people of England that the repeal of the corn and provision laws would give them every year a far greater sum than 100 millions. Why, I reiterate, this great truth is not merely that in this rapid age you must take every opportunity of enforcing strong conviction in the public mind, but because several Gentlemen, and some of those who sit opposite, have addressed me in private, and remonstrated with me upon what they considered a monstrous exaggeration. For instance, the hon. Member for Glasgow the other night

He

also considered that I had misrepresented him; and, although trusting to memory, which, though more treacherous than it was in my youth, seldom deceives me, I did give the information which was necessary to the hon. Gentleman; I told him I should give him the information in public, if in private my assurance would not satisfy him. Sir, I have proved my sincerity. I have the evidence of the Import Duties Committee under my arm, and I tell the hon. Gentleman that at page 68 he will read these words-"The people of England, by the repeal of the corn and provision laws, will gain a much greater suma far larger [after using the words much greater,' he adds 'far larger'] sum than 100,000,000l. per annum. What is the miserable deficit of two millions and a half to a nation, which, by a stroke of the pen, by a resolution of the House in Committee on Ways and Means, can gain so much? What are all the mines of Mexico and Potosi - what are all the galleons that Anson ever captured in value compared with this admirable piece of legislation which was founded by the Member for Glasgow?

now menaced. This is the only satisfac- hon. Member for Glasgow (Mr. Macgretion, or rather the only source of consola- gor) that evidence which informed the tion that I must believe that when the people of England are appealed to again by the hon. Member for the West Riding when they are called on to organise and agitate for a reform of their fiscal systemthey will at least pause for one moment and consider what have been the effects of their previous following of the counsel and advice of the hon. Gentleman. If his reform of our fiscal system is to lead to no greater benefits to the people of England than the reform under his auspices-under his superior auspices of the commercial system, I am in hopes that the people of in the lobby made an appeal to me. England will not lend themselves to a fruitless, a barren, and an unprofitable agitation. If, remembering all the promises which were made by the hon. Gentleman and his school-(I mention him as their leader, and their working leader) all those promises and all those prospects of fruition that were held out to them, they demean themselves at this crisis with good sense and caution, they will only justify the traditional character of the people of England in these respects of caution and good sense. They must remember at this moment, when the Minister has to come forward as the Minister has come forward to-night, to play a part so fatal, as I must believe to men of such station, great ability, and proved services, as the Gentlemen who sit upon the Treasury benches--when they are obliged to come forward and play the part that they have done to night, I say, Sir, it will be a point that must occur to the people of England, when the honour and existence of the Government at so critical a period is at stake upon the means of raising two or three miserable millions--[" Oh, oh!"] -miserable millions, I say, they must reThe hon. Member ought not member the evidence that was given be- again to vote for such a miserable impost fore the Import Duties Committee. Allow as the income-tax. A man who by his me to tell that Gentleman who favoured counsels can enrich the treasury of the me with his derisive criticism, that they country to such an excess, ought to work must remember the evidence given before out the whole deficiency. He ought to the Imports Committee, which was the have the library to himself. It is degrafoundation of our modern legislation, which dation and commonplace to a man like won from the most able man this country the hon. Member to quote others along has ever produced, and from one of the with him; and I do not quote them because most able statesmen England has yet pro- they only proved that we should obtain duced, the acknowledgment from that red from the repeal of the corn and provision box that it was the basis of his legislation. laws one million and a half. That I do Let the people of England turn to the not take into consideration. I fix upon the evidence forming nearly one-third of that hon. Member individually because his blue book-the evidence that consists en-estimate was the highest-because it was tirely of the inspired revelations of the founded upon the best evidence-because

he was the favourite counsellor of the most to admit that free trade was a great expowerful individual in the country-because ageration. Sir, there is no doubt that a grateful country, and the capital of a free trade is a great exaggeration. It great county, proved their confidence in his is a great exaggeration that it brings estimate by sending him into this House a perpetual peace and universal philan-and because, Sir, the budget of Her Ma- thropy. If it were only a great exjesty's Government, twice in the same aggeration, we might laugh at it; but week, is the real thing for which these undoubtedly those representations enter monstrous representations which he urged into practical life. They change tariffs, are continued. I will not, Sir, stand up they bankrupt merchants. They make First for a moment between you and those dis- Lords of the Treasury preside over empty tinguished orators who wish to address exchequers, and they make Chancellors you. All that I want is to notice a single of the Exchequer, after making one stateobservation of the hon. Member for the ment one night, come a few nights after West Riding. He has to-night announced and make another diametrically opposed to to the country he is prepared again to it, and call upon the House of Commons raise the standard of agitation. All I to sanction a course totally different and wish to do is to say that we shall not fall distinct. These pitiable, these humiliating without a struggle; and we shall not be circumstances require all the natural coubetrayed, for we shall know the enemy we rage of the noble Lord to sustain him in have to meet, and the cause we have to his difficulties. But, Sir, throughout this encounter. The hon. Gentleman tells us evening what I most deplore is, that a he has no doubt there will be an associa- Minister of the Crown should by a sort of tion for fiscal reform-an association which inuendo have intimated to the House of he anticipates will achieve the same re- Commons that there were external circumsults as his confederation for commercial stances which required us to prepare ourchange. Let me tell the hon. Member selves for war. Sir, I can imagine nofor the West Riding, that it is not merely thing more indiscreet, more impolitic, and his prophecy of commercial ameliora- I believe nothing more unjust. I have no tion that is now to guide the people of England, but it is also his prediction of political perfectibility. They have to test him as a judge. They have to test, not merely his opinions as to the policy which would fill the Treasury, but also as to the policy which would secure the happiness and independence of this country. The hon. Gentleman stands before us with all his talents as the supporter of a bankrupt exchequer, and as having, only within these few days, appealed to a revolutionary nation as the model of political perfection. That, Sir, is the guide of the people of England on the new movement in favour of fiscal reform. Why, Sir, the noble Lord who sits with his arms folded on the Treasury bench (Lord J. Russell)-I mention this merely in a guerilla sense-the noble Lord—who, I will do him the justice to say, especially when he does not make a set speech, makes admissions which entitle him to the respect of every Gentleman in this House-did at the commencement of this Session, in November, say, that no doubt free trade was a great exaggeration. The only good thing that free trade ever did was to place the noble Lord upon that bench; and the best return the noble Lord could make to those who voted for him was, what like a brave Gentleman he did make,

hesitation in saying that I deeply deplore everything that has passed in France. I think that the general course of peace and progress, whatever may have been the circumstances of domestic discontent, has been, if not broken, certainly disturbed by all that has occurred. I have no hesitation in saying that I lament that the late Ruler of France has fallen. Whatever his errors to his people may have been, he was a great prince, a great gentleman-[a laugh]-a great man. There may be those who are ready to laugh over fallen royalty. I, for one, would shrink from such a course; and least of all does it become us to do so; for whatever were his errors, to England and to Englishmen at least he always extended an appreciating sympathy; and I cannot forget that for eighteen years he did secure, he did maintain for Europe the blessings of peace. These are my individual feelings; but I hope there will be no mistake between the French people and the House of Commons upon this occasion. If there have been mistakes before, I hope there will be none now. I hope they will understand that the people of England are resolved to interfere in no degree or manner whatever with the domestic and municipal affairs of the French nation. I believe there is no

statement more unjust than that so popu- | Tamworth. Instead of the consequence larly and so vulgarly credited, that Mr. of that measure having been to diminish Pitt ever did from the first sanction any the revenue, he believed that, with the interference of that kind. Quite the re- single exception of the article of timber, verse. So I think at this moment that if the changes in the tariff had effected every the people of France observe treaties, the object which its most ardent admirers had nations of Europe will observe their inde- anticipated from it. pendence. That I believe to be the general feeling throughout the country-the general and universal sentiment, represented, I am sure, by Gentlemen of all sections in this House; and, therefore, I the more deplore that any Minister of the Crown should for a moment have assumed that such a contingency as war might happen. Upon such an observation we should all arise, and at once oppose our distinct expression of opinion, that we have no right to suppose that war will ensue with France. I do not want to enter into the question of the income-tax now; a great occasion will soon arise for that; but I do say that what has occurred in France, instead of being an argument in favour of the income-tax, is an argument against it. The very fact that it is acknowledged to be a war-tax is the very reason why it should be now most delicately dealt with by the House of Commons. I have ventured, after the expressions of the hon. Member for the West Riding, to make these observations. I do not think that the remarkable and unprecedented course of Ministers in favouring us to-night with a second budget should have been allowed to pass unnoticed; and still less do I think that the declaration by a Member of the Government that a warlike contingency may arise, ought for a moment to be sanctioned by this House.

MR. MACGREGOR thought the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been received very ungraciously by the House; but he was confident that the country would receive it in a far different spirit. He should make no reply to the hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, further than to say that he must be labouring under a mistake with regard to his evidence before the Import Committee in 1840, and that there was no part of that evidence which he wished to blot out. He denied that he was in any way the counsellor of the Government or of any Cabinet Minister with regard to the new tariff. He simply worked as an humble journeyman doing his duty, as he was bound to do; and he declared unhesitatingly that the full merit of that measure was due to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for

He

He

MR. BRIGHT felt bound to offer his acknowledgments to the Government for the change which they had announced in their financial policy. He thought it a very wholesome thing that the Government should not set itself in opposition to so strong an expression of public opinion as had been evinced upon this subject since Friday week. There was one matter, however, to which the Government had not yet attended-the Government had not announced that discriminating principle with regard to the income-tax which the country expected; but he trusted that on Friday next they would be prepared to make some such change in the principle of the tax as the country required. believed that there was the greatest possible disposition on the part of the people of this country to submit to the system of direct taxation; but it was not enough that taxation should be direct-it must be equal and just, which had not hitherto been the case with the income-tax. The hon. Member for Bucks had amused himself and the House with a speech of some length. said " amused," because it must be amusing to see the Member for a county of such classic fame as that which the hon. Gentleman represented, boldly and firmly reiterate sophisms with regard to taxation which any weaver in Lancashire or Yorkshire would be ashamed to utter. What was it that the hon. Gentleman now wanted? The hon. Gentleman's party might some time ago have occupied the Treasury benches if they had pleased; but though he was cheered by his Protectionist friends in his attacks upon the free-trade policy, he should like to know what would the hon. Gentleman himself have done during the last two years? Would he have suspended the corn law or not? Would he have imposed it again? Would his policy have been one of everlasting restriction, or was it to be relaxed at intervals? The noble Lord the Member for Lynn stated at the time that we had not suspended the corn laws soon enough; that he would have suspended them sooner; and he blamed the Government for not sending to foreign countries to purchase large stores of grain. Why, he could tell the hon.

n

i: policy.

the budget until Friday, he thought it would be much better to have postponed it for a month, to have gone through the whole question of taxation, and to have made an entire revision of the stamp duties and the probate and legacy duty; for he did declare that, after the repeal of the corn laws, there was not an inequality and injustice in the whole system of taxation so ingeniously cruel as existed in the stamp duties and in the descent of personal pro

taxes willingly; but the time was coming when the Government must abandon the unjust, unequal, and partial taxation to which for a long series of years they had been allied. Let the taxes be revised, let them be equally imposed, and there would be neither resistance nor complaints from a willing people.

Gentleman that the effect of the change the corn laws had been to admit 16,000,000 quarters of grain into the kingdom in sixteen months. Would the hon. Member have kept that amount of grain out of the country? If he had, the effect must have been most disastrous to many of his countrymen. By the change in the corn laws, however, all that grain had been imported, and the country which supplied us with the largest portion of it the United States of America-had pur-perty. The people of this country paid chased two or three times their usual amount of our manufactures. The hon. Gentleman charged the free-trade policy with the misfortunes of the last eighteen months or two years; but neither the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth nor the Anti-Corn-Law League ever assumed to themselves to regulate the searisons. They knew that there were periods MR. BANKES would feel obliged to the when the seasons failed, and when famine hon. Gentleman the Member for Manchesapproached. Famine had arrived, and it ter if, when he ventured to repeat the prohad set the seal to everything the free- phecies of Gentlemen opposite, he would traders had said in confirmation of their have the goodness to repeat them corAnd that the hon. Gentleman rectly. He begged to remind the hon. should dare now to defend the corn law, or Gentleman that the prophecies to which he to attack the right hon. Baronet, was, he alluded were to this effect, "that the first must declare, a monstrous piece of assur- to complain of these changes would be the ance. The hon. Gentleman seemed to operatives and the manufacturers theminsinuate that a reaction was going on in selves." Had that prophecy been falsified? the country, and that the people were anx- The hon. Gentleman the Member for Manious to revert to their old policy. If the chester had stated that the Member for hon. Gentleman truly thought so, he was Buckinghamshire had made use of argumost miserably deceived. Why, he really ments and observations which no weaver did not believe that even the Buckingham- in Lancashire or Yorkshire would assent shire farmers were anxious to return to it, to; but he begged to ask, whether the much less would the operatives of York-weavers out of work were those of whom shire and Lancashire listen to it; and he could assure the House that if they talked of reimposing the tax upon corn, an opposition would arise of such a nature that all that had been said about the income-tax and the national defences would be perfectly insignificant compared with it. He had proposed to move that evening on going into Committee, and his Motion stood upon the Paper, that the duties now levied upon personal property under the name of probate and legacy duty should be extended to real property. It was not now, however, of course his intention to proceed with that Motion that evening. He should propose that it should be postponed until the Committee upon Ways and Means should be taken; and he hoped that before that time the Chancellor of the Exchequer would go through the question, and would be able to state to the House his opinion with regard to it. Instead of postponing VOL. XCVI.

Third
Series S

he spoke? The hon. Gentleman taunted the agricultural interest with their prosperity; but if he looked at the opposition which Ministers were threatened with out of doors, it was not quite so clear that the prosperity which was attributed to the agricultural classes could be entirely acknowledged by them. The present opposition to the Government proposition was not confined to the towns and cities, for throughout every county in the United Kingdom the same feelings prevailed, and the same language was held to the effect that they could not pay the tax. He was therefore afraid that the prophecy made by the agricultural interests that they would suffer, but not the first, would be fulfilled. The hon. Gentleman the Member for Manchester had alluded to the anticipations of gold being taken out of the country as not realised; but he must take leave to remind him of the great distress 3 A

MR. F. O'CONNOR did not know what influence had operated on the Chancellor of the Exchequer; but he was happy to hear from hon. Gentlemen on the Ministerial side that it was public opinion. Yet, in reference to all this shifting and changing, he had only to observe, that the noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) and his Colleagues had split on their old rock, an empty exchequer. The Whigs, when they got into office with a full exchequer, indulged in such lavish expenditure that before long they were obliged to look to the country for more money. Many of the charges to which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had referred were merely incidental and casual, and the country should know that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was looking to permanent taxation for incidental expenditure. He (Mr. O'Connor) objected to this tampering with thousands and hundreds of thousands of pounds, while the country was in the present depressed state. With reference to what had fallen from the hon. Member for Manchester, he would observe, that the whole derangement of the monetary system was attributable to the system of free trade. That hon. Member had, in the course of his argument, made use of a fallacy. He had said, that America had purchased manufactured goods from this country three times as much as formerly; but he (Mr. O'Connor) wanted to know how much less wages the working manufacturers of Yorkshire and Lancashire had received for their labour. That was the vital question. The hon. Member inquired what would have been done if free trade had not been carried? He would tell the hon. Member, that if free trade had not been passed, wheat would never have reached 80s. the quarter, for the dealers

which prevailed in consequence of a scarcity of gold in the first year of free trade. Did he not know that a day had arrived when it was doubtful whether the Bank of England could, on the morrow, meet its engagements? Did he not know of the urgent remonstrances made to the Chancellor of the Exchequer to resort to those measures which, though they involved a departure from the law, were the only ones which could stay the mischief? The hon. Gentleman the Member for Glasgow had insinuated that the hon. Member for Buckinghamshire had quoted incorrectly the substance of his evidence before the Import Duties Committee; but he held a copy of the evidence in his hand, and it appeared that the hon. Gentleman did say that the working classes would be benefited to the extent of 100,000,000l. by the changes proposed. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had announced that they were to have an income-tax for three years more; but, he added, that if it did not succeed, he reserved to himself the right of coming down and demanding fresh taxes. If he reserved to himself that right, Parliament might exercise another, and refuse to vote the estimates until they knew what the future taxes might be. It would be sheer waste of time, if, after hearing two budgets unfolded, they were to proceed to their consideration without knowing the nature of what remained behind. Believing that Parliament had a right to be made acquainted with the nature of the taxes which might be submitted to them should the income-tax not answer its object, he would, on Friday next, claim the right of asking from the Chancellor of the Exchequer what it was he meant when he said he would reserve to himself the right of coming down to the House and submit-in corn, who had speculated on long bills, ting other propositions of taxation. The noble Lord who had opened the budget claimed the credit of having opened it in a fair and frank manner. He had done so fairly and frankly, because he had stated the sources from which he expected to raise his revenue. That was certainly a fair proposal; but all the fairness vanished when they were told by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that he would reserve to himself the right of applying to Parliament for increased taxation, but the nature of which taxation he declined to unfold. Under these circumstances he hoped the Government would not shrink from stating definitely what course they might adopt with respect to future taxation.

would then have been afraid to do so, because of the existence of the sliding-scale. He did not concur in what had fallen from the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth on a former occasion, to the effect that it was not the desire of any Government to augment the revenue. One fact was worth a thousand arguments, and the fact was, that Governments had never resisted propositions for that purpose, but had easily been seduced into compliance when asked to augment the revenue. Precedents had been referred to; but let them not draw precedents from the dead, or they might as well meet in a graveyard, and sit upon tombstones. These were not the authorities upon which men in the present