Mr Gladstone's Statements Discussed.

Thames Star, Volume XI, Issue 3486, 26 February 1880, Page 2

Mr Gladstone's Statements Discussed.

We have given extracts from Mr Gladstone's speeches in Scotland, and we how give a portion of an address giren by Sir Stafford Northcote, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, at Leeds, wherein he deals with Mr Gladston's statements :—

Now, Mr Gladstone is such a great authority on matters of finance that people are disposed to take whatever lie says entirely upon trust. I hare observed a very touching instance of this in your town There is a very intelligent newspaper—a first-class paper, as we all know, published in Leeds—the Leeds Mercury (laughter); and I know that it writes fairly and intelligently. But I saw the other day that Mr Gladstone having made a slip in one of his speeches and having informed his audience that the income lax had been raised to 6d, the editor of the Leeds Mercury not only enforced that fact on his readers, but went on to say that we have now the pleasure of paying a 6d income-tax to gratify the predileotiona of Lord Beacon sfield. (Laughter.) I beg publicly to tender my best thanks to that gentlemen for the very great liberality of his proceedings. (Laughter.) By the present law he need not pay more than sd, but he out of his goodwill to Lord Beaconsfield pays 6d. (Laughter;) But really it is impossible for you to accept in a blind way everything that Mr Grindstone has said. Why, you know that he himself has had to correct some things. He told his , audience that he referred to Scotland as, being the country indicated in the beauti- j ful song " The Land of the Leal," which i you know means Heaven. (A laugh.) I must say that when I read that I thought he must have had in his mind something like the idea which we have heard—namely, that all good Americans when they die go Paris. (A laugh.) So I thought Mr Gladstone meant that alt good Liberals when they die go to Scotland. (.Laughter.) Then in that sense Scotland may properly be called the land of Heaven. (Renewed laughter.) But the real explanation, it seems, is that he had so many things m his mind that he made a mistake and could not help it. - So he has made many other mistakes—l have no doubt with the same excuse. But it may be interesting to you to consider a little what his oratory amounts to, because, as I understand, you are to have a special interest in him. He has declared to win, I am told, with Midlothian; but he has engaged in Leeds, a sort of stablecompanion to Midlothian, which is to try its paces, and, perhaps, provide him with a safe seat in case the other should tail him. (Laughter.) Therefore, you are interested in considering what his statemenU are worth, and how they have to be examined. (Cheers.) Let me avoid as far as I can plunging you unnecessarily into a great wilderness of figures, and let me disentangle from his statements the principal charges whioh I understand him to make against us. In the first place, he told his audience at Edinburgh that we had increased the national expenditure by 8£ millions; secondly, that we have not made proper provision for the

expenditure which we have brought upon the iMtion ; and then he brings a number of charges—of which I will speak by and by—against us for breaking all the rules of finance. But with respect to the charge of increasing the national expenditure by 8£ millions, I demur altogether to the manner in which he makes his comparison. > What has ho done ? He takes the expenditure of the last year of his own Governxm nt—the year 1873 4—and compares it with that of the published accounts for the completed year 1878 79 under the Conservative Government. And he does it in a fair way, because In deducts on either side the cost of the charges of collecting tie revenue and gives a com* pari son of the net receipts only. So far I have not a word to aay against him. Then he proceeds to make his comparison by deducting, on the one side, from his own expenditure the two large sums of £3,200,030 for the Alabama indemnity and £800,000 for the Ashnntee war; but, on the other side, he declines to allow us to deduct from our expenditure any of that extraordinary charge occasioned by our provision to prevent war in Hurope, and,_alsoj_ the --charge-ia- - --cjitteiUfer^tiM i"South African war. He is good enough to Bay he will allow Ul to deduct what we expended upon education and on local subventions, because that has some justification or excuse; but he will not permit us to deduct the other expenditure. That is the most absurd tute" illogical way of making a comparison" which I ever heard of. If he likes to say, " We will deduct the extraordinary ex- , penditure in the one year, and then we must deduct it, also, in the other;" or if he likes to say, " We will compare the whole with the whole without deducting anything," that coarse is also open to him; but he hag no right to say, "1 deduct this expenditure of ours because it is good, and I will not deduct that expenditure of yours because it is bad." Why, he might just as well say, " I deduct from the expenditure of 1873-4 all the salaries of the Cabinet Ministers because they are gcod men, and I will not deduct them on the other side because they are wicked men:" (Laughter and cheers.) I claim that we should be allowed to deduct our extraordinary expenditure just as much as he. deducts his. I admit that the Alabama indemnity was an extraordinary expenditure, and I ant far from complaining of the course that was then taken in regard to that settlement. lam the last person who would have a right to complain of it. But I must remind the British Government of what is very carefully kept out of sight—as to what was the cause of that expenditure. How came it that such a bill was brought against the Government ? Why, it was owing to the, I will not say deliberate, bnt the culpable negligence of Lord Russell and Mr Gladstone in allowing the ships which preyed -on American commerce to be built in this country (cheers); and I say we hare no right whatever to be asked to, discount the result of that negligence which fell upon us in the form of the payment of the Alabama Award. (Cheers.) Again, as to the Ashantee war, Mr Gladstone says, " I deduct that because it was a war which nobody wished and it-came upon us very much against our desires." But I say the same as to our South African war, because nothing could have come on as with more complete: unwillingness on the part of the Government than did that war. (Cheers.) But if I am to deduct our extra* ordinary expenditure I shall have to. deduct on our side, not 4 millions, - but something like 4f millions; and this is the way I make it clear. In the first place, there was a million and a half token for the vote of credit for the South African war; in the second place, there were the supplementary estimates which were added to the preceding year to the Army and Navy expenditure for the purpose of providing against the possibility of t war in Unrope. These amounted to £3,200*000. They were for additions to the Army and Navy, and the result was in that way we had sn^xtraordinary expenditure of about 4J millions.• I see that several gentlemen have failed to notice that there was any such extraor* , dinary addition to our Army and Nary ; expenditure. •

(To be continued,.)