Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

11 articles on this Page




[No title]


[No title]


[No title]



PARLIAMENTARY INTELLIGEN C h. -+- TBE BTOOST.—The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in rising to < xplain his Budpet. said, at the outset, it was neces sari)y somewhat complicated. as he had to deal. not only wi.h ordinary revenue and expenditure for two yea s, but with the extraordinary expenditure authorised by the vote of credit. The revenue for 1877-8 bad fully answered his expectations, though it had probaHy been swelled during the last few days by the duties paid in fear of increased indirect taxa- tion. The revenue had produced jE79,783,298, and although there had been an increase in expenditure on the ordinary services, the net result of the year was that there was a surplus of £ 860,00! the total expenditure, inde. pendent of the vote of credit, having been £ 78,903,495. Out of the vote of credit of £6,000,000, £ 3,">00,000 had already been expended, to meet which £ 2.750,000 in Exchequer Bonds had teen issued, and £ 750,000 had been drawn from the surplus, so that they had to face a deficit on the year of £ 2,640,000 Turning next to the estimated expenditure of 1878.9, the permanent. charge on debt would be £28, 00,000; interest on local 101lns. £ 220,000; interest on Exche- quer Bonds, 04,000; charge of the Suez Loan, 2200,000; other Consolidated Fund charges, £1,760,000 ¡ the Army, £ 15,595,000; Home charges of forces in India, Navy, £ 11,053,901; Civil Service, the Customs, £ 2,793,0«8 Post Office, £ 3,313,215 Tele- graph Service, £1,114,972; Packet Service, £773,245 ¡ or a total of £81,019.676; as against an expendi- ture last year of £ 78,903,000. The former amount was without making any provision for the bonds issued for the vote of credit or for supplementary services. He estimated the revenue for the year 1878-9 at £ 79,4^0,000, or £ 303,299 less than last year, so that there would be a deficit of tl,560,000, without any provision for extraordinary expenditure. Much of the increased expen- diture was owing to the Prisons Bill coming into operation, and to the enhanced cost of public edu- cation. In addition to the deficit of £1,560,100 in the coming yenr, there -would be extraordinary expenditure which would raise the total deficit to £ 5,300,000. As to his proposals, he would readjust the house tax by placing offices und places of business where there was a resident care-taker on the same footing as warehouses, and meet the small deficiency thus caused by raising the dog tax from 5s. to 7s. 6d., charging the tax on all dogs over two months of age. Then as to the way in which the deficit of jB5,300,000 was to be met. A penny on the income tax would produce .1,800,000, of which £1,500,000 would come into this financial year; therefore, if twopence wtre put on the income tax, £3,000,000 would be added to the revenue of the year. Besides this, he proposed an additional duty of fourpence per pound on tobacco, and from this source they would derive £750,000, or, with the income tax, the addition to the revenue would be £3,750,000. The esti. mated deficit to meet all expenses was £ 5,300,< 00, and deducting £ 3,750,0 >0 from that amount, they would leave a remnant for the next year of £ 1,530,' 00. towards the payment of which £ 600,000 would be re eived, during that year, from the addition made to the income-tax. The I ight hon. gentleman concluded by moving, in a rapidly. thinning House, formal resolutions for raising the tobacco duty fourpence in the pound, and continuing the present tea duty. Mr. Gladstone began the usual desultory discussion which followed, by concurring in the suggestion of the Chancellor, that for fiscal reasons the resolution as to tobacco should be passed at once, though he did not pledge himself to the principle of that increase. The right hon. gentleman thought, further, that in imperial finance, each year should be considered by itself, and that no distinction should be made between ordinary and extraordinary expenditure. Mr. Mundella said he would have preferred an increase of the spirit duties to an addition of twopence to the income tax. Sir J. Lubbock thought toe much had been placed on direct, and too little on indirect taxation. Mr. food son expressed his objection to the system of large sup- plementary estimates, and Mr. Childers hoped the estimate of revenue from customs and excise was not too sanguine. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in reply, thanked the committee for the reception of his proposals. The discus- sion was continued by Mr. Parnell. Mr. Mitchell-Henry, and Major biohm, who objected that the present and pro- posed system of indirect taxation operated unfairly on the Irish people. A division being called for on the resolution relating to tobacco, it was carried by i04 to 24 votes. The other resolutions were agreed to amid cheering. LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND TAXATION IN LONDON.—In the House of Commons, Sir U. Kay Shuttleworth called atten- tion to the state of local government and taxation in London, and to the necessity of a measure extending to the whole metropolis the benefits of the Miuicipal Coruo. ration Reform Act of 1835. With this object the hon. member submitted a series of resolutions setting forth — 1. That the present state of local government in London was uus-tisflelory, and called for reform; 2. That the whole metropolis should be united under one administrative authority chiefly representing the ratepayers; 3. That these con- dition were not fulfilled under the present system of administration; 4. That the anciert Corporation of the City, if extended over the metropolis and re- modelled, would best achieve the purposes of a Mnnicipalty for London; and 5. That this reform should be undertaken by her Majesty's Government without delay. Mr. Charley, in opposing the motion contended that the direction which the reform of lo^al govern- ment in the metropolis should take was the creation of new municipal bodies outside the ancient Corpora- tion of the City, and not the exteusion of the Cicy Corpora- tion to the rest of the metropol s. If the proposals now made were carried out it would not reform, but deform, the local government of London. Sir J. McGarel Hogg also opposed the motion from the point of view of tbe Metropolitan Board of Works, of which body he is the chairman. He argued that the circumstances of the metropolis now and when the Board of Works was created were not so different as to render such a measure necessary. The board had been established in accordance with the recommendations of two Royal Com- missions, and it had successfully executed its municipal work outside the City. In the debate which followed Lord Elcho commented on the disadvantages of the divided go- vernment of London, which Mr. Stansfeld condemned as chaotie. Mr. Gross admitted that there were great faults in the government of London, but the City objected to the creation of the proposed municipality, and while so many conflicting op nions prevailed it was undesirable to pledge the House to any particular mode of action. There were questions affecting the gas and water supplies and the fire brigade which im. ptratively required to be dealt with, but he declined to give any pledge that the Government would bring in a bill to hand over the entire Government to the City Cor- poration first, and then to reform it, or vice versa. Mr. Lowe thought the time had come when the City should no longer be isolated from the great community around it. Lord J. Manners, Sir C. Dilke, and Mr. lJewdegate having spoken, Mr. Goschen promised that if a Conservative Government would undertake the reform of the local government of London it should receive all possible support from the Liberal party. Be believed that the attitude of the City on the question had completely changed. The House divided on the first resolution, whion it negatived by 116 to 73. The other resolutions were not put. 'JLHE EASTERN QUESTION.—Mr. Gladstone then asked whether the Government required of Russia that she should undertake before the assembling of the Congress not to withdraw therefrom before the discussion on any proposal which any Power might make to the Congress; and whether they intended to place their own liberty of withdrawal under a similar limitation. The ri:;ht hon. gentlemen explained that his object was not controversial but pacific, and, in course of his observations, described the proposition of Russia as to Bessarabia as a most unhappy resolution if it had been raised. He hoped tl-e Govern- ment would use every means to avert the shipwreck of the projected Congress. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said the object of the Government in reference to the Congress was, like that ef Mr. Gladstone's, not controversial, but pacific; but though they wished to enter the Congress, they wished to know what was to be discussed there. All the Government had done was to express a wifh, and make it a condition of entering the Congress t'.1at every article of the Treaty of San Stefano should be submitted to it. He could see no object in prolonging the discussion. The subject then dropped. THE QUEEN'S MESSAGE.—In the House of Lords, Lord Beaconstield moved an Address of thanks to the Queen for her most gracious Message communicating her intention to call °ut the Reserve Forces. He said h e thought it not unren son- able to make a few remarks on the subject, and after describing the circumstances which had occurred during many months past, and referring to the diplomatic correspondence which had resulted therefrom, he added that meanwhile information reached the Government that negotiations which were going on between Russia and the Porte were conducted with the utmost secrecy and mystery, but England declared that al' the quest'ons between Russia and Turkey should be matter of discussion in the Congress; and that every avticle of the Treaty of Peace should be submitted to the Congress. That treaty entirely abolished the dominion of the Ottoman Empire in Europe, and the case was not different in Asia, for the treaty would convert the Black Sea into a Russian like. When the hopes of the Government of the meet- ing of the t'ongiess were disappointed they had to consider what course it was the duty ef t ie British Government to take. There was but one course to pursue. When all the world was armed or arming, was England, he at-ked, to re- main disarmed ? In these circumstances, the Government felt it their duty to advise her Majesty to send a Message to Parliament notifying her intention to call out the Reserve Forces. Lord Granville expressed a hope that what was proposed to be done would not lead to another Crimean war. With regard to the papers laid before the House, he held that there had been a great diplomatic failure so far as England and Au-tria were concerned, though it had been a triumph for Russia. He was no admirer of Russian diplomacy, but he thought that England bad not acted with discre- tion m opening direct negotiations with St. Peters- tion m opening direct negotiations with St. Peters- burg. Lord Derby explained tho reasons of his retire ment from the Government. He denied that the calling out of the Reserves was either the sole or principal cause. He had disapproved of the vote of Credit, and he objected to cal ing out the Reserves because he did not think that an emergency had arrived to justify such a step, or that diplomacy had been quite ex- hausted. Moreover, if Russia would not make concessions because in her opinion they would involve humiliation, and war were to break out, he considered that it ought to be a naval war, ani should not involve an increase of our land forces. Reviewing the position of the great Powers and the influences which were operating upon them, he asked why England should not drift but absolutely rush into war ? There was now no hope of restoring the Turkish Empire in Europe, and, seeing that we had not interfered to save Turkey when we might have done so, why should we now be crying out. against her enemy, who was safe in- side the Bnsphorus ? He admitted that there were circumstances which might force us into war, but in his opinion there was great objection to our now commencing a wlrx whhh, if undertaken, would have to be done again in twenty or twenty-five years' time. For his part he tailed to see any real ground for a casus belli. The Lord Chancellor replied to tne speech ot Lord Derby. Lord Salisbury said that he had listened to the speech of Lord Derby with great surprise, because for all that passed in the Cabinet every member previous to his resignation was responsiUe. With regard to the Treaty of San Stefano, he observed that that document was one connected whole, so that the Government could not consider its articles separately. He observed tbat a misconception appeared to prevail that there was something warlike in the steps which the Government had taken, but he contended that the position of the Govern- ment was not a warlike position, for they had simply taken measures of precaution, being quite sure that if the tim should ever come when the measures of precaution should be converted into more active- measures, the spirit of Eng- lishmen would supply all that would be required. Ulti- mately the Ad iress was agreed to. CALLING OUT THE RESERVES -In the House of Com- mons the Message from the Crown announcing her Ma- jesty's intention 10 call out the Reserve Forces hiving been read, the Chancellor of tt-e Ex hequer moved an Address to the Queen thankingher for her gracious comm nication. The right hon. gentleman remarked th t, in taking this step, it was not intended to alarm the country by leading it to suppose that the emergency was such as might Eirise at a momel.t of national peril. At the same time, the emergency was of such a character as rendered it necessary that the army should be put upon a footing that would admit of its services being used wil liout celay in the event of their being re- quired, and the measures contemplated were similar tu and n the same spirit as the measures announced when the Pote of Credit was proposed. If he were asked why neasures of precaution were not taken until the war betwwa Kunia *e4 Xoskej had ended, his answer waa tbat < during the war England took up a. position of neutralityf which she had faithfully o "served whilst hostilities con* tinued But since the war in- tters had assumed a new aspect, and it had become necessary for her to consider her position, and the duties she might be failed fin tocNsclnrge. The system in South-eastern Europe, which rested upon the treaties between the Great Powers, was now virtually at an end. had broken down, a new system had to be put in its place, and the Treaty of San Stefano was to be substituted for the Treaty of Paris. If that wa., to be the case it was necessary that the Powers interested in the maintenance of peace should consider what was the nature of the settlement to which tbey were at-ked to be parties* and England among them claimed that she shonlu have a voice in the matter. In making the demand to bubmit the treaty to a European Conference the Govern- ment wi re only asking for that which Russia herself was ready to concede in July or August last and Ministers were in 1. opes even now that r he difficulties which had arisen mIght, be got ov. r, anr) that a Con fere > ce mightyet meet on satisfy tory terms. It wasacardiualpointof their policyto maintain the integrity of the Empire and the various oetween its different part-, and they could not shut their eyes to the effect which the changes under the Treaty ot San Stefano might have cn those communications, nor to the duty of being prepared o defend them should the necessity ..rise. He t) usted that no euch necessity would crise, ana that tbe spirit manifested by the country in the present crisis would continue to the'end. Mr. Gladaione that it was not his intention either to propose an amend* ment, or to support those of which Sir W. Lawson and Sir G. Campbell had given notice. It gave him satisfac- tion to find that the speech of the Cbanrellor of Exchequer contained no reference to building up that labric of iniquity formerly known as the Turkish Empire. He objected, however, that although the Vote ot Credit had been asked to enable the Government to go into the Congress with the confidence of the nation, they bad used it with a. special n ilitary view. In his opinion Ministers should have taken the advice of Ger" many, and met in Conference in some shape or other, rather than have canied on a. fierce controversy by telegraph. He further complained that they hllil not restrained the military ardour of the country* but, on the contrary, had, during tbe last four months, allowed it to drift in the direction of war. 1 he right bon. gentleman then proceeded to criticise the recent despatch of Lord Salisbury, whom he charged with having mads y several misstatements. The circular was, in fact, too strong in some points and too weak in others, and especially weak with reference to Bessarabia* towards which, he admitted, the conduct of Russia had. been utterly unworthy. As to the general policy of the Government, he could not reconcile or bring together their different proceeding s. To-day they moved in one direction, and next day another. They no* made themselves the organs and substitutes of Europe and he objected to the resumption of their unhappy and ill-starred system of solitary action. That had been their bane all through. They began with it, and they determined to end with it. If. however, they would work for the ends oi justice and freedom, and be content so far to humble themselves as to net with Europe, arid not without or against-Europe, he believed that they wou d receive the support of a unite ptople, earn the gratitude of a nation which was never slow to yield it, bad escape the immeasurable guilt of a causeless war. Sir W« Lawson moved to amend the resolution hy n.ddiug an eS" pression of regret. that, the Government had advised the cal ing out of the Reserves, no trreat emergency hmviulg been shown to exist, and the embodiment of the Reserve* being neit er prudent in the interests of peace, necessary for the safety of the country, nor war; anted b:v the state of affairs abroad. Sir W. Barttelot and Mr. Grant Duff con* tinued the discussion, when Mr. Hardy replied to M1' Gladstone, and, < n the motion of Mr. E. Jenkins, the debate was adjourned. ADJOUHNED DEBATE.—Mr. E. Jenkins on the follo"- ing night resumed the debate on the reply to the Royal Mess&ve, notifying the calling out of the Reserves! and the amendment to it proposed by Sir Wilfrid Lawson regretting tbat the Government had thought i» right to advise her Majesty to take such a step. Dir- Jenkins said he should not have advised a divieion, but if the amendment were pressed he should vote for it. He regretted that a disposition had been manifested not to discu-s some of the main points at issue, and he thought the Government were slowly but surely drifting the country into war without the being informed of any ground for such a course. Mr. HaS* bury said Russia had cou-e before this country and befote Europe with a freedom in her hand which she did not gi*f to the peoples ol south-eastern Europe, ai d he asked whether on readiug the treaty it was possible to come to any other conclusion than that it would -only give to those races a change of masters, and that instead of making final and permanent peace it would be pregnant with many wars. Mr. Chamberlain cordially supported the amendment, and believed that though he was one of a minority, thoae who, like him, would vote for is represented anything but a small t-ectiou of public opinion out of doors.. Mr. Baillie Cochrane mainta ne<* that it was impossible to accept the treaty in its pre sen" form, and that war was to be averted by a straightfol* ward and firm attitude on the part of the Gover11" ment. Mr. Jacob Bright considered that the pobtiCal history of Lord Beaconstield was not such as to inspir0 the country with confidence in him as a leader at such critical juncture. Mr. Dillwyn, feeling that the gre»» emergency contemplated by the Act had not warmly supported the amendment, though he decline1 to he classed, as a member of the peace-at-any-price I party. After some remarks from Sir Ii. Bowyer, fJIt. Richard, Sir C. Dilke, and Mr. Courtney, the Marquf .of Ha- tington said that if he had thought the step I proposed by the Government committed the country to war, or if he thought it would be followed by an ultimatum* or a declaration of war, be woul i have voted for tM amendment. There would be another opportunity discussing the Government measure, and this was no» an occasion when difffcrenci s between the two sides ct tne House should be multiplied. The Government statements, as on the occasion of the discussion of vote of credit, had shown divergencies, anti he no* asked them for a definite statement, whether they were Vr0l asked them for a definite statement, whether they were Pro, pared to go to war with Russia as an ally of Turkey. It v<- to be regretted that the negotiations for the meeting of the Congress should have been tnirusted to Lord Derby, who attached very little importance co its assembling when the rest of the Cabinet considered warlike preparations a naceS" sflry consequence of its failure. "With regard to the Stefano Treaty, the settlement proposed by it wouj- require careful revision by Europe, but, it was notunnatu* that Russia should frame such docum-nt at the end <3 the War, and there were reasons why t should be canva>j £ • in a spirit of conciliation by the British Government,. Tf* earlier communications of the Russian Go >er ment to Cabinet indicated that Russia would seek to recover Wr territory lost in 1856, and to make an trdvance Armenia, and in the face ot those commuuiov tions it 'was utterly impossible to se" the treaty a-i<<« witbont passing an emphatic condemnation of British neutrality during tho war, the end of which tb knew would be the demand of < ertain terms by Rus-ia Conclusion, he appealed to Sir Wilfrid Lawson to withdrft* his amendment, a if it were pressed to a division, it, must defeated by a majority that would strengthen the hanfis the war party; while Russia would imagine that a small P8?** in the House would aid her in resisting any modification < f the treaty. Lord Elci o asked whether the GovermneO had received the reply of Prince Gortsi h*k< ff, already Vn?Z lished in the Times. The Chancellor of the Exchequer the reply of Prince Gortscbakoff had not yet been by the Government; and no doubt the 'limes had antic* pated them, in consequence of the document having telegraphed from vt. fetersburg. In replying on tbe who' debate, he could only repeat tne remark he had made moving the reply to the Address, that it was an entii e va& apprehension to represent the step, or the series of t-tcp* which had been taken as likely to precipitate war. He t" garded those steps as likely to avert war. Another fallacy was that the Government was objecting to go into the gress; what they obj eted to was to go into a sbajr Conference. He believed that in the course *•* Government was taking they were acting in interests and would receive the support of Europe. but if they did not receive that support the Governing could not concur in a delusive treaty. He did not the Government would be left in this matter with" allies, but he had rather that thf y were than that they should consent to an arrangement, which would pW~J this country in the position of a mere signatory, In conclusion, he trusted no necessl" would arise for war, but, if it did, depend upon it the T,,t Ir vernment would know their duty to their country, and woo' not be found wanting in it. Sir W, Lawson declined withdraw his amendment, and the House divided. For Amendment, 64; against, 319. The reply to the B Message was then agreed to,


[No title]