In 1832, the gross revenue levied by the excise amounted to 18,266,071/., but this included tea, 3,509,8207. Tiles, starch, stone bottles, sweets, mead, and home-made wines, &c., abolished; and soap, paper, and glass, on which the duties were reduced to about one-half.

The produce of the excise has apparently decreased, but not, if the duties repealed, and those transferred to the customs and stamps are added to the

In 1845 Sir Robert Peel abolished the auction duty, and the obnoxious duty on glass, amounting together to 953,0137.

Now, in order to render the excise as little oppressive--as free from inquisitorial interference with labour, manufactures, and trade, we consider that, whenever the revenue can be levied equitably, and less oppressively, from any other source, we should abolish all the remaining excise taxes: excepting the duties on distilled spirits, malt, and licences; and, the collection of the two first of these might be transferred to one new and efficient revenue department, to replace those of the existing customs, and excise, and which would collect the taxes on commodities. The third licences might be transferred to the stamps and taxes.

We would therefore abolish, 1. The duty on bricks, as bearing oppressively hard upon a laborious occupation, which affords, and would afford, much greater employment to the people; thereby giving employment to bricklayers, carpenters, glaziers, joiners, upholsterers, &c., &c., thereby diminishing poor-rates.

2. The hop duty is partially repealed; an excise duty upon wheat or apples would be as reasonable as upon hops. It imposes a tax upon particular productions which can only be cultivated in certain parts of England; and the poorrates in Kent are much higher than in any other county.

3. Paper duties are also an obnoxious and unequal tax.

3. The post-horse duty is a tax upon intercourse, and highly objectionable. 4. The soap duties are absolutely a nuisance.

5. The game certificates are ridiculous as a revenue tax.

6. But with every exception that can be urged against the excise, we cannot dispense with its revenue, except by bold, equal, and just legislation in regard to other sources of taxation.

For a specification of the Receipt of respective Articles, see the following pages.

II. REVISION OF THE CUSTOMS DUTIES.

With the exception of the duties and prohibitions imposed for protecting various interests, the duties increased since 1787, were augmented with the idea of adding the same proportion to the income then yielded, as to the duty increased. The fact of high duties either causing a diminution of consumption, or an increase of smuggling, seems to have been utterly unknown to the generations which had arisen in the Exchequer, and the House of Commons, during the reign of George the Third, and until the duties and prohibitions were grappled with after the year 1819, by Mr. Huskisson and others. The revisions made in the tariff of 1825, by Mr. Huskisson, 1831 and 1832 by Lord Althorp, and in 1833 and afterwards by Lord Sydenham, then Mr. Poulett Thomson (although those statesmen went as far as parliament would allow them, the ministers having been actually outvoted in an attempt to revise the timber duties), still left the customs duties and corn laws on a scale highly injurious to the nation. The reductions and abolitions of customs duties carried into effect by Sir Robert Peel in 1842 and 1845 formed the greatest reform made in the customs duties since 1787; but the defects even of the existing reformed tariff of customs duties are palpable. The scale of corn duties were not defended as revenue duties, but as a scale of protection to the British agriculturist. The scale could not be protective, without raising the price of bread to the consumer. If it did not intend this it meant nothing. If it did not intend to allow corn to be imported from foreign countries to be sold at natural prices-that is unrestricted competition prices-the scale was a fallacy. If it intended to be a scale of revenue duties, the duties should have been fixed, and not variable duties, veering with the weather, and with the season. But we are bound in justice to the minister, to say his difficulties were great, and that his moderate reduction of corn duties, aroused the great body of landlords into opposition against him.

The sugar cuties are highly fallacious, both in regard to supply and revenue. There can be no equitable pretence for taxing sugar, or any other commodity, except for revenue. In eight months there has been a decrease of about one 1,000,0007. of revenue, occasioned by the recent alteration of the sugar duties. A duty of 18s. 8d., or 2d. per lb. on all sugars, without reference to production or origin, would have yielded an increase in the year of about 1,000,000l.: difference of revenue about 2,000,0007.

Nor can the rates of timber duties be equitably defended. There has been a loss of 600,000l. occasioned by reducing the colonial timber duties to 1s. per load. If this duty had been reduced only to 5s. there would have been no loss of revenue; although the duty on foreign timber was reduced from 55s. to 25s. per load.

A STATEMENT of the Amount of Customs Duty received on the undermentioned Articl es during the following Years.

Totals exclusive of corn and provisions. 22,280,463 21,670,066 22,449,901 20,700,963 21,541,572 22,041,418'

Exclusive of tea sold by the East India Company prior to the 22nd of April, 1834, the duty on which was paid to the Excise.

+ Including copper at reduced duties.

Since the reductious in 1842 the duties on all the articles marked (a) have been abolished, as well as the greater number, about 500, of those classed 35 as "Other articles" (c). On those marked (b) the duties have been reduced. The duties on animals, bacon, beef, pork, and hams, and most of the articles marked (c) will be completely abolished; the duties on corn, grain, flour, meal, rice, reduced to low_nominal duties; and the duties on butter, cheese, tallow, rice, silk manufactures, &c., will be greatly reduced by Sir Robert Peel's great free trade measure for 1846.

If we examine the foregoing table we find that, with the exception of timber, metals, tallow, articles of food, which may all be considered as raw materials, and silk and gloves, which are manufactures, the revenue derived from all, with the exception of the first eight articles, is scarcely worth the expense of collection.

The total revenues of customs, deducting articles of food, amounted in 1844, to 22,041,4187. Deducting the revenue from articles upon which the duties have been abolished (about 1,400,0007.), there remains 20,641,4187. Of this amount the eight articles first enumerated in the table yielded 19,520,3267., leaving a balance only for all other duties (except food), not abolished, of only 1,121,0927., and of this balance timber alone, at the reduced duties, yielded 916,6067. Nett balance of duties which we would propose to repeal (exclusive of timber) 204,4867.

If we therefore proceeded to tax commodities only upon the sound principle that, if an article should be taxed, the duty should be levied without any reference to its origin, let us examine the result as to the extent of oppression, and the inquisitorial mode of imposing and collecting the taxes.

Taking the revenue from customs and excise, for 1844, deducting the duties abolished, and corn, which it has been contended ought not to be considered an article taxed for revenue:

Now, upon the principle of taxing no article with reference to its origin-if we abolish all the articles included in the excise, with the exception of malt and distilled spirits; and all duties of customs, except the first eight in the table, we attain this object, and we render the excise infinitely less inquisitorial, and oppressive than it has ever been, since its establishment by the Long Parlia

ment.

These abolitions accomplished, the next consideration is the amount of revenue to be received, taking the year 1844 as the basis of calculation, viz. :