tionate national income, alleged by Mr. Henry, were incorrect, since the Irish poor law valuation is at least 20 per cent. lower than in England.

The result of the attempts at legislation for Ireland, if we except the debates on the franchise and on the closing of publichouses, in which the Irish members held a strong case, and were supported by the ablest Liberal champions, was not satisfactory, and the result contributed mainly to swell the large number of wasted evenings which every session can boast. Whether this is to be attributed, according to Mr. Butt's view, to English injustice, or as some would decide, to the needless and worthless proposals of the Irish members, it is not our province to determine. All that we record is the waste of time and breath, leaving no further monument than some hundreds of unread pages in Hansard.

CHAPTER II.

The Estimates and the Budget-Debates on the "Exemption Clauses" The Loenl Government Estimates-The Indian Budget Debate on the depreciation of Silver Mr. Holms' motion on Army Reform --The Army and Navy Estimaton Ecclesiastical Questions: the New Bishoprics, and the Burials Question Debate in the House of Lords on Lord Granville's Resolution Questions of Privilege Mr. Lowe's Speech at Retford --The Reform Club and its Members The Judi cature Bill.

THE Annual Estimates, forming a portly volume by themselves, enable the political student, before the introduction of the Budget, to form an idea of the development of national income and expenditure. When the Chancellor of the Exchequer has made his annual statement, the course of public business in ordinary mat ters is pretty well settled for the coming year, and neither the House of Commons nor individual members are prepared to challenge the knowledge and discretion of the department which asks for an increased grant, if the increase is within reasonable limits.

"Year after year," said the Times, "the great total creeps up, until we find that the Civil Service Estimates between March, 1873, and March, 1876, have increased at the rate of a million a year, and a quarter of a million more is estimated for the coming year. The creation of new Departments and the assumption of new functions on the part of Government are continually demanded by people who have never taken the trouble to look into a volume of Estimates, much less to trace their continual growth. In the returns we see the price we have to pay for the many excellent schemes recent times have adopted."

The increase in the Estimates for 1876-7 was, as in previous years, distributed chiefly over three classes, Education, Police,

and Public Departments. The addition for Primary Education alone in various parts of the kingdom was 251,8901. This sum consisted, for the most part, in England and Scotland, of grants for attendance of scholars, though 32,000l.-more than a third of the Scotch increase-goes to school buildings, and is something of a permanent outlay. The additional 11,000l. paid to the Irish Commissioners was entirely appropriated towards some little attempt to improve the position of the Irish teacher, according to the scheme of supplementing Local Rates adopted by Sir Michael Hicks Beach last year. In the class of Law and Police expenses the increase was 116,615l., of which 74,000l. arose from the relief of the local charge for the maintenance of the county and borough police in this island. 13,131. more had been employed to provide retiring allowances and pensions for the Irish Constabulary. The additional salaries to the officers of the County Courts were another important item. The other class showing a considerable increase include the Board of Trade and Home Office, and all those numerous groups of Public Departments which the tendency of our times is increasing every day.

The unpleasant fact resulted from this examination that the Estimates for the Civil Service and the Revenue Departments taken together showed an increase of 423,5621. over the cost of these establishments in the former year. Accordingly, Sir Stafford Northcote's chance of making a "popular budget" must have been non-existent from the first, and his task, when he rose to make his statement on April 3, was simply to explain the method he proposed to adopt in order to remedy the unavoidable deficit. He said that last year he had left himself with the narrow surplus of 400,000l., from which he had to provide 60,000l. for reduction of taxation, 100,000l. for reduction of debt, and considerable supplementary estimates, especially for Irish education. To meet these liabilities he trusted entirely to the growth of the revenue, and his anticipations had been completely justified by the result. The revenue of last year, estimated at 75,625,000l., actually yielded 77,131,693l., being an excess of 1,506,6931. At the same time the estimated expenditure of the last year was 75,522,000l., and the actual expenditure was 76,421,773, leaving an excess of nearly 900,000l. over the estimates. There was therefore a surplus of revenue over expenditure for the year of 710,000l. Sir Stafford Northcote then minutely compared the estimated and actual figures both of the revenue and expenditure of last year, and afterwards stated that in future the debt would appear in the estimates under three heads-the permanent debt, the interest on local loans, and the temporary debt. After noticing the balances in the Exchequer, now at 5,119,000l.-a very low point-he proceeded to state the estimated expenditure for next year as follows:

The total anticipated revenue for the year he put, therefore, at 77,270,000l., and deducting this from the anticipated expenditure of 78,044,000, there resulted a deficiency on the coming year of 774,000l. This deficit he wished to augment by exempting from the domestic servants tax boys or men only employed on casual jobs, which he reckoned would cost the revenue some 26,000l.; so that there is a deficit of 800,000l. If the prospect had been the same as last year, Sir Stafford Northcote would have been ready to trust to the spring of the revenue to make up the deficit; but that was not possible under existing circumstances. He proposed, therefore, to meet the deficit by additional taxation; and after examining the only two modes which he conceived were open to him-an addition to the spirit duties or to the income tax-he preferred the second course, and proposed to the Committee to consent to raise the income tax by one penny. But in future the line of exemption will be fixed at 150l. instead of at 100l.; the amount of deduction will be raised from 80l. to 120l., and it will be applied to all incomes of 400l. and under. The total receipt from this extra penny would be about 1,480,000l., of which 1,168,000l. will enter into this year's accounts, thus raising the revenue to 78,412,000l., and converting the deficit of 800,000l. into a surplus of 368,000l. The revenue and expenditure for the coming year will therefore be-revenue, 78,412,000l. ; expenditure, 78,044,000l.

The various minor objections which are always mooted in the conversational debate which follows a budget speech, may be dismissed, but it was soon made obvious that a strong opposition

would be offered to the increased exemptions to small incomes. On May 25, a high financial authority in the person of Mr. Kirkman Hodgson entered the field, with an amendment to the effect that instead of 3d. the Income Tax should be at the rate of 24d. in the pound. This would compel the Chancellor of the Exchequer to abandon the extension of the partial exemptions, but Mr. Hodgson showed that after exempting incomes under 150l, the 24d. Income Tax would leave him with only a small deficit of 78,000l. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, on the other hand, not only strongly objected on principle 'to commencing the year with a deficit, but showed that, even if the exemptions were given up altogether, the proposal would land him in a deficit of 108,000l., and of 250,000l. if the exemption of 150l. incomes were allowed.

After the rejection of this amendment by 227 votes to 142, on clause 8, Mr. Hubbard moved an amendment with the view of negativing the proposed increase of the deductions from 80l. to 120., and their extension from 300l. to 400l. incomes. The Chancellor of the Exchequer explained that the extension of these remissions did not rest on the sentimental grounds on which they were originally proposed, but on technical grounds, and they were intended to make the intervals between the different classes of income-the totally exempted, the partially-exempted, and the fully-taxed incomes-more gradual. Mr. Goschen, Mr. Gregory, and Mr. P. Taylor made some remarks, and the amendment was then negatived without a division.

The Times, in a leading article published on the following day, strongly combated the principle of exemption. "It is obvious," remarked the leading journal, "that there prevails widely in the House of Commons a jealousy--and a very wholesome jealousy---of the method of exemptions; but members were deterred from giving effect to their feelings by their votes, partly from a doubtful and hesitating apprehension that the exemptions now proposed are proper and justifiable, and partly from the consciousness that opposition to them is sure to be unpopular. This last feeling is in itself an argument for strictly watching the development of the policy of exemptions. It illustrates the difficulty of opposing it openly. As soon as a proposition for exemption is made in the House of Commons the step has been taken which cannot be retraced, the course begun which cannot be arrested, and the only way to prevent such propositions being made is to let Ministers know that, unless they are very carefully guarded, those who introduce them will be punished by defeats on some other questions of policy."

It was not until the session was far advanced that the "budget" of Local Finance was expounded to the House by Mr. Sclater-Booth. He premised that the bill gave power to the Government to sanction loans to the amount of about 4,000,000l., which would be amply sufficient for all the purposes required. Dividing his Local Budget into two parts-Debt and Current

Expenses-he showed that the Local Debt had increased from 80,000,000l. in 1873 to 85,500,000l. in 1874, and to 92,500,000l. in 1875. These figures Mr. Sclater-Booth analysed minutely and from different points of view, showing among other things that 12,000,000l. of the Local Debt is owed by the Metropolis, 33,500,000l. by the urban sanitary authorities (of which Manchester, Liverpool, Bradford, and Leeds accounted for 14,500,000l.), 30,000,000l. for the tolls and dues, and the remainder by School Boards, county and municipal authorities, &c. On the question whether local debt had increased more rapidly than rateable value, he mentioned that the latter has increased from 100,000,000l. in 1867 to 120,000,000l. at the present time, while in twelve months' time the amount of debt he calculated would be 95,500,000l. In the last year 6,505,000l. had been borrowed under Local Acts, and 1,975,000l. by the authority of the Local Government Board, and the great bulk had been raised from private sources. Although these figures were large he did not regard them as alarming, and there could be no question that they represented many valuable improvements and much additional comfort to the people. Passing next to the question of Current Expenditure, Mr. SclaterBooth said that the amounts raised by Local Taxation had been increased from 24,500,000l. in 1874 to 26,500,000l. and the principal items of this addition were accounted for by the Metropolis Sanitary Authorities and the School Boards. At the same time the Poor Rates had fallen to 7,418,000l., being a decrease of 500,000l. in three years. In fact, while the remunerative expenditure continued to rise, the unremunerative expenditure showed a constant tendency to decrease.

An important amendment (although in the form of a resolution) was moved by Mr. Fawcett, and supported by Mr. Rathbone and Mr. Goschen. It declared that unduly large proportions of the charge involved in the payment of the interest and capital of the loans raised by local authorities falls on the occupiers as distinguished from the owners of land, houses, and other rateable property.

As usual it was not until the last week of the session that the third of the Financial Statements, the Indian Budget, could find a day. On August 10, Lord George Hamilton introduced it in a speech admirable for clearness and completeness. Dealing first with the com parative statistics of the last three years, he pointed out with regard to 1874-75, that while the estimated revenue was 49,984,000l. and the expenditure 50,372,000l., the actual revenue was 50,570,171. and the expenditure 50,250,974l., thus changing a deficit of 1,388,000l. to a surplus of 319,1977. In 1875-76 the estimated revenue rose to an actual yield of 51,298,8721., and the expenditure, estimated at 49,314,000l., rose to 49,664,373,, so that a calculated surplus of 506,000l. was actually 1,634,499. The actual surplus would have been higher but for the famine expenditure, which in 1873-4 was 3,864,673l., in 1874-75, 2,237,860l.

D