The Sun.
London, England, 1866-05-04 00:00:00

____..........e..,,„
perhaps be added an item which is not very easy to deal
with,bite
arep appears
eianar
dr
sa se md beforeua cshpa sa
us
thepart
olfe a p etvhecesu lai i
tna rnu
unaac
erl r are
txnapgi
nee
nmd
ient
whetherut
reu no dr
ieatrns-erhu
odh lud eLah
f,tll iegoet
ineruet
account
tit hepferoepuvuribofluiec debt. I refer to the sum of £560,000 on.
aapbpoveaerfelg,ooono,hoool::h
srityifigcaavtieo,nbs,ringi
whichng hasthe gterehess adexdpeedntdou..thuree
of 1866 up to £66,474,000. There is, however, a sum
of
forsi Indiandesof
the and
account, other
cannotcharges,b e
saidwhich,
t o,
form any portion of the expenditure ; so that the t total of the expenditure may be taken as being
.C 65 424 ine
000
for the financial year which has just expired.
If' I '
look
for a comparison with the expenditure offormer
find that the expenditure of 1859-60, when
duly charged
rsil
with what belongs to it, amounted to £69,762,000 , but in
that were included large sums on account of
annuities
which expired in 1860 - a much larger emu
than the
amount of the annuities since created. The
amount
annuities which then expired was £2,149,000,aril
those created since amount to £710,000, showilig a
difference of £1,439,000 towards the extinction of . debt
which was provided in the former year, and has not been
provided in the years just passed. If, therefore, we take
the expenditure of 1859-60, for the purposesof comparison,
at £68,323,000, that of 1865-6 will be £65,424,000, showing
a decrease of expenditure in 1865-6, as compared with
1869-60, of £2,900,000. But the year 1859-60 was the
year in which the most important changes in the scale o 4
our expenditure were made ; and if I go back to 1858,8,
and compare the expenditure of that year with the ex-
penditure of the year just expired, rectifying both accord-
ing to the rules which I have stated, I find that the ex-
penditure of 1858-9 was only £63,225,000, showing an
increase in 1865-6, as compared with 1858-9, of £2,200,000.
That may be taken as a fair and accurate statement of the
condition of our expenditure at the present moment, as
compared with what it was six or seven years ago. lf I
look to the heads of expenditure I find they stand thus :
—The debt costs us £26,233,000; our defences, military
and naval, £24,829,000 ; our civil government, in which I
include the miscellaneous estimates, the Consolidated rend
charges, and packet estimates, £10,250,000 ; and the col-
lection of the revenue, £4,602,000. As the collection of
the revenue, however, ought really to be divided between
the other heads of expenditure, not being itself an inde-
pendent, but only a subsidiary and auxiliary descriptioq
of expenditure, I will treat it in that manner. Dividing
it, then, between the debt, the military or defence charges,
and civil charges, I find these to be the percentages :—The
debt costs us 43 per cent. of the whole expenditure, the
defences 40 per cent., and the civil charges, defined in the
manner I have stated, the remaining 17 per cent. That
may also be taken as an accurate statement, subject to this
qualification, that in the total sum charged during the year
for the expenses of the National Debt there is included a sum
not insignificant, which is really in repayment of the debt
through the medium of Terminable Annuities and not ac-
tually charged on the interest of the debt. if I compare
the expenditure with the revenue of the year it is this The expenditure, according to the Exchequer account laid
upon the table, was £65,914,000, the revenue, according to
the same Exchequer account, was £67,812,000, showing a
surplus of revenue overexpenditure of £1,898,000. If I were
to treat the accounts for fortifications as part of the expe.n_
diture of the year, that surplus would be reducect
to
.£1,338,C00, but I shall take notice of them when I come to
consider our engagements in connexion with the National
Debt, under which head they ought more properly to 'be
placed. Now, it is a matter of some interest to compare the
natural outturn of the revenue at the end of the year with
the estimated revenue at the commencement of tl'-es year.
The estimated revenue at the commencement of the year
was X 66,392,000, and the actual receipt has been £47,812,000,
showing a surplus receipt beyond the estimaterit amount of
£1,420,000. This surplus runs very much through the diffe-
rent branches of the revenue. I need not trouble the Com-
mittee with the figures as to each particuleir branch, but the
actual revenue from the Customs has exceeded the estimate
by the sum of £369,000 ; the actual receipt from the Eicise
has exceeded the estimate by the large amount of £758,000;
the actual receipt from Stampshas exceeded the estimate by
£270,000 ; the yield of the income-tax also went beyond the
estimate by the sum of £240,000. The grant of taxes to
the Post-office has produced precisely what they were esti-
mated to produce ; and the Crown lands have yielded the
same as the estimate within the sum of £5,000. But the
miscellaneous revenue and the receipt from the China com-
pensation fell short of what had been estimated by the
sum of £224,000—an amount which, in order to estimate
the real growth of the revenue, ought to be added to the
surplus I have formerly named, inasmuch as those two
heads indicate a diminution merely on certain repayments,
and have nothing to do with the question of the real springs
and elasticity of the revenue of the country. In the same
way, if I proceed to compare the revenue of the past year
with that of the preceding year, I find that it stands as fol-
lows :—On the whole of the nine heads of revenue the re-
ceipts in the year 1864-5 were £70,313,000. In the year
1865-66 they were £67,812,000, showing an actual decrease
of £2,501,000, in lieu of an estimated decrease of £3,921,000.
But if I strike out those two heads of Miscellaneous Ile..
ceipts and China Compensation, which have no real relation
to the subject, I find the actual loss was £2,386,000, in. lieu
of an estimated loss of £4,028,000. So that the rate of
growth of revenue, which I stated last year, on an ave-
rage of the six years preceding, to be about £1,780,000 per
annum, amounted almost precisely to that sum. ' It may be
goatee mat Iva t.eo z........ aoOS C 41... ..e,.....,,. of MA ry.,".....7.
from the same source, and excluding all legislative mea-
sures which tend in any way to affect those sources, has
grown by the sum of a million and three-quarters. It would
probably have grown by a somewhat larger amount if the.
circumstances of the harvest had been more favourable. But
whereas in 1864 the harvest was a fine one, and the price of
wheat between October and December was 38s. M. per qr.;
during the same period in 1865, when the harvest was below
the average, the price of wheat rose to 445. 10d. per qr., and
the price of wheat, on the whole, is a very goodinverse
test of the general condition of the countryand the capacity
of the people to consume those commodities which yield the
principal part of the revenue. If I look now to the branches
of the revenue of last year as they were specially affected
by the changes of 1864-5, they stand thus :—The estimated
loss upon tea came singularly near to the actual loss. The

estimated amount of that loss was £1,868;000, and the

actual loss was £1,871,000. This might naturally have bcua
expected. We have generally found that, under favourable
circumstances, the loss upon commodities of this kind
which have been subjected to a reduction of duty is less
than had been previously estimated ; but in this particular
instance I am inclined to think that a motion to which this

house was induced to accede for postponing the operation

of the reduced duty on tea—although I don't believe we
should have ultimately lost much by it—has had an un-
favourable effect upon the revenue from tea. But what is

more important is that the stocks have been less than at a
former period. The price of tea in bond on April 1, 1865,

was 16d. per lb., and on April 1, 1866, it had risen to 19d.

per lb. A reduction of 6d. per lb. in the duty on tea was

made; and as 3d. out of that 6d. per lb. was virtually neu-
tralised by the increase on the prico paid in bond, I think,

on the whole, we may be pretty well satisfied that the loss

on this item of receipt has not been greater than was ori-

ginally calculated upon. The case of the income tax shows

a somewhat smaller loss than was expected. The loss upon
that head was estimated at X 1,650,000, and the actual loss

has amounted to £1,568,000.

I have again to announce to

the committee that there is one estimate which fluctuates
in a singularly satisfactory and agreeable manner now
almost from year to year, and that is the value of a penny
upon the income tax. It has grown within our recollection
from between £700,000 and £BOO,OOO until it now amounts
to no less a sum than £1,400,000. (Rear, hear.) Next, I
come to the subject of fire insurance, in which the house
feels a deep interest, and with regard to which the hon.
member for Dudley (Mr. Sheridan) recently, in conformity,
I think, with the general wish of the house, forbore to
make a special motion antecedently to the financial state-

year 1864-5 has now been in operation fora ment for the year. The change which was maedaeri
atoythe duty
half. That was the change which related
fire.
We
on the insurance of stock in trade against
change for the full
have, therefore, had the effect of that
made
last year with re-
spectnamely, to the larger portion of them
in actual opera-
has a
and furniture of all kinds,
A is a change the
wallas
tion for only six months,
upon everything except stock
- 2 because
the arrangement of the
operation of which, owing only half a year after it has
duty, necessarily •
beey de, upon buildings
by rfrtirt enalteration, and the result is as
takes ' t ive have thus only half a
orzhapa bo remembered by the house that
gentlemen, who I am bound to
follows:—It
oser:x—dpeeriret;:lmseucepe
eal
ydeacreli!ivlryuuracrona asanudgoufingerepartoasupteheoteriotyl,
to may
licm*
held out very
all times who
hvoerhyallergaet
andino t insensibleofvw i eto
h
increase on the amount of property insured in consequence
of
he the
ghre
may attend the reduction of this duty; but I believe,
and always have believed, that it would be a mistake on the
part of the house if they were to expect any very large ex-
pansion in the amount of property insured from the reduc-
wtturea tdbulfint sof
the duty.
advantages
am
not
h at e
r al
points l
tion of the duty. I therefore estimated an increase at tho
rate of only 10 per cent., and I mean that estimate-1 mean
that I placed it at that figure—rather in deference to the
opinions of others than perhaps because it was precisely
the amount that I should myself have chosen. However,
that rate of increase has not been realised. Comparing the
two duties and comparing the value of the amount of pro-
- ' '

perty insured for the six months, for which alone wo Lave
the figures, I find that, as regards the loss of revenue for
the year, I estimated that loss at £260,000. lts actual
amount has been £272,000. And as respects the increase iu
the amount of property insured, the case stands thus :
The amount of property insured between Oct. 1, 1861, and
March 31, 1863—the six months to which alone the com-
parison can apply—was £580,000,000 in value ; 'while from
Oct. 1, 1865, to March 31, 1866, the total value of the pro-
perty insured was £627,000,000, showing an increase of
£17,000,000, or about 8 per cent. But then there is a regu-
lar standing increment in ths value of the property insured
which is not due to a reduction of tho duty, but to the
growing wealth of the country. That increment is on an
average £17,000,000 for the six months. If I deduct this
£17,000,000, which is due to the ordinary growth of the
wealth of the country, frou3 the £47,000,000 rhich fvrtuS