ADJOURNED DEBATE. (Hansard, 9 May 1861)

§ MR. BENTINCK
said, that in rising he did not wish to interfere at any length with the progress of the debate which might arise on this Motion. He rose for the purpose of repeating an attempt in which he had twice before been unsuccessful, but which he hoped would on the third occasion have that result which perseverance was proverbially said to deserve. His object was to accomplish what many hon. Members would agree with him in thinking one of the most difficult of human undertakings—namely, to obtain a direct answer from the Treasury bench. It would be in the recollection of many hon. Members that he had very lately during these debates asked the noble Lord at the head of the Government whether, in the opinion of Her Majesty's Ministers the present posture of affairs in the United States was not such as to induce them to apprehend that increased armaments might be required on the part of this country, and also whether the distress likely to ensue from a short supply of cotton would not in all probability act most unfavourably both on our Customs and Excise revenue? When he first 1765 had the honour of putting that question the noble Lord certainly avoided, if he did not evade the question; and, indeed, he afterwards admitted that his reply was not very explicit, because he said he thought he had answered the question" by implication"—a very unsatisfactory mode of meeting so important an interrogatory. The noble Lord went on to answer a portion, and only a portion, of his question, and finished by saying that he hoped the Customs' duties would not materially suffer in cousequence of the events now going on in the United States. The question went further and referred also to the probable diminution of Excise duties, and of that point the noble Lord entirely lost sight. When he first asked his questions he reminded the noble Lord that the whole aspect of affairs had changed since the earlier discussions upon the Budget, in consequence of the alarming news from the United States; and he still submitted that as a ground for putting the questions again to the noble Lord, and asking whether the intelligence that had arrived had or had not altered the views of the Government as to the propriety or the security of the financial arrangements which they had proposed. If the circumstances which intervened between the first discussion of the Budget and the day upon which he originally asked his questions were such as to alter the state of affairs and to justify him in putting those questions, the news which had arrived that day placed affairs in a still more remarkable position. On the last occasion when he put the questions, he asked the noble Lord his opinion as to the anticipated failure of the cotton crop; but he found this day in the second edition of The Times intelligence so alarming and decisive that it appeared to him that the questions which he had put three days since to the noble Lord had now acquired tenfold importance "Planting is neglected "—

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER:
Where does that news come from?

§ MR. BENTINCK:
From America.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER:
From what part—from the South?

§ MR. BENTINCK:
The intelligence comes from America. ["Read,"] He was reading the telegram when he was interrupted by the right hon. Gentleman. The telegram stated "planting is neglected in the South. The growing crops are in danger from want of cultivation." It ap- 1766 peared to him, then, that the danger which had so long threatened had at last arrived. It was quite clear, if that intelligence was reliable, that the time had come when they must fairly consider what would be the consequences to this country of a short supply of cotton from the United States, and he hoped neither the House nor the Government would overlook the magnitude of the question. On the strength of this intelligence he would now repeat his questions—whether the Government anticipated a probability, in the present state of affairs in the United States, of a necessity for increased armament on the part of this country, either naval or military; and also whether, in consequence of the news which had just reached this country as to the probable failure of the supply of cotton from the United States, Her Majesty's Government were or were not of opinion that the diminished supply of cotton was likely to produce great distress in the manufacturing districts, and to materially affect the revenue both from Customs and Excise? He hoped the noble Lord would not this time forget the question as to the Excise.

§ MR. CRAWFORD
observed that the telegram quoted by the hon. Gentleman was of just three days later date than the intelligence last received. Did the hon. Gentleman really think that it was possible that in the space of three days the cultivation of cotton in America could have ceased. It was necessary to receive with great caution telegrams arriving at this moment, when the cotton market was in such an excited state. He ventured to say that the telegram which had been quoted was nothing else than a cotton market telegram, intended only to send up the cotton market.

§ MR. DISRAELI:
I wish to take this opportunity of making a few remarks as to the course of public business in relation to these Resolutions. It is always difficult to combine fair discussion with an equally fair consideration of the progress of public business which is due to her Majesty's Government. With respect to the question before the House, many hon. Gentlemen have challenged the policy of the Government as expressed in these Resolutions, and others have objected to the mode of procedure by which it is intended to carry out that policy; and some Gentlemen there are who object to both. I am quite alive to the inconvenience of entering upon a fresh discussion now, if the public interests require us to proceed ex- 1767 peditiously with these Resolutions, and after the opinion which has been expressed by the Government, that it is an object of importance to bring their Bill before the House, I am prepared, and would recommend to those of my friends who may choose to listen to my advice—if the Government will give a fair opportunity for discussing the Bill on its second reading,—in that case, we should not oppose the Report of those Resolutions; but it must be with a full understanding that Members shall have a fair opportunity of expressing their opinion, and of taking any course which they may think it their duty to take with reference to the policy of the Government. If the Government are prepared to meet us in that spirit, and will at once say for what day the second reading of the Bill when brought up shall be fixed, and if that be an occasion which shall be fair to Members on both sides, I should be quite disposed to assist the views of the Government in respect to the Report of these Resolutions, and will accept the occasion to which I have adverted as one upon which we can enter upon a full discussion of the whole policy and procedure of the Government.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER:
The right hon. Gentleman is right in saying that the Government have stated that in their view it is decidedly for the public advantage to expedite the disposal of this question, especially after the delay which has taken place, which I do not seek to blame, but which certainly has been unusual, and, therefore, on that account I am desirous to get forward with the business. It is plain and undeniable that the House, or any portion of the House, is entitled, if it thinks fit, to demand a fair opportunity for debate upon the second reading. Upon this account, and as it is not probable that there will be a clear opportunity for the second reading to-morrow, we propose to introduce the Bill this evening, and to place the second reading for the first Order of the Day on Monday—a day which, I think, will be most convenient to all parties.

§ MR. DISRAELI:
I think the proposition a fair one, and I shall not object to the Resolutions being reported.

§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTON:
With the permission of the House I should like to give a reply to the question put to me by the hon. Member for Norfolk (Mr. Bentinck). The hon. Member asked me first, Whether the Government are of opinion 1768 that the recent events in North America would lead to the necessity for increasing the present military or naval force of this country? I think I answered that upon a former occasion in the negative. I do not anticipate that anything now passing in America is likely to require any additions to our naval or military establishments. Then I am asked, whether the events now passing in America are likely to diminish the duties upon Customs below the amount calculated by my right hon. Friend? My answer is I do not anticipate that those events will have any such effect. The hon. Member then asks me whether, in our opinion, these events are likely to interfere injuriously with the Excise duties? I can only repeat a similar answer, and say that I do not anticipate that those events will have any such effect, so as to damage the calculations of my right hon. Friend.

§ MR. NEWDEGATE
said, he wished to call the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to a petition very numerously signed, and having reference to the Resolution respecting the allowing wholesale dealers in spirits to sell single bottles by retail. He should be glad to know whether he intended to include the whole of his financial propositions in one Bill; because, if so, although he should not at present take the sense of the House upon the subject of the petition, yet he should, when they were in Committee, propose to divide the Bill into two or more parts?

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
said, there was no intention on the part of the Government to include the Resolution referred to in the principal Bill. That Resolution, and the one relating to hawkers and pedlars' licences, although they were of a financial character and moved in Committee of Ways and Means, yet as they involved other matters, such as those of police, they would be placed in a second Bill embodying the administrative details, and then the hon. Gentleman would have a full opportunity of objecting to the proposition. He wished to inform the right hon. Baronet the Member for Petersfield (Sir William Jolliffe) that what he stated on a former evening in reference to the consumption of spirits on the premises was quite accurate—namely, that the alteration would be confined to the consumption of spirits off the premises.