The Sun.
London, England, 1848-02-19 00:00:00

LONDON, SATURDAY E_VENING, FEBRUARY 19, 1848.

between 7,000 and 8,000 persons were out of employment
at Manchester, while others were only partly employed,
and then only with inadequate wages for their mainte-
nance and support. And yet with these facts it had
been attempted to persuade the House that they might
reasonably look for returning prosperity, for improved
commerce, and, as a consequence, a better state of
things. But facts and every day's experience proved
that the difficulties had arisen from the avoidance
of that system of protection which had been
so successful for so long a period of years Many
of the commercial reforms which had been effected,
though perhaps called for by the circumstances of the
time, had not benefited this country. On this subject
he should, however, reserve himself until a future oc-
casion. Ho might be ridiculed, but he declared his
solemn conviction that by exposing the labouring classes
to unrestricted competition with other countries, they
must load them with taxation for the public service, and
tend to pauperise the whole land. If so the income. tax
would become an inadequate source of supply. As to
the exemption of Ireland from the income-tax, he knew
there were reasons in favour of this. It was most de-
sirable to improve the condition of that country; but in
increasing the income tax at home, it was most unjust
that the man 'eh° had an income of 150/. to 2001. a year
in this country should be taxed, while the possessor of
an income of 20,0001. a year in Ireland was exempt. The
prospect of any improvement in our foreign trade was
most delusive. He was recently advised that not only
in the northern states of America, but in Georgia, the
great seat of the cotton plantations, manufacturers
were rapidly extending. Not only was this the case
in America, but in France, Switzerland, and all over
the continent. • The only way for this country to sup-
port its position was by protecting her agriculture, her
native industry, and her shipping interest. By this
means the people, instead of being pauperised, would
have a sufficiency of employment. He despaired of im-
pressing the Government with his views ; for, after the
conversion of the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth by
the Right Hon. Member for West Yorkshire, he feared
they could do nothing more than go on as they were,
however much he might wish the Legislature to retrace
its steps.
Colonel SIBTHORP said, whatever pain he might
have felt in listening to the statement of the Noble Lord,
he had experienced no surprise; nor should he be sur-
prised at any amount of hypocrisy and tergiversation on
the part of Cabinet Ministers and leaders of this House.
—(A laugh.) When the Right Hon. Baronet the
Member for Tamworth, after professing so much anxiety
for the protection of agriculture and so much regard for
the Church, and avowing his fixed determination to
maintain the interests of both, had displayed such tergi-
versatien and such unmindfulness of those interests,
what surprise could be felt at the course now taken
by the Noble Lord the Member for the city of London?
In 1842, when out of place, he had said one thing; now
he said another. On the introduction of the income-
tax, he had expressed his his anxiety that it should
be equal ; but what equality was there in the ex-
isting tax, which he now proposed to aug-
ment ? The fact was, he was now relying en the
support of those who had preceded him in office; there
was a kind of comfortable understanding between the
two parties.—(Laughter.) The Noble Lord had thought
it policy to act thus, no doubt influenced in some little
degree by a regard for the high office he held ; for it
was not to be supposed that Ministers were above re-
ceiving their salaries. He had no faith in the minis-
terial promises as to the limited duration of the increased
tax. There was an old saying, '° Catch a weasel asleep."
—(Laughter.) Ho agreed with the Hon. Gentleman
who had last spoken as to the impossibility of our
national interests being supported with protection. To
such a pitch of liberalism had we now arrived that he
understood we were about to send an ambassador to the
Court of the Pope ; and this would probably increase
our burdens some 4,0001. a year.—(Question.) This
was the question, if he was not mistaken ; tor their
liberal friends (there never was such a misnomer) were
now proposing to make additional demands on the poc-
kets of the people. Thus, after thirty-three years of
peace, we were about to augment a war tax. He believed
the invasion-panic was groundless; but the jealousy of
foreigners must be excited by our increased preparations
for defence, especially at a moment when the country
was loudly proclaiming its inability to bear further taxa-
tion.—(Question, question.) When he had done, the
Hon. Gentleman who cried " question" might speak.—
(Laughter.) He never had been put down in that
House, and never would be.—(Laughter.) What was to
be the result of the present proceedings? Were the people
to be robbed by an excessive income-tax to patch up the
misdeeds of an inefficient Government? The Hon. and
Gallant Member then alluded to the army, and said ho
did not regret the proposed increase in its efficiency.
Were the militia called out he was confident that, in six
months, they would be fit for the inspection of any
general in the service. But the militia was a consti-
tutional force, and therefore they did not find favour
with many Hon. Members. Convinced that the Noble
Lord's proposition must be distasteful to the country,
he would meet it with the most direct opposition.

Mr. F. T. BARING said he had heard the Noble
Lord's statement with considerable pain, not on account
of the mode in which it had been made, for, like every-
thing from the Noble Lord, it was clear and straight-
forward—(Hear, hear)—but he deeply regretted that,
under existing circumstances, in a time of severe distress,
the Noble Lord was obliged to state to the House a
considerable deficiency, that he felt it his duty to in-
crease the estimates, and consequently to impose
additional taxation. Great part of the excess of expen-
diture, he understood, had already taken place; and the
Noble Lord now felt it his duty in certain points, to add
to the establishments of the country. He was not one
who thought we could entirely rely on the good feeling
of foreign countries, or omit to place ourselves in a state
of adequate protection. He should therefore be pre-
pared to support that part of the proposition, if it
were necessary for the security and defence of the
country. But while doing so, he should feel it his duty,
and he trusted the House would do the same, to look
carefully to the amount of expenditure proposed, with a
little more reference to economy than had been practised
in former years.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped that this
House, unlike its predecessor, might feel it its duty to
investigate the votes proposed by the Government. He
should do this with a friendly feeling towards his Right
Hon. Friends below him, and with the firmest confidence
that they would propose nothing except on the best
grounds.—(Hear, hear.) He apprehended there was at
present about two and a half millions of actual defi-
ciency, without any increase whatever. He entirely
approved of the manly and proper way of meeting this,
either by reducing the expenditure or increasing the
taxation.—(Hear, hear.) It was pardonable, last year,
under the remarkable circumstances of the case, to meet
the deficiency by a loan; but he would bo no party
again to any postponement of a permanent defici-
ency; and he entirely approved of the course pro-
posed by his Noble Friend, of making the income
meet the expenditure fairly and regularly.—(Hear.)
As to the mode of meeting it new proposed,
he regretted he could not concur in it. He had opposed
the income tax on its introduction, when the Right
Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth had stated
that it might last for five years, but that he would take
it for three:years first. When, at the end of the three
years, it was proposed to continue it, he (Mr. Baring) had
stated that, though he entertained all his objections to
it, yet, as it,had been originally proposed for five years,
and as there was a deficiency of revenue to meet, he was
not prepared to throw any difficulty in the way. Had
tho Noble Loed now come down and proposed its conti-
nuation, without any addition, he should have had diffi-
culty in offering any objection to it ; for, much as he
had always objected to it, he thought a deficient revenue
worse than any tax.—(Hear, hear.) But the Noble
Lord, not content with the income tax as it stood, sought
to raise it from three to five per cent. ; he asked for the
original tax for five years, and the additional tax for
two, though it was almost a joke on the House to speak
of its continuance for so short a time.—(hear.) The
truth was, the three per cent. was permanent, and the
five per cent., in all probability, we should never get rid
of.—(Hear, and laughter.) This was a new proposition,
he could not concur in making the income tax part of
the permanent taxation of this country, and therefore he
could not vote for this, addition of two per cent.—(Hear,
hear.) He had opposed the income tax at the time,
thinking it a bad species of taxation. He considered it
a war tax; and now that there was a talk of improving
the defences of the country, he deeply regretted that
they were throwing away the most powerful weapon in
the treasury, which might have been made available on
the occasion of the breaking cut of a war.—(Hear.)
Three per cent. was a small eum, and left a considerable
margin for an increase in cases of difficulty; but when
it was raised to five— and he very much doubted whe-
ther it would stop there—to what taxation could
we recur in case of a war? Would it be possible to
raise the income tax above tea per cent.? and at a
time when, of all others, trade was in difficulty
and distress, could they have recourse to the
taxes upon customs and excise which had been thrown
away so lavishly ?—(Hear, hear.) Again, he was op-
posed to it because he thought it a dangerous course to
accumulate upon a direct tax any very large amount of
taxation. At present the income-tax might be popular
in certain quarters ; it might be supposed to relieve the
poor man, and to press only upon the rich. That
opinion was beginning to change ; and he believed the
time was not far distant, when, if the tax was raised to
five per cent., or perhaps a little higher, and was sent
over to Ireland, a very considerable feeling would be ex-
cited against it. In such a case, in the play of parties,
and with the difficulties of Government, the income-tax
might slip from under them, and place them in great
inconvenience.—(Hear.) He was quite ready to aban-
don all custom duties that had been imposed for the
purpose of protection, but not those imposed for revenue.
There was another objection which weighed much on
his mind. In times of great difficulty or war it might
be very well, in laying on a tax for two or three
years, not to be very nice as to whether its
pressure was equal on all classes. But when
the income-tax was raised to five per cent., and
made part of the permanent system of taxation, they
were bound to make it more equal and fair.—(Hear,
hear.) He alluded, of course, to the different way in
which the tax pressed upon income derived from pre•
perty and that derived from the exertions of individuals.
—(Cheers.) This could not long stand the test of fair
reasoning ; if the tax were raised to five per cont. the
public opinion would
be strongly excited against it.
They must matte it fair it they could. Ile hardly 'knew
how the alteration could be made : he feared it would
be. attended with the greatest imaginable difficulty ; and
this of itself was a great objection to the tax, that there
was inherent in it an extreme difficulty of making it a
fair tax upon different classes.
Mr. I)ISRAELI said that a wiser speech, a more prac-
tical speech, or one more justificatory of the opinions of
Hon. Gentlemen on his side of the House he had never
heard than that which had been delivered by the Right
Hon. Gentleman. He could not deny himself the feeling
of euegratuiatieg uis oli. Frieutia around hint uputt the
imoral drawn by the Right Hon. Gentleman from the

present position of the country.—(Hear, hear.) In
1842 there was a deficiency of 3,000,0001., which pro •
duced the fall of Noble Lords and Right Hun. on-
tlemen opposite. He did not wish that the present deficit
might be ominous of a similar result, but that they
might be able to contend successfully with the almost
insuperable difficulties they had to encounter. And they
had this advantage, that there was not a party ready to
take the government of the country on principles
avowedly opposed to theirs, and who professed to
raise the country from its low position by a process
which he would not then designate. It was enough
that that process was sufficient, that the deficit
was made to disappear, and that a large surplus re-
mained. But the 5,000,000/.: raised by the income-tax
disappeared during a time of peace, and then they. were
in the same position.—(Hcar, hear.) Was there no
moral to be drawn from that result?—(Hear, hear.)
Without floating in the atmosphere of theory, had they
not the experience of seven years to guide them, and
that experience was condemnatory of the new system.
They had been told that, with the imposition of thein-
come-tax, there would he a simultaneous relaxation in
the principles of their commercial system, which, before
the period for which it was passed elapsed, would produce
benefits which would relieve them from their difficulties. Where were they ?—(llear, hear.) Where were the
profits which they had received in consequence of the
abrogation of a single duty ?—(Hear, hear.) Where
was the 100,000,000/, which it was stated in the evidence
of the late Secretary of the Board of Trade before the Im-
port Duties Committee, and which was the basis of the
legislation of the then Minister of the Crown, they were
to receive from the abolition of the corn laws?—(Hear, .
hear.) Since then a new lease of the income-tax had
been taken, and with the incumbranco of a great
fine in addition.—(llcar, hear.) And the defi-
ciency had been amplified into monstrous dimensions.
Where was the 25,000,000 L which the more modest
Member for Bolton proposed ? It was not to be found.
Not ono shilling in the pound had been received,
but they had, it seemed, to pay a shilling in the pound,
not only to support the credit of the country, but to
maintain its independence in consequence of this new
economical policy.—(Hear, hear.) Tnis was bad enough
after the magnificent destiny that was promised them,
but it seemed they wore not to stop here, for it appeared
they were not only to have an income-tax,- but anin-
creased income-tax, as a permanent part of their
system.—(Hear, hear.) For the sacrifice they were
called on to make in 1842, they were promised a rapid
and immense harvest; but the dismal picture now was
that they found themselves swimming against the tide
with the same deficit hanging around their necks.—
(Hear, hear.) He wanted to know what the principle
of the income-tax was, and whether it was to be
perpetual? The Right Honourable Gentleman (the
Chancellor of the Exchequer) by his cheer intimated
that it was. The Noble Lord at the head of
the Government ought to speak out his mind
on that point—(Hear)—because it was one of the
remarkable circumstance of the income-tax that, while
one principle was alleged to that House, for its imposi-
tion, another was given out of the House. The Right
Hon. Baronet (the Member for Tamworth) told the
House, with his accomplished plausibility, that the in-
come-tax was a temporary sacrifice for great national
purposes; but, shortly after Parliament was prorogued,
a letter appeared from the same Minister, containing a
reason for the tax totally discordant and totally different,
and which remained up to that moment unexplained,
and he believed inexplicable.—(Cheers.) If a majority
of that House believed that the additional tax would
continue for only two years, that assembly was composed,
he would not say of most guillible materials—(Laughter)
—but was one to whose sympathies the Minister might
appeal with more confidence than any that ever
existed. Was it more likely that the Noble Lord
would take it off than the Right Hon. Gentleman ?
They had a right to probe the financial conscience of
the Minister to the bottom in this point, for it seemed
that prime ministers had revelations to make to the
foreigner which they would not communicate to that
House. What if, after the Easter recess, they see in the
.lournal des Debats or in the National a letter from the
Noble Lord to M. Guizot stating that the peace of
Europe was secured—that he had an income-tax of five
per cent., and that he might defy France. That would
not be more marvellous, and the mortification which it
might produce would not be greater, than that which
must have been felt when, a few months afier the House
consented to the first income tax, a Minister declared
that the reasons which he alleged to the House of Com•
mons for its imposition were not those which influenced
him in his own closet.—(Hear.) The Noble Lord load
no right to complain, therefore, if they received his
proposition with some degree of suspicion. 'With regard
to the relation in which this country stood towards
other countries, he expressed a hope which amounted
to an opinion that there was no prospect or the
peace of Europe being disturbed; yet the Noble
Lord came forward to propose a war vote. —(Hear, hear.)
The Noble Lord declared that the armaments of Eng-
land were by no means in that sorry plight that they
were represented to be in, and that they had been in-
creased; and all this notwithstanding the vigilance of
the Nestor of finance (Mr. Hume). If this were so,
where were all the advantages of a reform in Parliament,
which was to produce cheap government, and reduction
in the military establishments of the country ? The
army was cut down, and the navy cut down, and the
guns spiked, but after the hubbub was over, and the dust
laid, a reaction took place—you (the Reformers) and
your constituents were gulled, and the armaments of the
country were increased while you were looking on.
—(Hear, hear.) You who got metropolitan constitu-
encies to elect you because you said that you would cut
down the estimates, find, after a long peace, that not
only more soldiers, and more sailors, and more artil-
lerymen, are required, but the country was in a
state of alarm ; that it was not sufficiently pro-
tected and defended. So much for economy, and
for attempting to produce effects which it ought to
be known were impossible.—(Hear, hear.) But it
seemed that the age of petty criticism had passed away,
and that they would no longer tolerate that Gentlemen
should get up with that indomitable perseverance, which
he always admired in the Hon. Member for Montrose,
modified as it was with a naiveté that was charming—
(Laughter)—and criticise the conduct of Government
with respect to the expenditure of the country. A new
era was at hand. Armaments would no longer be re-
quired—ships no longer necessary—English regiments
would be as obsolete as the Roman legions, because
there was a new principle of government in action
throughout the world—the millennium, so often dreamed
of and anticipated in such different shapes, was at length
arrived. It appeared, however, that this new principle,
whichinflicted 5 per cent. income-tax upon them, was a
costly compensation as a security for the blessings of
perpetual peace.—(Laughter and cheers.) The apostle of
that new principle he had never spoken of with disrespect
in that House, and he ventured to admire his genius
when he was not supported by Prime Ministers.—(Hear.)
But the principle now propounded by the Hon. Mem-
ber for the West Riding (Mr. Cobden) was not se
ig
as that other principle which he promulgated—
the principle of buying in the cheapest markets and
selling in the dearest. This principle, which was not
now to the minds of naen—it was not confined to en-
thusiasts or preachers upon tubs, or solitary monks—
for it had before now influenced men of action as it had
influenced cabinets. It had been considered in cabinets
and public assemblies, said he need not remind the
House of what had been the barren results of those
aspirations. A century and a half elapsed since it in-
fluenced public councils, and they had during that cen-
tury and a half the longest and the bloodiest war that
ever existed. —(hear.) There was a man who had all
the eloquence of the Hon. Member—though he was not
a Member of Parliament—(Laughter)—the Abbe. Ssaint
Pierre—and he influenced Minist era a century ago by a
plan for perpetual ua^ peace. -e attended the Congress at
Utretcht, by desire, to explain his views to the repro-
s ofe
ton the Powers, who were extremely
inclined
gji:avtiews. They were the views of a
ltianteidv es
toact
remarkable man, end
a they became the more remark-
able, because they influenced the convictions of Rous-
seau, who made them popular throughout Europe. By
them the mind and opinions of Robespierre—the dis-
ciple, or rather the apostle, of the doctrines of univer-
sal peace—(Laughter)—werei formed, and he was de-
termined to put them n practice, and develop them
when he obtained power. The Ablai, St. Pierre's argu-
ment was, that Europe was a confederation, and that
none of the states which composed it could have an in-
ferest in going to war, because war was opposed to their
interests. It was, therefore, necessary that every power
should disband its army; but when it was put to him—
.. supposing any power
it incumbent
not consent to the new sys-
tem?" he replied, that was on the others
to enforce those peaceable principles of which he was
the great promulgator.—(Laughter.) So that it seemed
war was the essential element of his peace. The fal-
lacy of St. Pierre was the fallacy of the Hon. Gentle-
man. It was true that it was not the interest of those
nations which were constituted to go to war. War was
not produced by powers that were satisfied, but, as in
society, disturbance was created h
an individual, who
did not find himself in that position which he thought his
talents entitled him to.— (Lcud cries of " hear, hear,"
froin the Ministerial benches.)
e So wits war always
produced by nations, races, or princes, who agitated for
a position.—(Hear, hear.) Prussia had been often held
up in that House by liberal gentlemen as a model in the
art of government, but sixty years after St. Pierre laid
down his doctrine, Prussia did not exist, and a Mar-
grave of Brandenburg, conscious of great talents, and
representing an unknown and rough race, started up,
and said he would be king of Prussia, instead of
Margrave of Brandenburg, and so produced the seven
years' war.—(Loud cheers.) To reason in favour
of peace fram existing circumstances was to reason on
superficial grounds. The Hon. Gentleman took an easy
view of the whole continent ; and he had a right to do
so, because he had been everywhere well received. He
(Mr. Disraeli) was glad of that reception, though per-
haps he might be disposed to think that the continent
did a great deal for him, because he did a great deal for
the continent.—(Protectionist cheers.) He did not think
that the argument derived from increased commercial
intercourse was a sound one. Looking to the commer-
cial relations which existed with France in 1787, when
Mr. Eden was suit out to negotiate a treaty, he was not
surprised Mr. Pitt should have indulged in the that
ex-
pectations to which the Noble Lord had referred. Like
the hopes and expectations of the Hon. Member, they
were founded on the commerce with France, but at that
moment they were on the eve of the longest and most in-
ternecine struggle that ever took place between two
nations—longer than the thirty years 3 war in Germany.
The increase of commerce did not prevent war then ;
why should it prevent war now ?—(Hear, hear.) He
believed that by the aid of a wise diplomacy the peace
of Europe was never more secure ; he believed that the
struggles of former times would be gradually forgotten,
but there never was an argument founded on a more
flimsy basis than that which offered commercial rela-
tions as e bond of perpetual peace between nations ;
and as long as the universal principles of husaau nature
were not repealed by Acts of rarliaraent, he would be-

lieve in what the truth of history attested, and that
nations would continua to be agitated by the pressure
which gave rise to war. But it was said that new
tendencies hed been introduced by the new system cif
commercial policy. The only tendency which
he recognised in the new principle was the increase
of their taxes.—(liear, hear.) The Gentlemen who
represented the Manchester school were not content
with relieving themselves, but they must inflict taxes
upon their opponents.—(hear, hear.) This new prin-
ciple was, it seemed, an omnipotent deity, under whose
wheels every institution was to fall.—(tlear, hear.) He,
however, was not prepared to believe that the commer-
cial tendency was stronger than the religious tendency,
and as the people of Europe professing the same creed
for centuries, worshipping the same God and the same
Saviour, were not prevented from having recourse to
national defences, he did not think that the commercial
principle which was only in its swaddline• clothes, would
produce results so marvellous. The Hon. Gentleman
at the meeting in Manchester, where he promulgated his
formal revelation, quoted a flowery speech made at
Rouen by M. Grernieux—a speech quite worthy of the
purple rhetoric of theAnt'-Corn-law Leagna in its paimiest
slays—as his vindication to the people of England.
That gentleman also anticipated the millennium, and
terminated his tpecch with the words " liberty, equality,
fraternity." Why that was the Jacobin banner un-
ferled !—(Cheers.) What did those words terminate in
before ? Not in perpetual peace.—(Hear, hear.) Some
men were for liberty, many men were for equality, but
as fur fraternity, the only objection he had against it
was this, that he always found that every party and
.nation who wished to get, or who preached fraternity,
were always prepared to perform the part of elder
brothers.—(Much laughter and cheering.) That was a
rather alarming communication, but it was not all, for
when the sun went down

" The moon takes up the wondrous tale;"
and the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Man-
chester (Mr. Gibson), inspired by " liberty," by
" equality," and of course inspired by fraternity—
(Laughter)--came forward and told them that was not
enough, that the great movement was not to preserve
perpetual peace alone, that it must do more—that it
must touch the law of land inheritance—remove the
anomalies of primogeniture—(Cheers)—and certainly if
you inflict a 5 per cent. income-tax this would be the
result. Reverting, however, to the subject of debate, he
(Mr. Disraeli) reverenced the rude simplicity of the
Government.—(lronical cheers.) He only wished their
supporters had kept their principles for Covent-garden.
—(Renewed cheers.) But what was it the Government
asked them to do? The object of their policy
was to give the franchise to one class, who
throw the burden of taxation upon another.
(Hear, hear.) In an age of monopoly let
them take care that there was not a monopoly
of taxation.—(Renewed cheers.) The Ministry were
acting up to the spirit of a class whose principles were, in
his opinion, opposed to the permanence of our prosperity.
Ile wished the sources of that prosperity to continue,
bat he felt that it was impossible to secure the wealth of
nations without securing their power. If the principles
recerred to succeeded even for a moment, still they were
principles opposed to the independence of the country.
They might even Ise opposed to the defence of the
country ; for on the principle that they thought nothing
of a colony, Members opposite might reconcile them-
' selves even to consider England a province of France.—
(Loud cheers.) But though they on that side of the
House were, as they were called, " a broken and dis-
tracted party," he hoped there was spirit enough left to
deal with these principles in a firm tied manly mode.—
(Loud opposition cheers.) Weak or strong, they must
be prepared to inquire e hat were the principles of the
system they were invited to adopt, and be prepared to
support at all hazards the ancient and the venerated in-
stitutions of our realm.—(Great cheering.)
Mr. COBDEN then rose and said—l shall be obliged
to descend from those regions of imagination into which
the Hon. Member ler Buckinghamshire has soared; and
although he has apparently paid me the high compli-
ment of following me with some attention from France
to England, from Manchester to Covent garden, and
thence over the Continent, yet, whilst we are in a Com-
mittee of Supply, and while the budget is before us, the
Hon. Gentleman must pardon me when I say that I have
not found in his speech much that I think it necessary
to refer to on this occasion.—(llear, hear.) I must
confess that I did not hear with surprise the disastrous
report which has been made to us by the Noble Premier
with reference to the state of our finances. His budget
has been but a counterpart of the balance sheet of all
the industrial interests of the country; but what has
surprised me very much has been to find that, unlike
individuals who unfortunately have a balance on the
wrong side of the account, the Government, instead of
making some effort to diminish the expenditure so as to
render it equal to the receipts, seems apparently to have
only ono thought—that of raising the receipts to equal
the expenditure.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Now,
this is precisely the opposite policy to that which
is pursued by individual concerns throughout the
country. I venture to say that at this moment in every
manufacturing and mercantile concern in the kingdom,
the greatest pains are taken, and the utmost care and
anxiety are devoted to the task of making the two ends
meet in the balance sheet; and if they can contrive to
keep themselves from a loss in striking the balance I
believe they are very well satisfied. I am not only exceed-
ingly pained at the defalcations of our revenue, but I
am, if possible, more pained at the tone in which the
Noble Premier has alluded to the necessity of an in-
crease in our expenditure with reference to the army.
I must say—and I say it with the greatest regret—that
I believe there has not been a speech made by a Prime
Minister in this House since the peace so calculated to
do mischief as the speech of the Noble Lord.—(Hear,
hear.) Why, Sir, it I, an irresponsible private indi-
vidual, had alluded in such terms to France in the Free-
trade Hall iu Manchester, it might have been passed
over; but when a Noble Lord, holding the position of
Prime Minister of this country, draws attention
to the state of France, and adduces the pre-
parations of that country for war as a motive fur our
augmenting our armament, what is it but a menace?
(Cries of No, no," and " Hear, hear")—an Act cal-
culated to irritate and exasperate?—(No, no, and
cheers.) 1 am anxious to give you, the representatives
of England, the opportunity of disclaiming any such
feeling in the remarks which have fallen from the Pre-
mier; but we know we have a sensitive nation to deal
with, and I think there could not possibly have been too
much reserve exercised by the Noble Lord in dealing
with a topic of this nature. Now, I ask myself, " What
is the occasion of all this? Why have we heard lately
of the necessity of an increase of our armaments? What
leave beea the indications of a warlike tendency towards
us from France or elsewhere?" We were told in the
Speech from the Throne, that her Majesty had the
assurance from all foreign States of sentiments
of amity. Now, I wish to ask this question—
for it is time that wo should come to honest straight-
forward feeling and speaking—" Does the language
of the Sovereign speak the truth ?" If so, how can
this armament be necessary ? Are we justified in
arming in this country wnen we have declared,
through our Sovereign, that a feeling of perfect
confidence exists that peace will be maintained ?
Where thee is our danger? Has France been arming
against us? There is no evidence of the kind. I know
there have been facts and figures brought forward to
show that France lies been augmenting her navy. Yes,
and when this question comes substantively before the
House, as it will do—for if the Hun. Member for Mon-
trose (Mr. Hume) had not told me that it was his inten-
tion to propose a special motion on this subject I would
have done it myself, but I bow to him with all deference,
and shall be happy at all times to follow him his career
of economy—l will be prepared to show you from the
speeches in the French papers that your augmentation of
your navy has been the standing plea and excuse for the
increase of the French force .—(llear, hear.) The Noble
Lord has himself told us that our navy is as near as
possible double that of the French. Ought not that to
have satisfied us? Who's afraid?—(A laugh.) Yes,
who's afraid of being invaded?—(Hear.) Where are
the people that have petitioned fur your protection?
Why, I have the honour to represent the largest and
most important constituency of the empire; there is a
population probably of a million, and I believe there
is not one town in West Yorkshire in which there has
not been a public meeting to disclaim all desire of the
sort, to disclaim all fear, and to pray that you will not
augment your army. I represent 36,000 electors, and I
challenge any one to contradict use, when I say that the
vast majority of that important constituency is opposed
to this measure of the Government.—(Cheers.) I men-
tion this with the greater satisfaction, that it may go
forth, and go to France and to Europe, alongside of the
speech and the proposal that have come from the Prime
Minister.—(llear, hear.) And at what time is this pro-
posal made?—(llear, hear.) I should have been sorry
at any time to see such a proposal; but at a time sucleas
the present ought there not to be the most cogent reasons
why you should put us to this expense?—(Hear.) And
what are the reasons? I listened attentively, and I beard
not one fact alleged by the Noble Lord to call for these
armaments. Ile said that, in 1792, Mr. Pitt had great
confidence in peace, and he proposed, I believe, a partial
disarmament ; but there was war in 1793. It is true ;
but we were in different circumstances then in England,
as they were also in France. I believed that if Mr.
Pitt had had the power he would never have gone to
war to put doe n the French Revolution. I believe if
Mr. Pitt had had then what the Noble Lord has now—
an intelligent middle class in the kingdom, governing the
kingdom—and a more instructed working class averse to
war—he never would have embarked in that war—
(Hear, hear)—but he was carried into it by the aristoc-
racy of this kingdom and the obstinacy of the monarch
wielding the power of the aristocracy for the purpose.
—(Hear, hear.) But we have the lesson of the war
which followed—we have the debt which followed as a i
bond of peace. And !how is it in France ? What is
the motive now in Franco for going through such a re-
volution as in 1793 ? Why France has gone through
its social revolution—it has effected its social revolution,
and I know of no motive now why France should seek
such a revolution as that of 1793. 'They have no pri-
vileged order ; theyjibare no established church—
(lronical cheers from the Opposition)—they have no
great inequalities of condition ; there is a very
minute subdivision of property ; and I ask what
possible motive of the kind can there be in
France
being(l a r , hear.) Then, I say, these facts
evidences that we should new arm, are
insteadof
proofs that we are no longer in the same daeger.—
(Hoar, hear.) The Noble Lord has alluded to our
narrow escape in the affair of Mr. Pritchard. Why, I
take that as another proof that we are not going to war
for any such trifling things in these days.—(Hear, hear.)
We aro told of secret councils in the Foreign-office
between our Minister and the Minister of France, and
of the great danger of war. Well, I venture to say, that
if those two gentlemen had ever come to that point of
obstinicy or er recklessness, that they had proposed to
involve 60,000 of men, their fellow subjects, in a bloody
war, the result would have been that they would both
harp been turned out of office.—(Bear.) But what does

the Noble Lord come to ? Why, ho tells us that we are
not arming against a probability, but that it is necessary
to arm against an improbability—" that it is sometimes
necessary to take precautions against an improbability."
—(A laugh.) Now, I ask, is not that treating the
country with some degree of levity and with
some degree of disrespect ?—(Hear, hear.) Im-
poverished as the people are, not only by the burdens
of the State, but also by local burdens pressing
heavily upon them, is it not too bad to propose to in-
crease our army against the expressed wish of the people
of our large towns, and to have no better argument for
it than that it is desirable to take precautions against
an improbability?—(Hear, hear.) Let me ask the gentle-
men connected with the war service a question. Is it
not possible to make the present amount do?—(Hear,
and a laugh.) I ask the lion. Member for Sheffield
(Mr. Ward), the Secretary to the Admiralty, just to
consider the point. He is going, we will say, to get the
same amount as he did last year; has he ever thought
whether the same mount will not go a great deal
further now than it did twi lee or eighteen months since?
—(Dear, hear.) I ask any gentleman connected with
railroads, any gentleman connected with Birmingham
or with any of the iron districts, will not 17,000,0001.
go a greet deal further in the purchase of commodities
now than they would last year?—(Hear.) But I will
not say 17,000,000/., because my Hon. Friend will tell
me that a vast deal of that sum goes in fixed payments,
but I will say 2,000,000/. or 3,000,000/., and I state that
commodities are 25 per, cent. cheaper than they were
iast year; and it' he can get the same amount now
as he did then, let him make himself comfortable.—
; (A laugh.) There are very few of his constituents
in Slit ffield that will get the same amount as they did
last year.—(Bear, hear.) I see no reason at all why we
should augment our forces, and 'when the time conies I
will oppose its being done ; and by not one shilling will
I consent to augment the army, nary, cr ordnance this
year.—(Hear, hear.) Now, as to this income-tax that
is proposed to be put on. I have no objection to such a
tax. The Hon. Member for Bucks (Mr. Disraeli) has
been attacking me for that tax. I want to know what
taxes are fairer than property and income-tax.—(Hear.)
We raise 54,000,000/., and a large proportion of it comes
from tea, coffee, and sugar ; I ask the Hon. Member
for Bucks, does not he think that the poor wretches of
peasants that have to go and buy threepennyworth of
tea or twopennyworth of sugar on a Saturday night,
and pay a large per centage upon that little orttlay for
taxation, find it quite as grievous to them as the pro-
perty-tax is to the landowners ?—(Hear, hear.) I do
not think an income-tax quite so fair—(Hear, hear)--eny
great objection is its inquisitorial character, from which
men of property escape. But when you propose an in-
come and property-tax to spare the Government effecting
some little economy in your excise department and your
dockyards and your Government offices, then I object
to it.—(llear, hear.) But the Hon. Member for Bucks
(Mr. Disraeli) will excuse me if I tell him that what he
has said is rather calculated, unintentionally I am sure,
to create a misapprehension in Bucks as Ito what we
have been doing in the progress of our commercial re-
form. Ile talks of the great deficit. Yes; it is easy to
have a great deficit if you are always voting increased
expenses.—(Hear, hear.) But who votes those increased
; expenses? Has the Hon. Member for Bucks ever been
found voting for economy ? Will he now join in re-
sisting this profligate expenditure of the public money?
—(hear, hear.) Now, let the Hon. Member look well
to it. I will engage for it that though he rails at the
expenditure, thoug he denounces the income-tax and
abuses the free-traders for it, he will vote for
the expenditure.—(Hear, hear.) But don't let him charge
the free-traders with it. It is nit free trade that does
it ; it is the constant expenditure. Sine 1835 you
have increased the expenditure by 7,000,000/ , and
that upon the small item which is variable, and which
comprised the charge ;for the army and navy and ord-
nance; buttwho has done that ? Why, the Hon. Mem-
ber for Bucks and those who have acted with him.—
(Hear, hear.) There would have been no necessity for
an income-tax if the expenses had not been augmented ;
it is your extravagance that causes it.—(Hear, hear.)
Why, if you had kept the armaments at what they were
in 1835, you might now have stood in the same relation
to France—for France, as I will prove to you, only
armed'in self-defence and because you did ; and you
might have taken off the duty on tea, or the window-
, tax, or both together.—(Hear, hear.) You might have
had relief equal to the whole amount of your poor-rates.
You arc actually paying in this increased expenditure a
sum as large as your poor-rates ; it is tantamount to
doubling the pauperism of the country.—(Hear.) Then
I say, cut down your expenditure. Help us. Now, I
will give,you a reason why you should help us. I will
talk to the Hon. Protectionists now as men of sense.—(A
laugh.) Give up the idea of forming a party upon pro-
tection.—(Hear.) You see your leaders drop away ;
and why do leaders drop away ? Because you have really
no party, aed you have no principle.—(Laughter.) It
is a sham and a fudge.—(Renewed laughter and cheers.)
Talk of restoring protection! You might as well think
of exthroning the Stuarts again.—(Cheers.) You might
as well talk of restoring the year 1846 to the calendar as
of restoring protection.-- (Renewed cheers.) The thing
is dead and gone and disposed of.—(Cheers.) Then
what is the next question for you? You cannot in-
demnify yourselves against a moderate price of corn by
coming upon the public purse; that I guarantee—that
you shall never have a corn-law again, do or say what
you will.—(Cheers.) What then? Why, diminish the
expenditure.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for
Bucks usually favours the House with a great deal
of historical knowledge, and perhaps he will excuse me
for calling his attention to an historical fact which oc-
curred net more than 30 years ago. If the Honourable
Member will take the prices of corn in one hand and
the statements of the public expenditure in the other,
he will hind that in the years in which the prices of
corn were lowest the Parliament always cut down the
expenditure. Let us begin with 1822. After the
conclusion of the war the Honourable Member
for Montrose was always endeavouring to persuade
the House to bring down the establishments to
a peace footing, but he could never get the county Mem-
bers to listen to him till 1822. In that year wheat fell
to 445. a price unheard of for fifty years previously, and
then the county Members came up cn masse to support
the economical propositions of the Hon. Member for
Montrose; they struck off 20,000 men from the services,
and effected reductions in the expenditure to the extent
of 2,800,000/. The Hon. Member for Montrose, econo-
mist as lie was, felt a little alarmed at the slashing re-
trenchments of the country gentlemen.—(A laugh.) In
1826 the price of corn was fifty per cent. higher, and at
once the establishments were augmented and the expen-
diture was carried to the point at which it stood in 1821.
Then came that terrible year 1835, when wheat went
down to 335. 4d. on the average, and, immediately the
army, navy, and ordnance estimates were cut down to
11,500,000/. Now you are going to vote 19,000,0001.
for those estimates.—(hear, hear.) I tell the Protec-
tionists that they are going to have moderate prices
for corn. During the lust twelve months we have
had an exceptional state of things altogether. Every-
body knows that the future normal state of the corn
market will be one of moderate prices.—(Hear, hear.)
Bear in mind that when wheat comes to a moderate
price it cannot be got up again by any contrivance.
There can now be no rebound—no reaction by means of
the sliding scale. The corn-laws are repealed. The
merchants, manufacturers, and traders arc satisfied with
the result. Suffering as they were, the manufacturers
had not exhibited the slightest symptom of wavering on
that point. Do you suppose that the manufacturers of
the north and the workmen of the metropolis, when
corn comes down to 405., will listen to the syren notes
of the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, and consent
to have the corn-laws re•imposed?,—(" Hear," and
laughter.) I can tell the Protectionists that there is not
a chance of restoring the corn-laws. It is all moon-
shine to tell the electors of counties about protection.—
(" Question, question.") I think I am rather too close
to the question.—(" Hear," and laughter.) I say that
the only chance for you and your constituencies is to
help the free-traders in their endeavours to reduce the
expenditure of the country. It will not be possible much
longer to amuse the county constituencies with the cry of
protection. They begin to perceive that it is a phantom
and for their interest and your own you will be com-
pelled to advocate measures of peaceful economy.
I hope, too, that you will induce the Foreign Secretary
to hold out the olive branch to the French nation, ia-
stead of seeking for the means of irritating it and keeping
it in a constant fever of excitement. If free trade can
effect that, it will have done something to carry out
the principle about which the lion. Member for Buck-
inghamshire had eo much declaimed. I never said that
free trade would bring the millennium. I am not one
of the enthusiasts whom the Hon. Member compared to
St. Pierre. I certainly have said that the interchange
of commodities would knit nations together in the bonds
of peace; but in that I was only echoing what I conceived
to be the best sentiments in the speeches of the Right
Hon. Members for Tamworth and the Noble Lord the
Member for the city of London. I never heard those
eminent persons speak on the subject of free trade with-
out their descanting on its tendency to unite nations by
the ties of mutual interest. Though I am no enthusiast,
and do not look for the millennium as a consequence of free
trade, I do believe that that system will be the means of
closely uniting France and England. We have repealed
the corn-laws more by accident than anything else ;
for the spirit of free trade does not pervade this assem-
bly, nor the Goveintnent.—(Hear, hear.) If it did,
Ministere would not have introduced into this House the
question of war taxation in a spirit which might have
been tolerated 50 years ago, but which was totally re-
pugnant to the temper of the present age. Since, how-
ever, the corn-laws ere repealed, whether by accident or
otherwise, you will be obliged to economize by the re-
duction of the army and other warlike establishments.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I
think it would have been better to have postponed any
discussion on the topics introduced in the speech of my
Noble Friend until Monday week, for we have been led
into a debate upon this occasion which has been truly
described as being of a very desultory character. It
appears to me that the speech of the Hon. Member who
has just addressed the House, as well as that of the
Fon Member for Montrose, must have been prepared
under the idea that the Government intended to
propose this evening an enormous increase in the amount
of our establishments.—(Hear, hear.) The phrases
" war taxes" and " war budget" raust have beento
con-
cocted in the belief that my Noble Friend was about
000
propose an addition of 10,000 men to thearmy,oo,
ordnance.—
to the navy, and God knows what to thee e f
fact?
The
(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) Yet what is th
addition to the estimates is somewhere about 3,000 men,_
and the increase of cost 300,0001. It surprises me that
the Honourable Member for Yorkshire should have re-
presented the speech of my Noble Friend asT calculated
to excite an angry feeling in France. My I\ oble Friend
distinctly stated that, as far as depended upon us, we
were determined to maintain peace with France, and
he expressed his desire that we should continue
not only on friendly but very intimate terms with that
country.—(Hear, hear.) The Honourable Member
, condemned my Noble Friend for haying, as he said,

referred to the military force of France ; but the
fact is, that my Noble Friend expressly declared
that he would not allude to the French army. My
Noble Friend confined his observations to the French
navy, and in that inference he is justified by the general
course of precedent, for the estimates have seldom been
brought forward in this House without some direct
reference being made to the marine of France. I re-
member that when I represented the navy department in.
this House, the Government was annually censured for
not making that branch of the service more efficient,
and the naval force of France was constantly referred to
in justification of those remonstrances. The Hon.
Member must have wonderfully misunderstood what fell
from my Noble Friend when he could represent him to
have said that our naval estimates were twice as great
as those of France. My Noble Friend said no such
thing. On the contrary, he referred to the number of
seamen voted for the French navy as being as great
as those required for our navel service, and he
argued, from that circumstance, that our naval
establishment—taking into consideration the great
extent of our trade and colonial possessions beyond
those of France—could not be deemed extravagant. The
number of seamen voted for the French navy was,
20,000 ; about the number required in our estimates of
the present year. As regards men, therefore, the ser-
vices of the two countries are on a par. An Hon.
Member opposite read us a lecture upon the disregard
of economy during the last few years; but I believe that
my predecessors in office will concur with me in stating
that the increase of expenditure was not forced on the
House by the Government, but on the Government by
the House.—(hear, hear.) Whatever increase of ex-
penditure has occurred has taken place with the almost
unanimous assent of the representatives of the people of
this country.—(Hear, hear.) No doubt the events of the
last year, and the prospect of increased taxation, may
work a change in the tone of feeling in this House ?
but I }tope that Hon. Members will not rush from one
extreme to the other, and in their anxiety for
economy be induced to /forget what is due
to the honour and interests of the country.
I am disposed to deal as fairly and frankly with the
House as Hon. Gentlemen can wish ; and I will held
out no expectation which I think there is no prospect of
realising. With regard to the deficiency of 2,500,0004
to which the Hon. Member for Portsmouth has alluded,
and for which it will be necessary to provide, it includes
the expense of the Kafir war, which was caused by
events that took place within the colony itself ; the coat
of that war for the past two years was, in fact, money
already gone from the military chest ; to the extent of
2,500,0001., there was a deficiency over which the Go-
vernment had no control whatever. I have a strong
objection to providing for a peace expenditure by a.
loan. It is true that, to meet tho expenses caused by the
famine, and under the peculiar circumstances of last
year, the emergency was met by a loan ; but,
except under such extraordinary circumstaneea, I
should not be disposed to resort to one. With regard to
the income-tax, as it at present stands, it is quite true
I have indirectly expressed an (opinion that there
was no prospect of its being taken off; I did consider the
three per cent. as a permanent part of the taxation of the
country.—(llear, hear.) I know it was not imposed as a,
permanent tax; but when it was voted in 184 a, Ido not
believe any man really thought there was any prospect
of its being taken off.—(" Oh," and laughter.) I for one
voted for it, with e perfect conviction it would never be
taken off—(Hear, hear)—and I do not think any ono
was sanguine enough to hope it. I think it right to de-
clare that I do not see any chance of that part of our
taxation, amounting to 5,000,000 L, being taken off. This
applies to the three per cent.; with respect to the addi-
tion of two per cent. now proposed, for a period of two
years only, I will make no promise, as Ido not wish to
he taunted with it hereafter. The power is left to the
House of Commons of deciding on the question of its
continuance; but when my Hon. Friend (Mr. F. Baring)
says there is no chance or probability of this addition
being taken off, I think he rather underrates the pos-
sible amount of our future revenue, and miscalculates
our probable expenditure. Taking the revenue
at the end of last April it was 53,789,0001.; the ordinary
expenditure to be voted for this year, omitting only the
provision for past expenditure, would be 53,101,0001.
Deducting the ordinary expenditure of this year from
the ordinary revenue of the last, there will be a surplus
of 688,0001. ; if we deduct from this last amount the
expense of the militia aid the loss by the remission of
the duty on copper ore, there will be still a surplus of
497,0001. What I have said shows that the discontinu-
ance of the added duty is not beyond the region of pro-
bability ; but, as I said before, I will make no promise
on the subject. With regard to the prospects of an im-
provement in the revenue, it ought to be borne in mind
that the effect of such a calamity as a famine on the
resources of the country does not end with the cessa-
tion of the calamity itself. In the first half of 1846
there was an increasing revenue ; that improvement con-
tinued up to the end of July ; it was not till after that
month the revenue began to fall off. Even meaning
the state of things to be returning to the prosperity of
that year, still we cannot expect that the revenue
will improve till some time shall have elapsed after
the calamity; even if trade does improve, it will not
produce a favourable effect on the revenue at so early a
period as could be wished. The Hon. Member for
Poole (Mr. Robinson) has expatiated largely on the
extraordinary falling off in our exportts during the past
year. I think the Hon. Gentleman cannot have seen a
paper that has been laid on the table of the House this
morning. It gives a comparative statement of the ex-
ports of the past year compared with the year preceding,
and, with the single exception of cotton goods, for
which the high price of cotton is sufficient to account,
there is not an item of our export trade on which there
has not been an increase. On our linen and woollen
goods, in hardware, on our silk manufactures, there has
been an increase during last year compared with the
year before. lam quite at a loss to understand how
the Honourable Gentleman could have spoken of an
extraordinary falling off in our manufactures. I are
not aware of any other observation to which it is
necessary that I should refer. With regard to all these
questions of income and expenditure, they will be much
more properly discussed when the estimates come before
the House. The army and navy estimates will be sub-
mitted to the House in the course of next week, and a
fitter occasion will then be afforded for the discussion of
those matters. I can only remind the House now that
over the greater part of the expenditure wo have no con-
troul whatever, and I think that the House will agree
with me that we ought nut to get over the difficulty in
which we find ourselves placed by borrowing. we
have no other alternative, therefore, than to propose ad-
ditional taxation. With regard to the mode in which we
propose to raise the taxation, I think it will be better to
defer the debate upon it till Monday weeltAwhen I think we
shall be able to show that the plan which we have pro-
posed will occasion less disturbance and inconvenience
to commerce and to agriculture than any other mode of
taxation that can be suggested.
Sir R. INGLIS had tried on several occasions to catch
the Chairman's eye, as he wished to introduce something
like novelty into the debate. There was not, with the
exception of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, any
Member who had addressed the Committee who had
given even a qualified assent to the proposition of the
Noble Lord—(Hear, and laughter)—and upon that
ground he wished, as an independent Member, to state
in a very few words the view which ho took of the sub-
ject under consideration. Passing by the able and effec-
tive speech of the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire,
he would advert to the speech delivered by the Right
Hon. Member for Portsmouth, who was willing to con-
tinue an income-tax of three per cent., though a war
tax, but whose prejudices rose strong against it, and
compelled him to vote against his friends and succces-
sors, when, under pressing necessities, they were obliged
to raise it two per cent. But surely, if it was objec-
tionable in point of principle to impose an income-tax
in a time of profound peace, an income-tax of five per
cent. was not more objectionable, as far as principle was
concerned, than an income tax of three per cent. Ho
did not understand, therefore, the distinction made by
the Right Honourable Gentleman the former Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer. Now came the great ques-
tiea of all—Did we want the money? No man had a
morbid love for paying taxes, or anything else, though,
perhaps, an honest man might like to pay his butcher's
bill—(Laughter)—and not even the ingenuity of the
Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, or of the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, or of any former Chancellor of the
Exchequer, could produce money without corresponding
taxation. That must be either in the shape of an in-
creased property-tax, or of a tax that had never ap-
peared before. Did any of the Liberals propose to
revise old taxes—such as the house tax? It should be
borne in mind, that we had been spared for a longer
period in the history of Europe than had ever before
occurred, from any approach to war between any of the
great European powers. What right had we to expect
1
that another interval of half that duration would pass
without war? We believed that, through the mercy of
God, this country had been saved for centuries from a
personal knowledge of the horrors of war. How long it
might please Providence so to direct the elements as to
baffle the attempts of our enemies at invasion ho of coursh
ly,sg,Oiarairn,g which would
could not foresee. Three centuries ago a storm scattered
the invading fleet of the most powerful Sovereign in
Europe, and it was on that occasion thatv eouusrailiQialeveita,
struck the medal bearing this inscription, "
itstworams
clearalso
a dissipontur." On a subsequent occasNioonwa
prevented an invasion of this country.
mensely larger
through that
'irta,ln.caes
than that
the
our army of
obfut}
of aggression.
kind of discipline taught
render it more formidable for the purpose
discipline for the French
wanby continually
actual notonly
n
MinisterimokrenneTt
gtthhcea
ht
rdaenax
danger
cgni
e4or tt:f feel
very
army;
Algiers was a school of
and could oar English
his duty e dhet o
ll
• le on the subject, in which it was shown how
able erne
small the increased amount of taxation would be
remembered reading in t
compared with the increased premiums for insurance
upon property. Believing that there was an utter
fallacy in all thoso principles which assume
that commerce would unite that which Christianity
had failed to keep together—believing that as long as
human passions continued, as long as rapacity on
the one hand might be provoked by possession on the
other, so long it was the part of civil wisdom to be
prepared to resist a possible, though, perhaps, scarcely
a probable enemy—ho believed that in public, as in
private life, the best security that a nation, as an in-
dividual, could possess against attack was to be pre•
pared for it, even from a professed friend. Under
such circumstances, ho desired to express his ge-
neral concurrence in the proposition of her Majesty's
Government, though he should take another opportu-
nity of calling their attention to a subject which he
had already endeavoured to impress upon their prede-
cessors—to the principle upon which a property-tax
ought to he levied, or rather to the point at which it ought
to commence. He believed that a largo portion of the
population were utterly unable to pay the increased
tax; and he considered it to bo the duty of the GOA
Yerlllilellt SO to apportion the impost 1p to make tti