Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

1861.1

THE BUDGET.

177

manliness, did not hesitate to run the risk of offending his Orange Protestant supporters by defending Mr. Turnbull. He justly observed that the question was not one of religion, but it was whether that gentleman had received due protection from an unfairly conducted attack. At a later period of the year Mr. Turnbull brought his action against the secretary of the Protestant Alliance, but without success; and died soon after, of an illness which, if not produced, was certainly aggravated, by the annoyances and mortifications he had undergone.

The chancellor of the exchequer brought forward his annual financial statement on Monday, April 15. Although there was not now the excitement which the French treaty had produced, the anxiety to hear the statement, and the interest with which it was listened to, were as great as they had ever been before. It was a sensation in the midst of the dreariness which seemed to have settled down on the parliamentary debates of this year, even more than on those of any preceding session; and there was a strong curiosity to see whether Mr. Gladstone would attempt to carry on the system of bold reduction of taxation on which he had ventured so far, or whether, now, at last, he would not find himself compelled to hold his hands, and to tread in the steps of his less ambitious predecessors. The House was beset by multitudes, patiently but vainly hoping to obtain admission to the strangers' gallery, and the interest manifested within the house was at least as extraordinary as that exhibited in the approaches to it, and was sustained to the last.

Putting aside the consideration of the two millions voted for the fortifications at the close of last year, Mr. Gladstone informed the House that the estimated expenditure was 73,664,000l., but that the actual expenditure only amounted to 72,842,0007. He then came to the revenue, and began by comparing the income of the past with that of the two preceding years. He stated that in 1859 there was a favourable balance of about 1,200,000l. In 1859 the revenue was 71,089,000l., in 1860 it was 70,283,000l. . But he pointed out that the difference was partly accounted for by the circumstance that leap-year had occurred in the preceding year, and that Good Friday and the day following had been reckoned in the one year, and not in the other.

VOL. III.

N

The estimated expenditure for the coming year was 69,900,000l., and the estimated revenue 71,823,000l.; there was therefore a surplus of 1,923,000l. Under these circumstances the government proposed to remit the additional penny on the income-tax that was imposed in 1860, which would cause a loss to the present financial year of 850,000l. He also proposed to repeal the duty on paper on the 1st of October, by which the revenue would lose about 665,000l. This would reduce the surplus for the year to 408,000l. The chancellor of the exchequer then gave his reasons for not assenting to some minor remissions of taxes, respecting which he had received strong remonstrances from the trading community. He proposed to renew the incometax, and the taxes on tea and sugar, for one year only. He concluded his speech by warnings and lessons which derived peculiar impressiveness from his character and experience.

Now, sir, it is impossible for me to conclude a financial survey of the affairs of the country, with, at any rate, so much of effort to exhibit their details to the committee, without some few reflections upon its general condition. And in referring to that general survey, I must, in the first place, tender the expression of my gratitude for the kindness and patience with which the committee have followed me through what I may call a wilderness of figures. Sir, as respects the connection between the general condition of the country and its financial state, I must say the reflections which the future before us suggest are satisfactory. We have seen this country, during the last few years, without European wars, yet placed under a burden of taxation such as, out of a European war, it never was before called on to bear; we have seen it last year under the pressure of a season of blight, such as but few of living men can recollect. Yet, on looking abroad over the face of England, no one is sensible of any signs of decay. Least of all can such an apprehension be felt with regard to those attributes which perhaps are the highest of all, and on which most of all depend our national existence,the spirit and courage of the country. It is almost needless to say that neither the sovereign on the throne; nor the nobles and the gentry, that fill the place of the gallant chieftains of the middle ages; nor the citizens, who repre

1861.]

THE BUDGET.

179

sent the invincible soldiers of Cromwell; nor the artisans and peasantry, who are the children of those sturdy archers that drew the crossbows of England on the fields of France —that none of these betray either inclination or tendency to depart from the traditions of their forefathers. If there be any one danger which has recently in any especial manner beset us, I confess that, though it may be owing to some peculiarity in my position, or to some weakness in my vision, danger has seemed to me to lie during recent years chiefly in an increased susceptibility to excitement, in our proneness to constant and apparently boundless augmentations of expenditure. I do not refer to this or that particular change or scheme. Of course, I do not refer to the estimates for the year, which are in our judg ment required by the circumstances, taken as a whole, in which we stand. But I think that when, in an extended retrospect, we take notice of the rate at which we have been advancing for a certain number of years, we must see that there has been a tendency to break down all barriers and all limits which restrain the amount of public charges. For my own part, I am deeply convinced that all excess in the public expenditure beyond the legitimate wants of the country is not only a pecuniary waste-for that, although an important, is yet a comparatively trifling matter-but a great political, and above all a great moral evil. It is a characteristic, sir, of the mischiefs which arise from financial prodigality, that they creep onwards with a noiseless and a stealthy step; that they commonly remain unseen and unfelt until they have reached a magnitude absolutely overwhelming; and then at length we see them, such and so great as they now appear to exist in one at least among the great European states-I mean the empire of Austria; so fearful and menacing in their aspect, and so large in their dimensions, that they seem to threaten the very foundations of national existence. Sir, I do trust that the day has come when a check is beginning among ourselves to be put to the movement in this direction. I think, as far as I have been able to trace the sentiments of the House, and the indication of general opinion during the present session, that the tendency to which I have adverted is at least partially on the decline; I trust it will altogether subside and disappear. It is indeed true

-at least, I for one should be among the first to uphold the soundness of the assertion-that sweeping and violent reductions of expenditure are to be deprecated almost as much as excess and prodigality. But at the same time there is many a one who shares that sentiment, and yet who still feels that it is demanded by high public expediency and by national duty, that we should recur, I do not say to the charges-for national wants with the nation's ever-increasing growth will vary and will growbut to the spirit, the temper, and the rules with which no long time ago we were all wont to apply ourselves to the subject of public expenditure. Sir, I trust that such a wish may be realised; and if only it be so, then, for my part, I say that, if there be difficulties in the work of government, they are not, so far as regards the department with which I have the honour to be connected, difficulties which any man of ordinary courage need for a moment, under whatever contingencies, hesitate to face. The spirit of the people is excellent. There never was a nation in the whole history of the world more willing to bear the heavy burdens under which it lies, more generously disposed to overlook the errors of those who have the direction of its affairs. And, for my own part, I hold that, if this country can steadily and constantly remain as wise in the use of her treasure as she is unrivalled in its production, and as moderate in the exercise of her strength as she is rich in its possession, then we may well cherish the hope that there is yet reserved for England a great work to do on her part and on the part of others, and that for many a generation yet to come she will continue to hold a foremost place among the nations of the world.'

The question which had been raised between the two houses by the rejection of the paper-bill duty by the Lords remained still undecided. Should the Commons send up another bill for its repeal, to be again rejected, after the solemn resolutions it had passed during the last session? That was a course which the public opinion of the country would not tolerate, even if the government and the House of Commons had been willing to acquiesce in it. Nevertheless great efforts were made to effect this; and the claims of tea to a remission of duty were put forward in opposition to those of paper, and not without effect. No

[ocr errors]

1861.]

REPEAL OF THE PAPER DUTIES.

181

tax was more unpopular than that on tea, which in England had come to be regarded as a necessary of life. The agitation in favour of the reduction of the duty on this article was one which under other circumstances would have been very popular in England; but now the English people firmly repelled the temptation. A very successful agitation had been carried on in favour of the repeal of the paperduties in such a way as would settle the constitutional question that had arisen between the Lords and the Commons in favour of the latter. Backed, therefore, by the strongly-expressed opinion of the majority of the English people in favour of the course he had determined to take, Mr. Gladstone, on the 6th of May, announced that he intended to include all the chief financial propositions of the budget in one bill, instead of dividing it into several bills, as had hitherto been the practice. This virtually placed the Lords in the position of being obliged to accept or reject the whole financial scheme, and in fact deprived them not only of the power that they had exercised in the case of the paper-duties, but of that power of examination and amendment of details which they had hitherto enjoyed without question or dispute, and which but for this unfortunate revival of a dormant and useless right they would long have continued to retain. Of course this was not effected without a severe struggle. The influence of the aristocracy in the House of Commons, though greatly weakened, was still very great. There were a large number of members in the lower House who were heirs-apparent, presumptive or expectant of some peerage, and who were consequently anxious to defend the privileges and prerogatives of an assembly of which they would probably be members. A still larger number were returned by constituencies over which members of the aristocracy exercised an indirect and unavowed but still very powerful influence; to this must be added the social influence which the Lords possessed; and lastly the fact, that whenever a question arose between the two Houses, the conservative party almost to a man was ready to support the claims of the peers. But on this occasion the leader of the conservative party possessed another advantage, of which he made great use.

Lord Derby, during his brief term of office, had earned no small amount of popularity among the Irish, and

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »