that if the right hon. Gentleman really calculated on the positive reduction of the Revenue to be as great as the apparent amount of taxes reduced, the country could not expect him to go much further than he had gone. He regretted, however, that the right hon. Gentleman had not taken a more enlarged view of the subject. He regretted that it had not occurred to him that the reduction of taxes which bore on the productive industry of the people was calculated to increase rather than to diminish the Revenue. That had been shown in various cases. There was the tax on tobacco, for instance, a tax of 400 per cent on the article. The fact that the last increase of the duty upon tobacco had not increased the revenue arising from it, was a proof that tobacco was overtaxed. He was convinced, that with due attention and consideration, much greater relief might be afforded to the people, in the shape of a reduction of taxation, without any diminution of the Revenue. On that point an hon. friend of his had given notice of a motion for Friday next, in which motion-which he had hoped might have been rendered unnecessary by the financial statement of that evening-he now trusted that his hon. friend would persevere, and that he would receive the support of the House. He was not without hope that even the right hon. Gentleman would not object to his hon. friend's motion, considering its great importance. It was most desirable, indeed essential, that a general view of our finances should be taken, to alter, if possible, the unequal burthen of taxation, and render it less onerous on those classes who were least able to bear its weight. The hon. Member for Callington had said that, in 1786, Mr. Pitt considered a taxation of fifteen millions as pregnant with ruin to the country. At various periods of our financial history, similar opinions had been entertained. For himself, he was of opinion that the present amount of taxation, if properly levied, and not permitted to press on the productive interests of the country, might be borne without difficulty. Whatever surplus there might be of income over expenditure, ought, in his opinion, to be reduced in taxation. He never approved of the application of such surplus to the reduction of the national debt. He looked at that debt, not as capital which was to be liquidated, but rather as a perpetual annuity chargeable upon the country; and

he was convinced, that if, as he believed, by repealing taxes, the general wealth of the country would be more increased than the debt would be diminished by their continuance, good policy dictated that the amount of the taxes should be left in the pockets of the people. The right hon. Gentleman had said that, under the present circumstances of the country, Government felt called upon to run some risk on the question of Revenue. He (Lord Althorp) wished that they had run further risk. He wished that they had reduced other taxes; the reduction of which he was persuaded would have benefitted rather than injured the Revenue. By reducing the taxes to which he alluded, a spring would be given to industry, that in its effect would much more than compensate to the Revenue for its diminution in the first instance. Such were the views which he entertained on the subject. He approved of the reduction as far as it went; but he regretted that it had not gone further; he regretted that more general and extensive views had not suggested to his Majesty's Ministers the expediency of looking at the subject in a more enlarged view, and of proposing a more general measure of reduction.

Mr. Robinson followed; but all that we were able to collect of the hon. Gentleman's observations was, that nothing which he had heard from the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have the effect of inducing him to relinquish his intended proposition, on Friday next, to make a more extensive reduction of those taxes, such as those on Soap, Candles, and Hides, which pressed on the productive industry of the country, and to supply any deficiency which might thereby be occasioned in the Revenue by an equitable assessment on property.

Mr. Hume was anxious to say a few words, after what had fallen from the hon. Member for Callington, because he thought that that hon. Gentleman had taken a very unfair view of the statement of the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer; and had expressed fears with respect to the injury that statement was calculated to effect on public credit, which fears existed, he believed, in no other mind but that of the hon. Gentleman. If there were any subject which less than any other he should have expected to be agitated that evening, it was the Sinking Fund; a topic which had long been dead and buried,

He had hardly thought to have heard any hon. Member rise that night to vindicate the principle of what had been called a Sinking Fund, which had been of late years proved to be a practical burthen instead of a relief. The hon. Member for Callington had, however, quoted the speeches of Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox, in support of a system which was now admitted on all hands to have been altogether fallacious. There was nothing in Mr. Pitt's plan which made it differ from a private gentleman's own view of his commercial affairs; and it was a complete fallacy to say, that any individual could go on paying off his debts, by dealing in this manner with his own securities. The only way in which a government could diminish debt was, by applying surplus annual revenue to its liquidation. The idea of any person's paying his debts by borrowing was now allowed by every body to be perfectly impracticable; and yet if the hon. Member for Callington did not advocate that principle, it was difficult to see how he could advocate the Sinking Fund. Last year the more enlightened principle had been fully admitted and established, that the surplus of the Revenue applied to the discharge of the debt was the only legitimate Sinking-fund. He entertained no such fears as those which had been expressed by the hon. Member for Callington, who, he thought, had been rather hard on the right hon. Gentleman, in stating that he was the first Chancellor of the Exchequer who had taken away the credit of the country. He was, on the contrary, persuaded, that if the right hon. Gentleman had gone further, and had applied the 2,000,000l. to reduce 2,000,000l. more of taxation, he would have done more to support public credit than by diminishing the debt to that amount. However, no taxes could have been more judiciously selected for the operation of reduction. The free sale of Beer would be highly advantageous to the people; and he was persuaded that the right hon. Gentleman had by no means over-estimated the benefit of that measure. The relief given to the country would, he had no doubt, greatly exceed the nominal value of the tax reduced, and instead of being estimated at 3,000,000l. would, in point of fact, be equal to 6,000,000l. of relief to the public. In the article of Leather also, great advantages would result from the repeal of the tax. It would relieve the trade from being

in the hands of great monopolists. The regulations of the Excise with respect to the Leather Trade were so severe that scarcely any one could escape, and the number of persons engaged in it was, therefore, very limited. The repeal of the tax would increase that number, and the public would benefit by the consequent competition. Still he thought the right hon. Gentleman might have gone a great deal farther; and he perfectly agreed with his noble friend, the Member for Northampton, that the same amount of taxation which at present existed might be imposed with a quarter of the pressure on the people if it were removed from articles of productive industry. The noble Lord had certainly misunderstood the Chancellor of the Exchequer, for the right hon. Gentleman was not averse to any change of taxes that might be beneficial. All he had said was, that the subject had not entered into his present plan. He (Mr. Hume) could not now contemplate that the right hon. Gentleman would give his assistance to the hon. Member for Dover, in his efforts to show what taxes could be reduced or repealed, and laid on other items, with a view of benefitting trade, and alleviating the burthens of the people. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had not said one word upon the important changes that might be made in this respect; but it was not to be inferred from that that he was averse from such changes. The right hon. Gentleman proposed, for the present year,to take off the duty on Beer, to the amount of 750,000l., and on Leather, to the amount of 200,0007.—making in both a relief of 950,000l.; but there was to be an additional tax put on, to the amount of 400,000l., so that the nett reduction would be 550,000l. With this relief there would be left in the Treasury a surplus of 2,170,0001. So far from applying this amount of surplus, as the hon. Member for Callington recommended, to the reduction of the three per cents, he ought to proceed, in the present state of the country, to give a relief to taxation to that extent. He held in his hand a statement of all taxation repealed since the termination of the war in 1816: but not including the 18,000,000l. repealed in 1816. Since that period, there had been repealed (deducting the 3,000,000l. added in 1819) 9,234,000l. This had been taken off between 1818 and 1825, and he would compare it to the results of receipts into

greater, -a circumstance that could hardly fail to satisfy the country gentlemen. The brewers were ready, fairly and manfully, to meet the right hon. Gentleman's propositions, and they had not the least objection, as brewers, to have the trade thrown entirely open.

Mr. Maberly said, that the right hon. Gentleman had stated to the House that there had been a surplus revenue of 2,700,000l., and that he would reduce it, by a repeal of taxes, to 2,000,000l.; and the question that remained was, whether he had applied himself to those taxes which it was most judicious to reduce. None certainly could be more beneficially reduced than the Beer duty. This was a wise measure—one of principle-for the Beer-tax was an unequal tax, it was an unjust tax, and therefore ought to be repealed. The next reduction was upon Leather- —a tax which greatly enhanced the price of the article, and materially stood in the way of improvements in the trade. He then came to the question, whether in the subsequent year there would be the loss of revenue which the right hon. Gentleman had expected? The hon. Member for Callington seemed to think, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was in error, in leaving only 2,000,000l. as a balance, for he apprehended that next year there would be no such balance, and that, consequently, public credit would be injured. In his opinion, there was no ground for this apprehension, and the hon. Member ought to have kept out of view all those arguments about a Sinking-fund, which, whatever weight might once have been given them, were now acknowledged to be fallacious. The right hon. Gentleman's balance of 2,000,000l. would be a much larger bona fide Sinking-fund than any which had been in existence during the fifteen years that the hon. Member had supported the fallacy of the Sinking-fund; and public credit would in future be higher than when that fallacy had been kept up. The right hon. Gentleman, he thought, was perfectly right in raising the duties upon Spirits, notwithstanding that this increase might have the effect of encouraging smuggling, with all its demoralizing effects; for the use of Spirits by the poor was still more demoralizing, and of the two evils the point was to choose the least. With reference to the four per cents, the Government would be wrong not to adopt such a measure at the present

rate of interest; but the question was, whether they ought to expedite the business. If war were likely to disturb the country, it would not be fair to reduce the rates of interest; but in the absence of any such apprehension, it was perfectly fair. The right hon. Gentleman was entitled to guard himself against an unfavourable harvest; but he had not made a sufficient provision for the harvest being favourable. He was satisfied that the right hon. Gentleman's Budget was the best he had ever seen, for the right hon. Gentleman had travelled over the whole business of taxation upon principle, and his speech had conveyed to him, in very strong terms, a desire to look into every part of the expenditure during the recess, and to look into the superannuation, which of all things required the greatest attention upon the part of Government. The right hon. Gentleman had told the House to anticipate next year a reduction of esti mates; but he thought that the right hon. Gentleman might have effected greater reductions in the present year. There was no pretence whatever to keep up 5,000 Marines, when it had been stated by competent authority, that 1,000 would be enough. A large proportion of the army might be reduced. With reference to the reduction of the debt, he would recommend to the Chancellor of the Exchequer to attempt the plan of Mr. Brickwood, for he was convinced that it was the best mode of reducing a debt that could be suggested. He was sorry to say that Gentlemen in that House would not vote for reductions, though they were always ready to vote for extravagant expenditure; and yet, until the estimates were reduced to a much lower scale, it was in vain to expect a larger reduction in the taxes.

Mr. Bernal could repose, he said, some confidence in the promises held out to the House by the right hon. Gentleman, because he had not, like his predecessors, attempted to mystify the subject, and he was not ashamed of acknowledging the situation of the country, when he held out the hope of affording it relief. He well knew that the right hon. Gentleman had a great many conflicting interests to satisfy, but considering all parts of the subject, he must be excused for saying, that he had expected that the right hon. Gentleman would have been able to afford some little relief to the most suffering of all interests-the West-India interests.

He did trust that the right hon. Gentleman would be able to relieve some of the burthens under which the colonial interests had so long suffered. With respect to the Spirit-duties, why could not the right hon. Gentleman place the British and the West-India Spirits on the same footing? The West-India interests were at the lowest ebb possible. It was true that the duty was to be raised on Irish and Scotch spirits from 2s. 10d. to 3s. a gallon, and the duty on English spirits from 7s. to 8s.; but why were they not all put upon a footing with British and WestIndian? 3s. per gallon was to be the duty upon Spirits in Scotland and Ireland, 8s. the duty on Spirits in England, whilst 8s. 6d. was the duty upon rum. This he thought was trenching upon justice. The West-India interests were entitled to a reduction of the duty upon sugar, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not alluded to the subject. This certainly was not the time to enter into any details concerning the British West-India interests, but the time would be soon afforded when he should have the opportunity of explaining to the House the state of the question, and he hoped to convince all who heard him that the amount of duty collected by the Government upon sugar and rum was enormous, and that at present, the state of property in the WestIndies was such that it was unable to pay the imposition, and to make any returns to the owners. If the present rate of

duties were to continue the same for another year, the Revenue would suffer; for the estates, he was fully convinced, would be thrown out of cultivation. In the old colonies, such as Jamaica, it was impossible to carry on the cultivation much longer. In the new colonies where the soil was better, or less worked, it might be possible. He would make a statement to the House, which would show the necessity of the Government's attending to the subject. A West-India estate, producing one hundred and fifty hogsheads of sugar, and sixty puncheons of rum, which was the fair proportion, would pay, in duty to the Government, as he found, from calculations in his possession, 5,4007.; whilst the amount of profit derived by the proprietor, after all his outgoings, incidental to cultivation, would be only 1831. He would ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if this were not a state of things demanding the attention of Government?

and we

more

Mr. Alderman Thompson agreed with the hon. Member who had just sat down, that no interest required relief more than the West-India proprietors. However, he did not see how the Chancellor of the Exchequer could well carry reduction of taxation farther than he proposed at present, consistently with maintaining our existing establishments. He concurred with the hon. Member for Aberdeen in recommending to Government and the House to consider those taxes which pressed most heavily on the labouring, agricultural, and manufacturing classes. The time was arrived when we must alter our system of taxation; and he was glad to hear that the Government had not entirely lost sight of the possibility of doing so. He was aware that many objections were entertained against a Property-tax, but believed it would be soon thought that a tax upon capital was the only effectual way of meeting the emergency. The labouring classes were the great consumers, must enable them to consume largely than they did at present. The reasons why they were not able to consume more at present were obvious, they were placed in competition with the cheap labour of foreign countries, with steam and machinery. Notwithstanding the ridicule attached to the declaration of an illustrious person in another place, he must say, he connected the pressure upon the working classes in a great degree with the improvements in machinery. He knew the value of machinery practically, and was satisfied that the more we applied it the more should we increase the wealth and resources of the country; but we ought to enable the labouring classes to compete with machinery, by finding them adequate employment. The Chancellor of the Exchequer expected a considerable increase to the Revenue, in consequence of a consolidation andequalization of the Stampacts. He trusted the right hon. Gentle-man would be borne out in his anticipation. He might here allude to the stamp duties on policies of marine assurances. Upon an insurance which cost 5s., say from London to Calais, there was paid to Government 2s. 6d. The same was the case as regarded insurances for Holland and other places; and the consequence of levying so disproportionate a duty upon such transactions was, to drive that branch of business out of the country. Houses for effecting insurances were established