The Sun.
London, England, 1851-07-01 00:00:00

CUSTOMS BILL.

Oa the motion for going into Committee on this Bill,
Mr. THO \US DUNCOMBE presented a petition
from a gentleman trading in chicory in favour of the
reduction of the duty on chicory.
Mr. T. BARING then rose to move," That it be an in-
struction to the Committee to make provision for preventing
the mixture of chicory with coffse by the vendors cf coffee."
He said the late reduction of the duty on coffee had
naturally acted as a stimulus to the consumption of
coffee; but when the public could buy for 4d. per lb. an
article which passed for coffee, but in reality was not,
they could not expect this consumption to continue. He
was ready to admit that chicory was the dearest article
with which coffee was adulterated, for beans, lupins, and
mahogany shavings were much cheaper, but even aduiter.
ated with this an article could be concocted for 7d. which
was called coffee, for which, to obtain pure, the
public would have had to pay 10d. If persons
chose to prefer this mixture, well and good, but
this was far different from proclamations by a Govern-
ment that chicory might pass for the real article of coffee.
He thought it would be a most improvident sacri-
fice to repeal the duty on coffee altogether, but at
the same time that they had reduced the duty, by not
forbiding it to be mixed, but even enjoining that it ought
to be mixed with coffee, they had destroyed the full benefit
of that boon. This, however, was not a question of
mere fiscal duties, but one of fairness and justice, and
involving the prevention of fraud. Let them allow
chicory to be sold to those who chose to 'buy it, but still
ho thought they ought not to allow it to be sold for what
it was not. It was no answer to say that adulteration
had existed before this Treasury minute and would
exist after it; but it was one thing to stamp an
act as a fraud and brand it with disgrace, and
another to do all ie their power to encourage it. They
had not attempted to ecourage the mixture of sloe leaves
with tea, and all that be asked was that they should be
consistent with themselves, and not endeavour to pass
one law for one trade and a different one for another.
The country and the Government had but one common
interest in this matter, and that was to prevent fraud
and protect the honest trader, as well in the dealer as
the producer, the agriculturist or the manufacturer.—
(Hear, hear.) That was the rule which ought al-
ways to guide the Exchequer in its Customs and
Excise departments. The public had means otherwise
of protecting itself against frauds. In the present instance
the rich man might svcure himself against adulteration
by making large purchases for his own use, but the poor
man, who had an espial right to protection, was not able
to lay in any amount/of stores. He had to buy what ho
wanted in a state which should be ready for use, end no
extent of precaution on the part ot the Excise could prevent
the adulteration necessary to defraud him. In spite of the
declarations of the Right 'Hon. Gentleman the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, he could assure the House,
upon the best possible authority, that this Treasury
minute had greatly reduced the consumption of coffee.
—(Hear, hear.) In 1830 the importations were
22,691,000 pounds; in 1840 they were 28,722,000; and in
1850 they were 31,226,0001 b. In 1840 the duty on
West India Coffee was 6d. per pound, on East India 9d.,
and on foreign ls. 3d.; but in 1850 the duty on East
India was 4d., and on foreign 6d., showing an increase
of 6,000,0001 b. when the duty was highest and of only
2,000,0001 b. when there was a reduction of 50 per cent.
in the duty of 60 per coat. in bonding
charges. Now how came the large discrepancy? Surely
it did not arise from any want of trade or a lack of means
to consume, because our large towns and manufacturing
districts had in the latter period enjoyed more than an
average share of prosperity. Tho consumption of
tea had increased, it was true, but not in any
way disproportionate with the increase in the
population, and the state of things presented the extra-
ordinary anomaly to them, namely, that while tea with
its high duty had maintained a gradual increase, the con-
sumption of coffee, with a large reduction, had seri-
ously fallen. He could attribute the tall to
no other circumstance but the minute permitting
the adulteration with chicory. (Hear, hear.)
These were the grounds on which he proposed the in-
struction to the Committee; and this instruction would
not have the effect of making them go back to
the law which previously prevailed, and prevent
grocers from selling chicory, bat would allow them
to keep it in stock, and only prohibit the
sale of chicory under the name of the dearer
article. He wished to propose no interference with the
trade, and only asked the Government not to become
godfather to the illegal christening of chicory and coffee.
The great body of grocers in the metropolis were a
very respectable class of people, and he con-
sidered that if the sale of chicory in the
way he had mentioned was once declared to be illegal,
the practice would at once discontinue among them.
Many of them had resisted the temptation for a long
time, because they could not reconcile their minds
and consciences to the fraud, and it was only
when starvation stared them in the face, that
they found themselves compelled to mix chicory with
coffee. The Hon. Member concluded by proposing the
motion, which is given above.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
Hon. Member had acted under the delusion that coffee
was the only article adulterated, whereas almost every
other article of consumption was in many instances
mixed with deleterious ingredients. He (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) did not think it expedient that the
grocers throughout the country should be subjected to
Excise interterence to prevent their mixing chicory with
coffee. Any Government interference in regard to this
alleged fraud could only take place on two grounds—
either ; that the ankle was adulterated with dole
teriouti ingredients prejudicial to the health of
the public, or that the revenue suffered in
consequence of the practices adopted. Now he
was in possession of facts which showed that chicory
was not injurious to health, and that its mixture with
coffee was actually preferred by a great number of
persons. The revenue had suffered to a very inconsi
derable extent, if at all, by reducing the duty on coffee;
he thought he had adopted the best means of prevent-
ing the continuance of the adulteration by chicory.
He held in his hand a letter which he had received tl at
morning from a coffee-roaster in the metropolis, stating that
the mixture of chicory with coffee had led to the production
of a much better article than that which had formerly been
in use, and that previously to tho introduct'on of chicory
the coffee sent to the roasters was so bad that the men
engaged in roasting it could hardly remain on the premises
during the process, while the trade were at present enabled
to purchase good coffee, and, by mixing it with chicory, to
give the pnblic a much better and cheaper article than that
which they had formerly sold. He could assure his Honour-
able Friend that if he could give him (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) any information showing that a dele-
terious article had been mixed with coffee, he should take
care that the party guilty of the offence should be pro-
secuted. The Treasury minute dealt with chicory, and with
nothing but chicory; and with respect to the mixture of any
other article the law remained as it had been. He should
confess, however, that unless it should appear that there had
been some deleterious article mixed with the doffee he did
not think it was the business of the Treasury to interfere.
No doubt the Treasury found it desirable to prevent the
adulteration of such an article as tobaceo, on which a very
high duty was imposed. But it should be remembered that
the powers confided to the Excise officers in these matters
were confided to them mainly, not for the purpose of pro-
tecting the consumer, but for the purpose of protecting the
revenue. It was lett to the discretion of the revenue officers
to decide whether in any particular case the protection of the
revenue was so indispensable that it was advisable, in order
to attain that object, to subject parties to that annoyance
which always accompanied Excise interference. His belief
was, that in the present instance it was not worth while that
the Excise officers should interfere in the manner proposed.
His Hon. Friend had alluded to the falling off in the con-
sumption of coffee during the last three or four years. But
it should be observed that there had been a large increase
in the consumption of coffee during the last ten years; and
he believed that by reducing the duty on the article he was
raking the best means of insuring its increased consumption.
There were in Great Britain 131,000 grocers, who had taken
out licences for the sale of coffee, and it would be no light
matter to subject all these persons to that Excise supervision
from which they had been exempted during the last ten
years. He had received communications from several agri-
cultural districts, in which he had been requested not to in-
terfere with the growth of chicory,which had been carried on
successfully for some time. One gentleman had stated to him
that there were probably 20,000 engaged in the cleaning or
the cultivation of chicory, and that he himself employed
nearly 300 persons in that way. He further said that the
supply of labourers in that business did not equal the de-
mand, so that those who did offer themselves were all in full
employment. His Hon. Friend proposed that he (the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer) should put an end to that employ-
ment. He had been informed that in the great consuming
towns in the manufacturing districts the mixed article was
preferred to the inferior descriptions of coffee, and not a
single complaint had as yet proceeded from the consumers
against the mixture in question. All the complaints that had
been heard upon the subject had been raised by the roasters
and the sellers of coffee. His Hon. Friend proposed that
they should introduce into a Customs Bill a clause which was
to be carried out by the Excise; but it would be a new and
unexampled proceeding to introduce an excise restriction into
a Customs Act. He had formerly heard frequent complaints,
to the effect that he had imposed undue restraints on the
right of the agricultural interest to cultivate any article they
might please. And yet the Hon. Gentleman proposed it to be
known that if the consumer were prevented in that case from
having a cheap and wholesome beverage, that arrangement
would be forced on an unwilling and reluctant Government,
to the injury, as he believed, of the dealers, of the growers,
and of the public.

Mr. CRAWFORD said he entirely approved of the mo-
tion of the Hon. Member for Huntingdon. Neither the
growers nor the importers of coffee had any objection to chi-
cory as chicory; but they objected to the use which unscru-
pulous dealers made of the suspension of the provisions of
the Act by the authority of the Treasury. It was well known
that coffee was adulterated with the most unwholesome and
offensive substances.

Sir J. TYRELL said he felt compelled to oppose the
motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Huntingdon. A
good deal of land was at present used for the growth of
chicory, and a considerable number of labourers were em-
ployed in its cultivation. Now, he could see no reason why
those labourers should be deprived of that employment.
They had beam nothing of the unwholesomeness of chicory
until after large sums had been invested in its growth ; for
he believed that the cultivation of an acre of chicory cost 141.,
while it was an article very well suited to the climate of this
country.

Mr. ANSTEY said no one wished to interfere with the
growth of chicory, but what was desired was, to prevent
substitutes from being sold for coffee, and fetching a price in
the market which they would not otherwise reach; and he
contended that those who laboured to that end were truer
friends to the poor than the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
The only persons who benefitted by the present atrocious
system were those grocers who had memoralised the Right
Hon. Gentleman. He differed from the Hon. Member for
Huntingdon in one respect, for in his (Mr. Anstey's) opi-
nion, the object which he had in view might be attained by
abolishing the duty on coffee altogether. But if they were
not prepared to do this, there was no alternative but the
Excise system. The Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer said it was quite unprecedented to introduce an
Excise clause into a Customs Bill
; but he begged to remind
him that the Right Hon. Member for the University of
Cambridge, when Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1843, pur-
sued that course, for the purpose of preventing the adulte-
ration of tobacco. Similar precautions had also been taken
to prevent the adulteration of tea and pepper by means of
the Excise, and why shoUld not the same course be followed
with respect t 9 coffee

Sir F. BARING, as the author of the Treasury minute
which had been so much attacked, was anxious not to shrink
from taking his share of the responsibility attaching to it.
It bad been said that these frauds could not be prevnted ;
but ten years' experience in the case of tobacco had con-
vinced :iim of the contrary. In 1832 statements were made
t hat the adulteration of coffee had gone to a great extent, and
that chicory had been very much introduced. The freasury
minute was issued on the representation of the most re pest-
able part of the trade that the law was a punishment to the
honest dealer and a protection to the dishonest. Their state-
ment was this—" We obey your regulations, and do not mix
chicory with our coffee, but our neighbours do; and the re-
sult is that we are losing the trade which they gain." The
question was, whether the law would be effectual if carried
out, and he was assured that such would not be the case.
The respectable part of the trade whom he saw assured him
that the law was inefficient, and that if the whole of its
powers were carried into effect they would be unable to
accomplish the object in view. But he was told this was a
question of public morality, and that great dishonesty was
practised by those who so.d the mixture called coffee; but if
parties were perfectly aware of what they were buying, he
could not understand where the dishonesty was. But as
they talked so much of public morality he must beg to cau-
tion them with regard to one point. They could not carry
their object into effect by the mere repeal of the Treasury
minute ; they must introduce a new survey and system of
excise; and was that likely to render the people more moral?
He had had unfortunate experience of the effect of the Ex-
cise laws, and the evasions and frauds attending them, and
he was perfectly satistied that the success of this motion
would introduce a most unconstitutional practice, and he
therefore hoped the House would reject it.—(Hear.)
Mr. HERRIES assumed that as the Right Hon. Gentle-
man was the author of the minute in question he had ex-
hausted all the arguments which could he urged in its de-
fence. And, after all, what had he said? All he had said
was what with him was a matter of necessity. But, he said,
that if they now insisted on enforcing by means of the ex-
cise a check on this fraudulent practice, they would increase
immorality greatly by extending the excise laws. Why,
there was not one of these trades to which allusion had been
made which were not already subject to the excise with re-
spect to many other articles, so that the operations of the
excise officers in point of fact would not be extended at all.
This was the first time he had heard the head of a depart-
ment sanction the commission of fraud.---( Hear, hear.) A
technical objection had been taken to the motion on the
ground that an excise clause was proposed to be introduced
into a Customs Bill. But that was not correct. If the House
should accede to the motion of his Hon. Friend, it would not
follow that excise officers must of necessity be the persons
employed, for it would be quite competent for the Treasury
to employ the officers of the Customs if they should so please.
The mixture Ve as said to have been accepted by the public,
but he confessed he bad never heard that the public were
willing to have it, or that this celebrated Chancellor of the
Exchequer's mixture had been advertised. Such being the
case, and the motion of the Hon. Member for Huntingdon
not being inconsistent with the practice of the House, and
being moreover calculated to prevent fraud, he would cer-
tainly give it his support.—( Hear, and cries of " Divide.")
Mr B. OSBORNE assured the House that he would re-
spect the hour, and that his observations should be few. In
giving this assurance, however, he must remind those Hon.
Members who did not seem disposed to take their coffee
before dinner that this was a very important question to the
commerce of this country. A greater delusion had never
been foisted on the public than that which had been first
hatched by the Hon. and Learned Member for Youghal, and
now was brought into second life by the Hon. Member for
Huntingdon. What was the whole gist of the question ?
The Hon. Member called on the Chancellor of the Exchequer
to violate a very important principle. He called on the
Government to interfere in all the petty details of commerce,
instead of leaving them to the legitimate spirit of enterprise
and competition.—(Hear, hear.) He had been informed by
one of the first houses in the metropolis, that, in consequence
of the erroneous impression which had been abroad that bul-
lock's blood and bone-dust and other ingredients were used
for the adulteration of coffee, a great demand had arisen for
what was called " Anstey's Pure." - (Laughter.) But what
had happened since? He was told by the same authority that
within the last fortnight the same people had come back to
the establishment and said, "Let us have nothi g to do with
that stuffier which we paid Is. Bd. a pound, but give us the
old mixture at ls. a pound."—(Hear, and laugh, er. ) The
law of 43d George, which had been misrepresented, only
provides egainst the introduction of vegetable substances,
and would afford no protection against the admixture of
bone-dust and horses' blood. He had had this mixture
examined, and it turned out that it was not horses' blood
which it contained, but horse beans.—(Laughter.) It had
been asserted that the importation of coffee decreased last
year, but the Hon. Gentleman who made that statement
torgot to tell them that the impo tation of other potables—
tea and cocoa—had increased. He hoped the Irish Members
would well weigh this matter, for it was very important to
Ireland. He knew from residing in that country that this
beverage was fast creeping into consumption there, and he
therefore called—not on the Hon. and Learned Member for
Youghal, who, probably, did not care much for Ireland, in-
asmuch as he was never likely again to represent an Irish
constituency, but on the other Irish Members, to resist the
motion of the Hon. Member fur Huntingdon. He knew that
Hon. Member's motives to be perfectly pure, but there were
parties behind, large owners and consignees of tea and
coffee, to whom a reversal of their policy might make a dif-
ference of 25 per cent. on their money stock. Let the House
not be made the tool of a commercial operati an.
Mr. G. BERKELEY said, that the question before the
House was, simply this—whether the Government were to
sanction a fraud in this country or not?—(Hear, hear.) He
held in his hand a document of the greatest importance—
namely, a report from the Commissioners in British Guiana
as to the state of that colony and its exportations. He would
be glad to hear the Hon. Under-Secretary for the Colonies
explain why this report had not been laid upon the table up
to the present moment? It appeared by this report that the
export of sugar and c, flee had gradually decreased during
the last 20 years—but the decrease in the exportation of coffee
within the three or four latter years was most serious. The
policy of free trade bad inflicted great injury upon the landed
proprietors of this country, and these were not times when
their interests and those of the colonies should be divided.
The same policy that had brought ruin upon the colonies was
bringing ruin upon this country.—,Hear, hear.) Unless they
stood tog ther shoulder to shoulder to check this invasion
upon their just rights, they would find that it would un-
doubtedly end in the ruin of the whole community. He
trusted that the proposition of the Hon. Member for Hunt-
ingdon would be carried.

—Mr. WAKLEY said that this subject, if properly dis-
cussed, out to occupy but a very short space of time. The
question, in reality, was this—Would the Government of
England sanction a practice of this sort? (Hear, hear.)
It was not a question as to whether chicory was unhealthy or
not; but whether the Government, whose duty it was to
institute prosecutions for offences of adulteration, was to
sanction an adulteration in the article of coffee for purposes
not as yet explained. (Hear, hear.) He believed that the
Government, iu taking this course, was acting most unjustly,
immorally, and injuriously, both as respected their own
character, and the character of the British Legislature. He
regretted that he was not present during the entire of the
debate, but he understood that he had been al:uded. to by
the Hon. Member for Essex ( it J. Tyrell), whom he saw
in his place. It appeared that the Hon. Baronet had re-
ceived a letter from some person, whom he had not named.
He (Mr. Wakley) held the document in his hand. He did
not know whether he ought to read it—(" No, no," from Sir
J. TYILELL.) It was curious writing. The author appeared
to have had a twist in his hand as well as in his head,— (A
laugh.) The writer said he bad no doubt but that the
agitation on this subject had been set on foot by the
coffee merchants aad grocers, and that it was impossible
but that the Lancet and other publications were in their
pay. Now (observed Mr. Wakley) they said that the
practice of the Government in sanctioning this adulteration
was calculated to have an injurious effect upon the morals
of the people. He was sorry to find that that injurious
effect had even extended to the Hon. Baronet the Member
for Essex. That Hon. Baronet was at one time esteemed
and respected as a noble-hearted, very droll, straightforward,
and honourable man. He did not, however, hesitate on that
evening to read an extract from a letter in that House con-
veying an odious and scandalous imputation of this kind,
without reading also the name of the slanderer. If the Hon.
Baronet were acquainted with a single fact or circumstance
to justify him in conveying such an insinuation, in former
times, before he was reduced to his present wreck of morality,
he would have boldly stood upon the floor of the House,
and have named the party who had made the accusation.—
(Laughter) But now it appears, notwithstanding the for-
mer high attributes of his character, he is sunk to this de-
grading level, although he is still the country gentleman
par excellence.—(Loud cries of "Oh, oh.") Why, if he
were guilty of what was imputed to him in that letter, he
was unfit to sit in that House or to mix in respectable
society.—(Hear, hear.) Throughout those proceedings, he
assured the House that he was solely influenced bs, public
gr.unds and considerations entirely, and that he had never
been influenced in his conduct by individual feelings. He
would further assure the Hon. Baronet, that outside of that
House he was not personally acquainted with any grocer or
coffee merchant, nor had he any private communications
with such persons. What he had done was solely from
public considerations and on behalf of the public health,
which he believed was damaged by this adulteration.—
( Hear.) If he had said anything that was painful to the
Hon. Baronet's feelings he begged at once to recal the words.
It was not his intention to make any insinuations in reference
to him—(Laughter)—as he entertained the highest respect
for his personal character.
Sir J. TYRELL could assure the Hon. Member for Fins-
bury that in reading the extract referred to, from a com-
munication he had received that morning, he did not
mean to convey any insinuation whatever against the
Honourable Gentleman. He entirely acquitte I him of any
such motives. But when motives of a corrupt nature were
so bandied about he thought he might as well read the do-
cument in question.—(Laughter.)
Mr. HUME referred to a Treasury minute in reference to
this subject. A prosecution having been commenced in
Liverpool for a fraud upen the revenue by the adulteration of
coffee with chicory, the Chancellor of the Exchequer was Ma-
-1 plied to for instructions upon the subject. The Right Hon.
proceeding
Gentleman replied by saving that such a was iin-
proper, as it could not 6a considered that the revenue was
defrauded, the duty being paid upon chicory-
He would
support the Government.
Mr. CAT/LEY said that a great many of his constituents
were growers of chicory, as
tion that was calculated to discourageTts
osed to any proposi-
they found that nothing else
would pay them. He was therefore opp
growth.
The House then divided, When there
appeared
For Mr. Baring's motion 122
••• Against it 199
Majority against the motion --77
CUSTOMS BILL,TIMBE..R DUTIES.
Bill.
The House then went into Committee upon the Customs

Upon the clause respecting
timber being proposed,
Mr. lIERRIES thought it right to call the attention of
the Chancellor of the
E echequer to tlni alterations proposed
to be made in the timber duties. From all parts of by
country, and from Liverpool more esp, ecially, they had re-
ceived strong remonstrances against th a alteration of the
timber duties. From the city of Liverpool, especially, he
had had the honour of presenting a ire tition to the House
upon the subject. In this petition the re were several strong
reasons urged for not making the chat ige in these duties in
the manner it was proposed. The Canadian, the colonial,
and the shipping interest had already suffered much injury
by the alterations made in those duti es, and were likely to
suffer much more serious injury by the proposition of the
Right Hon. Gentleman. It would b e renaenibered that in
-,46 an adjustment was made of the timber duties in rrder
to carry out what were called the principles of free trade.
It was well known that the restrictive duties then put on
had reference to the difference of freight between the
Baltic and North American timber.. The difference of
duty he thought was about 30s. The difference of
freight was at the time 28s. in the one case and
14s. in the other. They now prt ;posed to take off
from both parties interested the same sum of 10s., which
would in effect favour considerably th e Baltic trade. He
was not prepared to go specifically if Ito the question, but
wished me:Ely to thr,-)v, out the sot ;gest Lon tor the con-
sideration of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. These alte-
rations had also the effect of giving to tl to Baltic shipowner
a decided advantage over Canada. Th4i W 43 altogether in

opposition to the principle upon which the alterations in
the duties were made, which were to give the advantage to
the British shipowner over the foreign shipowner. He hoped
that the Right lion. Gentleman would give him some better
explanation upon this point than anything he had as yet
heard him give. He did not intend to ask the Committee W
divide upon the proposition, nor was ho then fully prepared
to go into the whole question. He hoped that in a short
time he would be able to call their attention to the present
state of their shipping interest, when this question would
be put prominently forward for discussion. He would then
have a better opportunity of showing how extremely im-
politic it was for the Government to adopt the course whicln
they proposed. In the meantime he wished to receive
some explanation on the point from the Chancellor of the
Exchequer.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not mean
to enter into any question of the navigation•laws. He be-
lieved that so far from any interest having suffered by the
alteration in these duties, this alteration had proved most be-
neficial to the shipping interest as well as to the people ge-
nerally. He was glad the Right Hon. Gentleman would
offer no opposition on this occasion, as no opposition had been
:made on a former occasion when there had been a reduction
of the timber duties. It would be a hardship if persons were
now to be called upon to pay the duty twice, as it had been
suggested. He begged to say that be never considered the
law of 1846 as a final settlement of this question; but that
whenever an opportunity presented itself they onglat to re-
duce the duties on an article of such great impot tance as
timber for building and various other purposes. He \ yes able
to say that the importation of colonial woods had inc ceased,
whilst that of foreign timber had fallen off. He refer •red to
the circular of one of the largest timber dealers to show that
the consumers had received the whole of the benefit c f the
reduction of the duty. Another, a large builder, told him
that the reduction of the duty made to him the differeu ce in
the price of the roofing of a house.
Mr. MITCHELL was understood to say that to the con-
sumer the reduction in the prices of Baltic timber was if )s. a
load, whilst the reduction of the duty was only is. 6d. He
could say that C median timber had increased in value a Luce
the reduction of the duty. He did not approve of the atten tipte
that were made to interfere with these arrangements, and he
told the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Herries) that he did a of
represent the ,hipping interest in this country on the presca zt
question; that the only persons opposed to the change wce 'e
great shipping owners in Glasgow, who had built a grcs
fleet of ships in Canada.
Mr. HERRIES replied that the Hon. Gentleman was ea •
firely mistaken in thinking he was connected with indivi
duals in Glasgow. There was neither truth nor justice i 1
such an imputation. Representations had come to hi oat sfi
this subject from Ireland, great ports in England, and Glea
gow amongst the rest. As to the Right Hon. Gentleman the '
Chancellor of the Exchequer, he had not answered at all thi
matter of objection that he had touched upon.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER explained.
Mr. WAWN objected that under the present system a ship
could be built at Bremen duty free, and on arriving at 11
port had all the advantages of a British register.
Mr. HUME, as a supporter of the repeal of the naviga-
t ion-laws, complained of the heavy burdens imposed upon .
the coasting trade by the lighthouse dues. Those dues •
ought to be put upon a different footing, as it had been re-
commended by two Committees of that House. The Board
of Trade could not be got to move, and the consequence was
their coasting trade was destroyed—there was not only
the loss of money, but there was the loss of a supply of
seamen.
The Marquis of GRANBY maintained that the cob miff'
interest looked upon the agreement of i 846 as beieg fl o al;
and he could not now allow the Bill to pass without pro-
testing against the injury inflicted by this system of leg, ada"
ticn upon their colonies.
Mr. CARDWELL observed that the principle laiddown
in 1849 was to remit duties upon all the great raw materi ale
of manufactures. They had done this with cotton, silk, di 2r.
wool; at,d now a ship was the only article which was
mitted duty free when manufactured, and yet had impos ed
a duty on the articles of which it was composed. He m
very glad that in this Bill they were making a step La d'
vance by lowering the duties on those articles. He sin r
gested that lancewood poles should be included with fu
Lure wood.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER promised. IA
consider the question upon the bringing up the report.
Mr. A. BAILLIE observed that the reduction of the timistl
duty was no advantage to the agriculture of this country •
There never was a time within the last 100 years in which
native timber was so unsaleable as the present moment. ••-•
(Hear.) He had occasion lately to refer to the sale of timber
for the last 100 years, and he found that, while almost eve /
other article had risen in value, the case was different as ta
timber.
The resolutions were then agreed to, the schedule amendeit
the preamble arranged, and the Bill was ordered to be re •
ported with amendments.
INHABITED HOUSE-DUTY BILL.—FINANCIAL RED

SOLUTION.
Upon the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHE"
QUER that the House resolve itself into Committee on this•
Bill,
Mr. DISRAELI said—The Hon. Gentleman the Membef
for Bridport (Mr. Mitchell) has very unexpectedly made
very unfair attack upon me. The Hon. Gentleman seems
to suppose that it is not legitimate in a Member of this House
to question the propriety of any vote at which this House
may have arrived; that if once its opinion is expressed ill
that manner—

Mr. MITCHELL-Without opposition.
Mr. DISRAELI-Yea, without opposition-for lam 11(4
aware that the explanation of the Hon. Member makes eel
change in the question he thus raises, or in the principle fef
which he contends.- (Hear.) Does the Hon. Gentlevee°
mean to say that a vote of this House is equivalent to an
Act of Parliament? Such it is not in the contemplstril
of the Legislature.- (Hear.) It has. always been sups:sale:a
that when a Ministry came forward and requested of r.?!.;
House to sanction an alteration in the tariff it did so under
,1
circumstances that had been so well matured and consider!:
that there was the prospect that its proposition would es
..
radopted with so much certainty that the country might g d
nerally assume that the vote which it had called for weiz_.,4
fterwards be ratified in the form of a Bill. No doubt
leve
generally be entertained that Baal an autzeipanou wIP-0.
afterwards be justified by the act. Still it never has beeee
supposed that a vote of this House on the tariff could be jr
garded as equal to a solemn decision by an Act of the Leg we
lature -(Hear.) What, then, has happened in this session.
What are the circumstances that have occurred? TO!
House has been called upon to assent to certain alterations
in the tariff under quite d.fferent circumstances trom.
the circumstances under which the Bill is now brouget
before the House, and which Bill is the consequence of the
vote on the tariff. The circumstances of the revenue are
almost entirely changed between the one period and the ot here.
Is there not the proof that the condition of the revenue of this
country to a certain degree is now in a precarious positing!
arid that the surplus which was announced by the Minister ab
the commencement of the session, and which as a surplus he,
distributed in the mode which seemed best to him -one or
hese being the remission of the timber duties referred to be,
the Hon. Gentleman-but that since that proposition eva°
made the surplus that had been calculated upon as certaie
has become essentially provisional.-(Hear.) Under these.
circumstances, then, I thought I etas not taking an unusual
course; but, on the contrary, that I was taking one which is
in accordance with the customs of this House - that is, not
only actually proper, but called for. Before this House is
•prorogued, and that we are sent back to our constituents,
this House, the country, and our constituents sh uld clearly
understand what is their financial position.-(Hear, hear.)'
It has always been considered that that was a topic on which
it was most important that we should possess the most clear
conceptions; it always was considered that that subject ea°
peculiarly the care of the House of Commons. If we re'
turn to our constituents now we may give them, as regards
the exercise of our functions, a very clear, and, upon the
whole, I hope, a very satisfactory account. When the House
met it announced to us that one important interest in this
country was suffering great distress. As to the, causes of
that distress Gentlemen in this House were divided; but no
doubt was entertained that the subject was one of great in-
terest and importance. And no one can deny that it has
been discussed amply this session, and that the House by con'
sidorable numbers on both sides, who by their speeches or their
votes manifested an interest in that subject, has shown the
constituencies of the country that it has taken care to arrive
at a distinct and definite conclusion on the subject.-(Heart
hear.) So, also, with that all interesting subject, the Papal,.
aggression. Whatever may be the contrary opinions of
Members of this House, there is no doubt that we have par'
sued a course which has conducted us to a result which the
country can understand.- (Hear, ) Government, for in'
stance, has brought in a Bill which they considered an
efficient Bill, but which, on this side of the House, was not
considered to be an efficient Bill; and the united efforts of
the two parties in the House, which the country must ace
knowledge, even if it does not realise that which it expected,
have ac least produced a piece of legislation which is clear
in its object and definite in the results it wishes to attain.---
(Hear.) But if you come to the question of finance, I del)?
any Member of Parliament to go back to his constituents
and tell them clearly what is the condition of our finances.-• -
(Hear.) Whether we have a surplus or whether we have
surplus;lniostioanal,and,
whether the sources of our revenue are per-
manent or whther they are fleeting; whether they are pro'
provisional, whether they are provided for
a time so brief that, before another year shall have elapsed,
the principal features of our financial system may be changed.
On this topic, then-the revenue of the country, which de'
fends upon the taxation of the subject-we are not in
position at the present moment to speak with that satisfac-
tory certainty which our constituents have a right to expect
and to demand from us. Sir, it was with this viol
of the case that I have thought it my duty to entice-
' deavour to induce the House of Commons to enter into
discussion upon the present state of the finances of the
counrrY-
a discussion limited to that interesting and int'
portant topic, admitting no extraneous matter; and indeed
the merits of the subject do not require any extraneous mat-
ter to be introduced to command the attention of the House.
It is a subject which I hope may be discussed in a calm, ea
impartial, and an unimpassioned spi,it, and I at least on mate
'part have no meaning with respect to the opinions which 1.
shall with all deference place before the House other than
that which I have attempted to express in the resolutions
which I have laid on the table of the House. I shall cer-
tainly set no example of admitting into this discussion an
f
other considerations than those which are essentiallyfinancials
and I am persuaded, if the debate be conducted in that spirits
that, whatever may be the conclusion we arrive at, the de'
bate will be one which will not discredit the House, but tend
to satisfy the public.-(Hear, hear.) It is scarcely necessarf
for me to call the memory of the House to the financial state'
ment of the Minister which was made early this session-
The House was congratulated on the advantage of having a
financial statement made when the House met early in Fe'
bruary, but that financial statement, so far as its details
are concerned, and I will even say its principle, is not cony
pleted at the end of June.--(Hear, hear.) On that occa-
sion the Chancellor of the Exchequer calculated that a sur-
plus of about two millions sterling was at his disposition
and he stated to the House several remissions Of
taxation, which, assisted by that surplus, irrespective of
maintaining a fund for the seduction of the public debt, he
contemplated to accomplish. That surplus, I need not re-
mind the House, was assumed upon the fact that the House
of Commons would renew the expiring tax upon income.
Upon the assumption that that renewal would take places
and for no inconsiderable time, not merely for a term of three
years, but until certain results were obtained, which the
most sanguine cannot suppose are of easy or immediate se'
cemplishment-upon the assumption of that law being re'
newed, the Chancellor of the Exchequer found himself in
tosseesion of this surplus. Now I would beg the attention or
the House-tor the consideration is important-to the cha-
racter of the tax the renewal of which was the basis of the
financial statement of the Minister. Considerable contro-
versy has often taken place as to the intentions of the emi-
nent Minister who first reintroduced the tax upon proper*"
and income into our modern financial system-considerable
controversy las subsisted as to the real intentions of Sir 13.
Peel-whether in effect it was his intention originally that
the tax upon income should be a temporary tax, or whether
that was only a Parliamentary pretence under which he
wished to introduce a permanent feature of our financial
system. Now I wish to state my belief, and to adduce the
reason for that belief, that the object of Sir R. Peel in the intro'
And
duction of the tau uponlagoon was a temporary otiect,

con
,1 3s. a
Be
a Lace
tipte
od be
d not
•eats
was 'e
gm

as es •
adivi •

ice 1 1
es 1
Ghia '
in the
ill the

a ship
at 11

viga-
upon
dues •
eu re
Board
Ce was
t 01:111
of

)it
fi cal;
tfro'
11.da-

d o val
ter ti al3
:, Sr
'as d"
opos ed
le VI as
La a, (1°
sui
fu W

ised to

Linal 5(1
antl •
whit h
ent.
time et
eve /
as to

endeC4
be re •

-_, RE-

CHE
n this•

ember
lade
seems
House
House
ssed iu

beeil
bo
LEO;
ssion
Tbis
rations'