House Of Commons
Monday, March 13, 1826.
Financial Situation Of The Country
The House having resolved itself into a committee of Ways and Means,
rose to make his promised exposition of the Financial Situation of the Country, and addressed the committee as follows*:— Although, Sir, the circumstances under which we are now called upon to review the situation of our finances, differ in some material respects from those which existed at the corresponding period of the last year, yet there is nothing, in my mind, in the present aspect of public affairs, which ought to create either alarm or despondency. There may be grounds, and no doubt there are grounds, for much of individual sympathy for the severe distress which recent events have brought upon many classes of the community; and it is impossible that the causes which have tended to produce that distress should not, at the same time, be accompanied by much public inconvenience and embarrassment. But, Sir, I think 1 may venture to say, that the violence of the storm has passed away; that the clouds which impended over us have begun to disperse; and that, by the very conflict of the elements, the atmosphere has, to a certain degree, been cleared and purified. If, indeed, there were any thing doubtful in the situation in which we now stand, and in the difficulties by which we have been so recently surrounded;—if there were any thing obscure or mysterious in their nature;—if they had arisen from causes beyond our comprehension;—then, indeed, there might be much more reason for uneasiness than appears to me
to exist at the present moment. But in all the discussions which have taken place in parliament upon this subject in the course of the present session,—although there has undoubtedly been a great difference of opinion as to the precise extent to which different causes may have operated to produce certain results, there has prevailed among us, I think, but one sentiment as to the general nature of those causes, and as to their general operation in producing such consequences. I confess, therefore, that to my mind, this circumstance is a source of no ordinary consolation. In the course, however, of these discussions, there has been, in my opinion, a great deal of very unnecessary contest between those who are sneeringly denominated philosophers, and those who designate themselves by the more humble title of practical men. I call it "unnecessary contest," because I consider it to be the bounden duty of the legislature to endeavour at all times to render available the sound reasoning and theory of one class, by applying to them the practical experience of the other. It is only by a just application of the lessons of experience to the development of sound principles, that parliament can be enabled to determine upon its course; it is only by a judicious combination of these, the two elements of all wise conclusions, that the House and the public can be empowered to form a just estimate of the situation in which the country may be placed, and to arrive at an accurate and satisfactory decision. But, if those who have to prepare their minds for the consideration, or for the determination of subjects of this nature, are to be told that books must be thrown aside, and elementary reasoning rejected, I know not at what fountain they are to drink, if they are to be driven from those springs where science and knowledge are the presiding deities. And, Sir, when we find that in every class of the community knowledge has extended, and is extending itself to a degree, which but half a century ago would have been deemed impossible, are we who sit here, some of us as the ministers of the Crown, and all of us as united in the important act of legislating for a great country,— are we, I ask, to be behind-hand in availing ourselves of the increasing lights of human intelligence? Is it not, on the contrary, our duty to struggle to be foremost in the race? Knowing, as we do, that the progress of human knowledge must, in the first instance, be gradual and limited, it is our business to take care that, instead of being out-stripped, we lead the way; and, by assisting the judgment of our countrymen, enable them to avoid the errors into which they might otherwise fall, in regard to those great questions which so nearly affect their own, and the national interests. I am aware, Sir, that there are some persons who think this general diffusion of knowledge the misfortune of the age; but, for my own part, I confess that I cannot conceive how that mind can be constituted which contemplates the progress of human knowledge with an eye of fear. On me it produces an impression diametrically the reverse. I am convinced, that the more accurately the mass of the people is informed, the more they are in a condition to see and comprehend what is essential for their good, and the means by which that good is to be attained; the more likely are they to abstain from the use of means which would be prejudicial in their operation, and which would be calculated to prevent, rather than to forward the attainment of the good which they naturally desire to possess. If, then, all men (I was going to use that despised term, all philosophers) are agreed in the maxim, that "knowledge is power," the general diffusion of knowledge becomes pf incalculable value to a nation; for if, with reference to our present difficulties, and to all difficulties of a similar kind in which we may be placed hereafter, we find the people at large, if we find the legislature in accordance with the people, and if we find the government in accordance with the legislature—all building their conclusions on sound principles, all proceeding on the foundation of correct reasoning, I confess I think we may treat with comparative indifference the recurrence of the dangers by which we have lately been assailed; partly, because the chance of their recurrence will be diminished, and partly, because, if they should recur, we shall know better how to meet them. Sir, it is under these circumstances that we are called upon to look at the situation in which our finances now stand, and to consider what are the prospects of the country for the future. I think, however, that before I can satisfactorily proceed to explain the view which his majesty's government takes of what it is fitting to under existing circumstances, I ought to recall the attention of the committee to the course which has been pursued with respect to our financial system during the last two or three years. And I am the more anxious to do this because I have been reproached,—and reproached in no very equivocal terms—with having, on former occasions, used warmer language than I ought to have used, and with having contributed by that language to the production of much of that mischief which we all so deeply deplore. Sir, it may be true, it undoubtedly is true, that in adverting to the situation of the country in the last few years, during which it has been my lot to have any concern in matters of this kind, I have used strong expressions of congratulation. It is true, I say, that, on such occasions, I have described the country as in a condition of prosperity. And, Sir, I do not now regret that language; I do not now depart from that declaration; for surely the country is not to be considered in a state of decadence because some untoward circumstances may have occurred, to interrupt her progress, and even throw her back, for the moment, in her course. But this I will venture to add, that however I may have erred in the terms which I have employed; however, from the delight which every honest man must feel in seeing his native land flourishing and happy, I may have congratulated the House on the result with more of earnest warmth than of calculating hesitation, I have, in no case, stated any thing as fact but that which was strictly true: and, I think I can satisfy the committee, upon a reference to what I have led them to expect during the last three years, and to the results which have actually ensued, not only that I have not intentionally deceived the country (though that, indeed, has, I believe, not been imputed to me) but, that no deception at all has been practised. When, in the year 1823, it first became my duty to submit to the House a view of our finances, I ventured to assume that, in the course of that year, a certain amount of revenue would be realised; and allow me to ask, what was the result? It was found that my estimate, not formed upon any over-confident anticipation of improvement and increase, but upon the plain and simple basis, of the revenue which had been already received, was far below the actual amount. I assumed, in that year, that the Customs, the Excise, the Stamp duties, the Assessed Taxes, and sundry miscellaneous items, would produce an income of 52,200,000l. In the course of that session, we repealed taxes to the amount of about 3,200,000l.; of that sum I calculated that about a million and a half would be lost to the revenue in the course of 1823; so that in point of fact, my original estimate would have been borne out, if the receipts had been 1,500,000l. less than 52,200,000l. Now, what was the result? Why, that the actual revenue, after sustaining the loss that I have mentioned, amounted to 52,017,000l.; being less by 183,000l. only than my first estimate; and exceeding, by 1,318,000l., what would have been sufficient to realise my anticipations, after the reduction of taxes had been adopted. In regard to the year 1823, therefore, it is clear that I held out no expectations which were not justified by the event. And if the committee will examine the accounts for the following year, they will be led to the same conclusion. In the year 1824, I estimated the probable produce of the revenue at 51,265,000l. In the course of that session, however, taxes were repealed to a very considerable amount; and I calculated that the loss which the revenue would immediately sustainin consequence, would be 630.000l. But what was the fact? The actual receipts of the year, notwithstanding such a reduction of taxes, were considerably beyond the original estimate which I had formed: for, the estimate being51,265,000l., the actual produce was 52,562,000l.; being an excess of nearly 1,300,000l. Again, in 1825, I assumed that the revenue derived from the same sources would be 51,975,000l. From the repeal of taxes, subsequently enacted, I expected that in the course of that year the loss upon that assumed amount would be about 650,000l. Yet, the actual receipt, notwithstanding the defalcation occasioned by that cause, and by the commercial difficulties and pressure that began to be felt at the latter end of the year 1825, was 52,259,000l.; or, 384,000l. above my original estimate in the statement of the Budget; an estimate founded upon an hypothesis which bad no reference to any reduction of taxes in the course of that year. The result of all these statements is this:* From the original edition printed for J. Hatchard and Son.
| The estimated revenue for 1823 | was | £.52,200,000 |
| 1824 | … | 51,265,000 |
| 1825 | … | 51,975,000 |
| Total | £.155,440,000 |
| The actual receipt for 1823 | was | £.52,017,000 |
| 1824 | … | 52,562,000 |
| 1825 | … | 52,259,000 |
| Total | £.156,838,000 |
"Oh what a fall was there, my countrymen!
Then you, and I, and all of us fell down,
the appeal was not more vehement, the passions of his auditors were not more keenly excited, than the appeal which is now made, and the fire which is now kindled, against the unfortunate author of the woeful tragedy which terminated the existence of two insignificant fiscal departments! Sir, I could not imagine, at first, what was meant by all this indignation. I felt almost like "a guilty thing," oppressed by the weight of some undefined offence. If I chanced to meet my noble friend at the head of the Admiralty, or any of my hon. friends who sit at the same Board, I hardly dared look them in the face. I felt confident that the denunciation was for some dreadful crime, but I knew not what; and I was left for some time in all the agony of doubt. At last, I had the consolation of recollecting that I had Scotch blood, and good old Scotch blood too, flowing in my veins; and was persuaded that I could never be insensible to the honour and dignity of that ancient country. But, Sir, I confess that, when I have been passing in review all the signal triumphs which Scotland has achieved, in all that adorns, and ennobles, and benefits the human race; when I have been calling to mind the originality, the grace, and the genius of her poets; the eloquence, the accuracy, and the research of her historians; the elaborate lucubrations, and the profound discoveries, of her philosophers; when I have been watching their progress as they respectively either traversed the delightful regions of fancy, or penetrated the depths and recesses of history and of science, I never thought of including among the worthies of Scotland, the members of her independent Board of Excise. And when I have been reading with greatful exultation of the heroic exploits of an Abercrombie, a Moore, a Lynedoch, and a Hopetoun; when, two years ago, it fell to my lot to propose to this House to do an act of tardy justice, by proposing to vote a monument to the memory of lord Duncan; I certainly never dreamt that the honour of Scotland would be tarnished, if in the same year I transferred the seat of the Board of Customs from Edinburgh to London. I always thought that the honour of Scotland rested on a more solid basis. I thought that the glory of the great men who have adorned the annals of that country, would have shone with perennial light, if the Excise had never meddled with her whiskey, nor the Customs controlled her commerce; and I trust we may long continue to contemplate their lustre with instruction and delight, although her revenue boards have lost the affected importance of their imaginary independence, and have been swallowed up. O! dreadful catastrophe! in the all-devouring vortex of English uniformity. When, too, I am told, that the abolition of these and similar offices is something disrespectful to the what is called (not however by me) the impoverished nobility of Scotland, I think, that if I were a real Scotchman, I should be too proud to admit that the honour of the ancient lineage of that ancient kingdom would be diminished, because the government had less patronage to offer, and her nobility less of emolument to covet. These measures, dictated alone by the necessity of judicious retrenchment, may indeed be represented as punishments inflicted on an innocent and unoffending people, and the wrath of Scotland may be denounced against their author; but, as long as I am armed with the consciousness of seeking to diminish the burthens, and to increase the happiness of the people, I can look without terror upon the flashing of the Highland claymore, though evoked from its scabbard by the incantations of the first magician of the age. I shall now, Sir, proceed to the subject more immediately under our consideration, and call the attention of the committee to the financial condition of the country for the present year. I have already slated to the committee the great extent to which taxation has been diminished; I have stated the benefit which I am sure the country must have derived from the reduction; I have also shown how, out of that very reduction itself, may arise the means of carrying the benefit still further; and I shall now proceed to detail the estimate for the present year, 1st as respects the charges, and, 2ndly, the means by which I propose that those charges shall be met. The expenses are divided into two parts, viz.—the permanent charges, and those which are the subject of annual votes; and as of the latter, a considerable portion has already been sanctioned by the House, I do not think it will be necessary for me to trouble the committee with any comments or details respecting fit. But the general heads of the two branches are as follows, viz.—And bloody treason flourished over us:"
| £ | |
| Interest and Management of the Public Dept | 27,117,186 |
| Interest of Exchequer (deficiency) Bills | 50,000 |
| Civil List, and Pensions of a permanent nature, charged on the Consolidated Fund, and not the subject of an annual vote | 2,065,000 |
| Half-pay Annuity | 2,800,000 |
| Sinking Fund | 5,585,235 |
| Permanent charge on Consol Fund | £.37,617,421 |
| £ | |
| Army | 7,747,000 |
| Navy | 6,135,000 |
| Ordnance | 1,754,000 |
| Miscellaneous | 2,225,000 |
| Interest of Exchequer Bills. | £850,000 |
| Annual Votes, | £.18,711,000 |
| Add the Permanent Charge | £.37,617,421 |
| The whole expenditure of the year | £.56,328,421 |
| A small item, being the surplus of last year beyond the demand of the Sinking fund, which I consider myself entitled to make available towards the expenditure of the present year | £. 167,000 |
| Customs and Excise; which I take together on account of the transfer to the Customs of a large proportion of the duties formerly collected by the Excise; and the impossibility of separating the items without great confusion | 37,446,000 |
| Stamps | 7,400,000 |
| Taxes (including the Assessed | 4,800,000 |
| Post Office | 1,550,000 |
| Miscellaneous | 1,360,000 |
| The total income from these sources. | £.52,723,000 |
| Payment from the Trustees of Half-pay and Pensions. | 4,320,000 |
| The whole Receipts of the year. | £.57,043,000 |
| Deduct the Expenditure | 56,328,421 |
| Surplus for Parliament to deal with as they may think fit. | £.714,579 |
| £. | |
| Progressive reduction of Bounties | 50,000 |
| Wine Drawback, allowed last year to the wine merchants, but not to be deducted from this year's revenue. | 1,050,000 |
| Loss by the lapse of Tobacco duty. | 450,000 |
| £1,550,000 | |
| If to this be added the actual produce of the Customs and Excise in 1825. | 37,546,000 |
| We have a Total of | £39,096,000 |
| £. | |
| The gross receipts for January and February, 1825, were. | 2,259,669 |
| Those from January and February 1826, were. | 2,257,280 |
| Decrease | £.2,389 |
| £. | |
| The produce in January and February1825, was. | 292,933 |
| The produce in 1826 was. | 190,933 |
| Decrease. | £.102,000 |
| CUSTOMS AND EXCISE. | ||
| Produce of 1825. | £.37,546,000 | |
| Add—Progressive Reduction of Bounties | £.50,000 | |
| Wine Drawback | 1,050,000 | |
| Loss by lapse of Tobacco duty | 450,000 | |
| 1,550,000 | ||
| £.39,096,000 | ||
| Deduct—Further loss from Reductions last year | £350,000 | |
| Further loss from diminished consumption | 1,300,000 | |
| 1,650,000 | ||
| Estimate for 1826 | £.37,446,000 | |
| STAMPS. | |
| Produce of 1825. | £.7,447,923 |
| Deduct assumed loss in 1826 | 47,923 |
| Estimate for 1826 | £.7,400,000 |
| TAXES. | |
| Produce of 1825 | £.4,990,961 |
| Deduct loss from reduction in 1825 | 190,961 |
| Estimate for 1826 | £.4,800,000 |
| POST-OFFICE. | |
| Produce of 1825. | £.1,595,461 |
| Deduct assumed loss in 1826 | 45,461 |
| Estimate for 1826 | £.1,550,000 |
| MISCELLANEOUS. | ||
| Produce of 1825 | £.619,088 | |
| Add—Payment from Holland, Lottery, and East India Company, on account of naval force. | £.340,912 | |
| Add also—Silver from Ireland. | 400,000 | |
| 740,912 | ||
| Estimate for 1826 | £.1,360,000 | |
"To take up arms against that siege of troubles,
if we pursue our path with steadine and fidelity, we shall find our dangers and our difficulties diminishing with our progress; and we shall advance with systematic regularity towards that great end of all good government — the happiness and well-being of the people.—The right hon. gentlemen concluded, amidst loud cheers, with moving—"That towards raising the supply granted to his majesty, the sum of four shillings in the pound be raised within the space of one year, from the 25th of March 1826, upon Pensions, Offices, and Personal Estates, in that part of Great Britain called England, Wales, and the town of Berwick-upon-Tweed."And by opposing—end them;"
hoped the House would not be led away by the statements of the right hon. gentleman, some of which he considered to be complete fallacies, and should, he thought, be able to prove them, such, to the satisfaction of the House. The first and the greatest fallacy the right hon. gentleman had been guilty of, was his assumption with respect to the diminution of the charge of the public debt. He had gone back to 1816, and compared the revenue of that year with that of 1825; but with regard to the comparison of the capital of the debt, he had gone no further back than 1823. In that the error Consisted, and the only reason the right hon. gentleman could have for the deceit was, that in 1822, an additional charge was put on the management of the debt to the amount of 2,800,000l.; so that, in point of fact, the amount of charge, as compared with 1819, was in the last year increased. The only obvious reduction was in the unfunded debt; but then it should be recollected, that this was effected only by increasing the debt in another shape. To pay with one hand and borrow with another was not clearing off debt. That was the second fallacy worthy the attention of the House. With re- spect to the estimate of the revenue for the coming year, he should be most glad to go along with the right hon. gentleman, in taking it at what he had calculated; but he was afraid the calculation had not been made on sufficiently certain data. The right hon. gentleman had taken only one month of last year with one of the present. Now, he should like to have the calculation made from the 1st of January this year, to the present time, and compared with the same period of the last year. Doubting, therefore, the accuracy of the right hon. gentleman's principle of calculation, he could not place much reliance on his estimated surplus. Last year, the right hon. gentleman had told them that they were to have a surplus of 864,000l, and it turned out not to be a fifth of that sum; and this year they were told they were to have a surplus of 714,000l.
said, that the calculation to which the hon. member alluded was made last year, before the reduction of taxes took place, and of course the surplus was less by the amount of the taxes reduced.
said, that that of course would alter his argument, as to that point. Still, however, he must repeat his regret, that the right hon. gentleman had not made his calculation on the produce of the revenue up to the present period; for if it should turn out that there was a great falling off in the revenue in the month of February, the hon. member could hardly be said to have made a fair calculation. He was, happy, however, to see in the right hon. gentleman a disposition to take away any part of the unfunded debt. He regretted that it had not been done last year. The right hon. gentleman had entirely mistaken what had fallen from him upon a former occasion. He never meant to say that he could have funded Exchequer-bills, and reduce the 5 or 4 per cents at the same time. But he might have done so in subsequent years. He might have done so with great advantage to the public when the 3 per cents were between 90 and 100. He must again press upon the right hon. gentleman the dangerous nature of such securities as Exchequer-bills — he meant that class of them for which immediate payment might be required, as for a promissory note. He approved of the plan of funding nine or ten millions of Exchequer-bills, and of applying the Sinking- fund as, well to the redemption of the un-funded as of the funded debt. This might be very well done, were it not for the dead-weight, as it was called, which hung upon the Sinking-fund. In his opinion, it would be better to get rid of the deadweight altogether. It was, from the outset, a cumbersome and ridiculous measure. No persons felt more gratified than he did at the prospects of future prosperity held out by the right hon. gentleman, and he hoped they would be realized.
said, that the eloquence of the right hon. gentleman opposite- had entirely led the House away from those points to which its attention ought to have been called, and on which it should have got some more satisfactory explanation than they had heard that night. He was not then going to follow the right hon. gentleman through all his arguments, but he must object to the mode in which he had made his calculations, and the periods between which and the present he had made comparisons as to consumption and as to revenue. However, he would not have risen now but for the allusions made to his statement on a former evening. That statement was, that though so much had been talked of about the reduction of taxes, more money had been taken from: the pockets of the people within the last three years than had been within the preceding years. The moment he made the assertion, it was positively contradicted by the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and by the chancellor of the Exchequer. He would, however, repeat his assertion, and he would prove it to demonstration by the returns before the House. He would not follow the right hon. gentleman back to 1816, and he did not see what right he had to go to that year; but he would take the returns of revenue of the years 1817, 1818, and 1819, and compare them with those of the last three years, and it would be seen that in the latter more money was taken out of the pockets of the people than in the former. By those returns it appeared that the amount of revenue was, in 1817, 51,183,000l.; in 1818, 52,000,000l.; and in 1819, 51,000,000l. Now, he would admit, that many advantageous changes had been made in the mode of collecting the revenue, and the repeal of useless and injurious laws restrictive of the principles of free trade, in the last two or three years; but, in those years, the amount of revenue was—in 1823, 52,561,000l,; in 1824, 52,655.000l.; and in 1825, 52,044,000l.; thus making an average increase of 1,000,000l, per year. Now, he would ask, had the people not a right to expect that these immense sums should not be taken from their pockets in the eleventh year of peace? Was it not natural that they should in that year expect to be called on for a less sure than they were in the third year after the war? It was, he would contend, quite a fallacy to say that the public were paying less within the last three years than in the years he had named. On this ground it was that he could not consider the statement which he had heard from the right hon. gentleman at all satisfactory, as it held out no prospect of reduction of our immense expenditure. We had an army expenditure of 7,700,000l. Our naval expenditure exceeded 6,000,000l.; and adding the ordnance and miscellaneous, the whole made 17,500,000l. Was such an extravagant expenditure to be borne? They were told that the only reduction that would be made would be the duty on tobacco; and then they were informed that 10,000,000l. were to be added to the funded debt, which was before too large. Would the country be satisfied with this statement? He contended that it would not, and ought not. Neither did he think the right hon. gentleman's argument upon the consumption at all satisfactory, as a proof of the growing prosperity of the country. The right hon. gentleman had taken the consumption of 1816, which was unusually small, and compared it with that of 1825, which was extraordinarily great, and produced by causes from which the country was still suffering. He would prove, when the returns for which he had moved were laid on the table, that the right hon. gentleman's calculations about increased consumption were wholly erroneous. The right hon. gentleman had said, that there was an increase in the consumption of beer, of tea, and several other articles. Now, he should be able to show, not from the returns of a single year, but from the average of several years, that the consumption of malt, and beer, and tea, and several other articles on which they were told that a large increase had taken place, had diminished; taking, as they were bound to do, the increase of the population into consideration. He should be able to show, that the population had increased since 1788 or 1792, about 41 per cent, but that the consumption had decreased, as compared with the population. The statement of the chancellor of the Exchequer was defective, in not presenting to the House a fair view of the cash-account of the country. If a merchant wished to present a full statement of his affairs, could he be said to do so if he omitted a cash-account? Where was the cash-account here? There was none; and therefore he contended, that the statement was most unsatisfactory, for the calculation of those estimates had been made on erroneous principles. The assumption of a prosperous state of the country, from the supposed increase in consumption, was, he would maintain, a delusion; and he was surprised the right hon. gentleman was not ashamed to make such a statement. It was to assume the prosperity of the country, and to make that assumed prosperity a ground for continuing our immense expenditure. The hon. member then censured ministers for keeping up the cajolery of the Sinking-fund. They ought to give up that delusion, in order to afford relief to the country. In all the measures which ministers had adopted with respect to commercial policy, they were right, but as to finance; they knew nothing about it. He deprecated the' allusion which the right hon. gentleman had made to what had passed in Scotland, for the purpose of carrying the House along with him. The anonymous author of the publication to which reference had been made, was a man who had benefitted more by the taxes than almost any one living. It was no wonder that such a person should wish to keep up the system of taxation. Any thing which fell from persons in his situation was beneath the notice of that House. With regard to the diminution in the expense of collecting the revenue, he believed he might claim some credit for that reduction. He had, for three successive years been urging ministers to effect that reduction before they attended to his remonstrances. At length, however, they sent out the commissioners to Ireland; and he would not deny that they had done great good. When he first called the attention of the House to the subject, the expense of collecting the revenue in Ireland was 26 per cent, in Scotland 16 per cent, and 9 per cent in all other parts of the kingdom. It was in vain, however, to think of any effectual reduction in the burthens of the country, until the landed interest co-ope- rated with the other classes in insisting upon economy and retrenchment. On a future occasion, he would enter more fully into the subject. He had merely risen to enter his protest against the statement of the right hon. gentleman, lest the House should be led astray by the fallacies which it contained.
said, he felt himself obliged to express an opinion quite different from that which his hon. friend entertained with respect to the conduct of ministers. He thought the country was greatly indebted to the chancellor of the Exchequer, and the President of the Board of Trade, for the measures which they had adopted since they had been in office. They had effected considerable reduction of taxation, and placed matters in such a train, that a progressive reduction must take place; which would, he believed* and particularly in the case of Ireland, insure an increased revenue. The measures which ministers had adopted for reforming the mode of Collecting the revenue in Ireland would work a great moral improvement in the habits of the people. He trusted that they would carry their reforms still further. The revenue jurisdiction of Ireland should be entirely abolished. In the post-office department the most scandalous abuses prevailed. Might not this be incorporated with the English department? He Ventured to throw out the suggestion, and trusted it would obtain attention.
rose to express his concurrence m the sentiments of his right hon. friend who had just sat down. Nothing, in his opinion, could be more fair or more manly than the Candour of the chancellor of the Exchequer, in the speech which he had just made; and he was sure it would prove highly satisfactory to the country. Every financial statement must proceed upon some estimate; and he must be a bold man who would pretend to foretel what the revenue for the present year would be. Even the chancellor of the Exchequer, with the great judgment and acuteness which he possessed, could not undertake to say whether there would be one million or two millions deficiency in the revenue for this year. Where there were bubble fortunes, there must be a bubble revenue. The increase of trade proceeded from a momentary excitement. The general failures caused a suspension of those luxuries which had created the increase of revenue; and the revenue must suffer a proportionate limitation, which would probably be confined to the current year. Under all these circumstances, he considered the chancellor of the Exchequer's statement a very fair one. Though some of the minor points might be open to observation, yet, when looked at as a whole, it appeared so satisfactory, that he should be very reluctant to criticise particular passages. As to the surplus of 7,000,000l. when considered in connection with a revenue of 54,000,000l. comparatively it was no surplus at all; particularly when it was remembered, that 580,000l.. was made up by the 400,000l. which had accrued from Irish coin, and 180,000l. from lotteries, both of which items would not recur next year. The hon. member concluded by observing that, upon the whole, he had never, since he sat in that House, heard a speech which had given him more satisfaction than that delivered that night by the right hon. gentleman.
begged to explain himself upon two points. The first point was with reference to the revenue of the year. The hon. gentleman had taken him to task for admitting into the calculation for the year 400,000l. derived from the old coin of Ireland, and 180,000l. from lotteries; these being casual receipts, not to recur another year. It was obvious that these were casual payments; and then the question was naturally asked, how that deficit was to be made good next year? His answer was, that the growing progress of the other branches of the revenue was likely to make up for any deficiency of this nature. As to the question of the deadweight, although the defence of that measure did not devolve upon him, yet he had felt it necessary to justify the government, though he was not insensible to the objections which the measure was liable to. In other circumstances than the present, he might not have been adverse to re-considering it; but now, when he must assume some reduction in the revenue, he did not think he was in a situation to state what was the intention of government, should circumstances be favourable at the expiration of the period for which the bargain was made with the Bank. With respect to the debt, he wished k to be understood, that he meant to fund from 8,000,000l. to 9,000,0000l. of that sum; he meant to repay to the Bank 6,000,000l; and thus, by buying stock or Exchequer- bills, 3,000,000l. would go to the reduction of the unfunded debt in the market.
did not wish to protract the debate, but he wished to make one observation with respect to the duty on tobacco. He thought the reduction of duty from 4s. to 3s. was not sufficient to prevent the smuggler from competing with the fair trader. It would, in his opinion, be advisable to reduce it to 2s. in order to prevent smuggling altogether. He could not sit down without congratulating the country upon the favourable statement they had just heard. Such a statement, after what had recently taken place, was most cheering.
expressed his surprise that the chancellor of the Exchequer should have attacked the Scotch people for having objected to the removal of the Scottish revenue board to London, when, in point of fact, the great body of the people of Scotland were in favour of that measure.
said, he had not blamed the Scottish people; on the contrary, he had eulogized them; and had only expressed his surprise that any man could be found in that country to oppose or find fault with the measure.
could not help expressing his surprise at the attempt about to be made to alter the currency of Scotland. He hoped that those members who were more immediately interested in the welfare of that country would make a stand, and resist the plan proposed by ministers for altering the Scottish banking system. He was decidedly of opinion that any alteration would be injurious; and so long as he could get one member to support him, he should oppose it; and he hoped ultimately the measure would be abandoned. He hoped the members from Scotland would imitate the gentlemen of the sister kingdom, and stick together upon this occasion.
said, he could not help noticing what had fallen from the hon. baronet. The House had passed a bill which was to regulate the currency of England, and, he would ask, what right had Scotland to be exempted from a similar regulation? He was unable to comprehend why a measure highly expedient for England should not apply with equal advantage to Scotland. The hon. member for Midhurst had exclaimed against the country bankers of England; but he wished the House to notice the difference between their conduct and that of the Scotch bankers. The former, so far from asking for delay, might be said to have almost gone beyond the House. But the Scotch banks had come forward almost with a petition to that effect. Notwithstanding what had been said by the hon. baronet, he should be prepared to show, that the Banking system of Scotland had been, in a great degree, the cause of the over-trading and speculation which had been productive of so much evil. It was, therefore, too much for them to be told, that the people of that country would resist a measure which was agreed to by almost the unanimous vote of the House, and which was understood should apply to the whole kingdom. While on his legs, he wished to ask the chancellor of the Exchequer, whether he meant to make any reduction in the duty on soap, and on drugs used in the manufacture of silk?
asked, what was to be done with the surplus of 120,000l.? There was one tax, which, although unproductive, pressed heavily on persons ill able to bear it; he meant the tax on receipt stamps, which he thought it would be extremely desirable to abolish.
said, that when on a former night his right hon. friend had spoken of the duty on soap, he had intimated that the arrangement relative to it was this—that all who used it in the silk manufacture, should enjoy the same advantages as those engaged in the woollen manufacture; namely, that of a drawback of the duty. On the subject of dye-drugs, it could scarcely be forgotten that there had been imposed upon them no more than a nominal duty. The surplus of 120,000l., which had been adverted to, was, it must be confessed, rather small, considering the large amount upon which it was calculated; and, so far from going to seek for a mode by which to appropriate it, the matter of regret was, that the surplus should be so trifling on so large a calculation. The hon. member for Aberdeen had noticed the necessity for funding seven or eight millions of Exchequer bills. Now, even that operation, supposing there were no other, would go nigh to consume the whole of that sum. The hon. member for Abingdon had endeavoured to confuse one of the most luminous statements that had ever been delivered within the walls of that House. That hon. gentleman had proceeded upon an entire misconception of the facts; for he had asserted nothing less than that the public debt, in amount of capital, interest, and charge, had increased since the year 1819. It had been said, that by figures almost any thing could be proved; and certainly a practical illustration of this maxim had been given by the hon. member for Aberdeen. His fallacy consisted in his asserting that the debt of the country during the past year had increased 70,000,000l. and upwards, with an increase upon that of 2,000,000l. in the form of charge. This was for the dead-weight. The payment of an annuity of 2,800,000l. during the next 45 years, was taken by him as an addition to the public debt made in 1825, and as belonging exclusively to that year. Upon such grounds as these it was that the hon. gentleman cried out to the government to put an end to the dead-weight. There was another argument of that hon. gentleman to which he would advert. It amounted to this: that ministers, though they reduced taxation between twenty and thirty millions, still left the burthens of the people undiminished. There was a reduction; that was admitted; but because the taxes, when reduced, were in the remaining department more productive than before the reduction, it was inferred that no relief was afforded; which amounted to saying that the people of England were as much inconvenienced by the present amount of taxation as if no reduction had ever been made; that, in fact, taxation pressed now as heavily as it did in the year 1816; that the increased consumption, in which the late repeals of taxes had enabled the people to indulge, yielding larger revenues than heretofore, was to be taken rather as a continuance of burthens, than as a relief from pressure. Now, when the whole of the duty was taken off salt, half the duty off wine, large reductions on spirits, and various other articles, the hon. member for Aberdeen jumped up, and wished the country to believe that the repeal of seven-and-twenty millions of taxes yielded a benefit equal to the repeal of only 4,000,000l.
The resolution was then agreed to.