The Sun.
London, England, 1864-04-08 00:00:00

f-

the income tax. We do not propose a plan to abolish it. spirits and free trade t'n cultivation,. I ving it to the farmer
We do not propose that the committee should pledge it- to produce as he pleas( ,d barley, or lie' or tobacco.
.roplaincd of t he tone in which the
self to its abolition as a polies. That which we do propose Mr. BENTINCK
c
is this—that we should adopt as a policy its reduction, as right hon. gentleman (IVIr. Glaletone. ) had spoken of pr
circumstances may permit, to that which was once its legal tection. (Hear, hear, end laughter. He also contended
Miniterem ; anti that we should now proceed to take the first that there ought to be a reduction in the malt tax, and
of the two etepe which would bring us to that legal mini- prophesied that the first strong la °cerement which came
mum. (Cheers.) The proposal is to take off one penny from into office would re-ente ct tire duty t paper. (Laughter.)
the Chancellor of the
the income tax. (Cheers.) Ent if we can reach the standard Mr. CAIRD remonsl/4`rated with
of 5d on the income tax, that would establish a position in Exchequer on his pre.pose'l to impos, 3 a duty on certain in-
which Parliament would have it in its Power to consider de- ferior descriptions ot corn, wh ch we re principally used in
liberately and upon principle what course it should pursue. feeding stock and the purposes of dist, 'nation.
Now, sir, we propose to make a reduction in the tax to 6d. rho CHANCEL LOtt. of the EXC !EQUER then rose
The ultimate loss would be £1,230,000, and the immediate to reply. He said his proposal with respect to the d escrip
loss will be £BOO,OOO. The case of schedule B—l may say of tion of corn referred to by the hon. member (Mr. Caird)
ecotland and of Ireland—will be dealt with precisely in the was
tam atter on whi
resch
olu all parties
ith should be fully hen rd, and
manner It was dealt with by the act of 1853. £400,000 of tha in passing the w regard to it, th e come
the loss will be postponed, and the sUrplus, which began at mittee would not be bound to an y final judgment, While
£2,570,000, will be reduced to £434,000. But there is yet admitting that he had reas tD be dissatisfied W ith the
another subject. In consequence of the indications—the general tone of the discussion, he. would observe that he
formal indications—given by the house, we havo thought it should infinitely prefer to see the flees insurance duty stand
our duty, limited as our means are, to consider whether we altogether than reduce it by so sms .11 a proportion its 6d.,
could submit a measure which would indicate our desire to With regard to a staters ent made by an hon. biro. let (Sir
meet with deference anti respect the convictions that are J. Ferguson) respecting the income tax, the rig ht hon.
entertained by the House of Commons, even when we do gentleman reminded the .committee tie( et last year, when be
not entirely and absolutely share them. I advert, sir, to the submitted taxes of 7d and 0, the figure, he cave t he, house
fire insurance duty. (uheers.) We do not think we should were about £3,000,000. He re ow gave 70, and his estimate
have been justified in entertaining a large proposition with was still £4,600.000, founded on the ac charg es known
respect 'o fire insurance duties, to the displacement of either from the general re-assessment which hed taken 'place.
In
of the proposals which have made; nor are we prepared to reply to the remarks of an hon. gentlem in resee, :ting illicit
accede—and I trust the committee will not ask us to accede distillation, he wasillation prep
had nut ared to show, will
re
g ar
aud to
gmentati Ireland,
—to any such proposal. How does the case of the fire in- that
dist resulted f n on
surance stand ? The amount cf it is £1,700,0e0. and it of the spirit duty. As to the paper duty,. since he spoke he
increases at the rate of about. £.50,000 a year. Now, here had had We opportunity of seein
g , in a paper laid on the
again we are met with this difficulty. There is the greatest table of the leouee, that the export duty on rags would be
possible difference of opinion with respect to what I may removed by the. French Governmeiat. (Hear, lee er.) The
call the self• recovering power of the fire insurance duty in right hon. gentleenan concluded by moving that the chair'
the event of a reduction. I must say, for my own part, man report progr&e.
that lam not very sanguine, at least as regards the The motion was
agreed to, and the house neutered.
JAPAN.
greater part of that duty. Upon examining the duty,
,in into committee of enapply on the
it will be obvious to the committee that it divides On the motion for gg
itself into two portions. One portion of it, the army estimates,
larger portion, is a tax upon property; the remaining and Colonel SYKES inquired whether provisit n had been
smaller portion is a tax upon industry and trade. Two made in the Estimates for the charge of certain troops
thirds of it may bo said to be levied on buildings and furni- transferred from the Indian establishment for service in
tare—that is a tax upon property; one-third, as nearly as China or Japan, accompanying the inquiry by a rather long
it is possible to make a conjectural estimate, is levied upon disquisition upon transactions in Japan.
what may be called stoek-in-trade: Now, my hon. friend Mr. H. BERKELEY called attention to,
the inferior
the member for Bradford, in connection w,th an important
armament of the Volunteer Artil Forceand asked
deputation from the Chamber of Commerce of that town, whether any steps had been taken or were likely soon
expressed publicly to me a short time ago a strong opinion to be taken, to arm the Volunteer Artillery in the same-
that, as regards stock-in-trade, so far as his observation manier as the Royal Artillery.
went, with reference to those bra.nches of commerce with Mr. H. VERNEY moved a resolution, that it is ex
which he is connected, a reduction of the fire insurance duty pedient tie at the recommendations contained in the report
would be followed by a rapid recovery. Undoubtedly I go, of the ceenneittee on the proper means for the instruction
thus far with him, I admit it to be a general rule that and emplo venent of soldiers and their children in trades,
taxes upon trade, industry, and labour, when they are re- and of the tinder-Secretary of State in a letter to the
duced, recover rapidly; but taxes laid upon property, when Quartermastee'-General, dated May 23, 1862, be carried
they are reduced, recover slowly. We have se..n that in the into effect, with due regard to the duties and discipline of
case of the assessed taxes and in other instances ; the solu- the army.
tion of which is, that taxes upon property, are in the main The Marquis of 11ARTINGTON, i
somen his reply to Colonel
paid by the rich. They do not feel seriously or sensibly for Sykes, said he was la bteurng under misapprehension
Sion, respecti
he observed that
ng which he gave an
the most part the burden of those taxes, and when removed on the subject of his pica
their proceedings are not materially affected. New, sir, explanation. In answer te Mr. Berkeley
we have felt that if this question is in dispute as to the self- the Volunteer Artillery were ' not intended to act generally
recovering power of the fire insurance duty, it would be very in the field, but were raised a. lmost exclusively to serve as
desirable to endeavour to arrive at some solution of it by the garrison artillery, and they hat.' all that was necessary to
trial of an experiment, and therefore the proposal we make teach gun drill. In regard to the
resolution
of the ion moved by Sir
to Parliament is to reduce the duty from 3s to is 6d, so far H. Verney, he explained the intentions military
as stock-in-trade is concerned. (Hear, hear.) We shall authorities on the subject.
then see what the energy of commerce will effect with re- Sir H. VERNEY withdrew his m oS!.on.
spect to this particular portion. We have felt that there is The remaining orders of the day were then proceeded
something invidious in the present position of the duty on with, when certain bills were forwarded, and the house ade
farm stock with reference to stock-in-trade. They are really journed frt 20 minutes to 12 o'clock.
essentially the same thing, and they ought to have been
traced in the same manner. We do not propose to impose a
duty upon farm stock. I think that exemption was unfairly
granted when the duty on the sto&-in-trade was retained.
(Hear, hear.) At the same time, we are not prepared to
propose that the duty should be reimp. sed, but we are glad
to mitigate the inequality of the reduction of one-half.
Of course this will not take effect uutii the Act passes.
We propose it should take effect from the Ist of
July, and it will be necessary to introduce a provision
with respect to the return of duty upon altered policies
which would, of course, be at the lower rate. The finan-
cial result will be this. The proceeds of the fire insurance
duty upon stock-in-trade is £566,000. The first loss by
reduction will be £283,000; but, as it will only operate for
nine months, the loss will be £213,000. I allow for an in-
crease of 10 per cent„ which would be £21,000 ; net loss
for 1861-5, £192,000. Now the committee will see that I
have got to the full end of my tether. (A laugh.) Tho
surplus, before deductions, was £2,570,000. The proposed
changes, and the reiiet by them, are as follows. The relief
would be : On sugar, £1,719,000 ; on income. tax £300,000 ;
en flee insurance, £213,000 ; and on tea licences, £15,000 ;
making a total of £2,717,000. There will be a farther loss
in 1865 6 on sugar of £:8,000 ; on income-tax of £433,000 ;
on fire insurances of £70,000; making a total of £531,000.
The financial loss on which I must reckon in the present
year, namely, 1861-5, would be, on sugar, £1,330,000; on
incomeetex, £800,000; on fire insurances, £192,000; and
on tea licences, £1Q,000; making a total loss of £2,332,000.
The relief from taxes in this year will be greatly augmented
by the enactments of last year. Tho relief from taxation
which would operate this year is made of f,747,000, which
we now invite you to adopt,and of £998,.000 handed over to
us from the remissions of 1863, making in all a total relief
for 1861-5 of £3,615,000. The loss by the changes I have
proposed being £2,332,000, the surplus, after these deduc-
tions, is £238,000. (dear, hear.) It has grown "fine by
degrees and beautifully less," and I am sure I need not say
to the committee that that is not a surplus upon which we
' could possibly contemplate making any further operations.
(Hear, hear.) The plan of the changes we have proposed, we
have proposed in the discharge of our responsibility, and not
at all as being of opinion that they ought to be or can be com-
pared in point of magnitude as regards the remissions with
some former periods ; but they are, as we think, contributions
towards the accomplishment of the great purposes which
Parliament hes taken in hand ; and taken as the proposals
of a particular year, they may, perhaps, be just like
the stone that is cast by the passing traveller upon
the heap. Each separate contribution is small, but the
general result is that a heap of them arises, which becomes
enough to commemorate some signal action or the death of
a great man. It is in that sense we submit them to Par-
liament. We believe them to be good. We trust they will
meet with your acceptance, and that you will concede them
to be a pledge on our part of out earnest desire to co• operate
with the Legislature in carrying yet further forwards those
purposes the partial accomplishment of which has already
done so much for the strength and security of England—
for the comfort and happinelss of the people—for the honour
of the age in which we live—and for the hopes that we en-
tertain on behalf of the times that are yet to come. (Loud
cheers ) The right hon. gentleman whose statement occu-
pied precisely three hours ita its delivery, then placed in the
chairman's hands the resolution for the alteration of the
duty on corn.
Mr. CR AWFORD thought the statement which had just
been made would give general satisfaction to the country.
The sugar duties were not levied in a satisfactory manner,
and he should be prepared to move a mode for the settle•
ment of those duties, which would be at variance with the
proposition submitted,
Mr. CAVE said, with reference to the licences upon beer
houses, he hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would
give some other definition of those who were to be excluded
from the benefit of the change proposed.
Mr. HUBBARD expressed his regret at what had been
announced respecting fire insurances.
Sir J. FE RGUSSON having offered a few observatiois
upon the surplus,
Mr. WHITE said he shared the satisfaction of the house
with the Chancellor of the Exchequer's statement, The
results of free trade policy ware certainly marvellous. He
deprecated and deplored, however, the reduction upon the
income tax, seeing that a much more advantageous policy
could be pursued by lessening the cost of those articles
which were so largely consumed by the working classes.
Mr. DUNLOP thought that, upon consideration, the
member for the City of London would scarcely bring in any
measure at variance with what had been stated by the
Chancellor of the Exchequer respecting the sugar duties.
Mr. WHITES' OE criticised the policy which had been
pursued by the Chancellor of the Exchequer concerning
the spirit duties. The increase in the rate of duty had pro-
duced the reverse of a good effect. It had caused an increase
in adulteration. He understood from an eminent distiller
that, though pure spirits were sent out by the distillers, a
great deal of it was adulterated before being sold in conse-
quence of the high duties. In the first place it was watered,
then treacle was added, and it was strengthened by vitriol.
This dangerous and unpleasant compound was called Glad-
stone's Cordial. (Laughter.) In the course of further re-
marks upon the ill effects of the increase of the duty upon
spirits the hon. member said he believed there never was a
time when the illicit distillation of spirits was so rife in Ire-
land as at the present time; and it was a very remarkable
fact that wherever there was an illicit still there was
bonism. (Hear, hear.) lie thought the right hon. gentle-
man should act up to his policy, and restore the duties to
what they were in 18b8.
Mr. MERRITT intimated that, notwithstanding what
had fallen from the Chancellor of the Exchequer in regard
to malt, he should persevere with the motion of which he
had given notice on that subject.
Mr. KINNAIRD regretted any trader should be speci-
ally oppressed by taxation, but in the case of spirits there
were high moral considerations why the duty should not be

reduced.
Lord C. HAMILTON, on the other hand, urged that a
high duty led to illicit distillation, and observed that, for
himself, he should have been rejoiced if any reduction
could have been made in that branch of the revenue.
Mr. N ORRIS suggested further and more equitable alte-
ration in the beer licences, and that the gigantic joint stock
companies which were every day springing into existence
might be made to contribute to the exigencies of the State.
In regard to the importation of rags, the Chancellor of the
Exchequer was wrong in supposing that the quantity re-
presented by the Board of Trade returns as having been im-
ported within the last 18 months were for the purpose of
paper manufacture. The fact Was that the cloth manufac-
turers of Yorkshire and Lancashire we:e so pressed for ma-
' terial that they now imported the refuse woollen cloths of
the Continent, and rewrought them into new material.
Mr, MiM AHON advocated a reduction, in the duty on