HC Deb 07 May 1858 vol 150 cc288-92

Order for Committee read.

House in Committee.

Clause 1.

MR. J. H. GURNEY

said, he entertained no objection to the principle of the Bill. but it provided that the duty imposed should take effect immediately on its becoming law, and he would suggest that it was desirable to fix some certain time—say a fortnight after its passing—when the measure should come into operation. This arrangement would afford country bankers an opportunity of giving notice to their customers, who would thus be enabled to obtain stamps for their cheques on hand.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, that the Government intended to take the tax from the 24th inst., and he was about to propose the insertion of words to Carry out that intention.

MR. GURNEY

said, that would meet his views. He therefore withdrew his Amendment, and that of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was agreed to.

MR. MOFFATT

proposed an Amendment to omit from the operation of the clause, sums of money not exceeding £2, on the ground that in many districts wages were paid in cheques, which were taken by the trades people as money; and also because, in the case of benefit societies, small payments were made by order on the treasurer. A similar exemption of sums below £2 was made in respect to the receipt stamps.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

objected to the Amendment on the ground that, on principle, all exemptions were bad, and more than that, that the Amendment would extend that exemption to cheques payable to order, which already, if the distance was more than fifteen miles required a penny stamp.

MR. G. A. HAMILTON

said, that the object of the Bill was to place cheques payable to order or to bearer on the same-footing, and make them pay a penny stamp irrespective of distance.

Amendment by leave withdrawn.

Clause agreed to.

MR. BRADY

said, he rose to complain that in consequence of the manner in which the clause had been put he had not an opportunity of moving an Amendment which stood in his name.

Clause 2,

MR. J. C. EWART

said, he wished to ask whether the Government had considered his suggestion that they should allow postage stamps to be affixed to drafts as well as receipt stamps, as it would be a great convenience to the public at large.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, that however convenient it might be, the practice would create such confusion in the public accounts that it was impossible he could assent to it.

MR. KIRK

observed, that there was a strong impression out of doors that this measure would nut be so productive to the Exchequer as the right hon. Gentleman expected, and expressed a doubt whether people would not substitute a stamped draft for a receipt.

MR. G. A. HAMILTON

said, that the present Bill left the law relating to receipts precisely in the same condition in which it Was at present.

MR. KIRK

repeated his conviction that people would use these stamped drafts instead of receipt stamps, and thus occasion a less to the revenue.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, that there was no doubt that there would be some diminution on that source of the revenue alluded to by the hon. Gentleman, but that diminution had formed an clement in the calculations, and notwithstanding that diminution he still believed that the general result of the impost would be favourable.

MR. BRADY

said, he would beg to ask the right hon. Gentleman in the Chair whether he could be allowed to move the Amendment to Clause I on any future stage of the Bill?

THE CHAIRMAN

Certainly not.

MR. GROGAN

suggested that drafts drawn by people connected with savings banks, and which were usually for very small amounts, should be exempted from the use of the stamp.

MR. G. A. HAMILTON

said, orders and cheques for the payment of money connected with savings banks and friendly societies, and payments under the Poor Law Act, were already exempted from stamps by the various acts relating to them.

MR. MOFFATT

said, he wished to know whether a stamped cheque payable "to bearer" would be a valid receipt?

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, it would not be a valid receipt.

MR. MOFFATT

Would a cheque payable "to order" be the same as a bill of exchange with the endorsement?

MR. G. A. HAMILTON

said, the law would be precisely the same as it was now with regard to cheques drawn beyond fifteen miles.

MR. BLACKBURN

said, that it might not be considered a valid receipt for an account, but it would undoubtedly be received as evidence of the payment of the particular sum named in it, just the same as a bill of exchange.

MR. MANGLES

believed that it would practically be found that people would content themselves with drawn cheques to order, and making an endorsement at the back of such cheques.

MR. WILSON

said, it was clear that, after this Bill was passed, there would be no further drawing of cheques to bearer. All cheques would necessarily be drawn to order, and they would, to a certain extent, be proof of the payment of the money.

MR. COX

remarked, that he could not agree with the Chancellor of the Exchequer that, if this Bill passed, a cheque drawn "to bearer" would not have the operation of a receipt. He believed that a cheque drawn beyond fifteen miles, with a stamp, was tantamount to a penny receipt stamp whether it was drawn to order or to bearer. He was also afraid, that as the exemption in favour of savings banks was not expressed in the Bill, doubts might arise whether they really were exempt. It would surely be better to make the point clear by the insertion of a few words.

MR. MALINS

said, he thought that stamped cheques would not lead to any material decrease in the number of stamped receipts, and for an obvious reason. Few persons who paid away money would choose to rely upon such an unsatisfactory proof as the cheque; and when, therefore, they put a stamp upon a draft they would, generally speaking, require the person in whose favour it was drawn to contribute another penny to the revenue. The hon. Gentleman (Mr. Cox) need not be under doubt as to the exemption of the savings banks.

COLONEL SYKES

said, he could not help thinking that the House and the Government would do well to adopt the suggestion he had thrown out upon a preceding occasion—that a penny stamp payable by the customers should be affixed to all tradesmen's bills, above the sum of 10s. He believed that such a measure would be more productive to the revenue than the proposal which they were considering, while it would not be attended with any similar inconvenience.

Clause agreed to.

MR. J. H. GURNEY moved the following additional clause:— Provided always, that it shall be lawful for any banker or person acting as a banker, to whom a draft or order is presented for payment, if such draft or order requires to be stamped with a penny stamp, and has not been so stamped, to affix an adhesive stamp of one penny to such draft or order, and having affixed and duly cancelled such stamp, then to pay such draft or order; and that it shall in like manner be lawful for any person to whom any such unstamped draft or order may be tendered to affix thereto an adhesive penny stamp, and, after having duly cancelled the same, to receive such draft or order in payment, and to negotiate and circulate the same.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, he should oppose the clause. It would afford no sufficient security against fraud, and it was framed in violation of the principle on which the whole system of stamps was founded. That principle was that every instrument liable to a stamp should come at once into operation with the stamp upon it.

Motion negatived.

The Preamble having been put,

MR. W. WILLIAMS

wished to know whether the Bill ought not to contain some provisions relative to the crossing of bankers' cheques?

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, that the question was important, but that the present Bill was not a fitting occasion for considering the subject.

MR. AYRTON

said, he believed it would be quite unnecessary to make a new law hereafter.

MR. KINNAIRD

remarked, that he feared that the bankers would have some difficulty in obtaining a sufficient number of impressed stamps in time.

MR. G. A. HAMILTON

observed, that he was informed that the Board of Inland Revenue expected to have an ample supply of impressed stamps by the 24th. If they were not ready, adhesive stamps might be used.

MR. KINNAIRD

Would bankers be allowed to use adhesive stamps on common paper?

MR. G. A. HAMILTON

Yes.

Preamble agreed to.

Bill reported; as amended, to be considered on Monday next,

House resumed.