TOBACCO DUTIES. (Hansard, 8 April 1830)

Mr. Warburton
wished to take that opportunity of stating, that he was decidedly opposed to the principle of the Bill. Its object was, to encourage the cultivation of an article which could not be cultivated without a bounty, or such a reduction of duty compared with the duty on the imported article, as was tantamount to a bounty. The right hon. Gentleman had stated that his efforts had been directed to place the Tobacco grown at home on the same footing as that which was imported. That appeared to him most absurd. The question was, could the English grower compete with the Virginian planter? The attempt was as absurd as the system adopted in 27 France, of forcing a production of sugar from beet-root by high bounties, when the nature of trade would, in spite of every opposition, revert to its natural channel. The argument that some parties had already invested capital in the cultivation of Tobacco, was of no weight; for they had done it at their own risk, and could not reasonably expect that an absurd law should be passed for their protection. If it were right to grant protection to the capital already embarked, how much stronger would be the claim to protection for capital embarked after the law was passed? He anticipated from the new regulations nothing but ruin to one large branch of Revenue and a consequent necessity for new taxes.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, the facts were somewhat different from the hon. Member's statement. He accused the measure of being a bounty on the growth of Tobacco, by the difference between the duty of 1s. 8d. on every pound of Tobacco grown in Ireland and the duty on Tobacco grown in America. But the fact was, that a considerable quantity of Tobacco was already grown in Ireland, which paid no duty whatever; and the measure then under discussion proposed to levy a duty of 1s. 8d. on that Tobacco as well as on all Tobacco grown at home. How such a proposition could be called a bounty or a bonus on growing Tobacco at home, was to him inconceivable. If the difference between the two rates of duty was a bonus, that must be much greater as long as no duty at all was imposed on Tobacco grown in Ireland. If there were any absurdity then in his proposition, it was only in as far as it approximated to the arguments of the hon. Member. The hon. Member thought the bonus was an evil—he meant to reduce it by the sum of 1s. 8d. per pound, and the hon. Member declared that the plan was absurd. He would not, however, then discuss the plan. The fact was, that in Ireland there was grown 750,000l. worth of Tobacco annually which paid no duty; and came into competition with that which paid a high duty: the object of the resolutions was, to make that Tobacco pay duty, and thus contribute to the Revenue in a due proportion to that Tobacco imported from abroad.

§ Mr. Hume
was of opinion, that this measure gave a bounty to Tobacco grown in this country. He had no wish to impede its cultivation here, but it ought to 28 pay a duty equal to the Tobacco imported from abroad. If one person imported Tobacco and paid 3s. per lb., and another grew it and paid only 1s. 8d., there was a bounty given to the grower equal to the difference. He would recommend that the present growers of Tobacco should be allowed to carry on their operations for a year or two untaxed, with an understanding that, at the end of that time, they should pay a duty equal to that imposed on Tobacco imported. He was of opinion, that the Resolutions, if carried into effect, would lead to the cultivation of Tobacco to such an extent as to be injurious to the Revenue, and then the right hon. Gentleman would be obliged to prohibit it altogether—causing very great evil. If the Resolutions became a law, those who cultivated Tobacco under it would, however, be far better entitled to protection than the pre-sent cultivators of Tobacco in Ireland.

§ Mr. Bright
was surprised to hear of the extent to which Tobacco was cultivated in Ireland, and under the circumstances of that country, when capital had been drove from its natural channels, it might perhaps be proper to give it the advantage which this measure would not confer but secure. At the same time, if Ireland were entitled to this indulgence—the colonies to the soil and climate of which the cultivation of Tobacco was congenial, had stronger claims to a similar boon. To the people of those colonies it would be a great advantage—and in their behalf he appealed to the House. He had before called its attention to the subject, but he thought it of such great importance, that he could not do otherwise than again press it on the consideration of the Government.

§ Mr. Hume
then said, that he would rather agree at once to vote a sum of money to pay them than consent to this measure. He did not know what answer could be made to fishermen and manufacturers who claimed bounty and protection duties if this measure were passed. He considered that it involved a departure from those sound principles which had lately been professed by the Government; and he therefore hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would postpone the measure till after the holidays, when it might be fully and fairly discussed.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer
, in the then state of the House, had no option—he was not his own master, and though he could not see what the hon. Member could gain by the postponement, he could not do otherwise than comply with his request.

§ Mr. Hume
intimated, that he did not mean to avail himself of a thin House to enforce his own views, and he should have proposed the postponement though the right hon. Gentleman had been supported by his usual majorities.