The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-05-10 00:00:00

HOUSE OF LORDS.-FRIDAY.

--- - -
The seamen (Scotland) bill, the Southampton docks bill,
with several other bills, were brought up from the House of
C9tII.I,IIQIIS andsead &first time. - -
The report of the committee On the Irish constabulary force
bill, with some amendments, was agreed to.

THE IRISH. CHURCHES.
The Earl of RIPON moved 'for a return of the funds in the
hands of the commissioners for building new churches in Ire-
land, and of the number of applications which had been made
to the commissioners for the building of new churches in Ire-
land. In the course of his "speech his lordship proved tbctt the
means of the commissioners were very inadequate to the pur-
poses for which they were appointed, but that this was an im-s.
portant considero.tion before any ulterior step was taken with
reference to the established church in Ireland. The returns
were ordered.—Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMIONS.-FRIDAY.

An immense number of petitions praying for the'repeal of the
`• taxes on knowledge ",were presented.

THE BUDGET.

The house having gone into a committee of ways and means,
The CHANCELLOR proceeded to bring forward, his financial
statement for .the year. He prefaced it by referring to the re-
tduction already made on account of the civil government. In
1825 the cost of the several departments was £3,763,000; it now
was £2,780,000, showing a reduction of £976,000. The calcula-
tions of, last 3,ear on the subject of income and expenditure were
fully realised by an excess of income of £292,000, which ap-
peered over his estimates. The income of the current year was
-calculated at £46,980,000, and its expenditure at £45,205,000.
He calculated, therefore, on a surplus of £1,774,193, exclusive,
however, of paymentson account of West India compensation,
&c:; on that account, 'the largest payment to be made this year,
it would be £1,111,863, reducing his surplus unfortunately to'
£662,230. He compared the imports and exports of the four
years 1828 to 1831 inclusive, and the four years 1832 to 1835
also inclusive. These totals showed an average annual increase
of imports of about £960,000, and of exports of £15,449,000.
He also entered fully into the produce of the excise, and parti-
cularly eulogised the conduct of parliament in repealing the
beer duty,; and the malt duty, he estimated, would this year
produce £5,660,000. The stamps, he estimated, would produce
;£3,575,000.- Though the stamps bill would cause some diminu-
tion, it would also cause increase, so that he expected one would
meet the other; and, therefore, he considered the total amount
would not be affected. But this calculation was made exclusive
of the proposed alteration of the duty on newspapers. The
postotfice revenue had produced £1,540,000; but it would be
below that amount, in consequence of the reduction of the
postage on letters to, ,from, or.passing through France, result-
ing from the French treaty on this subject- He commented on
the increased prosperity of Manufactures and agriculture—the
advatice la the prosperity of the latter interest he attributed to
tbepoor laws amendment act. As 'to the use to be made of the
surplus,lo stated that, agreeably to the recommendation of the
excise ,inquiry commissioners, he pro osed the reduction 'of the
paper duty one-half, and the repeal of the
duty on stained paper.
'fie shmild,thereby lose eventually 250,000; but this year only
£125,000.
.A loss of £20,000 would be sustained by' the Post-
qffice, in consequence of the French treaty. The mode of re-
ceiving the probate duty was to be altered, it being now paid
beforehand;. the loss would be £20,000. By the reduction of
the South Sea,.. duties there would be a loss of £lO,OOO.
With respect to the stamp duty on newspapers he feared he
should have to sustain a double fire from his friends behind him
and from the honourable gentlemen opposite; but to both he'
would take the liberty of representing the position in which that
question stood at the present moment. He said tnthose who
asked for the total' repeal of that duty, " Do you think that
any minister could come down to the house on such a financial
statement as I have just made and propose that £400,000 out' of
the surplus of £662,000 should be devoted absolutely to the
repeal of the stamp duties on newspapers ? Do you think that,
even if a minister were so disposed, he could inducethe house
to accompany him in such a scheme ?" He knew full well that
the house would not accompany him, and even if the' house
would accompany him, he was not disposed to make the propo-
sition, because he had always considered this a fit subject for
taxation, and so long as the newspapers asked the government
to transmit them free of postage through the land, it was fair
and just, and legitimate and right, that they should be made a
subject of taxation. He was, therefore, not disposed to enter
into a proposal for their total repeal; but he would go further
and say, that in the present state of public opinion, if he were
to make such a proposition it would, be rejected. [Mr. Hume
was understood to signify his dissent from this opinion.] Did
,any hon. gentleman doubt it ? Well, let him bring forward
a motion, and make a stand. Let this house see who' those
were who, in the present state of the finances of the country,
wished to apply £400,000 out of £600,000 to the repeal of
stamps on newspapers. But he said it was material to deal with
this branch, of the subject. He adhered to the opinions which
hehad pronounced last year, on the motion of the hon. member
for Lincoln, that the present stamp duty on newspapers was not
to be continued or maintained. The. proposition then made
and acquiesced in by him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer).
and promised by him to be carried into effect on a fitting occa-
sion, gave him a right to ask of the house' if not to support, at
least to consider his proposition. Were hon. members aware
of that state of things going on in society? (hear, hear.) Did'
they know the position in which the present
-state ef things
placed the administration of the law, the security of property,
and the safetyof the revenue itsel ?—(hear, hear.) Upon these
grounds, and also for the sake of .the ,good order of society, he
should call upon the house to repeal a portion of the duty on
newspapers. The illicit trade in unstamped papers had been
going on for a considerable time—it began in London, where
they were circulated in open defiance of the law, and rapidly
extended itself through the country. Under these circum-
stances active measures• were resorted to in order to check it.
Prosecutions were carried on, imprisonments and penalties werel
inflicted—in short, the powers of the law were exhausted, and I
notwithstanding all this the sale eontinued—(hear, hear).—
Gentlemen would do him the favour of believing that this was ,1
one of the most painful parts of his duty—itwas onewhich had
to abundance of obloquy and reproach. both in and out of that:
house; but more particularly out of doors: He had been in 1
communication with the parties interested in the reduction of
the stamp duties. He had seen the newspaper proprietors, and'
they admitted that it was impossible to meet the case as it now
stood—(hear, hear). The reason was obvious—the temptation
to violate the law was too greatn—(hear, hear). , In Ireland, in
order to put an end to illicit distillation, they had tried laws
which, it, hid been justly remarked, were more fitted for the
meridian of Turkey—they even punished the innocent fur the
guilty, and resorted to almost every kind of violence, and with-
out effect, for it was always impossible to maintain an unrea-
sonably high rate of duty on any article. The only plan, then,
was to fix the duty below the insurance on smuggling, and this
was what he proposed to do, and what be trusted the house
would go along with him in doing. What did they apprehend?
Was it of revenue ? He would tell them that, it was going,
and that it would go, so that they were losing their revenue if
they did not adopt the principle of reduction :—This they might
at once see by the-following returns:— •

DUTY ON NEWsP-APERs.
Gross Revenue. Net Revenue.
1831 • • • .4586;t100'
1832 574,000
1833....
1834 .. '537,000,
.Of late there had been a slight increase, but that was but a
small part of the subject. The real question was—WOUld they
countenance such a system of violation of the law, which,
though bad in itself, was still more mischievous in the way of
' example. (Hear, hear.) In Ireland, already agenOes had
been established for the sale of the unstarived, so that to stop
them without reducing the duty was impossible. He believed
that some hon. members in that house were such advocates for
the total repeal. of these duties, that they wouldTatherleave the'
matter as it now stood, than that there should be a reduction to
one penny. If hon. members opposite were afraid of giving an