8 5 8 
THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST, [June i, 1888. 
which the reduction of the duty would cause ought to 
be filled by increased contributions from the land. 
Mr. Illingworth thought that the amount con- 
tributed to the Imperial revenue by the working classes 
was too large. The taxes they paid upon beer, spirits, 
tea, and tobacco were almost oppressive. In the past 
Several taxes of this kind had been reduced and Parlia- 
ment had for many years set its face firmly against any- 
thing in the direction of socalled fair trade. The Chan- 
cellor of the Exchequer would no doubt ask those 
who proposed to abolish the tea duty how they would 
suggest that the deficit should be made up ? Let the 
reduction in the income-tax be postponed and, if neces- 
sary, let the penny taken off last year be replaced. 
(Hear.) This tax fell upon the income-drawing and 
propertied classes and their claim should be subordi- 
nated to the more pressing claims of the working 
classes. (Hear, hear.) The Chancellor of the Exchequer 
bad stated that he thought the income-tax ought to 
be reserved to meet war expenses, but since, in time 
of war, the greatest sufferers would be the working 
classes, the income-tax in time of peace could not be 
put to better use than in removing the burdens on 
the necesaries of life. (Hear.) Tea was a necessary of 
life among the working classes, and it would be an act 
of equity and of true wisdom to abolish or at any 
rate reduce the excessively high tax now placed upon 
it. To do so would also bring the right hon. gentleman 
as muob popularity as he could secure by reducing 
the income-tax. The payers of income-tax, however, 
were much more in touch with Chancellors of the 
Exchequer than the working classes, and hence the 
claims of the latter did not receive that attention to 
which they were entitled. 
The Chancelloe of the Exchequer said that 
income-taxpayers brought no preasure to bear on the 
Chancellor of the Exchequer and were the most long- 
suffering of all taxpayers. It ought always to be borne 
in mind, however, that the income-tax had been suc- 
cessively raised for the purpose of metting an emer- 
gency, and it seemed only to be just, quite apart from 
any question of popularity to which the hon. member 
had referred, that if it was raised to meet an emer- 
gency it ought to be lowered when the emergency had 
passed away. (Hear, hear.) He quite agreed with the 
hon. member that it would be a most popular thing 
to reduce the tax on tea, and this showed that in 
the course Her Majesty's Government had taken in 
not reducing the tea duty but in reducing the in- 
come-tax they had been iufluenced by a regard for 
what was best in the interests of finance and not 
by any considerations as to popularity. (Hear, hear.) 
The hon. member for Leicester alluded with regret to 
the faot that the consumption of tea had not shown 
as much increase as might be desired. Such increase 
was "fairly satisfactory but not very satisfactory," as 
he had occasion once before to remark. But it ought 
to be borne in mind that this was in some degree due 
to the importation of Indian teas displacing the 
Chinese teas and to the fact that Indian teas were 
much stronger. (Hear.) He was informed that a 
pound of Indian tea produced more cups of tea than 
a pound of Chinese tea would produce, and this 
naturally had some effect in diminishing the quan- 
tity of tea used. He did not desire to de- 
preciate the suggestion made by the hon. member. 
On the contrary, he thought it would be extremely 
desirable that the tax should not be totally abolished 
but reduced. (Hear, hear.) He would not like to abolish 
altogether a tax like this, because the machinery for 
its collection being thus terminated it was the more 
difficult to re-impose it. (Hear.) If he had the 
necessary number of millions to spare he would much 
prefer to reduce both the tea duty and the tobacco 
duty than to abolish entirely the tea duty. (Hear, 
hear.) He was sure every member would be glad to 
seo the time come when progress would be made in 
the reduction of duty on consumable articles. The 
hon. member for Kirkcaldy spoke as if there were 
a growing tendency to throw taxation on the work- 
ing and to relieve the wealthy classes, and the hon. 
member for Bradford spoke rather in the same di- 
rection ; but he would place some figures before the 
Committee — not in a controversial spirit, but in order 
that the facts might be known. The total of the 
taxes on consumable articles hid fallen from about 
£43,000,000 in 1876-7 to about £41,000,000 in 1887-3 
or about £2,000,000. The taxation per head on con- 
sumable articles had fallen from £1 6s to £1 2s 3d. 
He rejoiced in that fact, but the same time he 
would call the attention of the Committee to the 
fact that the taxation on property and the earnings 
of the professional classes — he meant the death duties, 
stamps on transfers, house-tax, and income-tax had 
inereased £12,000,000, or 71 per cent. That was 
after the reductions had been made on the sugar 
duties. At the same time there had been an increase 
in rates, which fell to a great extent on the wealthy 
classes, and which, therefore, swelled the increase of 
taxation upon them. From that expenditure on rates 
the working classes had derived a very considerable 
advantage. For instance, in the matter of education 
the whole increase of taxation went to the advan- 
tage of the working class. (Hear, hear.) They had 
only so far to a slight extent been relieving the 
wealthier classes of some of the additional burdens im- 
posed during the last few years. He made a proposal 
this year to relieve the income-tax payers of a million 
and a half, a large proportion of which would go to 
the benefit of persons with small incomes, but a por- 
tion would go to relieve the wealthy classes. He 
proposed also the duties on wines and on foreign 
securities and other transactions amounting to £500,000, 
which would fall exclusively on the well-to-do classes. 
He thought, therefore, he might fairly contend they 
had not been drawn in the direction of relieving 
the well-to-r?o at the expense of the working classes, 
which would be entirely contrary to the financial 
principles they professed. (Hear, hear.) He had used 
an argument to which he adhered, which was that the 
income-tax was a valuable reserve in times of emergency, 
and there he thought he had the support of his right 
hon. friend the member for Mid Lothan, There was the 
great difference between the two sorts of taxes, that the 
income-tax could be put on at a moment's notice, 
whereas in the case of putting any additional duties on 
consumable articles, it was generally some time before 
full effect could be given to them. There existed the 
greatest difference of opinion as to the manner in which 
the gap left by taking off the taxes on consumable ar- 
ticles should be met. One hon. member had suggested 
retrenchment. The Government were only too anxi- 
ous to economize, so far as the efficient administra- 
tion of the affairs of the State would allow, and would 
resist as much as any member of that Committee any 
extravagance beyond that point ; but he did not think 
that by any possible retrenchment the gap could be 
filled up. Hard cases had been put where persons 
spent a large proportion of their earnings on tea, but 
such cases occurred under almost every duty. Nor could 
he admit the force of another argument — viz., that in 
proportion as the price of the article had fallen the duty 
should be decreased ; for if the consumer had to pay 
less for his tea he was not entitled to look upon it as 
a grievance that the duty had remained the same as 
before. (Hear, hear.) He was brought nearer to the 
cheap breakfast table which was desired. An hon. 
member had said that tea could be bought for 4Jd per 
lb., but he was afraid that very few poor persons had the 
beuefit of that price, and that the advantage of that cheap 
price went into the pockets of the middleman. (Hear, 
hear.) It would be satisfactory to him if it should 
happen that during his tenure of the office he now 
held he could make a reduction in the taxes re- 
ferred to. (Cheers.) 
Sir W. Hakcourt thought his hon. friend the mem- 
ber for Leicester was quite entitled to give emphasis 
to that subject. It was an unfortunate thing that 
there should be a proposal of which the relief went 
almost exclusively to the propertied classes. (Minis- 
terial cries of " No, no.") The Chancellor of the 
Exchequer had pointed out why he thought there 
ought to be this relief, and no one could deny the 
fact. Unquestionably it was a circumstance in which 
this Budget was distinguished from former Budgets. 
The right hon. gentleman had referred to the in- 
crease of contribution of what might be called the 
