The Sun.
London, England, 1845-02-15 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 15, 1845.

ing the past year that is 250,0001. Now,
I have been here speaking of the ordinary
permanent sources of revenue, and the net amount
of my estimate on these is 47,900,0001. Besides, I cal-
culate that during the coming year we shall receive
600,000/. on account of China. So that, even if the
House should refuse its sanction to the continu-
ance of the income-tax, I think that I should be
entitled to take credit for the half-year's produce
of that tax—viz., for 2,600,000/, which will come
into the receipts of the year ending the sth of
April, 1846. Therefore, with this 2,600,0001., and
600,000/. on account of China, I am warranted upon
calculating a clear revenue of 51,100,000/., even if the
House should refuse to continue the income-tax.
The charge for the debt could of course be calculated.
On the sth of April, 1846, the charge for debt will be
28,450,000/, and then you will have the full advantage
of that reduction which took place last year
on the interest of the Three-and-a-Half per Cents.
The charge for debt, funded and unfunded,
28,458,000/ ; the charge on the Consolidated
Fund, 2,400,000/., making a total of 30,858,0001. on ac-
count of the debt. The estimated debt voted last year
amounted to 17,700,000/. ; the total charge, therefore,
assuming the present system to remain unaltered, would
be 48,557,000/ Deduct that sum from the total revenue,
that is 48,557,000/. from 51,100,0004 still the surplus
on the sth of April, 1846, will be 2,543,0001. I really
must, even at the risk of fatiguing the House, detail these
calculations. I hope the House will pardon me for so
doing. If you were to deduct from the revenue of
next year the receipt of the income-tax and the
casual and temporary receipt from Chinese money, and
assume that to be the amount of revenue on the follow-
ing year, ending the sth of April, 1847, and taking
the expenditure to be the same, in that case there would
be a small deficiency of revenue as compared with the
preceding year. The question is, whether or not we
are justified in a demand for an increased expenditure
on account of the public expenditure, and I feel that it
is but right to satisfy the House what our intentions are
in making this demand. Ido not hesitate to admit that
no financial prosperity—no surplus revenue—relieves
the Government from the paramount obligation of con-
sidering whether it is consistent for the public interest
that a saving can be made in the public expenditure.
But I do not mean to say that there would be any more
justification on the part of the Government for a large and
profuse expenditure, when the revenue is in a flourishing
state, than there would if it were failing.—(Hear, hear.)
I feel that there is the same stringent obligation upon
her Majesty's Government to avoid increased—un-
necessarily increased—expenditure, when there is a
surplus of five millions in the Treasury, as when
there is no surplus at all.—(Hear, hear.) It is, I
know, of the greatest importance that I, and those Hon.
Gentlemen who act with me, should perform the duty
that devolves upon us, in respect to the public taxation,
to remove, within the least possible period that
we can consistently do so, such increased taxation as
we consider to press with additional force upon the
public trade and public interest.—(Hear, hear.) But it
is impossible to do this without exercising great care and
caution, as to the department in which the public ex-
penditure is to be reduced.—(Hear, hear.) At the same
time, permit me to say that I am greatly afraid that the
public are under a very erroneous conception with re-
gard to what is really necessary for the public expen-
diture, what that public expenditure actually is, and
the means by which it can be safely reduced. It is
generally supposed that all portions of the public expen•
diture which does not consist of payments for the con-
tinuance of the several public departments, is unneces-
sary and useless, but such is not the case. If we take
the amount of the revenue for the past year, which was
48,243,000/., it will be found to consist of the following
charges :-28,450,0001. on account of payments to-
wards the public debt. The sum paid to the naval and
military halt-pay amounted to 4,991,000/. The
charges fixed on as necessary for the Consolidated
Fund was 1,878,0001. In these charges I include
the provision necessary for defraying the expenditure of
the judicial establishment.—(hear.) There are, be-
sides, included in the whole amount of the sum that I
have stated as that which will be required for the public
service this year, not only the whole sum levied
as public taxation, but various other sums.
The sum of 35,309,000/., required for the purposes I have
already mentioned, if deducted from the 48,000,0001.,
the amount of the total sum required tor the public expen-
diture, will leave a sum of about 13,000,0001. for the public
service, in respect of which, it is supposed, some reduction
may be made.—(Hear, hear.) After deducting the
amount due to the public creditor, what then
remains to be disposed of to meet the expendi-
ture of the executive Government ? The total
amount of that would not exceed 12,933,0001.
Among the other charges which have received the
sanction of Parliament, is the charge for the Civil
List. And hero I may be permitted to say,
that any Executive Government that would have
a due regard to the exercise of a wise and
judicious economy, would not hesitate to follow the
example which has been set them by the controulex-
ercised over her own expenditure by the Sovereign.
A settlement was made of the Civil List on her
accession to the throne. On the occasion of her mar-
riage no addition was made to that civil list.—(Cheers.)
It has pleased God to bless that marriage by the birth of
four children, which has made a considerable additional
demand upon the civil list. In the course of last year
three sovereigns visited this country ; two of them
were two of the most powerful sovereigns of Europe
—the Emperor of Russia and the King of the
French.—(Cheers.) Those visits, of necessity, created
a considerable increase of expenditure, but through that
wise system of economy, which is the only source of
true magnificence, her Majesty was enabled not only to
receive those Sovereigns in a style of magnificence
which excited universal admiration, but without adding
one tittle to the burdens of the country.—(Loud
cheers.) And lam not required, on the part of her
Majesty, to press for the extra expenditure of one
single shilling—(lmmense cheers)—on account of these
unforeseen causes of increased expenditure.—(Renewed
cheers.) I think that it is but due to state this, to the
personal credit of her Majesty, who by the exercise of a
judicious economy, has been enabled to entertain these
Sovereigns with all the magnificence due to her station,
and without incurring a single debt.—(Loud cheers.)
I know it maybe said that I have not adverted to other
sources of reduction in the public expenditure. It may
be said that offices might be abolished, and that emolu-
ments may be reduced. I admit that no office ought to
be retained which is not necessary for the public service.
I admit that no emolument attached to any office ought
to be retained which is not necessary to secure the faith-
ful and efficient performance of the duties necessary for
the public service.—(Hear, hear.) On that point
we are all agreed. I vindicate no sinecures—(Cheers)—
and when an office becomes vacant we go through that
process which has been so frequently recommended, of
considering if the retention of it is necessary for the
public service, and if the emoluments will admit of re-
duction consistently with a due regard for the
public interests.—(Cheers.) Now with regard to
the charges for the collection of the revenue,
it should be borne in mind that the extent of the
revenue establishment is not merely to secure an effi-
cient collection of the money duo to the State, but that
it is of the utmost importance that every facility should
be given for the transaction of commercial business.—
(Hear, hear.) It is our duty:to reduce those establish-
ments, as far as it is consistent with public convenience.
I do not vindicate the retention of one single useless
officer ; but the public is interested in giving to the dis-
patch of public business every facility that you can give
consistently with a due regard to the public safety.
and, therefore, so far as the principle is concerned that
the revenue ought to be collected at the least possible
expense, and that you ought to make every reduction
you can, upon that point I apprehend there can
be no difference of opinion. But still, after that
admission, you will find that the subject has con-
stantly occupied the attention of every Government,
and that great reductions from time to time have been
made. But it would be a delusion and a fallacy to expect
that you can generally reduce the public burdens by any
diminution of the salaries of the officials employed. At
the same time it may be said that those great public
establishments for which a vote is taken every year,
and which constitute the main charge on the
revenue, independent of the fixed charges—such
as the army, the navy, and the ordnance of the country—
may admit of some reductions. I, first of all, will state
the estimate we propose for the expenditure on account
of the army. Now it is impossible to determine whether
that expense is justifiable or not, without adverting to
the extent of the colonial empire of this country. Now,
in point of fact, the main expense on account of the army
is the extent of your colonial possessions. You have
these colonial dependencies, and to make no provision
for the relief of the troops serving in them, will be in-

consistent with humanity in the first place, and incon••

our military establishments ought to be—in the year 1792
you had 22 colonial dependencies. In the year 1520
you had 34 colonial dependencies, and in the present
year, 1845, the colonies, which were 22 in 1792,
have increased to 45 at the present time.
It is the number of your colonies, and the
dispersion of the forces employed in them,
that leads to the necessity of frequent relief,
and imposes on you, with reference to your army par-
ticularly, as distinguished from the armies of the Con-
tinental powers, in order to maintain the efficiency
of that force, a considerable annual expenditure.
It may be said it is not our advantage to defend our
colonial empire, but I deal with the fact that you have
colonies—that you must provide a competent force for
each, and that having a competent force, you must have
some supply for the relief of them. Sir, I should be un-
willing—though I know our colonies are expensive—
I should be unwilling to give up that policy which
led to the foundation in different parts of the
globe of dependencies animated by the spirit of Eng-
lishmen, speaking the English language, and laying
the foundation, perhaps, in future times, of important
commercial States.—(Hear, hear.) Looking to our own
population—looking to its numbers—looking to its en-
terprise, I cannot say that I think it is unwise to pro-
vide au outlet for that population and that enterprise.
—(Hear, hear, and cheers.) And though it
may be attended at times with something of expense,
you must remember, however that may be, the fact that
you have at the present moment forty-five colonies, for
the military defence of which you must provide. For
the service of each of these forty-five colonies you have
a force, consisting first, of three battalions of the
army, 6,500 cavalry, rank and file, and you have one
hundred and twelve battalions of infantry, con-
sisting, rank and file, of 92,500 men, d that
is the amount of the British army wiwhich
you are to garrison all these forty-fivo colonies, with
which we are to provide against occasionally internal
commotion, and the chance of foreign attack, and to
provide also for the internal service of the
country. And this is to be effected, and is
effected, by an infantry force of 112 battalions,
amounting to 92,000 rank and file. Now, what is the
rule established with regard to relief ? The rule is this.
That a regiment shall remain ten years abroad, and five
at home ; and will any one say that that is an unreason-
able regulation—that it would be desirable, for the effi-
ciency of the army, that any regiment in the British service
should remain more than ten years abroad, or that it
should not have the advantage of remaining five years
at home. After their return they generally arrived in
such a state that it required some years to bring them to
a proper degree of health.—(Hear, hear.) And if her
Majesty's Government thought it advisable—that it
was consistent with true economy, with humanity and
with the efficiency of the service to reduce the
military force, it would be their bounden duty to do
so. What is the fact with regard to the
service of the regiments abroad ? Of 112 battalions in
the British service—l am now speaking of infantry of
the line—there are twenty-three in India, fifty
in the colonies, and four battalions on their
passage home, being seventy-seven battalions em-
ployed in the defence of our colonial empire.
You have 35 battalions at home—not, as it is supposed,
for the purpose of restraining, but for the purpose of
maintaining, the system of relief. Your rule is five
years at home, but ten years abroad, but you
have not been able to adhere to it. The military force
that you hare at home does not enable you
to supply the demand for the necessary relief. Now,
let me take:, a series of years, from the year 1824
to the year 1842, a period of eighteen years of profound
peace—at least, there was during that period no general
warfare. There was no interruption to tranquillity from
1824 to 1842, and the number of battalions during that
time remained the same. Now, what was the
service during that period ? Why, the average
service of the whole of the battalions was
ten years abread and five at home. For the whole of
the battalions, therefore, there was fourteen years abroad
and four at home.—(Hear, hear.) It might be said that
I speak of rank and file, and that there is necessarily
a number of officers included. Now, look at the
effect of that. You have a number of reduced
officers, and what was the effect ? Why,
in reducing the officers you would reduce the regiment,
and the consequence therefore was that officers must be
increased. Now, what was the effect with respect to
services in India? There were twenty-three battalions
in India, twelve of them whose period of foreign
service has been thirteen years. There were
four battalions in India whose period of service has
been upwards of twenty years; and there is one battalion
which has been on foreign service for twenty-three
years, which is now returning home, and if you allow it
to remain five years at home, and send it out again
for ten years, when it comes back it will have
been thirty-three years abroad on foreign service and
five at home. Now, if you adhere to your own rule of
five years at home and ten years abroad, you would
require no less than forty-seven battalions for India.
Independently of that, we have only thirty-five battalions
at home, and I ask the House whether her Majesty's
Government would be acting consistently with their
duty, if after the fact which I have stated, they recom -
mended a diminution of the British army? I know that
some temporary popularity might be gained
by advising that reduction, but when I look
to the system of relief, however imperfect
those principles upon which it is founded may be,
and of the present course at home which is carried into
country,—
effect, I am bound to say that I don't think it would be
on
r with itmhielictoanryomye,statoblpisrho.-
Imnleasntleits—seemc,opo.nifiirsteitd—ehexeracinuse me fO
liateYiimportance of our vast colo-
llledav:,ellhinegar.
consistent with srgoeudthnuedetgpine
inhoPedettahiel
thus
upon our expenditure, because,'as I said before, I do not
feel that any prosperity justifies any increase in the ex-
penditure which can be made. We propose no increase
in our military establishments, but, at the same time, we
do not think it would be desirable to recommend to the
House to diminish the military force of this country.
Consequently, we propose that the vote for the army
estimates in the present year shall be a vote of 6,600,0001,
the amount of last year's estimate. I now proceed to
call the attention of the House to the state of the navy,
and the: demand we shall feel: it our duty to submit to
the House for an increase in the estimate for it. We
shall propose, in the course of the present year, an in-
crease in the number of men serving in the navy, of
about 2,500 more than those that are now actually
employed, and of about 4,000 more men than
those voted last year. I shall make that proposal on
the following grounds :—On account of our extended
colonial empire, and the new commercial interests con-
nected with it. There is a growing necessity for pro-
tection of our commerce in almost every part of the
world. 'Within the last few years three great naval
stations have grown up. There is the coast
of Africa, the Pacific, and the China seas.
Now I will just compare the number of men
employed in these several stations in 1841, with the
number of men we felt it our duty to employ; for, really
we had scarcely any option to exercise with respect to
that employment, in the course of the autumn of last
year. In 1841, on the coast of Africa, there were em-
ployed 690 men. Last year, for the purpose of making
a more vigorous attempt for the suppression of the slave
trade there were employed on the coast of Africa 2,590 men.
In the Pacific, in the year 1841, there were employed
706 men ; in the last year there were, and there are at
present, employed, 2,437 men. In the China seas, in
1841, there was only a small frigate. I believe that was
previous to the commencement of hostilities ; but our
ordinary communications in the China seas were con-
ducted by the occasional presence of a small frigate. But
after the treaty which we entered into with China, there
were employed on the coast of China 2,805 men. We
have attempted to make a reduction. Under the China
treaty there was a stipulation that we should
have one vessel for each of the five ports
at which our commerce was to be carried on.
We attempted to reduce the number ; we tried to
adopt the plan of having steam-boats to pay occasional

visits to those ports ; but we were immediately met by
the strongest representations from the most eminent au-
thorities, from Sir Henry Pottinger and his suc-
cessor, Mr. Davis, earnestly entreating us, in
. _ _ .

consideration of our new relations, and of the

importance of imposing a check upon those who
formed those ports, and preventing any infraction of
the Chinese laws, immediately to dispatch an additional

force; and so convinced were we of the justness of the

representations thus made to us, that we at once

attended to the demand of Sir Henry Pottinger
and Mr. Davis, and sent there an additional
force. Comparing the number of men on these three

stations in 1841 with the number employed at present,
there is now an actual increaso of about 6,000 men.

The House will recollect what took place last year. I
need not remind you of the complaints which
were made, that we had not a sufficient force

at that time, but if I had the opportunity I certainly be-
lieve that I could convince every dispassionate mind
that we could not with safety or wisdom reduce the force
that we now have either in China or the Pacific.--
(Hear, hear, and cheers.) Not, indeed, that an increase
is wanted for any purpose of war or oppression, but our
commerce is greatly extending on the west
coast of South America, apd it is impossible '

to deny that the presence of a British vessel has a
great effect in maintaining relations of peace.—(Hear,
hear.) lam sure that upon those three stations alone
there has been an increase in the men employed at sach
a distance from this country of not less than 6,000 men.
You are to observe, too, that the very dispersion of your
naval force has an effect like that produced by the dis-
persion of the army. The necessity of having your
naval force dispersed over the habitable globe does, in
fact, diminish the efficiency of the naval complement at
home.—(Hear, hear.) We propose, therefore, with per-
fect confidence in the justice of the requisition to increase
the naval force of the present year to 4,000 men. The
expense caused by that increase will be about 184,0001.
I do not vindicate that increase merely on the ground
of fiscal arrangements. I say, without hesitation, that
I think it is of great importance that this country should
have the means of perfecting discipline, of improving its
officers, and of keeping at its command a certain num-
ber of ships of the line.—(Hear, and partial cheers.)
I do not believe that it ought to give, or that it would
give, any cause for jealousy, if this country should have
the command of nine or ten sail of the line.—(Hear,
hear.) It is of great importance that we should test the
quality of vessels in sailing, and we have no means of
doing so unless we send them to sea.—(Loud cheers from
Sir Charles Napier, followed by shouts of laughter,
in which Sir Robert Peel joined heartily.) Sir, I
am afraid that the approbation of the Gallant Officer
opposite, will not neutralise the opposition of Honourable
Gentlemen around him, who will not be, I fear, so much
convinced as he himself is, of the necessity for the in-
creased expenditure which I am about to propose.—
(Hear, hear, and laughter.) Ido not propose this aug-
mentation of our force with say view to aggression, but
because I think it politic that this country should have at
its command a few line-of-battle ships.--(Hear, hear.)
The increased number of men which I mean to propose
is 4,000, and if you attend to the requisitions of our com-
merce in different parts of the globe, you will find that
they will not enable us to have, under any circumstances,
more than ten sail of the line at our command.
It is impossible also, I think, for this House to
overlook the progress made in the perfection of
steam navigation.—(Hear, hear.) Last year this House
sanctioned a vote for two basins for the construction and
repair of steam-vessels—one at Portsmouth, and another
at Deptford. I shall therefore propose this year to take
a vote for proceeding with the formation of those basins
which the House sanctioned last year. The vote I pro
pose to ask for is 187,000/. I shall also take
a vote for the purpose of enabling us to
maintain the steam navy in a respectable
condition suited to a peace establishment. Now, on ac-
count of the naval service, and of the ordnance con-
nected with the navy, there will be an increase in the
estimates of nearly one million.--(Considerable sensation,
much murmuring, and whispers in all parts of the House.)
The works connected with the ordnance department
have not been recently pursued with sufficient vigour,
and we must, at all events, keep those fortifications and
works which exist in an ordinary state of repair.
The estimate I now present of the total expendi-
ture of the present year is as follows :—The
charge for the Debt, 28,395,000/, the charge
for the Consolidated Fund, 2,400,0001., making a total
of 30,795,000/. The vote of supply for the army,
6,678,0004, for the navy, 6,936,0004, for the ordnance,
2,142,000/, for the miscellaneous estimates, 3,200,0001.,
being together, 18,895,0001, and added to the charge
for the debt of the Consolidated Fund, 49,695,0001.,
for the revenue of next year I will take 51,100,000/.
The charges for the present year, 49,690,0001. And,
even with this increased expenditure, there would be a
surplus on the sth of April, 1846, of between one and
two millions.
An Hom. MEMBER on the Opposition benches—The
half-year's income-tax ?
Sir ROBERT PEEL—Of course the half-year's in-
come-tax. lam not now estimating the permanent ex-
penditure of the country. I am stating what would be
the state of the finance of the country on the sth of
April, 1846.—(Hear, hear.) It is quite clear, that
if the income-tax were not to be renewed,
unless there should be some considerable in-
crease in the public revenue from other sources,
there would probably be a deficiency. I have thus at
tempted to lay before the House the present financial
condition of the country, and estimated the revenue to the
sth of April next, and for the year ending the sth of
April, 1846 ; and I have also laid before the House what
amount of expenditure her Majesty's Government, with a
provident care for the public interests, will feel it their
duty to recommend to the House. The next question
that arises is—and it is a most important one—in
what manner this increase of expenditure is to be
provided for ? Will you run the risk of curtail-
ing the revenue for future years, by making no
provision for the future, and because that is 1846 the
revenue will admit of increased expenditure, we should
postpone the consideration of future wants until they
come upon us. Her Majesty's Government did not
consider they would be doing their duty by acting with
such disregard to the future condition of the country.
I know it does not conduce to popularity to propose a
continuance of taxation, but it is the duty of a Govern-
ment to consider the prospects of the future, as well as
the present exigencies of the country, and if they are
satisfied that the public interest demands a continuance
of taxation, even though it may be unpopular, it be-
comes their duty respectfully to submit to consideration
a proposal on that important subject. We are now in-
duced to propose a continuance of the property-tax for a
further period, and before I am led to ask the assent of this
House, or any Gentleman in this House, to that pro-
posal, I feel it is absolutely necessary that I should
explain, as I shall now proceed to do, what are the views
of her Majesty's Government with respect to the appro-
priation of the surplus revenue, which will be placed at
their disposal, after fully providing for every exigency
of the public service. I know well, as the Noble Lord
opposite stated the other night, that it is impossible to
give an opinion upon the question, abstractedly,
can the property-tax be continued or not, with-
out knowing what are the measures in respect
of relief from taxation, which would follow as a conse-
quence of its continued imposition. Let me assume, for
the present—and I merely assume it for the pur-
pose of argument, and to make my state-
ment 1' more clear—let me assume, I repeat, for the
present that the House has granted the continuance of
the property-tax. I will then give a short estimate
of the revenue arising from it, together with other
sources. Suppose the property-tax to be continued,
the estimate of the revenue for the next year on the
sth of April, 1846, aided by the 5,200,0001 of the
property-tax, will be 53,700,000/. and as long
as the other sources of the revenue remain equally pro-
ductive, and as long as the property-tax is continued,
53,700,0001., subject to a reduction of 600,0001., will be
the amount cf the revenue. This 600,0001.'
is the amount received as Chinese money ; it
will be received for one year more, but
for the purpose of calculating the revenue,
I had better strike it out altogether. The re-
venue for, the year, then, on the sth of
April, 1846, will be 53,100,000/ The charge for the
debt, and on account of the different branches
of the public service, will be 49,690,0001. ; so
that there would be left, as long as the income-
tax should be continued, and deducting the
Chinese money, a nett revenue of 3,409,000/.
That is the surplus that will remain if the House should
acquiesce in the proposal which I shall make to increase
the expenditure in the navy, and if they shall also de.
termine that the income-tax shall be continued. Now it
is a most important matter for consideration, in what
mode that surplus, or any part of that surplus, shall be
employed for the relief of taxation. What are the in-
ducements in the way of the increased efficiency of the
public service, and of the diminution of taxation, which
I hold out to the House of Commons as a motive to
induce them to consent to the continuance of the income
tax? I should not propose to the House the continuance
of the income-tax unless I had the strongest presumption,
partly founded on the experience of past years, that it
will be competent to the House of Commons, by
coatinuing the income-tax, to make such arrangements
with respect to general taxation, as shall be the founda-
tion of great future commercial prosperity, and shal
materially add to the comforts even of those who shalt
be called on to contribute to the income-tax.—(llcar.)
When the question is, having a considerable sur-
plus, to determine how that surplus can be most
efficiently employed, the question becomes one worthy
of the most important and serious consideration. In the
first place, we must consider the claims which may be
urged in favour of a reduction of taxation on account of
the heaviness with which certain imposts press on ar-
ticles of consumption.—(Loud cheers.) We have also
to consider what taxes press on the raw materials which
constitute the staple of the manufactures of the country.
We are also bound to consider what taxes cause a great
increase in the establishments necessary for their col-
lection, and what are those taxes, the remission of which
will enable us to diminish our establishments, so as
to enable us to reduce our expenditure. We are bound
also to consider what are those taxes the removal of
which will give more scope to commercial enter-
prise, and occasion an increased demand for labour.
—(Cheers.) I will not say which of these
considerations ought to be the most predomi-
nant—all ought to occupy our serious attention—
all are of the very greatest importance. If we

receive the sanction of the House fur the con-
tinuance of the income-tax, we shall feel it
to be our duty to make a great experiment
with respect to taxation, and we shall hope that the
general prosperity which will result therefrom will con-
tribute to fill up the void caused by the
cessation of taxation. We do not propose to maintain
any material surplus of revenue over expenditure,
confident that, whatever may happen, this House
is determined to maintain the public credit.
—(Loud cheers.) We have determined to recom-
mend extensive reductions in those taxes which, in our
opinion, press more onerously on the community than
the income-tax. I first propose to take those taxes
which are imposed by the Customs duties, and I shall
submit to the consideration of the House, on that point,
what are the views of her Majesty's Government in re-
spect to a reduction upon the duty of sugar.--(Loud
cries of " Hear, hear," from both sides of the House.)
The House will recollect that upon this subject
last year au arrangement of a temporary cha-
racter was made, by which sugar, the pro-
duce of settlers who used free labour, was admitted
into competition with sugar the produce of foreign free
labour. There was r.o reduction proposed to be made
upon British free labour sugar ; but a proposition was
made for the admission of sugar the produce of foreign
free labour, which has induced her Majesty's Govern-
ment to call attention to the subject of the sugar duties
generally, with the view to proposing a reduction in
them.—(Hear, hear.) The amount of a discriminating
duty proposed, by which to admit foreign sugar, the
produce of free labour, was 10s. Gd. ; and her Ma-
jesty's Government now propose to admit to general
competition sugar upon the terms to which allusion was
made last session.—(Hear, hear.) We also propose the
admission to competition of sugar, the produce of free
labour in our colonies, upon the same terms as sugar, the
pkoduce of free labour, in those foreign countries
th which we now have what are called
those " reciprocity treaties " that have hereto-
fore been made.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) I beg it
may here be understood that I do not now wish to pro-
voke discussion upon this subject—that would be much
better reserved for a distinct discussion upon this
subject—(Hear, hear)—but it is important that I should
make a general allusion to it in my present statement.
The discriminating duty proposed to be established last
session was, on free-labour British plantation sugar, 245.,
and 5 per cent., and that upon free-labour foreign sugar,
345. and 5 per cent.; which would produce, upon the
former, a total amount of duty of 255. 3d., and on the
latter of 355. 9d. But, in the reductions pro-
posed last year, it was proposed to establish a
higher discriminating rate of duty on free-labour foreign
sugar than we conceived bore a fair proportion to colo-
nial free labour sugar. Therefore her Majesty's Go-
vernment came to the conclusion that the circumstances
under which the foreign countries producing sugar by
free labour, and those of the colonies, were not
such as would render such alteration expedient.
We stated at the same time that a classification, if it were
possible, which would apply to our own sugar as well as
foreign sugar, might be well worthy of consideration.
Several gentlemen who spoke on the other side of the
House contended for pressing the establishment of it, if
possible, between the grosser and finer kinds of sugar. He
had communications with official persons conversant with
matters of this kind, and they certified that it was pos-
sible, with regard to our own and foreign sugars, to es-
tablish such a discrimination. We propose, therefore,
with regard to all sugars except the produce of our own
colonies, to make this reduction. In respect of brown Mus-
covado sugar, which is now subject to a duty of 255. 3d.,we
propose to make a reduction of 1 ls. 3d, and to reduce
the duty to 145.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition.)
With regard to Muscavado sugar, that reduced duty
will apply to all British plantation sugar—to sugar the
produce of the Mauritius—to sugar the produce of our
West Indian Colonies ; and with regard to the produce
of those districts in British India, with regard to which
a different rule now applies, we propose, in the case
of those districts, to retain the same relative pro-
portionate duty, and that duty shall be 18s. Bd.
This is applicable to those countries of India which
are permitted to import sugar. We propose
that the amount of protective duty shall not exceed 9s,
4d., and the duty on free labour sugar will, therefore,
be 235. 4d. Of course, in countries with whom existing
treaties are in force, we cannot deprive them of that
which is their right. With regard to white, or clayed
sugar, or sugar which by some process is made equal to
clayed sugar, we propose that the duty on Bri-
tish Plantation East India Sugar shall be re-
duced from 255. 3d. to 16s. 4d., and that the
duty on sugar imported from India, or those parts of
India from which sugar may be imported,
shall be 21s. 9d:, and that the duty on free
labour foreign sugar—that is clayed—shall be 285,,
thus retaining the whole amount of discriminating duty
which last year was 10s. 6d., but applying it in a different
manner, giving 9s. 4d. protection on Muscovado sugar,
and increasing the protection to lls. 4d. on white sugar.
The amount of discriminating duty would remain
the same as it was last year. The duty on molasses
we propose to preserve in the same proportion, It is
necessary that I should make the intentions of the Go-
vernment well understood. Without going into minute
details, reserving them for consideration when the sugar
duties come under the attention of the House, we
propose to make a further reduction on refined sugar.
We propose on refined sugar that it should be imported
at a duty of 145., instead of 18s. Bd., and that
double refined sugar should be imported under a
duty of 215., the 14s. including the 5 per cent. Now, it
is important that in the present statement I should skit*
the probable amount of sugar to be derived from the
possessions of this country abroad. For the purpose
of obtaining information on that subject, we have
applied to four independent sources for the purpose
of obtaining an estimate of the probable supply of sugar
for the next year, and I will now read to the House, with I
its permission, the estimate that have been formed.
The stock of sugar on hand on the Ist of January last
was 45,000 tons, and the estimate made by the Customs
of the probable production of the British India plantations
is as follows :—From the West Indies and the West
India colonies, 135,000 tons; from the Mauritius, 40,000
tons ; and from British India, 70,000 tons, being
the supply of sugar in the present year, independent of
the stock on hand of 245,000 tons. I trust that there
may be reliance placed on this statement, as it has been
procured from the best sources of information. The first
of the other authorities which we have consulted, calcu-
lated the produce of British plantations at 140,000 tons ;
the Mauritius at 40,000, and Britishlndia at 70,000, making
a total of 230,000 tons. The second party consulted has
not given so flattering an account. They have estimated
the produce of British Plantation sugar at
only 12,000 tons, the Mauritius at 40,000
tons, and British India at 70,000 tons,
making an estimate of 230,000 tons. The fourth esti-
mate formed independently, as I said before of any
communication, is that with regard to British plantation
sugar. The estimate for British plantation sugar is
130,000 tons, Mauritius 40,000 tons, British India
65,000 tons—making a total of 235,000 tons. The lowest
of those estimates is 230,000 tons, and the highest
is 250,000 tons. If you add the highest to the stock in
hand, that gives a supply of 295,000 tons ; and if you
take the lowest, it will give a supply of
275,000 tons. We consider that the effect of
the reduction upon sugar will be, on the whole,
a reduction of duty, so far as duty is connected with price,
amounting to lid. per lb., or not quite so much as 11d.
But if you add other charges that accompany a high
rate of duty, we think the full effect of the reduction of
the duty will not be much short of lid. per lb.--
(Cheers.) Because as the duty increases there are
charges incidental to that increase. Now I will give, as is
my duty, the best estimate we can form as to the pro-
bable loss to the revenue which will arise from that pro-
posed reduction. As I said before, we calculate, indepen-
dent of any supply of free-labour sugar—we calculate on
a supply for improving the stock in hand of at least
275,000 Z for the present year. The greatest amount of
consumption, I believe, has not been more than 207,000
tons in any one year. We think it is probable that the
effect of the reduction of the duty may lead to an
increased consumption of perhaps 43,000 tons, making a
total probable increase—of course these estimates must
be general ; but we think the probable increase of the

consumption of sugar, in consequence of the reduced duty,
will make a total not much short of 250,000 tons. The

consumption of British Muscovado sugar to the exten

of 160,000 tons, at 145., would give 2,240,0004 The

consumption of c]ayed sugar to the extent of 70,000
tons, would give a revenue of 1,140,000/. ; foreign free
Muscovado sugar, 5,000 tons, at 235. 4d., will give
a revenue of 116,700/. ; of clayed, or equal to
clayed, 15,000 tons, at 285., would give a revenue
of 450,000/. As I said before, these estimates are very
general, but supposing them to approximate to the
truth, the consequence would be that we shall

receive from the duty on sugar, in consequence
of the reduction, the sum of 3,946,000/. The
revenue derived from sugar in the last year was
5,216,0001. There will therefore probably be a loss in
the next year of very nearly 1,300,000/.—(Flear, hear.)
Now, postponing any discussion on the subject of the

sugar duties until the period when it will come imme-
diately under consideration, I proceed to enumerate the
other duties of which we shalt propose, as a consequence

of the contianance of tho income :tax, the reduction or