The Sun.
London, England, 1861-04-23 00:00:00

hon. gentleman says every day brings £IOO,COO to the reve-
nue ; so that, if there were no Sundays, according to this
calculation, you would gain a total sum of £5,200,000 per
annum. But you can hardly rely on that reason as an ex-
planation of the deficiency. (Hear.) The right hon. gentle-
man ascribed the increased importation of butter, cheese,
and similar commodities to the removal of duties ; but I
think it was due to a much sadder cause—namely, the
failure in the production of the articles of food required by
the people of this country. (Hear.) I will not enter into tho
question whether gieat importations are always a test of
national rosperity ; nor, although, no doubt, when we im-
port gold, that gold must be paid for in our exports, whe.
ther the exportation of our home treasure to meet a sudden
demand, and the monetary difficulty consequent upon it, is
not in reality a national calamity. (Hear.) I only wish to
state, with every deference to those from whom I differ, my
conviction that the provision which the Chancellor of the
Exchequer proposes to make for the future is neither safe,
wise, nor politic. (dean) I ask what was our position at
the termination of the last financial year ? The right hon.
gentleman stated the deficiency at £2,271,000, part of which
ho said belonged to a previous year, although it had all still
to to paid for; and he told us that it was very gratifying
the result was such as it was. No doubt the case might
have been worse; but I confess that, although authorised

by Parliament, the mode in which the deficiency was met is
not eatisfactory to my mind. It was met by the absorption
to a great extent of our available means for future purposes
—(hear)—and by an increase of the National Debt, besides
the continuance of the debt through the renewal of Exche.
quer-bonds which had been promised to be paid off. All
this was done by the sanction of Parliament, and I do not
censure the right hon. gentleman in any way for the course
he pursued ; but I wish to explain that, if adopted as a per-
manent measure for meeting our permanent wants, it is
neither satisfactory nor safe. (Hear.) With that absorption
and that addition to the National Debt, is it wise to have re-
course to a remission of taxation of a character that cannot
restore and recuperate itself, and which cannot be reimposed
in case of need by any future Ministry? (Hear, hear.) I
say, then, that the Government ought to have been warned
that the right course for them to follow was to retain taxa-
tion to such an extent as would secure us against every
exigency, and to reduce or remove only that portion of our
taxation which by increased consumption and the aug-
mented resources of the country might be restored to the
amount required by the public service. If there ever was
a moment when prudence would be dictated to a Parlia-
ment, looking to our foreign relations, looking to our home
concerns, to the state of our trade, and the uncertainty of
the future, I may be bold enough to say that is the time
when over- caution would be a virtue, and rashness a griev-
ous vice. (Hear.) But, assuming that we have perfect
peace both at home and abroad, and a good harvest next
autumn, let us consider what arc the wants of the country,
and what the means by which it is proposed to meet them.
Our whole expenditure, we are told, is £69,900,000 for the
year. Now, that, I have no doubt, has been fixed as the
maximum point it can reach, because the budget shows that
we ought to be insurcd.against any fresh demand of money.
I do not believe the Chancellor of the Exchequer would pro-
pose to remit the duties which he proposes to take off if he
did not feel confident that under no circumstances whatever
could he have to call upon this house for further grants of
money. So I take that for granted. There are two items
which strike me as a little doubtful. I speak with diffidence
upon such a point, but, if lam net mistaken, our naval
affairs are in a state of transition. There are changes being
adopted in the form of construction and arming of ships
which must be very costly in their nature. I will not say
much about the money for fortifications, but the right hon.
gentleman must recollect, although he did not mention it
in his speech, that the interest upon these annuities, in pro- ,
portion as the money is expended,must increase the charges
upon the country. (Hear, hear.) Those are two items
which are not, perhaps, of exceeding importance, but still
Ciey are matters which suggest doubts as to the future ex-
penditure of the count-y. The total revenue is put at
£71,823,000, giving an apparent surplus of £1,900,000. Sup-
posing that all is prosperity and sunshine in this country
during the next year, I do not believe—although I speak
without authority upon that point—l do not believe that
the estimate of the right hon. gentleman as to the produce
of the Customs and Excise are at all exaggerated. But will
ho tell us that there may not be such circumstances in this
country, such as a failure in the coming crops, such a ces-
sation of demand, such a stagnation of trade in the manu-
facturing districts, and loss in the agricultural districts, as
may materially diminish the revenue of this country P. I
do not make any charge against the right hen. gentleman,
but he is aware how £600,000 disappeared last year from a
failure in the crop of hops and of malt. One may be per-
mitted to say that nothing can be more dangerous than to
reckon upon everything being in a state of perfect prospe-
rity when we know how much a partial adversity will cost
us. There is another item which appears to me of g doubt-

ful character—the £750,000 which the right hon. gentle.
man expects to receive from China. (Hear.) There is the
credit of £BOO,OOO of last year, which is, I suppose, to be pro-
vided out of balances in the Exchequer, or by Exchequer-
bonds. Then, on the other side, we have this £750,000. I
can't help thinking it would be rather the wiser course to
await the certainty of such a payment before we proceeded
to dispose of it. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman calcu-
lates upon a surplus of £400,000, but if this £750,000 is not
paid there will be a deficiency of more than £300,000. Once
it is in our Exchequer, we can do what we like with it ;
but, looking at the uncertainty of events in China, unless
I had been assured by the right hon. gentleman that the
whole cost of the China war will be met by the sums
already voted, I should have said, " Let us wait awhile.
The balance is not yet struck,' and we may be called upon
to pay a good deal more than we at present expect." We
are told we are to have the £750,000 clear, but I do not
clearly understand that point. The noble lord opposite
told us that the amount which had already been received
from the Chinese Government was £250,000. We must,
remember that of the 8,000,000 taels which tho Chinese
Government has engaged to pay, about £050,000 is appli-
cable in the fire-A instance to the payment of claims of Bri-
tish merchants. (Hear.) If only £250,000 has been re-
ceived, there is still £400,000 to pay before the British Ex-
chequer can get a single penny. Now, is China such a
speedy paymaster; can she pay so rapidly r In Lord Elgin's
despatch of Oct. 25 he says that to obtain a large indemnity
is simply impossible, and then he goes on to say that it will
be necessary to take 40 per cont, of the gross Customs'
revenue of China for about four years in order to provide
payment of the indemnities already claimed by Baron Gros
and himself. We may therefore calculate upon consider-
able uncertainty in the transmission of money from China
to the British Exchequer. Upon those considerations I,
for one, would rather say, " Let us pause in our remission
of taxation, or at least let us pause before we remit any
duty which is not of a character to be revived if once re-
mitted." (Hear, hear.) I believe that it is for the in-
terests of the country and the promotion of real economy
that the Government should not be a needy Government,
and should not be compelled to borrow, nor to have re-
course to any shifts upon the occurrence of exigencies. The
right hon. gentleman has estimated that he has £1,900,000
to dispose of, and he does so by taking off ld. from the in•
come-tax for three-quarters of the year, and remitting the •
paper duties from October the Ist, or half a year's loss to
revenue. But for next year he gives up in reality the whole
of these duties; he gives up £1,100,000 of income-tax and
£1,39,000 of paper duties, making together £2,400,000.
Upon the Ist of May, 1862, there will be another £1,000,000
of Exchequer-bonds falling due, which ought to be paid, and
which a promise had been given should be paid. Thus there
will be next year a reduction of £3,400,000 in our taxation,
and unless it can be shown to the house that there will be
a great reduction in our expenditure, I say it would be un-
wise to assent to such a sweeping reduction of our income.
(Hear, hear.) Now, upon what grounds can we expect a
large reduction of expenditure ? I should be very happy to
support any prudent measures of economy, but when it
comes to a question of economising in what is necessary
for the safety of the country, or for the maintenance of our
good faith, I doubt whether this house or the country would
assent to any reduction. (Hear, hear.) Weall hope there
may be no wars in Europe ; but can we bo sure of it P We
all trust that if war does break out, we may be excepted
from it ; but are there not in such cases measures of precau-
tion, measures which good faith and honour require us to.
take, which may entail large expenditure ? And how could
we meet that expenditure with our present financial pros-
£l,3oo,ooo a year, and which, when once ,
pros-
pects ? We are about to take off duties rwehmiicthtedprocdouuclde
never be renewed. (Hoar, hear.) If the same wants which.
occurred last year should arise in the next year, we shall not
only have to restore the penny of the income-tax we are now'
about to remit, but we must add another penny to replace
the void caused by the remission of the paper duties.
1e ct
Therei o n i ofs
neon doubtet xstpressesmischief
aa
(Hear, hear.) We must again have recourse to an increase(
ettui
the
taxation
ttwx
avih.
power
rti
rohonyefweachaeorosan.ur i .
.I:le6em(
dawl (Hear, of direct taxation, and whatever may be the comparative
merits of direct and indirect taxation, it must be borne i
mind that direct taxation might be pushed to such an extent
as to become not only unpopular, but impossible, giear4
I cannot help recollecting that in 1853 the income tax was
ear, hear.)
7d. in the•pound, and in 1860 it was 10d. with a forced col-.
beyond its
thatixspeahy i
during meodfnei rantbethco
i;tllioarnned.coblAnlye :ft,
. therehaordinaryt tihs
eincomeli anothermi
vote of tbis house it was, in April, 1857, reduced to 9d.
The year 1857 was a most calamitous year for all the inte-
rests of the country. Money was at one time
10 per cent..
and yet, I believe, the revenue from all ;other 'sources was
wonderfully increased. So when you remove duties on con-
sumption you may, in replacing it by direct taxation, de-
feat your own intention. (Hear, hear.) We do not take
into any account the probabilities of war—Nve do not want
to go to war with any country, and I hope no country wilt
go to war with us. But how do we stand, even for a time
of peace ? The operation of a bad ;harvest has already
diminished the revenue. Trade has been greatly affected
by the recent events in India, which have diminished
the means of consuming our manufactures in that
s
empire. Our trade thewith United States ha
and to a great 'extent stopped
by what has occurred i
been disorganised,
in America. Only look at.
the returns of the last two months, and see to what an ex-.
tent onr manufacturing interests have been affected
by these events. If the disorganisation continues yea
cannot expect to see prosperity and employment revive
iii an waufoctgrius ilatricto, %elicit§ Iwo tc, rho Au.