As able Menibers to it who devote themselves more particularly to fostering the industries of the British Empire as distinguished from the United Kingdom, some of whom secure opportunities not always legitimate for favouring the industries of the British Empire at the expense of free trade principles, and the interests of the consumer in this country. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: What does the honourable Gentleman mean by "legitimate"? MR. E. ROBERTSON: That is a matter of opinion. I do not agree that to show greater preference for Colonial products under all circumstances over other products is a legitimate means of fostering the industries of the Colonies. We have now a choice to make by which we can give a perfectly legitimate preference to same degree; there is this marked difference, that, whereas, as I understand, tobacco is not cultivated to any extent within the borders of the British Empire, the tea consumed in the United Kingdom is becoming more and more a product of the British Empire. The figures on this point are really of a remarkable character. They have been supplied to me by an authority on the subject, and are well worth the consideration of the Committee. Starting in 1865, when the tea duty was first reduced to 6d. in the pound, I find that of the 100 millions of pounds of tea consumed in the United Kingdom in that year not more than three per cent. came from British territory, the rest being China tea. The figures are, 3,000,000 from the British Empire, 95,000,000 from China. year by year went on, and in the reduction of the tea duty the proportion changed gradually in favour of Britishgrown tea, that process received a remarkable acceleration in the next stage in the history of the tea duty-namely, in 1891, when it was reduced to 4d. in the pound. Year by year China tea, under the lower duty, was being shoved out of the market by tea grown in the British Empire, particularly in India and Ceylon, until in 1897, the last year for which I have any figures, we have this most remarkable and, I think, satisfactory conclusion, that, while the consumption of tea in the United Kingdom has more than doubled since 1865, the proportion between the quantity of tea grown within the British Empire, and in the rest of the world, has changed in a still more remarkable degree. Out of 232 millions of pounds consumed in the United Kingdom in 1897, 211 millions were produced within the British Empire and only 21 millions in China. China, which was sending us 95 millions in 1865, only sent us 21 millions in 1897, and the British Colonies, producing tea which only sent us three millions in 1865, sent us 211 millions in 1897. I do not say that is the result of the reduction of the tea duty-no doubt that had something to do with it but I believe the lower duty had a most important bearing on the cultivation of tea in British India and Ceylon. There is a most important point to be made from the figures I have quoted, and I ask the attention of honourVOL. LVII. [FOURTH SER.ES.] one of our Colonial industries over the other parts of the world. The benefit of any reduction in the duty must, of course, in some degree, go to the producer as well as to the consumer, and any reduc tion in the tea duty would consequently benefit not only the growers, but all employed in the cultivation of tea. If, in making the choice, you reduce the duty on tea, the benefit will fall on the producer who produces tea within the British Empire. I have given the proportion between British-grown tea and foreign-grown tea, and that alone ought to be sufficient to justify the reduction of the tea duty. If that duty is reduced, so much of the reduction as goes to the grower will be a benefit to our fellow subjects in other parts of the Empire, whereas, if we adhere to the proposal of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to reduce the duty on tobacco, we will be benefiting very few in the British Empire, as far as persons engaged in the production of tobacco are concerned. I have already given you the figures of the amount of British-grown tea consumed in the United Kingdom. Take India and Ceylon by themselves, and the interest of these great dependencies in this subject may be stated from another point of view. I learn from the authority whom I have already quoted that at the end of 1896 the acreage under tea cultivation 2 G means a re duction of 1d. in the pound should not be beyond his means. At the present moment the reduction of 1d. in the pound involves a loss to the revenue of £1,000,000 sterling a year, apart from the rebatement resulting from increased consumption. Supposing We give this reduction of 1d. or ltd., had reached the enormous total of the tea duty. What amount of reduction 433,000 acres in India, and 320,000 acres ought to be made I do not venture to in Ceylon. I am also told that in India say, but I think 1d. or 1d. in the pound and Ceylon alone the number of coolies- would easily be within the our own fellow subjects-employed in the of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I cultivation of tea reaches the enormous do not know what surplus he has figure of 900,000. All these natives who at his disposal, but I think have given up their lives to this industry in our own dependencies would benefit by a reduction of the tea duty, whereas no corresponding benefit would be conferred on any large number of British subjects by the reduction of the tobacco tax. I think this is a point which ought to be borne in mind. I have spoken of the enormous advance within the last generation of the tea industry of the British Empire, particularly in India and Ceylon, but I gather from evidence derived from other sources that that industry is extremely susceptible to small variations in the profits. The right honourable Baronet the Member for Wolverhampton is at present Chairman of a Commission which is about to sit, and I imagine some very remarkable evidence will be submitted to it by commercial authorities in India with reference to increasing the value of the rupee by a re-adjustment. I allude to that to show that the tea industry in Ceylon more particularly is extremely susceptible to small variations of profit, and I venture to think that if relief were granted by a reduction of 1d. or 2d. in the pound it would be a very great advantage to such a susceptible industry. The case for the reduction of the tea duty must, I think, be held to be proved by the evidence I have obtained. There is one other observation I should like to make. We have been dealing with the Far East very recently, and the policy of the open door;" but, whether it is to be established or not, I think that the interests involved in the opening up of the Chinese Empire, one way or the other, are too strong to be resisted, and we may look forward in future, I imagine, t increased and strenuous opposition on the part of the Chinese tea industry as against the same industry in India and Ceylon. We would, therefore, be helping the enormous tea industry of India and Ceylon, under circumstances which it may become difficult for them to sustain in the future, by now reducing Mr. E. Robertson. we can make certain that the benefit of *THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EX-1 women I have mentioned. These are the CHEQUER (Sir M. E. HICKS BEACH, poor people you ought to have regard to Bristol, W.): No. on this occasion rather than to the other, You ought to have regard to it from the MR. E. ROBERTSON: Nobody can tell point of view as regards the comparative. except from his own experience. Every-worth of the two industries to the British body knows that, as a rule, women do not smoke. MR. E. ROBERTSON: Some women may smoke, but the personal experience of Members will enable them to decide the question for themselves. My experience is less fortunate than that of honourable Members who are prepared to say that women do smoke. Children do not smoke. *THE CHANCELLOR CHEQUER: Some smoke. OF THE EX Empire, and as regards the facility it affords of transferring the boon to the consumer instead of to the middlemen, and as regards the class that is to be benefited in respect to its numbers.. Having regard to all these things, I do venture to submit to the Chancellor of the Exchequer that in deciding in this case in favour of tobacco and disregarding a reduction in the duty on tea he has made a mistake, and it is an unfortunate mistake. But it is not too late to rectify it, and I hope this House will place it on record that the duty on tea should be relieved instead of tobacco. I. shall have much pleasure, therefore, in supporting this Motion. MR. E. ROBERTSON: Again my experience is less fortunate there than MR. G. C. T. BARTLEY (Islington, that of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. N.): I do not dispute the conclusions Many men do not smoke, but most men, arrived at by honourable Members, women, and children use tea. As but I think that a much more deep far as the relief is concerned, you and important consideration underlies certainly spread the benefit over a larger the question as to whether the reduction area if you give preference to tea instead of tobacco. There is still another should take place on tobacco or tea, and development which I do not think I ought that is, Sir, that we must remember that to leave out before I sit down, and it- it is most important that every section many honourable Members are not, per- of the community should at least conhaps, so well qualified by experience to tribute in some way to the great Imperial speak on this matter-is this: that in taxation of the country, and it would be such constituencies as I have the honour a very evil thing if taxation were so to represent a vast proportion of the arranged that a large section of the compopulation almost live on tea. It may munity would practically pay nothing. be a good or a bad thing for them, but Now, Sir, it is a fact that we have tea and bread, and not much of any- reduced our subjects of taxation almost We are told that the thing else, are the three meals which, I to a minimum. was going to say, 30 per cent. of my spirit of temperance and total abstinence constituents have to sustain themselves is growing very largely. Well, Sir, that on. In most manufacturing communi- is a subject in which everybody is glad ties, where there are many women em- to hear of progress, and we should all ployed, as there are in the constituencies like to see the number of total abstainers like those I represent, and where enormously increased; but when we come they have acquired the taste for to consider it from a fiscal point of view, tea, that a large if the duty on tea is practically abolished number of these people who live-which I take it to be the aim and by hard work on small wages have tea and bread for breakfast, tea and bread for dinner, and tea and bread for supper. These are the people you ought to have regard to rather than the smokers, although the smokers may be the husbands of some of the you will find object of the honourable Gentleman who has just spoken-we shall get this state of things, that practically speaking all those who are total abstainers will pay nothing at all towards Imperial taxation, or very little indeed. Now, Sir, I think that would be a very serious state of affairs. Let us look at it in another way. If we do not have a resolution of this Take the case of a man earning a pound kind we cannot re-enact the tea duties. a week-a total abstainer-who consumes When we come to the Second Reading of say half a pound of tea per week. What the Bill, that will be the proper time to does that man pay to the Imperial taxa- discuss the whole financial bearing of tion? Why, he pays the sum of twopence one particular part. I confess that the per week to the revenue, that is to say, Chancellor of the Exchequer treated us a tax of fourpence per pound. Now I very generously. He offered us the other do not think anybody can say that that night the choice between tea and tobacco, is an unreasonable payment for a citizen and he seemed prepared at that time of this great Empire who has all the to take it by the voices of the majority, advantages and securities that belong to and I think waited for the answer from the this country. I am sure it would be a House as to which we would prefer. I do very bad system if the fiscal arrangements not know whether he will be of the same of the country were so made that any-mind when it comes to the discussion on body or any class of persons could do the Second Reading of the Bill. I coraway altogether by their own method of fess my predilections are in favour of living with subscribing to the Imperial tea, and not from any of the personal revenue. That is the reason why I think considerations to which the right honourthat it would be a very great mistake to able Gentleman alluded the other night. do away with the tax on tea. I know it I am not altogether so impartial as he would be a very popular thing, for it is is on those subjects, and I confess my easy enough on the platform to get popu- contributions to the Exchequer under the larity by advocating the reduction of any head of tobacco are much higher than duty. But, at the same time, I agree those under the head of tea. But the with reducing the amount of the tax on consideration by which we ought to be tobacco, because I think many people governed, I think, is whether we have a really forget that with the very poor power of giving the consumer some tobacco is almost a necessity of life. They relief. There are two questions. First might be able to do better with their of all it should be given if possible to the money, but still the fact remains that largest class of consumer, and, secondly, amongst the very poor the use of tobacco that you should have the greatest ceris, after all, their only luxury, if not a tainty of the reduction getting through to necessity, and I therefore think that the the consumer. I have not the smallest Chancellor of the Exchequer was certainly doubt that there are a far larger number right in selecting this article for the sub- of people who consume tea than there are ject of relief from taxation rather than who consume tobacco. My personal tea. Although I am sure that everybody experience does not entirely agree with is glad to see a reduction of taxation, I that of my honourable and learned Friend think from a national and Imperial and the Member for Dundee that ladies do social point of view it will be an evil if not smoke; certainly that is contrary the subjects of taxation are so arranged to my own personal observation. But that any large section of the community at the same time if you take family by do not pay towards the Imperial revenue. We used to hear it as a Liberal doctrine that taxation and representation should go together, and I think there is a danger in enormously reducing the taxation of any individual who pays very little in proportion to his earnings, and it is an evil in every sense if the reduction is so made that any class is absolutely free from a certain payment to the Imperial taxation. SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT (Monmouthshire, W.): I should like to say a word or two now, although I do not think this is a fit time to discuss this subject. Mr. Bartley. family, unquestionably the number of persons who partake of "the cup that cheers but not inebriates" is far larger than of persons who smoke. I have taken some pains to inquire as to the alterations in the tea duty and the tobacco duty, and I am informed, on what I certainly regard as very reliable authority on the subject of tea, that the whole of the reduction in the duty on tea has gone to the consumer. I cannot speak with the same positiveness on the subject of tobacco, but I think it is much more doubtful, and really it depends, I think, not so much upon the quantity as upon lor of the Exchequer proposes to give to tobacco would be almost exactly equivalent to a reduction of the tea duty by one-half, and on the whole I should prefer that reduction for the reasons I have stated, that it would benefit a larger number of the people, and also be a benefit to the Indian producer. the quality as to how far it will go to great consideration, and if the same law the consumer. However, I hope before operates now as then, what the Chancelwe come to the Second Reading of the Bill I shall have more information on that subject. There is another consideration to which I attach also considerable value, and that is this, that tea has now become a British product almost exclusively. I was going to say four-fifths, but I believe it would be nearly true to say nine-tenths, of the tea consumed in this country is grown in India and Ceylon, and the quantity of Chinese tea is really almost an insignificant fraction. I think that is a consideration for the Treasury, as India has suffered very severely in the course of the last two years, and if the growth of tea in India would in that way be encouraged that is an additional argument. The question probably cannot be disposed of to-night on this Resolution; but I think it is a matter that requires a good deal of consideration, and we should have more light on the respective merits of tea and tobacco. As to the amount of income disposable, the sum money that would be equivalent to the reduction of 6d. upon tobacco I am disposed to believe would be exactly the sum which would reduce the tea duty by one-half, from 4d. to 2d. That is my experience in the past. Now, when the present First Lord of the Admiralty took 2d. off the duty on tea, reducing it from 6d. to 4d., he estimated that the loss would be 1 millions, but the loss was not a million in the first year, nor has it been a million since. I have not got the figures here, but speaking from memory, I think that the recovery has been such that the loss now only amounts, I think, to £500,000. That was the result of the reduction when it was made occasion. If that of *SIR CHARLES DILKE (Forest of Dean): When we get to the Second Reading of the Bill, we shall then have a chance of discussing the whole finance of the year, and we shall have other questions to discuss which have been raised by my honourable and learned Friend. I am bound to say that I think he would not have been in order if he had asked whether the Government had any money to give away for the purpose of a reduction in taxation. That is a question which we shall certainly have to discuss with the right honourable Gentleman on the Second Reading of the Bill. On this occasion we shall not be in order in discussing the question whether they have got the money to give at all, or whether they should make proposals for a reduction. For that is a matter upon which I shall take a different view from that which has been generally expressed; but I cannot discuss it on this occasion. It was understood the other night, when we passed the tobacco duty, which took away all actual interest in the matter, that we might refer to it to-day. That will, no doubt, be convenient. As the matter has been raised, perhaps, Mr. Lowther, you will allow me to refer upon briefly to what has been said, in order to be so, I do not see that there show that there are two sides to this is greater reason to anticipate a larger loss from the reduction from 4d. to 2d., than there was in the case of a reduction from 6d. to 4d., but the Chancellor of the Exchequer knows this subject better than I do. When the reduction was made in 1891 the estimate of the loss was £1,500,000, but the actual loss was £1,017,000 in the first year. You never had a loss of more than £1,000,000 afterwards, and the tea duty has recouped itself so that the present loss is only half a million. That is a the last question. The honourable Members who have spoken in favour of the reduction of the duty on tea have assumed that they are speaking from a democratic point of view. Now, the most antidemocratic tax which this country labours under is the tobacco tax. [Cheers.] I am glad to hear those cheers from Members acquainted with both these trades. The tobacco duty is one which varies from 1,700 per cent. down to 24 per cent. ad valorem. This I pointed out in opposing the increase in the tobacco |