Mr Gladstone's Statements Discussed.

Thames Star, Volume XI, Issue 3488, 28 February 1880, Page 1

Mr Gladstone's Statements Discussed.

We have given extracts from Mr Gladstone's speeches in Scotland, and we now give, a portion of an address giren by Sir Stafford North cote, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, at Leeds, wherein he : deals with Mr Gladstone's statementsl:----(Continued.) '." . I see that some rery able gentlemenone, for instance who is now a candidate > in a neighbouring borough, Mr Waddy— made a charge against us, but they hare altogether failed to observe that the expenditure they hare quoted against us is not our ordinary Army and Nary expenditure, but includes the large sums which we had to take to prevent a European war which would hare been far more costly. (Cheers.) Well, we Bhall argue by and by whether that expenditure ' was judieous and whether it was neces* sary—whether it was cheaper for us to spend some six or seven, millions on 'preparations to avert war, or to< allow a state of things to arise which would have plunged us into a second Crimean war, with its tenfold expenditure: (Cheers.) I say we will argue all these points by and by; but we insist upon baring comparisons made fairly and with like set ' againßt like; and therefore I say that our excess of expenditure over that of Mr Gladstone's Government was not, as he puts it, 8f millions, but about 7 £ millions. That, however, appears a large sum on paper. But look a little behind it and '- inquire what were the causes of this increase of 7f millions, for this is the rint on which attention should be, fixed, have taken the .figures thus:—There was an increased charge for the debt of £1,937,000, an increase on the Army and Navy of something like £2,300,000, and an excess pn the civil expenditure, of 3 J millions. Well, now, you may think that amount of £1,937,000, or ftearly £2,000,000, of the charge of the debt is in itself a very strong and conclusive argument against the present Government, and you will naturally say, it is making bad worse when you state that the charge for the debt -of this' country has, under your management, increased by nearly two millions in five years. That is just one. of the points on which it is necessary that you .should clear, your; minds and understated what this debt charge really is. Now I hold in my hand / here a little extract, from a paper from which all these figures have been takes. It is what is. called " The Statistical Abstract of the United Kingdom." It is a little Blue-book—anybody may get it —and it will be found very instructive, and if you look at its contents " and make a comparison as to the different parts. of the . debt,. you will see how this great increase. arises— how the charges for the debt, which in. 1874 were £26,700,000, have risen in-1878 to £28,644,000. iThatis divided-into six items. In the first place there is the charge for the interest upon the funded < * permanent debt; that has not risen, it has diminished. That has* fallen from being nearly £22,00CMD00 in 1874 to 2l\ millions in 1879. That is a very curious thing. .. If you see that the interest on. the funded • debt is diminished by half a million^ and. - even acknowledge that upon the whole ,■ • the debt has not been increased, but has ■• been diminished, some say by more' and some say by less, how is it there is so large an increase in the annual* charge as £1,937,000? Well, what is the 1 next item ? Terminable annuities. Now they . have risen from £4,586,000. to £5,711,000., There has been an increase in the terminable annuities of something like £1,100,000 a year. Well, that .means this—that we are converting the permanent debt into a debt which is to expire* It means that we are redeeming deht at a - considerablyjaccelofalcd ratio every year ; and in consequence though we are paying' more, we are"paying that in order ,to get - rid of and discharge a debt* which would-. be a burden to us. Let me give you an instance of oue thing we did ourselves :— One step I took on our first coming into power was to cancel severr millions of permanent debt and create an annuity charge of £650,000 a year, in order that that might be redeemed before 1885. That added greatly to our charges, but it was in order to diminish the debt, and you will find the benefit of this when you come to the year 1885, and when you find the annuities have been created, and

which are nearer five millions a year than than four millions—they are quite 4f millions a year—will come to an end in * that year and will relieve you of that amount of■•■ eharge| (Cheers.)./1 .adtait that some portion of those additional annuities is due, not to the action which I hare been describing, but also to the creation of new annuities in consequence of the addition of new debt, but not one sixpence of that new debt created in the shape of short.annuities is due to the action of the' present Government. It is due to the obligations thrown upon us by preceding Governments in respect of fortification and barracks which we have kadi to provide. (Cheem.) These gentlemen who are so extremely particular at to our conduct in providing all that is necessary in taxation within the year did not . do it .themselves when they had to provide for the fortifications of the country and for barracks. (Hear, hear.) 2fo; r they began a series of borrowings which.we have had to carry on, and entailed a charge of about £49,000 a yeiirii The next item is a small one; it is a charge on the permanent unfunded debt which has hardly varied; within "the five years. It amounts to £138,000. Then comes another charge to which lonust ask your special attention. It ia a charge of £633,000 for the new sinking fund.: Well, that is not an addition to the expenditure at all. It is money directly apolied to redeeming and cancelling debt. It is, in fact, a re-arrangement which was

made two or three years ago on the suggestion of the present Government, which I explained in the Budget of the year, by which we raised the amount which the country pays year by year for the redemption of debt, and we fixed it at a permanent amount of £28,000,000 a year. It was undoubtedly an addition to The expenditure, bnt it was not to pay away upon one service or another; but to enable yon to redeem the debt at a greater ratio than you were doing. Before we added to the, charge, the intereatn on the charge for debt had fallen to about £26,700,000, and it was raised at once to £28,000,000 by the decision of Parliament that -they would

Jew by year;set aside £28^000,000 for the iacharge of the interest of the debt and for applying whatever might"remain over when that interest Lad been defrayed to the redemption of more debt. If you had kept the accounts in the old way, this £633,000 would hare been counted as part of your surplus for the year, but became it is not so accounted,, because it is kept within that new arrangement, they are good enough to set it down as if it were an increase of expenditure.