LEAVE. (Hansard, 17 March 1859)

§ MR. H. B. SHERIDAN
, in moving for leave to introduce a Bill to reduce the duty upon Fire Insurances, said, that an increasing agitation was going on out of doors for the total abolition of the tax on fire insurances. An association had been formed to effect that object, which was supported by the noble Lord the Secretary of State for India, and many other hon. Members of that House, but the more moderate proposal contained in this Bill, if conceded by the Government and the House, would, he thought, be sufficient to satisfy the public mind on this subject. His measure was not of a sweeping character, and would not interfere to any appreciable extent with the existing revenue. He sought to reduce the duty of 3s. per cent now charged on all fire insurances, the premium payable upon which did not amount to 5s. per cent. The reduction would apply to all that class of insurances popularly termed prudential insurances, and which included houses, household furniture, jewellery, musical instruments, &c. Half of the insurances effected in this country were effected at a rate of premium higher than 5s. per cent, so that this Bill would deal only with one-third, or at most with one-half, of the present receipts from the tax. The total amount of revenue derived from 296 the duty on fire insurances, exceeded £1,300,000 per annum, the moiety of this, obtained from insurances on houses and household furniture, being £650,000. He proposed to reduce the duty from 3s. to 1s. per cent on the latter class of insurances, the apparent effect of which would be to diminish the revenue by the sum of £433,000. He said the apparent effect, because he believed the extent to which the public Exchequer would be endangered by his proposal would be considerably less than the sum he had named. Indeed, there was good reason for supposing that the temporary deficiency which the Bill would create in the revenue would be speedily supplied by the increased business which the partial remission of the tax would bring to the insurance office. In 1835 the amount of property insured had been £500,000,000, and in 1855 it stood at £800,000,000. The house would see that was not an increase commensurate with the growth of the national prosperity within the same period of twenty years. Taking an intermediate date, 1846, the property then insured was only £700,000,000, and the revenue to the country derived from it was only £1,062,000, whereas, had the fire insurances gone on increasing at the same ratio as the national prosperity, the Exchequer might have derived from those insurances no less than £13,000,000. Now, in 1859, the total amount of property in the kingdom was valued at £4,000,000,000 one-half at least of which was insurable, and would, if insured, yield the country £3,000,000 of revenue. The reason why that was not the case was that the increase of the amount of property insured had not been at all in. proportion to the increase of our national wealth. In 1851 it was calculated that the value of insurable property was £2,000,000,000. The amount actually insured, however, was only £900,000,000. The smallness of this proportion was occasioned by the pressure of this tax. In France, on the other hand, the amount of property insured was £1,800,000,000. The proportion of insured property, therefore, was much loss in England than in France, notwithstanding that the practice of insuring against fire had been carried on in this country 180 years, while in France it had only existed thirty-eight years, the cause of the difference being partly the lower rate of duty and partly the provision of the civil code, which makes the person in whose house the fire breaks out liable for the injury which it may occasion to the 297 property of his neighbours. There was another reason in the requirement imposed upon all railway companies to insure the property throughout the whole length of the line, and these heavy insurances they were enabled to effect in consequence of the low rate charged. In Russia there was a duty which was a little worse than our own; and it acted as a virtual prohibition. There was no doubt then that if the alteration which be proposed was agreed to the amount of insurances in this country would be largely increased by the very general introduction of the French system. In Continental countries the increase in fire insurances was about 8 per cent; in England it was about 10. Mr. Coode had shown, however, that wherever the duty had been increased fire insurances had decreased. Petitions had been presented for the total repeal of the duty from all parts of the country, signed by merchants, bankers, traders, and others. There was, in fact, a strong feeling in the country against the tax, and therefore be hoped the House would give him leave to introduce a Bill to reduce it from 3s. to 1s.

MR. NICOL
seconded the Motion.

SIR STAFFORD NORTH COTE
said, that the hon. Gentleman professed to ground his arguments upon the assumption, that the reduction in the duty could not materially affect the revenue. This, however, was an assertion easy enough to make, but not so easy to prove. The revenue from this source had greatly increased during the last few years, and it was still rapidly augmenting. It had advanced already from £954,000 to £1,209,000. The hon. Gentleman would find that although the insurance on agricultural property had increased since it was exempted from the duty, the amount of property subject to the tax which was insured had increased at the same time in a greater ratio. The experiment therefore advised by the hon. Gentleman would be exceedingly dangerous to an important part of the revenue. If the Government could afford to dispense with this tax they would very gladly do so; but under the circumstances he must, with great reluctance, oppose the introduction of a Bill which would only raise expectations which it would not be possible to gratify.

§ MR. HADFIELD
said, he had no doubt that if the duty were reduced the revenue would not suffer. When the duty on coffee was 3s. 6d. a pound coffee was almost a prohibited article now that it was a few 298 pence there was a large revenue obtained from it. Then take the Post Office: he believed the number of letters sent had increased sevenfold. He believed that if the duty had only been a shilling, the ruin of many persons, which had been caused by fires, would have been averted, but the high duty had acted as a preventive of insuring. The duty was a tax on prudence, and in every sense, a most objectionable one, and he knew the feeling of the country to be very strongly opposed to it. He had himself presented petitions signed by thousands and tens of thousands of people against it, and he trusted that his hon. Friend would divide the House upon the question.