The Sun.
London, England, 1861-05-31 00:00:00

beginning of a serious innovation, fraught with danger to
the country. (Oppositicn cheers.) It might, perhaps, be
enough fur me to say that not one syllable had been adduced
from any speech of mine to sustain that belief. Whether '
such be the desire of the hon, member for Birmingham I
know not, but it is not mine. (Some interruption.) lam
sure that hon. gentlemen opposite will permit me to state
in a few words the view I take of the proposal of her Ma-
jesty's Government. We are not cow at the beginning, but
at the accomplishment and consummation of a great series
of legislative changes. We are not introducing novel prin-
ciples, but working up the residue of great and beneficent
operations introduced by great men, whose names will ever
live in the grateful memory of the country, and who ad-
vanced them up to a certain point and then handed them
over to us simply and in all humility, but likewise in all
fidelity, to complete. I confess that, in my opinion, the days
of what are called by their friends comprehensive, and by
their enemies ambitious, budgets are gone by. They began
in 1842 and 1845 with Sir R. Peel, who had a great work to
do, and who set about it like a workman equal to his busi-
ness. Then came in 1852 the budget of the right hon. mem-
ber for Buckinghamshire, who quite justifiably in his
own point of view, though I did not concur with him, pro-
duced an extensive and comprehensive new financial plan.
In 1853 I was myself responsible for a plan of the same
kind, and again last year, taking the opportunity presented
by the treaty of France, we introduced a measure which in
our view went to complete the whole of that series of changes
which had been initiated, though not entirely, in modern
times by Sir R. Peel. Therefore, it is not the commence-
ment, but the conclusion of our commercial legislation that
we are now proposing, and viewed as the conclusion I put
fearlessly to the house the proposal for the repeal of the
paper duty as being one as well and as firmly founded in all
the sound principles of finance and of industrial economy
as any proposal that during the course of the last 20 years
was ever submitted to and met the approval of Parliament.
(Cheers.) I heard with deep regret last night the speech
of the right hon. baronet the member for Tamworth, though
not indeed with the same regret as I heard some other re-
marks made by the hon. baronet the member for the West
Riding. I hope that the hon. member for the West Riding
will express his regret before the conclusion of the debate—
(laughter, and cries of "hear")—for having, with or with-
out premeditation, spoken of the American Government as
a great Republican bubble. (A cry of " Hear.") lam
sorry to hear that phrase cheered by a single member, and
had hoped that that was the first and last time we should
hear any member allude in ajeering way to the tremendous
calamity which threatens to fall upon a great country—
(cries of " oh," and cheers)— but T do not believe that the
hon. member for the West Riding had any intention to
speak in such a spirit. With regard to the right hon. baro-
net the member for Tamworth, I cannot express the regret
with which I heard it Stated by him that this measure is
one which appears to aim at some extensive substitution of
direct for indirect taxation and is not a measure of free

trade. The recollection of the long years during which I
sat by the side of one in whose memory the hon. baronet is
entitled to feel the deepest interest led me to a different con-
clusion, and I think it would puzzle the hon. baronet to draw
a distinction in principle between this last Excise duty which
we are now proposing to remove and those other Excise
duties, noc one whit more objectionable in principle or more
oppressive in practice, which his honoured father was the
instrument of repealing. (Hear, hear.) I certainly had
hoped that in the work of removing this description of legis-
lation from the statute-book we might have had the advan-
tage of the hon. baronet's assistance; but, if not, we must
still appeal to the convictions and experience of this house,
and until I see the contrary, I never will believe that this
house, after the eleventh hour, will withdraw the last hand
from the work it has hitherto carried through with firmness
and courage ; and on the present occasion I anticipate a de-
cision which shall be faithful to the spirit of the former acts
of the Legislature. (Cheers.)
Sir J. RAMSDEN rose to explain. He said—The right
hon. gentleman has commented in somewhat severe terms
on the observations I ventured to utter. He said that I
stated that previous surpluses had been actually in hand,
but he omitted to add some important words, on which the
whole meaning depended. I said that formerly the surplus
had been either actually in hand, or in some other form
equally tangible and secure. (Hear, hear.) I put it to the
sense of the committee what is the plain meaning of those
words ? (Hear, hear.) I did not speak in childlike igno-
rance, as the right hon. gentleman seems to think, of the
arrangements by which the surplus in hand is devoted to
certain purposes, but I meant to convey this meaning, that
it is not justifiable to repeal permanent and safe taxation—
(oh, oh, and cheers)—except on the faith of a surplus, which

the experience of the previous year has shown that we can
depend on. (Hear.) I went on to say—(cries of "Oh I"
and cheers)—that it was unprecedented for a Chancellor of
the Exchequer to close the year with a deficit of more than
£2,500,000, and then to propose to remit taxation on the
faith of a sui plus purely founded on speculative calculations,
(Hear.) The right hon. gentleman takes exception to that,
and quotes against me the case of the budget of the present
Home Secretary in 1857. If I was speaking of any one for
whom I had a less unfeigned respect than I have for the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, I should say that to adduce that
example is trifling with the sense of the committee. (Hear.)
For what was that year ? It was the year when we returned
to a peace establishment from the great expenditure of the
Crimean war. (Hear, hear.) I repeat the challenge I
made to the Chancellor of tne Exchequer, to show in a year
of peace a case in which any Finance Minister has closed
the year with such a deficiency, and has proposed to remit
taxation on the face of a surplus so purely speculative as
the present. (Cries of "Hear, hear," and "Divide! ")
Grave charges have been brought against me. (Cries of
" Divide I" " Chair 1") The right hon. gentleman has seen
fit to renew the observations which in an early part of the
evening were made by the noble lord the member for the
city of London. At that time I rose and offered an expla-
nation of the remarks to which the right hon. gentleman
has referred. If I might be allowed to form an opinion of
the sentiments of the Committee from the manner in which
they received my explanation, I believe it was perfectly
satisfactory. (Cheers.) The explanation which the right
hon. gentleman asks has, therefore, already been made and
has been thoroughly accepted ; and I now leave it to the
fairnono of the committee to judge between the right hon.
gentleman and myself. (Cheers, and cries of " Divide 1")
Sir J. PAKINGTON—I am glad the hon. baronet oppo-
site has not complied with the suggestion of the right hon.
gentleman that he should express regret for one of the best
and most effective speeches I have ever heard. (Hear,
hear, and " Divide I") At this late hour I will not inter-
fere between the house and the division. I will, however,
claim their attention for a few moments, as I believe I am
almost the only member of the house who has not yet
spoken on the Budget. (A laugh.) My reason for now
rising is that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the
course of his speech, put a question which I think it is in
,my power to answer. The right hon. gentleman cora-
-1 plained that the present duties on tea and sugar had been
described as " War Duties," and he asked who was the
author of the phrase. To that question I believe I can
give an answer. In 1857, in one of our debates, one of
the speakers said, " It is almost matter of good faith,-that
when next remissions of taxation were made, the duties
on tea and sugar, which were, in fact, war duties, should
be reduced." (Cheers.) The speaker added that there
could be no greater' claim for a reduction of taxation
than on those articles which entered so largely into the
consumption of the people. (Hear, hear.) Who spoke
these words ? The noble lord the present Secretary of State
ror Foreign Affairs. (Cheers.) Therefore the author of the
phrase "War Duties," as applied to the duties on tea and sugar,
of which the right hon. gentleman complains, was to noble
lord his colleague, to whom I refer him. (Hear, hear.) I
confess I have heard with extreme surpriseany reference to
the Flintshire election. (Cheers.) The right hon. gentle-
man took part in that election, and also in the same election
two years ago. If there is a man in this house from whom
I did not expect to hear any reference to the Flintshire elec-
tion it is the tight hon. gentleman. (Hear, hear, and
divide.) I claim the right to say that I have listened to
these debates from first to last, and have heard nothing to
affect the opinion I entertain, and which the great majority
in this house and the country also bold with roe, that this
budget is open to three fatal objections. The first is, that
the arrangement is one that is financially unwise. The se-
cond is, that the budget is no better than a party manoeuvre,
and has been arranged with a view to the interests of party,
and not of the country. Lastly, I am of opinion that this
budget does involve unnecessary offence, if not insult, to
the House of Lords. (Oh 1) The House of Lords, however,
I have no doubt, will treat that offence with the contempt
it deserves. (Oh !) I maintain that the House of Lords
has never objected to repeal the paper duties. They only
objected to reduce the resources of the country. (Oh 1) If
hon members will refer to the speech of the Earl of Derby
they will find in a distinct statement that he agrees in
thinking that the paper duty is an objectionable impost,
that its maintenance is a mere matter of time, and that
whenever the state of the finances renders it desirable he
is prepared to repeal the paper duty. The right hon. gen-
tleman has spoken of my right hon. friend (Mr. Disraeli)
as being unable to resist the temptation of explaining away
the part he had taken in 1858. But the part taken by my
right hon. friend requires no explanation. He held the
same language then that the Earl of Derby held last year.
We were parties to a resolution, and we thereby acknow-
ledged that it was right to repeal the paper duty whenever
the financial state of the country would permit. When
the right hon. gentleman imputes to us that we are incon-
sistent in proposing to repeal the tea duties, whereby we
reduce the revenue by £200,000 more than he proposed, my
answer is to be found in an extract from another speech by
the noble lord (J. Russell). He was then an independent
member of the Opposition. In 1857 the noble lord said he
was sure that a reduction of the duty on tea to ls. per lb.
would be followed by an increased consumption that would
soon bring up the revenue to its former amount. (Hear.)
This is an answer to the charge of inconsistency. [Lord
J. Russell.—l never said the revenue would be made up in
one year.] No ; but I adopt the language of the noble
lord, and say that the duty in a few years will be entirely
made up. (Hear, hear.) I think that the Government
ought to have considered the interests of the country, and
not the interests of part3r; and, had they done so, they
would have repealed the duties which in time of war_ were
put on the c-anforts of the people, instead of repealing the
duty on an article which contributes to comforts of the masses
in only a very slight degree. For those reasons I cannot
concur in the proposition of the Government. (Cheers.)
Lord PALMERSTON.—Sir, I cannot begin the very few
words which I shall feel it my duty to submit to the house
on the present motion without expressing the satisfaction I
feel, and which I am sure is participated in by all present,
at seeing again within these walls my hon friend the mem-
ber for Rochdale, returned after rendering those valuable
services—(oh 1 and hear, hear)—which he has performed
for his country—(renewed cries of oh 1' and hear, hear)—
and restored to that health which I am sure even those who
differ from him in politics are happy to see hint enjoying.
(Cheers.) Now, Sir, the hon. member for Norfolk has
asked mo a question which he has repeated for the second
time, and I presume it will be a question put every fort-
night till the end of the session. (Laughter.) lam happy
to be able to answer that question in the same words in
which I answered it before. (Laughter and hear.) The
hon. member arks me whether there is anything in the
present state of affairs on the continent of America which
induces me to think it will be necessary to apply to this
house to increase the armaments either by land or sea. I
stated to the hon. gentleman that I saw nothing in the
events now taking 'place in the United States which was
likely to :lead to those consequences. The hon. member
asks me again whether those events in America are likely
materially to affect the Customs and Excise duties of this
country. The best answer which I can give him on this
point is to state the fact that during the eight weeks =d-
i ing lan Saturday the produce of the cadcus and rgoin