§ 16. "That on and after the twenty-ninth day of September, nineteen hundred and fifteen, until the first day of August, nineteen hundred and sixteen, there shall be charged on any of the following articles imported into Great Britain or Ireland a Customs duty of an amount equal to thirty-three and one-third per cent. of the value of the article, that is to say:—
- Motor cars, including motor bicycles and motor tricycles.
- Accessories and component parts of motor care, motor bicycles, or motor tricycles."
§ Question again proposed. Debate resumed.
§ The PRIME MINISTERI understand that a compact was come to last night between my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer and those who were criticising this particular Resolution, that, if the Adjournment of the Debate was agreed to, a decision on the Resolution would be come to to-day without further discussion. If, therefore, I interpose by leave of the House, it is not with any intention to violate that compact, but because it will be for the convenience of the House, before they decide upon this particular question and some other questions which are to follow, if I state—and I do so without, I hope, trespassing upon the time of the House—the view of the Government. I gather from what I have read and heard that there was a good deal last evening of what, in another sphere, is sometimes called "liveliness"—liveliness of spirit, animation of interest. I am very anxious, if I may say so, to appeal to the House in all quarters to realise precisely the situation in which, in regard to this matter, we stand.
The Budget which was introduced by my right hon. Friend represents the unanimous judgment of a united Cabinet, and I think it is only fair—and I say this with- 1030 out directing my remarks to any quarter of the House in particular—that in its consideration it should be regarded by the House of Commons as a whole. I strongly deprecate any attempt to upset the balance, whether upon the one side or upon the other. I do not know whether I am under suspicion—[HON. MEMBERS: "No, no!"]—in regard to what I may call my Free Trade record. St. Paul said, in a moment of perhaps excessive modesty, that he was the least of all the Apostles. Not quite in the same breath, but in another moment of perhaps undue exaltation, he said and boasted that he was in labours more abundant and in journeyings more frequent than any of the others. Perhaps I may say of myself—though I do not presume to cite the analogy as in any degree parallel, or perhaps even becoming—that both as regards labours and journeyings I have perhaps done as much—as many of my Friends here would think with pernicious results—in the cause of Free Trade. If I thought that any proposal in this Budget, or in any other measure put forward by the Government of which I have the honour to be the head, was directed, remotely or immediately, against the cause of Free Trade, I should be the last person to subscribe to it, or to commend it to the House of Commons. I do not say, in regard to that, "Let the dead bury their dead," because this controversy between Free Trade and the principles opposed to Free Trade is a perennial one; but I do say, let these controversies, which are in a state of suspended animation, continue during the War in a state of suspense. And the practical moral in regard to this particular matter which I draw from these considerations is this: Each of these taxes has been considered, and proposed after weighing its individual merits. The notion, which I observe prevails in some quarters, that these taxes—of which the imported Motor Tax is the first in point of order and perhaps in point of importance—were suggested, or initiated, in the Government by those who have recently joined us, among whom, of course, are some of the most eminent apostles and propagandists of Tariff Reform, is entirely without foundation. I am not a Tariff Reformer. I do not think that I ever shall be. But if ever I were, I certainly should not have begun the construction of what used to be called a "scientific tariff" by selecting these particular duties, or by imposing this particular percentage of levy. I cannot imagine a tariff started under more un- 1031 favourable conditions, and less likely to conciliate popular support, or to attain the purpose which Tariff Reform has in view. I wish the House clearly to understand that, be these taxes good or bad, that is not their source, and that is not their intention. The intention and object with which these taxes are put forward are of a very different kind, and entirely without prejudice to the general question between Free Trade and what is called "Fiscal Reform." The object, and a very important object, is, on the one hand, to diminish or discourage the consumption of superfluous or unnecessary commodities of a luxurious kind, but still more—and this to my mind is the really important point—to discourage unnecessary importation.
In the conditions under which we now live, everything that comes into this country from abroad which is not absolutely needed for the sustenance or carrying on of the industry of our population, involving as it does a corresponding obligation on us to export, tends still further to disturb and depress the exchanges, and, therefore, to embarrass the conduct of the War and the provision of the financial resources which are absolutely necessary for its successful prosecution. These are small matters I agree. In the aggregate they do not amount to very much, but they amount to something, something indeed quite substantial, and, in the opinion of the Government—I speak for my Free Trade colleagues just as much as for those of my colleagues who are supporters of Tariff Reform, without any regard to what I may call the general issue as between those two sets of principles—these taxes, limited in amount, temporary in their duration, experimental in their character, will be and are calculated to have the effect—which I believe everybody in this House desires, that taxation should, as far as it can, produce—of limiting unnecessary importation, and to that extent of facilitating the financial prosecution of the War.
4.0 P.M.
Do not let it be supposed that I, or the Government, are attempting in any way to curtail the freedom of discussion in the House of Commons. Nothing is further from our thoughts. Take what I may call the other side of the Budget, that side which deals with direct taxation—the Income Tax. We are quite ready, as my right hon. Friend has shown, to receive, and indeed to act upon, practical suggestions for the improvement of this or that 1032 proposal. And so in regard to these taxes, when we come to discuss one after another, any practical suggestions which are made for their improvement, or any practical objections which are put forward in regard to this or that particular item, that the trade or social interests of the country would be injuriously affected—they are, of course, entitled to be put forward—these suggestions and objections will, of course, be respectfully considered by the Government. We do not intend in any way to override the power of free discussion which, especially in matters of finance, is the peculiar province and prerogative of this House. But I must make it quite clear—I hope that I shall have the assent of my hon. Friends behind me, who are as keen Free Traders as I am—that the Government do regard these taxes, as a whole, subject to criticism and discussion, as an integral part of the Budget, and they will ask the House of Commons above all to remember that we are not now dealing with normal conditions. We are not proposing—who would suggest?—a Budget like this under any other conditions than conditions of war. If I may make an appeal to the House, we must carry on the discussion in that atmosphere, and with those considerations always in view; and nothing that is done that is proposed or that is assented to under conditions such as these can, or ought ever, to be regarded as a precedent or an example of the kind of taxation which we should impose in times of peace and in normal conditions. That is the governing fact in the case. Now that this tax, which is the most productive, and in regard to which my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has shown very great willingness to remove practically every objection, is, I hope, going to be assented to by the House, I trust that the succeeding Resolutions will be considered individually upon their merits—I mean the merits of the particular taxes—and that those larger and more general considerations, which would be most appropriate if we were engaged in peace times in discussing tariff matters, will, by universal consent, be put on one side, and that the House will remember that the primary, indeed the ultimate, purposes of any Budget proposal, under the circumstances of the day, are, first and foremost, to produce revenue, and, next, and hardly less important, to attain other objects—the diminution of unnecessary consumption and the checking of superfluous im- 1033 ports—without which the financial future before us would be far more formidable than it is naturally. I am sorry to have said so much, but I wanted to make the position of the Government perfectly clear. The Budget is proposed on the joint and collective responsibility of the united Cabinet, and, with a full sense of that responsibility, they ask the House of Commons to accept it.
§ Mr. BOOTHI want to ask the Prime Minister a question on one point. While we give general assistance and support to this Government in relation to the War, I wish to know if those who disapprove of some of these smaller points, possibly involving some sixty or one-hundred thousand which cannot play a part in the
§ provision of funds for the War, are allowed to carry their disapproval to the Division Lobby to mark their difference of view in regard to that taxation, and would that be regarded as a matter on which the Government would resign?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI cannot prevent or check in any way the action of individual Members; they must follow their own conscience. I do, speaking on behalf of the Government, very strongly press the inexpediency of such a course.
§ Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
§ The House divided. Ayes, 174; Noes, 10.
1035| Division No. 9. | AYES. | [4.4 p.m. |
| Acland, Rt. Hon. Francis Dyke | Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward | Nield, Herbert |
| Agg-Gardner, James Tynte | Griffith, Rt. Hon. Ellis Jones | Nolan, Joseph |
| Amery, L. C. M. S. | Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.) | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) |
| Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry | Guinness, Hon. Rupert (Essex, S.E.) | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight) | Paget, Almeric Hugh |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Hall, Marshall (E. Toxteth) | Partington, Oswald |
| Barlow, Sir John Emmott (Somerset) | Hamilton, C. G. C. (Ches., Altrincham) | Pearce, Sir William (Limehouse) |
| Barnes, George N. | Hamilton, Lord C. J. (Kensington, S.) | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) |
| Barran, Sir John N. (Hawick Burghs) | Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis (Rossendale) | Pennefather, De Fonblanque |
| Barrie, H. T. | Hardy, Rt. Hon. Laurence | Perkins, Walter F. |
| Beck, Arthur Cecil | Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire) | Peto, Basil Edward |
| Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) | Harris, Henry Percy (Paddington, S.) | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Bentham, George Jackson | Haslam, Lewis | Price, Sir Robert J. (Norfolk, E.) |
| Bigland, Alfred | Helme, Sir Norval Watson | Prothero, Roland Edmund |
| Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine | Henderson, Rt. Hon. Arthur (Durham) | Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel |
| Boyton, James | Henderson, Sir A. (St. Geo., Han. Sq.) | Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) |
| Brace, William | Henry, Sir Charles | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Bridgeman, William Clive | Hewins, William Albert Samuel | Rees, G. C. (Carnarvonshire, Arfon) |
| Broughton, Urban Hanlon | Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy | Rees, Sir J. D. (Nottingham, E.) |
| Bull, Sir William James | Holmes, Daniel Turner | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs) |
| Carlile, Sir Edward Hildred | Horner, Andrew Long | Robinson, Sidney |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H. | Houston, Robert Paterson | Rolleston, Sir John |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Ingleby, Holcombe | Rothschild, Lionel de |
| Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord Robert (Herts, Hitchin) | Jardine, Sir J. (Roxburgh) | Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter (Dewsbury) |
| Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. A. | Jones, William S. Glyn- (Stepney) | Runciman, Sir Walter (Hartlepool) |
| Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry | Keating, Matthew | Rutherford, John (Lancs, Darwen) |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Kellaway, Frederick George | Rutherford, Watson (L'pool, W. Derby) |
| Collins, Sir Stephen (Lambeth) | King, Joseph | Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood) |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Cowan, W. H. | Larmor, Sir J. | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) |
| Craig, Ernest (Cheshire, Crewe) | Law, Rt. Hon. A. Bonar (Bootle) | Samuel, Samuel (Wandsworth) |
| Craik, Sir Henry | Leach, Charles | Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John Alisebrook |
| Crooks, William | Levy, Sir Maurice | Smith, Rt. Hon. Sir F. E. (Walton) |
| Currie, George W. | Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert | Smith, Sir Swire (Keighley, Yorks) |
| Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | Lloyd, George Butler (Shrewsbury) | Soames, Arthur Wellesley |
| Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardiganshire) | Long, Rt. Hon. Walter | Spear, Sir John Ward |
| Denniss, E. R. B. | Lonsdale, Sir John Brownlee | Spicer, Rt. Hon. Sir Albert |
| Dougherty, Rt. Hon. Sir J. B. | Mackinder, Halford J. | Swift, Rigby |
| Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | Macleod, John Mackintosh | Tennant, Rt. Hon. Harold John |
| Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor) | Macmaster, Donald | Thomas-Stanford, Charles |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) | Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J. | Thompson, Robert (Belfast, North) |
| Fell, Arthur | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| Field, William | McKenna. Rt. Hon. Reginald | Thorne, William (West Ham) |
| Fisher, Rt. Hon. W. Hayes | Magnus, Sir Philip | Thynne, Lord Alexander |
| Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue | Markham, Sir Arthur Basil | Tickler, T. G. |
| Flavin, Michael Joseph | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Touche, George Alexander |
| Fletcher, John Samuel | Money, Sir L. G. Chiozza | Tryon, Captain George Clement |
| Forster, Henry William | Montagu, Rt. Hon. E. S. | Walton, Sir Joseph |
| Gardner, Ernest | Mooney, John J. | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Geddard, Sir Daniel Ford | Morgan, George Hay | Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney) |
| Gordon, John (Londonderry, South) | Morton, Alpheus Cleophas | Watt, Henry A. |
| Goulding, Edward Alfred | Mount, William Arthur | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| Grant, J. A. | Munro, Rt. Hon. Robert | Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P. |
| Greig, Colonel J. W. | Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield) | Wilkie, Alexander |
| Williams, Col. Sir Robert (Dorset, W.) | Worthington Evans, L. | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Lord E. Talbot and Mr. Gulland. |
| Wing, Thomas Edward | Yate, Colonel Charles Edward | |
| Wood, Rt. Hon. T McKinnon (Glasgow) | Yerburgh, Robert A. | |
| NOES. | ||
| Clough, William | Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) | |
| Galbraith, Samuel | Outhwaite, R. L. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Lieut.-Commander Wedgwood and Mr. Lough. |
| Healy, Maurice (Cork) | Pringle, William M. R. | |
| Hinds, John | Sherwell, Arthur James | |
| John, Edward Thomas | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
Question put, and agreed to.