The Sun.
London, England, 1865-07-14 00:00:00

ceived with a scoff, or with contumelious silence, by the
free-trade party. But that violated their Principles. Now
you know how advantageous treaties of commerce are, and
you know that the increased trade consequent on the treaty
of commerce with France has materially supported Eng-
land in the crisis through which she has been called to pass
during the struggle which lasted for so long a time in the
United States of America. How can it be said that all this
benefit is due to the Liberal Government when they so put
themselves in opposition to the principles of a French
treaty ? The Liberals have been telling you that there is
to be a great treaty of commerce with Austria. It has been
announced, from week to week, that a treaty of commerce
with Austria was likely to be concluded from which we
were to derive benefits similar to those which have re-
sulted from the French treaty. I said there was no chance
of any such thing. We have heard of a right hon. gentle-
man (Mr. Hutt) who has dined with the Emperor of Aus-
tria, and who has made speeches in various languages, but
the simple reason we are likely to be unsuccessful in this
case is, that we have no concessions to grant to the Aus-
trian Government When you adopted the principle of un-
restricted competition—whatever other benefits might re-
sult from it—yet, of course, viewing the question in its
particular bearing with respect to Austria, you allowed all
the products of Austrian industry to come into this coun-
try, and now what have you to induce Austria to lower
her duties on the articles of your production ? Why did
you succeed in completing a treaty of ::commerce with
France ? Because, though you adopted generally the
principles of unrestricted competition, yet Sir Robert Peel
was obliged to keep the duty on some articles of French
produce, for instance, upon their wine and upon their
silk, because Sir Robert Peel thought that you could
not at that time part with them with due regard to
the revenue, and therefore when you entered into
negotiations you had a great deal to offer France ; you had
the offer of reducing the duties on wine and silk, and there-
fore you negotiated a successful, a most successful treaty,
which has been of inestimable advantage to this country,
because it has been effected in total violation of the princi-
ples of free trade. (Hear.) I attribute the attention with
which you listen to me to the interest you naturally take in
this subject, which is one of the most important with which
Englishmen should acquaint themselves. (Hear.) I am told
there has been a large reduction of taxation by her Majesty's
Government. I admit it, but it has been of taxation which
they themselves levied on the country, and that fact is
omitted. (Laughter.) There is one subject on which I
confess that Mr. Gladstone and myself have differed. I
have agreed with him in reducing the duties on tea, and in
reducing the charge of the income tax. I was in favour
of the principle of a treaty of commerce with France,
though I differed in detail as to the manner in which it
was brought forward. There is one point, however, in
which we differ, and that is the malt tax. (Cheers.) My
excellent colleague in the representation of the county
has already expressed before you decided views upon
the subject of the malt tax, though in my address I have
omitted to. touch upon that topic. I do not treat the
matter now for the first time. For eighteen years I have
enjoyed your trust and general approbation, and being
placed, more by accident than by any merit of my own, is
charge of the public revenue, I asked 3ou to allow me to
be returned to Parliament unpledged. But 1 did think
that if there was any subject on which it was unnecessary
for me to declare my sentiments it was the malt tax. I
remember that in 1852, when the general taxation of the
country was reviewed, and when the country had finally
adopted the principle of unrestricted competition, I re-
commended, on the part of the Government of Lord
Derby, that the malt tax should be reduced by one-half.
(Hear, hear.) What happened ? Many Liberal gentle-
men—l do not say that I received a fervent support even
from many members on my side—but the generality
of Liberal members professed a belief that a remission
of one-half of the malt tax would be of no use whatever. I
heard .of many such gentlemen who have since stated,
either in the House of Commons or battling at the hust-
ings, that a.reduction of one-third of the malt tax would be
of advantage.; but at that time they refused a proposition
for remitting it by one-half. Why did we deal with the
malt tax ? ,We did. not believe that, though the country
had definitely accepted the principle of what is popularly
called free trade, but what is really unrestricted competi-
tion, there was any doubt that that policy must have an in-
jurious effect upon the wheat crops of the British farmer
in the long run, and events have shown that that opinion
was not incorrect. Therefore it was of great importance
that the crop next in value should be freed as much as pos-
sible from all unnecessary impost in its general use, and
that the farmer should be freed as far as possible from e very
disadvantage. In the adoption of the proposition to take
off one-half of the malt tax you would not have entirely
obtained that object ; but when you had to deal with a tax
which then produced £6,000,000, and now produces
£5,000,000 annually, it was necessary to have a beginning;
and if one-half were taken off first, and there was a recur-
ring surplus such as we have of late been accustomed to,
you might soon take off the other half. (Hear.) Therefore

I believe this is a sound policy. (Hear.) I-believe that
the real reason that there is so much feeling in the couu-

try respecting the malt tax is, that experience has proved
that the British farmer can no longer depend upon the
weight and profit of his wheat crop, but that he must look
to his barley. [A Voice : " Then we should get jolly
drunk."] (Much laughter.) I should think that gentle-
man has had a glass before this. (Renewed laughter.)
When the question of the malt tax is brought forward

we must consider it with reference to the general state
of the country, and with regard to our finances, and, if
we possibly, can, we should relieve the British farmer
from this tax, on principles of financial justice as well
as on the ground of general utility. (Cheers.) One
other observation with respect to finance. Almost all
that has been said in addresses at the hustings has referred
to expenditure, but there is another equally important in
finance; I mean economy. (Hear, hear.) We are told there
have been great benefits accruing from the placing of the
finances in the hands of a Liberal Government, but I will
place before you simple facts which cannot be controverted.
In 1858-59 the expenditure was £64,900, 000, though really
it was only £63,000,000; but in 1865 the sum of £2,000,000
for the payment of the Terminable Annuities was no longer
required. The expenditure of last year was £66,000,000.
(A Voice—‘.‘ The family has got bigger!" followed by much
laughter.) A gentleman says the expenditure has increased
because the family. has got bigger; but that cannot be the
reason, for two years ago the expenditure was £70,000,000,
and now it is £66,000,000. (Laughter.) If we had had an-
nual Parliaments I could have given that gentleman fresher
information. (Loud laughter.) I say that there is, even as
compared with the year in which I was responsible for the
finances of the country, an increase in the amount of taxa-
tion levied to the extent of at least £3,000,000, an increase
from £63,000,000 to £66,000,000. Bat how were those
£66,ooo,ooo.arrived at when two years before the sum was
larger by several millions? The reduction was produced
by repeated.motions in the House of Commons, made by
myself, or by my friends, for a diminution of expenditure. I
am perfectly willing to give the Government credit for all
that they have done in the way of decreasing taxation and
introducing greater economy in the public service, but I do
not believe that our financial prosperity is wholly the result
of their exertions. (Hear, hear.) I have shown that if you
had a Conservative Administration there would have been
a repeal of the paper duty as well as a reduction in the tea
duty, and a great reduction in the income tax. I believe
that there would also have been a treaty with France, al-
though not one, perhaps, framed with such admirable
ability as the treaty conducted by Mr. Cobden, and
not by the Government. And here I cannot help
remembering that it has been said, that while Lord
Derby,: when he was Prime Minister, in 1852, was
engaged in negotiating a French treaty, another Prime
Minister was actually throwing impediments in the way
of such a measure. I have shown you that the course of
Lord Derby's government has nothing to dread upon this
subject of finance from a comparison with their successors ;
and I have been forced to take this course in vindication
of those with whom I act in pnblic life. In fact, the
whole thing has been a genteel impasture from beginning
to end (cheers and laughter); and if those gentlemen did
not occupy distinguished positions I am afraid they would
really be taken before the Lord Mayor for obtaining ap-
plause under false pretences. (Renewed laughter.) That
reminds me of a circumstance which occurred to me to-
day. A gentleman stopped me on my way to these hust-
ings for the purpose of speaking to me about the malt tax.
He said that the farmers had been treated very badly in
that matter, and that they had always looked forward to
the falling in of the Terminable Annuities as the means by
which they were to get rid of that burden. I said to him,
as I was already later than I ought to have been, "My
dear sir, I am behind time ; if you hold me by the button
the election may be over before I can take any part in it,
instead of me." (Great laughter.) I was thus
and, perhaps, my excellent friend, Dr. Lee, will be re-
turnedobliged abruptly to get rid of the gentleman by whom I
was so importunely consulted. But it is very remarkable
that nobody appears to know what Mr. Gladstone did
with the Terminable Annuities. I will now tell you what
he did with them. It has hitherto been kept a secret, but
Parliament having been dissolved I will let you know all
about the matter. One evening there was a very full
attendance in the House of Commons,. as it was known
that Mr. Gladstone was going to make a great :speech,
and to perform a wonderful feat in finance. He had
£22,00.000 at his disposal. These Terminable Annuities,
to which every class of Englishmen who thought that
they had to submit to any kind of fiscal grievance
had been for half a century looking forward as the best
chance of securing to them some redress, had at length
fallen in; and what did Mr. Gladstone do with them ?
By a feat of legerdemain, that exceeded any of the con-
juring tricks of M. Robert, he took ono million of the Ter-
minable. Annuities and turned them into " ducks"—
(laughter)—and then he took another million and turned
them into
"drakes"—(renewed laughter)--and in half an
hour all these " ducks" and " drakes" were cackling and
flying about the House of Commons, until we were all so
ashamed of one another that we ordered strangers to with-
draw, and determined to keep the whole affair a profound
secret until the dissolution of Parliament. (Continued
laughter.)
Having
I will next proceed to notice the case of the Union Charge-
ability Bill. I have hero, in the first place, to state that I
have always been in favour of doing away entirely with
the law of settlement. With regard to Mr. Villiere's bill,