SIR HENRY FOWLER: I have not said that.

Gentleman drag in armaments? Does lengths to which he would drag me. he conceive that this is an implication If he is not so Radical at present it is that while we would grant money for not that he is less Radical in his mind, everything else we would not make but that he is cribbed, cabined, and adequate provision for the Army and confined by the position that he holds on the Navy According to the old pro- that bench, and possibly by some of the verb, he who excuses himself accuses colleagues around him. I admire him himself, and I am bound to tell my right also as a Nonconformist. He has always hon. friend that I regard this as gratui- boldly stuck to his guns. He has been tous incense heaped up on the altar of opposed to all State endowments of the god of war. I am not going to burn religion, and he has fought gallantly not that incense. I do not consider that this only for the liberty but for the equality is precisely the time for expressing any of religions in this country. I agree such opinion. This is a Finance Bill, with him in all that. I might say that and the strictures of my right hon. I share his Nonconformist conscience. friend are upon the mode in which the But what is the present position of my money is to be raised. What in the name right hon. friend with regard to the of goodness has that to do with arma- expenditure of which he complains? He ments? The right hon. Gentleman is one of the high priests of the Birminghas suggested that some of us are not ham Imperialism. He approved and disposed to follow him because we do not still approves of the war. He has stated believe that he is actuated by fair motives. in the country that we ought not to Who ever said so? I have never said so negotiate or to do anything of that in my life. There is a great difference sort. between that and considering, when we have words of this sort interpolated into an Amendment, what are the opinions of the gentleman who proposes the MR. LABOUCHERE: I think his Amendment. For that course of action words were that there ought not to be a I have the authority of my leader, the patched-up peace, but that we ought right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the to fight the matter out to a finish. I Opposition. In July last Sir Wilfrid assume that if he approves of that policy Lawson proposed a reduction of the in the present he would approve of it salary of the Colonial Secretary-some- also in the future. Such a policy thing for which I should have thought involves enormous armaments, and if anybody would vote blindly. The you have armaments you must pay for Leader of the Opposition said he should them. Therefore, it seems to me that vote neither for nor against it, and one of with the policy of my right hon. friend the reasons he gave was that he was inany real economies would be practically fluenced by the general views of Sir impossible. We entirely disagree as to Wilfrid Lawson. In the same way, the meaning of the word" adequate "; he having to estimate these words in the applies one sense to it, I apply another. My Amendment, I am influenced by the hon. friend the Member for East Northgeneral opinions of the right hon. Gentle- amptonshire has an Amendment on the man in regard to a matter which does Paper protesting against the war. That affect this expenditure. I am a great is his preamble. If he had asked me, admirer of my right hon. friend. II should have said that I agree with every admire his eloquence, of which we have had a specimen this evening. I admire him as a Radical. Hon. Members who are new to the House do not know what a Radical he is. I have heard Members complain of his Radicalism. I have sat on these benches with my right hon. friend, but I was a mild and temperate Radical in comparison with him. I followed him because I respected him so much, but I really trembled at the

word of it, but I think it is inopportune to bring the matter forward as an Amendment on this occasion. Would my right hon. friend vote for that Amendment, or would he refuse to vote for it, on account of the preamble?

MR. ASQUITH (Fifeshire, E.): It is more than a preamble.

MR. LABOUCHERE: Well, it is an enlarged preamble. If my right hon.

friend would refuse to vote for that take advantage of every opportunity Amendment on account of the sentiments upon which we can act unitedly. We expressed therein, why should he com- do not differ in regard to the particular plain-I do not suppose he does-if I Bill before the House, and we are ready refuse to vote for his Amendment on to vote against it when the question account of the preamble? It is perfectly is put from the Chair. We do not fear true that there are differences on this even the consequences which would side of the House. I am glad there are, ensue upon the Bill being thrown out, because it shows that we on this side of namely, that Ministers would go out of the House think, and that we are not office. My right hon. friend seemed sheep blindly following any bell-wether rather to deprecate that idea, and to or running anywhere as driven by the suggest that this Amendment was not dogs behind us. Last week we had an really opposition, but a piece of gentle object lesson of the patriotism of hon. advice which the Government might well Gentlemen opposite in in connection take in the matter of finance. He seemed with the army reorganisation scheme. to think that a Minister should bring Nearly everybody opposed the scheme. in his Budget, and, if the Opposition Hon. Gentlemen, one after another, disagreed with it, say, "Yes, apparently jumped up and complained of it, but you are right; I will take back my when it came to voting they went like Budget, and bring in another until it sheep into the lobby and recorded their pleases you." That is rather an odd votes in favour of a scheme which they argument to come from a right hon. considered as bad as it possibly could be. Gentleman who was a Member of a We on this side of this House do not do Government which went out on the that sort of thing. We understand cordite Vote; it is precisely the reverse patriotism very differently. If we differ of the course they followed. from our leaders we give effect to our difference in the lobby.

SIR HENRY FOWLER: We did not

MR. SAMUEL EVANS (Glamorgan go out on that Vote. shire, Mid): We do not differ.

MR. LABOUCHERE: My hon. friend says we do not differ, but I have known even him to differ. But it shows that we are a vital, thinking, independent party, and we vote according to our convictions, whereas we have this instance of hon. Gentlemen opposite

MR. GIBSON BOWLES (Lynn Regis): Not me.

MR. LABOUCHERE: But while we do not differ with regard to the Bill, we do differ with regard to this Amendment. Take, for instance, our fellow-workers in Ireland. They are not going to vote for this Amendment. I believe several Radicals intend to adopt a similar attitude. Those Irish Members and Radicals may be right or they may be wrong, but it does not alter the fact. The result will be the same so far as the division on the Bill is concerned. The only distinction is that by the right hon. Gentleman bringing forward this Amendment and asking us to vote for it we are divided, whereas a clean vote against the Bill, without any Amendment of this sort, would have united us. That, therefore, would have been the better course. As I have said, I shall not vote for the Amendment, because I object to the preamble. But even if I approved of the preamble I should not vote for the Amendment, because I am anxious that unity shall prevail on this side of the House, and, if I knew that a certain number of gentlemen were not going to vote for the Amendment, I should say

that the better division was the larger | It seems to me that it is cant to talk about division, or the one which united us most, economy. If you want economy, pracand therefore should vote simply "Nay "tically the only way to get it is to reduce against the Bill. I am glad that that opportunity will come at the end of the debate, and all Members, whether English or Irish, Imperialist or pro-Boer, will be able to go into the same lobby, actuated by the same feeling, that the sooner the Government is turned out of its present position the better it will be for the country.

This

your expenditure in those departments where the money is expended-I mean the expenditure upon education, upon the Army and the Navy. Will any hon. Member of this House say that they themselves advocate a reduction of expenditure in any of these directions? If they will say so here, as some hon. Members do, will they say it also to their constituents? The hon. Member for *MR. COHEN (Islington, E.): I am North Monmouthshire, in speaking upon surprised that, for I think the first time, the income-tax resolution, challenged us in a speech of the right hon. Gentleman to go to our constituencies and there opposite, we have not received that advocate the expenditure we have voted explanation which we always expect and for here in this House. I accept that usually receive of the motives which challenge, and I say that before my conhave actuated him in bringing forward stituents I have always held out that the his proposal. Some explanation is cer- expenditure of the country must grow tainly needed, because I think most I do not mean the war expenditure Members of the House must have some but the normal expenditure. difficulty in understanding the Amend- expenditure is growing and must grow, ment as it stands. That difficulty will because of the requirements of education, not be diminished by our knowledge of and because of the necessity for the the opinions of the right hon. Gentleman. increased normal expenditure in regard The Amendment begins by asking the to our defensive forces. It is not only House to record its opinion that the this country which has recognised that proposals of my right hon. friend the necessity for a growing expenditure. I Chancellor of the Exchequer do not have before me the figures which were exhibit that regard for economy which given to the Statistical Society by Lord the condition of the country imperatively Avebury, in which it is shown that demands. I submit that, looked at from during the last twenty-five years the the business point of view, the right hon. expenditure of France in this respect Gentleman cannot expect economy from has grown from £83,000,000 the financial proposals of this or of £140,000,000; the United States from any Government. £64,000,000 to £110,000,000; Russia from £74,000,000 to £149,000,000; and Italy from £44,000,000 to £70,000,000. I will not trouble the House with the figures of all the European Powers, but I do say that it is nothing but cant to talk of economy when you are not yourselves willing to reduce the expenditure which requires this taxation to be imposed.

I quite understand from what my right hon. friend said that he looks upon all these financial proposals as coming here with the authority of the Cabinet. Perhaps that is so, but I submit to the right hon. Gentleman that it is not from the financial proposals of a Government that you can expect economy. So soon as the House of Commons votes and the nation requires money to be expended, it really is the duty of the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Government to submit proposals which will provide the money voted by the House, and which is required by the country, It seems to me that a great deal of cant is sometimes spoken here in the name of economy, and my hon. friend the Member for Exeter has spoken of it as a platitude to talk about the safety of the Empire.

to

There is only one other point to which I should like to refer. I look with a little anxiety as to the way the floating debt of this country is going abroad. I make no complaint of the increase in the income-tax, which we all recognise as necessary, and the income-tax payers have always been a target against which successive Chancellors of the Exchequer perpetually fire. I quite recognise that in times of war the incometax is a tax to which recourse ought

immediately to be had. What we com- expenditure. As to the war expenditure, plain of, if we complain at all, is not that I will merely say that it is to me, and, I the income-tax is raised now, but that believe, to a very large number of those it is never lowered in times of peace and who sit on this side of the House, a source plenty. I will not dwell upon that, of very great disappointment that we are because I wish to call attention to the not laying upon our own shoulders a growing unfunded debt of the country. larger share of the cost of the war rather There is a very interesting Return which than placing it on the shoulders of has just been presented to Parliament, posterity. I think it must be well on the motion of the Member for Exeter, known to all the Members of the House and it shows that the unfunded debt of that, looking to history, this is not the the country has grown to the unpre- way war expenditure has been dealt with cedented total of £75,000,000 sterling. in previous generations. Allusion has Of this amount, £30,000,000 is for the been made to-night to what we did at the war loan, which is not redeemable until time of the Crimean War. I think I am the year 1910. Of the remainder, there right in saying that the taxpayers then are £14,000,000 redeemable in 1905, and paid something like half of the whole £10,000,000 in 1903. I hope both these expenditure. If we go further backamounts will be paid off out of the mines if we go back to the really great wars of and the indemnity to be obtained from the beginning of the century-we find a the Transvaal. That leaves £21,000,000 still more satisfactory state of things. sterling in Treasury Bills in the hands We see the patriotism of the people of of the public, and principally in the that time urging them to far greater hands of the foreign public. That is an sacrifices than did the patriotism of the element of danger to the money market people at the time of the Crimean War. of England and the world, and it is not From 1806 to 1815, when not only was advantageous to the Exchequer. The the stress of war far greater than it is right hon. Gentleman the Member for to-day, but when the prosperity of the West Monmouthshire, in his Budget people was less than it is to-day, and speech of 1894, dwelt upon the importance when the commerce of the country, of keeping the unfunded debt of this unlike that of to-day, was interfered country in the hands of the English with in all directions, the people of the public. I think the strength of English country took upon their shoulders to pay finance consists in the debt being held the whole cost with the exception of the by the British public, so that you never interest on the debt. It would seem that need fear a forced realisation by foreigners the sacrifices the people are willing to at a time which would be very incon- make have become less and less. In the venient to your own money market, and beginning of the century the whole of which probably might bring disaster to the war expenditure was borne by the the commercial and industrial classes of people, at the middle of the century half the country. I have only to say in con- was borne, and now, taking the figures clusion that I think the country has of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he recognised that this Budget is not only, as has shown that we are only putting the Member for West Monmouthshire something like one-third of the expendisaid, an honest and straightforward one, ture on the shoulders of the people at the but it is also a just and equitable Budget. present time. I confess that I cannot It has distributed the burden of taxation follow the figures of the Chancellor of the justly upon all classes, and I believe that Exchequer, but I do say this, and the the vote which will be given upon this figures cannot be manipulated, that last Bill will reflect thoroughly and com- year we raised extra war expenditure of pletely the verdict and judgment of the about £12,000,000, and this year that nation on my right hon. friend's financial £12,000,000 will go almost entirely proposals. towards the ordinary expenditure of the We are country apart from the war. raising this year £11,000,000 more for extra expenditure, and we are raising the rest of the war expenditure entirely in the form of debt. We propose to take

*MR. ASHTON (Bedfordshire, Luton): In the remarks I have to make I shall confine my attention to the question of the ordinary revenue and expenditure of the country more than to the war Mr. Cohen.

power to raise the sum of £60,000,000 of the country. The right hon. Gentleby the creation of debt, and we propose to man the Member for East Wolverraise only £11,000,000 by the further hampton gave some interesting figures taxation of the country. In other words, of the extent of that extravagance. I make out that we are only paying this I think he put it very low, for, year one-seventh of the whole of the cost as far as I can make out from of the war by means of extra taxation the figures one can get at, the increase of the country. I think that is a very in the ordinary expenditure from 1895 lamentable state of affairs; I do not think up to the present time has been no less that I put it too low when I call it cowardly than 30 per cent. I am glad to think finance. I think it is cowardly to that the Chancellor of the Exchequer posterity. I do not think that anyone feels keenly that that is a serious state of will contend that posterity will gain things. It is a serious state of things pecuniarily by the war which has taken which, if continued on these lines, will place. We have not done our duty as a bring even this great and prosperous nation during this century by paying country to the verge of bankruptcy. I off the debt with which the country was regret especially that the Chancellor of burdened at the beginning of the century. the Exchequer has not dealt with the We have had a century of unexampled question of local taxation and grants in prosperity-prosperity which is not very aid from the Imperial exchequer. The likely to recur again, now that we have Chancellor of the Exchequer has told us, the competition of foreign countries in and I entirely agree with him, that every quarter of the globe. I think looking to the vast increase in the ordimyself that with a hundred years nary expenditure of the country, it is of great prosperity we might have essential, or, at any rate, it is advisable done something more than pay off that the framework of the taxation £200,000,000. Now we are proposing should be enlarged. But before extendto hand on to posterity the remainder of ing the framework of taxation I think the debt unpaid and our obligations the first thing we ought to do is to get besides. I am afraid that it is back to the national exchequer the vast the very prosperity of the country sums of money going away in relief of which has tended to demoralise the local taxation. In order to enlarge the people. Adversity, no doubt, is a hard frame work the Chancellor of the Extaskmaster, but, at any rate, it teaches chequer has only put on the sugar duty the virtues of self-sacrifice, and it is those and the coal tax, for we can hardly call virtues which are largely absent from the increase of the income tax an enlargethe moral fibre not only of the Govern- ment of the framework. I for one do not ment, but of the people of this country complain of the sugar tax. I feel very at the present time. strongly that at the time of a war like this which has undoubtedly been a popular war, although I wish it had not been so popular, it is only right that all classes in the country should be called upon to pay something towards the extra taxation that is necessary for the war. I would suggest to the Chancellor of the Exchequer that, when times of peace return again, instead of abolishing the sugar tax he should leave it at a low rate, so that we should have always the means of increasing it in case of distress. He should also leave the tea duty at a low point, so that in case of distress it could be increased-—

Now, Sir, I propose to turn to the ordinary Budget. I cannot help feeling disappointed that, with such great opportunities as the Chancellor of the Exchequer has had in dealing with these hundreds of millions in consequence of this lamentable war, he has not made greater use of those opportunities in the general adjustment of the taxation of this country. As has been stated by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Wolverhampton this evening, the Government does not seem to have done any thing to check the extravagance of the past six or seven years. They seem to have drifted in finance as they have unfortunately drifted in other ways. They have made no attempt to stem the tide of extravagance in the expenditure

Attention called to the fact that forty Members were not present. House counted, and, forty Members being found present-