§ Bill considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ Clauses 1 to 5 were agreed to.
§ Clause 6 (Purchase of Plant of existing Fire Offices).
§
SIR MINTO FARQUHAR moved the adoption of the following proviso:—
Provided that the means of extinguishing fires afforded by the said 'London Fire Engine Establishment 'shall not be diminished within the respective districts within which such means are at present applicable.
§ MR. HARVEY LEWISsaid, if the Eire Insurance Companies were not satisfied they had better have kept the matter in their own hands. It would be most unfair to the Metropolitan Board to hand over to it the duty of carrying out this Bill and then hamper them by a proviso like this.
MR. T. G. BARINGsaid, he could not agree to the proviso, and assured the hon. Baronet that according to the plans proposed to be carried out the protection to every part of London would not only not be diminished, but it would be increased.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clause 10 (Powers of Fire Brigade).
§
MR. AYRTON moved to add to it that—
No Water Company shall be liable to any penalty or claim by reason of any interruption of the supply of water occasioned only by compliance with the provisions of this section.
§ Motion agreed to.
§ Clause, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 11 (Contributions by Insurance Offices).
§
MR. HARVEY LEWIS moved—
That the rate which the Companies shall pay instead of £35 for every million of business, shall be £87 10s. per million.
§ This Bill inflicted some hardship on the metropolis. The Fire Brigade, as now constituted, cost £25,000 a year, and the effect of the Bill would be to give a bonus of £15,000 a year to the Companies, which would have to be borne by the ratepayers. The cost of the proposed plan was £50,000 a year; and of that the Offices would pay £25,000 a year, the Government would pay £10,000, and the object of his Amendment was to provide for the remaining £15,000 somewhat differently to the way the Bill provided for it. Mr. Drummond, Chairman of the Fire Brigade Committee, and one of the leading directors of the Sun Office, had stated that the offices did not want to escape paying their fair share-that gentleman completely and positively disavowed any wish to saddle the public with £25,000 a year, although he said "the public of London had no more business to have their fires put out for nothing than Liverpool, Manchester, or other towns." If the clause were agreed to it would divide the additional £25,000 a little more equitably between the Companies and the public.
531§ Amendment proposed, in page 4, line 11, to leave out the words "thirty-five," in order to insert the words"eighty-seven,"—(Mr. Harvey Lewis,) —instead thereof.
§ Question proposed, "That the words 'thirty-five' stand part of the Clause."
SIR MINTO FARQUHARsaid, the Insurance Companies were under no obligation to provide a Fire Brigade, and if they were saddled with a large sum they might either withdraw altogether or charge an increased sum on their premiums. Within a radius of six miles from Charing Cross it was computed that there was property to the value of not less than £900,000,000, and not more than a third of that was insured. Insurance Companies could not be expected to provide Fire Brigades for those who did not insure.
§ MR. AYRTONsaid, it was apparent that, whatever scheme was devised, the inhabitants of the metropolis would have to pay whatever sum was levied upon the Insurance Companies. He contended that the sum contributed by the Insurance Companies should be charged upon the premium, instead of on the amount of property insured. The premium was the measure of the risk against fire, and therefore the measure of the duty which the Fire Brigade was called upon to perform. A person who occupied an ordinary house should not be called upon to pay as much as the owner of a warehouse where the risk of fire was large. In the levying of a halfpenny rate this class of property would escape paying its fair proportion. He would, therefore, suggest that the words as proposed by the hon. Member (Mr. Harvey Lewis) should be left out, and then the House should consider what other words should be inserted in their stead, in order to maintain the principle to which he had referred.
§ LORD FERMOY, whilst admitting that the Bill was founded upon sound principles and would place the Insurance Companies in a better position than they at present held, said the objection which they, as representatives of the metropolitan ratepayers, had to the Bill was that in the compromise come to with the Insurance Companies the interests of the ratepayers were about to be sacrificed. The Companies would be certain to benefit by the change, and they should not shrink from paying as large an amount as before. He should support the Amendment proposed by his hon. Colleague (Mr. Harvey Lewis), and he trusted that the Government would 532 deal fairly between the ratepayers and the Insurance Companies.
MR. T. G. BARINGsaid, that if the offices chose to give up the brigade, the legal liability would rest on the parishes. There was no doubt a great deal to be said against raising the money necessary for maintaining the Fire Brigades by levying a rate; but, at the same time, by levying a contribution on the offices they were enabled to reach property which would be protected, but which would not pay anything to the rates. He hoped that the lowering of the duty would have the effect of reducing the amount of property uninsured, and that would diminish the difficulty of raising the contribution; because, of course, if the whole of the property of the metropolis was insured nothing would be fairer than to raise the necessary funds by a tax on the offices. As to the Amendment itself, he must object to it, because the present scheme was a compromise which he should be sorry to disturb.
§ Question put, "That the words 'thirty-five' stand part of the Clause."
§ The Committeedivided:—Ayes 61; Noes 16: Majority 45.
§ MR. AYRTON moved an Amendment to make the contribution to the Fire Brigade proportional to the amount of premium rather than to the amount of insurance.
MR. T. G. BARINGreiterated his views that the contribution should be according to the amount insured, and not according to the premium.
§ Amendment negatived.
SIR MINTO FARQUHARsuggested that the period during which the Insurance Companies should contribute towards the expenses of the brigade according to their present rate, instead of in the manner provided by the Act, should be extended from one to three years.
§ MR. AYRTONthought the clause should be omitted from the Bill altogether.
MR. T. G. BARINGagreed to extend the period to two years, and moved the insertion of an Amendment at the end of the clause.
§ Clause amended accordingly.
§
Amendment proposed,
At the end of the Clause to add the words "Provided that any Insurance Company which at the time of the passing of this Act contributes to the expenses of the said Fire Engine Establishment may, in respect of all payments to be made by it in the year one thousand eight hundred and sixty-six, but not afterwards, contribute after the yearly
533
rate of thirty-five pounds in one million pounds of the business in respect of which it contributes to the said Fire Engine Establishment for the present year, according to a Return which has been furnished to the Chairman of the said Metropolitan Board, instead of in the manner in this Act provided."—(Mr. Baring)
§ Question put, "That the proposed Amendment, as amended, be there added."
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes 68; Noes 11: Majority 57.
§ Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.
§ Clauses 12 to 15, inclusive, agreed to.
§ Clause 16 (Contributions by Government towards expenses of Brigade).
§
MR. BLACKBURN moved the omission of the words, "ten thousand pounds," in order to add—
The amount of rate of ½d. in the pound in the full and fair annual value of all property belonging to the Crown in the metropolis, which would, if rateable, be charged to the relief of the poor.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clause 17 (Expenses of Act not specially provided for).
§
MR. HARVEY LEWIS moved to insert after the word "place," in line 5, the words—
Such full and fair annual value to be computed to the last valuation for the time being acted upon in assessing the county rate.
§ MR. AYRTONthought the words of the Amendment would create great inconvenience if they differed from the provisions of the Metropolitan Local Management Act.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ MR. CLAY, with the view of relieving the Water Companies from the payment of rates on their pipes, those Companies having been in that respect very badly treated, moved to add at the end of line 5,
Provided, that the proportion of any such payment by the overseer of any parish which shall be attributable to rates paid by any Water Company in respect of their pipes or works, may be deducted by such Water Company out of the next payment of rates demanded by such overseer, and shall be allowed by him accordingly.
§ MR. HARVEY LEWISobjected to the Amendment on the ground that it would give rise to great litigation.
§ MR. CLAYdenied that any litigation would necessarily arise in consequence of the addition of the words he had proposed, and said that the reason why he had asked 534 the House to make such a concession was that the Water Companies gave water gratuitously for extinguishing fires.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ Clause, as amended, agreed to.
§ Remaining clauses agreed to.
§ MR. AYRTONproposed a new clause (Maintenance of floating steam fire-engines on the River Thames by the Board), one provision of which was that the Conservators of the River Thames should pay £3,000 for the purpose out of the funds in their hands.
§ Clause negatived.
§ MR. AYRTONproposed to add a clause (Persons to whom assistance has been given to contribute towards the maintenance of the Fire Brigade.)
§ Clause negatived.
§ Preamble agreed to.
§ Bill [reported; as amended, to be considered on Thursday next, and to be printed. [Bill 230.]