HC Deb 15 July 1857 vol 146 cc1523-32

Order for Committee read.

House in Committee.

Clause 1.

MR. HUTT

said, he wished to take that opportunity of explaining the objects of the Bill, which, he feared, were not sufficiently understood. The object was to amend the Act 6 & 7 Vict., c. 106, by which the buildings occupied by scientific and literary societies were exempted from local rates; in consequence, however, of the narrow construction put on that statute by the courts of law, the intentions of its framers had been defeated, and its present effect was that only wealthy societies formed by the higher classes had obtained any benefit from it. All the popular institutions founded by the spontaneous exertions of the people for their own instruction and improvement, such as mechanics' institutes, derived no benefit from it, and were not exempted from the payment of local rates. It was to remove this anomaly that, at the request of the Society of Arts, he had taken charge of this Bill. He admitted it might be better if no such exemption at all was allowed, but so long as the principle of exemption was admitted, no bodies were better entitled to it than those which were devoted to the education of the people. It had been objected that if the Bill passed every club would be exempted from payment of rates; but the Bill was confined to societies established for scientific, literary, and educational purposes, and no club came within that description.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 2 (Lands, &c. occupied exclusively by any Society instituted for purposes of Science, not to be rated to county or other local rates or cesses).

MR. SPOONER

said, he rose to move the omission of the words "science" and "literature," as he thought that the exemption of institutions devoted to such purposes from local rates would, in towns where those rates were extremely heavy, increase the burden of taxation thrown upon hard-working mechanics and artisans. He was desirous of limiting the exemption to institutions established for strictly educational purposes.

Amendment proposed, "in page 2, line 14, to leave out the words 'Science, Literature.'"

MR. W. EWART

said, the objections of the hon. Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Spooner) ought to have been urged against the old Bill, fourteen years ago. There was in these matters a Statute of Limitations in reason, if not in law.

MR. JOHN LOCKE

said, he objected to the clause on the ground that they had no right to tax parishes for the advantage of particular institutions. In Southwark, which he represented, there were a great number of literary institutions, schools, and other places for educational purposes, with which the parish in which they were situated had no more to do than any parish on the other side of the water. The parishes in Southwark were poor, and it was most unjust to take this money out of the rates to support institutions with which they had nothing whatever to do. It would he a very different thing if the money came out of the general funds of the country, but they had no right to exempt them from all the borough rates. The principle of the Bill was bad in itself, and the whole effect of it would be injurious. They might as well go to the parish and ask them to pay for the gas they consumed. He was happy to afford assistance to such institutions, but he did not think this was the proper way in which to do it. He should therefore support the Amendment of the hon. Member for Warwickshire, as it tended to narrow the effect of the clause.

MR. BOUVERIE

said, that he thought it would be hard on the hon. Member for Gateshead (Mr. Hutt), after the House had affirmed the principle of the Bill, to emasculate it in the way which the Amendment proposed to do. He agreed that it was undesirable to carry these exemptions from rating further than they had already gone, but the Committee would bear in mind that the exemption sought to be established by this Bill was one which already existed in some cases, and that this was only an attempt to apply that exemption to analogous institutions which it was doubtful whether the existing law intended to embrace. The real grievance was that Mr. Tidd Pratt certified all kinds of societies indiscriminately, receiving his guinea, and the ratepayers were exceedingly dissatisfied. Applications had in consequence been made to the Court of Queen's Bench, and the result was that in many cases the decisions of Mr. Tidd Pratt had been reversed. The friends of the institutions felt aggrieved that those decisions had not been final, and now wished Parliament to carry out their views. After the view which had been adopted by the House, he thought that the Bill ought not to be defeated by a side-wind.

MR. SPOONER

said, that all the arguments on their side were in favour of education, and what he wanted was, that the dilettanti portion of science and literature should be left out.

MR. PULLER

observed, that he thought that educational institutions were more entitled to exemption than scientific and literary institutions; but he was afraid that if the Amendment passed, many of the latter, which were in effect educational establishments, would be deprived of the benefit of exemption; he referred especially to mechanics' institutions, and other societies of a similar character. He trusted the hon. Member for North Warwickshire would withdraw his Amendment, the tendency of which would be, not only to re-impose on the wealthier societies a burden from which they had been exempt, but also to fix the same burden on mechanics' institutions.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE

said, he should support the clause as it stood, however anomalous it might be to include in it science and literature with purely educational establishments, for he contended that it was the duty of Parliament, and of all who wished to see the education of the people promoted, rather to stretch a point on the side of mercy and generosity than to seek to impose harsh and unnecessary restrictions on the enfranchisement and development of institutions and societies of the kind contemplated by this Bill. He wished the hon. Member for North Warwickshire had seen, as he had recently done, well-dressed mechanics visiting the literary and scientific institutions of Manchester and Salford. He would remind the Committee that with the divided opinions of the country on religious subjects a national system of education was impossible; and, therefore, it was desirable to fill up the existing gap as well as they could.

MR. RIDLEY

remarked, that he considered that the Bill was simply a supplementary measure to an existing Act of Parliament, and was only meant to carry out the original intention of that Act on a point which had been ambiguously expressed. He should, therefore, support the clause as it stood.

MR. AYRTON

said, that he considered that where a building was erected and an institution formed for the exclusive use of a particular parish, it had a good ground to claim exemption from rating; but where institutions were formed for the benefit of others besides the parishioners they had no claim to be exempted. The whole question turned upon that point, and the whole difficulty had arisen from that principle having been overlooked by the courts of law; if, therefore, the other points were got rid of he should take the sense of the House on the expediency of exempting those institutions only which were for the benefit of the parish. As the Bill stood, the old Rugby School would be exempt from rating, though it was designed solely for the benefit of the sons of the wealthy.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE

said, he could not consent to such a proposition, as much difficulty would arise in the case of schools and institutions established for distinct sects in the same parish.

COLONEL SYKES

said, there had been conflicting decisions as to what literary and scientific institutions really were, but this Bill would set the matter entirely at rest. He believed that mechanics' institutions throughout the country were borne down by these difficulties, but that this Bill would remove those difficulties, and thus confer great benefits upon the working classes. He denied that it would apply to such an institution as Rugby School, for it would he a complete perversion of terms to call that school a literary and scientific society.

GENERAL THOMPSON

asked if it was seriously intended to make the exemption for a building from parochial rates, dependent on keeping out any individual who was not of the parish. A clergyman drew a good deal from the parish; but would there be sense in making him forfeit it, if an outside barbarian, an extra parishioner, was found attendant on his ministry? Would it not be much better, that twenty neighbouring parishes should have twenty scientific institutions, and each allow free ingress to the others?

MR. PEASE

said, that a general desire had been expressed in the Committee to promote the cause of education. They had seen the establishment in this country by voluntary efforts of many valuable institutions, and he was of opinion that they ought to give them all the support which could be legitimately bestowed on them. They all knew that there was no period of greater moral danger than that which came between childhood and manhood, and mechanics' institutions were precisely adapted to provide for that case. That which contributed to the improvement and advancement of the working classes was the truest economy for the whole community; and, therefore, he believed that allowing the exemption of rates in this case, would ultimately tend to diminish the rates which the metropolitan Members seemed so anxious to protect.

MR. PALK

said, he thought that the opponents of the measure would be few and far between if it was solely directed to the improvement of education. But it stretched much further, and was rendered, by the looseness of its phraseology, dangerous to the very institutions which it was intended to benefit. The word "art" was a very broad term. Drawing was an art. Were they to afford the proposed boon to drawing academies? He thought there were plenty of those establishments in London already, without any encouragement by Act of Parliament. It was difficult, indeed, to say what the term "arts" would take in. He should support the Amendment.

MR. SPOONER

said, that he should most certainly take the opinion of the Committee on the subject of leaving out these two words, the more especially as there was an intention on the part of the right hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Bouverie) to move the omission of the word "education," so that all their labours would be in vain.

SIR WILLIAM JOLLIFFE

believed that extremely little benefit had arisen to any institution whatever by granting these exemptions. Nothing was calculated to create a greater feeling of illiberality to such institutions than granting them particular exemptions from taxes, while in nine cases out of ten the real benefit was received by the landlords of the houses in which they were located, who made the exemption of taxes a reason why an addition should be made to the rent. There was no justice in the present state of the law in reference to this matter, and he was satisfied not only of the injustice of exemptions as a general rule, but that they did no good to the institutions. Hon. Gentlemen argued the question as if the opponents of the Bill were the enemies of education, whereas the contrary was the fact. Believing that they would fail to accomplish the object sought by this clause, he should vote for the Amendment.

MR. COLLINS

said, he objected on principle to the subsidizing of these institutions by Parliament against the wishes of the parishes themselves. There was a mechanics' institution in the town he represented, of which he was president, which was exempted from local rates; but that was by the wish of the inhabitants, and it worked extremely well. He disliked a compulsory exemption, however, as it tended to render these societies unpopular.

Question put, "That those words stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided:—Ayes 131; Noes 81: Majority 50.

MR. BOUVERIE

said, he should move the omission of the word "education" in the 14th line of the same clause. He would not hare objected to exempt schools for the poor, but the word "education" was so general that it would exempt establishments of a very different kind.

Amendment proposed in line 14 to leave out the word "Education."

MR. W. EWART

remarked, that he thought that the reasoning of the right hon. Gentleman went rather to the extension of the area embraced by the Bill than to its restriction.

MR. HARDY

said, the object of the Bill was to overrule certain decisions of the Court of Queen's Bench. What was meant by "science," or "literature," or "education," or "art"? Would the word "art" include rope-dancing? The Judges would be placed under great difficulty in construing such words. It would be better to abolish all exemptions whatever. The societies spent in contesting their liability far more than the amount of the rates which could be claimed. He thought that while hospitals, churches, and other public buildings, were rated for the support of the poor, institutions like those comprised in this Bill ought also to be rated.

MR. PULLER

said, he should support the principle of the Bill, as being already known to the law. He believed that the courts of law would so construe the clause as to avoid the difficulties which had been suggested by different hon. Members. With regard to the particular Amendment under consideration, it appeared to him that the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bouverie) ought, if he followed the just conclusion to be drawn from the observations with which he had introduced the Amendment, to give his support to the introduction of the word education.

MR. MILES

suggested, that instead of the word "education," the words "places of instruction for the poor" should be inserted.

MR. BOUVERIE

said, he should have been very willing to exempt such schools, but he was told it was impossible to bring them under the operation, of this Bill, which contemplated societies having rules established for their management.

Question put, "That the word 'Education' stand part of the clause."

The Committee divided:—Ayes 82; Noes 111: Majority 29.

MR. HARDY

then moved to insert the word "fine" before the word "art." The decisions of the Court of Queen's Bench had brought the law into a clear and intelligible state, and this clause without the Amendment would confuse it.

Amendment proposed, in line 14, after the word "the" to insert the word "Fine."

MR. HUTT

opposed the Motion, on the ground that while it would exempt from the payment of rates galleries of painting and statuary, it would include institutions established for teaching reading, writing, and arithmetic, and for instructing the people in the art of chemistry and all branches of knowledge which might be illustrated by experiments.

MR. PALK

said, he should support the Amendment. He had imagined the meaning of the clause to be in accordance with it, and that the insertion was unnecessary. But he now found that the words were intended to have a wider scope, and without the word "fine" the law would be evaded.

MR. W. EWART

said, that the great object was to extend the study of the fine arts to art as applied to workmen. They wanted fine arts extended downwards.

Question put, "That the word 'Fine' be there inserted."

The Committee divided:—Ayes 97; Noes 96: Majority 1.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE

then proposed to insert the words "or elementary instruction." Such schools had an equal claim to exemption as any institution exempted by the Bill.

MR. BOUVERIE

opposed the Amendment. The Committee had decided that exemptions should not be carried further than they were carried already.

MR. W. VANSITTART

also opposed the Amendment.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

MR. HARDY

said, he should move the addition of the word "exclusively" after the word "arts." As the clause stood, a large and exclusive luxurious building might be exempted by being associated with rooms devoted to the fine arts. There must be some limitation.

Another Amendment proposed, in line 14 after the word "Arts," to insert the word "exclusively."

MR. HUTT

opposed the Amendment as unnecessary. The law already disqualified buildings of the kind alluded to. What the Judges would have to consider, would be the final object of the institutions which it was sought to exempt. They ought not to prevent their giving a cup of tea for the comfort of the members.

GENERAL THOMPSON

said, he also opposed the Amendment. Surely it was not intended to do nothing for institutions which might be open only one day in the week, or one hour in the day. These were the very institutions of the poor; and if the House was sincere in its desire to promote such, some way would be found to give them the advantage of this Bill.

MR. JOHN LOCKE

said, that he also was in favour of some limitation. The Judges could not lay down a precise law, and it was impossible to say where they were to stop.

MR. W. EWART

said, that the object of the Society of Arts, from which this Bill proceeded, was to get rid of the word "exclusive," because they found they could not extend the object of their institution under the actual law. The spirit of the proposed Bill would prevent any abuse.

MR. PEASE

observed, that he hoped the House would not assent to an Amendment, the effect of which would be to exclude mechanics' institutes from the advantages of the Bill. If hon. Gentlemen objected to those institutions, or were opposed to the spread of education by such means, they should say so in terms. He must also deprecate these fine-drawn distinctions as being at variance with the principle established by repeated decisions of that House.

COLONEL SYKES

remarked, that he wished to know whether, if the Amendment should be carried, the taking of a newspaper by a mechanics' institute would exclude it from the operation of the Bill?

MR. HARDY

said, he thought it was unfair that those who objected to the form of this Bill, should be denounced as objecting to the spread of education. The Amendment was intended only to place the matter in the same position as it was in at present. Without the Amendment the clause would only give rise to incipient litigation. With the Amendment there would be no difficulty, as the law had been already clearly laid down by the Judges.

Question put, "That the word 'exclusively' be there inserted."

The Committee divided:—Ayes 114; Noes 69: Majority 45.

MR. HUTT

said, after the decision of the Committee, which entirely changed the object of the measure, he did not think it would be of any use to proceed farther, and he therefore should move, that the Chairman report progress.

House resumed.

[No Report.]