The Sun.
London, England, 1850-03-16 00:00:00

of his, for he bad before stated, that lass .; than half a
million ought never to be taken from the r eserve fund of
a Chancellor of the Exchequer. Since lae , had had the
honour of filling his present situation, tha t was the first
time be was possessed of a surplus; on the ct mtrary, he had
on several occasions been obliged to born , and he did not
feel he would be acting the part of an 1 tones t man, if he
did not urge on the House the necessit. 7 of repaying, as
soon as possible, the money which had b een so borrowed.
—(Cheers.) Such a course was essent Lto the main-
tenance of public credit, and the secant: r of all property
WAS bound up with the fulfilment of the i r engagements.
—(Hear, hear.) He was far from suppc sing that those
who callei still further for a reduction e f taxation had
the slightest intention of injuring the ni ttional credit;
but if they were to borrow money, anti at the same
time, reduce taxation, there never weak 1 be an end to
their increasing liabilities. The Right 11.4 mi. Gentleman
having again expressed his anxiety that no t Lew demand far
a reduction of taxation for the present wo u Id be enforced,
concluded by moving that a sum of 9,201 )„000l be raised
in Exchequer-bills.

Mr. HUMS said the very gratifying n twiner in which
so small a reduction of taxation to the cc c ntry had been
received ought to be a lesson to those wl had hitherto
been the great cause of its increase. a believed the
relief it was proposed to give was a very p .oper relief as
far as it went, but what he objected to w: as, that in the
spe,.,ch they had just heard the Right Het a. Gentleman
had merely confined himself to a statement of the surplus
and the way in which he proposed to api sly it, instead
of making a general statement of the to ration of the
country, and giving his reasons why • larger reduc-
tions could not have been effected.— (Hear, hear.)
A budget should show what the whole to ,xation of the
country was, and the reason the expend i turn was pro-
posed to be made. He wanted to kno e r whether the
country was to expect any further ret h action or not.
So far as the reduction of the duty on s a ,nips was con-
cerned, ho believed it would be very beneficial, as
would the abolition of the duty on bricks, but be
must say he had very great doubts a s to the pro-
priety of making any further advances to the land-
lords either in Great Britain or Irelar al. Such ad-
vances were opposed to all sound princi F le, and never
should be granted unless there was a str ang necessity
shown. Money was plentiful in other (pa: trters at pre-
sent, and therefore that necessity did n.c t exist. He
considered the advances already made to t he landlords
an ample compensation fur any loss they might have
sustained. He hoped the House would nal t support the
measure, as he considered the proposal to keep such a
surplus to meet these advances was of a most doubt-

ful character. The influence upon the a anitary con-
dition of the people of the window-i ax was so
important that it ought to be abolished, e ven if it left
a small loss on the annual income, en l upon the
supposition that no farther reduction could be
effected. But he believed that he mat I show how
a saving of ten millions could be made. They had
often been told that they had a very small, amount left
upon which any reduction could be effecte I; but by a
return he had moved for, of the half-pay a nd effective
service of the army, navy, and ordnanco for the last
twenty-eight years, be found that the ref a :nue in 1848
was, in round numbers, 57,000,0001.; the ez q senditure for
the civil and military establishments was l 0,427,0001.;
thus leaving an amount of 27,000,0001. c a ly that they
could not deal with. He complained of the • extravagant
cost of our establishments. In the years 1832-3-4-5,
the cost of the whole establishments and 3 ivil list did
not exceed 21,000.0001.; last year it was. upwards of
30,000,000/. What reason was there for th eit not going
back to that lower standard? The Gove r nment were
bound to show good reasons for maintaining t 1 se increased
establishments. Nu doubt if they were to I ,ecome like
l)on Quixote, running round the world as m ediators, as
we had done for many years past, and meth dling with
everybody's business but our own, he did not know
where the expense of our civil and military establish-
ments was to end. The House would act with
great indifference to the interests of the c 'ountry, if
they did not press for greater reductions, it i order to
compel the diminution of our establishment s. Unless
they refused to grant taxation, the Governs tent of the
day, he did not care what party they belonget I to, would
never make any reductions in these estta olishments.
They had heard from the Right Hon. Baron et of many
reductions within the last three years. But he gave the
Government no credit for that. If the l louse had
granted a five per cent, income-tax, and al lowed of a
continued large expenditure, these reduction a would not
have been made. By refusing that tax, the iovcrnment
had been forced to make reductions amounti r .g to nearly
four millions, and he said they should, there fore, in the
same way force further reductions. He was prepared to
show the way in which the window tax, mi t.t tax, and
the tax on soap, could be all abolished wit Jaout either
danger to the public credit, or to the effi& .4 tncy of the
public establishments. He had no wish to deta i n the House,
but he must complain that Ministers had nit a le no state-
ment of the nature and necessity of our pres a at expendi-
ture. The House, which professed to be the ;guardian of
the public purse, neglected its duty; and e the state-
ment that night Ministers had omitted, for ti > e first time,
the usual statement that they had brought t down the
public establishment to the lowest point con s istent with
public efficiency. Upon what principle coo .1 d the high
salaries paid to judges, and other high office z a be justi-
fied ? He did not mean to enter into det: c Is, but for
the reasons he had given, the House should t tot be con-
tented with the budget they had heard, and o t ight to de-
mand further reductions. He believed the Hl", use should

sweep off one tax after another, and thus c ompel the
Government to reduce establishments. If t hey left a
surplus in the hand of any Government, who: .her Tory,
Whig, or Radical, they would expend ii. —(Hear.)
He thought the taxes on knowledge wore pro ductive of
greater evils than a few millions of debt, at i 1 the Go-
vernment ought to be compelled by the Hou s e to carry
out a fiscal system of removing every imp( diment to
education and the diffusion of knowledge a mong the
people. Ile should not then move any mo t. on on the
question, but he felt it to be his duty to < express the
dissatisfaction he felt at the nature of the stat e ment they
had just heard.
Mr. FRE WEN said, he must express great i lisappoint-
ment at the speech of the Right Hon. Baron • because
after the numerous deputations that lea I waited
upon him and the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russ ell) it was
fully expected that a reduction would have bee r , proposed
in the hop duty. It was the only tax that wa s imposed
upon produce grown out of doors, and the ill ity varied
so much in proportion to thejvaried produce oft he crop—
which was of the most precarious nature—tha t in some
years the people in that part of the country in which
they were grown were thrown into bankruptcy from one
end to the other. Some of the owners of hop farms had
had one half of them thrown upon their hands. This
was in a great measure the operation of the ex else duty.
He thought that when the Right Hon. Baron at (Sir R.
Peel) reduced the large duty upon foreign hop:., the ex-
cise duty should at the same time have been taken off.
He believed that the retention of the tax w o uld cause
universal dissatisfaction in the whole Weald o f Kent and
in his own district (East Sussex). The amoux It paid for
labour alone was from 125,0001. to 180,0001. a year, and
looking to the large expenditure on this her,tl alone, it
was too bad to have a direct tax of no less the.r 118,0001.
a year thrown upon them. That was the amount of
duty they had to pay last year, or rather a ith which
they were charged, for some of it was not yet. paid. He
felt bound to state to the Committee that c; aneral dis-
content would be produced in the part of line country
with which he was connected by the omissiixn of which
he complained.
Mr. HODGES had also to express his doeep disap-
pointment that the Chancellor of the Exchoquer, after
all that had transpired, should have thought It his duty
to retain so obnoxious a tax, and one that pressed so
heavily upon his constituents as the hop duty... He was,
however, mistaken in supposing that these claims could
be neglected with impunity. If the Right Honourable
Gentleman continued to act in this spirit, it would be
the duty of those who represented the hop-Brewing dis-
tricts, certainly he would consider it to be his own duty,
to support every motion that might be made for reduc-
tion, in order that the Chancellor of the Exchequer
might at last find a surplus out of which he could afford
to abolish the hop duty. From the frequent interviews
that had taken place between the representatives of the
hop growers and the Government, they had every rea•
son to expect, that in the statement which Ead just been
made, a reduction of that duty would have been included;
and he must concur in the feeling of disappointment
which had been expressed by the Honourable Member
for East Sussex.

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said he did not mean to enter
into any discussion upon general taxation, but merely to
ask for a solution of two points which seemed to him to
require a little further explanation. It had been as-
sumed that the surplus would be two millions. It was
now reduced to a million and a half, and very properly
so, for the reasons that had been given. His only doubt
was, whether even that sum was not too large, because
he found in the charge on the national debt for the year
ending 1850, an addition of 13,000/ over the charges for
the year ending 1849. Now, 13,0001. would represent a
capital of 4,000,0001. borrowed at 3 per cent., and he
could not see how, under the circumstances, the surplus
could be a million and a half. The proposal to pay
250,0001. for the extinction of the equivalent fond ap-
peared to him to be a system of mere hocus poeus with
public accounts, and ho doubted very much the propriety
of lending money to the landlords of any country, while
we were, if not adding, at least not cutting down our
own debts.

Mr. COWAN said he regretted to learn that it was
the intention of the Government t.) postpone until after
Easter the introduction of the Bill to regulate savings'
banks. Much anxiety existed upon the subject in Scot-
laud, and he should very much wish that the intentions
of the Government with respect to it might be stated
before Easter.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the subject could
not be brought forward before Easter, but that it should
be brought forward as soon as possible afterwards.
Sir DE LACY EV ANS expressed a wish that some
of the smaller receipt stamp duties had been remitted,
particularly the threepenny stamp, which were felt as a
great burden by many of the small traders throughout
the kingdom.
Tho Marquis of GRANBY said, that although he had
not great hope of expecting from her Majesty's Govern-
ment measures of a remedial nature for the agricultural
classes, still he was glad to find that the Right lion.
Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had pro-
fited by his experience of last year, and had introduced
his statement earlier in the session. There were, un-
doubtedly, great clamours in the country for a reduc-
ti,n of taxation, but he thought the maintenance of
the public credit was a prior and more weighty con-
sideration.—(Hear.) Ile found that petitions had been
presented to the Right Hon. Gentleman for the reduc-
tion of the duties on tea, bricks, soap, malt, windows—in
short, on all descriptions of articles. It was clear, how-
ever, from the recent political history of the country,
that reduced taxation had not benefitted the lower
classes to the extent that was promised for it, or ex-
j‘ected. The Right Floe. Gritleurni stated, that sine°
1836 there bad been no less than eight millions of taxes I
reduced. He also repeated what Dlr. liuskissen said in

1830, that the great capitalists of the country were
making wealth, whilst the poorer and middling clime_
of society were not progressing. He (the Marquis of
Granby) had hop ed all along, that if that remission of
taxation was still going on it might have averted the
state of things which Mr. Huskisson described. Look-
ing, however, at the reports of the Poor-law Commis'
shiners, of the mining districts, and the other usual
sources of information, he was led to the conclusion that
the middling classes of society were not better off, not-
withstanding the reduced taxation imposed upon them. If
he was told to look at the increase of the population, and
the increase of capital, he would answer, that there, might
be an increase of the population, and an increase of ca-
pital, but it was not an increase of either. With refer-
ence to the labouring classes of the country, the Right
Hon. Gentleman admitted that there was great distress
in the agricultural population, and that admission went
some way towards remedying it.—(Hear, hear.) As to
what he said about the importation of corn not affect-
ing its price, he would ask him whether he believed that
ten millions of quarters of corn could be imported with'
out having a sensible effect on its price? It was impos-
siblet to suppose that that could be the case. Then loos
at the increase of taxation on the industrious class':
Let them take the case of the farmer, and consider that
taxes, which he could formerly pay with six quarters 01
corn he could not now pay without nine quarters. The
distress which would necessarily ensue in the struggi,l
which this new legislation brought, had been Nve"
prophesied by the Right Hon. Baronet who was the
author of it, and he presumed that the remission of stamP
duties on transfers of land, which the Government re'
posed, was intended most probably for this benefit. An-
other measure was the repeal of the duty on bricks, which
he thought would prove of very great benefit to the
.
lower classes. In that point of view he thought
it a fair measure of justice, though, from a variety
of circumstances, it could not fail of operating withk
great inequality. As a measure for the relief of 11
landed interest, however, it was utterly worthless. with
regard to the measure for advancing 2,000,0001. to sag.
land and Scotland, and 1,000,0001. to Ireland, for
drstn-
age and improvement c f land, he agreed in opinion silt'
the Hon. Member fur Montrose, that when money w,as
to be had at the rate cf per cent., that measure 50
was one which could not prove of great benefit to the
landowners. Upon the whole, however, rejoicing at the
altered tone of the speech of his Right Hon. Friend 0,1
Chancellor of the Exchequer, remembering that he said
he was anxious because he saw the advantage of grows
ing our corn in our own country, as far as that was per:
sible, of not trusting to foreign supplies for that Brno'
—rejoicing at that favourable change in his opinion'
seeing that he acknowledged that something might hie
done to mitigate the distress that prevailed in the agrien
tural districts—lamenting at the same time that he has
not done more in the way of relieving them from bur-
dens which would have been an immense relief to the,ll:
he was still pleased to that extent with the views which
he had expressed on the stsbjeet. But firmly believing
that no mere reduction of taxation which he could ogee
could compensate for the 91,000,000/. mentioned by the
Right Hoe. Gentleman the Member for Wolverhemptet
on the first night of the session—believing that the only
eff' ctual remedy was a return to that commercial system
from which they had of late years departed, he humbly
to express his opinion, that it Would be fold
necessary one day to revert to it; and that if they 0
not do so of their own accord the circumstances of the
country would compel them to return.
Mr. EWART said he was glad that the Government
t
had determined upon the abolition of the brick duty.
was, in his opinion, a wise measure as well as a just en
because the duty aft'. seed Ergland only, Scotland ent,
Ireland being exempted either by law, or practically 1)
the tact of custom. The Right Hon. Gentleman, theJ
r
Chancellor of the Exchequer, had alladed to the eels.
brated speech of Mr. Huskisson in 1830. He Tenses'
bared the words of that speech, and they appeared is
him at the time exactly to describe the state of thingd
which then obtained. Only two alternatives presentef
themselves to his mind in the present conjuncture e;
financial affairs. Either they must consent to a reduce;
taxation, or to a general system of direct taxation. `ll
was impossible for the present state of things to go °,O
consistently with the preservation of the trade of the
country. He was glad to hear the Chancellor of tekt
Exchequer express the opinions that he had that nig:Ph
uttered. They were the principles of Huskisson,
he hoped would lead to the gradual abolition of all
ob-
noxious duties, which oppressed without benefitiel,
society; and if agricultural duties stood in need 0f
reduction or repeal, he should be most willing to copal,
~
in an endeavour to place them on a more setisfactol7
footing.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. NEWDEGATE said, that if Mr. rfuskissr
could be restored to that House, he would pause ere be
sanctioned, with his deliberate and experienced opinion'
the application of those principles to the removal of tilos.°
restrictive systems which, in agricultural produce and 111
navigation, he firmly believed had contributed 10,!0
~
than all other causes to the commercial greatness of this
country. The picture of financial matters which the
o
Chancellor of the Exchequer had drawn was by no me sit
a very encouraging one. In ono breath he took credild
for the reduction of eight millions of taxation, and
within
the of continually decreasing exchequers wit°
the period of that reduction. He thought it .
delusion to say that prices of corn abroad could be 09f
precedent for prices at home, and he felt it his duth if
he could, to dispel it, which he could from statistical re-
turns published by the Board of Trade, and which were
printed by order of the House of Commons on the 7th of
April, 1843. Those returns contained the prices of col
in Denmark between the years 1815 and 1839, and
appeared that the average price between those Year'
was 295. a quarter, to which the expense of freight to
this country must he added, amounting to about ss:•
a quarter. At Ilamburgh, although the Right
Honourable Baronet the President of the Bon,r
of Trade had stated that the average Pic„,"-
;
of corn at that port, between the years 1839 and 18'
was 435. 4(1. per quarter, it was in fact only 265. and 27e
3d. Between the years 1837 and 1846, both inclusive'
the average prices of corn were as follows:—At flair:
burgh, 265. 3d.; at Lubeck, 295. 4d.; at Dantzic, 25
end at Stettin, 335. Bd. Upon that statement be mightr
fairly assume that, including a sum of ss. a quarter 10e
freight, corn might have been delivered from any of these
ports within the times above stated, at the average Prier.
of 355. a quarter. He had devoted many years to tuh'
study of this subject, and regretted the delusions whic.,
prevailed upon it, but he could not be surprised at 01,
result when such errors were circulated by persons c',;
authority. He had given the prices between the •years 183,:
and 1846, because these were years when prices were,-,-;
their natural level, before they were disturbed by hoh-v
our ports thrown open to foreigners. It was of little
use to cite France and Belgium. There was no doubt
that ta theseaua s t t
biunteiett chhsoaeautrmne
letvi
ati
were
rsi
ecng exportedaluarsi
egncaused by
ebrxyapcntoochrreetn: lastthe exportations
oe
poverty
ex o
o !
of
caused by poverty. When he was in the United States'
which occurred a few years since i
, be took the pans
to
opf trlatcaticoon country
It
ascertain what would be the probable range of Price°.
He found that at New Orleans prices, from September,
1843, to 1845, ranged on an average at 245. 8d• Per
quarter; and, adding the expenses of transport at We"
it might be imported at 355. the querter. He, however'
of corn ln
from the
jest
lir
thought that the continental countries would be aide to
sell at lower prices. He hoped the House would excuse
him for adverting to these matters, but he had done re
because he believed the information upon which be made
these statements was authentic. The trade and navign*
tier) returns issued by the Board of Trade were calei
Dated to delude the public upon the subject. It was statedin those document:: that the expenses from New York
:
we-e eleven shillings the bag, which was 50 Per
cent, greater than the real amount, which wa
not more than 6s. the bag. The Chancellor of
the Exchequer alluded to the period of distill.;
bances on the Continent, and appealed to him as an
honest man to recal the opinion which be had formerly q:
pressed, that these disturbances had not injured the trade
of this country. Although the Right Hun. Gentleniuil:
was net then in his place he would answer that sPPea
and begged to say that he did not think the disturbances
on the Continent injured the trade of this country t°
the extent which was ascribed to it. Whatever disa''
vantage might have arisen from it, it was more than,
compensated by the number of absentees they sent bee'
to. this country, and the influx of gold which was toes*
untted to this country for safer deposit and investment'
The circular distributed by niessre. Gibson and Ord, who
r
were free traders, stated that Vie troubles of 1848 rather
aided the depression of that period, and expressed
,an
o
opinion that nothing but a general war could injure te"
trade of this country. The relief which was now pro'
posed for the agricultural interest was not more than, s
half per cent. upon what they were stated at by tue
Member for Wolverhampton to have lost by the abrogsh"
Lion of the corn-laws. The Government held out no
prospect of effectual relief. He was glad they had maero
that explicit declaration. It was too much the cust-s,
to speak of the agriculture of the country as if it was oe
insignificant interest--(" Hear, hear," from the pt
tectionists)—but he was assured it was too Prneo;
ful and energetic to nduere a state of t"'"°
by which it was avowed it was given up to hoe'
less ruin.

Lord IL GROSVERNOR had heard a portion of i„„bte
speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer with regt,.%-.
—(Hear.) The Right Hon. the Chancellor of the
chequer admitted that the reduction of the tea
would be a great boon to the consumingduties.
pealed to the state of the revenue from which 11 BPf
peered that at no future period Would a reduction °
those duties classes, but 61).
be possible. He had certainly hoped, 69
his Right Hon. Friend had a surplus he would have
been prepared to propose a more courageous niessure.
It became his duty a short time ago to signalise one,
tax, than which there was not one on the statute-boL
more distinguished by want of principle and injustice--
he meant the tax on the attorneys' certificatcs•—(Rea'
hear, and ironical cheers.) He dared Hon. ClentleinFll
to the proof, and would give them an oppoittiliiiY of d.is.
cussing the question after Easter, when he pledged bile,
self to prove teat there was no tax on the statute-bo.o:
more uojust in principle or more unequal or oppressive
in its. application. But there were many other taxes to
which the same observation would applY,
and let the
House recollect that these taxes were imposed during the
war, and were a disgrace after 35 years ot European lic.aceci
He did not say that the amount of revenue derived
from these taxes was not required by the public service;
but it ought to he obtained from other sources. Tiler.
' was another point to which he wished to direct the at."
tention of the House, and that was the enormous amour
of force all round England to guard Our customs,. be-
cause tie chose to place on a certain number of article:
so heavy a duty that the mceess!ul run of one cargo out
of seven or eight was sufficient to remunerate the smug'
glen. He was very glad to find that the duty on brisks
was likely to be removed. That no doubt was a O.IX
which had been stigmatised by the Sanitary Commis-
sinners; but the window-tax, which was far more in..
furious, remained unrepe,ile(l.—(Hear, hear.) The
fin.,. :
nr7f-t?,, t.le
benefit which wouid accrue to tne small occupiers from
his proposed modification of the stamp duties, but no