Mr Osborne was right. No ministry, had there been a decent Opposition, could have stood such an exposure. We even go further; for we believe that—but for the French revolution, and the universal turbulence abroad, which rendered it absolutely necessary that this country should maintain a firm front, and exhibit no symptoms of internal weakness or discord—the present ministry could not have existed for another fortnight. As it is, we are in some respects glad that they have continued in office; because, though late, they have been called upon to act under circumstances which, in future, may give a new and improved tone to Whig political opinions.
Before quitting the budget, let us say a word or two regarding future financial prospects. It is no doubt possible that trade may revive—though, from the present aspect of European affairs, we are not inclined to be at all sanguine in our expectations. We cannot, it is quite clear, reduce our effective establishments; for no one can say what emergency may arise to make us, not mere spectators, but active partisans in a contest which we shall deeply and long deplore. Economy we may practise at home, and for once we are of Joseph’s mind. There are items in our civil and pension list clearly superfluous and undefensible, and we wish to see these removed, though with a just regard to vested interests and claims. We are no admirers of such antiquated offices as that of Hereditary Grand Falconer; and we think that Mr MacGregor’s inquiry, as to the heirs of the Duke of Schomberg, who for a century and a half have been billeted upon the country to the tune of three thousand a-year, deserved at least a courteous reply from so very determined an economist as the Premier formerly proclaimed himself. A doorkeeper may surely be maintained at a less annual expense than the income of a country gentleman; and in many departments even of government, we have certainly been over lavish of remuneration. But these retrenchments, though they may give satisfaction to the nation, can never free it from its embarrassments. The revenue has clearly sunk to a point when it must be augmented by some decided and effective measure; and it will well become us all to consider, even without reference to past disputes, from what quarter the supply is to come. If the decision, or at all events the expressed feeling, of the House of Commons can be taken as an index of the popular wish, the nation will not submit to an augmentation of the income-tax. No increased duties upon excise can be levied,—indeed the cry is general for the removal of those which exist. The window-tax—though it might be materially improved by a more equitable arrangement, and by rating great houses without any graduated scale—is decidedly unpopular. In fact, all direct taxation is of an obnoxious character—it is the fertile source of murmur and of discontent, and it never can be adjusted so as to render it palatable to the payer.
From what quarter, then, is it possible for us to recruit our revenue? How are we to provide for casualties, and for a possibly increased expenditure? That question must be solved in one way or the other, and that without lack of time. It will not do to go on from year to year with a continually increasing deficit, the arrears of which shall be passed to the capital of our national debt—we must raise money, and the only question is, how to do it.
Within the last six years, says Sir Charles Wood, the nation has remitted seven and a half millions of annual taxation: since the peace, says Lord John Russell, more than thirty-nine millions of annual taxes have been removed. Highly satisfactory this, no doubt—but what does it prove? Simply that we have pushed the abolition of indirect taxation too far. We have gone on, year after year, lowering tariffs, for the purpose of stimulating foreign trade. We have thereby unquestionably increased our imports, but we have failed in giving any thing like a corresponding buoyancy to our exports. Why we did this is not very difficult of comprehension, if we look attentively to the state of party which has subsisted for the last few years in this country.
Free-trade, in so far as it lessens the cost of production, is clearly the interest of the master-manufacturer who exports for the foreign market; but, we repeat, it is the interest of no one else in the community. Free-trade in certain articles,—that is, in raw material introduced to this country for the purpose of being manufactured, sold at home, or exported—is just and commendable. Free-trade in what are called the necessaries of life, such as corn and cattle, does not tend to the wealth of the country; but, for the present, we shall leave that subject in abeyance. Free-trade in luxuries and in manufactured goods, whenever these latter displace the home labourer in the home market, we hold to be utterly injurious, and we shall presently state our reasons.
The Manchester school have adopted, preached, and insisted upon free trade in all these branches. It was their interest to push the cotton trade to its utmost possible limits, and to undersell all competitors in every accessible market. Hence their favourite doctrine of cheapness, which in appearance is so plausible, but which actually is so fallacious, and the pertinacity with which they have continued to preach it up. Hence the League, in the formation of which they displayed such undoubted energy, and the immense sums which they lavished for the popular promulgation of their creed. To conciliate these men, swollen to a formidable number, and maintaining their opinions with extreme plausibility, and no ordinary share of talent, became an important object to the leaders who were then at the head of the two great parties of the state. It is in vain to deny that a large body of the middle classes were concerned in this movement, and, to gain their votes and support, the unholy race for power began.
Hence our legislation, whether under Peel or Russell, has been directed for the last six or seven years invariably to one point. The man who could boast of having removed the greatest amount of taxation was sure to be the popular favourite; and we all know in what manner, and by what means, Sir Robert Peel accomplished his share of the work. He first, on the assurance that it was to be merely temporary, obtained an income-tax, amply sufficient to redeem the financial deficit which was the legacy of his predecessors. He next proceeded to make that income-tax permanent, by paring at, and reducing the tariffs; and finally, in order that his rival might not have the start of him in popularity, he threw his party overboard, and consented to the abolition of the corn-laws.
But there is a point beyond which taxation cannot possibly be remitted; and that point Sir Robert Peel had reached before he retired from office. True, the effect of his measures had not yet become apparent, but they were foreseen by many, and perhaps not unsuspected by himself towards the close of his tenure of office. Further than as being consenting parties to those reckless sacrifices of revenue, it would be unfair to charge the Whigs with having brought us into our present perplexity. Sir Robert Peel is the real author of this, and he cannot escape the responsibility.
Now upon two points—viz., the introduction of raw material for manufacture, and of articles of food—we shall for the present forbear joining issue with the free-traders. But the third one, that of the admission of foreign manufactured goods at nearly nominal rates of duty, is far too important to be passed over, even at the risk of repetition.
The industry of this country is not confined to a few, but flows through a thousand channels. There are, however, about four great trades in which Britain can at present, owing to her mineral wealth, machinery, and capital, compete with decided advantage against any other country in the world. These are the cotton, the linen, the woollen, and the iron trade, the exports of which articles amount to rather more than TWO-THIRDS of the whole exports of the United Kingdom, or in round numbers from thirty-three to thirty-five millions annually. It is to the unceasing agitation of men connected with these trades that we owe the erection of the League, and the progress of free trade which has brought us to so low a condition.