The Sun.
London, England, 1861-04-26 00:00:00

IRON-CASED VESSELS.

Mr. KNIGHTLEY asked the Secretary to the Admi-
ralty whether, in the contracts for the iron-cased vessels
ordered by the Government, and now in course of construc-
tion, any stipulation had been made as to the quality of the
iron to be used; and whether it was proposed to subject
the plates to any, and, if any, what, test to prove their
strength ?
Lord C. PAGET said that this matter was under the
careful consideration of the Admiralty, and a commission,
including some most eminent scientific men, MIS appointed
to inquire into the subject, and give Government every
assistance.

RAILWAY ENGINE-DRIVERS.
Mr. BENTINCK asked the President of the Board of
Trade whether he had lately received a deputation of rail-
way engine.drivers, the object of which deputation was to
call his attention to the consequences of that class of rail-
way servants being overworked, and asking for the inter.
ference of the Board of Trade in the matter ; and, if so,
whether any, and what, answer had been given?
Mr. M. GIBSON said that he had received such a de-
putation, and confessed he was surprised to hear of the
uqualm 9f howl Owe aleA we r 9 cmployed, amyer,

he informed them that Government could not interfere be-
tween them and their employers.

THE BUDGET-ADJOURNED DEBATE.

Mr. S. FITZGERALD, on resuming the adjourned
debate on the motion for going into committee of Ways
and Means, complained that the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer ha I not given any explanation in reply to the tem-
perate questions which proceeded from the Oilpo-
'sktion benciles: Several considered that the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer over-estimated his re-
ceipts for the present year, and was sanguine in
respect to certain sources of income on which
he relied, but which it was believed he would never realise.
It was also strongly objected to the financial scheme of the
right hon. gentleman that he proposed to remove a tax
' which he could not replace, and which would have
to be supplied by au addition to other taxes which were
already unbearable. He believed that on both sides of the
house it was considered that, in reference to this particular
tax, the right hon. gentleman had been influenced only by
a desire to conciliate the member for Birmingham (Mr.
Bright), a course which should not be pursued by any dis-
tinguished statesman. The right hon. gentleman bad not
been candid in his st ttement with respect to the year
1860-61, for he said that the deficiency in income as corn•
pared with expenditure was only £2,270,000. But it ap-
peared that there was a further deficiency of £750,000,
which would have to be provided for out of the current
year. With reference to 1861-62, he repeated
that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was too
sanguine in his expectations. In support of that assertion
he would ask if any one acquainted with the state of things
in China was satisfied that the sum of £1,000,000 voted for
the expenses relative to that country would be found suffi-
cient ? The right hon. gentleman went on the assumption that
there was to be no failure in the harvest, and that peace
was to prevail on the continent, but could any statesman
be sanguine on either of these points? (Hear.) The Foreign
Secretary stared the other evening that an indemnity to the
amount of £650,000 had been received from the Chinese
authorities, but it turned out the sum really received was
only £212,000. He contended that the Chancellor of the
Exchequer could not realise by January next the amount
which he anticipated from China, for of the £550,000 that
would be in the hands of the Government from Chinese
customs not one farthing would come into the possession of
the right hon. gentleman. Notwithstanding this the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer took credit for that money.
He believed that Mr. Bruce had already fol-
lowed the example of the French and American
GovernmentS, and paid the British merchants in full, and
therefore not one farthing of that money would be avail-
able for the purposes of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
(Hear, hear.) Another objection to the budget was the re-
peal of the duty on paper; and with an admitted deficiency
on the income last year, and a probable deficiency for the
current year, the Chancellor of the Exchequer had
spoken in support of repealing this duty of unbroken
pledges, but ho believed there was no member of
that house so overburthened with broken pledges as the
right hon. gentleman. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) He
denied that the house was pledged to the repeal of this
tax, though they were with regard to other taxes. How
many members of the house were there who, at the last
election, did not express an opinion that the income tax
should bo repealed? He said those who agreed with him
(Mr. S. Fitzgerald) considered that the Chancellor
of the Exchequer had understated their expenditure,
and exaggerated their receipts for the current year. If
after the statements that would be made on
his (Mr. Fitzgerald's) side of the house, the Government
still said this was a surplus, they must be responsible for
that assertion. But if there were such surplus he and those
who agreed with him would not consent to the remission
of a tax which could net be replaced, and, as he previously
stated, could only be supplied in the event of a deficiency
from other intolerable imposts. (Hear, hear.)
_

Mr. M. GIBSON said—The financial scheme that has
been submitted to the house has undergone much and varied
inquiry, and I remark that the investigations which hon.
members appear to have undertaken have lc‘d them on diffe-
rent points to very different conclusions. It is not for the
Government to complain of the most searching inquiry into
such a financial proposal as it may think fit, on its respon-
sibility, to recommend for the adoption of Parliament; I,
for one, should be the last to complain, or to think that the
House of Commons should be deterred by any consideration
from giving the fullest attention, or applying the most
searching investigation, t the financial plan of the Govern-
ment. But there is this remarkable difference that strikes
me at once, that, while the hon. member for Stamford (Sir
S. Northcote) tells us he is satisfied with the estimates of
the revenue from Customs and Excise, as submitted by the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, the hon. gentleman who has
just spoken disputes those estimates, and the calculation of
what they will probably yield, and says the Government is
misleading the house into a reckless remission of taxation in
those sources of revenue. I believe the probable yield of
the Excise and Customs has been honestly estimated, in
conference with the departments which can alone judge
what is likely to be the yield of those great sources of re-
venue, and I will undertake to say that those estimates
would in all likelihood have been the same if the right hon.
gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) had been Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, instead of my right hon. friend. (Hear, hear.) These
are not matters respecting which officers of departments can
plot in concert with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in order
to cook up an account that may mislead the House of Com-
mons. (Hear, hear.) Nothing of the kind. These, I repeat,
are honest estimates, niad by men of judgment and integrity,
and I believe that they represent as accurately as can be
ascertained what will be the revenue of the incoming finan-
cial year. (Hear.) Sir, I must say lam surprised, not at
the criticisms which have been passed on this budget, but
at some of the statements which have been made respecting
it. The hon. and learned member for Mallow (Mr. Long-
field) said he viewed this budget with abhorrence both in
its substance and its details. I certainly should not have
thought it calculated to give rise to such emotions. (Hear,
and a laugh,) lam astonished also at the indications from
some hon. members of what they would have preferred. I
had not the good fortune to hear the speech of the jion.
member (Mr. B. Stanhope), but I am told it was a very
good one. (Hear, hear.) He said he should have preferred
if the Government had proposed a larger income-tax, ac-
companying this proposal with a reduction of the duties on
tea and sugar; but I do not believe that that is the opinion
of the party with whom the hon. gentleman acts, and I
never heard that they would have been prepared this year
to agree to an increase of the income-tax if it were accom •
parried by a remission of indirect taxation. It has not been
thought right to propose a larger income-tax than 9d. in the
pound, though, according to the lion, gentleman, one of 10d.
or 11d. in the pound ought to be proposed in order to reduce
the duties on tea and sugar.

Mr. B. STANHOPE—Perhaps I may be allowed to ex-
plain what I did say. After stating that I did not wish to
apply the unnecessary penny in the way proposed by the
Government, I added that I should not object to spend that
penny, or even an additional penny, in taking off indirect
taxation.

Mr. M. GIBSON—Then there was the hon. member for
Chippenham, who objected to the Budget, and wished for a
practical amendment. Anything, ho said, for a practical
amendment, in order to condemn the scheme of the Govern-
ment. Well, I am only sorry there is not a practical amend-
ment before us. (Hear, hear.) We want to know what is
the alternative proposition by which hon. members would
abide as a substitute for the plan of the Government. (Cheers.)
The hon. memlSer who opened the discussion said nothing
very definite. His was a speech full of negative proposi-
tions, but he told the Government that their responsibility
was great, and that their first duty was to provide ade-
quately for the public service, maintain the public faith, and
if remissions wore proposed to give them in the way most
likely to benefit the country. (Opposition cries of " Hear.")
That is good advice, and it is my belief that the Govern-
ment have acted consonantly with it. (No.) We have, as
we believe, provided adequately for the public service. We
are as alive as the hon. member can be to the necessity for
upholding public credit, and we believe that in the remis-
sions which we propose we are doing what, on the whole, at
the present time will prove most beneficial to the general
interests of the country. (Cheers.) The hon. gentleman who
last spoke asked me to explain one item of income which
he seemed to think very doubtful—namely, the amount
which will be received from China in the course of the pre-
sent financial year. The hon. member has given us his esti-
mate of the probable yield of the customs duties at the
various ports cpen to our trade in China; but let me re-
mind him that ho gave us an estimate of what had been re-
ceived during 1859, which was a year of war—(hear, hear)—
and he also failed to tell us that under the treaty now ports
are to be opened. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member seems to
doubt whether the departments in England and the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, with a full knowledge of the de-
tails and a full sense of their responsibility, are able to give
the probable yield of the Customs of the United Kingdom ;
and yet he, an independent member, is prepared to give us,
from some private sources of information, the exact amount
of what is to be the year's yield of customs duties in some
ports in China. (Hear, hear.) Now, with all respect for
him, I prefer to take the estimate of Lord Elgin and baron
Gros, who have told her Majesty's Government that, under
the treaty of Tien-tsin, there will be certain sums received,
amounting to about £1,000,000, during the present financial
,
year. hear.) There are, in fact, five quarters', or
nearly a year and a
-hall's receipts ; but the money will be
forthcoming, and we shall he able to carry it to the ere,lit of
the country during the present financial year. (Hear, hear.)
Out of this £1,000,000 I am not aware that anything that
Mr. Bruce may do or may have done in consequence of
delay in his receipt of instructions can make a difference
exceeding £90,000 or £lOO,OOO in the estimate of my right
hon. friend. This million is to be disposed of rateably be-
tween the merchants and the Government. It has ap-
peared to us that, considering that this country has ex-
pended some millions for, as we are told, the protection of
merchants and of trade in China, there should be out of this
indemnity at least a rateable proportion retained by the Go-
vernment. (Hear, hear.) Basing our opinion upon autho-
rity of the only persons who are qualified to guide us in this
matter—namely, those who have been on the spot, who
have negotiated this treaty, and who are responsible for the
advice they give,—we believe that a moderate estimate of
the araount which can be carried to the account of the
British Government during the financial year is at least
£750,000. (Cheers.) I should infinitely-have preferred
keeping witlliu ply more .inanicainte pr9yiuce, to 101 l