The Sun.
London, England, 1844-04-30 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS. April 29.
THE BUDGET.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (in
continuation from our Third Edition)—The House
must bear in mind• that, in the present year, that fund
has been produced by the imposition of an extraordi-
nary tax in the year 1842, and which produces
5,100,0001., which is the main ground of sur-
plus which, this evening, I have announced to
the House of Commons. Now, I will
call the attention of the House to the circumstances
under which that tax was imposed. It was imposed
at a period when the country had been labouring for
a considerable number of years under the evil of the
revenue of the country failing to equal the expenditure,
and when there was the necessity for great exertion
in order to make the revenue sufficient to bear
the necessary charges of the country. It was
imposed also with • another object—namely, with
a view of giving relief to the commercial
interests of the country, by reducing the
amount of taxes upon a variety of articles, and
for the purpose of trying the experiment whether by
immediate reduction in certain duties you might not
bring round in a limited period the revenue to the
same amount as that which it was before the reduc-
tion took place. It was imposed, therefore, with the
double object of supplying, during an interval, the
previous deficiency of the regular revenue of.the
country, and for giving time for the repealed
duties to recover, so as to be as pro-
ductive as before the reduction was effected;
with that view it was submitted by my Right Hon.
Friend to the House, and he stated his opinion, that if
that tax were continued for five years, it would have
the effect which he anticipated.—(Cries of " Three
years.") My Right Hon. Friend took it for a shorter
period.—(Laughter.) My Right Hon. Friend
indeed took it for a shorter period for
three years—and he did so on this ground,
that if at the expiration of that period the
result which he had anticipated to occur at the end
of five years should not occur, then the House would
have an opportunity of considering whether they
would continue that impost for the same period,
or whether they would take another mode of
supplying any deficiency which might exist.
I have no hesitation in saying that, at the present
moment, I cannot form any estimate of what those
reductions may be. 'When I look at the list of arti-
cles in the tariff on which reductions of duty took
place, and at the increased consumption which has
taken place of those—when I find that only on five
has consumption decreased, while on all the rest con-
sumption has increased —I must say, I entertain, very
sanguine feelings as to the ultimate success of the ex-
periment. But the House will be good enough to bear
in mind that in some main articles—timber, I will espe-
cially mention on which a reduction of the
duty has taken place, that reduction did not
come into operation until the middle of last
year. The experiment, therefore, in these instances,
has not had a fair trial ; and I am not therefore pre-
pared to say what course ought hereafter to be pur-
sued in respect of them. In the course of the next
year the peoperty-tax must necessarily come under'
the consideration of the House, and it will be for
it to say what course it will pursue with
respect to the continuance or discontinuance
of that impost. Such being the circumstances, I think
it must be obvious to every one that I should not have
acted a becoming part if I had induced the House to
consent to a large reduction of duty, which
might have had -but one effect, namely, . that
of hindering Parliament from coming to an

unfettered decision on the financial condition of the
country in the course of the next year. It is, there-
fore, that I think this is not the period for the 'House
to entertain propositions for any reduction—for alny.
considerable amount of reduction—of the taxation'ot
the country. But there is another reason which,
independently of the property-tax, must have contd.
derable weight with the House in inducing it
to pursue the course which we now recoramend.
We have had, as the House is aware, a dew
ciency of revenue as compared with expenditure,
for a series of years. That deficiency continued far
six successive years, and though for the present v
have mastered it, yet it should be recollected by thee
House that we are still suffering from the conse-
quences of it. Those deficieneies had to be met either
by adding to the debt of the country, or by drawing
on the decreasing amount in the Exchequer, in $
way which it was not safe for any country to de'
Why, Sir, when I addressed the House in the course
of the last year, the balances in the Exchequer wei:re
under 1,000,0001. per month ; by the adue
tion of the surplus of the revenue during
the present year, those balances had arisen to 11
2,000,0001. to 2,400,0001. But when we had
a balance of only 1,000,0001. per month in the D('
chequer, what was the state of our account at the
Bank of England? We were obliged to borrow
2,700,000/. in anticipation of the revenue, while We
were at the same time obliged to borrow
5,000,000/. more in deficiency bills, for the purpose
of paying the public creditor the sums which were
due to him. I think, therefore, that we Car
not act wisely for ourselves, or honourably
for the country, or, indeed, safely for its interests;
e do not make some effort to return to such e state
of prosperity as will place the balances in the tr
chequer in a position that will enable it to liquidate
its payments to its creditors, and to bring the dernen.r,
of the Bank on account of these deficiency hil,l!
within some limited compass ; or, at all eventss.."l
render the Government so far independent Of t°„11
assistance, that it may have at its disposal a e°";;
siderable portion of the sum required for its 011
quarterly expenditure. The present quarter °
the year is at all times one of great TOe,
sure on the finances, in consequence of the payrati
on account of the National Debt. We require ler%
balances in the Exchequer, in order that we may ecti‘‘,;
dependent of the Bank to a certain degree, and coe,ell'i
the operations of the Government on the priacire4
have just stated. Under these impressions, so strolls ye
do I feel the importance of this course, that even if tilet
had been no question involving the continuance of th
property-tax coming on in the course of the next Yet:
I should not have thought I was acting the part of "'"
honest man or a conscientious Minister, if I had for
borne to ask the House to apply the surplus of the Pr;
sent year to the augmentation of the balances in t
Exchequer. I trust, and indeed I feel confidel
that the House, acting on the principle W,lllc,i
guided it on a former occasion, will not he'„
tate to comply with that request. I
forget that when I brought forward the proposal for tee
reduction of the Three-and-a-Half per Cents., the /Pe%
at once cordially concurred in the sentiment that /l
should not relieve ourselves at the risk of hazard'°o.
1
dangers to be incurred hereafter, or at the expense,°
those who are to come after us. And upon that er;
ciple I now call uPox the House not to give themsets
temporary relief by a present remission of taxation, ~`";i
to place the finances of the country upon a footing tP7,
will 'enable it hereafter to follow the bent of lis
inclinations, and give relief to its donstitUe°
without endangering the credit of the countrit;
or risking its ability to meet the paytnell
it was bound to make.—(Cheers.) These are the 1
sons which have induced me to resist the large demo°.
which have been made upon us from Yary
' 130
ous quarters for a reduction of taxation. t.,4,
at the same time there are some articles on whirl
taxes are imposed, upon which either a partial or t°,":,.4
reduction of the duty may be made without much ivirti,
to the revenue, but the removal of which may be cto
lated to give an impetus and improvement
trade. I propose to submit to the House .01
variety of articles, more or less of importance, in 1,111 t,
I think some reduction of the duty may be made. Ftr.9o
with respect to those articles that will affect the DtC2e
revenue b
, I allude to a regulation with respect to ,
article of glass. I have had an application made to If;
to repeal the whole of the duties on that attic
but that I am not going to do.—(Hear, hear, and to
laugh.) That is not the course I am about 0
pursue ; but there is one portion of the duty en gsta
which I think I can satisfy the House may be reee'le-b
without injury to the revenue, and the effect ofwb.o
would give facility to trade. I allude to the distinotithe
duties on flirt glass and bottle glass. Flint glass, el es
present moment, pays a duty of 2d., while bottle gboase
pays only a duty of three farthings ; each 0f t to
articles, upon exportation, are entitled the
receive a drawback, nearly amounting t°„,i'd to
whole of the duty ; and, in order to put et:,,s—ade
fraud, the law enacts that no drawback shell r Now
on flint-glass, unless its price is sd. a pound' ode
the fact is. that there have been great improvements turere
in the manufacture of that article. Many mandiae a if
can make flint-glass at less than sd. a pound ; en.heir
they• do so, then they are deprived of he
drawback, added to which, when they go into t
market they have to compete with the foreigner, wh°'
manufacturing his glass at a less price, has the advan-
tage. There is another necessity why sone alteratiohe
should be made—there is great difficulty, so well isit so
article manufactured, in discovering which is bottle g a
and which is flint glass; and when the claim for the drag.
back comes, there are perpetual disputes as to the dtl_titi
Under these circumstances, I am of opinion that it W0t!..1
be beneficial to remove the distinctive duty between of.
and bottle glass. The reduction will only amount tot,fr
limited sum of 45,0001. a-year, but in 0* present yea
it will be only 35,000/., as I propose that the reductien:
not to take place till the sth of July, by which tie it
the manufacturers will have an opportunity to bond
glass, and avoid the imposition of the duty. The u.„l/0.
on bottle glass being three farthings, and on flint glass tr;',lt
pence, I propose that the duty on both shall be le" y
three farthings. There is another article subject to duo
to which I am desirous of calling the attention of the 1-I°t,is
with a view to its repeal—l mean the duty on the artie-be
of vinegar.—(Great laughter.) It may excite 'et
laughter or ridicule of Hon. Gentlemen who are e.
quite aware of the bearing such articles have upon Inerlie,
factures; but looking to these considerations, I cannot 1°
bear dealing with them. Now, if Hon. Gentlemen reed he
ninth report of the Excise Commissioners, they will
this
that, so far bacleas the year 1834, the repeal of ter
• duty. on vinegar was recommended.—(Hear.) The COl
missioners stated that the produce of the duty in the )_re
year was 23,0001., for the due protection of which th.hi,
was a code of regulations under the 58th of George -`to
with regard to which they observed it was difficult for
concede on what ground it was necessary to provid vies
the protection of so small an amount of duty by a i,ore,
of provisions of so complicated and extensive a no es,
es,
The Act in question contained twenty-nine clans
the infringement of which was punished b
penalties varying from 1001. to 500/. The circunistan°o.
of vinegar being used by calico printers, and that 03!4"be
facturers would be much benefited by the repeal ot.'ea
duties, as well as the benefit which the public derigool
from an article so generally in use, were all additit of
in favour of a repeal of the duty. This was the opine 833'4.
a gentleman ho directed the excise in 1833 and 0
I may observe to the House, that vinegar only PaYsesa
duty when it is made by the manufacturer for sale; of
therefore, as in the case of beer, the duty falls hearts,
upon those who have not the means of making the frog~
cle for themselves, and are obliged to purchase it, for
the manufacturer, whilst those who can make Dd a
themselves are altogether exempt from the b° The
that presses upon their poorer brethren. ad
revenue, revenue, in this respect, has but little there!: to
since the period I have alluded to. It amenni:led,
25,000/., and is a tax which I think ought to be rePe" is
Acids of a particular kind are essentially necessar•lop
many branches of manufacture, such as calico-print
for instance; and in order to give to the manufteetee
the advantage of procuring those acids cheaply. „des
law provided that pyroligneous acids in a Cr-de.
impure, and unrectified state, should be ni ;Os
without payment of duty at all. This coscee"
drer,
was intended for the benefit of the manufeetreti
At the time the concession was made it was consiu'd
a very considerable one, because manufacturers met
pyroligneous acids in the state contemplated by the rer
of Parliament. But as the skill of the manUfetnturoli
improved, those acids were produced in an ireirthae
state, which offered more advantages in their tlee_,„"or
if they were sited in what he might call their Parlieu'esf
tary state.—(Laughter.)- I will, however, allow ontitol.
for the dealer to get rid of the stock on
tPacco
The next sutiject is one of considerable iuipor—s tbe
both as regards its consequences to the commerce ?t.h 1
country, and the amount of revenue derived front1•
the
propose to the House a considerable reduction nel'ase-
duty on marine assurance. By making that I.° of'
tion, we are likely to produce an effect which lit",
vantageous and appears attainable. To those wh°bool°
anything of marine insurance, it is obvious that it s re-
settle itself in Great Britain. Marine assuralicseatict
quires large capital on the part of those who e°""fore,
it, and perfect confidence in their honour. If, there„, sag
there be any country in the world in which I shOgiu
cosh'
marine insurance would flourish above any other (1000
try, it is Great Britain, possessing, as it yet/
capital, integrity, and great extent of territory'- en that
notwithstanding these things, marine insurance teios 0'
decline. The tax was originally imposed in t pferi
war, and was valued at a very large amount. os in"
ship that sailed, and all the property it carried, "'re but
cured, and they could be insured no who svhell
in this country. But then, after the peace.'utioos,
the country was suffering under heavy contriudotioll
imposed for the carrying on of the war, v° ree;, 034
was made in the duty on marine insurance. But 010
the pressure of this duty was felt to be so gre!
twbich
Lord Auckland, acting upon the principle I.ll)°_"ries in'
I now propose to act, reduced the duty on melderehis°
surance to one-halt; and calculated upon a L 4! Lail
loss to the revenue. But in that calculatio toith.
Auckland was mistaken, for in two year!! n°het
it
standing that large reduction, the duty eattler ,resent
had previously attained. The consequence ot oer-
Britls to
chhigahntrsateisnsoufreinsiunrafnorceeigins tchoautntartiepsreisnent
Prthe Mad: 10._°
their own ; and in Hamburgh, for instance,
In our -11/
marine insurance has sery.much increased. tint o
country, in marine insurance the.
Tan:, 'to say
duty has decreased, and I am sere- to t
materially so, a fact which I certainly v.
present high rate of duty. There j 5 at
another--ti racire°l;
stance which makes the duty on marinee inoseurencoh
England heavier in many instances. :In
derably less t
goods sent by steam-vessels is consi
short tiri
when sent by sailine• vessels ; therefore
.R.l ohttrgh
eference
as between this country and France, and Pla