The Sun.
London, England, 1849-06-06 00:00:00

shows that up to this time public opinion was not. pre •
pared for the change which the House in 1846 adopted.
My belief is. though I do not assent to the wisdom of the
course the House took in so lung delaying this change,
that it was not behind public opinion in the course it
took on that subject.—(Bear, hear.) With respect to
many subjects in relation to religious liberty, as to the
Roman Catholics particularly, does any one believe that
universal suffrage would produce less feeling of reli-
gious bitterness and animosity that now exists among- -
Members of the House?—(Cheers.) My belief is that
Members of this House are far more liberal than the
community in general are disposed to be.—(Cheers ) The
lion. Gentleman says the liberal and democratic ele-
ments of the country do not exist in the House, more
especially in the Cabinet, and that the feeling of the
aristocracy entirely governs the formation of the Mi-
nistry. With respect to this subject—though I am afraid
the Hon. Gentleman will think I am labouring under
some strange delusion—my belief is that the people—
that the humblest people, that the poorest people of this
country, have no indisposition to the aristocracy.—(Loud
and general cheering.) My belief is that the aristocracy
is not and could not be forced upon them, but that the
aristocracy having, from the time it became a free
country, most happily for its liberty and most fortu-
nately for themselves, felt a sympathy with popular
liberty having even entertained popular prejudices
when the people were prejudiced, and having stood up
for popular rights when those rights were attacked--
my belief is, I say, that the aristocracy of this country
has a strong bold on the opinions and affections of the
people.—(Leud cheers.) And, Sir, when we talk of the
aristocracy, and of the members of different Admi-
nistrations, let it be recollected that many of the
aristocracy of this day were the democracy of 50 years
ago.—(Cheers.) It was said by a very clever person,
whose opinions I have heard quoted in the House, Ma-
dame do Steel, when she carne to this country and
studied our manners and constitution a little, " I see now
what is the difference between your aristocracy and the
ancient noblesse of France. In that country the aristo-
cracy was the despair of talent, in this country it is the hope
of talent."—(Much cheering.) These very words very
well express in my mind the difference between one of
those constitutional aristocracies which never admitted
new persons into its ranks, and never gained new mem-
bers, and the aristocracy of England, which contains in
many instances persons the sons and grandsons of those
who were themselves the democracy of the country,
whose fortune was of the very smallest and most insig-
nificant, but whose talents, we find by the credit which
they obtained for the exercise of them, raised those per-
sons to a place among the aristocracy.—(Cheers.) And
are we to be told the very next day, as it were, that
those persons are to be put under ban and excluded
from all share in the government of the country,—
that they are not to enjoy any of the social distinctions
of life ?—(Cheers.) What I have to find fault for with
the Hon. Member for Manchester (Mr. Bright) and
those who agree with him is, that they are so exceed-
ingly narrow-minded.—(Tremendous cheering from the
Opposition benches.) Get them upon the subjects with
which they are particularly conversant, and I listen with
great admiration to their extensive knowledge and acute
ability, but when we come to discuss large questions
such as concern the fortune of our empire, then I see
that they have intellect and understanding bound
up in such a narrow round—(The Noble Lord was in-
terrupted by a tremendous burst of cheering from the
same quarter)—that it is quite impossible to get them
to understand those great principles on which our ances-
tors founded the constitution of this country, and which
we, their successors, humbly admire and endeavour to
follow. The Hon. Member (Mr. Bright) spoke too of
economy, and told us that nothing could be done in this
House to obtain it—that motions for economy were refused
'and rejected, and that even the smallest reduction was not
sanctioned by a majority. But, Sir, I think in this re-
spect the House and the country have very much come
to the opinion if there is a strong disposition for re-
trenchment in the public mind that the Government is
likely to listen to that opinion, and that having listened
to it they are more likely to carry such retrenchment
into effect in the manner which is conducive to the effi-
ciency of the public service, than by votes and discus-
sions debated in the course of some half-hour upon the
estimates. The fact is, that since the estimates of last
year were introduced, the navy estimates have been re-
duced nearly 400,0001., and there have been various
other reductions. Therefore, though there have been
no direct votes of the House cutting down the esti-
mates, yet the influence of public opinion has been
brought to hear upon them, and they are now made
more in conformity with public opinion than, as
I must confess, they were when we presented
them at the beginning of last year. But if this be the
case, the Hon. Gentleman has no reason to complain
of the want of economy which exists. The Honourable
Gentleman, indeed, speaks always as if we were adding
to the taxation of this country, and as if the people
were borne down by an additional weight of taxation
which it was impossible for them to bear. He (Mr.
Hume) always argues in this way—we paid 50.000,0001.
10 years ago ; we pay 52,000,000/. now. There is,
therefore, an additional taxation of 2,000,000/. But
when he does so he really uses a computation which is
unworthy of the knowledge we know the Honourable
Member must possess on the subject. The real matter
to be inquired into is, whether the same taxation is kept
up, if there has been any addition to it, or if the taxes
have been reduced. In looking to this subject I beg
to refer the Honourable Gentleman to a paper of the
tuxes imposed and of the taxes reduced within the
!ast 20 years, viz., from 1829 to 1847. I find the sum
all is, that while 6,000,000/. of taxation has been lin-
pesed upwards of 17,000,0001. has been reduced, making
balance of excess of taxes repealed over taxes imposed
of 11,266,0001. (Cheers.) And, be it observed, in the
course of these 20 years the population has been increas
nig, the means aid property of the country have been
increasing, and, therefore, with 11,000,0001.1, ss of tax
ration, that which remains is imposed on a greater amount
of population and property.—(Hear, hear.) There have
been of late great complaints that taxes imposed on er-
iieles of consumption of the people were maintained, and
it was sai 1 the-re should he direct taxation instead.
Now, let us examine this question, I find that of the.
sum total of taxes taken off, 7,500,000/. was taken off
the Excise, and 9,500,0001. off the Customs, while
800,0001. had been imposed on the Excise and 2,000,0001.
on the Customs, leaving a balance of 7,000,0001. in excess
of duties repealed in the latter, and of 6,000,0001. in the-
former in the last 20 years.—(Hear, hear.) So farais it
from being true, therefore, that the country is burdened
and weighed down by an additional amount of taxation.
that this Houie for the last twenty years, having beer,
employed in the same way for twelve years before, has
been employ ed in taking off the load of taxation, and in
diminishing the burdens of the people. But let me con-
sider the state of those taxes which are on the neces-
saries of life at the present period, and compare them
with what they were formerly. I will take a speech de-
livered in this House 112 years ago.—(A laugh.) We
have had since that time many wars, and more especially
the last great revolutionary war, which caused this
country to incur debt to an enormous extent, and there-
fore it may be supposed that taxes on the necessaries of
life would be greatly increased. Here is an extract from
a speech delivered at the period I mention:—
" For my part, I do not know any one necessary of
life upon which we have not some tax -or another,
except water; and we can put no ingredient I know of
into water in order to make it palatable and cheerful
wit'sout paying a tax. We pay a tax for air, and
for the light and heat of the sun in the daytime,
by means of our tax upon windows; and for light
and heat in the nighttime by means of our duties Nem
coals and candles; we pay a tax upon bread, meat, roots.
and herbs of all kinds by means of our salt duty; we pay
a tax upon small beer by means of the malt-tax, and u
heavy additional tax upon strong beer by way of ex-
cise. Nay, we cannot have any clean thing to put upon
our backs, either of woollen or of linen, without paying
a tax by means of the duty on soap, &c."
Now, with respect to all those taxes, it is to be observed,
that the duties on coals, candles, and most of the taxes
here mentioned no longer exist. Adam Smith, writing ,
some twenty years after, said there were four articles,
necessaries of life, taxed in this country,—leather, salt,
candles, and soap. Of all these there is now only one
which bears any tax. I think these things are worth
mentioning, because we hear it continually repeated that
there are great taxes on the necessaries of li!e, which
our ancestors had not to bear, and that the people are
now suffering under an additional weight of taxation.
That two such great wars—the American and revolu-
tionary war—both of which I must confess appear to me
to have been unnecessary—(Hear, hear)—should have
rendered necessary a great load of taxation, is what I
am compelled to admit, but it is what I am sure the Hon.
Gentleman would not wish to alter, if the alteration re-
quired any breach of faith or any attack on public cre-
dit.—(Hear, hear.) And yet let him not be sure the
plan he proposes would not have a great effect on that
credit. I cannot forget when one of those great peti
tions, signed I believe by some 3,000,000 or 4,000,000,
was presented by the Hon. Member (Mr. Duncombe),
the petitioners especially declaimed against the national
debt, and asked the House to abolish it, on the ground
that we were directly forced to incur and pay the
interest upon it. Therefore, Sir, I don't think it so
exceedingly safe, if this motion should be carried, that
many of those admitted to the suffrage would not in
their ignorance think they would be benefited by the
reduction of those taxes required to pay the national
debt.—(hear, hear.) With respect to the gist of this
motion, and as to its main purpose of admitting every
male of full age to vote, I must say, frankly, that I do
object to giving every person a vote for Members of the
House of Commons—(Cheers)—in the belief that they
would, many of them, be easily affected by misrepr_!:
sentations and delusions, and that they have not !ufili
cient political information to enable them toon make a
right choice of Members.—(Cheers.) The
Member asks me if I do not believe in their virtue and
Honourable
integrity. I entirely give credit to the great body of
the working classes of this country for their virtue and
integrity. I believe, from time to time you may enlarge
and wore
the suffrage, that they will
more
worthy of the franchise; but, b comeas' al.ras I can see and ob-
serve, I say that if you were at the present time to
divide the whole country into districts, and give every
man a vote, as the Eon. Gentleman proposes, the people
would be liable to be misled by artful and designing
demagogues—(Cheers)—and that the representation of
this House, so formed, would not conduce to the welfare
and good government of the people.—(Loud cheers.)
The Hon. Member asked us to imitate that which is now
going on in countries abroad, and on this subject I must
speak in the same spirit as that in which it was adverted
to by my Right Hon. Friend the Secretary of State for
the Home Department (Sir G. Grey). I by no means
wish, as the Honourable Member (Mr. Hume) seems to
suppose, to defend or to eulogise those Kings who have
so long withheld from their subjects constitutional
liberty; on the contrary, I have said in this House that
my belief was, if they began after 1815 to admit their
people to the enjoyment of constitutional liberty—if they
had framed those laws with respect to the press which
would have enabled thei t subjects to understand and
dieettea political Dietteee jeisteed of being driveu to ape!