The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1854-05-09 00:00:00

FINANCIAL BLUNDERING,

IT would seem that the administrative talent for
which the Peelite faction claimed so much credit,
and for the display of which they submitted to be
submerged in the slough of Liberalism, has not
been very successful in the finance projects of Mr.
GLADSTONE, the Chancellor of the Exchequer. All
are familiar with the miserable failure of his
attempt, last year, to reduce the interest of the
National Debt ; and now we have, if possible, a
more signal failure in his attempt to raise six
millions for the expenses of the war, by an issue of
Exchequer Bonds. Last year his failure was
attributed to his not having applied for tenders, as
to the rate of conversion ; and this year his failure
is attributed to his having pursued that course; so
that, whichever way he turns, he seems sure to be
wrong. It cannot, however, be denied that he is
entitled to credit for ingenuity, but, unfortunately
for his reputation as a finance minister, ingenious
projects are not the best suited for operations in
the money market. In order not to alarm the
country with his improvident arrangements, he
quietly asked for six millions, at an interest of
three-and-a-half per cent., but it now appears that,
by a little shuffling of the cards, the interest will
be really equivalent to four per cent., and even at
this rate he is not able to raise the first two mil-
lions without making a second appeal. It is cer-
tainly a striking instance of Mr. GLADSTONE'S
financial ability, to pay off six millions and more,
bearing three per cent. interest, and then, within
a few months, attempt to borrow it again, at an
increased rate of one per cent. interest, thus in-
volving a positive loss of £60,000 a year. He has
indeed proved a costly Chancellor of the Exchequer,
and it may need more ingenuity than even Lord
JOHN RUSSELL possesses to persuade the country
that it has gained by a Coalition Ministry, which
furnishes such proofs of its utter incapacity. We
are paying the price of the folly committed in
rejecting Lord DERBY for such a mongrel combi-
nation of political pretenders to statesmanship.
Notwithstanding the assertion of the ministerial
organ that Mr. GLADSTONE would require only the
first instalment of two millions, it will be seen by
the supplemental estimates, which we publish in
another column, that no less than £5,595,863 ad-
ditional is demanded for the expenses of the war.
Of this sum £4,553,731 is for the navy, including
£3,096,700 for the transport of troops and horses:;
£300,000 is for the army, and £742,132 for the
ordnance department. This may appear at first
sight a great outlay, because we have been so long
accustomed to milder figures ; but it is very mode-
rate when compared with the enormous expenditure
during the last war. Considering, however, the
immense extent of the national resources, there is
nothing to create any disinclination to prosecute
the war with vigour, and increase the probabilities
of success by the amplitude of provision for all
contingencies. The only cause of regret is, that it
should have been rendered inevitable through the
want of a firm tone of resistance in the first instance.