« ForrigeFortsett »
BRITISH SUBJECTS IN FOREIGN STATES. There were (males and females together) in Greece, 1,068 ; in Russia, 2,783 ; in the Sardinian States, 1,069; in European Turkey, 611; the Two Sicilies, 1,414; China, 649; Persia, 33; Alexandria, 155; Cairo, 85; Tripoli, 23; Belgium, 3,828; France, 20,357; Saxony, 321; Asiatic Turkey, 624; Mexico, 755. From other countries no returns were received.–Census, 1851.
HOUSE OF COMMONS, MONDAY, MAY 8, 1854. Mr. Gladstone developed the views of the Government respecting the existing state of the finances. The statement he had made on the 6th of March showed that, with the additional half-year's income-tax, the total revenue would be 56,656,0001., and the expenditure 56,189,0001., leaving a surplus of 467,0001. Since then, new estimates had been framed for the navy, the army, the ord. nance, and the militia, which left an amount to be provided for of 6,000,0001. Some provision must be made besides for unknown charges; he put down for this a sum of 850,0001. (in addition to 1,250,0001. already estimated under this head), for which sum he should ask a vote of credit, applicable to services which might arise in the course of the war. The result was, that the amount for which he asked the committee to provide, in addition to the sums already granted, was 6,850,0001. ; and the conviction of the Government was, that this amount ought to be provided by an addition to the taxation of the country. They proposed to execute the intention they had formed in case of a further demand, namely, to repeat the income tax operation already made, and to double the tax, asking the committee to grant this augmentation for the period of the war. The produce of this tax would provide for two-thirds of the expenditure, and then came a grave question-how the remainder was to be provided for. Although aware of the value of the income tax for the purpose of
the Government were not inclined to push it at once to an extreme point, nor was there any other direct tax to which they were disposed to have re
With respect to indirect taxes, they did not intend to alter the rate of postage, to reimpose repealed duties, or to meddle with the duties on tea or tobacco; and, in resorting to articles of consumption, they selected those in which the taxes would least interfere with trade or innocent enjoyment, and would make the smallest deductions from the comforts of the people. First, they proposed to augment the duty on spirits in Scotland 1s. per gallon, and on spirits in Ireland 8d. per gallon; the estimated gain was 450,0001. In the next place, they proposed to classify and re-adjust the sugar duties, which would involve no present increase of duty, but would add to the duties that would be otherwise payable after the 5th of July from 1s. to 1s. 6d. per cwt. The gain upon this modification of the sugar duties would be 700,0001. These three sums amounted to 4,400,0001., leaving still 2,450,0001. to be provided for to meet the additional charge of 6,850,0001. There was therefore yet another step to be made, and the Government proposed to make that step by the augmentation of the duty on malt, being convinced that, in combination with the increase of the spirit duties, and the modification of the sugar duties, it was the fairest mode of giving effect to the principle upon which they had determined to act-namely, that this war having been
undertaken not for the benefit of any particular class, but with a view to national interests and the national honour, the charge ought to be fairly distributed among the different classes of the community. In increasing the malt duty from 2s. 9d. to 48., the rate would be still lower than before 1801, much lower than in 1802, and less than half of what it was during the war from 1804 to 1816. The net receipt from this additional duty (deducting 5 per cent. for diminution of consumption) would be 2,450,0001., and, adding this to 4,400,0001., the total would be the sum he asked the committee to vote,-namely, 6,850,0002. The gross amount of taxes asked during the present year was 10,157,0001.; and, setting against this sum 1,474,0001. of repealed taxes, the real augmentation of the public burdens in
the present year would be 8,683,0001., two-thirds of which would be raised by a single direct tax upon the wealthier classes, and the remaining one-third by indirect taxation, affecting the whole consuming population, comprehending ail classes. The Government proposed that the income tax and the malt duty should be granted for the term of the war, the spirit duty, without limitation, as a permanent duty; and, with regard to the sugar duties, they would require particular consideration hereafter, but it was proposed that these should be war duties. There was another point. Out of the 6,850,0001., the produce of the additional taxes, he could not expect to receive before the 5th of April, 1855, more than 2,840,0001. ; 80 that he should be in arrear at that date, 4,010,0001., and this sum the Government, in order to have a command of cash, ought to have the means of raising ad interim, and the proper mode was by temporary securities, which might be in the form of exchequer-bills or exchequer-bonds; and the right hon. gentleman explained, in much detail, the course which the Government proposed to pursue with reference to the issue of these temporary securities. He concluded by moving certain resolutions. After a brief discussion these resolutions were agreed to.—The Times, May 9, 1854.
ASPECT OF TRADE. In the month, ending April 5, 1853, we exported nearly eight millions' worth of goods ; in the corresponding month of the present year nearly nine millions' worth; the exact returns of the two periods being respectively 7,887,2331. and 8,880,8051. Inasmuch, therefore, as the declaration of hostilities was made at the end of March, we have gained 993,5721. in the returns of a month of actual war. If, again, we take the whole quarter of the current year now last past, we find that the aggregate of our exports has been 21,361,3311., whereas in in the first quarter of last year, it was only 20,391,7231., so that there stands a difference of nearly a million in favour of our progress. If we take the year 1852 for comparison in this respect, the gain is still greater, being no less than 43 millions. There is no aspect in which the results do not present a favourable appearance.
The particulars of the return exhibit two or three notable features. In the article of cotton yarn there is a considerable decrease, traceable directly to the effect of the war in checking purchases for continental use. The exports, too, of oil and seeds have declined in value from 71,2841. to 30,4301. These commodities have heretofore been furnished largely by Russia, and, now that such supplies are likely to be intercepted, the stocks are naturally reserved for home consumption instead of being sent abroad. Silk and woollen yarn show also a decrease, but with these exceptions the current flows entirely the other way. Metals have increased from 1,269,9171. to 1,662,5151., and cotton manufactures, which had recently been declining, have now taken an upward turn, and risen from 2,409,8501. to (2,553,7511. The value of our exports in machinery has almost doubled (193,9811. in place of 105,6021.); in beer and ale they have risen from 130,0361. to 170,3361., while other articles of colonial use show that those markets are still as serviceable as ever.
With respect to imports, the consumption of provisions in general, and of many articles of luxury in particular, is sufficient to prove that there has been no falling off in the prosperity of the community. In tea, it is true, there is a very large decline, but the fact is reasonably explained by the reluctance of people to make their purchases until after the impending reduction of duty had trken effect. Coffee in the meantime had risen, as had sugars in general, especially West India and Mauritius. East India was almost stationary, and in foreign produce there was a diminution. The importations of grain are remarkable in the extreme. In the month of April, 1854, we took twice as much wheat, and twice as much grain of other descriptions, as we did in the like month of 1853 ; and, although the first quarter of the year last mentioned showed returns double those of 1852, the first quarter of the present year has exhibited a prodigious increase even over that excess.-- The Times, May 9, 1854.
THE CRYSTAL PALACE.
On Saturday, June 10, 1854, Her Majesty the Queen opened the Crystal Palace. The ceremony was witnessed by the Prince Consort and the Royal Family, by the King of Portugal, and his Royal brother, the Duke of Oporto, by the Foreign Ministers, the leading Members of the Administration, the Royal Commissioners of 1851, the Royal Commissioners of the New York Exhibition, the Committee of the Dublin Exhibition, the Representatives of the Imperial Commission for the French Exhibition next year, General Morin, Count Lesseps and M. Arles Dufour, by a large number of Peers and Members of the House of Commons, with their families, by the Mayors of the different corporate towns in the kingdom, by the Presidents and Vice-Presidents of the chief learned societies in the metropolis, and, finally, by an assemblage of about 40,000 spectators.
The procession round the building, was duly marshalled in the following order by Mr. Belshaw, who, by prescriptive right at such ceremonials, himself led the way:
SUPERINTENDENTS OF WORKS AND PRINCIPAL EMPLOYES.
Mr. E. Campbell
Mr. J. Campbell.
Mr. G. Paxton.
ARCHITECTS OF INDUSTRIAL COURTS.
PRINCIPAL OFFICERS AND HEADS OF DEPARTMENTS.
Dr. R. G. Latham.
Mr. Digby Wyatt.
The King of PortugAL.
The Cabinet Ministers.
WAR WITH RUSSIA.
Come the three corners of the world in arms,
BRITISH PROPERTY. [Copy of a despatch from the Foreign Office, in answer to an application made by the British Consul at Riga.]
Foreign Office, Feb. 16, 1854. The Earl of Clarendon has had under his consideration your despatch of the 26th ult., enclosing the copy of a letter from of Riga, requesting to be informed "what respect would be paid by British cruisers, in the event of war, to bona fide British property, the produce of Russia, if shipped on board neutral vessels." I am to acquaint you, in reply, that property of the description in question—the produce of Russia, and exported therefrom by and on account of a British merchant domiciled and trading there--although purchased before the war, and exported to England, would not be respected by Her Majesty's cruisers, unless in pursuance of a licence, or some special instructions from Her Majesty to the officers of her navy. By the law and practice of nations, a belligerent has a right to consider as enemies all persons who reside in a hostile country, or who maintain commercial establishments therein; whether these people be by birth neutral, allies, enemies, or fellow-subjects, the property of such persons exported from such countries is therefore res hostium, and, as such, lawful prize of war; such property will be considered as a prize, although its owner is a native-born subject of the captor's country, and although it may be in transition to that country; and its being laid on board a neutral ship will not protect the property. You will therefore inform whom it may concern that, in the event of war, the property will not be protected by the consular certificate, or by any other document, but will be liable to capture and condemnation as prize.
PROTECTION FROM RUSSIAN AGGRESSION. (Extract of a letter addressed to the British Diplomatic and Consular Agents.]
Foreign Office, Feb. 23, 1854. For these reasons Her Majesty's government have agreed with that of his Majesty the Emperor of the French to instruct their civil and naval authorities in foreign parts to consider their respective subjects as having an equal claim
WAR WITH RUSSIA.
to protection against Russian hostility; and for this purpose, either singly or in conjunction with each other, to act indifferently for the support and defence of British and French interests. It may be that, in a given locality, one only of the powers is represented by a civil functionary, or by a naval force; but in such a case the influence and the power of that one must be exerted as zealously and efficiently for the protection of the subjects and interests of the other as if those subjects and interests were its own.
I have, accordingly, to instruct you, sir, to act in conformity with this principle. You will consider it your duty to protect, as far as possible, against the consequence of the hostilities in which England and France may shortly be engaged with Russia, the subjects and interests of France equally with those of England; and you will make known without reserve to the French civil and naval authorities with whom you may have means of communication, any dangers to which the interests of either country may be exposed, or any opportunities with which you may become acquainted of inflicting injury on the common enemy.
Instructions to the same effect will be sent by the government of France to its civil and naval authorities in foreign parts, and Her Majesty's government concur with that of France in anticipating the most favourable results from this decided manifestation of the intimate union which prevails between them, and which it is their earnest desire should influence their agents in all parts of the world at a moment when they are about to engage in a contest with the empire of Russia for an object of such paramount interest to Europe as the inaintenance of the Turkish empire.
I am, &c.,
GOODS FROM NEUTRAL PORTS.
Office of Committee of Privy Council for Trade,
Whitehall, March 14, 1854. GENTLEMEN,– In reply to your letter of the 24th of February, requesting to be informed whether, in the event of war between this country and Russia, Russian goods imported from neutral ports would be considered contraband, or would be admissible into England ?
I am directed by the Lords of the Committee of Privy Council for Trade to inform you that, in the event of war, every indirect attempt to carry on trade with the enemy's country will be illegal; but, on the other hand, bond fide trade, not subject to the objections above stated, will not become illegal merely because the articles which form the subject matter of that trade were originally produced in an enemy's country.
I am, Gentlemen, your obedient servant,
J. EMERSON TENNENT. Messrs. Martin, Levin, and Adler.
Office of Committee of Privy Council for Trade,
Whitehall, March 16, 1854. GENTLEMEN,—-In reply to the inquiry contained in your letter of the 15th inst., whether, in the event of war being declared between this country and Russia, it will be allowable to import Russian produce, the property of British or neutral subjects, from neutral ports, I am directed by the Lords of the Committee of Privy Council for Trade, to refer you to the gener al principle laid down in my letter of the 14th, and to repeat that, in the case of articles originally produced in Russia, but since purchased from neutrals at a neutral port, and in the ordinary course of trade with such port, by British merchants, the fact of their having been originally produced in Russia will be immaterial.
I am, gentlemen, your obedient servant,
J. EMERSON TENNENT. Messrs. Martin, Levin, and Adler.