in the Straits, where the Chinese regard the Government Stamp as giving an additional validity to their bargains, in harmony with their own customs, and which they think well worth the cost.
I scarcely know whether I ought to note the fact mentioned in the Protest that one of the official Members of Council expressed an opinion adverse to the principle of the proposed Bill. I understood him merely to ask for a preliminary inquiry into the preferable mode of raising the necessary funds, and that he disapproved of the Schedule of the Singapore Act, which I likewise disapproved. I believe the amended Schedule entirely meets his views and that it really meets those of many others originally opposed to the measure, and indeed it is quite evident from the tone of a portion of the Press that the Memorialists do not represent Public feeling so generally as they had supposed.
I regret extremely that I have been obliged to occupy your attention so long, but I have no other means of placing before the Public the Government views of a very important question. I shall however only advert to one more point, but that is the heaviest grievance of the Memorialists, viz.: "the expansive powers of a Stamp Ordinance." It appears I had mentioned this as amongst the advantages of such taxation. This they call "the evil at the bottom of the whole proposition." I would remind them that, if I mentioned that point, I equally alluded to such a Bill's "capability of immediate contraction" whilst the objection of that expansiveness lies more or less against every scheme of taxation. Those who see a capability of expansion in Stamps have not failed to discover it also in the Police and Water Rates and even to press it to the extent of class legislation.
In point of fact however it was rather contraction than expansion, which I had in view—for I was aware that a serious objection to the Bill—and one, which deprives me of the adhesion of some leading Members of the Community—is that it is impolitic for the Colony to show any surplus on its Balance Sheet. It is thought—I hope only by a few—that the Home Government might in such case increase the Colonial contribution towards Imperial objects.
You see that I am very candid—but that such feeling did exist and does exist is well known to many of my friends and I could not ignore it. I therefore caused the proposed Bill to be so framed as to give the Governor in Council power to annul or lessen the Duty on any item, but no power to add to the items or increase the Duties. It does appear to me therefore rather hard that, having been thus careful to prevent the receipts from Stamp Duties exceeding the contemplated requirements of the Government, I should find the Memorialists designating my well-intentioned effort in their behalf—as "the evil lying at the bottom of the whole proposition."
I have now put the Government case before you—and shall be well pleased, if I find, on discussion, that without undue sacrifice of Revenue, I can redistribute the incidence of the proposed taxation in a manner more acceptable to those whom it will affect.
Page 13
WEEKLY RETURN OF THE STATE OF THE COLONIAL TREASURY.
ABSTRACT SHEWING THE MONIES RECEIVED AND PAID BY THE COLONIAL TREASURER, AND THE BALANCE REMAINING UNDER HIS SEPARATE CHARGE,
AT THE END OF THE WEEK, MONDAY, 3RD SEPTEMBER, 1866.
PAYMENTS AMOUNT DATE Salaries, Contingencies, &c. for August $64,434.94 Administration of Justice, Conveyance of Mails, Public Works Balance remaining in the Treasury $17,069.17 Deposited in Strong Vault Nil *In Banks unavailable deposits $59,200 RECEIPTS AMOUNT DATE Land Revenue $8,882.26 1866 Sept. 3 Licenses, Taxes $94.51 Postages $14.90 Fines and Fees of Courts $9 Fees of Office Withdrawn from the Oriental Bank, Ordinance No. 12 of 1857, Reimbursements $15,000 Withdrawn from the Strong Vault Miscellaneous Receipts From 27th August to 3rd September, inclusiveCOLONIAL TREASURY, Victoria, Hongkong, 3rd September, 1866.
(Signed,) F. FORTH, Colonial Treasurer.
* Balance of Judicial Deposits (not available), $147,249.88.
Page 14