The Sun.
London, England, 1857-02-21 00:00:00

• but it was produced much more by the visitation of Provi-
• dance. We had had three bad harvests, and we bowed to
the decree of a Power before which even Parliaments must
with humility bend. But this is the first time that a Chan-
cellor of the Exche9uor has come forward with a plan
creating an enormous and increasing deficiency—(cheers)
—and that, too, in the face of a House of Commons, the
cardinal point of whose financial policy has been through
out its now long'existence to accomplish the extinction of
the income tax. So that we have brought our finances
to this position,—that the year 1860—when the policy of
1853, on which the hope and expectation of Parliament
and the country have rested for the extinction of the in-
come tax, was to have boon accomplished—is to witnes
not its extinction but its perpetuation, awl instead of
receiving that relief from taxation to which we have
been looking forward with such anxiety, we are then to be
called upon for new taxes to meet a deficiency which may
amount to not less than 10 , 000,600/. (Hear, hear.) I am,
of course, perfectly willing to admit that figures of this
kind must be received with considerable indulgence on both
sides of the house. (Rear, hear.) There may be counter-
vailing causes which to a certain extent may alter thee(
calculations; the consuming power for instance; on which
so much of our financial system very properly rests, may
increase, though we most remember that it is at the pre-
sent moment a consuming power at high prices, and there-
fore we must not rest too much on that. But admitting
that your customs may increase, this great fact remains,
that in the year 1860, if we pursue the financial plan intro-
duced on Friday night to its consequences, instead of wit-
nessing the extinction of the income fax, we shall have to
grapple with a colossal deficiency. Under these circum-
stances I thought it my duty to place on the table the re-
solution to which I am about to ask the house to agree.
Let us see what, if I am right in my estimate of the con-
sequences of the plan of the right hon. gentleman, would
be the wisest and most temperate course to adopt. If the
house really believes that we are menaced by a deficiency,
what can be more judicious than to proceed upon this ex-
' cellent principle of finance—which, indeed, must be the
basis of all sound financial schemes—to
adjust the esti-
mated income and expenditure in such a manner as is best
calculated to prevent a deficiency, and then in pursuance
of a policy to which I believe this house is pledged to pro-
vide in the best manner we can for enabling Parliament in
the year 1860 to remit the whcle of the income tax, as was
promised to the country in 1853. That is the object of the
resolution which I placed on the table; but no sooner had
I given notice of this resolution than a most extraordi-
nary change occurred in the financial world. The right
hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer was at
the table—the house being in Committee of Supply—
moving a vote to which there was no opposition, and he
took advantage of that opportunity to offer to the house a
supplement to his financial statement of the preceding Fri-
day, introducing elements, in my opinion, entirely incon-
sistent with the statements, a:•guments, and plans which
he had previously laid before tr. lam not complaining
of this; the right hon. gentleman has a right, of course,
to make two financial statements if he chooses—there have
been Chancellors of the Exchequer who have made even
more—(laughter)—l am only putting before the house a
narrative of these incidents. And what was the right hon.
gentleman's statement of Monday niszla Is was appa-
rently add...y-1 to my resolution. which was then in the
possession of the house. He said, very frankly, I own,
" I can answer the motion of which notice has just been
given at once," and, mentioning me, he said I seemed to
fear a great deficiency in the years 1858-9 and 1859-60, but
that there was in reality no fear of any such deficiency.
gentleman, " what
for those years" (he
m'a'
hwmtiylhl
estimatesatveel t
0, ,ld u"sosfoanti said a
ethe
Friday,p reing
dbh
iutt
tubroew,
that is nothing); "and
I will tell you how I mean to meet that expenditure."
The right hon. gentleman, with great frankness, gave us
his estimates for those years, and they varied very slightly,
but not in any degree so as to affect my argument, from
the figures which I had assumed before he made that sup-
plementary statement, leaving, therefore, if my first con-
clusion was just, on each year a vast deficiency. " But,"
says the right hon. gentleman, " there will be no deficiency,
because we are going to adopt the expenditure of 1853-4."
No doubt if the Government be going in 1858-59 to adopt
the expenditure of 1853, that is an important element in
the consideration of the financial plan. But if that be the
case, although I do not complain for a moment of the pre-
viousathaethsetataeamtheneat
authentic
criticisms into which I have been betrayed by the
right hon. gentleman making his statement on Friday—
which I considered to be a statement of authority—incon-
sistent with that which he made on Monday, I say if that
sMtaetne--
aa are to
complae
int,
Mon-
day, as I
ment, what are the irresistible inferences which we are
be the case,
d
to draw from it? In the first place, one naturally asks if
there is to be that vast reduction in 1858-9 which is to
prevent these enormous deficiencies, what is the reason
oanwdi without owuet
that the reduction has not some effect in 1857-58 ? (Hear,
hear.) Let us know what are the causes which will enable
the Government in 1858-59 to make a reduction of which,
according to the representation of Friday, no hope was
held out fur 1857-58. (Hear, hear.) If I go through all
the heads into which the Chancellor of the Exchequer ela-
borately analysed the estimates which had not been intro-
duced by their respective Ministers on Friday—if Igo
through his analysis of all the causes of excess of expendi-
ture in 1857-58 over 1853, I cannot find—except in that
poor item of "unfulfilled contracts," for which a large es-
timate, including gunpowder and timber, would be
500,x001.—that any of them, according to his views, would
be less influential in 1858-59 than in 1857-58. But now,
after that statement of the right hon. gentleman, I want
the house to consider this :—What would be the effect if in
1857-58 the Government would do that which they say they
are prepared to do in 1858-9? Let me show to the house
the effect of that upon our income and expenditure. We
are to fall back in 1853-59 to the expenditure of 1853-54.
Now, the gross expenditure of 1853-54, as stated by the
Chancellor of the Exchequer on Monday, was 55,840,0001.
Add to that the increased charge of the debt, 716,000/. ;
add the Exchequer Bonds to be paid off in 1857.58,
2,000,0001; add also the Sinking Fund for 1857-58,
250,0001., and the total will be 58,836,0001. That is an
estimate for 1857-58, drawn up on the expenditure of
183-54, which is to be the basis of 1858-59. Now, this is
very important; and let me press it therefore upon the at-
tention of the house. Having ascertained that we might
Lae et an expenditure of 58,836,000/., let us see what the
the income of ]857-58 would be on the supposition that
the income tax was not increased beyond 5d., and that
there was no increase in the tea and sugar duties. The
income estimated by the Chancellor of the Exchequer on
Friday was 66,366,0001. From that deduct for the 2d.
on the income-tax, 2,000,000/. ' deduct also the tea
and sugar duties, which I take at 911,0001., and we have
then the income for the eneuiug year 62,455,000 z.,
against an expenditure of 58,836,0001. We thus should
have, according to the new position of Monday, a surplus
at the end of the year of upwaids of 4,000,0001. in the ex-
chequer without adding any new taxes whatever, without
increasing the income tax, which ought to be only sd. in
the pound if we adhered to the old system, and without
adding to the taxes upon sugar and tea. The right hon.
gentleman, then, by the statement which he made on Mon-
day, has opened a mesb'intaresting subject of speculation
which I am sure every hon. member must appreciate.
(Hear, and a laugh.) Now, how do we stand in this mat-
ter ? because it is exceedingly difficult to deal with a finan•
cial statement which has apparently two colours and two
forms and aspects. If the statement of Friday be the au-
thentic statement, we are about to be landed in a great de-
ficiency, and there is no hope whatever of seeing the end of
the income tax in 1860. If, on the other hand, the version
of Monday be the orthodox version we not only get a re-
duction of the income tax immediately, and we not only
have no recourse to those indirect taxes which have created
so much:odium out of doors, and which are so much opposed
here, but we have a fair prospect also of getting rid of the
income tax in 1860 altogether. But it is impossible that
two results can be more different. (Hear, hear.) If we
are to adhere to the budget of Friday, it's deficiency ; if, on
the other hand, we are to fall back, as we were told that we
were on Monday, to the expenditure of 1853, we have be-
fore us the most rosy prospect that a financial Minister
ever introduced to the House of Commons, especially at the
termination of a war. (Rear, hear.) I should think,
then, that a debate upon the scope and tendency of these
financial propositions is not at all irrelevant or unneces-
sary. Now, I know it will be said that in the estimate
which I have offered there is an element as regards the
last two years of the right honourable gentleman's plan,
assuming that :he really adopts the expenditure of 1853,
which I have omitted ; but I assure the right honourable
gentleman that I have not forgotten it. According to the
estimate of income and expenditure for 18 -)7 and 1853
drawn up on the basis of the expenditure of 1853 I have
shown to the house that without any increase of taxation
whatever there would actually be left in the exchequer a
surplus exceeding 4,003,000/.—that is to say, that there
would be left in the exchequer about that sum which the
right hon. gentleman will obtain by that large portion of the
war income tax which is not yet paid. That is the exact sum
probably which would be found as surplus in the exchequer.
Otherwise, without the war income-tax for 1857-58, the
expenditure and income would exactly balance themselves
suppose that you took the expenditure of 1853. The right
hon. gentleman, however, may say to me, " But if you take
the expenditure of 1853 there is an item of vast amount
which will enter into the calculation of 1858-59 and 1859-
60—'which is not included in 1857-58—I mean the charge
for the sinking fund for the war debt of 1,500,000/. There-
fore, if the income and expenditure of 1857-58 did balance
themselves after that surplus derived from the war income
tax was deducted there wouldrbe a deficiency of 1,500,0001.
upon those two years." Well, Sir, I grant that. I grant if
you established the expenditure 0f1,853 as the basis of your
operations, and if you did all thatl have sketched out, that
you would find a deficiency in consequence of the sinking
fund for the war debt of 1,500,0001. for the last two yearaof
the right hon. gentleman's plan. But remember that we
shall have iu the exchequer a surplus upwards of 4,000,0001.
I do not mean to say that that 4,000,0001. can legally be ap-
plied at the present moment to the liquidation o the sink-
ing fund, or even to the payment of the exchequer bonds of
the last two years. The law respecting surpluses and ba-
lances is too rigid to permit of the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer's applying it without appealing to Parliament; but see
what the effect of the statement of Monday is :—Here you
can, by falling back to the establishments of 1853, carry on
the affairs of the country without any new taxes whatever,
and with a large surplus at the end of the current year of
upwards of 4,000,0001. in your exchequer ; but in the last
two years of the right hon. gentleman's plan there will be a
deficiency in consequence of the action of a special sinking
fund for the liquidation of the war debt, But when we
recollect that that large balance has been obtained by war
taxation in a time of peace I do not see why the Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer, instead of imposing new and vexa-
tious and odious taxes upon the people, should not come
forward and ask the ROllBO of Commons whether in equity
that surplus of 4,000,0001. might not be applied to the
liquidation of the war debt. (Hear.) In that case, accord-
ing to the statement of Monday, the right hon. gentleman
might carry us through the three years of his scheme with-
out increasing any of our taxes, and might he enabled to
deal with the income-tax by the aid of the terminable an-
nuities and such other means as might then providentially
arise. (Hear.) What a different plan has the Chancellor
of the Exchequer adopted ! The Chancellor of the Exche-
quer,
in this state of the finances, comes forward and pro-
poses new taxes. The Chancellor of the Exchequer enters
into au essay as to the comparative merits of direct and
indirect taxation—a barren subject for this house and the
country, for whatever their relative merits may be it is
clear that our revenue must be derived both from direct
and indirect taxation, and we must appeal to both to a very
large extent. But the Chancellor of the Exchequer finds
himself in this position, according to the Friday view, that
he comes forward to propose the most odious of direct taxes
and the most odious of indirect taxes. (Cheers.) Sir, with
regard to the income-tax, I am not one to show that this
house will resist a fair introduction of direct taxation in
our system, but direct taxation has never taken a more in-
tolerable form than in the income tax. (Loud cheers.) It
has been condemned by the voice of the country and the
decision and policy of this house. I need not enter into
the catalogue of its enormities--that it is unjust, unequal,
and inquisitorial. There are very; few who have listened
to me who have not had personal proof of these qualities.
A. laugh,) These are grievances which are not to be borne
in time of peace and with the income tax as a permanent
feature of our national systenA• In a national emergency
these grievances are ,pt felt, At such j moment private