HC Deb 19 February 1805 vol 3 cc562-5
Mr. Alexander

brought up the report of the committee of ways and means of yesterday. Several resolutions were read and agreed to without any discussion. Upon the resolution being read, which goes to state the agreement of the house to the levy of an additional 25 per cent, on the property tax,

Mr. Fox

rose, and requested, some explanation of the nature of the exemption from the property tax, allowed, to the holders of the loan. He did not altogether understand it as it was formerly stated.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

observed, that it was not strictly an exemption, but a forbearance for a time, till the instalments should he paid up. When the loan was converted into stock, and the first dividend was paid, then it would of course become subject to the tax as well as other property.

Mr. Johnstone

expressed his regret to see so little disposition in the house to examine closely into the subject of these resolutions, which was of so important a nature, that he should not feel that he did his duty, if he passed it over in silence. The house, he was sorry to say, was not put in a state to judge so accurately on the subject as it ought to have been. Certain accounts had been ordered by act of parliament to be annually laid before the house. It was true, that they were not in strictness required to be laid on the table previous to the 25th of March; but since the budget had been brought forward so early this session, it might have been expected that the accounts deluded to should, have been presented in time sufficient to enable the house to examine the subject with the requisite degree of information. We wanted an account of the public income and an account of the disbursements. The distribution paper ought also to have been presented sooner, with an account of the consolidated fund, A confusion also arose from its being stated that the expenditure would be 44 millions, and provision was made only for 35 millions. Then, there was a million for the East India Company. He assented to that sum. But he did it for reasons of his own, arid not for those alleged on the other side. The East India Company had engaged to pay 500,000l. annually to the public; and instead of that, this was the second time that they called upon the public to pay money to them. Notwithstanding this, it was contended on the other side, that the East India Company was in a flourishing condition, and we had recorded this by our vote, He hoped the subject would be at another period more fully investigated. There was also another resolution to which he was by no means inclined to give his assent. It was that which went to give 5 millions for subsidies to the continental powers. He trusted that no one would think that he contended that this island should keep aloof from continental connexion. The man did not deserve a seat in that house who could wish this island to be insulated in its interests and connexions, from the powers on the Continent, or who would not be desirous of contributing all in his power to diminish the preponderating influence of France upon the greater part of Europe, which he could not consider otherwise than as one family. He would therefore, chearfully grant any sum, which was likely to be applied with any effect to the diminution of the enormous power of the enemy; but, before he voted such a sum as this, he should expect to sec some prospect of accomplishing his object, by the co-operation of those powers bordering on France, such as Austria and Prussia; but, without this aid, he could anticipate very little effect from powers so remote from it as Russia and Sweden To expect a reduction of the power of France, by means of such allies, would be as wild and romantic As the. measures said to be taken by some of the agents of England, who attempted to accomplish their purpose by the force of two bottles of sympathetic ink, and the sum of 500 guineas—.He also had great objections to the duty on salt. This house had voted, about four years ago, that it was highly impolitic to tax that commodity. It was strange now that it was proposed to tax it doubly. This he supposed was the difference between a weak and inefficient administration, and a strong and vigorous one. Another objectionable tax was that on horses used for husbandry. The right hon. gent, had lately given his assent to a bill which had for its object to courage agriculture, and now he came forward with a resolution of this nature! Two years ago, when the war had commenced, the house had been pompously told, that the war would be carried on by 12 million of war taxes, without borrowing a larger sum than was annually reduced by the sinking fund. He, on the contrary, had stated, that the expenditure would amount to 42 millions, when our force was carried to its utmost extent, and that we should be compelled, to borrow 23 millions. The result now was, that our whole expenditure this year was upwards Of 49 millions, and amounted to 44 millions independently of the subsidy, and that the loan, in place of 7 millions, was 22½ millions for England, and 2½ millions for Ireland.

Mr. Francis

said a few words upon the subject of the million which was to be paid to the East India Company. This was the second time that parliament was called on to make an advance to them of the same amount; and yet every statement which was made of their finances, declared that they were at present in the most prosperous situation, and held out the most flattering prospect of increasing wealth in future. He would not say, that nothing was now owing by government to the Company; but he could not help remarking, that the 500,0001. which they had covenanted annually to pay the public, was never stated to have been actually so paid but once. But, in fact, there was no parliamentary evidence of the existence of the debt. The house had, indeed, the word of a right hon. gent, that it was so; but that was not a parliamentary ground Upon which they had a right to dispose of the public money; and it was evident to him, that neither the former nor the present sum ought to be paid without a parliamentary inquiry, and a satisfactory proof being given to the house of the existence of the debt. If it was proved that the debt did originally, exist, the house would then have to inquire, whether or no it was liquidated, or nearly liquidated. The Company would then have to give in an account of their stock, and would be obliged to make a deduction according to the state of the account between them and the public. If the statement given in the course of last session was strictly true, and that in reality the Company's debt from the country was neatly liquidated, than the legal consequence ought to be, that the Sum now required to be advanced should be deducted, in order that the debt, now so near liquidation, should be finally extinguished. He therefore, wished to know whether this sum was meant in liquidation of the former debt?

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

declared himself rather unprepared to give the hon. gent, a satisfactory answer; but he certainly did not propose to vote this sum without reserve, or without subjecting the Company to be called to an account for what may be due from its revenues to this country. The, vote now called for had no relation to, much less did it annul, any prior engagement; but both the hon. gentlemen were mistaken as to the purport off the act of 1793, which enjoined, that, after the Company should pay its dividends and expences, and have a surplus to a certain amount, then out of that surplus, it was to contribute half a million towards the general finances of the country, and be at liberty to apply the remainder to the increase of its dividends. This subject would best be referred to a future discussion, when the state of the East India) finances should be brought before them; but it surely would be allowed, that the Revenue and resources of the Company might be very prosperous, and yet, by the-intervention of two or three unexpected wars, be rendered inapplicable to the aid of the national revenue.

Mr. Johnstone

agreed, that the Company might have a just claim upon the public, but what he complained of was, that after declaring that they had a surplus of a million, instead of paying out of it what they owed to the country, the house should be called upon to discharge an old debt to them.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

explained, that the surplus so often mentioned was only stated to arise out of the territorial revenues of the Company, of which parliament had no right to claim any share, until it was brought home by investments, and all the charges on it paid. That indeed might be made the subject of a future claim; but as to the territorial revenue, parliament had no immediate right to interfere with it.