The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-03 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MAY 8, 1853.

imported duty free in 1851; and of such articles, then
subject to duty, as it is proposed shall be Admitted duty
free under the new tariff.
Agreed to.

continue the income tax unmitigated and unchanged; and
because—and this was his main objection—the resolutions
sought to perpetuate the injustice and inequality which
had brought discredit on the Legislature, and under which
no many persons suffered severely. In the course of a pre,
longed speech in support of these views, he expressed his
hope that some one connected with Ireland would move
for a committee to report on the ability of that country to
bear additional burdens, and entered into a comparison of
the last and present budget as regarded the taxation of the
fundholder. Introducing animadversion on the way in
which he said ministers had recently evaded a guarantee
they could not violate, he deduced an argument that there
was no ground for confidence that any words which could
be introduced into the bill would bind a ministry to ter-
minate the tax in 1860.
Mr. LOWE, remarking that Sir F. Kelly's speech had
not been addressed to the amendment, proceeded to deal
' with his arguments, amusing the committee by showing
to what they led, and describing the deduction of Sir
F. Kelly really to be that every person in every schedule
of the income tax was entitled to a large reduction.
He admitted that any tax was unjust per se; and in
answer to the demand 4 for graduation, contended that
what Mill had laid down as the abstract justice of
taxation, namely, ' the requiring equal sacrifices
from all parties, was impossible. He confessed that
some of the flagrant errors might be corrected, and
schedule D might, for instance, be dealt with ; but we
should thereby introduce a new element into the system,
and no longer ask what income a man had, but how he
obtained it, and we should immediately have a revolution
and social war in each of the schedules. He, for example,
had a small property in Australia, which ho would not ex-
change for one of the same value in London, and it would
become a matter of complaint that his income was acci-
dentally derived under more favourable circumstances
than an English one. Such a principle would lead to the
subdivision of classes until all the alphabet would be
pressed into the schedules, and the tax be frittered away.
As regarded Ireland, he said that the fact shortly was,
that the service for the year was inexorable, and if Ireland
did not pay the 460,000 i. some one must, and that must
be Great Britain. What claim had Ireland to make Great
Britain her tributary ? The Government scheme was
founded on the principle of free trade, which was more
valuable even than free trade itself—namely, social and
financial equality, and the doctrine that no portion of the
people ought to be taxel for the benefit of another. As
regarded the Consolidated Annuities, some parts of Ireland
were charged with them, others not.' The former surely
received ample advantage ; and as for the latter, instead
of their complaining of the hardship that an undistressed
part of the country, which had been advancing in pros-
perity, was taxed like the rest, as they ought to have been
long ago, they ought to be thankful that they were not
charged with arrears. He sarcastically remarked upon
the hardship of taking a burden off a poor cottier to put it
upon, a man with at least 100/. a year. Denying that this
was a "rate-in-aid," and declaring that it was an Imperial
tax for Imperial purposes, he demanded whether the word
Union was a meaningless formula • and urged that we
were not entering into a convention Wttlf foreign country.
He observed that it would have been easy for Mr. Glad-
stone to have got rid of three-fourths of the speeches in
this debate, if he had chosen to deal with the income tax
as the late Government had proposed to do, and had stooped
to mean truckling to gain a temporary popularity.
Mr. ISAAC BUTT contended that the tax was unjust
as an Imperial one, and especially unjust as regarded Ire-
land, and that no reasonable prospect was held out of its
termination at the end of seven years. He urged that by
the budget carriages and attorneyswere relieved from taxa-
tion, that the struggling class of artisan and trader might
be burdened. As to Ireland, he thought it would be well
worth while to relieve her representatives from such taunts
as Mr. Cobden's, but then her whole financial condition
must be examined, and it must be shown that she was to
be fairly dealt with. He denied the unwillingness of the
Irish to pay their debts, and hoped he had shown that
Irish gentlemen might oppose the budget' for other reasons
than those which had been imputed to them, lavishly, if
not liberally. Referring once more to Mr. Cobden's allu-
sion to the fight made by Irish members for the "jobbery
of Kilmainham," he challenged him to make good his
words.
Mr. Sergeant MURPHY contendedthat it was clearfrom
the disposition of the English Parliament, that an income
tax for Ireland was inevitable ; and, therefore, that it was
better to take it at the hands of those who would also give
good government than from those in whom he had less con-
fidence. There was a reasonable guarantee for its extinc-
tion in 1860. The remission of the consolidated annuities
was a very important boon, and he would only look at the
question as one affecting the whole of Ireland. He also
freeremarked
trade while
upon tphayienagdvnaonttaagx.
advantage Ireland had derived from
Mr. CONOLLY argued that the imposition of this tax
upon Ireland was unjust, and denied the right of Govern-
ment to treat the consolidated annuities as a just debt.
Mr. ROCHE did not think the income tax the most un-
just tax existing, and pointed out the equal injustice of
tho incidence of many indirect taxes; and he believed that
in 1860 the balance on the Chancellor of the Exchequer's
plan would be in favour of Ireland. Insisting on the value
of obtaining equality, even at a sacrifice, he expressed his
opinion that the budget was beneficial to the best interests
of Ireland.

Mr. DISRAELI—There are several hon. members con-
nected with Ireland who wish to address the committee;
' who will no doubt answer the observations of the hon.
gentleman who has just sat down, but, as this debate has
not passed over a whole week—(hear, hear)—l think it
may not perhaps be presumptuous if I take some part in
it to express the opinions of some English members upon
the question before us. (Cheers.) Whether we divide
to-night or not, and I hope we may divide to-night--
(hear, and cheers)— hon. gentlemen on the other side will
clearly understand that, in all probability, many occasions
will occur on which they may offer their opinions upon
the interesting subject under discussion, for at present
we are only upon the threshold of the debate. (Hear,
hear.) Under these circumstance, then, I shall take
the liberty of offering some observations] to the com-
mittee. I am bound to say that, in considering the
budget of the Chancellor of the Exchequer with all
that attention which so important a proposition de-
serves, to the general principles upon which his financial
policy is framed, I must give my entire approbation.
(Hear, hear, and cheers.) I say that in no spirit of
affected candour, or to obtain credit for a magnanimity
which is really not required by the occasion, but I say it
because I find in the principles upon which he has framed i
his policy the identical principles which, only four months
ago, I endeavoured on two occasions, on the other side of
the table, to impress upon the consideration of this house.
(Cheers.) I said then, as the organ. of.the Government, that
I thought the time had arrived when it was necessary to
assimilate our financial policy to our ne* commercial sys-
tem. (Some hon. member—we believe Lord J. Russell—
exclaimed, " Hear, hear." I don't know who said
"Hear, hear." I think it was the noble lord opposite,
but I recollect when I made that statement four months
ago the noble lard, instead of saying "Hear, hear," rose
and, in a spirit certainly of incredulity, if not of ridi-
cule, spoke of the idea of assimilating our financial
policy to our new commercial system as a wild con-
ception, which had nothing to do with the practical
affairs of life. (" Hear, hear," and a laugh.) I said then,
Sir, in order to assimilate our financial policy to our new
commercial system, we must make up our minds to com-
mence and to carry out a complete revision of our taxation.
Will the noble lord say " Hear, hear," to that ? I remem-
ber that when I made that observation before—and recol-
lect it is only four short months ago—the noble lord said
it was most ridiculous to enforce a complete revision of
our taxation ; that our taxation had been revised more
than once ; that anything like a formal revision of taxa-
tion was quite unliecessary, and out of the question ; that
all we could di) was to let the principles which had been
established with respect to our finance operate in a natu-
ral manner, and that any proposal to have a formal or
complrote revision of taxation was one of those phrases
which could never influence the affairs of the world. I am,
however, extremely glad to find that the noble lord is so
ready to encourage me at the commencement of my obser-
vations. (A. laugh.) But it was not merely the noble
lord who entertained this opinion. We had a speech de-
livered to-night—a very able speech, delivered, unfortu-
nately, in a thinner house than it deserved—by a member
of the Administration, the secretary of a board, and, I be-
lieve, the secretary of a board because he made a speech
against the last budget. (Hear, and laughter.) What did
that hon. gentleman say on the same subject? The hon.
gentleman the Secretary of the Board of Control (Mr.
Lowe), in the month of December last, saw no case made
out for any revision of taxation. "All that they had to
do," he said, "was to continue going on as they had gone
on hitherto." (Cheers from the Ministerial side.) We
shallt er) h_aanvde
Iseveral s mn
roer eh
oonf . these
gentlemenls sen
theytin c
areh eevr se— (ry I a u g h-
agree-
able to me to listen to. (Hear, and a laugh.) The hon.
Secretary to the Board of Control continued :
furtherctwi "When the
osnusrpolfutsasxahatlilonb, on oditsh poosseatoof by their making
remissions had been made, which led to the rwieoenidPelerfauls feexrmtener-
sion of trade, commerce, and increasing revenue, which all
acknowledged, they would then have done all that a wise Go-
vernment and a prudent Legislature could do under the cir-
cumstances."
(Hear.) Now, let hon. gentlemen recollect these words of
the hon. member for Kidderminster, for I may recur to
them. That hon. gentleman has spolon to-night,
in the absence, unfortunately, of many who are
listening to me now, and in a very different spirit from
otfutrh
afitn
objectan ci a l
that which he manifested on the occasion to which I have
just referred. It must be remembered that I said that,
policywhile it,
ot woansrne w absolutelyeommneerceeisasla
system,
stteo
taxa-
tion, I said also that there were two things which. atChan-
could only be effected by a complete revisriiviolionaptw9eurroewthesecellor of the Exchequer should not, under the circumstances,
anhciecsti
refrain from doing, and without having
this great object could not be attained.
things ? One of them was, that
deficiency which
chequer must not shrink from making a
but that he
was to be supplied by the proposal of new taxes
to carry out his system • and the other was, that it was
year,regi late financial
absolutely necessary that he should no
mas,siamndilatteha
the Chancellor
tboutnaxdoehsf
iistnhoeopreEdrxari
t i o colleaguesn (cheer s?
tions by the horizon of the financial
might even presume to attempt . to,
ow, how were these
operations for a longer term.
papyo,sintioonlsanrgueceaigyeedcabny tehxeprneosbslethiCloerdheivapnrebd hisa
from the Opposition)—with which
et heretical idea was
received, that a Chancellor of the Exchequer may feel a
it his duty to create a deficiency nd to supply the
tax. (Cheers and
vacuum by the proposition of a
who was
confined
then to thefor
hisso atbosekningeowaein'ito,hiltosoemin
impose
laughter.) That indignation was not
Secretary of the Board of Control,
laugh.)
What said
standing upon the ancient ways. (A
memberigfhort hthoen.Ugnenivteler--
alarmed upon the
house the very unorthodox
man (Mr. Goulburn) was particularly
thatsity oflli gchamaubtrihdogriety? the
(Hear,righ ht
ehaorn.).
Thatr
subject, and described to the
this country should be administered. .
which this and
different was the basis
" But mark how
proceeded. They orepceeded on the
former Governments _
b a skilful management of the
basis of having first securedofy
the country a large available
manner in which it was then proposed
Htheatsatihde—finances of
receipts and expenditure
did not in the first place.
by fresh taxation."
They
Parliament to make it up
call upon
what were the feelings of the present
(Cheers.) Well,
Exchequer upon the subject? I don't
Chancellor of the
' ht hon. gentleman is present, but I
balance, out of which they couldoarfLotred
atdoefimoaiokoeur,edouncatitohnoso.
know whether the right
any
comments upon what he has
shall be
seemed to be strucsaid,
speaking of me almost in a tone of 1
(a laugh)----
and he Chancellor
at otfhethpereEpLcihteioqnu—er
derision,—
" H©
is
(Hein,t' and laughter.) Now, that is a
peal another tax.
said in
phooserroorne
tax in order to re- ,

most uncommon proceeding On the pail of a Chandelier of
the Exchequer." But, great as Was the in' dig-fiatiOn of the
members of the preterit Governnient, because I hadrecourse
to the first method Which was necessa ryto
pulley—namely, that I should create a defiler" otitamj.
n w
supply it by new taxation, their indignation was still
greater that I should presume to anticipate Ula ipaasnage,
ment of our finaneet flit it Period more advanced than the
financial year. (Hear,
terminatien of the impending
, hear.)
I mik). quote Upon this subject again the words of the hon.
Member for Kid.dermintter, befttift6i as bet: has shown to-
night he it hot tiOl ill honourable member but a iiBr)-
high.--Mitidtd member. (Laughter.) He has 'told us to-
WO* that he is one of those gentlemen who never will
sacrifice anything for ephemeral popularity7,(Hear, and a
laugh)— that he is a man who would not to-day say one
thing anti to-morrow say another to gain temporary ends.
(Rear, hear.) Listen, then, to the touttie of the hon. mem•
ber for. Kidderminster, and quote his! speech, for it was
a single speech, and one that received a memorable reward.
(Cheern and laughter.) Mark, that in order to carry into
tifect a complete revision of our financial system, it Was
necessary to have recourse to two proceedings—the first
was to create a deficiency by the remission of taxes, which
could only be supplied by the proposition of others ; and
the second was that a Chancellor of the Exchequer engaged
in such an enterprise must not shrink from attempting to
control the financial management of more than the financial
year. That, however, was not the opinion of the Score•
Lary of the Board of Control, He said,—
" The right hon. gentleman" (my humble self) " had given
theni two budgets to consider ; one for 1853, the other for
1854. Tho wisest man would have enough to do in attempt-
ing to arrive at a correct view of the financial condition of a
great country, even for a single year."
(Cheers from the Opposition). But now we have a budget
for seven years—(prolonged cheering from the Opposition
benches)—and, not content with this—not content with
regulating the commercial arrangements of the country
for seven years—the Government accompany that measure
with financial propositions that fix the rate of interest for
nearly half a century. (Cheers.) Really I think this is
rather a remarkable contrast to have occurred within the
space of four months in the opinions of a statesman who
would not say one thing to-day and another to-morrow for
mere ephemeral popularity, the only difference being that
the economic gentleman who was the member for Kidder-
minster four months ago is now Secretary to the Board of
Control. (Laughter.) Hon. gentlemen will doubtless ex-
cuse these frank comments. I make not these quotations
by way of taunt. ("Oh !" from the Ministerial, and cheers
from the Opposition.) I have a perfect right to make the
quotations, and I am justified in making them, to vindi-
cate the course I took on the occasion to which they refer,
(Hear, hear.) Well, then, having given my approbation
to the general principles on which the Chancellor of the
Exchequer's financial scheme is founded, because, I have
before observed, it is, in fact, the identical process by
which I myself attempted to operate (" No, no," from the
Ministerial, and " Hear, hear," from the Opposition
benches)--the process is the same, though the application
is different.--(hear, hear)—l have now to see whether I can
bestow the same approbation upon the application of the
principle as I give to the principle itself. I come first to
the consideration of the first resolution before the com-
mittee, to which an amendment has been proposed by my
hon.
friend the member for Hertfordshire. The Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, by this resolution, proposes to
continue the income tax for a term of seven years. It is a
tax which has never, in our time, been proposed for a
period of that duration. (Hear, hear.) The Chancellor of
the Exchequer objects to provisional budgets—he objects
to our finances being in a condition which is not esta-
blished and confirmed—he thinks that no arm of our
finance should be of a temporary or doubtful character.
There is a great authority, I am told, just published,
which seems to express the same opinion. This is the lead-
ing article of the Economist newspaper. (" Hear, hear,"
and laughter.) It is headed " The Budget, its Great Poli-
tical Feature ;" and it informs its readers that ",Nothing
can be more disgraceful to a great nation, or injurious to
its best interests, than to permit its financial condition
to be exposed to serious uncertainty, which has pre-
vailed in this country, at least since the expiry of the in-
come tax in 1851. Since then more than 5,000,0001. of
the necessary income of the country have been subject to
an annual vote." This, then, is the great political feature
of the budget, to terminate the dangerous and pernicious
system by which so large a portion of our income as
5,000,0001. is dependent on an annual vote of this house.
What new lights break upon us ! Perhaps I may remind
the committee—although I confess that until I heard the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, and read this authority, I
should have thought it unnecessary to do so—that at no
very remote period—no longer, indeed, than when I first
entered this assembly, a large amount of the annual re-
venue was always under the control of Parliament, and
subject to an annual vote. (Hear.) But what is more ex-
traordinary- still, this state of things was held by high
constitutional authorities to be one of the securities of the
rights and liberties of the people. (Cheers.) The system
was then highly valued by all gentlemen professing liberal
opinions, not only as the safeguard of popular rights and
liberties, but also as the best security for an economical
administration of the finances. (Hear, hear.) The sugar
duties were voted annually in order that Parliament
might have a control over the annual revenue of the
country. (Hear, hear.) In amount, too, the sugar duties
were little less than the income tax, which we are now dis-
cussing. (Cheers.) Why, it was only at a very recent
period that the Minister of the day, having to deal with
the sugar duties, took the opportunity of appealing to the
house, on account of the question of slavery to concede that
those duties should no longer be dependent on an annual
vote and entered into a compact with the house to substi-
tute for the amount secured by those duties an equal sum
to be subject to an annual vote of the house. (Cheers.)
Who was that minister? The committee shall hear. On the
20th of July, 1840, the house resolved itself into a Commit.
tee of Ways and Means, like the present, and Lord John
Russell spoke in these words :—" I do not propose to vary
in any respect the constitutional practice of leaving a large
a considerable amount of revenue, dependent on a yearly
vote of .this house, as hitherto has been the case, I shall
therefore propose some other source of revenue, which I
will state before these resolutions are formed into the
shape of a bill, to be yearly income, and for which, pre-
vious to the sth of July, the minister of the Crown shall
every year be obliged to ask the consent of parliament. I
think that it would be unfortunate that the duties on sugar
should be made the annual subject of debate, and, without
departing from a constitutional practice, I shall endeavour
to find some other duty, which it will be less objectionable
to take as an annual vote." (Cheers.) The noble lord,
who will probably follow me in debate, will, perhaps avail
himself of the opportunity to inform us what is the branch
of public revenue which, in conformity with the promise
then given, he has provided for the annual decision of Par-
liament. (Cheers and laughter.) The noble lord, however,
on a point of constitutional practice, speaks with the au-
thority of a master, and he is bound, before the committee
shall come to a vote on the resolution submitted to it, to
explain upon what grounds he supports a proposition ad-
vanced for the express purpose, as was avowed, of setting
aside the " constitutional practice of having a considerable
amount of revenue dependent on a yearly vote of this
House." (Cheers.) We have been expecting every year
that the noble lord would produce the tax over which Par-
liament should exercise the control declared to be so valu-
able in a constitutional as well as in an economic point of
view ; but we certainly did not expect to be told that
the enjoyment of this great constitutional privilege was a
fiscal enormity—(cheers and laughter)—we did not expect
to be Itold that when, by accident, an opportunity oc-
curred of dealing with a branch of revenue, equal
in amount to, but not greater than the sugar duties, if we
exercised our power in this respect we should endanger the
finances and expose the country to danger. (Cheers.) So
much, then, for the Chancellor of the Exchequer's first
propositionto renew the income tax for seven years on the
ground that it was desirable a large branch of the national
revenue should not be dependent on an annual vote of Par-
liament. I differ from the right hon. gentleman on that
point. The late Government having to propose the con-
tinuance of the income tax, indicated that the period
should be three years, in deference to the precedent which
had always prevailed ; but, if we had to chose between a
period of seven years and a period of one year, I should
vote for the latter. (Hear.) What I wish to impress on
the committee is, the error of these new fangled doctrines
—that it is dangerous to have a large amount of revenue
dependent on the annual vote of Parliament ; for I believe
that if we' regained the exorcise of the ancient constitu-
tional privilege from which we have been too long de-
barred, it would be in the power of this house to ensure a
better and more economical control over the finances.
I come now to the second part of the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer's proposition respecting the income tax, and that
is with regard to its assessment. The right hon. gentleman
proposes not only to continue the tax for seven years, but
also that no difference shall be made in the mode of its
assessments. Perhaps the house will not think it imperti-
nent in me if I take the opportunity of explaining the
reasons why the late Government fixed on the rate of as-
sessment which they recommended the House of Commons
to adopt. Remember, I have never had an opportunity
of expressing my opinions on this matter. Our vote for
the income tax never came before the house. In deference
to the feeling of the house, I placed the whole financial
propositions of the late Government before it, and the
income tax resolution was included among the others, but
I said, at the time, that I did not intend to ask for the
opinion of the Committee of Ways and Means on the
question until after Christmas, and that all I then de-
sired was, that the house should be in possession of the
principle on which we proceeded. Tho noble lord the
member for London, when a candidate for a seat in Parlia-

ment lately, said I had declared I had not had time to look
over the schedules of the income tax. I suppose men may
say anything when they are on the hustings. (Cheers and
laughter.) Great license, we know, is permitted under
such circumstances, and therefore I should have made

no remark on that statement of the noble lord, had I not
heard it stated on Friday last, in sentences of solemn pro-
priety, that the debate on my proposition respecting the
income tax, had confessedly broken down. Why, there
never was any discussion on the subject. I never said that
I had not looked over the schedules of the income tax ;
and perhaps those who make these assertions are not as

well acquainted with them as myself. (Hear, hear.) What
I said was, that between the time when I publicly an-
nounced the rate of difference we proposed in the schedules,
and the end of a week following, I had not had time to
refer to the practical authorities to make an adjustment in
harmony with the settlement we proposed, but that no
alteration that could be made would materially affect the
financial results which I had laid before the house. Let
me remind the committee of the circumstances under which
we undertook the revision of the taxation of the country,
the first steps towards which was the proposition I sub-
mitted to the house; for I stated, at the time, that it was
not a complete system. It was our opinion that the taxa-
tion of this country unduly pressed on the interests con-
nected
.will the land. (Hear, hear.) That opinion we
expressed' openly ; we had no wish to conceal it. ,It was
our opinion that after the abrogation of a protective policy,
the best mode of assisting a class subjected to unrestricted
competition was to lessen the cost of production, and we
thought that that could not be done without a general
revision of the system of taxation. (Hear.) This policy
was openly announced ; nothing was hidden ; our object
was avowed, and the means by which we intended to attain
that object were publicly announced. (Hear, hear.) If
we could convince the country that our policy was just we
did not despair of attaining our object ; but unless we
could convince the country that our policy was founded in
justice, we knew that it would not be accepted, nor did we
desire that it should be. The principle of unrestricted com-
petition haying been recognized, it became my duty to
commence the revision of our financial system with the
avowed view of removing its undue pressure on land. It
was impossible fur us to carry those measures into effect;
it was impossible for us to sustain the operations which we
contemplated without the aid of the income tax—that tax
against which so much odium had been excited, and in our
opinion, in a great degree, so unjustly excited. It was our
opinion, having to revise the whole system of our taxation,
with the avowed purpose of Tell, aving the land from an
undue pressure, that it was abso'intely necessary we should
come to the commercial classe's with some exposition of
-what wo really believed was Vat) undue pressure of one par-
ticular tax upon them, and o f our willingness to remove the
injuatice of that tai with rennet t,3 the trading, the coin-