COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 14 March 1861)

SIR GEORGE LEWIS
moved a Resolution, on which to found a Bill for the purpose of continuing for ten years the coal duties and the port duties on wine now levied by the officers of the Corporation of London. The coal duties consisted of a 4d. duty, which the Corporation considered part of the City estate: an 8d. duty which had been appropriated under an Act of Parliament, and the proceeds applied by direction of the First Commissioners of Works, and which would shortly expire; and another duty of a 1d., which would also shortly expire. He proposed to continue these duties for ten years—the proceeds of the 9d. tax to be paid into a fund to be devoted to metropolitan improvements—the purposes to be hereafter defined by Parliament, but more especially with reference to a recommendation of a Committee of last Session which sat on the Embankment of the Thames. These duties were at present levied over twenty miles round a central point in the Metropolis; but he proposed to confine the area to the metropolitan police district.

§ MR. AYRTON
objected to this mode of proceeding. It was usual to indicate the 2036 nature of a Bill before going into Committee to move the Resolutions.

SIR GEOBGE LEWIS
believed he had followed the universal practice in regard to this subject. If the House wished the debate to be adjourned he should not object, but he saw no necessity for that, as the Bill could be debated on the second reading.

§ MR. PULLER
complained that several towns in Hertfordshire would still be left liable to the tax, when they had nothing whatever to do with the London coal or London improvements. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would reconsider the area of the district still left liable to a tax.

§ MR. AYRTON
said, that the only case in which a Resolution was at once moved was in eases where the revenue was affected. The House was taken by surprise. The Resolution was a most objectionable one, and he should oppose the Bill on every stage.

§ SIR FRANCIS GOLDSMID
thought the complaint that the House had been taken by surprise was not warranted.

SIR MINTO FARQUHAR
was glad that the area was to be confined to the metropolitan police district; but he thought that as the money was to be exclusively devoted to metropolitan improvements, it, therefore, ought to be limited to the Metropolis alone.

§ MR. INGHAM
said, the measure would operate prejudicially on an important industry in the north.