§ MR. HUMEsaid, it appeared from a balance-sheet which had been laid on the table by the Government, that there was an excess of expenditure over income amounting to 269,000l. He wished to know whether or not the Government were now prepared to submit to the House their estimates and expectations of revenue and expenditure for the current year?
§ The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, the hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose had referred to a balance-sheet which was laid on the table the other day. Although there was still in the expenditure of the year an excess over revenue, in round numbers, of 270,000l., yet he must say that the balance-sheet was one which could not be unsatisfactory to the House; for there was included in the expenditure a sum of 390,000l. for Irish distress, which he had not contemplated having to provide for out of the income of the year. Besides, the whole sum which he had felt it to be necessary to provide for by borrowing money, was actually covered by the income of the past year. The income of the last year was half a million better than he anticipated it would be when addressing the House in August last. There was also included in the excess of this year an uncontemplated excess of naval expenditure, which, though it had been voted this year, was fairly chargeable to the revenue of next year. Therefore, although there was an excess in the expenditure of the year as compared with the income, yet he thought the prospect held out by the balance-sheet was very satisfactory, showing, as it did, that notwithstanding the difficulties with which the country had had to contend during the last twelve months, the income of the country had risen beyond what he anticipated when speaking at so recent a period as last August, He might say, generally, that he was confirmed in the expectations which he had held out to the House that, with the present means; the 535 income would exceed the expenditure. He was sorry, however, to be obliged to add, that the blockade of the northern ports had given a check to the export trade to the north of Europe, and that he did not now feel quite certain that the estimates made before that event would be fully borne out. He still believed that the income of the year would more than fairly cover the expenditure; but for the reason which he had just stated, he could not make so precise a statement as was desirable.
§ MR. HUMEhad not so much intended to ask a question respecting the revenue, for he was not at all desirous that the revenue should increase, as to obtain information respecting the expenditure. He wished to know whether the reductions which had been announced were actually in progress?
§ The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, the hon. Gentleman was aware that the reductions already announced to the House in the naval, military, and ordnance estimates, amounted to upwards of 1,400,000l. He could not undertake to make any considerable reductions beyond that amount.
§ MR. HERRIEShad not clearly understood the right hon. Gentleman's meaning with regard to the blockade of the northern ports. He did not exactly see how that event could have affected the prospect of a favourable revenue for the year.
§ The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERhad not stated that the revenue would be diminished by a decrease of exports arising from the blockade of the northern ports; but his right hon. Friend must know that the revenue of the country depended in a great degree on the country being in a prosperous state. He had within the last week received accounts to the effect that a check had been given to that prosperity of trade which existed two months ago; and any calculations which were founded on a state of trade so prosperous as trade generally was two months ago might not be borne out, unless the causes of the recent check were removed.
§ Subject dropped.