HC Deb 05 April 1853 vol 125 cc625-42
MR. OLIVEIRA

Sir, in rising to bring under the consideration of the House the Resolution of which I have given notice, I have to solicit that indulgence which I observe is always granted to Members who are placed in the position that I am—that of addressing the House for the first time. Sir, if that indulgence is necessary under ordinary circumstances, how much is the necessity enhanced when so humble a Member of this House ventures to treat of a question of the magnitude and importance of that to which I refer. No considerations of a personal nature would have induced me to undertake this task; but when I am informed by large and important commercial classes that the uncertainty which exists upon this subject is acting prejudicially on their interests, and that the revenue arising from this source is interfered with, I readily adopt the course of bringing it before the House, in order that it may be dealt with, and a decision arrived at. Were it not for these considerations, I would far sooner have left the subject in the hands of the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I hope, however, that right hon. Gentleman will acquit me of personal discourtesy, or any desire to anticipate his views upon this question with reference to his general financial statement; I have already had some communications with the right hon. Gentleman upon the matter, and I have explained to him the necessity I felt for bringing the subject forward thus early. Sir, I hope I do not exaggerate the importance of the subject, but I confess I cannot view this as a mere narrow question of whether wine shall be cheap or dear—whether wine is to be reserved as a luxury for the rich, or a necessary and daily article of consumption for the million—whether a few opulent merchants shall exercise a monopoly upon this branch of commerce, or whether their interests are to be invaded. This question, as I apprehend, stands on far higher grounds, and its merits must be discussed in connexion with far nobler objects. This is a question involving considerations of a financial and commercial character of the greatest moment. It is a question affecting the moral and sanitary interests of the bulk of the people of this great country; it is a question relating to the international and treaty engagements with other countries; and, lastly, it has important bearings upon that greatest of human blessings, the preservation of peace between the nations of the world. I am aware that I shall be told there are many other subjects which have stronger claims for a reduction of duty than wines—for instance, hops, soap, tea, paper—the taxes upon knowledge, as they are popularly called—malt, and a variety of other taxes. I perfectly agree that at first sight this would appear so, and upon a recent occasion I showed my concurrence in this view by voting for the abolition of the duty on hops; but in that case, as in all the others referred to, there is this distinction, that they are total repeals of existing revenues without any substitution; whereas, there is an almost moral certainty that by diminishing the duty upon wine to a low standard, consumption will increase to such an enormous extent as to produce a much larger amount of revenue than that now received. This, I think, is a fair deduction, judging from experience in tea, coffee, and sugar—all of which have, under a low duty, increased in a most surprising degree; whereas the duty upon foreign wines, notwithstanding the great increase in the population and distribution of wealth, has remained stationary, or nearly so, as shown by the following table:—The wine duty in 1833 produced 1,633,830l.; in 1834, 1,705,639l.; in 1835, 1,691,522l.; in 1836, 1,793,963l.; in 1837, 1,687,097l.; in 1838, 1,846,057l.; in 1839, 1,849,698l.; in 1840, 1,791,636l.; in 1841, plus 5 per cent additional from 15th May, 1,720,479l.; in 1842 (stagnation about treaty), 1,334,469l.; in 1843, 1,703,344l.; in 1844 (when Treasury Minute issued, settling the question about the drawback), 1,922,545l.; in 1845, 1,891,232l.; in 1846, 1,892,206l.; in 1847, 1,778,645l.; in 1848, 1,799,126l.; in 1849, 1,767,516l.; in 1850, 1,821,123l.; in 1851, 1,856,331l.; and in 1852, 1,872,943l.; Tea produced in 1841–2 was 3,973,688l.; 1851–2,5,985,482l. The consumption of coffee in 1841–2 was 28,370,857 lbs.; 1851–2, 35,044,3761bs. It will be in the recollection of the House that early last year a Select Committee of this House was appointed to consider and inquire into the cause of the decline in the revenue derived from the import duties on wines. That Committee was moved for by a learned Friend of mine, no longer, I regret to say, a Member of this House, or this subject would have been dealt with by him instead of falling into the hands of the humble individual who has now the honour to address the House. That Committee sat for a period of seven weeks—namely, from the 22nd April till the 8th June, during which time a mass of most valuable information was collected upon this subject. I was a constant attendant at that Committee, and I was invited to give evidence before the Committee with reference to the wines of the south of Portugal, Madeira, and those produced in and about Xeres (sherry). In my humble judgment the evidence in question goes clearly to prove that a very large reduction in the duty would be desirable. I hold in my hand the evidence of that Committee. I regret to say no Report was made to this House, though a Draft Report was drawn up by a Member of the Committee, a few passages from which I will (with the permission of the House) refer to. The following is one of these passages:— The consumption of wine has not kept pace with the increase of population. For many years past it has been nearly stationary. Of late it has shown a strong tendency to retrograde." "In the decennial period of 1785–95, the era of Mr. Pitt's liberal commercial policy, with an average population of 13,000,000, and an income of less than 15,000,000l., the average annual consumption was 7,000,000 gallons." "During the decennial period 1775–85, immediately preceding, with an average population of 12,000,000, the average annual consumption had not exceeded 3,000,000 gallons." "In the decennial period 1831–41, the population averaged 25,500,000, but the annual consumption of wine averaged considerably less than 7,000,000 of gallons. During 1841–51, the average consumption has been less than 6,500,000 gallons, although the population has increased to an average of 26,500,000, paying for 1851 upon nearly 60,000,000l. to the Income Tax. At the same time the average revenue from wine remains nearly stationary at 1,700,000l. I will now refer to some points which bear upon the commercial and financial interests involved. I am of the same opinion with most of the witnesses, that nothing short of a very large reduction will stimulate consumption so as to increase revenue. There can be no doubt that British shipping would be largely benefited by it. I will read a passage from a work recently published by a great authority upon this subject, Mr. Cyrus Redding. He says, in his introductory remarks to his compressed edition of the evidence taken before the Wine Committee— The present duties on wine are not to be judged solely by their extravagant amount; they lock up and keep idle a large amount of capital and labour which would benefit the public and the revenue too if they were in full activity If the consumption of wines were increased to 30,000,000 of gallons, as there is every reason to believe it would be, there would be required no less than 600 vessels of 250 tons each to bring the wino home, instead of 120; these vessels must take out freights, so that the advantage to the shipping interest would be very considerable. In connexion with this part of the inquiry, I am happy to see that a company has recently been formed by some of the leading wine houses who have trading transactions with Spain and Portugal to establish screw steamers, and they represent— That the importation of wine to London alone amounts to about 20,000 butts of sherry, and about 16,000 pipes of port annually, and by quicker communication great advantage will accrue to the importers thereof, who may then calculate on arrivals with a greater degree of certainty, and thus be enabled to reduce the large stocks in bond now held by them at a heavy expense. I am strongly of opinion that a condition of a large reduction in our duty upon wine should be a simultaneous large reduction in the duties charged upon British goods in France, Spain, and Portugal. If I am rightly informed, negotiations for this object have been going on with France for some time. I feel satisfied that in Portugal the same object might be obtained, if negotiations were opened on the subject, and no doubt ere long Spain would follow the example. In my inquiries upon this subject with various commercial bodies throughout the Kingdom, I have found a great difference of opinion. The Chamber of Commerce of Belfast have addressed me upon this subject, and forwarded the following resolution:— That in the opinion of this Chamber a reduction of the duty on French wines would be desirable if the Government of France would, as an equivalent, admit the manufactures of Great Britain and Ireland at a corresponding reduction. In the same spirit, the Mayor of Newark addressed me:— I am much in favour of the above project (reduction of duty on foreign wines), especially if it can be coupled with the very essential condition in paragraph No. 4 in your circular letter of September 1. That paragraph in my letter is as follows:— 4. A large export of British manufactured goods would take place to the wine-growing countries, it being a sine quâ non in granting the reduction of duty on foreign wines that the countries so favoured should at the same time admit British manufactured goods at a corresponding low duty.—B. Oliveira. He goes on to say— I believe that the introduction of the light wines of France and Germany, bringing them within the reach of the superior artisan and the middle classes, will be productive of great improvements in their condition, both physical and moral, as it will substitute a wholesome tonic beverage for the baneful ardent spirits. I have always considered the apparent innocence and good taste of the outdoor amusements of the bulk of the population on the Continent, as compared with our own, to be the consequence, to a great extent, of the innocent nature of their beverages, compared with the heady and often deleterious ale (almost always salted in the low public-houses to induce thirst), and the still more objectionable gin and whisky. A great authority inclines to the opposite side. The late lamented Mr. Porter, when asked his opinion upon this question, replied— In dealing with our own tariff, I would never ask if a foreign Government would do it. I would do that which I thought for the best interests of this country, and have them do the best they could for the interests of their own country. In an interview I had with the President and Vice-President of the Chamber of Commerce of Manchester, they totally disregarded the reciprocity question, and I hold in my hand a letter from that body containing the following statements:— I send you a local paper containing a copy of a memorial recently addressed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer by this Chamber on the subject of improved commercial relations with France. You will perceive on perusal that this Chamber cannot concur in the doctrine laid down in the fourth paragraph of the document dated 1st of September, and bearing your signature, which was forwarded to this Chamber. The paper referred to I hold in my hand. It is the Manchester Examiner and Times of October 23rd last year, containing the memorial which was forwarded to the right hon. Gentleman the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, who promised to give it "his full and anxious consideration." The passage in the memorial is, "Your memorialists urgently pray that an Act for diminishing the duties on wine to at least one-fifth of its present rate may be proposed to the Parliament about to assemble." I could multiply extracts of this tendency from commercial sources of the highest authority, but I will not occupy the time of the House. Now, one of the objections raised by the opponents of this measure is, that a sufficient quantity of wine calculated for this largely increased consumption could not be produced. I conceive this to be a complete fallacy. In the kingdom of Portugal alone there are produced annually 900,000 pipes of wine. I beg to read to the House a letter I received a few days ago from one of the greatest commercial houses in Lisbon (Mr. Walsh), in which is the following passage:— I think, and have always thought, that this country has plenty of resources which only require development to make it prosperous. Its produce of wine amounts to upwards of 900,000 pipes. The Portuguese Minister at this Court (Count Lavradio) fully corroborated this statement to me, and assured me that wines of the best quality, grown upon his own estate, were sold at 4l. to 5l. per pipe, and wines from my own knowledge which would be much esteemed here if imported at a low duty. The same distinguished individual informed me that the province with which he is connected (Estramadura) could export annually 200,000 pipes of sound wholesome wines, besides providing for its home consumption; and these I conceive to be exactly the kind of wines suited to the taste of our middling and humbler classes—possessing body, flavour, and warmth, without alcohol. But at the present duties these fine wines are prohibited, the duty being practically from 700 to 800 per cent upon their value. The produce of France is estimated at 900,000,000 gallons. I give this from the letter of a gentleman of the highest authority in the trade (M. Gassiot). Of Spain I have no data; but I hold in my hand a letter from a correspondent in the Island of Teneriffe, forwarded to me through the kindness of Her Majesty's Consul of that island. It is to the following effect:— I find that the total produce of this island was long calculated to average 25,000 pipes; but of late years, from the decline in price and unproductiveness of wines, the proprietors in many parts have converted their vineyards into potato and corn fields, and in others they have rooted up a great many of their best plantations; and for the last five years the average has not exceeded 10,000 or 12,000 pipes a year. The exports have declined in a much greater degree, and 1,500 to 2,000 pipes a year may be taken as a just estimate, of which about three-fourths may have gone to Great Britain. The quality of the wine, when properly taken care of, is good. Vidonia is the principal sort produced; but there are Malmsey and Tent wines of superior quality. Present shipping prices are—cargo, 10l. to 12l. per pipe; second quality, 14l. to 16l.; ditto, 20l., of 100 imperial gallons. The wines of Teneriffe would be much esteemed, in my opinion, if the duty were lower. I am well acquainted with them, having passed a considerable time in the island. Madeira would supply a large quantity, if the taste for that wine were restored, as I make no doubt would be the case if the duty were reduced. The produce of that island, from all the best sources of information, averages 30,000 pipes per year, of various qualities; but in consequence of the very small demand for these wines, coffee, sugar, and grain have been planted over a large portion of the island. If, however, a demand should spring up, no doubt the inhabitants of that beautiful spot would soon consult their own interests by supplying it. With reference to the capability of the soil of Portugal, as well as other wine countries, to produce large quantities of wines, it is only necessary to see what has been the effect in former times, when port wine was the favourite in this country. Mr. Balbi, in his Statistique de Portugal, giving an account of the establishment of the Alto Douro Company, says— The district where the famous wines of the Alto Douro are made, since 1756, under the control of that company, is comprised between the Maris and the Tua, in the provinces of Tras-os-Montes and Beira, along the banks of the Douro, being about one league in width and eight in length. This little space, which before the formation of the company was desert and uncultivated, has become one of the most populous spots in Portugal. The wines of the first quality are generally sold to foreigners, especially to the English; the second class are consumed in the country, or exported to Brazil. Now, it is just these second-quality wines which are very cheap, that would, with a low duty, be consumed largely in this country, and might be produced to an unlimited extent. It is said that the labouring classes in England would not acquire a taste for these new beverages. I would upon this subject simply refer to the evidence given in the blue book by Mr. Short, Mr. Pool, and Mr. Barker, briefly as follows:— Mr. Barker, a licensed victualler, in Holborn, sells retail over the counter, in glasses, a pipe and a half of Port in a week; some drink at the counter, others take it home in small bottles; the principal consumers are small tradesmen, bankers' clerks, and persons of that class, a very large proportion of the sick poor, and clerks and men of an income of 150l. or 200l. a year—what you would call 'skilled labourers.' Amongst these respectable artisans and middle classes he finds that there is a decidedly growing taste for wines, and says, "No question but this consumption would be surprisingly increased with the reduction of duty." Mr. Pool, also a licensed victualler, of London-bridge, draws from the butt port and sherry, and bucellas, in quartern glasses; in this way he sells a pipe in three weeks. If the duty were reduced to 1s., he would do twice as much trade as he does now as regards wines. His customers are of the artisan class, many of them; there are thousands of people who come to his place who would drink wine instead of spirits. He considers that the increased consumption would displace spirits certainly, but not beer. Mr. Short, of the Strand, is able to buy more largely and therefore more cheaply, than any other licensed victualler in London; and, as he makes a proportionate reduction in price to his customers, who are of exactly the same class as with Mr. Pool, he has a larger custom. He draws about 160 pipes a year—more than three pipes a week sometimes; and of this, perhaps two pipes and a half he sells in draught. He draws principally port, sherry, and bucellas, from the butt; champagne, hermitage, and claret, from the bottle; all these he draws in glasses. The people come to the bar and drink it, and walk away. He charges 4d. per quartern glass of port, 7d. per quartern glass of champagne, and 6d. per gill glass of claret. The duty is so much on the French wines, he cannot bring it in. If we could get the duty down on French wines, the people would drink them in preference to port. If we could sell claret at 2d. or 3d. per glass, we should have them in all day; they take a glass of wine however. Bricklayers' labourers, coalheavers, journeymen carpenters, and men of all grades come in and take their glass of wine. You never see anybody drunk in my house; we have a thousand people a day, and not a drunken man amongst them. Irish labourers frequently carry home a bottle of port to their families. I have seen them come miles to get a bottle of draught wine. And this brings me to consider the effect that the use of wine would have upon the moral and social, as well as the sanitary condition of the people; and I am very strongly of opinion that drunkenness would be diminished, and many crimes which result from that odious vice would become of rare occurrence. There can be no doubt, I think, that in a sanitary point of view the use of wine would be advantageous. Now, the most serious practical question remains to be dealt with—namely, the immediate falling-off in the revenue before the increased consumption at the low duty should right itself, and the drawback to be paid for stock in hand. Upon the first question, I can only ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer to commence my system while he has a surplus revenue, whilst he has the power to keep Exchequer-bills at 1d. per diem, and whilst Consols are at par; and little difficulty will be felt as to the second point. I am informed by merchants who have examined the question carefully, that the estimate for drawback would be from 500,000l. to 600,000l.; which might be provided for in debentures to be received in payment of future duties. I will not detain the House by going into the question of adulteration, the great evils arising from the doctoring of wines by retail dealers, by admixture of noxious ingredients; nor into that wide field the manufacture of British wines, amounting to about 600,000 gallons a year, a large portion of which are sold as foreign wines, by which the revenue suffers. I have already occupied so much of the valuable time of the House, that I must express my regret that my zeal in this question should have induced me to trespass at such length. Permit me, in conclusion, to thank the House for the kind and patient hearing it has given me whilst I have so imperfectly endeavoured to lay this subject before it; and I beg Her Majesty's Government to carry out in this respect that system of unrestricted competition and prudent extension of the principles of free trade to which they are so solemnly pledged.

Motion made, and Question proposed— That this House will resolve itself into a Committee, to consider the Import Duties upon Foreign and Colonial Wines, with a view to reduction to one shilling per imperial gallon.

The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, that the character of the hon. Member for Pontefract, and the manner in which he had introduced this important subject to the House, made him most anxious to avoid any appearance of discourtesy to that hon. Gentleman, or of a reserve amounting to discourtesy, which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was afraid, unless he prefaced what he was about to say by an apology of this kind, might possibly appear to have been intended. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would have been most desirous, had it been consistent with his duty, to enter at the present moment upon a full exposition of the views of the Government with regard to the wine duties. He fully agreed with the hon. Gentleman that there were very strong reasons why the views of the Government and the intentions of Parliament on this subject should be made known at the earliest possible moment. It had been the unfortunate destiny of the wine trade, at more periods than one, to be subjected to the annoyance—he might almost say the torture—of this description of uncertainty, an uncertainty grievous in all trades, but especially grievous in the case of a commodity which was subject to a duty bearing so high a proportion to its value, and a commodity, too, which acquired its highest value from being so long kept in store. He was sure, however, the hon. Gentleman, who had shown so much candour in his statement, would appreciate his motives when he said that, having fixed a day on which it would be his duty to declare the intentions of the Government, and to make proposals to the House with respect to the finances of the country in general, it would be a positive departure from his duty if he were now to acquaint the House with what he might then have to state on the subject of the wine trade. The delay which might occur between this day, the 5th of April, and the 18th, would add but little to the evils of the uncertainty which had to this time prevailed. He would promise the hon. Gentleman that when the day for the financial statement arrived, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would either announce a change with regard to the wine duties, or else he would endeavour to show that the Government had been precluded by reasons which it was not in their power to surmount from recommending such a change at the present time. At the present moment he would only tell the hon. Member that there were but few words in his address with which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not thoroughly concur. He was not one of those who thought it impossible or visionary to expect a great extension of the taste for wine, and consumption of wine, among the people of England. On the contrary, it appeared to bins that the present state of the taste of the people in regard to wine was the natural result of our fiscal system in that respect. It appeared to him that there was a growing disposition to drink wine here in spite of the system that had so long prevailed. Considering that wine was one of the great gifts of Providence to man—considering what a place it occupied among the means of his subsistence—considering how many useful and wholesome ends it subserved in connexion with his physical temperament—considering the manner in which it might be used as a competing article with alcoholic spirits: he must confess it was most desirable, if it were possible, to make an important change in the duties upon wine. The extension of trade in Europe—the breaking down of a set of virtual monopolies which we had created, and which aggravated the wine duties—monopolies in favour of particular districts—the stopping of adulteration, and putting down spurious articles brought into demand under colour of a system of high duties: these and other considerations recommended a proposal, he would not say whether that of the hon. Member, but which should bring about an important change in the wine duties. In fact, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) might say he knew no article burdened with a fiscal chain under our financial system with respect to which any stronger reasons for a change could be given. But, most unfortunately, it likewise happened that, strong as were the reasons for alteration, the difficulties were equally pre-eminent. It would be absurd to make a trifling alteration. To make a great alteration, reducing the duty to a low uniform rate, the hon. Member considered would be perfectly safe. He said, "Reduce it from 5s. 9d. to 1s. a gallon, and you would be greatly gainers." [Mr. OLIVEIRA: In a short time.] "A short time" was a convenient phrase. [Mr. OLIVEIRA: In two years.] He had great respect for the hon. Member's word, and almost an equal respect for his opinion; but here was a revenue of 1,750,000l., and, before parting with five-sixths of it, he should like to have either a surplus of a nature which the House thought could properly be so disposed of, or some very good security indeed as to the mode in which the amount was to be made up; and he would frankly say that he did not think the hon. Member's case was quite made good on that vitally essential point. His position and that of persons out of doors was, "Only make the reduction of duty large enough, and you will rapidly recover it all;"—the hon. Member said, in two years; others said, at once. This was matter of opinion. As he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had said, he should not like to part with that revenue without some security; he should like some good and sufficient security—a bond from some of the gentlemen who were so confident—to make up a deficiency, if it should occur. But, as matter of opinion, he would state the ground upon which he demurred to accept the reasoning. He did not think that the taste with respect to wine, or any other article, was to be revolutionised, or materially modified, in a day. The present state of the taste for wine in this country he considered to be the result of the long prevalence of the existing financial system, but he held that you could not alter it essentially, except in the course of years. Two years, he was afraid, hardly amounted to a period such as must be contemplated. We consumed about 6,000,000 gallons, from which we derive an income of 5s. 9d. a gallon. If the duty were to be reduced to 1s., we must have 36,000,000 gallons of foreign wine instead of 6,000,000. He did not think we could consume 36,000,000 gallons until the national taste was, he might say, completely transformed; and he hardly thought the hon. Member himself would say that it would be rational to anticipate so great a change in the national taste within the very short period which he had laid down. Here was to him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) the knot of the question. If the duty could be brought down without loss to the revenue, the matter would be very simple; but if it could not be brought down to a very low rate without a large immediate loss of revenue, then look at your difficulties. Immediately you found those who recommended the reduction competitors with a host of persons recommending reduction upon other articles as important, nay, in some cases more important, upon the whole, to the comfort and welfare of the community. If you said we must sacrifice 1,000,000l. for some years upon wine, you must be prepared to confront those who told you—and told you truly—that with that 1,000,000l. a year you might effect a great reform in the duties upon tea; you might effect something very near a reconstruction of your Customs tariff generally; you might remove that most mischievous duty upon soap; in fact, you might make a multitude of changes, such that he, as one anxious to remove the wine duty, was yet bound to say he was not prepared, under the circumstances of the country as we saw them, or were likely to see them, to make an immediate sacrifice of 1,000,000l. a year for this purpose. There was an intermediate course of attempting to vary the duty, to prevent inequality of operation; but that the hon. Gentleman had not recommended. Upon the whole, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) thought he had gone as far as his duty would allow. He had expressed views with regard to the possible consumption of wine under a different system, and with regard to the strong objections to the present system, which he thought were as decided as those of the hon. Gentleman. With regard to the question of revenue, he had expressed an opinion different from that of the hon. Gentleman, because, though with him he might be disposed think that after a considerable number of years the duty even at 1s. would recover itself, yet, looking upon it as almost certain that such a change would in the first instance involve a very heavy loss of revenue, he thought there were other claims which, in all probability, the House would consider prior and weightier, and upon which, if they had such a revenue to dispose of, they would choose in preference to dispose of it. As he had said, he should think it his duty again to advert to the subject when stating the views of the Government with regard to finance in general; at present, he regretted that he could not go further than he had done to meet the views of the hon. Gentleman and those who concurred with him. There was a collateral point raised which evidently was in the nature, as far as it went, of an aggravation of the difficulties attending this proposal. The hon. Member said that if the duty were to be reduced from 5s. 9d. to 1s., it would be necessary to allow a drawback upon stocks in hand. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would not at present dispute that; but drawbacks upon stocks in hand with respect to Customs duties had been, he might say, abolished, and the case of wine, in his opinion, would not form, under ordinary circumstances, an exception to the general rule. The general rule being established, ought, under ordinary circumstances, to be applied, but he must confess, adverting to the nature of the change proposed, that if the wine duty were reduced from 5s. 9d. to 1s. the case of the wine merchants might be a very strong one, and he would assume that they came to Parliament and that Parliament sanctioned their claim. Of course, however, that claim could not be found upon the Treasury Minute of 1844, the occasion of which was this: Wine at that time was the subject of negotiations with foreign countries, negotiations liable to extend over a course of years, and it would have been most cruel to expect parties to conduct their trade under the pressure of uncertainty for so long; and it would have been cruel to the revenue also, to which, in 1842, 400,000l. or 500,000l. were lost. A Minute was therefore issued, providing that in case of the reduction of the wine duties under treaty drawbacks should be allowed. The case now was different; it was not a reduction under treaty that was proposed. But, assuming that the parties were to ask for and obtain a drawback upon stocks in hand, that was a very serious matter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and to the House. He would not enter into the figures now, but he believed the hon. Gentleman said it was a question of 500,000l. or 600,000l. He said it might be done by debentures; but those debentures were to be receivable for duties in future years, and therefore it would but be draining now the resources of future years. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) must say that, if the case should occur, he hoped the House would determine to provide honestly—not using the term in an offensive sense, but only in a Chancellor-of-the-Exchequer sense—to provide honestly for that heavy expense out of the expenditure of the year, and not throw it upon future years. But, looking at the matter in that view, it was obvious that it constituted a most formidable addition to the loss of 1,000,000l. of revenue which we were to expect in the first instance, and which would thus be raised to 1,500,000l. before we could expect a revolution in the taste for wine upon a reduction of the duty to 1s. He did not remember that there was any other point to which he need advert. In the general views of the hon. Member he concurred; in his wishes with regard to the subject he cordially participated; in his partications of the result he must confess he was unable to follow him; and with respect to the definite intentions of the Government, whatever they might be, his duty would be to reserve any intimation of them until the 18th, when he should have to make the financial statement for the year.

MR. JOHN MACGREGOR

said, he was glad that the hon. Member for Pontefract (Mr. Oliveira) had brought the question of the reduction of the duties upon wines under the consideration of the House; and were it not that there were great finan- cial difficulties in its way, he should at once vote for the hon. Gentleman's proposition. There were, however, other claims quite as important as the lowering of the duties upon wine, which the great commercial interests of this country with justice could make upon whatever surplus revenue might exist. With respect to high Customs duties imposed entirely for the purposes of revenue, he believed that the wise course in the present financial condition of this country would be to reduce those duties gradually. With regard to duties of excise, such as soap, paper, hops, and malt, all levied for revenue only, a partial reduction would be of no practical benefit whatever to the consumer. When you can afford to do so, consistently with the exigencies of the State, you ought to repeal the duty altogether, in order to supersede the presence of the exciseman from the manufacturing premises. Until the income tax was disposed of, he did not think that they ought to call upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer to make any reduction in any duties whatever. In making these observations, however, he did not wish it to be supposed that he differed from the principle which had been laid down by his hon. Friend the Member for Pontefract; but he was of opinion, that after the explanation which had been given by the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, it would be better if his hon. Friend were to consent to withdraw his Motion. He trusted that the duty on wine would be reduced; and he also hoped that the duty on soap would soon be abolished altogether, for he knew of no tax at the present day imposed upon the people of this country which was so pernicious in its effects as that which was levied upon soap. This relief, however, could not be effected until the income tax were reimposed, he hoped in a more equitable form, and until 1860, that is, when the terminable annuities should fall in.

MR. MOFFATT

said, that after the excellent speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, embracing everything that could be said in favour of a reduction, he regretted to find that he spoke only in a Chancellor-of-the-Exchequer sense, and that there was, after all, but a dim and distant prospect of the wine duties being reduced. The right hon. Gentleman said that if be could satisfy himself that there was a reasonable prospect of increased consumption following a reduction, his difficulty would be removed. The analogy of other nations showed that the difficulty was more imaginary than real. In Paris the consumption was about 218 bottles per head per annum, the duty being about 10d. per gallon. Even in the Hanseatic towns, where the duty was much higher than in Paris, the consumption was 28 bottles per head. It was the opinion of experienced commercial men that a reduction to 2s. per gallon would be very beneficial. On looking at the returns recently laid before that House he found that the annual value of gloves imported from France was 80,000l., of watches imported 100,000l., of potatoes 400,000l., things for which France was not particularly distinguished. Such circumstances, when taken in connexion with the fact that only 70,000l. worth of wine was imported per annum, were well worthy of the right hon. Gentleman's consideration.

MR. HUME

said, he thought the Motion had not been unproductive. They had heard the right hon, Chancellor of the Exchequer denouncing the tax; and the first step towards getting rid of an evil was the admission of its existence. As the right hon. Gentleman had said the tax was as bad as the hon. Member (Mr. Oliveira) represented it; that was a pledge to remove it whenever he could. But he was really in a condition to begin the reduction directly; that was proved by the result of the reduction in the sugar duty. There was no part of our financial arrangements so injurious as that which taxed the innocent beverage of the people. High taxation on beer tended to demoralise the people. We had made food cheap, we ought to make drink cheap, and, when we had 26,000,000 gallons of spirits annually consumed, the Government ought to look to the matter. As the price of malt had been raised, the consumption of spirits had increased. That the greatest advantage would result from grappling manfully with Excise and Customs duties was proved by experience in regard to the reductions begun by Sir Robert Peel; for the Customs and Excise duties exceeded by about 2,000,000l. what they were before those changes were made. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was right never to be without a surplus; but he was placed in his present office that he might apply his superior knowledge to making the best arrangements for the revenue. Experience showed that these heavy duties limited the consumption and the enjoyment of the community; the members of the community were entitled to the utmost enjoy- ment consistent with the maintenance of the revenue; and the object was to give the community all the security that could be given for the revenue, and the members of the community all the enjoyment that could be had consistent with that security. The time, he hoped, was approaching when Parliament would be enabled to deal with a great many of our taxes—with taxes to which, for every 1l. that the public ought to pay, they paid 2l. or 3l. in consequence of the mode in which those taxes were levied, or the irregular way in which they came to be charged on the consumer. The heavy pressure of the duties on spirits and tobacco was contrary to all just principles, encouraging immorality, and depriving the legal trader of the advantage he ought to possess. He held the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the position which the right hon. Gentleman had taken on the wine duties. Before resuming his seat he wished to call attention to the situation in which hon. Members were placed by Acts of that House. When a great increase of expenditure took place, he warned the House that they were wasting the public means. He believed the alarm of last Session led to that increase. He made no objection, because there was no standing against the flood. When you saw people mad, you could only get out of the way. The people seemed to him to be mad, and the Ministers on both sides went with them. Some said do one thing, and some another, and the result of that system of seesaw was, that Parliament had laid out 1,000,000l. on the militia, and 1,000,000l. on fortifications. He did not blame the Chancellor of the Exchequer so much as the House of Commons. He hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would take an enlightened and bold view of the system of taxation, and would not be frightened by the apprehension of losing a few thousands; but if he were going to throw away 150,000l. on a school of design, and 100,000l. on this fortification and 100,000l. on that fortification, his surplus would be but small.

MR. DUNCAN

said, that he had occasion lately to wait upon the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade to deliver to him a memorial from the Chamber of Commerce in Dundee, which fully explained the effect of a prohibitive French tariff, not alone upon the trade of that town, but also of several other towns both in Scotland and in Ireland. In that memorial there was a statement of the quantity of linen which had been manufactured in the trade for twenty-one consecutive years; and he wished to call the attention of the right hon. Chancellor of the Exchequer to the effect which the importation of French wines into this country at a reduced rate of duty would have, not simply upon our revenue, but upon the manufacturing industry of the people. In the year 1834, the amount derived from the quantity of linen exported from Great Britain was only 51,000l., and from the quantity of linen-yarn only 31,000l.; but the moment the tariff was reduced, the quantity rapidly increased. In 1842 the amount of linen exported from this country was 8,586,667 yards, which yielded a return of 270,000l.; being a considerable advance upon the amount in the year 1834. Now, it was obvious that this country had a great interest in increasing that trade; but instead of fostering the importation of French wines in order to effect that desirable object, a prohibitive duty had been placed upon those wines, and the consequence was that the French had imposed an additional duty upon our linen manufactures; the import of which into France had consequently fallen, and thus materially affecting our trade in that article. The House had, therefore, something more to consider in the present instance than the mere question of revenue; and he was of opinion that the Chancellor of the Exchequer could do nothing better than to effect a reduction in the duty upon French wines, so that our linen trade might be benefited; and he had little hesitation in saying, that by taking such a step, the right hon. Gentleman would be conferring a lasting benefit upon the community at large.

MR. OLIVEIRA,

in reply, said, that taking into consideration the terms in which the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had opposed the Motion, he could not refuse to withdraw it. The right hon. Gentleman had given him some encouragement by admitting the wisdom of reduction as soon as practicable; but out of doors the impression produced upon the wine trade by what had been said that night would be, that the right hon. Gentleman did not intend to assent to such a Motion at present.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.