In the debate that followed the chief speaker was, of
course, Sir William Harcourt. He at once took the very strongest possible objection to the proposed dealings with the Sinking Fund, and denounced them in language which could hardly have been increased in vehemence had the Chancellor of the Exchequer contemplated an act of repudiation. He re- gretted that a period of remarkable prosperity should be chosen as the occasion of repudiating our obligations, and he characterised the Budget as the most serious and disastrous in its proposals that had ever been made by a Chancellor of the Exchequer of this country. The proposals were a fatal blow to the standard of national integrity which we had set up and maintained through good report and evil. Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Disraeli, in 1859, when the country was threatened with war, scorned to resort to such a measure, and the fact that the present Chancellor of the Exchequer had adopted a policy of bilking his bills showed that the Government were too weak and too cowardly to meet their responsibilities. This is mere raving. Had Sir William made a temperate attack on the Budget he would have been infinitely more effective. As it is, the public will simply ignore his pumped- up passion.
