HC Deb 24 July 1845 vol 82 cc1038-40
On the Motion of the Earl of Lincoln

, the Coal Trade (Port of London) Bill was read a third time.

On the Question that the Bill do pass,

Sir James Duke

moved the introduction of the following clause:— Be it enacted, That, from and after the 31st day of December next, there shall be allowed upon the exportation from the Port of London, westward of the. City boundary on the River Thames at Staines, of coals exceeding in quantity in one barge, lighter, or other vessel, twenty tons, which shall not have been landed, a Drawback of the full amount of all the Rates or Duties which shall have been paid in respect of such Coals, subject however to such rules and regulations as may from time to time be made by the Mayor, Aldermen, and Commons of the City of London, in Common Council assembled, to prevent fraud in respect of such Drawback, such rules and regulations to be approved of by the Committee of Her Majesty's Privy Council for managing the Affairs of Trade; and if the master of any vessel, or any coal weigher, shall, in any certificate or otherwise, state any circumstance which is not true, for the purpose of enabling the owner of such Coals or his agent, to obtain any such Drawback as aforesaid, or if any lighterman or other person employed to carry such Coals to their destination westward of the City boundary on the River Thames at Staines, shall not deliver the whole quantity of such Coals at some place to the westward of the said boundary, every such master or coal weigher, lighterman, or other person, so offending, shall for every such offence forfeit and pay any sum not exceeding one hundred pounds. He thought that the great expense to which the inhabitants residing to the westward of the city boundaries were subjected for the conveyance of coals from the port of London, amounted to as much as the whole freight from Newcastle to London. He would be one of the last persons to hinder or lessen the revenues of the country; but in this instance he was sure that the introduction of this clause would increase commerce, and promote the prosperity of the city of London. Under these circumstances, he trusted the noble Lord would give the clause his favourable consideration.

Clause brought up and read a first time.

On the Motion that it be read a second time,

Mr. Hume

seconded the Motion with pleasure. Coals that were unloaded in the Port and transmitted to the eastward of London, were allowed a drawback on the duty, and all they wanted was to put the inhabitants of the west end on the same footing as those at the east, and being such, he did not think the Government could offer any opposition to it. In his opinion, it was of the greatest importance to give all possible facility to the coal consumption, which trade was the great nursery of British seamen, and every restriction that was removed from the trade would tend greatly to encourage it. The Government had admitted the necessity for the removal of all possible restrictions from that trade, and he hoped that when the Government saw the great danger that trade was in of entire annihilation from the competition of railways, the Government would see the necessity of conceding this slight boon.

Sir G. Clerk

could not consent to the introduction of the clause. Although he was perfectly aware that some decrease had taken place in the Greenland, South Sea, and coasting trades in the last few years, still the prosperity of the general trade had increased so much that he was sure there was not the slightest diminution in the amount of tonnage, or in the number of seamen employed during the past year. If they admitted the principle of allowing the drawback on coals carried to Staines, it would be necessary to allow it also on coals carried by canal, and they had no legal means of preventing those coals from being afterwards carried back into the city boundaries.

Mr. Forster

supported the second reading of the clause. He thought that every encouragement should be given to the extension of our coal trade by sea, instead of hampering it by a continued increase of duties.

Mr. Stuart Wortley

maintained that the allowance of the drawback would not present any difficulty that could not easily be surmounted.

The Earl of Lincoln

resisted the clause, on the principle that the creditors of the coal-duty fund would suffer materially by permitting the drawback, and that it would be a breach of faith to them to do so without their concurrence. If the hon. Member were to carry this clause, the Government ought to permit the like drawback on coals carried by the Paddington Canal, the Grand Junction Canal, and the river Lee, and as that would be a serious interference with the revenues of the city of London, he should feel it his duty to object to the clause. He would advise the hon. Gentleman to withdraw the clause, and bring in a separate Bill next Session.

Mr. Wakley

hoped the present discussion would be a lesson to the House how they again imposed taxes upon the necessaries of life on a promise that they should soon be got rid of again. Fuel was as great a necessary of life as food, and the increase in the price of that article, after leaving the hands of the wholesale dealer, and before it reached the cellars of the poorer classes, was not to be believed.

Mr. Muntz

thought it extremely absurd that the duty should not be imposed on the continental consumer, and yet impose it on the consumer at home.

The House divided on the Question, that the clause be read a second time:—Ayes 24; Noes 37: Majority 13.

List of the AYES.
Baine, W. Muntz, G. F.
Bowes, J. Norreys, Sir D. J.
Brotherton, J. Ogle, S. C. H.
Duncan, G. Palmer, R.
Egerton, W. T. Rous, hon. Capt.
Escott, B. Somerville, Sir W. M.
Esmonde, Sir T. Tufnell, H.
Ferguson, Sir R. Wakley, T.
Fitzmaurice, hon. W. Wawn, J. T.
Forster, M. Wortley, hon. J. S.
Grosvenor, Lord R.
Hutt, W. TELLERS.
Liddell, hon. H. T. Hume, J.
Mitcalfe, H. Duke, Sir J.
List of the NOES.
Baird, W. Graham, rt. hn. Sir J.
Baring, rt. hon. W. B. Greene, T.
Bentinck, Lord G. Hamilton, C. J. B.
Blackburne, J. I. Hamilton, G. A.
Bowles, Adm. Herbert, rt. hon. S.
Broadley, H. Hussey, A.
Bruce, Lord E. Jermyn, Earl
Buller, Sir J. Y. Jones, Capt.
Cardwell, E. Kemble, H.
Clerk, rt. hon. Sir G. Lincoln, Earl of
Cripps, W. Lowther, Sir J. H.
Fitzroy, hon. H. Mackenzie, W. F.
Flower, Sir J. Masterman, J.
Fremantle, rt. hn. Sir T. Meynell, Capt.
Fuller, A. E. Patten, J. W.
Gaskell, J. Milnes Peel, J.
Goulburn, rt. hn. H. Polhill, F.
Smith, rt. hn. T. B. C. TELLERS.
Spooner, R. Young, J.
Wellesley, Lord C. Lennox, Lord A.
Mr. Hume

then moved, that the clause imposing the 1d. tax be struck out, as the faith of Parliament was not pledged to that.

The Earl of Lincoln

opposed the Amendment.

The House again divided on the Question, that the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill:—Ayes 41; Noes 24: Majority 17.

List of the AYES.
Baird, W. Greene, T.
Baring, rt. hn. W. B. Hamilton, C. J. B.
Bentinck, Lord G. Hamilton, G. A.
Blackburne, J. I. Herbert, rt. hon. S.
Blake, Sir V. Hussey, A.
Broadley, H. Jermyn, Earl
Bruce, Lord E. Jocelyn, Visct.
Cardwell, E. Kemble, H.
Clerk, rt. hon Sir G. Lennox, Lord A.
Cripps, W. Lincoln, Earl of
Denison, E. B. Lowther, Sir J. H.
Douglas, Sir H. Mackenzie, W. F.
Duckworth, Sir J. T. B. Patten, J. W.
Egerton, W. T. Peel, J.
Esmonde, Sir T. Polhill, F.
Fitzroy, hon. H. Rous, hon. Capt.
Flower, Sir J. Smith, rt. hn. T. B. C.
Fremantle, rt. hn. Sir T. Spooner, R.
Fuller, A. E. Wellesley, Lord C.
Gaskell, J. Milnes TELLERS.
Goulburn, rt. hon. H. Young, J.
Graham, rt. hn. Sir J. Baring, H.
List of the NOES.
Aldam, W. Masterman, J.
Baine, W. Mitcalfe, H.
Bowes, J. Muntz, G. F.
Brotherton, J. O'Connell, M. J.
Crawford, W. S. Palmer, R.
Duke, Sir J. Somerville, Sir W. M.
Duncan, G. Strickland, Sir G.
Escott, B. Tuffnell, H.
Ferguson, Sir R. A. Wakley, T.
Forster, M. Wawn, J. T.
Grosvenor, Lord R.
Hawes, B. TELLERS.
Hutt, W. Hume, J.
Liddell, hon. H. T. Wortley, hon. J. S.

Bill passed.

Back to