said, he begged to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether his attention has been directed to the figures in the Stage Carriages, &c. Return (No. 309), just presented to this House, particularly at pages 2 and 3, as showing that the recent Act, 26 & 27 Vict., has afforded no relief from the grievous amount of Mileage Duties imposed on road conveyances carrying passengers at separate fares, in London and other large towns, in competition with Railway Trains and untaxed Steam Boats; and whether, as the population of large towns use to a very great extent Stage Carriages or Omnibuses, his consideration has been given to the justice of extending the provisions of the Act 26 & 27 Vict. to every description of vehicle?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER,
in reply, said, he had no reason to suppose that any advantage would be derived by large towns from the extension of the provisions of the Act 26 & 27 Vict. There was no tendency in those towns to use vehicles carrying ouly a small number of passengers, but rather to establish large ones. The object of the Act was to accommodate small towns, villages, and minor railway stations, where the traffic was so small that it would not pay to establish large vehicles. With regard to the other portion of the hon. Gentleman's question, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) could only refer to what he stated when he made his last financial statement—namely, that it might be desirable to re-consider the taxes on locomotion with a view to their reduction or omission when the state of the revenue would permit it to be done with justice and propriety, otherwise it would set aside claims of a more pressing character. Of course it was not in his power to take measures this Session with reference to the subject.