ment whatever, publishing it to the world, that our fixed determination was the deftruction of the Government of France

Mr. Gregor rofe, and ftated to the House fome particulars of the propofed taxes, which he did not perfectly underftand from the fpeech of the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and begged to have a further explanation.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in explanation, faid, that it was proposed to raife 4,500,000l. as voted in laft Parliament for war taxes; and it was propofed in the prefent feffion to add the fum of to 6,100,000l. the former, as the growing produce of the confolidated fund to the 4th of April 1804. He faid, that this was not the time for entering into a minute confideration of what the hon. Member had alluded to; and he owned that he could not at present do it with fufficient accuracy to fatisfy the Houfe as to every particular information which might be required; but he was perfectly ready and willing at present, if it was infisted on, to ftate the grounds on which he founded the ftatement which he had fubmitted to the Committee of Ways and Means, previous to the Christmas recefs. The hon. Gentleman who had ftated, that he (the Chancellor) had held out to Parliament expectations of a furplus arifing from the confolidated fund of 1,500,0001. had been mistaken in making fuch a statement, for no fuch expectations were ever held out by him to that effect. There were two refolutions which he begged to advert to more particularly :-As to the duty on wine, it was propofed to make it the fame as in the year 1795, and he had therefore ftated it at 101. per tun, which would produce no less than half a million to Government. As to the duty on tea, he had before stated that it was intended to propofe an augmentation equalto the whole amount of the fubfifting duties, which would make it 45 per cent. ad valorem on the finer kind, and 15 per cent. on the coarfer, which would produce one million three hundred thousand pounds. He begged, however, to mention, that from the prefent refolutions it would appear, that a duty of no less than 45 per cent was at first intended to be impofed upon all teas, both fine and coarfe, by which it was left in the power of the Committee to reduce the taxation, if they thought proper, in the manner which he had propofed, and which he had juft now re-stated. The reafon why this duty had been put fo down in the refolut tions was, that it had been at firft fuggefted to him, that by making a difference in the taxation on the fine and the coarfe

coafe tea, it would be a means of affording an inducement to dealers in that article to adulterate the fine, so as to comprehend it within the inferior defcription. This, however, he had thought moft proper to leave to the confideration of the House.

Mr. William Smith rofe, he faid, only to lay in his claim to oppofe, an fome future day, feveral of the taxes in detail; for however much he might approve of the fyftem of war taxes in general, he was ftill inclined to think that there were many articles of luxury, even pernicious articles of luxury, which ought with equal propriety to be taxed, as well as thofe which had been stated to the Houle.

Mr. Baftard obferved, that he fincerely, hoped the right hon. Member would prove himself to be as vigorous and determined in fpending the money properly, as he had been in ftating and calculating the fum which he had found prudent to exact.

Mr. W. Dundas stated, that as the barley in Scotland was of an inferior quality when compared with that produced in England, if the duty on that article were to be the tame in both countries, it would injure the agriculture in Scotland, by difcouraging the cultivation of it. He therefore should propofe, that the duty on barley in Scotland fhould be half of that to be impofed in England.

Sir R. Buxton faid, he was one of those who would votę fufficient fums for carrying on the war, but he thought it thould be done with as much regard to public convenience as poffible. Inftead of the tax on barley, he would recommend an additional ftamp duty on country bank notes.

Mr. Ferguson adverted to the inferiority of Scotch barley, and thought the tax was too high.

Sir W. Elford found fault with the tax on land.

General Gafcovne faid, every Gentleman took that oppor tunity of mentioning his difapprobation of fuch taxes as they did not like, and he should therefore exprefs his objection to the tax on fugar, which he thought was now become a neceffary of life, and which he thought was infinitely too high.

Lord G. L. Gower expreffed his difapprobation and furprife at the duty on malt. After the number of peutions which had been prefented against it last year, he was aflonifhed the right hon. Gentieman fhould think of making fo heavy an addition to it.

Y 2

Mr.

Mr. Balbington faid, he could not avoid taking that opportunity of giving his decided difapprobation of the lottery, which he confidered as highly prejudicial to the morals of the people, and a mode of raifing money which, in a commercial country like this, fhould not be reforted to, as it encouraged gaming, and, in fact, in fome degree, went fo far as to legalife it, though the law was very fevere against every other fpecies of gambling.

Mr. Johnstone faid, that notwithstanding fo many hon, Gentlemen had given their decided opinion in favour of railing a certain and confiderable part of the fupplies within the year, he could not bring himfelf to fee that meafure in the fame point of view. This he knew, that it had been the practice of all nations to raife money by loans as long as they could. He could not but object to the whole of the ways and means; for large and unprecedented as the demands were which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had made on the country, he was convinced in his own mind they would not anfwer. Reafoning, he faid, upon all cxperience, it was too much to affume that the old taxes thall be as productive as they were before. He then went into a confideration of the taxes as laid down by the right hon. Gentleman, and contended that from the statement of the right hon. Gentleman there would be a deficieney of two millions. He afked how the right hon. Gentleman, could pretend to fay the annual expence would be only 26 millions? The eftablishment of 100,000 feamen was not complete, nor would be this year. It was the fame with our army and militia: fo that, he contended, the expences of the war this year only, would be 30 millions. For taking three quarters of a year, the cofts incurred could not be less than 26 millions; and from that confideration he infifted that he had a right to affume, that the war cannot be carried on at a lefs expence than 40 millions a year. He faid, he did not fcruple to give his opinion that we might at this moment have been at peace, either by permitting Malta to remain for a term of years in our hands, or by ceding it into thofe of Ruffia; and he could not but condemn Minifters for having plunged the country into a war, as he thought it of very little confequence whether Malta was in the hands of the Ruffians or in our own.

Mr. Vanft art begged leave to make a few obfervations on what had fallen from the hon. Gentleman who spoke last. He asked the hon. Gentleman if he could lay his hand on

his heart and fay, that if peace had been preferved by giving up Malta, that peace could have been preferved fix months longer? He infifted the hon. Gentleman was very far out in his calculation, when he contended that the war would cost 40 millions a year, for that no one year of the last war, even the most expenfive, had coft more than 35 millions. He faid the hon. Gentleman had not stated the matter fairly, when he had faid that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had eftimated this year at no more than 26 millions; the proportion laid down for England and Ireland was 27 millions for the former, and little more than three millions for the latter, which was taking it one million higher than his right hon. Friend had done. He then went into a statement of the fums which the Government had to meet the feveral exigencies, viz.

£6,500,000 } 2,700,000

500,000 12,500,000

22,200,0001.

So that the whole expenditure of the war wouid be completely defrayed; and he hoped that until peace can be con cluded with honour and fecurity to the country, the Houfe will not be induced to lofe fight of thofe effectual means which had been so unanimously reforted to, and which could not fail to enable us to profecute the war with vigour and cffe&t.

Mr. Barwell said, that in the prefent critical fituation of the country, he was of opinion that the Houfe fhould be liberal in voting fupplies. If a twentieth is wanted it thould be given, and if that won't do, Minifters ought to have more. He thought, however, there ought to be an equal tax on fugar in general; and he had no doubt he thould be able to prove, that the intereft of the revenue, and every other confideration, require the tax to be on the value, and not on the quantum.

Mr. Babbington explained.

Mr. Moore faid, that whatever the taxes of the country. amounted to, they must be paid; and it was much to the honour and happinefs of the country to refled, that the opinion was unanimous, of our being very well able to pay them.

Mr. Fuller thought the tax on fugars would bear very hard on the planters, and that if the islands were vitited by

droughts,

droughts, to which they were fometimes liable, they would find it very difficult to pay it.

Mr. Johnstone faid, that in anfwer to the queftion put to him by an hon. Gentleman (Mr. Vanfittart), he thought the peace would have held fix months, and that it was as Jikely to have held as any peace we can make now. He had been charged with holding out the language of def pondency, but he thought there was a charge of a much more mifchievous kind attributable to others, which was that of inflaming the minds of the people in order to plunge them into a war, the effects and confequences of which they will long and feverely feel. He contended that the statements of the hon. Secretary were not correct.

Mr. Vanfittart explained.

Mr. Dent afked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why foreigners were excepted from the tax on funded property?

The Chancellor of the Exchequer faid, he wished foreigners to be excepted because they were not chargeable with any other tax. The principle on which British fubjects were taxed in this refpect was, because they were liable to all other taxes, and it was his object at prefent to tax all British property in as equal a degree as poffible. Foreigners were not reprefented in that Houfe, but placed a confidence in the honour and juftice of the nation, and therefore he thought foreigners were well entitled to the exemption from this tax, and to receive their dividend without any diminu tion whatfoever.

Mr. Dent acquiefced in the juftice of the argument, and reafons given by the right hon. Gentleman; but thought it might be productive of confiderable frauds, as British fubjects might place large fums in the funds in foreign names, and by that means evade the tax.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer admitted, that the matter would require great precaution; but ftill the exception was abfolutely neceffary. What precaution would be requifite, however, it was not now the proper time to difcufs.

Mr. Calcraft faid, he thought the exception was highly honourable to the character of the nation, as well as to the right hon. Gentleman who had made it. He confidered this as an income tax, not as a tax on the funds, otherewife foreigners would be liable to it. He thought the property of those who have placed money in the funds from national confidence, and who were not reprefented in that Houfe, thould be held facred, and specially protected, and fuch a conduct

was