The Sun.
London, England, 1861-05-03 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS-YESTERDAY.
TILE ITALIAN PARLIAMENT.

The Marquis of NORMANBY asked her Majesty's
Government whether they had any objection to give a copy
or extract of any despatch from Sir J. Hudson forwarding
the report made to the Parliament now sitting at Turin as
to the numbers of electors qualified to vote at the late election,
and of those who gave their suffrages to the present sitting
members, and of those who voted for other candidates.
The noble marquis said, as the Sardinian Chambers had
given the information to the public, the Government would
not refuse to give copies of the papers he asked for.
Lord WODEHOUSE said no such despatch had been
received. He was, however, assured that the Parliament
of Turin was a fair exponent of the feeling of the Italian
people.
The house then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.--YESTERDAY.
THE BUDGET.

On the motion for going into committee of ways and
means,
Mr. HUBBARD moved as an amendment, " That it is
not expedient to remit taxation to such an extent, that the
annual produce of the remitted taxes shall exceed the esti-
mated surplus revenue, in the budget for the current
financial year." He did not mean to go into the question as
to the right which Government had to expect of receiving
any sum from China within the financial year which had
just begun. He took the assurance of the President of the
Board of Trade to be satisfactory on that head respecting the
sum of £70,000 which ought to be carried to the credit of
the Chinese expedition. He would ask the attention of the
house to the course pursucd by a prudent manufacturer,
who carried on extensive operations, and had built a mill,
which he had insured. The min was burnt down, and he
received the amount of it. The first thing he did was to
rebuild his mill with the money which he received, or paid
it away in the discharge of the debt incurred in doing so.
Ho could not see whore the difference lay between the pru-
dent course of that manufacturer and that which a prudent
Chancellor of the Exchequer ought to take in his dealings
with the country at large. He believed that the £750,000
expected from China ought not to be placed on the credit
side of the national account, and the balance of surplus,
instead of being £1,923,000, would be £1,173,000. But he
would assume the balance was really £1,923,000, because it
was not upon one point only which he wished to insist.
His right hon. friend proposed to deal with that sum, and,
in the course of his eloquent speech, he told the house that
he intended to give up about one million income tax, and
£1,400,000 paper duty. He wondered how his right hon.
friend would deduct £2,400,000 from £1,923,000; but the
course pursued by the right hon. gentleman reminded him
of the tricks of the conjuror, who produced from the same
box flowers, feathers, and some blind pigeons. (Cheers,
and laughter.) He wondered whether his right hon.
friend would be more dexterous than conjurors at coun-
try fairs, and it was behind the scenes which he wished
. the house to go to see how £2,400,000 was met by a sur-
plus of £1,923,000. In the first place the Chancellor of
the Exchequer proposed to collect the income tax at
the reduced amount for only three quarters of the year,
and the paper duty he did not propose to remit on the
15th August, because that would trench too much upon
his balance, but on the Ist October next. He now came to
the point to which he desired to call the attention of the
house, and he would ask whether it was a wise and safe
policy for a finance minister to propose so large a remission
of taxation, and to justify that, not by the surplus at his
command, but to measure that surplus at his command
against a distant period of the financial year, within which
he proposed to confine the measures of remission. Assum-
ing that the Chancellor of the Exchequer represented a
northern constituency to whom the repeal of the sugar duties
would be an acceptable boon, he (Mr. Hubbard) could un-
derstand the right hon. gentlemen, in proposing such a mea-
sure, to say he could not make the remission at present, but
that he would do so from December next, the loss from which
would be only one and a half million. With regard to such
a mode of making remissions, it had, as he humbly sub-
mitted, a most injurious effect upon the future interests of
the country, and hardly came within the province of those
propositions which the right hon. gentleman had chal-
lenged the house to discuss. (Hear.) Ile would now come
to matters relating to the importation of foreign merchan-
dise, and undoubtedly, taking one year with another, a
country with the productive power of England exported
more than it imported. But from the ordinary course of
trade there would arise exceptional circumstances, and the
year 1847 was a remarkable instance. This country and
the adjacent islands suffered from scarcity of grain, and the
consequence was that they had to import not less than
£20,000,000 worth to supply the wants of the people. That
was paid for by gold to a large extent, and not by exports.
The late season was like that of 1847, and the country had
consequently been suffering from scarcity of grain products.
and that had led to unusually large importations. The
Chancellor of the Exchequer had told them that, whereas in
1859.60 this country imported £17,000,000 worth of corn, it
last year and to this time had imported £37,000,000 worth,
being an excess of £20,000,000. But who could say that
that expressed the loss which the country would suffer from
the failure of the grain crops? 'With regard to the impor-
tation of wine to the extent of 11 million during the past
year, he was assured by one 'of the most eminent houses in
the City that the general character of those additional im-
ports of the past twelve months had been of a decidedly in-
ferior description, and that a large quantity of French
wines for home consumption weuld entail considerable loss
upon the shippers and importers, and would prevent further
shipments. He had been informed that a large quantity of
this wine was spoiling in the docks. Ons of two things must
follow these importations—the wine must either go into
consumption and ruin the constitutions of those who drank
it, or remain in the docks and ruin those who imported it.
(Hear, hear.) Leaving out of the accounts the money ex-
pended for cheese, butter, and eggs, it appeared that this
country had imported corn and wine to the value of about
£22,000,000, and that was an expression of the loss suffered
by British capitalists and British farmers. (Hear, hear.) As
regarded the revenue, it appeared they had received <£Bo,ooo
from the duty on grain, and about £373,000 in excess of the
expected duty upon wine, making about £1,200,000; and
in addition to that amount he found from a paper circulated
yesterday that by the system of quarterly collections of the
income tax a large sum had been obtained by the Chancellor
of the Exchequer. The hon. gentleman then referred to
letters which he had received, showing that the tax collec-
tors in some parts of the country had demanded the pay-
ment of the income tax due on March 20 three weeks before
that period ; and he also stated that he himself, residing in
St. Margaret's, Westminster, had received a notice that in
consequence of the important financial measures of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, imperative orders had been
issued to collect the income tax forthwith, and consequently
he had paid on the 12th March every farthing of income tax
which would fall due on the 20th. He wanted to know
whether the extra £2,000,000 income tax had been
collected under the same pressure ? No doubt his right
honourable friend would say it was perfectly legal, and
so it was, but he (Mr. Hubbard) . desired to know
whether this system of collection was to be maintained, for
he had received a series of letters on the subject from all
parts of the country. (Hear, hear.) He wanted to know
whether the taxpayers were to be called upon for the pay.
ment of their taxes, not merely immediately when they were
due, but three or four weeks before they became due. (Hear,
hear.) That was a subject which he hoped the house would
find was not below their dignity to inquire into. (Hear,
hear.) The hon. member, having quoted a former speech
of Mr. M. Gibson's, in which the practice of making pro-
spective budgets was censured, proceeded to say that he
thought that admirable doctrine in any case, but doubly ap-
plicable to the budget of the present year, which antici-
pated not only expenditure but income. It was not equi..
table, he contended, irrecoverably to relinquish a tax and
leave the responsibility of providing for the deficit upon the
Chancellor of the Exchequer of another year. One word
in conclusion. He thought the house would not require to
be told that he was not moved by no party feeling, but that
his object was to point out defects which referred to the
present scheme, but might affect the financial system of
the country for many successive years. The hon. member
concluded by thanking the house for the patience with
which he had been listened to.
The CHANCELLOR, of the EXCHEQUER said that it
was his intention to reply tt) the hon. member in the briefest
terms possible ; and he must confess that he failed alto..
gether to discern the connexion between a considerable
portion of that speech and the motion which his hon. friend
had submitted to the house; so much so, that out of the
numerous details into which his hon. friend had entered,
there wasnot one which might not have belonged to ano-
ther occasion. It appeared to him (Mr. Gladstone) a
matter of very great doubt whether the speech had been
made to the motion, or the l tatioanharran.ged to square with
the speech. (Hear, heat.
upon him the necessity
cheese,
I:s4v
thethat he
answer respectingshould make no
of iutyin on. friend had imposed
which had only the remotest,vosilges and other matters
he
connexion with the
question on the table ; neither should
friend's comparison between certain. syatesuanZer his hon.
the proceedings of a young man who might, have largefinanceance and
con-
nexions at Newmarket and elsewhere, becanthe
attacked was that which had been established by law
this country, and, with respect to that touching letter Which
had been read by his hon. friend, he must say that that
letter having been addressed to his hon. friend in his capa-
city of chairman of the income tax committee, he (Mr.
Gladstone) regretted, as a member of that committee, that
his hon. friend had not taken the usual course of submitting
the mat ter of complaint to the executive, so that the whole
affair might have been carefully inquired into. (Hear,
hear.) He should not follow his hon. friend into the dry
details which he had quoted from circulars which had been
prepared by persons who were not under the control of the
Government, but if his hon. friend had shown them to him
it would have been his- duty to ascertain the facts and to lay
them before the house. There was but one point respecting
the income tax which required notice. His hon. friend
had said that if such extraordinary power was exercised to
get in the income tax this year, the revenue of the coming
year would be proportionably impoverished. Now, that
might be very fair to use in an argument, but was untrue
as a matter of fact, as so far from the collection of the in-
time tax having outrun the collection of the previous soa.