The Sun.
London, England, 1860-02-22 00:00:00

stable by throwing away this treaty ? (Hear, hear.) He
was prepared to say that this treaty was the best guaran-
tee for peace, and for that reason he was prepared in the
main to support this budget.
Mr. DODSON said that the income tax would tend

to produce a spirit of economy on the part of the house
and the people. (Hear, hear.) It was said that this
treaty was politically wrong, but commercially right. He
was almost inclined to reverse that dictum. The Chancel-

_ .
for of the Exchequer had contended some years ago, in op-
position to Mr. Oliviera, that a reduction to the extent of
ls. per gallon on wine would produce very little effect on
the consumption. But they must consider the Chancellor
of the Exchequer in 1860 as replying to the Chancellor of
the Exchequer in 1856, and say whether or not he had the
best'of the argument. It was difficult to trace the precise
effect of the wine duties. The reductions effected in 1787
_ _

by Mr. Pitt had the effect, for some years, of largely in-
creasing the consumption. But there were additions made
to these duties in 1795, and in 1803, 1804, and 1805, none
of which, however, materially affected the consumption,
while, at the same time, they brought an increase of reve-
nue. It was not till they got to 1813, when the duties were
very high indeed, that they found both a diminished re-
venue and a diminished consumption. In 1825 Lord Ripon
reduced the duties on wine by nearly 50 per cent.,
and in 1831 the duties on all kinds of wine were equalised.
The effect of this was an increased consumption, which,
however, by no means kept pace with the increase of popu-
lation ; and in 1858, and over an average of six or seven
years preceding, the consumption of wine per head had not
been so great as it was in 1813 and 1814, at the time when

the wing duties had been raised to the height of which he
had spoken just now; Social habitshad a greater influence
than any change of duty on the extent of consumption. He
should accept the treaty in the hope that great and lasting
good would spring from it. (Hear,. hear.) It seemed to
him that the budget was not more remarkable for its bold-

ness than for its foresight. It was a plan which would lay
the foundation of a wealth which would hereafter amply
repay us for any sacrifice which we might temporarily
make for the purpose of carrying it into effect.
Mr. DAWSON said the people of Ireland would'not be
satisfied with the financial expectations of this year as
likely to foreshadow the future financial policy of the
. .

country. The income tax was originally imposed only for
three years; but had now become a permanent one ; and he

believed it would not only be kept on, but increased. As a
salve for this evil, which was now declared to be a necessary
one, they had giyen them a treaty with France, by which
we gave them coal and iron, essential for their commercial
and aggressive purposes, in order that we might have
cheaper wines for the wealthier classes. Ireland must feel
a considerable loss in the admission, free of duty, of eggs
and butter, for she now exported 50,000,000 eggs, and pro-
duced a far larger quantity of butter than she consumed.
Take next linen; a duty of 20 per cont. ad valorem or even
of 25 per cent., the maximum duty after October 1, 1864,
would be prohibitory. Even if the duty were reduced to
10 per cent. when the French manufacturer could import
machinery free, he would have the advantape over us. For
some years the restriction on the exportation of machinery
was abandoned. The French were the greatest linen con-
suming people in the world. The blouse was worn by all
the peasants and the artisan class. The trade had fallen
from £1,000,000 to £150,000, owing to the facilities given
to France to import free machinery, and now by giving
them coals and iron we should make them our competitors
in all the markets of the world. Unless the duty were re -
duced to 10 per cent., the linen trade would gain no benefit
whatever from the treaty. The people of this country
ought not to be so severely taxed as was proposed, under
this scheme, for the sake of any treaty which would not
given them equal advantages in return. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. CROSSLEY found considerable disparity in the
views of hon. members, and it was alleged there was no
use in taking the duties off wine and paper, for they would
get them no cheaper. With respect to the system of
libenses, he thought the right hon. gentleman must alter
it, because he could assure him the extension of beer-shops
in the country had produced great evil. He quite agreed
with him that in taking off a portion of the wine duties he
must extend the places for sale, but if he did so, the parties
ought to be placed under the supervision of the magis-
trates and the cognisance of the police. It would be a great
injustice to the licensed victuallers, who had a large pro-
perty embarked in trade, to allow parties to obtain licences
at the option of paying a certain sum of money. He hoped
the right hon. gentleman would take care that no such in-
justice was perpetrated, and as regarded the budget gene-
rally, it had his cordial concurrence.
Mr. P. HENNESSY, as an Irish member, thought the
budget of the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the
Exchequer one of the very worst ever presented to Parlia-
ment. He referred to a number of articles where all the
gain under the proposed system would be £580,000 to the
English, and less than £2,800 to Ireland. In 1840, the
populatioa of Ireland was something over 8,000,000, and
the population now was something over 7,000,000 ; but in
1840 the larger population consumed somewhere about
4,000,0001b5. weight of tea, while now the smaller popula-
lation. consumed 10,000,0001b5. of that article, so that the
larger population, as ho said, consumed less than the
smaller, and whilst last year the duty paid on tea amounted
altogether to £4,700,000, the duty in Ireland alone
amounted to £700,000. He should confine his remarks to
those few facts, and looking at them seriously, he believed
they justified him in giving his vote against the budget.
Mr. GRANT DUFF said, with regard to the wine
duties, it had been said that it was impossible that the
British palate could ever reconcile itself to the French
wines. In refutation of this he would only refer to the case
of Scotland. It was perfectly notorious that up to a very
recent period French wines were very largely consumed in
Scotland, and hon. members would remember the adage—
" Firm and erect the Caledonian steed,
Prime was his mutton and his claret good :
' Let him drink port,' the English statesman cried :
He drank the poison and his spirit died."
(Hear, hear.) And a countrymen of his own, Sir R. Gor-
don, in his travels, related that he found French wine
in Morayshire actually cheaper than he had found it in
Normandy. With regard to the paper duty, there seemed
to be a general consent in the policy of not keeping it up
an hour longer; and whilst a great deal was said about
the height to which the education vote was rising,
he must observe that there was no education like that
which a man gave himself by reading when once the
rudiments of education had been acquired. Cheap books were
a most important element of education ; and if this educa-
tion were not exclusively spread among the working classes,
an extension of the franchise would be a curse instead of a
blessing. (Hear, hear, from the Opposition benches.) The
proposed simplification of the tariff would, he thought, have
I an advantage both ways. It would not only have a general
effect, but, by cheapening a number of foreign articles, it
would cause new branches of invention and Industry to
spring up. (Cheers.) Besides which, the obnoxious searches
at the Custom-house, which all had experienced with so
much annoyance, would be done away with. It might be
said that these rerations would affect only the upper and
middle classes, but it was these classes after all which con-
tributed most to the revenue, and it must be always remem-
bered with satisfaction that we had no passports and no
quarantine.
Sir STAFFORD NORTHCOTE said he fully appre-
ciated the great merits which were contained in the scheme
which was at present under the consideration of the house.
When the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer sat down, an hon. gentleman rose in his place and
said he had never listened to a speech in which there was
more tinsel. (Laughter.) He (Sir S. Northcote) was fully
prepared to admit that there was a great deal of real ster-
ling gold in the proposals of the right hon. gentleman; but
then he could not help remembering an old proverb, which
told them that gold might be bought too dearly. (Hear.) They
must consider whether on the whole the benefits offered to
them were worth the price which they were called upon
to pay for them. There was one consideration which im-
mediately suggested itself, and would occur to the minds
of hon. members, namely, the great benefits which they
were told would be derived from the simplification of the
tariff. Much discussion had taken place on the policy of
such a course, and the right hon. gentleman the present
Chancellor of the Exchequer said in that discussion that it
was desirable to get rid of those infinitesimal duties, and
that when they came to balance the gains against the
losses, they would find the advantage in favour of this
country. He did not now wish to express any opinion on
one or the other side of that question, as it had yet to come
nnder their consideration in the course of the discussion
which would take place on the treaty. But he wished to say
a word in reference to that important part of the subject, the
treaty with France, for it had been arranged that the treaty
and the budget should be considered together. A great deal
had been said on both sides of the house, but more particu-
larly on the other side, that this treaty was contrary to the
principles of free ti agile. That observation had been made
made
J h
,testingly, perhaps, on that side of the house, buthis
con-
fessed that when this matter first presented itself to
mind, he was not disposed to think there was anything con-
trary to the principles of free trade iu it. He had always
reciprocitye
beenwere
uotbroughtvery up
muchintihne
favouropinion
ef thattne treatiesp rin
marutain d
by the free trade school ; but without caf)reyeiung
etple:f
intavineeli
rigorously the doctrines which might have
condemned on that ground. If
a measure by no means to be .
at different periods on that question, he took it_ that this was
d to the duties on wine was in this treaty
with regard hon. members would consider what the nature. of the provi-
sion
which made • it appear thae
they would see it was a very loose provision. There was nr
thing in the treaty at first sight
the duties imposed upon French wines were lighter than
those imposed upon the wines of other countries ; but if
hon. members would consider they would see that there was
a considerable difference. The duties proposed by the treaty
to be imposed on the importation of French wines wore,
upon wines of 15 degrees of proof spirits, ls. per gallon;
upon wines from 15 to 25 degrees, Is. 6d. per gallon; and
upon
wines containing from 26 to 40 degrees, 2s. per gal-
lon, that was to say, eighteenpence as against one shilling,
upon wine which contained a higher degree of spirit.
The effect of the treaty would be that the wines of France
would be imported into this country at ls. a gallon, and
the wines of Portugal at ls. 6d. a gallon. That was a very
questionable policy, and it was certainly not in accordance
with the principles of free trade. If they went to Spain
and Portugal, what inducement could they offer those
countries to import their wines ? They would say, " You
have so arranged your duties that the wines of France shall
come into England at a lower price than ours, and you must
rearrange your duties so as to allow us to enter your market
on the same terms." But this country would not be able to
do that, because it is bound by the terms of the treaty for
10 years to maintain the differential duty. It might be
said
that it was unreasonable on their part to condemn the treaty,
bd
ee utbhtefu reall , it
effect. W as
et hf eti
the
edturteya
ttyo culpo
es
ne I yt
heex
but surely when there were matters like these so very
ga mineuerea
lwi
uhtaetr
ews otzu ledf
reeatthoehjtercetaitoyn;
wapasa,rtthfraetmit thtieedcounps rationitdhee-
this
eof
the country.
detailsliisgreat
hands of the Government for 10 years. (Hear.) He was
quite willing to admit that he s
aw many advantages to be
derived frith the treaty. (Hear.) He believed that, though
it would not give them all they had a right to expect, and
though it contained conditions which might bo embarrass-
ing to the Government, yet, at the same time, he quite ad-
mitted it made a breach in the prohibitive and protective
system of France. (Hear.) His objection was not to the
advantages, but to the price that was to be paid for them.
1 The hon. member for Montrose had that night paid a high
tribute to the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
which, he said, was characterised by its simple eloquence.
It was eloquence, no doubt, but as to its being "simple
eloquence," ho could hardly admit that. (Hear.) But sub-
sequently the hon. member for Montrose had illustrated his
meaning of the term "simple eloquence" by telling them
that all the great ad vantages that were to be derived from this
budget would be obtained by only an additional penny to the
income tax for one year, Well, the Chancellor of the Exche •
quer told them that ho had a deficit of £9,400,000 to make
up, and he sketched various modes by which that might be
done before coming to the plan which he proposed for the
acceptance of the house. What was the plan ? He ex-
pected £8,472,000 at the result of collecting three-quarters
income Up; within the present financial year, lie pro-
posed to take up in advance £1,400,000 of malt duties, and
to receive from the continuance a the war duties on tea
and sugar £2,100,000. But he (Sir S. Northcote) contended
that if they did that, apart;; from uncalled-for reductions,
they won ld not require a 10d. but a 7d. income tax. If they
were to collect 7,loths of that income tax within the year,
7 _mho of a 74 , biome tax would give them £5,900,000.