The Sun.
London, England, 1868-08-26 00:00:00

THE ,EYPENDITURE OF THE MUIY-TRY.

Mr. Childers addressed a large meeting of his constitu-
ents at Pontefract on Monday night. After dealing with
the Irish Church, he went on to speak of the financial
condition of the country. In 1862 (he said) our expendi-
ture for everything except public debt was little more than
£43,000,000. In the following year the expenditure was
reduced,to £40,840,000 ; in 1864 it was reduced to £40,000,000;
and in 1865 to £39,680,000 ; so that in these three years
the Liberal party reduced the expenditure by £3,390,000 a
year. In the three following years the public expenditure
was increased by the Conservative Government from
£39,680,000 to £43,730,000, or allowing, as they must, a
margin for the change in the method of accounts—and he
thought £860,000 was the outside to be allowed for such a
change—the increase in the three years was not less than
£3,190,000 a year. But more than that, the expendi-
ture of the Liberal Government always fell below the
original estimate ; the expenditure of the Conservative
Government always exceeded the original estimate. What
was the result ? During the years when the Liberal
Government was in power, there was altogether a surplus
of £12,850,000. And how was that applied ? It
enabled the Government not only to reduce the
national debt by a large amount, but it enabled
them to take off taxation to the amount of
not less than £13,880,000, or an average of £2,776,000
a year. And what was that taken off ? " There was
£3,900,000 taken off tea, £1,700,000 taken off sugar,
£300,000 taken off timber, and the rest was taken princi-
pally off the income tax, and partly off smaller matters of
taxation. That is to say, that £6,000,000 a year was
saved by thrift of the Liberal Government, and put into
your pockets by the reduction of taxation on the
articles to which I have referred. And what is the
case now ? The deficit last year, putting the Abyssinian
expedition altogether out of question, was £13,000 ; this
year, according to the statement of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, the deficit is £148,000 ; so that, instead of
finding an average reduction of the taxation to the amount
of £2,700,000, as you experienced under a Liberal Govern.
ment, you find an average deficit of something like
£lOO,OOO a year. What is the result of it all ? The result
is this, that on the one hand the policy of a Liberal Govern-
ment is to reduce the public charge, to keep the depart.
ments within their estimates, to diminish the taxation of
the country, and to reduce the national debt—(cheers)—
whilst on the other hand the policy of a Conservative
Government has been to increase the public charge, to
allow the departments to spend more than the estimates,
the result being the creation of a deficit, no reduction of
the national debt, and no reduction of taxation. But we
may be told that there were certain charges the Conserva-
tive Government had to meet, and at first it was said that
these charges were the result of the neglect of the
Liberal party in respect of the great fighting services. We
had debates in Parliament on this subject. There was a
debate in the House of Lords, in which the late First
Lord of the Admiralty, the Duke of Somerset, took
part, and the charge was withdrawn, or put at
least into a more moderate shape, and there was
a debate in the House of Commons with respect to was
affairs, and it was admitted that there was no neglect on
the part of the Liberal party in dealing with the army.
Between 1860 and 1865, in the improvement of the social
and sanitary condition of our soldiers and sailors, the late
Government spent no less than £2,000,000. This was
done to carry out a highly economical plan, but it cost a
great deal of money, and it did not justify any increase in
the estimates and any absence of reduction in taxation.
Of this £2,000,000 no less than £500,000 or £600,000 was
spent for the enlargement of barracks, not less than
£300,000 or £400,000 for the enlargement of military hos-
pitals, not less than £256,000 for improving the sanitary
arrangements of barracks, and not less than £25,000 in
giving quarters to our married soldiers. In addition
exceptional sums were spent for the purpose of protecting
our commercial harbours and stations at Bermuda, Malta,
and Gibraltar—an amount of expenditure which, if neces-
sary, did not justify any attempt to increase the estimates
of the country."