am I using the language of exaggeration and over confidence, when I say, that the affairs of this kingdom are in a right and prosperous course? There may still be many difficulties to meet us on our way. We may have to undergo, as we recently have experienced, the sudden violence of the unexpected tempest; we may have at times to encounter "the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune;”—but, Sir, if we have only resolution and constancy enough— To take up arms against that siege of troubles, And by opposing-end them;" if we pursue our path with steadin e 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." which our revenue stands at present; I Mr. Maberly 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 diminu tion 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 ef fected 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, Mr. Hume said, that the eloquence of the accuracy of the right hon. gentleman's the right hon. gentleman opposite had principle of calculation, he could not entirely led the House away from those place much reliance on his estimated sur- points to which its attention ought to have plus. Last year, the right hon. gentle-been called, and on which it should have man 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. fund as well to the redemption of the unfunded 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. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that the calculation to which the hon. member alluded was made last year, be fore the reduction of taxes took place, and of course the surplus was less by the amount of the taxes reduced. 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. Mr. Maberly said, that that of course That statement was, that though so much would alter his argument, as to that point. had been talked of about the reduction of Still, however, he must repeat his regret, taxes, more money had been taken from that the right hon. gentleman had not the pockets of the people within the last made his calculation on the produce of three years than had been within the prethe revenue up to the present period; for ceding years. The moment he made the if it should turn out that there was a assertion, it was positively contradicted great falling off in the revenue in the by the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and month of February, the hon. member by the chancellor of the Exchequer. He could hardly be said to have made a fair would, however, repeat his assertion, and calculation. He was, happy, however, he would prove it to demonstration by to see in the right hon. gentleman a dis- the returns before the House. He would position to take away any part of the un- not follow the right hon. gentleman back funded debt. He regretted that it had to 1816, and he did not see what right he not been done last year. The right hon. had to go to that year; but he would gentleman had entirely mistaken what had take the returns of revenue of the years fallen from him upon a former occasion. 1817, 1818, and 1819, and compare them He never meant to say that he could have with those of the last three years, and it funded Exchequer-bills, and reduce the would be seen that in the latter more 5 or 4 per cents at the same time. But money was taken out of the pockets of he might have done so in subsequent the people than in the former. By those years. He might have done so with great returns it appeared that the amount of advantage to the public when the 3 per revenue was, in 1817, 51,183,000%; in cents were between 90 and 100. He 1818, 52,000,000l.; and in 1819, must again press upon the right hon. gen- 51,000,000. Now, he would admit, that tleman the dangerous nature of such se- many advantageous changes had been curities as Exchequer-bills he meant made in the mode of collecting the rethat class of them for which immediate venue, and the repeal of useless and injupayment might be required, as for a pro-rious laws restrictive of the principles of missory note. He approved of the plan free trade, in the last two or three years; of funding nine or ten millions of Exche- but, in those years, the amount of revenue quer-bills, and of applying the Sinking-was-in 1823, 52,561,000%; in 1824, 52,685,000l.; and in 1825, 52,044,000l.; decreased, as compared with the populathus making an average increase of tion. The statement of the chancellor of 1,000,000l. per year. Now, he would ask, the Exchequer was defective, in not 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 sum 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 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. Sir J. Newport said, he felt himself obliged to express an opinion quite different from that which his hon. friend enter tained 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. Mr. Baring rose to express his concurrence in 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. The Chancellor of the Exchequer begged to explain himself upon two points. The first point was with reference to the revenue of the year. The hon. gen. tleman 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 hewas 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 it to be understood, that he meant to fund from 8,000,000l. to 9,000,000%. of that sum; he meant to repay to the Bank 6,000,0004; and thus, by buying stock or Exchequer bills, 3,000,000l. would go to the reduction of the unfunded debt in the market. Mr. Calcraft 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. Captain Gordon 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. The Chancellor of the Exchequer 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. Sir C. Forbes 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. Mr. Ellice 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 expe dient 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 sys tem 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? Mr. Bright asked, what was to be done with the surplus of 120,000l.? There was one tax, which, although unproduc tive, 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. Mr. Huskisson 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 |