Page 325 - clra62_0019-(GIPE)

A FINANCIAL RETROSPECT, ~o~"'190I 317
which the comparison extends, and increases in the
latter part, the comparison of the amounts of taxation
affec,ed does not quite show the real reduction that has
taken place, but it shows a figure that may be a good'
deal less. I n the last ten years there is an increase of
taxation of no less than £ 19,500,000 on balance, but
the same changes of taxes in the first ten years of the
period would have come to a good deal less money, and
it is this' amount which should be compared with the
early reductions, so as to show what the real growth of
revenue has been.
If we made the comparison with the estimates of the
current year the result would be much the same. We
should have to add about II million £ for the increased
taxes in last budget, thereby showing a small increase
of taxation on balance to be deducted from the apparent
growth of revenue from 70 million £ in 1861 to 142!
million £ in the current year. But this apparent in-
crease, according to the explanation above given, would
be far more than the real increase, and on balance there
would be no such increase. Weare quite within the
mark in saying that the doubling of the revenue since
1861 has been effected without any increase of taxes
on balance, but rather along with a decrease. 1
2. The second point which is obvious on the surface
of the tables is the fact of a great change in the relative
importance of different branches of the revenue in the
total product. A glance at Table V. shows that, while
Customs in forty years have increased from 23.3
million £ to 26.3 million £, or about 15 per cent.;
Excise from 19.4 million £ to 33.1 million £. or 70
per cent.; and Stamps (excluding death duties) from
4.9 million £ to 7.8 million £, or 57 per cent.; we find
income tax increasing from 10.9 million £ to 26.9
miIHon £. or nearly ISO per cent.; death duties from

1 No dilferencewould be made in this conclusion~rincluding the
revenues handed over to local authorities. The net reduction of taxa·
tion shown would be so much less. but the growth of revenue would
be so much greater.