was not concerned 4 per cent. only was to be charged.
The first and natural consequence of any department lend-
ing money at a higher rate of interest than the natural rate
of money market is, that the first-rate securities will
not apply, for first-rate securities will not pay 5 per cent.
or 4 per cent. if they can get their money at 34 per cent. ;
and if your funds are employed the chance is that your
security is second-rate security. (Hear, hear.) Well now,
sir, I have here ample information as to the manner in
which those funds were employed as regards the country
gentlemen ; but I have no wish to enter into any details
to show that in many instances those advances might not or
ought not to have been made. At this moment the country
gentlemen are not applying for any great amount of that
fund, for the reason which my right hon. friend the Secre-
tary of State for the Home Department adverted to the
other evening—viz., that they cannot afford to pay so high
a rate of interest for the loan which is afforded them.
(Cheers.) tat, sir, the objection to this department has
nothing to do with the circumstances on the surface, to
which the right hon. member for Carlisle has adverted, and
only adverted. The question is one of a much deeper cha-
re.cier, and now, perhaps, the committee will permit moth
inform them under what circumstances and by what rea-
son my attention was drawn to this loan fund. Sir, I found
in revising the public accounts of the country a department,
and a department of no great mark, with a very large bal-
ance of the public money unemployed, amounting, when it
first attracted my attention, and I believe at this moment,
to upwards of 380,0001., lying Reffectly idle. It is no doubt
a rule, which I should think no gentleman opposite will
impugn, that large balances of the public money lying idle
are a feature which ought not to be encouraged, and which
ought to be inquired into. But I found that with the large
amount of balance there was a law in existence that per-
emptorily every quarter of a year increased it by the sum
of 90,0001., less the amount paid to Ireland; and it became
therefore my duty to inquire why so large a balance re-
mained unproductive—what was the object of that balance
—what had been effected by that fund, and what might be
the consequences of its remaining in its present state? The
right hon. baronet said, in a manner which he did not in
any way qualify—which, in fact, was almost the basis of
his appeal, if not of his argument—that not a single shil-
ling had been lost—that under the innocent managementof
those respected names which he appealed to, and those
worthy officials whose services I have presumed to notice,
the simple country gentlemen have been benefited—that
that revolving fund had raised our gaols and enlarged our
unions, and after 30 or 40 years' experience, not a single
shilling mind you has been lost—" Why does he touch it?"
(Cheers.) Now I must inform the committee that the right
hon. gentleman, in the minute statementwhich he gave of this
department, omitted all the most important facts. I doubt
not, sir, that if a fund had been intrusted only to respect-
able unpaid commissioners of such habits of life as were re-
ferred to by the right hon. gentleman, devoted only to the
worthy and laudable purposes which the right hon. gentle-
man described as the sole object of its investment, I doubt
not that though there might have been an occasional job
unconsciously perpetrated, and an occasional bad security
inadvertently taken, yet that no very serious consequences
would have elapsed. (Renewed cheers,) But, sir, with so
convenient a fund at their disposal, there was another party
to interfere beside the respectable commissioners, and the
fund has been employed for purposes very different from
those of my hon. friends near me—the country gentlemen
of England. (Cheers.) With these large balances and
funds another influence has interfered, very briefly alluded
to by one of those right hon. gentlemen who have spoken
on the subject. "We all know how convenient it is to the
Minister," said the right hon gentleman, " to have at a par-
ticular moment such a fund at his command ;" and I will
show the committee how convenient it has been to the
Minister to have that fund at his command. (Cheers from
the Ministerialists.) And I will show to the committee
what flagrant misappropriation there has been of the funds
of this country, and how immense an amount of money has
been squandered away, virtually without the cognizance and
control of Parliament, and entirely by the .machinery of this
Public Works Loan Fund. Now, sir, "it is excessively
convenient," says the right hon. gentleman. There are mo-
ments when even I, with my brief experience of office,
which seems so much envied—(cheers)—when even I may
experience the convenience of such a fund. Well, I don't
know what I may come to ; but certainly, during the short
period that I have had the honour of presiding over
the Exchequer, I had not the slightest idea that I was to
avail myself of such an opportunity. (A laugh.) This,
now, is the way in which my predecessors have availed
themselves of such opportunities. I shall hut the question
simply before the committee, whether they think that a
department ought to be encouraged for the reasons urged
by the right hon. member for Carlisle, or whether I have
taken a judicious course in attempting to terminate its
existence. I leave that to the decision of the committee.
Now, sir, let me explain how the Minister of the day,—l
make no charge of any Minister of any party—my observa-
tions are general—bow the Minister of the day has availed
himself of the public funds, virtually, as I shall show you,
without the cognisance of Parliament, and how immense
sums have been squandered without even the hon. member
for Montrose, I believe, being aware of it. (A laugh.)
Now, I take a case, and there are many other illustrations
of the same thing. I take the case of the Thames Tunnel.
Now, there is a body of ingenious men wll resolve to make
a tunnel under the Thames. Well, it is a great triumph
of scientific enterprise, and much to the honour of the Eng-
lish character, that such an undertaking should have been
entered into without, of course, the slightest chance of ever
getting the smallest interest for the money. It is only in
England that such things are undertaken, and such enter-
prises encouraged. (A laugh.) However, there are mo-
ments when even the most enthusiastic in the enterprise
begin to think that public assistance is required. Ap-
peals are made to the Minister. Those appeals are
stengthened and supported by powerful Parliamentary in-
fluence. A bill is brought into Parliament on a sub-
ject which interests nobody, and it allows the undertakers
of that public enterprise, the members of a public com-
pany, to raise money. Who of the 650 members has an
eye on a bill of that kind ? Probably not five men in the
house, unless they are directors of the company, are
aware of it. That bill contains a clause permitting the
Lords of the Treasury to advance from the Public Works
Loan Fund a sum by way of loan to carry out the projects
of that company. The bill is passed. Being passed the
promoters go to the Treasury—l am now speaking of the
Thames Tunnel Company—they go to the Treasury by vir-
tue of that clause. The Lords of the Treasury advance, by
way of loan, through the machinery of the' Public Works
Loan Fund, no less a sum than 250,0001. to the Thames
Tunnel—(cheers)—not a shilling of which has ever been re-
paid, or can ever be repaid—(hear, hear)—and-en-which, I
believe, only per cent., which is received probably as an
admission fee into the tunnel, has ever been given to the
Treat-hurV. Now, what I say with regard to the system is
is —lt is perfectiy open to the House of Commons to do
that Which all assemblies and individuals have a right to do
tunnellunildlus'e'
asks the
!it a great folly. If a Minister comes forward and
ofr
Commons to vote 250,0001. to make a
that 250,000/.,-ei,Z the object, and though you may think
voting 25030ZfThames, at least we have the glOry of
and rational pu tbe employed in amore useful, elevating
appealing to threPose reasont least there is an opportunity of
) Thltand the sympathies of the house.
,0001.urilader this system no one is the least
(Hear, hear.
ltil3chth2eso
country
lent. Lent ! Yes, but how lent ?
aware that 250
is
of a loan. (Cheers.) Now, this
It is a grant in the.shape
Ma and its accumulated
interest
try. I will give one
more instance, and it is one of recent interest. I am

tee we are indebted, with scarcely any exception, for all the
forms of public accounts that now prevail. What was the
rcommendation of the committee of 1822 with regard to
these advances and repayments ? That committee, formed
of the most distinguished men, concentrating their atten-
tion upon this sole subject, specifically recommended that
all advances and repayments should enter into the accounts
of income and expenditure—(cheers)—and for six years
the advances and repayments figure in the public accounts.
It may be said there was another committee of public ac-
counts in 1828, and that they took a different view. That
would not invalidate the high authority of the committee
of 1822 ; it would not deprive me of the authority that the
course I have taken is not unprecedented, because I have
proved that it was practised for six years. But let us in-
quire what was the opinion of the committee of 1828.
They recommended that it would be more convenient that
advances and repayments should be kept in separate ac-
counts from those of the income and expenditure. But I
am informed, wed I believe correctly, by a most distin-
guished member of that committee, that the recommenda-
tion did not arise at all from any difference of opinion in
the principles brought into controversy on this subject,
and they added this to their recommendation, that when-
ever the issues were stopped and the accounts were closed,
then the general aecount was to be taken, and they were
to revert to their old position in the public accounts. Well,
Sir, I now approach the second great arraignment of my
financial statement that was made by the right hon. mem-
ber for Halifax with respect to the grave mistake that I
had made in the estimate for the year after next, as to the
deficiency which would accrue to the revenue from the
proposed semi-repeal of the malt duty. (Hear, hear.)
The house will recollect that I placed in my estimate as
the loss which I believed would occur in the year 1854-5
from the alteration of the malt duty the sum of 1,700,0001.
The right hon. member for Halifax said the less on the
malt duty must be at least 2,500,0001., taking, of. course,
the most depreciatory view of the result of the re-
duction of the duty. He placed the duty as low as
200,0001., and he said, " You will get 200,000/. by your
Scotch drawback, and other things, which will reduce the
loss to 2,100,0001."
Sir C. WOOD—I gavo you credit for 200,0001.
Mr. DISRAELI—That is what I stated. (Cheers.)
But the funds, the obstinate funds—(a laugh)—are above
par, when they ought to be at a discount, and the national
credit is good. (Laughter.) Now, when I brought under
the consideration of the committee the subject of the re-
peal of the malt tax, I said that the Government had fol-
lowed in their treatment of that tax the recommendation of
the Royal Comnhissioners of Excise Inquiry, presided over by.
Sir H. Parnell, in 1832. The recommendation of those com-
missioners was, that in case there was ever free trade in
barley, one-half the malt tax should be repealed, and that
the Scotch and Irish drawbacks should be terminated. In
the interval, since that commission sat, the Irish have
voluntarily renounced their drawback. The commissioners
further recommended that, when free trade in barley was
established, and the malt tax was reduced to one-half, an
end should be put to the enormous and preposterous system
of credit given to maltsters. I said that we wished to follow
the recommendation of those eminent men the members of
the Excise Commission as nearly as possible • but we
thought it highly important, in following the recom-
mendation of the commission as to the reduction of the
credit given to the maltsters, that the trade should not
be disturbed. We felt that the whole system was 'vicious
in principle and pernicious in practice, and that it was
absolutely necessary to make some considerable change.
That subject has been for some time under our consideration.
Our object was to put an end to, or to modify, the system
which grew out of circumstances totally different from
those of the age in which we live, and, while we placed
the conduct of the trade upon a much more healthy and
satisfactory basis, not to disturb the trade. Well, assisted
by those able gentlemen, many of whom, I dare say, are
well known to members of this house, whose aid has been
most valuable to me, we completed the plan which we con-
sidered to be right, but the effect of the new system upon
which the credit of the maltster is to be placed, though, in
my opinion, it will not in any way disturb the trade, will
have an immediate influence upon the revenue. In the
year 1854-55 there will be a sum of 600,0001. paid to the
revenue, which, if this system were not reformed, would
not be obtained. Now, what did I do under these cir-
cumstances ? Assuming that the loss from the semi-repeal
of the malt tax would be 2,500,0001., I deducted from that
amount the sum which, as I have just stated, was reported
to me upon the very best authority as that which would
be gained, and which would reduce the loss to 1,900,0001.
Then the sum of 200,000/. taken from the Scotch draw-
back would further reduce it to 1,700,000/. ; and as I was
not making a formal estimate, in dealing with a time so
remote, I did not make any allowance for that increased
consumption which was mentioned by the right honour-
able gentleman. (Hear, hear.) If I had made an allow-
ance for the increased consumption the sum would have
been only 1,500,0001., according to the estimate of
the right honourable gentleman, and if I had made an
allowance according to the estimate which was given me
by the highest authorities in the trade it would have been
much less. But, as I have never made any estimate since

I have had the honour of addressing this house, which has
not been very prudential and moderate, instead of the
sum which I was authorised to calculate upon, I only men-
tioned 400,000/. ; but upon the estimate I ofered to the
house the other day, if I had chosen to take into conside-
ration the increase of consumption, which at so remote a

period I did not choose to place before them, the surplus
upon the year would have been 3(:)0,0001. The right hon.
member for Cambridge University said that I had made

another mistake with reference to the malt drawback.
Now, in ascertaining the malt drawback, I look with great
(reference to those gentlemen who have been Chancellors
of the Exchequer, and who now rise and shake their heads
at me. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) After all, there is
only one way of carrying on the public business. When a
question of this kind is put before us, we must obtain the
very best information that we can get from the highest and
most authentic quarters, and must exercise our own judg-
ment upon the facts placed before us. (Cheers.) Well,
the highest authorities—men whose information upon
this subject none can rival, and -whose intelligence and
integrity of character none can surpass—men to whom I
am indebted for their able and generous assistance,
differing from me in political opinion as many of them
do—(hear, hear)—united in recommending me to take
one-third of the stock as the amount upon which I should
pay drawback on the 10th of October, and the sum I was
recommended to take, as a very safe estimate of the amount

' of drawback. calculated by those who are perfectly
acquainted with all the principal maltsters of the country,
was 880,0001. Well, according to my usual habit, I took
-that 'amount a the minimum, and this is what excited the
hilarious eloquence of the right hon. member for the Uni-
versity. " But why fix the 10th of October ?' said an hon.
member on the other side. " Hero is the whole plot,"
said some hon. gentleman •, "if we can only find out why
the Government fix upon the 10th of October, we shall be
able at once to put an end to all this financial sophistica-
tion." (Hear, and a laugh.) An hon. gentleman who is
a great accession to our debates—for I think it is a very
fortunate circumstance in such an assembly that we should
have gentlemen, on whichever side they may sit, like the
hon. and learned member for Kidderminster (Mr. Lowe),
who has shown, on the rare occasions on which he has
addressed the house, considerable information—seemed
to possess on one point information superior to that of
any other hon. member. I allude to the subject of
brewing. (A laugh.) lam surprised that an hon. gen-
tleman who seemed so complete a master of the art of
brewing, and who made so eloquent a defence of the sys-
tem of credit to maltsters, should be the person to ask why
we fixed upon the 10th of October for the half-repeal
of the malt tax. If I had been as successful with regard
to my resolutions as I could -possibly expect to be, I calcu-
lated that it was not probable that the resolution upon the
malt tax would pass before March, but the policy which I
announced and recommended. in December would, if I had
not proposed, a drawback, have completely paralysed the
trade. It was absolutely necessary I should announce that
the Government would give a drawback on stock in hand,
and the consequence is that the trade goes on just as usual.
The hon. gentleman who possessed such remarkable infor-
mation on the subject of brewing and malting ought to
know that by far the greater amount of duty which is
charged, and upon which the usual credit is given for
1853-54, is charged between October and April. Malting
virtually ceases at the end of May, and I may say, indeed,
that from May to October malting does not go on, but
there is something that does go on, and that is brew-
ing. (Hear, and a laugh.) The brewer acts upon the stock
of the maltater, and therefore, when you have to pay the
drawback, you pay it in the most advantageous circum-
stances, when the malting season again commences. In
fixing the 10th of October, then, I fixed a date which the
highest authorities in the trade agreed was the only period
at which the arrangement could be made. Now, I don't
like to revert to a subject to which I have already re-
ferred, but the honourable member for Kidderminster
said that he would look to me to mention a parallel
case to one which he put as to the repayment of
the 400,0001., and that he trusted, in my reply
I should not forget his illustration. Now, in deference to
the challenge, I to inform the hon. gentleman that my
parallel case is this. I will suppose the case of a careful
father of a family, o every
of his expenditure and income, and devotes one-fourth of
his surplus to the paymentf his debts, a portion of those
three months takes account
debts being incurred by advances to his son ; but the son,
when he makes the repayments, makes them into the
hands of a banker, by whom no interest is given, and the
father, instead of al lowing the money to remain there,
takes it into his actu a/ account -when- he takes - stock for-
the three months, and. with the surplus contributes to the
reduction of his debts. I am sorry that this matter
should have diverted me from the general tenour of my
remarks, but after four nights' debate it is difficult to
put every observation in its proper order. (Hear, hear.)
Then there is another fault of mine upon which the hon.
and learned member for Kidderminster is the great au-
thority, and that not only here, but I suspect elsewhere
also. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The Kafir war has
broken out again. (Hear, hear.) Now, I made a state-
ment to the house a fortnight ago respecting the prospects
of extraordinary expenditure with regard to the Kafir
war. I have formed my opinion on the subject of the
Kafir war—with great deference to the dispatches which
are received by the Secretary of State—from the dis-
patches which are forwarded to my own department
from a branch of the service under my immediate
supervision and control—l mean the commissariat depart-
ment, a branch of the service which deals entirely with the
extraordinary expenditure under the control of the Trea-
sury. Whatever the result may be, I must say that I be-
lieve the public funds were never administered by more
able men than those who have regulated the extraordinary
expenditure of the Kafir war in the commissariat depart-
ment. That department communicates directly with the
Treasury, and, although the dispatches are mainly confined
to the question of expenditure, there is sometimes a great
deal of information conveyed in them in a less public and
formal manner than in the dispatches received in other
quarters- Well, upon the information which I have re-
ceived, which has never deceived me, which has justified
me, at the commencement of the year, in not calling upon
the house to confirm that vote of 200,0001., I made the
statement the other night, that I believed the Kafir war
was terminated. We have had more recent information,
and I can t truly say that all the information that has
reached Me has entirely substantiated the statement I made
upon the previous authority. (Loud cries of " Hear,
hear.") I have no hesitation in saying the Kafir war is
terminated.. (Cheers.) The best evidence I have is, that
the coma tissariat department, who are dealing with the
extraordinary expenditure, the only one that figures in our
estimate, are winding up their extraordinary accounts—
(hear, hea r)—and they announce that, except for some
casualties, they will not trouble me for any further ad-
vances. Hear, hear.) They give incidental details of
the state c f the country, which convince me that the war is
finished. (Hear, hear.) In a war with a savage country,
you cannot have peace suddenly and precisely ascertained,
as you do -with a nation with which you have a treaty, or
where you can take the capital, or where some incident
occurs whie; h convinces all the inhabitants that the struggle
is over. (He ar, hear.) A sort of flickering ember there may
be ; and to the last an officer may be scalped, or some
straggling as sassination may occur ; but that the Kafirs can
now bring at ty force into the field I believe the committee
may b© esti; fled is impossible. (Hear, hear.) It is not

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, DECF,MBER, 17, 1852.

that several chiefs have surrendered—these things have
happened before; it is not even that the Waterkloof is
cleared, though that is important ; but it is that in the
bush, in the Amatolas, the skeletons of the Kafirs are
found ; it is clear that they have no means of subsistence ;
they are lingering in the bush and dying. (Hear, hear.)
Well, after my estimate, I thought it right to apply to the
Secretary of State, and I said, " What are your dispatches?
I have laid my estimates upon the table on the dispatches
of my department ; but what are yours ? They may clash."
The same ship that brought me information brought
dispatches to the Secretary of State ; and here is a dispatch
of General Cathcart. I will read a paragraph of it, if the
committee wish; it is strictly in keeping with the subject;
we are vindicating the estimate, and I rather think I ought
to do it. (Loud cries of " Read, read") It is dated from
Graham's Town, the 12th of October, 1852
By this report, and other events which are detailed in
my dispatch respecting British K afraria, you will perceive
that the war of rebellion may now be considered to be at an
end ; and, as it has been attained not by any compromise or
treaty, but by force of arms, and a severe moral lesson, by
the dispersion and repulsion of the most powerful tribe from
the natural strongholds which they long believed to be im-
pregnable, cannot fail to impress upon those who are consci-
ous of their inferiority in respect to these natural advantages
the ultimate ruin and destruction that must be the result of
rebellious opposition to her Majesty's authority, and there is
reason to hope, provided that authority be duly supported by
an adequate permanent military establishment"--(" hear, hear,"
from, we. believe, Sir W. Molesworth and others)—" that any
similar protracted and expensive Kafrarian war may be long
adverted."

(Hear, hear.) I read that because it is a definite`annoimce-
ment. (Hear.) With respect to the "adequate military
establishment," the hon. baronet need not be alarmed ; we
shall depend upon the mounted police, which is a colonial
force, and I think I may promise the house that we shall
not have any increased expenditure on account of the war.
(Hear, hear.) The head-quarters of General Cathcart are
at Graham's Town. He has withdrawn two regiments
from the seat of war, and I trust we shall soon withdraw
others. (Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") There is another
point in the estimate which I ought to notice, which has
been urged by the right hon. gentleman the member for
Cambridge University (Mr. Goulburn.) He said I had made
no allowance for the loss to the revenue from the proposed
permission for refining in bond. It is very inconvenient
for me, at this moment, to refer in any detail to the subject
of refining in bond. The refining in bond will depend upon
certain conditions. I have pledged myself that those con-
ditions shall be placed before those most interested without
being previously bruited about. I can only say, therefore,
at present I do not make any allowance in my estimate for
a loss on the refining in bond, because I believe not the
slightest loss to the revenue will occur. (Hear, hear.) I
hope the right hon. gentleman will be satisfied with my
giving my opinion, and not press sue to go into any detail
upon this point. (Hear, hear.) Sir, I approach, perhaps,
still more serious subjects. It has been said that the house
tax has been proposed by the Government in order to carry
the semi-repeal of the malt-tax. Well, I admit that that
is a very plausible charge ; it is a good card. (A laugh) I
find no fault with any gentleman opposite who makes the
charge. I know myself sufficiently to feel convinced that
were I in their situation and their circumstances, it is very
possible I should have made the charge myself. (Laughter
and cries of " Hear, hear.") Nevertheless, though it be a
plausible charge, a good charge to make, it is not a just
charge. (Hear.) They have no connexion whatever in the
origin of the measures which we have thought it our duty
to recommend to Parliament. (Hear.) The right hon. gen-
tleman opposite informed the house on Tuesday night
that I had promised the country a new system
of taxation ; but he did not produce any authority for
that important statement, and, generally speaking, when
statements of such magnitude are made anthorities, are
furnished. (Hear, hear.) I will sit down now, if the
right hon. gentleman will rise and give me the authority.
(Cheers.) It is very true that the lively member for Mid-
dlesex (Mr. Osborne) quoted a passage from my address to
my constituents, which, certainly, was not merely made to
my constituents, but to those in other places whom my
feeble authority might. influence ; but if an opponent could
have wished to assist the man whose adversary he was, he
could not have done me more justice, or given me a better
turn, than the lively and somewhat audacious member for
Middlesex did. (Laughter and cheers.) I listened to his
speech with all that pleasure which I am sure the house
shared—(hear, hear) ;—I think it was one of his best
speeches—(hear, hear) ;—but the passage that most delighted
me was that which he quoted from my own address, for I
had not seen that address for a long time; and, really, after
some of these charges which have been lately made, I ar-
rived at almost a nervous state upon the subject. (Laugh-
ter.) What did I say there? I, who am charged with
misleading the farmers at the election, and throwing them
over afterwards—(hear)—l said that the genius of the age
was in favour of the change that has taken place, that it
was in vain to struggle against it, that they must find the
means of meeting it in reducing the cost of production,
and that one of the means of reducing the cost of produc-
tion, lay in reducing taxation. (Hear, hear.) And I am
described as having deceived the farmers before the elec-
tion, and thrown them over afterwards—(hear hear)—and
the right hon. gentleman says we are assembled here to re-
ceive the new system of taxation which I promised. Where
is your authority ? Her Majesty's Government did all
that they promised ; they did not promise a new system of
taxation, but they did revise the taxation of the country.
(Hear, hear.) The committee will, I hope, excuse my en-
tering into details. We gave to that subject a long, and an
anxious, and a most impartial consideration. In review-
ing that, which I may call a colossal subject, the question
naturally divided itself into many groups, if I may use a
word now familiar to us. We had to consider those ar-
ticles that entered into the general consumption of the
people, that were necessary for their healthy sustenance,
and that were exposed to enormous imposts, such as tea and
coffee. That was one subject on which we felt that it was
necessary something should be done to meet the principle
of unrestricted competition, now permanently established as
the principle of our commercial code, and in order to assi-
milate the financial system under which the community
live who were subject to the principle of a restricted com-
petition. We had to consider the whole question of the
stamp duties with reference to those real burdens upon
land—upon the transfer of land, which must sooner or
later be dealt with —(loud cries of "Hear, hear")—and
question of the utmost difficulty, which must also not long
be neglected—the question of the legacy and probate
duties. We had to consider whether it was pos-
sible to propose to Parliament a duty on succession,
which, in connexion with the total reform of the burdens
on the transfer of land, would be an equitable and just set-
tlement of the question, and one which was for the welfare
of all classes. (Hear, hear.) That is what I may call a
second group. (Hear.) We had, in the third place, to
consider those Excise laws which exercise a pernicious in-
fluence upon the employment of capital and upon the em-
ployment of labour, like the soap and paper duties. The
question of the assessed taxes, with the necessary reforms
which they require, alone form a fourth group. (Hear.)
We were obliged to consider the whole of our tariff with
regard to our commercial relations with other countries,
because there was an inclination in some countries to in-
crease those commercial relations, and we wished to en-
courage them. (Hear, hear.) These were five great sub-
jects, all of them demanding our attention, with all of
which, sooner or later, a Government must deal • and we
had to choose how we would commence this arduous en-
terprise. (Hear.) But there was a very important question
also to consider when we took this general survey of our
financial system—a very important question to settle
before we could decide even as to the first step we should
take—and that was the question how far we should prevail
upon the country to fix upon that sum of direct taxation
which was necessary for any. Ministry that attempted to
enter into a career of financial reform. (Hear.) I have
been accused by the member for Halifax (Sir C. Wood) of
making a proposition which recklessly increases the direct
taxation of the country. (Hear, hear.) I have been Ac-
cused by the member for Carlisle (Sir J. Graham)—prompt
in accusation at all times—(Cheers from the Ministerial
side)—of pushing direct taxation to a rash extreme. In
the first place, the proposition I made on the part of the
Government, instead of recklessly increasing the amount
of direct taxation, would not, if it passed, occasion so
great an amount of direct taxation as prevailed under the
superintendence of the finances by the right hon. gentle-
man the member for Halifax, when he enjoyed not only
the income and property tax, but the window tax, which,
in the last year of its existence, brought him nearly
2,000,0001. sterling. (Cheers.) The right hon. gentleman,
who says you must not recklessly increase the amount of
direct taxation, reduced the amount which he received in
its last year from the window tax, and was content with
the modest sum of 700,0001. by way of commutation
for the window tax. I cannot forget that the right
hon. gentleman, who recklessly charges me with in-
-creasing the amount of direct taxation proposed first
a complete commutation which would have made
his house tax larger in amount than the one I have
proposed. (Loud cheers.) But is this all? Is this all
that has been done by the right hon. gentleman who
charges me with proposing recklessly to increase the direct
taxation of the country? Why, there is the Minister who
with the property tax you have now, producing its full
amount, with a window tax that brought nearly 2,000,0001.,
came down to the House of Commons one day and pro-
posed to a startled assembly to double nearly the property
and income tax. (Great cheering.) I look on this con-
duct as indicating carelessness of consequences. I look
upon it as the conduct of a man who has not well weighed
the enterprise in which he is embarked. We hear of the
duplicittion of the house tax—an innocent amount ; but
if the right hon. gentleman had carried the duplication
of the property and income tax, I think he might fairly
have been charged with recklessly increasing the direct
taxation of the country. (Loud cheers.) The most curious
thing, however, is that the Minister who came forward to
make a proposition, which nothing but the most grave
conjunction of circumstances could have justified, at the
first menace of opposition withdrew his proposition. (Loud
cheers.) Talk of recklessness ! Why, what in the history
of finance is equal to the recklessness with which
the right hon. gentleman acted ? (Loud cheers.)
And what was the ground on which he made this monstrous
and enormous proposition ; a proposition which only the
safety of the State would have justified him in making?
When he was beaten, baffled, humiliated, he came forward
to say that he hail sufficient revenue without resorting to
that proposition. (Great and continued cheering.) e
future historian will not be believed to be telling the truth
when he says that the Minister came down nearly to double
the income tax, and the next day came down to say that
the Ways and Means were ample. (Renewed cheering.)
But then he tells me, and not in very polished, and in
scarcely Parliamentary language, that I do not know my
business. (Great cheering.) He may have learnt his
business. The House of Commons is the best judge of that.
I care not to be his critic ; yet if he has learnt his business
he has to learn some other things—that petulance is not
criticism, and that insolence is not integrity. (Loud
and continued cheering.) The committee will remem-
ber that in dealing with those five great groups of taxa-
tion to which I have called attention, and all of which
I may say equally demanded the consideration of a
Minister, we had to deal with the great subject of direct
taxation. There was, indeed, the income and property tax
in existence for a brief space. It was, perhaps, possible
that the Ministry might have come forward in the House
of Commons and obtained a temporary continuance of that
impost. That is not by any means certain. But there
were peculiar circumstances connected with the position of
the Ministry and the property and income tax. Her Ma-
jesty's Government were of opinion that the time could no
longer be delayed when the Government of this country
must recognise a difference between the incomes which ac-
crued from precarious and from realised property. (Hear,
Neer.) It was evident that such an acknowledgment acted
upon must diminish the produce from that tax at a mo-
ment, when certainly we did not wisli our resources from
direct taxation to be diminished. It is difficult I confess,
to answer every observation that is made ; but another
right hon. gentleman, who recently spoke, has been criti-
cising, I think before the appropriate time, what he calls
my bill on the property and income tax. In the first place,
my bill is not before the house. When he sees it, he may
criticise it. We are placed in this position with respect to
the points of detail which the right hon. member for Ports-1
mouth mentioned. We were perfectly aware, as nobody

tile
posed this measure, but I do not say it will not au
thin],
interest of the cultivator of the soil, any more tha, thet
that by remitting the duty on tea I have not no, of
which I have no doubt will greatly promote th,i3iiwldo rot
the Indian occupier and of the China trade. 13 e for the
bring forward the proposition, in the first the
advantage and interest of India and China. L t,O-1,51•31,„ soil
farmers-or even those odious beings the owners 1
J Ist the
-(a laugh)-have the benefits of toes legislatioen4eri
or the
same as you admit the manufacturer of Manch s the
merchant of Liverpool to find in his transaction.
of tee
vantage of reducing the price of bread or the nricifiesr,
to the wife of the poorest cottager in the country-L.4 eon'
bear.) But I said this-Deal with the interest 01 "0 le-
-1 sumer, and incidentally you will find that yoliaoLtive ie.
clueing the greatest advantage to the great Pr° told thsi
terests of the country. (Hear, hear.) But I ilh.stodipg
in repealing a portion of the malt tax,
nlestly 1 have
that I showed you in my statement how meb,_ to its
put the resources of the country, I 'l2-31'n Tlie
,Ilea" the
foundation the credit of England. on I
credit of England depends on a farthing 8113nr
poor man's beer? (Cheers and laughter.) ewber
,
forget how that " weird Sybil," the right ho in. muca is
Cambridge, gave forth that solemn oracle. t _
ter.) Now Ido not think that any thrall; publiic
justify personal appeals of that kind. He 8.9:5 ill°
credit is in danger. Well, I don't think wear,
public credit never was in a better positioi:o i;istori
hear.) I never remember any period in i'11„,,,y
of this country when her resources were,
from
'-ihe or
daily, so visibly increasing.. (Cheers fr° n Y 7/
position.) I will not enter into the discuss os r
the cause was gold, the repeal of the corn 11!,w lore
crease of emigration : but, as to the last
point,fr 0
•
one. thing in the speech of the hon. member.. io
minster to which I have adverted so much.
from what quarter it comes • my business is noowcilt
the attacks made on the Government, but Io be
opinion of the hon. member for Kidderminster t
as heretical on emigration as it is upon hrewnitki
malt. (A laugh.) I repeat that lam very gi,ord
him here among us, but all the opinions I haven:loe
him yet appear to be quite unsound. (Cheers a
I continue in that opinion. In the first plio'oceueiT'
founded Ireland and England, though I, the diet)
pains, and perhaps not necessarily-, showed
,ufa it
between them the other night. As to Eugls's.e •
interesting to hon. members to quote a Ps.°l criar4
letter written by the most eminent actuaricre ,
greatest statistical inquirer in England, whose 11,11'.,.
knowif-to the hon. member for Montrose; thong:B6;i,
think it necessary to mention it, which I 10.",c_e_ eg,s,
reference to this subject. "The rate,' u°ll,;, eoss,''
births and marriages has greatly increased innw' to
-
and I think emigration may facilitate thDg
than impede it, - the reserve of prodinel..)
which we have in this country." (Roars of lail,n_go•
is a point I wish to bring to 'the attention o;
member for Kidderminster. (Renewed laugher.°'iti '
lived abroad in a country with a sparse nolll,lhave
has no idea of the reserve of producing pow, or W
(Renewed laughter.) But he goes on, Y.°ll„tiss
from the fact that in the south-eastern e 0 there
married women of ages between 20 and 45„
." _4,111110.°d,
women of the same age-that is, from 20 to 4,r
thst39(ll
of whom only about seven bear children notwi .0
the
(Renewed laughter.) Now, I have confidence 1, vie'
serve of producing power, which I think tenh4o3l
with his colonial experience, had not givenwilieb
to us for. With respect to the point tO wentie
alluded, my opinion is, that the surplus revo
country will be very considerable at the 8,8 fol
year 1854-55. But I look to other resourcx..ed pole.
year than to increasing profits, or the increlthe
bbo
lation of this country, and I will mention wi? trnihe ri
(Hear, hear.) I look to a great retrenchment
expenditure of this country-(cheers)-a
nd
00 to
the committee allow me, advert for one in°lllo.o
point. I believe that any great retrenchruen,t hlisliPeor
4.
effected by looking to the efficiency of our egv3ol,l 'llO
and trusting to the economy which is the VS'
quence of that efficiency. I do not think it II horehoe
the result can be reaped till 14-55. NOW' thew, yok
house will permit me, very shoBrstly, to show °Left
illustration of a remarkable kind what is the,'"eiple moo!,
ministrative reforms conducted on the the pr,Be econ,
ciency without any regard to what is called iner._, reiie,l
I, in my estimate of the effects of administratilug. to uoe
should have spoken of millions, but I am now g°,oaatisiio
with an instance in which only thousands °l.l. rre yollete
concerned. But the case I am about to lay be oi set`
real case which, however slight the instance, Itbelllo
show the principle. It is due to my noble frien„, sal'
ber for Buckingham (the Marquis of Chandos)
I am entirely indebted to him for the case in qnt,tio bee es
I may most sincerely say of him that, since he
the service of her Majesty there never was °'bii se?
who devoted his life so completely to the Pt! iepietil
(Hear, hear.) In preparinc, the measures of
reform, which I wished Co bring before the
making a catalogue of all the establishments ''
be attended to, I found in the report of the se,
of 1848 upon miscellaneous expenditure, of whil
hon. member opposite was the chairman, this
-" Whether a reform might not be effec'
the Chief Secretary's office in Ireland with th,
cillor's office." That suggestion was made in I
to my noble friend the member for Buckinglisi
attention to this passage, and I said, " Will,
land and will you take somebody with you '
your labours, and examine into this question
Secretary's office ? But, mind you, mere ref
not our object ; economy must be combined
(Hear.) If more money is necessary you
but go to Ireland, examine into the whole
report to me by what means you can ren,
more efficient, and let me know the
require." Well, Sir, he went, accompanied
tarp of the audit board, one of the most it
assiduous of public officers. (Hear, hear.)
their inquiries into the Chief Secretary's offi.
By the report of the committee of 1848 it
whether the consolidation of the Chief Seci
and the Privy Council office would not be
My noble friend, however, effected a 1
not only of the Chief Secretary's office a.
Councils', but of the Pines' and Penalties' ofil,
deal with an annual cost of 21,7381. He
office into the most efficient state that a in•
be in ; and the natural consequence of its bei
most efficient state was, that the cost of 21,
duced to the sum of 5,1781. (Cheers.) Th
effected by an inquiry conducted without a'
sideration but that of efficiency, produced
per cent. upon the original cost ; and yet -
nothing can be done in administrative reforul'
I must, in justice to any noble friend, netic,f,
stance. His only fault is that he is of a too ret,i-14 •
(Hear.) There are very few men more capable vlsti,
ing information to the house, especially 111)11111
financial accounts ; but he takes refuge insto`'‘,lsiiP„iic".:
domitable power of application to business for obr,
already so distinguished. (Hear.) There WS,S tbej,
tion made, and apparently a very fair one, s4l,
of the Secretary at War, when the Militia 7301 fer 2).,,"
for an increase of staff. There was of coursen-tar,bie,
siderable increase of duty in the office consequ'ocle
new measure, and it was just one of those J whi,4°
might have been conceded heedlessly, and wilt ye cir
one, upon a-superficial view of the case, might „,,I`3„ prij' 4tW"
accorded. But I, having great confidence in ut'„ ti,t)ilo
of administrative reform, and equal confidenc°,," to °E
lities of my noble friend, before I would agre,,ijce e
crease of expenditure in the office in consetlit„ t
militia, which I should have witnessed with V-04003/0/
lingness-(hear)-asked him to appoint A cod ,„tt
which he did with the assistance of the Secrea a qtr
Treasury, the secretary of the Audit Board, CliePll;sd'
man once a member of this house, the resent
cretary of War (Mr. B. Hawes). They exanii'llt-e, 511.4 o'',f
ject and put the office into a most efficient 041.,,itIrd`„
whole of the additional business is carried on," the ifr fel
farthing of additional expense. (Cheers.) 1-„'lLiactr
the Irish office, the persons employed were r` Ib:tit,er
57 to 40 ; but, allow me to remind the house, pre°,:oL,,,r,
all this retrenchment, perfect efficiency
..,05,„ 111
(Hear.) These are, some may think, minill"tiou'
but they are instances well worthy of Ate-with 1411
Government' have been dealing, however,_„oollll,o,ll'''
larger instances. (Hear.) They have been 9":4,oo`'ef',
deal with the great department of public e.,:,01
and, as the results of that attempt, I as the 49,.g
Government, express our opinion that there 910011;0 v,f
considerable retrenchment made in the public 101'
and that this retrenchment may be brought to
year 1854-55. (Cheers.) But, Sir, one thing is
th0„1,:
-that you cannot embark in an undertaking °f
unless you have the fair support of the House,°,,,,,
(Cheers from both sides of the house.) -c4..fitli
opinion is this-that it is not wise to grapple
partment of public expenditure by conunit_iwilliP`,o
hear.) lam of opinion that you must deal "`brol''lf
commissions-the same commissions that al„reggli‘
bear upon the revenue department ; but, altu,.°;s-Inf,)111
have commissions and the royal sanction, it "L the ~f
that the question should be fairly broughtber9r4;olili4
of Commons in the way of exposition, and th,..3,-es,
have the moral sanction and support of that -11,.°4-y.ingLef
hear.) It is perhaps the most difficult and ,01
a Minister can embark in, and unless he has, I is cer s 4
Crown and Parliament to back him, failare,;olllo4.
though with that support I think success i 5,11,9-,, -elj-1"1
(Cheers.) Well, then,*hen lam told that 1 1114'.4thsiiiid)
ground for my surplus of 1854-55, my answe..„r 'foe
lieve we shall have much.more than the s,,,turnot•J
cursorily ventured upon in my general ataxy' a, AY, isql
you I have other resources upon which I &I'll, 9;1.
I believe, with an ample surplus to begin I`l-10',';it
fault of the House of Commons if in the year; thvati'li
do not find their public service more efficon"noirrotlll,
and less costly. (Cheers.) I think I hest.°
euery objection of importance which has veacoVii
against the Government propositions. I hacetion`lill,l
tering into the question as to the unconstitu to',
our conduct with respect to the income tax• t,(144
opportunities will arise for commenting upon :lb I j
be said upon this subject; and the house W;,0411,1e)
come to a fair decision on the subject. .A.l""te-
minute objections have been made to poinot (It,o
I have not stopped to notice these. I have,aiag bef yi
to vindicate that part of the income tax rerf
farmer's schedule. I shall be prepared to e've
committee' the facts and reasons which 0,1 ytoltiesop
us to take that course ; but I may stll'°-,,i011 0,,,0
our only object was to make as close an aPPtbat- 5°01.4
justice as possible. And I will not vote for tot deet;re-
if it is not the prevailing feeling of the house the fre-e
just arrang Afterement. I will not enter now int° 0 tly
of the hor• duty and things of that kind. sch of fa
tracted a debate, and following so manysPn%ee-1101°.fej
mented upon so many points in the financis-iiiiet etwes-
Government, I hope the committee will feel defe,bve°,3o
avoided some of those points it has been frou'eidiel"te
them, and not from any wish of my own. tO r`¢ere"tol')lf'
jest.
nh
I( Ho
ought,
pßeruhtapsso,mtoe
notice.advice bee„ e
to°
ibeefdhieietir
withdraw my budget. (Lauolter.) was ceilwrillP
Pitt withdrew his budget, and that more
Le I 4ot te0,,,;
persons had done so too. (Laughter.) IN ii",,.11/
pire to the fame of Mr. Pitt, but I will notiz-s: sir
degradation of others. (Loud cheers-) '''being t° iit
seen the consequences of a Government net I,l°
onrll 11
pass their measures-consequences not h°ll„.v, 11°00'
Government, not adva,ntageous to the eotul"'"t• to'ce-tir
my opinion, conducive to the rePutaticli os-) 1,i'14
which is most dear to me. (Loud c...--rais jje
ber a budget which was withdrawn, t tA7
drawn, and withdrawn again-()augur{ tike Q° veil sr
1848. What was the consequence of °ors° trot,
existing upon sufferance ? What was the 00bled
the finances of this country.? Why, that,idow °reAd./00's;
tion respecting the commutation of the wm' t to rti 10!
duty, which now I am obliged to attereluf pay„o is/Jo,'
The grievance is deeper than mere questi?e! 0, im
deration. When parties are balanced-wu
cannot pass its measures-the highest %ties, 05,,t ',
life, the most important dogmas of Pl' this '''t• ,/
into party questions. (Hear) Look a'uetton
direct taxation, the most important q later :ewe
It is a question which must sooner or_ 15,0f0i
upon everybody's attention ; and I so

t4° sYrapathiE
ize
temed,' wit
wde• taxes, the
b
lo!qteinistrative
14111 quire into (
4?-tnpossible
might
treforrn wo
Y I
e4alition.es, (C
vs,.)
A. eoalitic
i,LIO/Is, althou
4
6 their triun
"peers.) i knowis I;
WhoseWhowhich 0
.
d Wise an(
14, e'reos of Pt
moat august
a
e
fabri of avi
his seat amid
6.414A-bSToNE
,
obtain a hea
:Prevailed in th
"4( Mr. Patten,
,
;10 me that t
4't Ought to
let—(loud eh
91°' the

who had to make preparation on such a subject could be
ignorant, of the anomalies that existed in schedule B.
The right hon. gentleman and his friends will some day
find in the records of my office, that I have not been negli-
gent in the consideration of that subject, which is one of
the greatest difficulty. To frame a complete measure on
that, or any other subject, connected with the property and
income tax, would baffle the genius of the greatest man
that ever dealt with finance. We have endeavoured in the
bill and schedules to meet that difficulty. But it was im-
possible for me in December to offer an estimate, and at
the same time place these schedules in the hands of the
house ; and it was requisite that by the necessary alte-
rations made, the general financial result should not be
affected—because the alterations were not only in schedule
B. Under these circumstances I placed that estimate
before you; but the committee will do me the justice to
recollect I said that there would be an apparent deficiency,
but that no loss would be incurred. I naturally thought an
occasion like that was not the legitimate and proper timo
of the year to enter on details respecting the income tax.
(Hear.) I can assure the committee that, if I had thought
otherwise they would have found that the question would
not have been neglected. Whatever may be the result at
which the committee may arrive with respect to the de-
tails, it will not change the financial result which I wished
at that moment to impress on their attention. We had,
then, to consider the great question of direct taxation. It
is totally impossible—with whatever group we commenced
—that we could embark on a career of financial reform
which would be really efficient, unless we had an amount
of taxation still including the income tax. What is the
rule we laid down ? Instead of being reckless, or, in the
language of the right hon. gentleman the member for
Carlisle, ready to push direct taxation to a rash extreme,
we resolved that the direct taxation on which we should,
rest should be in amount of revenue inferior to that which
had recently prevailed in this country, and which, since
the repeal of the corn laws, had been cheerfully assented to
by the people. Well, we had then to lay down two prin-
ciples connected with direct taxation. We had to assert
that there is a difference between property and- income, a
difference between precarious and certain income. We had
next to vindicate the principle which we believed, and do
believe, is a just one, and which, if not now, must ulti-
mately be recognised and adopted—namely, that the
basis of direct taxation should be enlarged. (Ministerial
cheers.) Having these two principles to guide us in de-
vising means by which we were to obtain the amount of
direct taxation necessary for our purpose, we thought. if
we applied them moderately, temperately, scientifically,
and wisely in the measures that we brought before the
house, we should be acting rightly. We believed that the
difference which we recognised between realised and pre-
carious incomes was one which certainly did not operate on
the excessive side of the scale ; but we believed that the
recognition of that principle was one which would gratify
the working millions of this country, and we believed also
that in asking them to contribute to the revenue of the
country, by extending the house tax to houses of 101.,
we were taking a course perfectly justifiable. (Cheers.)
The question of the suffrage has been introduced
into this debate. I candidly admit that lam one of those
who do not like to blend the question of the franchise with
a question of mere money ' • nor am I one of those who are
so anxious to introduce this question of the suffrage
into a discussion having relation to our financial system.
If it be sought to establish as a permanent feature of our
social system that there shall be created classes who are to
exercise political power by means of throwing an undue
weight of direct taxation upon the wealthier portion of
the community, and an undue weight of indirect taxation
on the working classes, I cannot imagine a circumstance
more fatal to this country, or one more pregnant of disas-
trous consequences. (Cheers.) But of this I feel convinced,
that those who will first experience the disastrous conse-
quences will be the privileged class. (Cheers.) There was
one observation made by the right hon. member for Carlisle
which I ought to notice. That right hon. gentleman parti-
cularly dilated on the hard case of that class whose income
amounted to 1501. a-year • those whom he considered to
form the most straitened class perhaps in the country, and
who bore most of the brunt of indirect taxation. It was
the same argument which has been used to-night by the
hon. and learned gentleman the member for Southampton
(Sir A. Cockburn.) Now, that subject has been investi-
gated by men who have devoted their lives to the study of
these questions. It has recently been investigated by a
gentleman who is what is called a Liberal, and who if he
were a member of this house would, sit opposite to me--I
mean Mr. —, one of the most able inquirers into these
subjects of the present day, and, if any position has been
more completely established than another as regards the
incidence of taxation, it is, in my opinion, this—that there
is no class upon whom that incidence falls more lightly than
upon those who possess 1501. a-year. It is that class who
possess property of 3001. a-year who bear the brunt of in-
direct taxation. That can be completely and most satis-
factorily shown. But we had on Tuesday night's debate
a most doleful and piteous appeal made to the house upon
the hardship of taxing poor clerks with incomes of be-
tween 1001. and 1501. a-year. The right hon. gentleman
stated that 150/. a-year was exactly that point in the scale
where manual labour ends and professional skill begins.
You can recall to your minds the effective manner in
which the right honourable gentleman stated this. (Cheers
and laughter.) He showed himself, in my opinion, an
unrivalled artist when he told us that this was the point
where the fustian jacket ceased, and broadcloth became
the clothing. (Cheers and laughter.) The right hon. gen-
tleman is one whose skill we must all admire ; though I
do not so much respect him as I greatly regard him.
(Cheers and laughter.) In deciding upon the incidence
of taxation, no one knows who has not embarked in
that terrible enterprise the labour you have to undergo,
the documents you have to read, and the mental exertion
you have to apply. I am sure, for myself that there has
been nothing ever written on the subject that I have not
had to digest. My researches have been ample, and among
the memorandums to guide me and lead me, I have
studied statutes and consulted records wherever they could
be found. I hope lam superior to quoting Hansard, and
all that sort of trash. (Laughter.) But I will state that
among the documents, publics and official, which I read
to guide me, and the perusal of which persuaded me,
I found one which greatly influenced me. I found the
Superannuation-tax Bill of 1834, which was drawn up and
introduced by the right hon. gentleman the member for
Carlisle, being one of those great and worthy efforts which
the right hon. gentleman made with a view to the im-
provement of the administration of the country. (Cheers.)
I found in that bill that the line was drawn at 100/. per
annum—(cheers and laughter)—that the poor clerk under
that sum only pays 2A per cent., while the poor clerk
above that sum, though he may only have 1101. a year,
pays 5 per, cent. (Cheers and laughter.) That was the
reckless lal;our of the right hon. gentleman the member
for Carlisle. (Hear, hear.) I know my deficiencies as
much as any man in this house—probably more. But
after all, what, I ask, is to guide us? lam perfectly wil-
ling to forget all that might be said in debate ; but when I
get into office, and refer to public records, and when I
look at a statute of the realm, then I suppose I am come
to the calm, solid, and solemn conclusion of a statesman.
Though I would not legislate upon a passage of a speech,
yet I find dispatches and statutes to consult, then I feel
that though opinions may change upon political matters,
this is the better mind of the man, and, being the better
mind of a most able man, I confess the reading of that
statute did influence me in that very arrangement I had
proposed respecting the poor clerks with regard to the in-
come tax. (Loud cheers.) And remember what has hap-
pened to the poor clerk since 1834, when this statute was
drawn ; remember the reduction of taxation of which the
poor clerk has had the benefit. Remember the repeal of
the corn laws. (Cheers.) Look at the position of the poor
clerk who had 1101. a year, and then had a double tax
placed upon him by the right hon. gentleman ; and look
at his position now to what it was then. I say without
hesitation, that I do not believe that the condition of any
portion of the labouring classes has been so much im-
proved as that of the class of clerks whose salaries range
between 100/. and 150/. a year. Well, having believed
that it was necessary, before we undertook the great
labour which we felt it our duty to embark in, that we
should have a certain amount of direct taxation to rest
upon ; having determined that we would make this differ-
ence in the assessment in the schedule between realised
and precarious incomes, which must inevitably reduce the
amount of direct taxation from that source which our pre-
decessors enjoyed ; having believed that we had attempted to
supply that necessary amount by our proposition with re-
spect to the house tax in a manner which was reasonable,
which was just, which was on the whole most beneficial to
the community,—which in its operation would ultimately
tend even to confer advantages on those classes on whom
the tax was to be imposed ; having by this measure, if suc-
cessful, succeeded in obtaining the amount of direct taxa-
tion which was necessary, but which was still inferior in
amount to that which only two years ago had been enjoyed
by our predecessors we had to decide upon which of the
five groups of taxation we should operate. Recognising—
I am obliged to repeat it—recognising the great and pT
i manent revolution which has occurred n the commercial
system of this country—recognising, as I have done, unre-
stricted competition as the principle on which our future
commercial policy is to be based : and wishing to assimilate
our financial to our commercial system, and assuming that
we had obtained this amount of direct taxation to rest
upon, we ultimately decided that it would be the wisest
course to commence by acting upon those articles which
entered most into consumption by the people, and that
it would be for their salutary advantage, if we selected
those articles which were subjected to the largest impost.
(Cheers.) Now, that is the real history of the connexion
between the direct and the indirect taxation, as they are
both dealt with in this financial measure. Under these
circumstances we were induced to recommend to the house
the proposition which we have made with respect to the
tea and malt duties. I think the house and the country
have recognised the wisdom of the course we have pur-
sued. (Hear, hear.) At this late hour I shall not enter
into any elaborate argumentation on the subject of the effect
which will be produced by the modification of the malt
tax. lam told, that if you reduce the tax on the con-
sumer, and only as a tax on the consumer—and to that
point I shall advert presently, as being in perfect harmony
with the principles laid down in our revision of the taxa-
tion on one article—to the extent of 2,500,000/. sterling,
that you do not affect the price to him in the least, and
that all the reduction goes to the brewer. (Hear, hear.)
I remember when we used to discuss the effect of
taxation on another article that similar observations
were made. Ido not care now to remember from what
quarter they emanated, but the effect and object of
those observations was exactly the same. (Cheers.) Then
it was, "Oh ! those villains, the bakers !" (Loud cheer-
ing and laughter.) You may reduce the price of corn—
you may injure the agricultural interest—you may ruin
the farmers and the country gentlemen—but you could
not reduce the price of the loaf to the consumer. No,
the bakers took it all. (Cheers and laughter.) Oh, yes.
and there were the millers. The millers were worst of,
all—they carried off all the reduction. (Cheers renewed.)
Well, those arguments had a considerable effect, and there
was such a prejudice raised against the bakers throughout
the country, that I should not have been surprised if they
had been all hanged in one day, as the bakers had once
been in Constantinople. (Laughter.) It was said at that
time that a fall of 4s. a quarter on wheat would not affect
the price of bread, and we were told that the bakers, like
the brewers, were a great monopoly—they were great
capitalists—they were a kind of Freemasons, and, do what
you would, it was totally, impossible in any way ever to
get a cheap loaf, (Hear, hear.) And now—such are the
vicissitudes of political life—now we hear the same argu-
ments from those who wanted to buy in the cheapest and
to sell in the dearest market. (Hear, hear.) The great
opponents of colonial imports—the members of the import
committee—here we find them rail arrayed in favour of
high taxation for the producer, and here we find them,
with taunts to us, using all the fallacies which we at least
have had the courage honourably to give up. (Tremendous
cheering.) Tell me Protection is dead ! Tell me there is
no Protectionist party ! Why, 'tie rampant, and 'tis there.
(Pointing to the Opposition benches. Great and prolonged
cheering, and some ironical laughter.) They have taken
up our principles with our benches, and I believe they will
be quite as unsuccessful. (Cheers.) I must here make
one observation. I say it is in the interest of the consumer,
in complete accordence with the principles we laid down
in revising the taxation of the country, that we have pro.

)re at
,t chi
MSS
rhy a
lubje

An
the 1
ph'
rem
Min
'PPM

ren
Les d

)nomi

mot

sai(
I c

TOD
tctly
iety,
?ass be,
area n
lyself
posit
‘urte:
if son
vail the
COD
lye tl
b
tha
:;tlll.l s:et
aguterotudflmblliha.dtshhnher,
orjhl
in!octohshus:i(4l.'
intere
o
,0441,.t0 say to IT
'4l'4l:lisle that he
kti (Lona cheer
ro,,,etilan that wha

!~4--that he has
" Vder a 1011, an
th,"1°11)----that 011
• o,
members
uce in the
elt When coin
(Loud I tt, •(L
It; :4sing on frt
to - al the v
me us, a
which
of a se:
ids. Ii
positio
ittee va:
ropos iti,
)ncled
is oxte
ter of t 1

and it

Ler occa
Lblo hoi

to dew
he MEM
know i

ve her(
vast n
Tder tl

which
)1 Pun

passes 1
a libert

amount

Mee pal
reduce

ou ma. 3
iird rea
that
ipon any

tee is en;

, and I w
t engaged in
L'rroal duty.
:!,5 in the rule
sttion f taxe, b• o .
toJect of that e(
c a new tax. bi
ti,441, and to giv
iumittee whit
hs'
ew tax. (He(
Teatlenaan speal
,4°4 of those wl
Pitt—he
four y
Itt—he is fres
',bV events of th
~
.4°ll•Y Does
'Mires to be ref
Itvile had. it decla
e increase of
14:(1,•that by thi
,440(1.113.teh;enc,rbeTart
acce ,ue to an an
lotion the tern.
d vested it of i
Oiled the pre
taken its stand
4,114 learnad ge
,V_Yself and my
au, exercised.
went I should
Which he spot;
Cheers)—but 1
say with re,
treat I never ]
'5'1,0141 demand
"41 not on all e
i gilt hon. gent
ill, junelast yq
the Excheque.
Was one not h
14 ''„ ,voPosals of tl
advanced, ore
Withdrawn, a
'rank, the m
suspicion of e
!Pection. (B
1 Ject the resoh
Vote on the h,
as a resolutio•
l'l,o Means pre
have expresse
Principle of a
disadvantage
,
.14 the difficu
on a widened
that shape fe
t2stem of the
`otticulties a
' eitherto hav
"° have been
committee.
,Widened bey
4. must say t
cation for th
Whether it v
ItPon houses
the notice of
lected that
(Illation was
Vote for the
tlen,,,, whi
bier house i
reasons why
Whole, to I
of the hen
Portant qu,
Of town a
and the 13
is impossili
and find ti
one-half of
that the wi
under some
tax as a gre
Sir, there 1£
exposed by
kouth. T
' rate of th
. , grossly um
91 linowlef
In London
$, things bees
the right 13
4 appears
first hour 1
Which he 1
question—
regard to l
from the 1
solution o'
of the whe
' nothing •L,
although ]
hours on c
to tell us 1
and in sem
xi:lent to d
' eensideral
is necessa
right hon
for doubli
tontlemai
• 11°1050 tt:

ia,lo'
acifootatirlar
oeoeitinerci,riieg
ov
cittiod:::0:1
ei:::000. .
*4'ti
it.
trt:etilile,e'l
ic,.
~r,
‘,3,v1
lij
aeolufl.au
lel I(onttteClstth
aheerihtrynteinheehtc)arweh!tt:lll.
be vr , Lenin°.
Kbether ' tle for 0 i
rd from
lice)—the
'
tgl'ter.a.' . e rap lii,e,
he co- . 4f, 'II— \ a
~.lictioll he has a
1141 13 . eareer_t I
l__
eis ~1 . for ht hon,
[ dadno„, '•{ °r 1
3iv;;/ k'''' bored he
fg, try,
..„. 3 41.theeo.h
'°llllot.ber Sta,ll,e4 all
Fel
,aal."rielf stric
.) /lit' Al ' PrnPrie
be VII' ' el tre
tre liar
~, sPttsf
'`i:na ;4 ' corm/
'it leli 1 lelfri th il
'III, 46'11Y but I°o
oPYPstI:
o ere. :a, ' effort
Orr' # i who B°f
odiep Ith 0 avail
tbe re. ' , _ eel's and
ber' 'tar t
13 0 k f to hay
itfere'lis3 ilitke, in h
1 '„f 00 ' the b
[e v the Y those Is
of t i ritn,
for ill 5, ~ ae): and car
oel'll it,-venceN
i•

pitoiristrono th 4,74 to Cal
aralni4ell o'o befer
a boti ;,,re re -
sevielicit.rearefAeti'l I.44Ohe°4firiBlit."
Cllr ham
roe° 01" o' 14-`egllg
eted COei ,0 prof
ice'flplio utth Innfit
. siolfre .eBB pro
-bato co extol]
yotl.ga hat
to floe Levi is, othe
r();Itr-eo,11,130'
with ef6h,ci; ifitj !„11,,°11 othE
h4ll "ge do 1
50° fi,
(toe 41 14. 3' free t
th
11:1:11tobeerirti
,:ibf
le tio
rciprlo. ilT111:behlwo It ofe
hat
1,11 biej re are a
flee 'b 4
0,„0„ or
get 05tieS!'10, ktilent
e ii,l3 tjlber of
b
coilrsTst that r
and tffebllolo is the
[lee. tileOce V 'coo Cl'S' thes
°I
ai
oI
mblitc ).(n1 i
P triay 1
1 7381ns .
.00on
oet the thi
of
148
'" -0 ) „,
( 4(1.01)1
1 5 toll
9111 Cl3Ceir tO "PI
rips,
ct lllloitteE
tic° ED 4„e°2lBe, at
reiiin Or, 0, trw eons