The Sun.
London, England, 1860-02-24 00:00:00

iNcVohwil:3ll'v'irtahlou;,et
gpureosntriioeficli
nag
cent., to begin in October, 1864 ; so that we make imme-
dn,iurateyceoarncse,
concessions,
concessiontlie 6r,d fa
faith
of France, that was a promissory note coming from such a
variable people as the 1.,:e ich, that it was not what would
ce be called in the city a dse.untaele
.When b"' en he said
France made no conceeeients he reede a edetake. The llth..
article of the treaty prevides.tha• the tee) contracting- par-
ties should levy no duty on the ex; ort of coal. It did seem
to him supremely ridiculous that France. should undertake
to levy no duty on tee expert of c, al, inasouch as she had
no coal to export. It was diffeeeet with Eaglaxcl, for she.
had coal to export and did export it, and she engaged not
only eo.; to levy a duty upon the ex• ort ofecal, but not to
prohibit the export of coal. He took a ',met serietis objec-
tion to that provision of the treaty. ( item%) lie asked
upon what commercial principle the Government had un-
dertaken to levy no export duty on coal, He. was satisfied
that a tax upon exports was one of the most legitimate
means cf raising a revenue. There were very few countries
that could raise a duty upon exports. The Two Sicilies bad
mines of sulphur, and it was good policy in that country to
impose an export duty on that article. Russia had immense
fertile plains of grain, which she exported, as also bides ani
tallow, and it was Only proper that countries so favoured by
nature should turn those great resources to their own al-
' vantage. (Hear, hear.) The export valise of coal was
£6,000,000, and of this France took just 41,250,000. He
now came to the article of brandy, and here he would
quote an extract of a letter written by Lerd John Russell
to Lord Cowley and Mr. Cobden. Lord John Russellsaid
—" Adverting to the distinct nature and very reuchhigher
market value of French brandy, and more especially to the
interests of England, the Government consider 10e. per
gallon to be the proper duty. It; nevertheless, you should
find that by making a ooncession, even beyond what I have
named, you can obtain from the Government of France sa-
tisfactory arrangements for an early reduction of duty
upon some important commodities, you are authorised to
engage for the reduction of the duty on brandy to the same
rate as British spirits brought from the colonies-namely, Bs. 2d. per gallon." Now. what we: e those important con-
crssions that had induce Z the negotiators to consent to a re-
duction of the duty to Bs. 2d. e (Hear, hear.)
Passing
the concessions made on either side, it appeared to trim that
there was no consideration on one side for what was given
on the other. He would endeavour dispassionately to look
upon this matter. The English concessions ha bad spoken
of—the French concessions being 25 per cent, at four years'
date; if that were not a prohibitive duty he had much mis-
taken tie speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The
right hon. gentleman told the house of the state of the linen
trade as regarded our exports to France, and that the rais-
ing of the duty in 1842 from 27 to a much higher per cent-
age had completely extinguished the trade. If that were
so he should like to know would this treaty revive it ? If
this treaty wore to be considered as a step in enlightened
legislation he was very glad of it • he was glad that the
most eminent liberal, es of trade, Mr. Cobden, should have
had the ho t- ar of indec:r g the French Emperor to substi-
tute for a p-.ohibit'em terms something less stringent,
and which held out the hope of some further advance here-
after. But when he had said that he had said all he could
say in favour of the treaty. He congratulated Mr. Cobden
on the progress of his imperial pupil, and he congratulated
his imperial pupil f r his quiokness of apprehension; but
he could not congratulate the English public on an addi-
tional twopenny locums tax as the price of the lesson in
political economy given by Mr. Cobden to the Emperor of
the French. If Mr. Cobden could have prevailed upon his
Majesty to cut down a portion of his immense armaments,
so that we could do the same—our naval and military force
could be brought down to one-third less—we could have
saved £10,000,000, and there would be no need for a seven-
penny or a tenpenny income tax, (Hear, hear.) He
would now come to the duties ex proprio rnotis of the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer. Many of those reductions were
in themselves very execellent, and some of them would
contribute to the production of cheap plum-puddings.
(A. laugh.) The duty was reduced upon eggs and nutmegs
and raisins and currants, &c., to the amount of £380,000.
The Government seemed to proceed in this way. Having re-
duced the duties in favour of France £2,000,000, they took
off duties to the extent of £2,000,090 in favour of the English
consumers. But when they considered the price paid for the
concessions of France the question was a very serious one.
He would now come to some of the details of the new im-
positions. First, as to contract stamps. Was any document
which recorded a bare 'sin between two parties, whether issu-
ing from a broker or between individuals, to be subject to a
stamp 1' Did the right hon, gentleman see over how wide
a field this new taxation would extend ? Take the case of
a mine. The broker had a book in which he entered every
sale he made, and then sent to the two parties for Whom
he acted a copy of his entry. Was each of theSe copies
to be taxed ?—for if so it would not be merely a penny, but
a twopenny tax? Ile would next take the case oft MO parties
—the one living at Hull, suppose, and'the other in London.
The man in Hull wrote to his correspondent in London,
saying he would give a certain price for certain goods: The
merchant in London wrote to say he would' accept the price.
These two letters in law constituted a contract. Were:these
letters to be brought under the new tax, or were they to be
Subjected to a penalty for net paying the tax ? Take the case
of a commercial traveller, who made a sale to a country
shopkeeper, and entered a memorandum of the sale. Was
there to be a penny stamp taxed to every such entry?
Let them suppose a transaction ins Manchester between one
merchant and another. Nothing passes —there was merely
an entry in a book—was this registry of a bargain to be sub-
ject to a stamp ? Take the case of a broker 'on ' Chen ge. Men
ran hither and thither, made entries on scraps of paper, the
effect of which was that thousands; tens of thousands, passed.
Were all such transactions to be subject to the new stamp ?
Was the house to be called ripen to check this vigour of trado
—this life-like operation—by a paltry tax of one penny ?
(Hear.) Upon his word, he could scarcely keep his patience
to see trade impeded by this miserable penny stamp. (Hear.)
He confessed, as a merchant, that-he did not yet knew but
he would have to get all his letter. Opel shrived, {for he
could not, tell, under the Ite.w law, what might be called a
contract. They were taking the dut-.4 elf paper %One direc-
tion, and hnpostreg a tax in another of a most vexatidus and
harassing character, otax which 'would be, productive of
annoyance and litigation, and 'S% hid). woutd.involve the risk
that, unless the hew were strictly complied evitheendh con-
tracts would be valueless.. Why, under the proposed' enact-
ments, merchants of the highest credit might be ruined by
the mere accidental omission 'of a penny stamp. , (Hear.) A
great characteristic of the, presenenge was its Tespectior the
economy of time. Millions had been spent in railways and
electric telegraphs. He didnot' core so ninth for the amount
of the stamp as the lime that would be lost and thelannoy-
ance which would be occasioned by the, imposition of it.
The next 'proposal was as to dock warrants. He did not
know whether the tax was meant to apply to what was
known as delivery orders ; if so, it would work in a most
oppressive manner. A ship arrived, and a merchant gave a
delivery order for the whole cargo. If the proposal upplied
to the general warrant only the annoyance would be limited
comparatively, but those general warrants were followed by
subsidiary warrants as the cargo became subdivided, so
that a payment might use required for each and every pack-
age in a cargo. The house would see from this a multipli-
cation of warrants; that the sum would multiply in point of
tax as the value of the article would diminish—(hear)—and
though the 3d. on the general warrant would not be much,
3d. on a small package would be a great deal. Therefore he
did not think that this kind of dock warrant invest would
do other than operate injuriously to the interests of trade.
He next came to the charge of the Custom-house officers
for inspecting bonding operations. That would be a most
onerous charge, and he wits informed that in many cases
it would destroy all profit. Its very introduction was so
objectionable that he would seriously recommend to the
' right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer its
' entire 'abandonment. • There was also a tax on re
morals. On tea, for instance, a cwt., there would
be for the charge of removal 41d., for the looker-on, Is.
lie next came to the registration. To this there were most
serious objections. It was very desirable they should obtain
accurate information as to the exports and imports of the
country ; but those were for the public utility, and why
should the merchant be teased with them. By the registra-
tion proposal every individual package would have for
re-
gistration to pay the sum of one penny. Now any such
stipulated sum was highly objectionable. Take the case of
a basket of grapes, worth 2s. 6d. ; the charge of a penny
was to be made on this.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—No, no
nothing of the kind.
Mr. HUBBARD—The question was, were we net too
strait-laced in making people pay for that which conduced
to the advantage of the country at large ? He now came to
the most important consideration in the budget—that of the
income tax, which had to fill up the chasm. The addition
proposed was no less than 3d. on the original tax proposed by
Sir R. Peel, and sd. different from that which would have
existed but for the change, although this v as the era which
had been looked forward to for the remission of taxes. The
right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer ob-
served the other night upon the patience with which the
people had borne the income tax. Why had they so borne it
from year to year ? Because the English people believed in
the words of statesmen—(hear, hear)—because they believed
that every year would be its last ; lull now it was brought
forward in its most aggravated form —a most grinding exac-
tion for another year, without one word of hope. (Hear.)
What had been the opinion of every great statesman on this
tax ? That it was a thing intolerab a in time of peaee. (Hear.)
And because of its temporary nature they said, " Don't
mind looking at its imperfections, eon wolf ! have it long."
The income and property tax taxed fairly real property and
dividends, and there its fairness et upped, for it taxed laud-
owners on the money equally laid out in repairs and agency. ,
It taxed the householders on the necessary provision for
want of durability of property; it taxed the annuitant,
whether for a term or for life, not upon the revenue, but
upon the capital. The right hon. gentleman the Chancellor
of the Exchequer had used the lauded interest wrongly, to
obtain right. He was sorry the Chancellor of the _Ex-
chequer had adopted language which contained a most
mischievous fallacy., Of the sum which he called interest
—and if the sum paid upon the Long Annuitieleer,ate itlteee
rest the Government had not yet paid
the The incomey
had not paid the capital. (Hear, hear.)
st but upon
sae was not altogether a tax upon intnertse
to trade, and
capital. The budget was full of impedime
was not an equal
full of imperfections. The income tax.
commercial classes.
tax as between man and man of the
r and one man would
Two men might make £lOO,OOO !
athecaothei, although both
pay double the income tax o
perfect accuracy, and according
would make returns with petax
which permitted that to
to law. Now, was tt? ,
I-. make his point clear,
be done quite untenable
house to consider this. One man returned
he would ask the iamount of gain, and consequently paid
year by year an e‘rae
en the other man made a large sum One
the same sunl' and the thi. d year nothing at all, and he
year, less the next,
a small average, or probably pay no income
would pay upon heat-.)
Hear,Was not such a tax a most eli-
tes at all. (le
e for a country like this? He might observe
jecti"labl- dto any system a legislation
that he ()Wee s for the public
borne made a party question.
One party in office
brought forward an income tax, and the other party opposed
it—(hear, hear)—and that party brought it forward with
some improvements, and then the other party attacked
it. (Hear, hear.) So great were the imperfections in the
present system that it was a great disgrace to the age
in which they lived, and he would not believe that a
revenue sufficient for the wants of the country might not be
raised by a tax which would be less iniquitous than this.
(Hear, hear,) The hon.. member for Montrose had stated
that this was the best budget since the death of Sir It.. Peel,
that all these measures would give an immense impetus to
trade, and that the trade with France would be immense.
(Hear, hear.) Now, although there could be no doubtthat
trade would be increased in wine and brandies and silks;, yet
it must be remembered that the great budget of Sir R.. Peel
was of &very different character. That right hon. ge ntla-
man 's great glory was that he emancipated the indust,ry of
the people of this countr (hear, hear)—and his fire t and
great object was the abolition of the corn laws. Hear,
hear.) Some hon. gentlemen said that measure had, made
no appreciable reduction in the price of bread ; bill. it had
made bread dearer in other countries. It had e tertelised
the price of that article all over the world. The pc dice? of
Sir R. Peel was to operate upon the large necessariers of life,
and on the consumption of raw products of other cots attics
by the conversion of them into manufactures. But %mg
was not a country which could supply Fumy articles fc a. that
it purpose, and would_ not be by increasing the iptioll
d ilex
of such commodities as wine and bum y they
would