The Sun.
London, England, 1836-03-16 00:00:00

saving the revenue from loss. His Hon. Friend had Said,
that according to their own principles he could show that they
Lad acted
in a manner similar to what he now °posed, and
gave as an instance the article of wax. His Hon. Friend,
With his acuteness, should have seen the difference between
the two subjects, lie came now to the article of cottons.
l'he duty was calculated at 2,000,000/. sterling 43 er received from it at the Exchequer but 500,000!. all= the rest went in drawbacks; and under all these considerations
tall hey came to this—whether for 500,0001. they would undergo
the annoyance and trouble imposed, as well as placing im-
Pediments in the way of trade, and that for collecting the ex-
.e,, !:! Ise duty
lon an article calculated to bring to the Exchequer
tZh.:00,000/., but of which the real amount was•only 500,0001.
at was their duty then ? It was some indication What eas
"KeIY to be the consequences, that to induce the House to
?gree to the motiop, it was expressly and distinctly stated that
I'lt could be but temporary. The tax upon cotton was admitted
obe a bad one. Two years afterwards it was found to be so
bad, that his Noble Friend and himself had the satisfaction of
v°!lling down to that House and declaring that they would get
rid of of the obnoxious tax—and they now felt the full advantage
of its certain repeal.—( Hear.) But what benefit for the agri-
culturists did his Hon. Friend propose. in the imposition of aY of 10/, upon foreign.tallow for a year or two, to raise ex-
PeCations which could not be realized ? Those hopes would
disappointed, and those who were now urging on the pre-
sent question would call loudly for the repeal of a tax so very
tlobnoxious as a tax upon a raw material impertant and useful to
arge number of the manufacturers of this country.—( Hear.)
13ctmast observe, on the whole view of the case, that a more
raortlinary proposal be had never heard of than that of don
'rot
Friend, which would in effect be to raise the duty on
exported soap to 101., whilst it was well known that it could
'rot now be exported at a duty of 3/.—( Hear.) It was on these
lounds
"on. Friend that he was prepared to resist the proposal of his
, a Ported by the Housecourse in which he trusted he should be sup-
SIBTHORP had not heard a single observation
;11,1.frern the Right Hon. the President of the Board of Trade
Itle?11 could be 'called an argument against the proposal of
la; HOO. Friend ; who, he only complained, had not gone so
as he (Colonel Sibthorp) was inclined to go. The Right
4 °- Gentleman had put this subject in comparison with the
Mrapery tax upon newspapers—(laughter and cheers) but he
(Colonel Sibthorp) would venture to say that the labourer
he gladly throw aside his book, and his newspaper too, if
e Were to see'a good sirloin of beef on his table.—( A laugh.)
Mr. HAWES supported the motion. This question pre-
41',ited a case of sound special exception to a very good gene-
tpral, rule, which had been well enforced by his Right Hon.
„, lend the President of the Board of Trade. At the same
I'm; however, he must say, that his Right Hon. Friend had
~etrayed a very singular want of acquaintance with the prac-
"cal part of this manufacture. His Right Hon. Friend argued
that an increased duty on raw material could not be imposed
Without proving injurious to the export trade in the manu-
factured article. But the case of soap -was an exception to
'tots principle; 'the fact being that the chief export trade in
ItnaP was supplied from other raw material than tallow, the
'eater part of exported soap being made from colonial
(Cries of" Hear, hear, hear.") Putting an increased duty
'Pon the imported tallow, therefore, could not affect the
'export
trade in soap. Right Honourable Friend had
ext gone on to show that the consumer could not be benefited
e°Y adopting the present proposal. He (Mr. Hawes) was not
repared to say that the consumer. would in every case be
uenefited. In the case of candles he admitted that an in-
eteasecr duty on tallow must cause an increase in price to the
waft—incr. By reducing the duty on soap, however, he con-
t.,Rded the advantage must be considerable to the consumer.
Hon. Member then went on to show that although the
total. amount of duty levied on soap was 1,076,0001., the
tamount which reached the Treasury, after all the -various ex-
nses of collection had been paid, was only about 600,000/.
Rmaintained, therefore, that the same argument which his
'de e Hon. Friend had used some years ago, when reducing
Th V upon printed cottons, would apply to the present case.
itbi trade having been almost at a stand-still for a consider-
Joe ° time of late years,- notwithstanding the vast increase' of
°lllation, and the increased consumption in other articles of
taken use, and notwithstanding the enormous fall which bad
place in the price of the raw material—notwithstanding
all these4o circurnstanees, it would be found that the receipts
Hezi, the soap duties had been almost stationary since 1833-34.
that ad only one word to say with regard to smuggling, and
eitt 'YU; that that practice had not been diminished by the re-
ellenta of the duty upon soap. He believed it would be found
tpa,eareful inqutry, that the amount of soap actually made in
Sland was nearly double what-was charged-for.
1.1"`r• P. BARING said—With respect to the remark of the
Member for Lambeth, that soap for exportation was
tit4rlY Manufactured from colonial oil and not frem tallow,
/t as an argument which went against himself.—( Hear.)
te:ad been said that the reduction of the duty on soap had
site 4,0 no advantage, inasmuch as the consumption bad been
itorst'Y stationary for a series of years. In order to show how
botlnded the assertion was, that the consumption of soap had
the nln,seteased on the lowering of the duty, he would only state
th of a respectable witness who was examined before
kee°lntnission, and who alleged " that a much !tatter and
k.„° economical kind of soap had. of late been used, and con-
(lesent,lY, a much larger quantity of real soap consumed."—
sso %) This witness also stated, that half as much soap again
pose_ dbe consumed, if there were no excise. For the p.ur-
el' of clearing up all doubt upon this matter, he would just
ePitien the average' consumption of 1828, 1829, and 1830,
'll ar • tie ed with that of 1831, 1832, and 1833, was 517,0001b5.
nurehar,;(l soap, and 695,0001b5. of soft soap ; whilst if the con,
nf f,"„ea of 1834 was compared with the average consumption
10,0'48, 1829, and 1830, it would be found to amount to
..„41910,0001b5, of hard soap, and 698,0001b5. of soft soap.
tiet ler, hear.) He begged of the Hon. Gentlemen con.
affcee„",with Ireland to reflect how the proposed measure would
„if e The argument addressed to the representatives
I,he cn,,g; laed Was, that they would have an equivalent for raising
land psi of Candles on the reduced price of soap. Now Ire-
gee.,,,"`u a duty neither on soap nor tallow ; and the cense-
both of the change proposed would be, to impose a duty on
ivrtnose articles in that country.—( Hear, hear.)
Cep, • WARBURTON—This proposition involved two dis-
lhie..questions ; first, the remission of the excise duty on soap ;
he "ett, the imposition of an additional duty on tallow for
reodProteetion and benefit of English agriculturists. The
ave:edio which the agriculturists sight relief was at length
and the plot which was obscurely hinted a.t in the
ther„-Ing of the session was now, for the first time, disclosed.
Posh,: teat a measure, the effect of which would be, by im-
the -15,a tax on tallow imported from foreign countries, to raise
twe.llll.!iree on all tallow 71. a ton, when it was notorious that
third
f& cf.
the tallow consumed was home, and only tine-
turins°reign production.—( Hear, hear.) Thus the agricul-
Uoverptvenld besrelieved to the extent of 700,0007., whilst the
rejt'inent would receive by the imposing of the duty on fo-
wit%
thacllow only 380,000/. This, he owned, was consistent
the !Tian views expressed at the beginning of the session as to
ee.r, In which the agriculturists would obtain relief as
atteil- wan his own suspicion at the time that their plan for
itneitivn.g, thaty. object would be by taxing the
.rest of the corn-
'aws ( near, hear.) So long as the policy of the corn-
pre,,o_:s. attempted to be maintained, and any measure was
nJust'(l for the benefit of the agriculturist, by doing an act of
it hlee to the rest of the community, he would always feel
ProplossitthitY to raise his voice against it.—(Hear.) Let a
Bea sa I°ll be made for changing or taking off the excise duty
ut 8 and did not say that he would. not vote for
tePosie he found thct question mixed with that of
4erlt 44: duty on tallow, he felt bound to resist the pre-
has Lord 11*
quite addressed the House for a short time but
1,11 inaudible in the Gallery.
logeridet CHANCELLOR. of the EXCHEQUER felt
eeasidcr°e ,express his views on such a subject, because he
,ertireentu it of importance that the opinious of the Go-
elrehht on a measure of so peculiar a nature should be dere& throughout the country, and carefully consi-
1111ith bY, the House.—(Bear, hear.) These were objects
Ivhieh Z!stlitl not be attained by any other than the course
to. aoi' had taken. But so anxious and so cautious was lie
that in tielalling on the House for any decision on the question,
resch„. e schedule moved for in Committee to-night, the
resolution lee and duties now in force were proposed to be con-
oiliin "'
t 0
[lean, h ear, hear.) He had said that he was un- tp h e
teresr:vs
untilhe thet opinion of the House taken on the question
s thebe period when, on a review of the whole in-
r rst to country, it could be determined what was
discio?ne ; and if he could have abstained altogether
kith teen
one
his opinions on the stamp duty, it v.rould
ttlth th more acceptable to himself, and more consistent
nt bPiiri I,neiples which he had laid
.down for the fulfil.
at the duty. On the same principles he was anxious
4(.ldd questlen of the reduction of the duty on soap
ReaeralLle ielt
Perfectly oren to he considered when the
or the Preposition as to the manner in which the revenue
aeuver,tiel:°_lltrY should he made up, was submitted. If, how-
t PPortetiP,rernt motion were pressed to a division, those who
47i.rticipate
.e
ere fairly liable to the imputation of being anxious
, ess ,
~h report of the Committee sitting on agricultural
°4l' thcsj—whlorlear.) Could there be any sequence in the ideas
47 Posic, professed to afford relief to the agriculturists by
th, 4.0:t G,sty which would rot, on their own statement, bone-
iwhich
..e1 t!essed class amongst them (the wheat growers),
ordet, would take 2s, or 33. out of the pockets of the people
did n_u_ make take
return of ls. to the revenue ?—( Hear. )
fat!ided interest,
otmean for a moment to depreciate the claims of the
,!,Rnea r_ towards which he entertained feelings of un-
-144.04.1ect
tlelct and deference, to a due share of the relief
ttlianNl that 115ointry from taxation but it should be borne
or
the
wis.l9terest had been alealready benefited by a re-
Ilintilt °I. the h I
o e of the duty on candles, and one-half the
the on had _ duty on soap. The seconder of the present
lamrchlissiortidly admitted that the result of it would be
trtxa ; but that Part of his rent in favour cf. the occupier of
this It.ii4t. to whiehas not a Principle for affording relief from
he would assent. He was desirous that
he the sti°ll--not f emission
.0 an excise duty on foreign tallow, but of
out in made loi.l the duty on soap—should be reserved until
liot a.ecord
1.18 ger.ieral statement, when, if a case were made
to
t:llesit,„to
tao'accejoislth the view of the Hon. mover, he would
lotion adoption
Lk, it. But at present he could not consent
thc
cOOl pricci a motion which would tend to a great vio-
the eturner Pie, and which must entail great irjustice on
be Anestio ',;—( Cheers. ) Not wishing then to prejudge
sist~n et the duty desiring d
•nied kith yon soap, and not that it should
,jet be deemed . another question which he felt bound to re-
sit, It but fair, just, and reasonable, that the sub-
tle I.l,\4,,oareserved for future consideration.—( Hear. )
PlaiN PEEL c equer • EL did not think the Chancellor of
rcotwhich rightly understood the nature of the coln-
had bad tn..e Right Hon. Friend who introduced the
avail 'ore it :`_.e
,% It was that the Right Hon. Gentleman
laceele ser,:i_uel(l be known what would be the amount of
4 re? nri histo", and of the public engagements, given a
lletien of
.Y,sell Part, and- the part of the Government, that
tanip duty should be granted. This surely