The Sun.
London, England, 1832-02-07 00:00:00

Ifreoole• It would he extremely gratifying to him if die
Noble Lord could give a satisfactory explanation of the past
end still more so, if he could give them such information
:5 to the future, as would relieve the apprehensions of
the country as to the mode in which the financial affairs
of the empire—which were, after all, the most important
—would be managi.d.

Lord ALTHORP could assure the Eight Hon. Gentle-
man that he felt it would be very absurd, were he to com-
plain of his taking the first practical opportunity of bring-
ing forward the complaint which he had just made. In
answer to what had been urged by the Right lion. Gen
tlemsn, it was his duty to give, in defence of himself and
the First Lord of the Treasury, the grounds on which
!hey made the statements the Right Hon. Gentleman had
alluded to. It would also be, he admitted, his duty to
state what he hoped and believed the prospects of the
Government were. The Right Hon. Gentleman had
accused them of having deceived Parliament, by stating
their expectations of a surplus of about 500,0001. while,
in fact, on the other hand, there was a deficiency of
700,000/. Now the House had frequently heard him
state that, in his opinion, a large surplus revenue, for the
purpose of going into a sinking fund for the discharge of
the debt, was not desirable. At the same time he was
always ready to admit, that the situation of a deficiency
was such as it was the duty of the House and of the Go-
vernment, if at all possible, to avoid ; therefore, he
could not differ from the Right Hon. Gentleman in re-
:Jetting the deficiency, though he could not go the full
length with him in thinking that deficiency had produced
alarm anti dissatisfaction amongst the people.—(Hear,
hear.) As to the statement made on the 17th of October,
the Right lion. Gentleman had truly said, that they had
declared they had better grounds to go upon at that period
than could have been expected at the beginning of the
year. This he had stated then, in answer to the Right Hon.
Gentleman, when he said that he (Lord Althorp) was cal-
culating from a surplus on too small a scale. Then, as on for-
mer occasions, he stated, that in his opinion the surplus
needed not to be so large ; and now, as to the grounds on
which they had rested their expectations of a surplus, he
hail to declare, tit it, according to the best calculations that
could lie made, it appeared to them, after the most deep
consideration, that they were safe in stating the surplus
lie (Lord Althorp) did state as likely to accrue. But, said
the Right Hon. Gentleman, there was actually a defi-
ciency at this period. He (Mr. Goulburn) did not consi-
aer the circumstances of the case. They had the expen •
diture of three quarters before them, and, as for the first
quarter, they had asked for the expenditure and the result
at taxation—namely, the receipts. These were the
;rounds on which they proceeded ; and in matters on
which chance could have any share, they were as safe as
any grounds could well be. It was upon these grounds
he had stated the surplus of the revenue which he antici-
pated. He must admit, that on one part of these grounds
his information had not been correct. In the last quar-
ter the beer duties expired, and, consequently, no mentian
of them did teally occur in the last quarter. This un-
loubtedly led him into an error as far as 350,000/.
(Laughter.) lie did not wish to deceive the House. It
they thought him in error, he was bound to suffer fur
it ; but never would he attempt to deceive them. Be-
sides, there was another error into which he had been led,
Out in which hr must take the Right Hon. Gentleman as
particeps crirninis—namely, the amount likely to accrue
from the increased duty on spirits. The Right Ho-
nourable Gentleman calculated that at 450,0001. ; and he
~31r. G.) was aware that a large quantity of this would fall
in the last quarter. Notwithstanding the anticipations
iif the Right Hon. Gentleman, however, the additional duty
produced no increase, hut, on the contrary, there was a
falling off of 100,0001. in the year; and thirdly, a Bill
hail come in from Canada about the Rideau Canal, on
which they had not at all calculated. Besides, in the
last quitter there was a great staguation of trade and diffi-
iailty in commerce, which produced a falling off in the
revenue. He had stated the grounds of the calculations
an which they had proceeded, and the reasons why these
grounds had deceived them. The Right Hon. Gentleman
said, that at the end of 1830 there was 2,200,000/. sur-
plus revenue. This was true ; but the arrangements he
,nude were likely to affect the revenue of 1831, and
therefore it could not be calculated that because the sur-
plus of 1830 had been 2,900,000/., the surplus of the
last year should have been so great. He would next ad-
vert to the reduction of taxation, and first be would state
the ease in the way most unfavourable to himself. That
was to take solely into consideration the reductions which
had been made by himself. The amount of taxation taken
off last year at his suggestion was 1,500,000/. By addi-
tional taxation he derived 100,000/., which left a total
reduction of 1,400,0001. And there was now a deficiency
~f 700,0001. Therefore, if he had done nothing in the
way of reduction, the Itight Hon. Gentleman would still
have a surplus of 700,000/. This was putting the case
in the way most unfavourable to himself. He would now
t ke it the other way, and show tie effect of the Right
Hon. Gentleman's reduction of taxation in the last year.
The amount of taxation reduced by the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman was £2,794,000
The loss by the duty on spirits was lOO,OOO
The loss by the corn duties 250,000

Making a total of. £3,144,000
\Vhich being deducted from 50,P56,0001.,} £50,05,;,000
as thus
3,144,000
Would leave £46,912,000
As revenue; but
The expenditure being 47,123,000
46,912,000
And the revenue only

£lll,OOO

He had first stated the case in a manner unfavourable
to himself : he had now stated it in a manner unfavour-
able to the Right Hon. Gentleman. According to the first,
there would be a surplus revenue of 700,0001., and accord-
ing to the other case, there would be a deficiency of
111,000/. He believed, however, that if he had not re-
duced the amount of taxation there would have been a
surplus; but, certainly, not to the amount of 700,0001.
The Right Hon. Gentleman said, he would not go into
the Budget of last year, or attack him (Lord A.) for the
propositions he had made; and, he had added, that the
country bad a great escape in the fact of all these propos.-
tions not being adopted. or else the deficiency would have
been much greater. Now, in reply to this, he begged
leave to remind the House that all the propositions he had
made for the increase of taxation had not been adopted—
and some that were, from the lateness of the session and
other causes, came so recently into operation that they had
little or no effect on the revenues of the year. Theref"re
be could not admit that the deficiency would have been
even so great if all his propositions for increased taxation
had been adopt. d. Naw he had stated his whole defence
to the House for what had passed last year ; and, he trusted,
that the House would believe, that in no statement which
he had male he had any intention of deceiving the House.
He had now stared the whole case, and would leave it to
the House to form an opinion upon his conduct. But it
certainly was more important to make a statement now of
the effect of the measures taken with respect to the re-
venues of the present year.—(Hear.) lie was ready to
admit his imprudence in bringing forward his statement
last year at so early a period as lie did. And certainly now,
in making any statements, he was liable to inaccuracy front
the early period of the year. They might consider that—
The loss on camas would be £400,000
On coals
And on reduction of taxation, &c.

Making as a total

On the other side,there was the drawback on
printed cottons
The: linen bounties 155,00)
. .

The wine duties on the stock in hand
Taxed beyond what had been laid on last year
upon malt
And here he might observe, that, whatever might be said,
he thought that the Bills respecting malt and beer were
exceedingly important, and from the malt duty an in-
creased revenue would accrue. There were, besides, many
duties which would this year come into full operation. The
duties on wine might also be expected to increase, as in
like manner the importation of cotton. He, of course,
proceeded upon the supposition that the expenditure of
this year would be the same with last year ; and he
thought he might confidently anticipate this, as he knew
the estimates for this year would be considerably less than
for the last year.—(Hear.) Well, then, for additional
duties he might calculate on 375,000/. ; and for taxes
coming into full operation, &c. 150,000/. ; which would
amount to 1,337,000/. ; and 1,173.0001. being deducted
from it, would leave a surplus of 164,000/. In conclusion,
he said that although he lamented the reduction in the re-
venue, he felt perfectly confident that the public might rely
that they were prepared to meet the expenditure for the
year which was to conic.
Mr. ATTWOOD ridiculed the idea of the Noble Lord's
saying last year that 350,000/. would not be a sufficient
surplus, but that 450,000/. would, when there was an ex-
penditure of fifty millions ; and half of this went to pay
the interest of the debt. He protested, too, against the
conductnight,
too
ifnai n Gg ((Ivo ewr nnmeennct
ofe practice
two as,falsify night
another
after
mass n oth e i
Twrheiacshurytlcieyiertlwtehree,mosfelcv,eisrsper,odnua(t,uedra.l—ly(a_Cnbxeicemrt.
manner they presumed cv
out the accounts in the too)u
laT makehbhe
most agreeable to their superiors ; but the Noble Lori
might depend upon it that a Chancellor of the Exchequer
would be deceived himself, and deceive others, if he did
1-uot rx:twine and closely sift the accounts laid before

Hear.) The public interest demanded that either the
Noble Lord should abandon his office, or conduct it upon
different principles. Either the country was unable to
support its burthens, or the Government were unable to
perform their duty. It was impossible to impose new
taxes ; and to talk of a new loan, after fifteen years of
peace, was perfectly absurd. He was afraid that the Noble
Lord intended to proceed with some of those fine schemes
of finance which he had already proposed, and which
were altogether founded on the fancies of the Hon. Ba-
ronet (Sir H. Parnell) behind him. The great difference
he observed between the two parties in the House always
had been, that the present Government, when out of
office, had maintained that the Tory expenditure was most
unnecessary and profligate ; but now this economic party
had been in power for a year, and the country had an op
portunity of observing to wh.t extent they had been able
permanently to reduce the expenditure. The expense of
the army in the last year under a Tory Ministry, assisted
by a boronglimougering Parliament, was 6,999,000/. ; at
present it was 7,200,000/. ; which made an increa-e of
upwards of 200,0001. He did not blame Government
for this ; he merely cited it to show that their actions had
been contrary to the assertions of their whole life. Again,
look to the navy, in which they were told by the Noble
Lord the system of patronage was to be for ever at an
end. Under the old profligate Tory Administration last
year, the expenditure had been 3,209,000/. ; under the
new Administration, it was 5,680,000/., leaving a sur-
plus of 480,000/. He came now to the miseellineous
estimates. What was the result of these ? Did they
prove a diminution of expenditure? On the contrary, a
very slight examination of them would show that their
amount had been less under the former than under the
present Ministry. In 1830, under a Tory Ministry, their
amount had been 1,950,0001., while in 1831, under a
Government, the supposed personification of all that was
prudent and economical, they amounted to 2,850,0001.
(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord might show particular
reasons for this increase of expenditure, he would not say
that the Noble Lotd could not; but there was the fact of
the increase in the first year of a Government that came
in under the most distinct pledges of economy-. In fact,
he had no hesitation in asserting that, in the course of the
last year, there had been a great addition to almost every
one of the burdens of the State. It would, perhaps, be
stated, in answer to this, that such was the structure of
the present House of Commons, that it opposed an in-
vincible obstacle to real economy. He asked whether the
Ministry had tried that?—(Hear, from the Oppesition.)
He was convinced that, if the same system which had
hitherto been pursued was adopted in a reformed Parlia-
ment, there could be no further reductions with the safety
and honour of the public. A reformed Parliiment, if it
reduced to a large extent, the burdens of the people, must
Joso at the expellee of the public creditor.---(Hear, hear.)
Could they reduce the army or the navy upon any great
scale? and if they could not do so with safety, would they,
to diminish the amount of taxes, seize upon the dividends
of the public creditor ?—(Hear, hear.) It was a vain de-
lusion to suppose that a reformed, or an unreformed Par-
liament, could discover resources of the country, by which
its necessities could he provided for in a very mat, rial de-
gree.—(Hear, hear.) They praised themselves for being
an Administration that was favourable to peace. Why,
one year of Whig Administration bad scarcely elapsed be-
fore this country was on the brink of a war—on the verge
of a bloody and desolating war—(Hear, hear)—and he
would venture to assert, that unless their foreign policy
was founded on better calculations than their home policy,
there must be war.----(Hear, hear.) Indeed he felt no he-
sitation in saying, that the present Ministry as little de-
served the confidence of the Crown, and the support of the
Parliament, as any set of Ministers with whom it had
ever been his lot to:be acquainted.—(Hear.) The British
navy had been sent to threaten Holland. Did not that
act almost necessarily tend to produce war, notwithstand-
ing all the protocols and all the paper that had been wasted
under the pretence of preserving peace? And if war had
begun on that account, it would not hare ended in a few
weeks, as same might, perhaps, imagine. Those who did
imagine that because France appeared to be with us, the
war would have ended almost as soon as it began, bad
little knowledge of the perseverance of the House of
Nassau, which never had been known to give up any ob.
jest for which is contested.—(Hear, hear.) The liberty
not only of Holland, but of England, was owing to the
immoveable fit rnness of the Princes of that house—(Hear,
hear,)—and when Holland was fighting for her just rights,
did any one suppose that the rest of Europe would have
stood tamely by to see her crushed? It they did, they were
mistaken.

Mr. P. THOMPSON agreed with the Hon. Gentleman
only in the concluding part of the speech he had just de-
livered, namely, that the greater part of that speech was ;
not addressed to the question of finance before the House,
but to the foreign politics of the Government and to
Reform, wide which the question had little, propsrly
speaking, to do.—(Hear, hear.) He should not follow that
Hon. Member in his observations made on the subject of
finance and of Reform, but with respect to those upon
finance he must say, that the Hon. Gentleman on this
occasion seemed to have forgotten his favourite theory of
not relying upon figures—(Hear, hear, and a laugh)—end
to have depended on them mainly for his statements. Now,
it could not be supposed, that he (Mr. P. Thomson) was
at all displeased with this change in the lion. Gentleman's
mode of argument—on the contrary, he had always re-
commended the Hon. Gentleman to have recourse to the
aid of figures upon matters of finance, because such matters
were usually best discussed by their aid, but then he wished
also, that the figures stated should be correct, or should be
correctly quoted. 17nless they were so, he must dispute the
statement ; and for that reason he disputed the statements
of the Hun. Gentleman. The Hou. Gentleman had objected
to the increase in the expenditure of the army—if that ex-
penditure was not justified, why had not the lion. Member
been in his place to oppose the estimates when they were
moved ?—(Mr. ATTWOOD said something across the table,
the purport of which did not exactly reach us.) The Hon.
Gentleman said that the miscellaneous estimates had been
increased, but he had not gone into them to show that his
assertion was well founded. He (Mi. P. Thomson) could
not help observing that in making this assertion the lion.
Member had never once alluded to the important circum-
stance that nearly half a million of money had been car-
ried from the head of the civil list to be placed under the
head of miscellaneous expenditure.—(Hear, hear.) Thee
the lion. Gentleman accused the Noble Lord of having
forgotten the candle duty in his statement. Why, in the
statement alluded to, his Noble Friend had debited himself
with 400,000/. on account of the candle duty which had
been taken off.—(Bear, hear.) The estimates, there-
fore, instead of justifying the assertions of the Hon. Gen -
tleman, showed that a large saving had been effected, and
that a surplus would notwithstanding be left.---( Hear.)
But when the Hon. Gentleman accused them of want of
economy, how did lie settle the account with the Right
lion. Gentleman below him ? If economy had not been
sufficiently practised, whose fault was it ?—(Hear, hear.)
lie would not generally go over the state of the country
when the late Administration quitted office, nor would
he spank of the increase of the military force having
been rendered necessary by the conduct of their prede-
eessors—(Loud cheers)—ner would he say what the
Government had been obliged to do in consequence of the
extravagance and worthlessness manifest in the expendi-
ture of the Government that had preceded thern.—(Hear.)
He would not ask what had been the expenditure they
found the Government engaged in with respect to the I
building of palaces—(Cheers)—he would nut advert to
the extravagance to which the former Government had
become a party in the case of the Rideau Canal—(Cheers)
—but he had a right to say, that a large proportion, if not
the whole deficiency of which so much had been said,
would not have existed but for claims of the description to
which he had referred. The Right Hon. Gentleman op-
posite had set the Hon. Gentleman the example of making
these charges against the present Government. The Right
Hon. Gentleman had seated with an air of absolute horror,
that for the first time in the history of this country—( Mr.
Goulburn dissented)—he would not misrepresent the Right
Hon. Gentleman; perhaps it was the first time for years
past I.e had observed a deficiency in the public revenue—
that for the first time for years past he had seen the ex-
penditure exceeding the revenue. The House should soon
see whether that assertion was correct. When the Right
lion. Gentleman spoke as he had done of the Noble Lord
at the head of the Government—of that Noble Lord's de-
sire to provide his relation.; with places—when lie spoke
in that manner, did he forgy, that when he was a member
of the last Administration, he endeavoured, but just before
that Administration quitted office, to quarter on the pension
list of this country the sons of two Cabinet Ministers ? To
be sure the attempt was defeated ; but the defeat was owing
to the House of Commons, not to the foihearance of the
Right Hon. Gentleman. He should now refer to the other
charge of the Right Hon. Gentleman as to the deficiency
When of the public revenue. the Right Hon. Gentleman
saoke in terms of such horror of the deficiency, he must
have known that deficiencies of a greater extent had not
been unknown in the later times of this country.—(Hear. )
lie did not know whether the cheers of the Right lion.
Gentleman indicated his assent or dissent, hut the proof
of the fact was easy. He (Mr. P. Thomson) could take
any year irom 1E323. He would not go farther hack, but
would begin from that year, because it was to be recollected,
that the Parliament had then pledged itself, by a aistioct
resolution, that there should be an efficient sinking-fund
of ia,000,000/., which might be considered as a portion

of the public expenditure.—(Hear, bear, frost Mr. Gout-
burn.) He should nut take it as a portion of the public
expenditure, and yet there would be found to be a deficiency,
The deficiency in the account of 1823, including the ad-
vance for naval purposes, was 2,991,000/. In 1824, the
deficiency was 1,007,0001. In 1825, it was 2,125,0001.
In 1826, 6,717,000/. In 1827, it was 6,603,000/. In
1828, it had fallen to 959,0001. In 1829, it had fallen
to 807,000/. ; and in 1830, he would do the Right lion.
Gentleman the justice to say, that there was a balance
of 978,0001. the other way. The statement he had just read
proved, however, that deficiencies in the public revenue, as
compared with the public expenditure, were not quite so new
as the Right Hon. Gentleman had seetned to imagine. But if
that statement did not satisfy the Right Hon. Gentleman, he
would quote the words of the Right Hon. Member for Har-
wich, in his evidence before the Finance Committee. That
Right Hon. Member had said, " The sum payable far life
annuities should be added to the 49,750,0001., before the
balance was struck, and that would give a total of
50,368,000/., giving a deficiency of 127,0001. upon the
whole expenditure." He (Mr. Thomson) deplored the
deficiency in the revenue of this year ; but certainly such
a deficiency was not unheard of in the history of this
country; and the difference between the present and the
former state of things was, there was now no concealment.
—(Cheers from the Ministerial benches, answered from
the Opposition.) The accounts were now stated plainly
and fairly—(Renewed cheering)—they were plainly and
fairly put before the public; and the desire of the present
Government was, that the people should be acquainted
with the red state of the public finances. The present
Ministers did not borrow money, that they might use it
in appearing to pay off a part of the national debt—
( Cbeers)—they did not take money, borrowed from the
Bank, and secured at a heavy interest, upon what were
called long annuities, and then put it down in their ac-
counts us part of the income received, and applicable to
the discharge of debts and expenses—(Hear, bear, hear)
—they did not attempt any mystification ; they desired
that every thing should be plain and intelligible.—( Hear,
hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman had talked of the mis-
calculations of his Noble Friend. Let him ask the Right
Hon. Gentleman whether miscalculation had not sometimes
happened to the Right Hon. Gentleman.—(Hear, hear.)
In the middle of 1830, did not the Right Hon. Gentle-
man come down to that House, and say he expected
400,0001. from an increase of the consumption of spirits?
—(llear, hear, hear.) Had not the Right Honourable
Gentleman made some miscalculation on that point.—
(Hear, hear.) There had been a deficiency of no less than
100,000/. instead of there being a gain of 400,000/.
( Hear, hear.) But if there was a deficiency now, where,
he would ask, was that deficiency ? Did it consist of mo-
ney taken from the pockets of the people, and lavished
upon undue expenditure or unworthy enterprise ? or did
it not remain in the pockets of the people, to be drawn
thence if the necessities of the State should require it ?
(Cheers from the Opposition.) He understood that cheer,
and perhaps it would have been more gratifying to the
Right Hon. Gentleman had there been a surplus, even
though that surplus had been wrung from the people by a
larger and heavier taxation.—(Cheers from the Ministerial
Benches.)—He was happy to say that it remained is the
pockets of the people, there to fructify by use, and to sti-
mulate their industry.—(Hear, bear.) He asked those
who smiled at that statement, where would have been the
benefit to have extracted that money from the pockets of
the people with the mere view of making a surplus in-
stead of allowing a deficiency ? Perhaps it might be said
that public credit had suffered by the deficiency. He was
aware of that argument, and he was aware that, generally
speaking, it was the duty of the Government to take care
that there should be in the Treasury a sufficient sum to meet
the public charges. But in this instance he was happy to
e able to assert, moat positively, that public credit had
not suffered in the least degree. There had been no in-
dication in the public funds that, by this deficiency of
600,000/., public credit had suffered. But supposing the
Noble Lord had had the prescience which the Right
lion. Gentleman assumed to possess, would he have been
justified in refusing to the people the promised ben, fit of
the reduction of the coal duties and of the duties on cotton?
—(Hear, hear.) Then the Right Hon. Gentleman had
talked of the frequent changes made by the present Govern-
ment in the taxes they had determined to retain or to re•
move, and be accused them of blunders. What ! had the
Right Hon. Gentleman made no blunders?—(Hear, and
laughter.) Had the Right lion. Gentleman forgotten
1830—had he not then changed the duties on spirits no
less than three times ?—(Hear, hear.) Had he not, in
like manner, changed the duties on rum and on sugar?—
(Hear, hear.) Had he forgotten that Sugar Bill which
was universally, and not inaptly, designated by the appel-
lation of " the unintelligible Sugar Bill ?"—(Cheers.)
He did not say these things in the way of blame to the
Right Hon. Gentleman, any more than what the Right
Hon. Gentleman had said had been uttered in blame
of the Noble Lord.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.)
The Right Honourable Gentleman had talked of con-
sistency. What was the conduct of the late Oppo-
sition and of the present Opposition upon this ques
tion of inconsistency? It had been the duty of the pre-
sent Ministry to defend, in office, the system of free trade,
which they bad advocated before they easne into office,
and they had done so consistently.—( Hear, hear.) When
the late Ministers had taken the initiative in the intro-
duction of measures of free trade, the late Opposition had
supported them in it ; but what did he find now—did
they receive support front the present Opposition in pur-
suing those very measures which the present Opposition,
when in office, hail comtnenc-d ? Were there no party
motives which influenced their conduct?—(Cheers.)
Was there no going away—(Cheers)—when consistency
required that they should stay and support their formerly
declared opinions ?—(Hear, hear, hear.) He alluded to
the questions that had lately been brought before them.
He did not allude. to the timber question, for they had
been told that it was po sible to ride off the difficulty with
respect to that question, by the somewhat nice difference
between a financial and it commercial measure.—(Hear,
hear.) But that was not the case with the glove trade,
nor with the silk trade. On those questions the saute
principles, and, if not, the same measures, at least mea-
sures founded on the same principles as those which had
before been adopted by the late Ministry, came into dis-
cussion, and, strange to say, the authors of those mea-
sures—those who had been too happy when his Right
lion. Friend the late Mr. linskisson brought the ques-
tions before the House, to unite with, to follow in his
train—with hint
"'l'o share the triumph, and partake the gale,"
immediately that the present Ministers endeavoured to
follow up his plans and support his system, held back and
tried to deprive them of the honour and triumph which
they had justly earned a right to share.—(Cheers.) He
did not blame the Right Hen. Gentleman fur this. Na
doubt the Right lion. Gentleman had rood and weighty
reasons fur doing so, and likewise for opposing him, when
it fell to his duty to introduce the Sugar Bill. There
was no change in the principle of the Ml.—(Heer, hear,
from the Opposition.) He repeated it, there was no
change in the principle of the Bill, and he challenged any
one to show that there was any change whatever in it.
But if it was insisted that there was any change in one
Bill, or one measure (which he denied), there could not
be a change in all, yet the conduct of the Opposition had
been the same with respect to the Sugar Bill—to the
timber. question—to the duty on gloves—and yet, on
all these he had met with exactly the same results, arid
the same admirable proofs of consistency in the Right
Hon. Gentlemen opposite.—(Cheers ) Of course he
should not impute to them unworthy motives litr such
conduct ; but he should do all that he was permitted to
do ; he should express his doubts of the consistency of their
opinions and of their authority on such subjects.—( Hear,
hear.) A man might change his opiniun fro'n further
examination of a great subject; but i 1 he changed it under
particular circumstances, he ceased to be an authority on
such subjects. He had said so much on this subject, in
reply to the observations that hail been made on tine state•
merit of his Noble Friend ; that statement would, he was
sure, be found quite satisfactory to the country. They
would du justice to the purity of his intentions, and to the
manliness and candour of his statements. his predictions
would be received in the spirit in which they had been
made, and the Noble Lord would be able to make up the
present deficiency, and yet to preserve himself from the
necessity of imposing fresh burdens on the people.
Mr. G. DAWSON—I must say, Sir, that I have seldom
beard a speech more full of inconsistencies—that more di-
verged from the subject under consideration, or that was
more 101 l of wandering statements than that which the
Bight Hon. Gentleman has just delivered.—( Hear.) When
I heard the eloquent speech of my Right Hon. Friend (Mr.
Goulburn), and heard the answer attempted to be given to
itfo for the
the t
ieNNt, aide
Lordor,
oLrodrd h, coouwi(elv
note r g rbeuatt
pnei
tays respect felt
the tich
the Noble Lord cut.—(Hear, hear, from the Ministerial
benches.) The Right Hon. Gentleman told the Hon
Members, that if those cries of " hear, hear," were re-
peated, he should mention the names of certain Members to
the House, and continued. The Noble Lord felt that
he could not answer the eloquent speech (a more elo-
quent speech I hardly ever heard), and, therefore, he
did not make the attempt. He avoided the attack, to which
he felt he could give no answer, and contented himself
with making an appeal to the Howe on his motives and on
the honesty of his intentions. The Noble Lord frequently
makes appeals of thin sort, sod they seldom fail of pro-

ducieg a eoneiderebte effect. But these appeal.: from the
common sense of the House to his honesty must at least
fail him : and be will find that it is so, when perhaps be
least expects it. I do not doubt his honesty, but I doubt
his capacity for business ; and I think that the proof of
that incapacity has been much increased by the Noble
Lord's statement of this evening. The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman, however, has taken a different course ; for, feeling
the impossibility of defending the speech of the Noble
Lord by argument, he has carried the war into the ene-
my's camp, and accused us who sit on this side of the
House of inconsistency ; but in taking this course, it
seems to me that he quite foigot that many of those who
now have seats in the Cabinet were actually Members of
the then Cabinet which had the conducting of these very
measures. When, therefore, the Right Hon. Gentleman
accuses us of waste with respect to the expenditure of
Buckingham Palace, his censure does not fall on my Right
Hon. Friend, hut on Lord Goderich, who was at that time
Ch incellor of the Exchequer—(Cheers)—and who is now
a Member of the Cabinet to which the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman himself belongs. But I can, in a great measure,
understand the uneasiness which the Right Hon. Gentle-
man has shown. I can understand the sympathy which
tie has expressed for the distress of the Noble Lord. I can
imagine why be feels hurt by the ridicule thrown by my
Right lion. Friend on the first and second Budgets of the
Noble Lord ; and God knows, that however strong those
expressions may be, they fall far short of the real merits
of the subject.—(A laugh.) I say that if the Right
Hon. Gentleman has felt annoyed by these ex-
pressions, I can account for it ; for if report speaks
true, he himself was the real parent—the too lately pro-
claimed father of those unfortunate Budgets. It is, there-
fore no matter of surprise to me that the Right lion.
Gentleman should have shown such a feeling on the sub-
ject. The Right Hon. Gentleman, in expressing that
feeling, took occasion to enter upon a tirade against my
Right Hon. Friend, and accused him of having dealt in
great looseness of figures. Now I think that 1 shall be
able to show that this attack on my Right Hon. Friend is
altogether unfounded. The broad statement on which my
Right Hon. Friend went was, that the estinutes of 1831
were greater in amount than the estimates of 1830. In
proof of this statement he went through those estimates
item by item. He showed that the navy estimates were
greater, and the military estimates were greater; the ord-
nance, I believe, were smaller. But the grand effect of
the Right Hon. Gentleman's indignation rested on the
miscellaneous estimates ; and because may Right Hon.
Friend did not at the moment happen to recollect the par-
ticular circumstances connected with those estimates, the j
Right Hon. Gentleman indulged in all the powers of ridi-
rule that he was able to muster on the occasion. The Right
lion. Gentleman, however, must have known that in thus
directing his argument, he was resorting to a mere subter-
fuge for the purpose of directing the attention of the
House from the real fact, that the estimates of the present
Whig Government were in fact larger than those of the
previous Government in MO. I believe that the Right
Hon. Gentleman cannot deny that this is the case by
something between 300,0001. and 400,0001. The Right
lion. Gentleman then went on to load the Members on this
side of the. House with abuse fur the manner in which they
hail conducted their patronage when they were in office ;
and he taunted them with having, as the last act of their
Government, proposed the giving retiring pensions to two
sons of Cabinet Ministers. But does the Right Hon.
Gentleman forget the attempt that has been made within
the last year to palm a much grosser attempt of patron-
age on the public under the pretence of saving and reforma-
tion? It was only the other day that a Bill was intro-
duced to this House (and which Bill is now actually on
time table of the House), which purposes to give a salary of
2,0001. a year to Mr. Abercrombie, as a superannuation
allowance for having been Judge in one of the Courts of
Scotland. And for what was this 2,000/. a year to be
given ? For having perforated eighteen months of duty.
—(Hear, hear.) After this job was stopped last year by
the prorogation of Parliament—after it had been shown
that Mr. Abercrombie might he more judiciously provided
for by making him Chief Commissioner in the Bankruptcy
Court of England, care has actually been taken to fill up
that very office, so that now, on the renewal of the Bill,
the propesimion suggested last year can no longer be fol-
lowed up by this House, which I have no doubt would
have been the case h id the office remained open. After
this, I ask whether the superannuation allowances to which
the Right Hon. Gentleman alluded to are to be compared
to this job, which has been printed under tke sanction of
the present Government? Surely they sink into insig.
nificanee when put in comparison with such a job as that
which I have just describer. Let me also ask in this place,
whether the Bankruptcy Court itself is so deserving of the
wonderful praise that some would bestow on it? Is there
nothing like partiality shown in that Court? However, I
sisal not on this occasion say more upon this subject, as not
many weeks can elapse before the House will have an oppor-
tunity of forming its judgruent upon it. Neither will Igo
through all the topics that have been urged by the Right
Hon. Gentleman, believing that I have seiml enough to
show, that, however deserving of reprehension the late Go-
vernment may have been, they have been most religiously
followed by the present Government. There is one point,
however, in the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman, on
which I must enlarge somewhat more fully. I allude to
the statement that he has made with respect to surplus.
The Right Hon. Gentleman, in a most sweeping manner,
declared that there had been no surplus since 1823 ; and
made this statement on the strength of some figures that he
brought down with him. But I beg to observe, that none
of these figures are before the House; they proceed from a
more private calculation of the Right Hon. Gentleman :
ails can, therefore only be taken quantum valeant. But,
if a regular return on this subject was called for, I am sure
that the calculation of the Right Hon. Gentleman would
prove to be totally unfounded. But as the case stands
already, there is a paper on the table of the House, signed
" Thomas Spring Rice," on the 15th December, 1831,
and from that very document it appears that the Right
Hon. Gentleman's statement is altogether incorrect.
Now, of course, I do not undertake to answer for the
accuracy of the Honourable Member for Limerick's
statement—(A laugh)—hut as we are arguing on the
figures of the Right Honourable Gentleman, I have,
at all events, a right to set the one statement against
the other. I will state from that paper the whole of
the income and the whole of the expenditure of tLe country,
from 1827 to 1830. In 1827 the income was 55,285,626/,
and the expenditure 55,734,000/. So far, then, the
Right Hun. Gentleman is right. There is a deficiency in
that year. But, then, please to observe, the Government
was in the bands of the late Mr. Canning and of the
Noble Lord (Paltnerston) opposite; and, therefore, what-
ever deficiency there may Lave been that year, the Right
Hon. Gentleman must settle the matter with the Noble
Foreign Secretary who sits next him.—(Hear, hear.) But
I very well remember, at that time Mr. Canning fully
explained the deficiency to the [louse, and, unlike the
Noble Lord, came down beforehand, and told the House
there would be a deficiency. It is, however, to 1828,
1821', and 1830, that I shall more particularly allude,
because those were the years my Right Hon. Friend was
Chancellor of the Exchequer, and I had the honour of
holding an office under him, for which reason I feel a pe-
culiar interest in those years, and really believe I shall be
able to shew that, so far from any deficiency, there was a
considerabl-.. surplus. In 1828 the income was 57,485,00 W.
.irl the expenditure 54,836,000/., making a surplus of
2 648,000/. In 1829, the income was 55,821,0001.,
and the expenditure 54,316,000/., making a surplus of
1,475,000/. In 1830, the income was 54,840,0001., and
the expenditure b 3,011,000/., giving a surplus of
1,828,0001. After having made these statements, I think I
may very well place this signed paper by the aide of the
Right Hon. Gentleman's private calculations, and leave the
two to speak for themselves. As the Right Hon. Gentle-
man has told the House what has been done since the
present Government came into office, I will tell him what
was once done before that event took place. Between
1828 and 1830 inclusive, a reduction was effected in the
I estimates of 2,096,000/. ; at the same time a reduction of
j the interest of the debt was &so effected-7°5,000/. on
the funded debt, 128,0001. on the unfunded ; in addition
to this there was a reduction of taxes to the amount of
3,500,000/., including the taxes on beer, leather, snd
other smaller burthens ; and, notwithstanding these reduce
tions in the estimates, the national debt, and the taxes,
my Right Hon. Friend was lucky enough and skilful
enough to leave, according to time paper which I have just
quoted, a surplus of 1,800,000/. And now, what is the
condition of the year 1831 ? The estimates have been in-
creased by three or four millions. Of the taxes, some
certainly have been reduced, but then others have been
increased ; and so ueskilfully have the two been blended
together, that it is impossible to state whether they are
productive or unproductive. As to the surplus, I think
that the statement of the Noble Lord may teach th-
House and the country that no such thing is his-1y to result
from his way of managing matters---(Hear, hear, hear)._
and, in fact, on the face of that very statement, it
appears that there is no reduction of the debt—that
there is no surplus revenue ; but that, on the contrary,
there is a gross deficiency of 700,000/. And this,
in a very few words, is the contrast between the fihancial
operations of the two Governments.—(Cheers.) But the
real question, after all, that is now before the House is
not the couip irative merits of the two Administrations.
The question that we now have to consider is, what is the
reason of the defalcation in the revenue, and the tend dis-

!appointment that has taken place in all the calculations nf, I
the Noble Lord ? My Right Hon. Friend has referred to
the speech of the Noble Earl at the head of his Majesty's
Government ; and, in like manner, I could read to the
House the speech of the Noble Lord on a similar occasion,
and which contains language quite as strong as that of the •
Noble Earl. The speech of the Noble Lord, which was
made after three quarters of the year were over, spoke
with the greatest confi lence of the calculations he was
putting forth. And yet, with all this strong language, all
the predictions of the Noble Lord were falsified—all his •
roost sanguine anticipations were disappointed : for which
reason I ask threw Hon. Gentlemen who are 91 fond of
cheering all that falls from that side of the House, whe-
ther
we must not pronounce that the Noble Lord's confi-
dence was without caution—whether his boldness was not
without judgment—whether his assurances were not with-
out reasonable foundation ? To show how ignorant the
Noble Lord is of the details of office, it is only necessary to
refer to his speech. It is only necessary to recur to that to
show be was wrong in his calculations of both income and
expenditure. According to the statement which he put
forth on the 3d of October, he set the amount of Customs
at 16,750,000/, which, in the end, only produced
16,568,0001., being a deficiency of 233,700/. The Ex-
cise was stated at 16,800.000/. and its produce only
16,303,000/. being a deficiency of 496,000/. In the
Stamps, for a wonder, the N,,ble Lord was right, he hav-
ing set the amount at 6,850,000/., and the produce being
6,917,000/., giving an overplus of 97,830/. in favour of
the Noble Lord. In the Post-office he was also right,
the amount being stated at 1,500,000/., and producing
1,530,000/., leaving 30,000/. overplus. But in the Taxes,
again, he was wrong, for he placed the amount at
5,000,000/., while the produce was only 4,864,000/.,
giving a balance of 135,0001. against the Noble Lord.
The Miscellaneous were equally incorrect, for they were
placed at 350,000/, and produced only 262,000/., giving
a result of 87,000/. contra. The tots' result of all which
was, that while the Noble Lord anticipated a revenue of
47,250,0001., the actual produce only amounted to
46,434,0001.—( Hear, hear)—from which it appeared, that
although the Noble Lord had the advantage of making his
calculations as late as October, the balance was 825,0001.
less than he had anticipated.—(Hear, bear.) Nor had the
Noble Lord any right to allege the variation of contingen-
cies as an excuse; for, having had the advantage of con-
sulting all the Officers of the Treasury on the subject, the
result proved either gross incapacity or gross neglect
in the formation of the calculations. But having
thus shown how the Noble Lord erred in his anticipation
of the revenue, I now come to point out the blunders in
his calculation of the expenditure. The Noble Lord set
the amount of the expenditure at 46,756,000/, but it
afterwards turned out that the actual expenditure was
47,123,000/. ; so that here again there a mistake of
367,000/. ; and by putting the two errors together—that
in the revenue and that in the expenditure—there was no
less a mistake than 1,200,0001. in the calculations of the
Noble Lord for that year. Again, I say, the Noble Lord
must not shift the blame of this from his own shoulders to
those of the Excise and Customs Offices.
Lord ALTHORP—I do not blame them.
Mr. G. DAWSON—The Noble Lord does not blame
others : and I say that I think the blame rests with him ;
and I further say, that these are the real points that call
for answer, and to which the Right Hon. Gentleman has
attempted to give no answer whatever. It is no answer
for us to sit and hear the Right Hon. Gentleman declaim
against my Right Hon. Friend on the subject of the Sugar
Duties. The result of the endeavours of my Right Hoe.
Friend has been to put the finances of the country in a
flourishing condition ; but the result of the endeavours of
the Nohle Lord has been to put them in a most deplorable
state, to which maybe added his futile attempt to mystify
them at the same time.—(Cries of " No, no.") I say that
there has been an attempt at mystification, because he has
endeavoured to call away the attention of the House from
the deficiency of 750,000/. this year, by talking of his
anticipation of a surplus revenue for the next year. But
thus early, I beg to enter my caveat against the calcula-
tions of the Noble Lord. The gist of those calculations
seems to be, that he has an expectancy of 1,300,000/.
as a set-off against the present losses; but unless the
House can make up its mind to have a very good opi-
nion of the Noble Lord's financial skill, I think that it
will be much safer for it to come at once to the conclu-
sion, that the expectancy thus set forth is n orth nothing
at all. Another point to which there has been no answer
given, is the charge, that this subject had never been
properly brought before the House of Commons until it
was forced forward by the gentlemen who sit on this side
of the House. But it is observable, that whenever the
Government wishes to get rid of any unpleasant responsi-
bility (in illustration of which, I may particularly cite
the case of the Committee on the Civil List), they always
cloak Vaeir dread of the danger under the pretence of
coming into the Howe for advice.--(Cheers.) But, in
my opinion, the duty of a Government is to come down
to this House with their own plans. So likewise in the
case of the salaries of the Civil Officers, and in that of the
tithes of Ireland, the same unwillingness of responsibility
has been evinced ; and the same call for assistance has been
made upon this House. But while this line of conduct
has been pursued in these instances, they have been ready
enough in others to act for themselves : witness the little
reluctance they displayed in saddling on the people of this
country the payment of five millions and a half when it
was to serve as a bribe to a foreign Prince to accede to
the objects they had in view.—(Cheers.) The House has
now been sitting for three weeks, and not one word bad
it previous to this evening beard respecting the state of
the finances of the country; and it is only in consequence
of their having beers forced by my Right Hon. Friend to
initiate the subject, that we now have it before the House;
from which I think it appears that these Whig Ministers,
who make a pretence of applying to Parliament on every
subject, are in fact the most unconstitutional Ministers
that ever held the reins of Government in this country.—_
(Laughter, and hear, hear.)

Mr. SPRING RICE thought that his Right Hon.
Friend (Mr. G. Dawson) had uttered some marvellous
incomistencie.s, not only in the same speech, but almost in
the same breath ; having charged the Government, at
almost one and the same instant, with coming to Parlia-
ment for its advice on every topic, and likewise with bar-
ing been too unwilling to come to Parliament for its ad-
vice—(Cheers)—but he (Mr. Rice) really thought that
if a fur comparison were made, it would be found that,
with respect to Parliamentary Committees, the late Go-
vernment was much more prone to shrink from responsi-
bility than the present. It was true that his Right lion.
Friend had alluded to the salaries of the officers of the
Crown. But was not that a case that stood by itself ?
And was not that a case in which they were justified in
coming to the House of Commons, and saying, " In every
other case we are willing to decide for ourselves, but in
this, as it has particular reference to our own matters, we
think we had better throw the decision of it on the
representatives of the people, seeing that it is an inquiry
which has long been called for, and that we are ready to
pledge ourselves to carry the recommendation of the
Committee into effect." This was what lie thought they
were fully justified in doing: and they had shown their
sincerity by carrying every recommendation of the Com-
mittee into effect, even before its report was printed, and
laid before the House.—(Cheers.) Another charge
which his Right Hon Friend had brought against the
Government was, that they had submitted the ques-
tion of the Civil List to a Committee up stairs.--
But would not his Right Honourable Friend have
fowl one of the first to have taunted them if they
had not pursued that course ? and was not that the very
point on which the late Government went out of office ;
and had not the present Administration come into office,
pledged in a manner to that very step?—(Cheers.) And
yet, with this very fact staring him in the face, the Right
lion. Gentleman thought proper to bring a charge against
the Government for doing the very thing that, had it been
undon., would have made the gravamen of his attack?
The Right Hon. Gentleman then went on to charge my
Right Hon. Friend near me (Mr. P. Thomson) with
having been desultory in his observations ; but, lie would
ask, were not those observations in reply to what had pre-
viou.ly fallen from the Hon. Member for Boroughbridge?
Were act all those remarks which had been complained of,
made in following up the observations of that Hon. Gen-
tleman ? It was not my Right lion. Friend who brought
forward the question of foreign policy. Quite the con-
trary. But the Right Hon. Gentleman is too experienced
a debater not to know that that subject, having been intro-
duced by the lion. Member for Boroughbridge, my Right
lion. Friend was driven to reply to him. In short, did
his Right lion. Friend introduce any of those topics that
had been called desultory ?—No, he did not. They were
introduced by Members on the other side of the House;
and he had been necessarily led to the observations that he
had made in reply. He (Mr. Rice) was quite willing to
admit that many of those observations might have been
par .d. —(Heer.) For his own part, he could not se why
foreign policy, or the manifold protocols of Holland and
Belgium had been brought forward ; though, by the way,
he might be allowed to remark that they were the only
issue of paper to which he had ever heard the Hon. Mem-
ber for Boroughbridge object.—(Hear, and a laugh.)
His Right Hun. Friend (Mr. Dawson) had found fault
with the estimates of last year, and had accused the Go-
vernment of departing from its principles therein. Butt
:n deciding that question, tilt), were bound to look at the
tate of the country. With fogad t, that iutvuai mate,

1