The Sun.
London, England, 1860-02-11 00:00:00

FEBRUARY n, 1860.

-,., e.+~

trade of the country at the same period, instead of growing • pursue with equal
'teS.ansitshteerncy an end that. is more bene
at the rate of £1,515,000 a year, grew at the rate of firecliaatlions(Cohfeaerers,..i)t
eteiumethwohnovcolrouse-
£4,3ol,ooo. (Hear, hear.) Well, then, I say it is the duty of Sir, there
estaeblivsashedenbeeetwa
Govern-
the Government, both on account of the special circum- la tmeetslater
s ot
of
England and France. It was in the reign of the
cause
stances of the juncture, and likewise, and still more, on the Arts; and it marks a dark spot in our annals, be-
broadam,
.:.it -was an union formed in a spirit of domineering
ground of general and comprehensive principle, at
this thee to make considerable remissions ; and if that be so, e,u qttemontletenrtheßountetiadte, andsr was
sbaseotanad vilueiosuubosterteheeencay
the next question is on what principle you should mak-, tions ; it was an union of thevaGovn ernmnenuts. This is nue;
them. Of course, the subject of the tea and sugar cl-atie, to be an union of the Governments ; it ie to be an union of
would naturally occur to the mind of every one as Baying a the nations—(cheers)—and I confidently say again, as I
claim, at any rate, to the first consideration. T have already ventured to say in this House, that there
have
bound, never can bo any union between the nations of England
however, to say that these are not the subjec'Se on which it and France except an union beneficial to the world, because
has appeared to the Government that tleey might operate directly either the one or the other begins to harbour
with the greatest advantage. No doubt the duties on schemes of selfish aggrandisement—(Opposition cheers)—
trheaaottmaTiett thev jealousy of oetfhpirtisoronl:teighbour will powerfully
tea and sugar are taxes most desirable to be re-
pealed. They are harmless and beneficial articles— itself be the toosetrYconacedusiv being
nnelitilrerrmoof harmony
milcan
f
articles of universal consumption, and I trust the meditate anything which is dangerous to Europe. (Hear,
hear.) There is another class of objections of which Ido
time may arrive, and arrive at no distant date, when we
may be able to recur to our former standard in regard to nottiio scollain, but which I hope to remove. There are
wosaythaotfale,orememrractl. trlevatoyllis anrtl abandonment
these taxes. But, on the other hand, there never was a of thee principles
time when the people were so well able to pay these taxes mercial treaty would be an abandonment eoef tal:en; ya oo
m principles
as now. The increase in the consumption of these articles of Free Trade, in the latitude in which we now employ
is regular, and the revenue is a growing revenue. If we that phrase, if it involved the recognition of exclusive pri-
are to have a very large scale of expenditure and a very Ntrieleagtvesw.
oubledthiifs smeonscutldaimo it that esdlni Pitt's commercial
teon our part high income-tax, I cannot think, while the bulk of the which it was expressed,- have been teen') athrte
atuermailuin.
burden should fall on the shoulders of those having pro- donment of Free Trade ; but, at the same') time, I can-
porty, that it is desirable tho labouring classeis should bear not mention that treaty without saying that I think it was
no share of the burden. But, sir, I stand more especially for the time at which it was made one of the best and one
on this—the duties on tea and sugar, whatever also they oo
of
uthtreas)vuitseet
atm elaesausrte sa
as
veloruaotepa tee
adub yotiaer
a Parliament,a eanocl has
may be, are simply revenue duties. They entail no corn- brilliant career to the fame of the any other
statesmanssg who
plexity in their system of Customs law; above all, they en- concluded it. (Hear, hear.) We, however, have no ex-
tail none of the evils that belong to differential duties ; and elusive engagements we have not the pretence of an ex-
I will by and bye invite you to join the Government in elusive
eneassement. France is perfectly aware that our
legislationb makes no distinction between one nation and
enacting measures whereby you will be able to counteract another, and that what we enact for her we shall at the
and root out eviis of that kind, as well as give relief in the same time enact far all the world. lam surprised at the
price of commodities. But Ido not hesitate to say that it number and variety of these objections which conic rushing
is a mistake to suppose that the best moao of giving benefit frhomsialllquarters. Itt is like the ancient explanation of the
south,
hcause efa
to the labouring classes is simply to operate on the articles rushing. storm—all
together :
consumed :nth—era: the winds, north, east, west,
Pend soeua
consumed by them. If you want to do them the maximum " -Una Eurnsque Notusque ruant creberque procellis
of goud, you should rather operate on the articles which " Africus."
give them the maximum of employment. (Hear, hear.) Sometimes a treaty is an obsolete and antiquated idea ;
What has made the great change in their position of late sometimesan abandonment i tisa
o f i dangerousree tred innovationo
T reare ; o
u
and at others o
ila class
se
years ? Not that you have legislated here and there taking
of men and those are gentlemen with whom we shall have
off ld. or 2d. in the pound of something consumed by the much difficulty in dealing. These are they who find fault
labouring classes. That is not what has bettered their con- with it—and that I must say is by far the soundest objection
dition as it has been bettered during the last 10 or 15 years. —because it is an abandonment of the principle of I'rotec-
It is that you have set free their trade—(hear, hear)—it is tion. (lloetftri,rhoetaz.t)io This treaty is an abandonment of the
that you have put in motion the process to give them the principleenga engagement which itncentaianms .mistt
caowr-taarian?yf anyootaiocontains
entanglinguox-
widest field and highest remuneration for their labour. elusive privilege, but it is an abandonment of the principle
(Hear, hear.) Take the great change in the corn laws ; of Protection, and a means of sweeping from the statute-
it may be doubted whether you have given them cheaper bookmai n theupo
upon
hiite f relics
The f
fact
thatt s a,
se stille are-
bread—it may be a trifle cheaper than before—that is so, that our old friend ProteCrtion, whop used presently
to
change, however, is comparatively immaterial; but 'you dwell in the palaces of the land, and who was :dislodged
have created a regular and steady trade of something some ten or fifteen years ago, has, since that period, found
like £15,000,000 a-year ;by that trade you have very comfortable shelter and good living in holes and cor-
h)—and you are now invited, if you will have
created a corresponding demand for the commodities of
itiheerse—eoo(a
dnleasusg to concur in the operation, to see whether
which they are the producers, their labour being an essen- you cannot likewise eject him from those holes and
tial element in their production, and it is the price their corners. I told you that we are to remove the duty from
labour thus brings, not the price of cheapened commodities all manufaotured goods, and there is hardly one of that
that forms the main benefit they receive. That is the class of duties which is not, in point of fact, the representa-
tive of a strictly protective duty•, nay, more—and mark my
principle of a sound political economy applicable to cora-
words—in many cases of a prohibitory duty. Perhaps the
mercial legislation, and that is the principle on which we case will be best explained by my stating to the
will invite you to proceed. I may say therefore, in passing, committee what will bo the financial results of
in regard to the tea and sugar duties, we shall ask Perlin- the treaty as it stands. I will not enter into any small
d
mont to renew them—not to renew them for any lengthened details, and will take three branches of reduction only
period, but only for one year, with tho further addition of —the reduction of duty upon wine
that upon brandy, and the abolition' the reduction of
of the duties upon
three months till July, 1861, because the Ist of April is an manufactured goods. The reduction of the duty upon wine
inconvenient period for Parliament to consider the question. from ss. 10d. to 3s. per gallon will afford to the consumer a
relief of £830,000, and will entail upon the revenue, after
Sir J. PAKINGTON—You propose to leave the duties allowing for an increase of consumption to the extent of 35
as they are ? per cent, a loss of £515,000. The reduction of the duty on
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Oh, I
brandy from 15s. to Bs. 2d. a gallon will give to the consu-
mer a relief of £446,000, and, assuming that the consump-
mean to take the duties precisely as they now stand—that tion will be raised to the point at which it stood in 1850,
is, ls. sd. per lb. on tea, and the duties on sugar, which aro just before the disease of the vine commenced, it will cause
classified, but which may be represented on the whole as a lossofthie2a2bso, OliOtOiouto o
ft the
lor edvuetniouse .ou There are three
ose smallto
being about 3e. the cwt. above the minimum point at which
articles
postpone for a single year, in the meantime reducing Prep it by
they stood fixed in 1853. Having stated to the committee ono-half. One of them is the article cork, which has been
the conviction of the Government that we ought to have the subject of a great deal of debate in this House. I must
remissions, and large remissions—that we ought to have say that altogether there never was a stronger apparent
remissions by which we may most effectually act upon the case . h madethe
a measures
sf for
whichr Protection, ewc tiro:
adopted,, and
qauceonuc e.
trade and commerce of the country, and upon the demand I t r..a
siderabteeshock to the trade, anca considerable change of
for the labour of the people—l come now to the question of its nature and of the course which it takes, the House has
the Commercial Treaty with France, and I will confidently nothing to repent. On the contrary, the total consumption
recommend the adoption of that Treaty to the house, as of cork is much larger now than it was before the duty was
fulfilling and satisfying all the conditions of the most bene- reduced. On account of the importannteiel the of
lt sht of April, present
pro
ficial change in your commercial legislation. But perhaps,
186n0,gefei r, the
Teducwti of
eon f propose
e to gyduty v
e
uon cork, and of these
sir, as the committee has not yet had an opportunity of affecting two other trades, on the simple ground that they
reading the Treaty, it may be convenient that I should state are trads carried on almost entirely by diffused rural la-
to them very briefly its principal contents. (Hear, hear, bour, to which it is not desirable to give a sudden shock.
and a laugh.) First, I will take the engagements of Franco. Those amreeatuhteitgoloovjlotrdaudtLaawilll thei rtencrueoeircii saturadwupexlatitingr.
France engages to reduce the duty on English coal and coke they will be taken off. The amount of duty on manuyfekinc.
from the let of July, 1860 ;ou bar and pig-iron and steel tured goods, which will be abolished, amounts to no less
from the Ist of October, 1860 ;on tools and machinery from than £432,000. The principal articles are silk manufac-
the Ist of December, 1860; and on yarns and goods in tures—£27o,ooo ; gloves, subject:to a short delay, £48,000;
flax and hemp, including, I believe jute, in which a great
artificial flowers, £20,000 ; watches, £15,000; certain oils
£10,000; musical instruments, £9,000; leather, £9,000 ;
and very just interest is felt in some important die- china, £8,000; glass, £7,001. There are also a great num-
tricts—from the Ist of June, 1861. That is the first im- ber of minor articles of industry produced largely abroad,
portant covenant into which France enters. Her second especially in France. The total relief to the consumer, that
and great engagement is postponed to the Ist of October, is the amount of duty remitted, under the French treaty,
1861, it being, I think, in the knowledge of the committee will bo £1,737,000 ; the loss to the revenue for the first year
that that is done under a pledge by the Government of will be £1,190,000. Now, Sir, the objections which are
France to the classes who suppose themselves to be inte- taken to this treaty in the interests of free-trade will not,
rested in the maintenance of prohibition. On the Ist of I am quite sure, be very long alive ; but there is one ob-
October, 1861, France engages to reduce the duties and to jection which turns upon another point with which I
take away the prohibitions on all the articles of British pro- must endeavour to deal. It is that which tells us that
duction mentioned in a certain list, in such a way that no the duties we are about to repeal are, forsooth, revenue
duty upon any of those articles shall exceed 30 per cent. ad duties, and duties which are levied upon luxuries, and
valorem. Ido not speak of provisions, which flo not mate- do not affect the poor man. Compassion for the poor
rially enter into the Treaty ; but those articles, Sir, include man is a very fine thing, and I should be very sorry to say
all the staples of British manufacture, whether of yarns, anything that appeared to depreciate or undervalue so sacred
flax, hemp, hair; wool, silk, or cotton—all manufactures of a sentiment, but I must say that it is entirely out of place
skins, leather, bark, wood, iron and all other metals, glass, here. There is not one of these duties that is a revenue
stoneware, earthenware, and porcelain. I will not go duty—no, not one of them. How they work with respect
through the whole list, but lam not aware of ary great or to poor men, how they work with respect to those not rich
material article that is omitted. France also engages to men, we will presently inquire. But if these are revenue
commute these ad valorem duties into rated duties by a duties it is very curious to see who are the people who are
separate convention; but if there should be a disagreement alarmed at the treaty. Are the manufacturers of British
as to the terms on which they should be rated under the brandy the guardians of the British revenue ? Are the ins-
convention, the very maximum chargeable on every class porters of Cape wines the guardians of the British revenue ?
will be 30 per cent. Then the duties will be levied at the Have the manufactures of British wines a peculiar interest
proper period upon the value, which will be determined by in the wellbeing of the exchequer ? The manufacturers of
the process now in use in the English Customs. That is Spitaltields and those of Coventry, who have an incorn-
to say, the importer will declare the value, and it will be in parable organ in my right hon. friend (Mr. Ellice), are
the option of the Custom-house authorities in France to most excellent citizens, and no doubt contribute their share
appropriate the article upon paying the price which he has to the revenue, bat my right hon. friend won't tell me that
declared, with a percentage added. (Cheers.) And I must their great activity in rushing up to London and making
say that I hold it to be a signal proof of earnestness and representations upon this subject has arisen from their in-
liberality on the part of the French Government that it has terest in the British revenue. It has arisen from something
introduced an administrative regulation into its code for very different. They don't come into my room and tell me
the purpose of disarming suspicions and insuring the effica- that they are there as the guardians of the British revenue,
cious execution of the Treaty. (Hear, hear.) There is a they tell a much more simple and a much more intelligible
further provision, Sir, that the maximum of 30 per cent. tale. They say this—that the duties which now stand upon
shall after a period not exceeding three years be reduced your tariff are, and it is perfectly true, levied upon articles
to a maximum of 25 per cent. And I may be permitted to consumed by the rich. But why are they not levied upon
remind the committee that this rule of 30 per cent., to articlesconsumed by the middle, the lower middle class and
which France is nominally about to pass from a sys- the poor ? Because they won't let thorn in ; because they
tern of prohibition, is the very rule which was are prohibitory against those articles. (Hear.) That is the
adopted nominally by the British Parliament when Mr. solution of the whole case. Our manufacturers give over to
Huskisson was our Minister for Trade, and we first set France the highest qualities under cover of duties which
about snaking important commereial changes. But there is, are as good for them as prohibitions, aid reserve for thorn-
lam bound to say, this difference between the two cases— selves the making of the lower qualities, and the power of
that the rule was accompanied in England with such modes exacting from the British consumer a higher price than
of operation that duties far exceeding 30 per cent, were in they will be able to get if this treaty is confirmed by Parlia-
a multitude of instances kept alive; whereas as far as the ment. (Hear, hear.) I took the liberty of saying to one of
terms of this instrument go, France has, I think, given us a the deputations, "It seems to me this is much the case of
security that 30 per cent, will really be the maximum, the corn law over again." Don't let there be any mistake.
and that, from the nature of things, in a great multitude of What is wanted is, a higher price than that at which you
instances the duties will be much below that rate even on can get goods from France. That is the Alpha and Omega,
manufactured goods. (Hear, hear.) I come next to the the beginning and the end of it. I said, ' Is not this the
English covenants. England engages, with a limited period case of the corn law ?" "Ohl dear, no ; not the least like
of exception, to be exercised with respect only to two or thecorn law." In fact, there is generally, on the part of the
three articles, to abolish immediately and totally all duties most respectable classes, a desire for the protection of their
upon all manufactured goods. There will be a sweep, clean, awn business. They show that though they are without
entire, and absolute, of manufactured pods from the face exception adherents of free trade they are not adherents
of the British tariff. She engages to reduce the duty on of free trade without exception. (A laugh.) Let
brandy fi•orn 15s. a gallon to the level of the colonial duty us now consider the circumstances which render it
viz., Bs. 2d. She engages to reduce immediately the duty necessary to make a special arrangement. I entreat the
on foreign wine. In the Treaty it is of course French wine committee to look at the present state of the trade between
which is specified ; but it will be perfectly understood that England and Franco; it is not a little instructive. Con-
we proceed with regard to the commodities of all countries eider in the first place, the relative positions of England and
alike. England engages, then, to reduce the duty on wine Franco. It is perfectly true that France is a foreign coun-
from nearly ss. 10d. to 3s, per gallon. She engages fur- try, but she is a foreign country absolutely separated
ther to reduce that duty from the Ist of April, 1861, to a from you by a narrower channel than that which divides
scale which has reference to the strength of the wine as you from Ireland ; and while nature, or providence rather,
measured by the quantity of spirits it contains. That scale has placed you in the closest proximity, it has given to
is as follows :—Onallwines inbottle, whatever the strength, these two great countries such diversities of soil, climate,
and on all wines having 26 degrees and upwards of proof products, and character, that Ido not believe you can find,
spirits, 2s. per gallon ; on wine having lo and under 26 on the face of the world, two other countries which aro so
degrees of proof, Is. ed. per gallon ; and on wine with less constituted for carrying on a beneficial and extended corn-
than 15 degrees, Is. per gallon. A power is reserved to us pierce. Cheers.) I believe, indeed, that the prohibitory
‘,f increasing our duty on wine in case we should increase system subsisting between Lngland and Franco is no less
our Excise on spirits. And if, upon due fiscal considera- unnatural as to every commercial—I think I may add as to
tions, we should find it necessary on that account to increase every moral and political—result than if you were to revive
our duty on wines, we also engage to charge on any French those prohibitory systems which formerly separated Eng-
articles which are subject to Excise in England a duty cor- land from Scotland, and Great Britain from Ireland. (Hear.)
that our system. is not prohibitory
responding with the Excise duty, together with extra and I shall be told, perhaps,
articles it is not, for fin ther charges to which the English producer may be put and certainly in respect manyoffrom France;
in consequence of the regulations of our Inland Revenue have considerable importations.
I but when I
Department. These, Sir, are the chief covenants on the part remember how much we still prohibit, have no hesitation
of England. Both parties reserve to themselves power to in saying that, although our system
is far bettor than that
place Customs' duties anew on any foreign articles whatso- of France, yet, on the other hand, it is far indeed from being
ever, provided they place the same duties on the like articles what it ought to be.
._(Hear, hear.) . Let us look at the
neet
tvhgaeel
iarl
snot: drr
but
tugi :it
articles
:Tr
have
origin;-was
vela,
are
of domestic production. They likewise agree to treat question on the French side. The doctrine is that we should
each other on the same terms as the most favoured nations. attend to our own interests, and leave France to manage
All the articles of the Treaty are to continue in operation hers. What,ottlatlen, is thefstate;otf tradero as regards France ?
of f whatever aEfdt
for a period of ten years, with a provision as to giving notice In 1858 tet
expovratls7huot
exports
es
of any desire for their revision, These, then, asse the prin- —not British£llooo. Of that amount the home. consumption in
cipal stipulations of the Treaty with France, which may
,1000.
cannotA gpeotrt
ai
to n
the
have been seen by hon. members in one form or another, Fra:in
but which have not collectively, or upon authority, as yet une
.ueernewraatsedllqa'n4d6s
b d the' of
met the public eye. I will not affect to be unaware that
etatnel9 90tI
particularsaefthe whole.
articles to thevalue of £9,819,000,
many objections have been stated to this Treaty. It has about -
Of Observe how they are die-
even been said that its terms indicate a subserviency totributes.the goods sent to France in 1858, amounting
sacrifice of British to those to £9,819,000, raw materials, upon which no labour whatever
France, and involve a interests I
was passed, and the great bulk of which of foreign nations or of a foreign Government. Sir, am
but were not of British
thankful to think that no Ministry, be its merits or bo the origin,merely passed through our warehouses, were
and half-•manufactur •
distinction of its chief what they may, can in this countryed articles, £160,000. The
totalamount£B,7oo,ooo,of
hold office for a single session upon terms of subserviency. manufactures which we send abroad every
is here a per- year is about £130,000.000 • but in to any Power whatever. (Cheers.) There , lB5B our exports
of the two of manufactured
feet security in the nature and in the traditionst goods to France were only £688,000. It
hat is meant is worth while to t
Houses of Parliament. But, sir, I knowanrtoic
wles of a Treaty £68,000, £2oB,ooogwoeares el)
further in the analysis. Of that
by eubserviency to France as regards thefor Cashmere shawls, which merely
by this Treaty, carne here in
like this. We have given France nothing . y, transit, and £217,000 fir machinery; which
sacrifice which we are to our friends over the water
if. I except some very trifling fiscal
of brandy. Inotion of
mean some
make with respect to the single article advantage. The value of all the other
that it might not be necessary to(Hear,
hear.
reduce the duty to quite manufactured articles was £263,000. hear.)
I want
therefore there might boa to know whether that
so low a point as we take, and is a state of things so satisfactory that
ladvantage may not be when
question whether some infinitesimal
that
adsoli- we have an opportunity of amending it we should
surrendered in that form. But, with. small refuse to do so. I understand the statement of the moderate
given nothing to Franco by this Free-trader who says
tary exception, we have .
with that half a loaf is better than no bread,
liberal handthat all
have not given as ato
Treaty which webreaking down of restrictions is good, and that it is
the changes here proposed are wiser to break
ourselves. (Cheers.) And down our own restrictions and leave those of
changes every one of which deserves the acceptance of f this our neighbour if we cannot touch them than to perpetuate
house on its own merits, in conformity with al the prin- both. That is true and reasonable ; but I cannot under-
ciples and acted upon for many stand those
that have been recognised
Years past. Sir, as to the charge of subserviency.to France come from other quarters, who, I must say, know little of
I know that this Treaty may be said to bear a political cha- what they talk about, and who say it is a positive evil to
rector, The (mammal' relations of England with France induce our neighbours to break down their restrictions.
have always borne a political character. What is the history Tkey do not see what they condemn is a doubling of the
of the system of prohibitions on the one side and on the benefit. They think there is a chivalry in free trade, which
other which grew up between this country and France P It is degraded if it becomes a matter of bargain, whereas it
waesimply this—that enaingyeerseneee iu political estrange- appears to me that bargain is really at the root of the whole
scent from her at the time of the Revolution, you followed thing. The only reaeon why we have not made bargains
and continued that estrangement both on the one side and similar to the present in former years was simply because
the other by a system of prohibitory duties. And Ido nod we could not make them. It was not for want of trying.
deny that it was effectual for its end .I don't mean FON four or five years such was thechief business of several
for its economical end. Economically it may possibly e have departments of the State, and yet no progress could be made.
been ruinous to both countries. lint eer lie political 'Kid it Why ? Because they set out upon a false principle—the
eve s effectual. AO beta} se i wee ofeetuel T
i Call upon you principle that the concessions, which each party made to the
to legislate mow by the reaerse of that premiss, And if yon other were not a benefit beet an injury to itself. (Hoar, hear.)
desire to knit toseethee la amity those two great nations We have not proeeeded upon that principle. We never pre
whose oolithete have often shaken the world, undo for your tended en leeeneo that we were going to inflict injury upon
purpose that which your fathers did for their purpose, al 1
A oWsclyce. 'We have offered Franco tar t)tet akl in. breakizg
, . .

down her own vicious prohibitory system. In doing so, we
may have given a greater benefit to France than to ourselves.
I shall not attempt to measure it on one side or the other.
What we have done is good—nay,doubly good ; good for our-
selves if France had done nothing at all, doubly good because
Franco has done a great deal. (Cheers.) One word upon
our exports to Franca at a former period. About 20 years
ago there was a trade in:English manufactured goods with
France. It was in linen and linen yarns. In 1842 we
greatly reduced our duties, not by treaty, but independent of
France. How did that country reply to us ? France was
under a very friendly Government at the time, but how did
she meet the immense benefit we had made in favour of her
commerce ? She met it by smiting this single branch of
trade in British manufactures with prohibitory duties. She
raised her duties upon linen yarn, which before 1842 had
been from 9to 12 per cent., to from 13 to 27 per cent. Her
duties upon linen cloths, which before 1842 had been from
15 to 23 per cent., wore increased to from 20 to 36 per cent.
The result may e anticipated. In 1841 we sent to France
linen and linen yarns to the amount 0f.£1,000,1/7, whereas
in 1858 we sent only £151,483. Such is the state of trade
between England and France, and I confess I am not so
well satisfied with it as not to think that it admits of some
improvement. As an hon. friend whom I see opposite said
the other day with respect to our wine duties, so I say of
our trade with France, it is not in the best " possible" state,
but, on the contrary, might be amended with advantage.
(Hear, hear.) I have promised, however, to show what the
real meaning of the doctrine is, that we are hero dealing
with revenue duties. Take the article of brandy. I pre-
sume nobody will pretend that a duty of 15s. upon French
brandy, compared with a duty of Bs. on British spirits, is a
revenue duty. There is an article manufactured in this
country which some of us may have been happy or un-
happy enough to taste. It is called British brandy. (A.
laugh.) In consequence of the immense price to which '
French brandy is raised by our duty, which has the effect
not only of raising the price of the best French brandies,
but of excluding entirely everything but the best French
brandies, our middling and indifferent British brandy comes
into the place which is left empty for it by means of our pro-
hibitory duties. As far as brandy is concerned, therefore,
we are not dealing with revenue duties. Can we regard the
duties upon silk and wine as revenue duties ? The mystery
of the wino duty is a very deep one. Here especially we are
met by the cry that wino is the rich man's luxury. It is
the rich man's luxury, but I shall show presently that
those who are not rich are making desperate struggles to
get at it—(a laugh)—and that, too, with some limited and
qualified success. But wine, forsooth, is the rich man's
luxury. Is tea the rich man's luxury ? No. It is the poor
man's, and, above all, the poor woman's luxury. But 1 speak
in the year 1860. In 1760 tea was the rich man's luxury. In
1760 there was no more tea consumed per head of the popu-
lation than there is wine now. In 1760 there were
4,000,0001 b. tea consumed ; now the annual consumption its
76,000,0001 b. The price of tea which is now sold at 3s. per
lb. was then advertised by the chief houses at £1 per lb.
(Hear.) Wine is the rich man's luxury, and you may make
tea, or sugar, or any other article of consumption the rich
man's luxury if you put on duty enough, by which you will
not only effectually bar the access of the poor man to it, but
reserve to yourselves the proud satisfaction of saying " Our
taxes are paid by the rich ; none are levied upon articles
consumed by the poor." (Hear.) Let us consider now the
necessary operation upon an article like wine of a uniform
rate of duty. Wine, I suppose, more than almost anything
else that is produced from the earth by the labour of man
varies in quality and price. It is not too much to say that
the price of wine runs from 1 up to 100. Upon all qualities
we lay the same rate of duty. What is the effect ? That
we tax even the highest wines somewhat heavily ; the next
to the highest we tax very heavily indeed, and all except
those limited classes we totally and absolutely prohibit.
Let me give one illustration from a simpler case than that
of wino, which very clearly explains how this matter stands,
and dispose, once for all, of the notion that we are dealing
with revenue duties, laid upon the luxuries of a class, and
not upon articles wanted for the consumption of the poor.
It is the very simple case of gloves, which was stated to ma
by a most intelligent and respectable deputation, who, as
became them, made no secret at all about the matter. Our
duty upon gloves is 3s. Bd. a dozen. We imported in 1859
about 300,000 dozen. The value of the gloves we import is
about 245. a dozen wholesale • the retail price ranges from3os. to 365. Our duty is something like 15 per cent., which
seems very moderate, and enables those who aro so dis-
posed to say, "Ah we do not discourage the importation
of French gloves; we merely lay upon them a duty of 15
per cent. for the sake of revenue." How does this work ?
It works in this way, that it causes the French to furnish
us with the finer qualities of gloves, while they leave to us
the supply of the poorer qualities. Abolish the duty, and
you will find that a quantity of gloves would be imported
from France, Naples, Germany, and Belgium. They will
not be gloves at 245. a dozen, but gloves at 18s., 15e., 10a.,
and Os. a dozen. The lesser-priced gloves cannot pay
the duty, for the duty, when applied to gloves of 10s.
a dozen, is 37 per cent., and when applied to gloves of
61. per dozen is 58 per cent. ; and those gentlemen,
whose words I heard with implicit belief. told me dis-
tinctly that if this duty were removed a large quantity
of gloves would be imported here at 10s. and 12s. the
dozen. Therefore the duty is not a revenue duty, but
it is a:protection duty on the higher qualities as regardsthe
bulk of the trade, and as regards the bulk of the British
consumers it is a duty not of protection but of prohibition.
So it is with the wine duties. Is that doubted ? Let us se*
how the wine duties operate as a system of protection. We
have heard of Cape wine, and if we visit places much fre-
quented by the lower and middling classes we see advertise-
ments representing largo tuns surrounded by jovial people,.
with the words Cape Port and African Sherry written on
them. In all probability that is not Cape port or African
sherry. Those who import African sherry know how to
make a better use of it. There is a system of promotion
and preferment. (Laughter.) The African wines are used
for mixing with foreign European wines, and to empler
language familiar to my right hon. friend the Secretary for
War, v tee the African wine promoted somenew composts are
brought forward and delivered to a discerning public, with
what result it is not for me to say. (Laughter.) The African
wine has a differential duty in its favour of nearly 35. &
f
gallon;
from
wine,
nd if he I
betseerceh ratehol be
se who
thisf e. g r l
that eta caance
anxiety
theyt o
g oalorevenuealong
with us reforming the wine duties ; for they will see that
the decrease in the receipt duty from year to year would,
apart from any treaty with France, but from fiscal con-
siderations, compel them in the course of a few years to
reform the wine duties. I take for each period of year°
during the last nine years the consumption of foreign wiT
faonrdeiCgnapwe
iwneinecoinasuthmeed in Unite(tihe t
K ialfrder YeaTrsh, elBasvle-r3s,gyr""-
was 6,225,000 gallons. (Hear, hear.) During the same
period the average consumption of colonial wine 0""
254,000 gallons. In the period of 1854-56 the average COI.
sumption of foreign wine was 6,393,000 gallons, being.
increase of 168,000 gallons over the previous period. Thu'
increase took place when the disease of the vine was
at its worst ; and I mention this particularly be""
cause, as this represents the consumption of foreign wille
during the disease, it shows that the increase which
has taken place in the consumption of Cape wine cannot be
owing to the disease in the European grape. When that
disease was at its worst the consumption of foreign wine
increased, as I have already stated, by 168,000 gallons ;
the average consumption of Cape wino during the same
period-1854-56—rose from 254,000 gallons to 298,000
gallons. During the last term of years-1857-59--the die'
e Ise of the vine was very much mitigated, but the average
consumption of foreign wine showed a decrease of 500,000
gallons as compared with the consumption of 18.54-1856.
The average consumption of foreign wine in 1858-59 Tag
5,893,000 gallons, while the consumption of the colonial
wines had increased by 357,000 gallons, the average eon.
gumption in that period being 655,000 gallons. The cob).
nial wine is, in fact, rapidly displacing the foreign. The
present duty is purely a protecting and differential duty,
and is hostile to the revenue of the country. But there 4
another element affecting the wine revenue, and that 4
the manufacture of what is called British wine. While the
consumption of foreign wine has fallen from an average of
6,225,000 gallons to 5,893,000 gallons there has been an in*
oreaso in the manufacture of British wine. British
I mean that in the hands of small respectable manufac.
hirers, and am not referring to what is sold for fraudulent
purposes—is made very much with raisins, sugar, and
brandy. The duty paid on these materials is reckoned ass
amounting to ls. 2d. a gallon. Therefore you have a dutf
on foreign wino of ss. 10d. a gallon—on colonial wino of
2s. 11d. the gallon, and on B.itish wine of ls. 2d. the gallon.
The result is that the consumption of foreign wine dimi-
nishes, the consumption of colonial wine has increased, and
the consumption of British wine has trebled within the last
10 years. This has all the essential characteristics of *
trade carried on under the influence of differential duties,
therefore say that the present wine duty is a protective and
differential duty with respect to the three classes Which
enter into our consumption, namely, foreign, colonial, and
British wines, they all paying different rates of duty to the
revenue. (Hear, hear.) Out of the enormous quantity of
foreign wino manufactured abroad no doubt it is true that
only a small fraction would become available for this coun•
try. The great bulk ie a wine which an Englishman would
not take in exchange for his beer; but it is also true that
between that common and coarse wine and the fine wines
there are 10,000 intermediate shades, and there is an ins•
mense capacity for producing wines fitted for the English
market and for the taste of the middle and lower middle
classes in this country, which capacity is at present en.
tirely stifled by the operation of the wine duty. There ie
a notion that there is something fixed and unchanging hi
an Englishman's taste with respect to wino. You find wt
great number of people in this country who believe, like
an article of Christian faith, that an Englishman is not
born to drink French wines. (Laughter.) Do what rat
will, they say; argue with him as you will; reduce
your duties as you will ; endeavour even to pour the
French wine down his throat, but still he will reject it. (A.
laugh.) Well, these are most worthy portions of the
community - but they form their judgment from the mirror
circle of their own experience, and won't condescend to look
beyond that circle for any consideration whatever. What
they maintain is absolutely the reverse of the truth, for
nothing is more certain than the taste of English people at
ono time for French wine. (Hear, hear.) In earlier period/
of our history French wino was the great article of cow'
sumption hero. (Cheers.) Taste is a mutable thing. If
you go back to what an eminent living poet has called " the
spacious times of great Elizabeth," you will find that
the most delicate lady in the land did not scruple the&
to breakfast off beefsteaks and ale. Down to the
Revolution French wine was very largely consume°
here. I have seen it stated, and have no reason to doubt
the assertion, that in 1687 there were imported into this
country 3,800,000 gallons of French wine, or about two.
thirds of the whole quantity of foreign wine which we nee/
consume. How was this consumption checked and dis-
couraged ? By the influence of prohibitive duties. The
prohibitive system grew up by degrees, and by degrees the
English people were positively beleten and starved eut of
their taste for French wine. Bizt for 100 years after that
the taste itself remained, for when Mr. Pitt made tlte
treaty of 1786 what was the result ? According to the
interesting paper written by Lord Chelsea, in the 70
front ;
precedine.l7B6 the import of French wine into Engleno
was under 100,000 gallons. In the six years om 17ff
to 1792 the import grew to 683,000 gallons. -Then with
the war two or three years afterwards a nearly prohibitives
at all events a high differentiai, duty was imposed, and the
average import fell to 161,000 gallons, At that average',
remained till 1824, when the differential duty, insteaLt
4s. 5d., became 2s. 5d., and the consumption rose to 372,u_74
gallons. I must admit that when the duties were equsinr"
in 1830 the consumption of French ine did not inereasoei
It seemed as if by that time, after the pressure ,_,
heavy duties for a contra.), and a half, the taste for
it was nearly forgotten, and it became the luxury of a fife_
limited class in the conernunity. But it is remarkable t
ir;
in conjunction with the very changes of taste which, he 1„
been proceeding of lute years, we may likewise perceiv .07r
the operation of the present wine duties proofs of gro,vortso
taste for French wino ; for whereas from 1825 to 18° that
only consumed 379,000 gallons a year, '
and after 183.000 or
consumption was reduced to somethince like 310,00
315,000 gallons. on the average of the last ten Ye ar.
on
of
, have consumed 584,000 gallons, so that the importsti oge
French wino is absolutely increasing, and the 'well
of the total consumption is rapidly increasing. Taste,_, old
is mutable. It is idle to talk of the taste ifor port", inie
sherry and the highly brandied wines as fixed_oll_lll---•