§ MR. ELLICEsaid, he rose to call the attention of Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer to circumstances connected with the collection of the Tax upon dogs, and to ask, whether any alteration was contemplated with regard to that Tax? His part of Scotland was favourably situated for the establishment of a cordon to prevent the movement of diseased cattle. Stringent measures had been adopted to prevent the spread of infection, and cattle were prevented from passing over the Caledonian Canal from the south to the north of Scotland. But there was a class of animals with which they had no means of dealing—namely, the ownerless dogs which roamed through the country day and night. Those dogs completely eluded the cordon, and the guards placed on the bridges of the canal. The danger of the spread of infection had thus become so imminent that the gentlemen of the district considered how it could be met and what measures could be adopted to lessen it. They commenced by inquiring whether the alleged owners of those dogs acted up to their legal obligations by paying the dog tax. They told the local revenue authorities that the county was ready to give them the assistance of the police, and the assistance of the Excise officers would have been available also. But the local revenue authorities refused to interfere. Having failed with the local authorities, he and the gentlemen who acted with him made an application to the Board of Inland Revenue; and he was permitted to read to the House the Minute he had received from the Board. It was as follows:—
It is the business of the surveyor of taxes for the district to bring into charge the owner of every dog liable to the tax; but before making an assessment the surveyor must ascertain the owner or person harbouring the dog, and, furthermore, he must satisfy himself that the dog is not exempted from duty. The exemption extends to all dogs kept for the care of sheep or cattle, or in driving or removing the same, without limit as to number. Thus the dogs of tenants (without limit 1833 as to rent), shepherds, drovers, and butchers are exempted from duty. No surveyor or other officer can satisfactorily, or on all occasions, determine what dogs are exempted and what are not. If the surveyor is to take the statement of the owner of a dog, or that of his neighbours, he will conclude that the dog is exempted. If, on the other hand, he shall disregard the statement of the owner and his neighbours, and assess the owner, the local commissioners will relieve and the Judges will confirm; and, in the meantime, considerable expense may have been incurred by the Crown, as well as by the appellant, in a matter in which the Crown is ultimately defeated,Acting on that view of the case, instructions seem to have been given by the authorities that no effort should be made to collect the tax. Practically it was a nullity, except in the case of those who paid it voluntarily. He believed that comparatively very few in the north of Scotland paid the dog tax, though hundreds—in deed, he might say thousands—of dogs were roaming about the country. Every cottier was in the habit of keeping one or more dogs, though many of those cottiers found it difficult to find sufficient food for themselves and their families. The consequence was these dogs roamed about to find food which their owners were unable to give them, and found it at the expense of the farmers. The loss of sheep in the West Highlands had risen to the alarming extent of not less than 10 per cent per annum. He did not say that the whole of that loss was attributable to dogs; but there could be no doubt that thousands of dogs had no other way of feeding themselves than on the flocks of the farmers. In Ireland a tax of 2s., by an Act making it imperative on any person keeping a dog to declare himself the owner of it, had been willingly submitted to in order to abate the dog nuisance; and for England also a Bill had been passed to meet it. Beyond the depredations upon their stocks, farmers, and others interested in our stock farms, were now in great alarm lest the rinder pest should be spread by the uncontrolled wanderings of these unowned dogs. The farmers would gladly pay a moderate and fairly assessed tax. A tax of 12 *. seemed an immoderate charge; but, from conversations he had had with farmers he believed that a tax of 4s. or 5s. would be willingly paid. He thought that though the immediate effect of imposing a moderate tax, the payment of which was to be rigidly enforced, would be to diminish by one-half the number of useless dogs, the revenue would still be the gainer by such a change. He hoped, therefore, his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer would give the House an assurance that he would take the subject into his attentive consideration. If his right 1834 hon. Friend was not prepared to impose a moderate tax and enforce it, he ought to abolish the tax of 12s.; for it was not fair that a minority should pay that impost while the majority of those who were liable to it escaped its payment altogether.
§ MAJOR WALKERsaid, he was a proprietor and sheep farmer in the neighbourhood of the hon. Gentleman, and entirely concurred in every word which had fallen from the hon. Gentleman. [Cries of "Order!"]
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, he was sorry his hon. and gallant Friend had been prevented by the rules of the House from giving his views fully on the subject, but what those views were could be gathered from his having so emphatically stated that he concurred in all that had fallen from his hon. Friend who had introduced the subject. It would have given him much pleasure to hear the opinions of other hon. Members on this question. He would never be inclined to evade any responsibility in dealing with a subject which was properly of a financial character, and where there were means of obtaining a thorough investigation. But the Treasury found itself embarrassed in dealing with certain subjects, especially where considerations of revenue were mixed up with considerations of police. It was very difficult to make proposals of a fiscal character when those proposals were liable to be suspected and to be taken for what they were not, and it was equally difficult to make proposals relative to police when it might be supposed that considerations connected with the public peace and comfort were merely put forward for the purpose of getting money. It would be impossible for him to move in this matter without the assistance of the House. He must be made aware of what the sentiments were in different parts of the country upon the question before making any proposal. This subject had been one of the standing difficulties of the Revenue Department ever since he had any connection with it. When he first became Chancellor of the Exchequer, in 1852, the matter was in almost inextricable confusion from a distinction which then prevailed in the rate of duties, some dogs being taxed at 8s. or 1835 10s.—he forgot which—and others at 14s., the distinction between the rate depending on the question of breed, and there being no means whatever of determining this most difficult matter, this question of breed was added to the other difficulties the surveyors had to contend with. The promiscuous crosses among dogs were greater, perhaps, than among any other description of created beings. Then came the uniform tax of 12 *., a rather high rate. His hon. Friend said they ought either to proceed on a strict system or abolish the tax. The tax, no doubt, was very unequally enforced; a great many liable to it did not pay; but speaking generally, the efforts of the Revenue officers to enforce it were very successful, the best proof of which was that it was paid upon 300,000 dogs—or, in other words, on the supposition that people paid for two dogs each, which could hardly be the case, 150,000 persons paid the tax. Now, though we had an army of 150,000 Volunteers for another purpose, he very much doubted whether an army of 150,000 volunteers could be easily found to pay the dog tax. He admitted the tax was too high to be enforced, but lowering it would not remove all the difficulty. It was necessary, if there should be a remodelling of the tax, that the exemptions should be removed. It was quite obvious that any proposal to part with a tax which brought in £170,000 a year could not be adopted without much consideration; and he doubted whether the House, taking into account the many claims which it had to meet, would think it desirable to make the keeping of dogs cease to be a source of revenue to the country. He had, however, always found this difficulty. Mankind might almost be divided into two classes—the dog-lovers and the dog-haters. There was no medium. Every man either kept a dog or hated it. There were a great many who hated dogs, such hatred being founded on different principles. Dogs were a nuisance to that great part of the community who did not keep them. Some persons liked them for their social qualities, some for their sporting qualities, and others liked them because they took care of their houses; but to a great portion of the community they were a considerable nuisance. What a nuisance dogs were about the streets of London, and how many accidents were they the cause of ! He knew very well from whole floods of correspondence relating to the dog tax that there were many who felt very jealous of keeping up the exemptions. 1836 Then take the sheep farmers. The destruction of sheep by dogs was very considerable, and the annoyance of dogs to parties who were not their owners very great. Now, it would in his opinion be quite possible to lower this tax very considerably—to 5s. or 4s.—without entailing any material loss of revenue. It was not a subject on which, if they could avoid it, they ought to give away much money. But if any change were made the tax must cease to be an assessed tax, for assessed taxes were very cumbrous and troublesome of collection. The first thing was to get a man liable to the charge, then he had to make returns, then a demand was made upon him to pay, and sometimes it was necessary to go through various troublesome processes before the money could be recovered. The most beneficial change, then, that could be made would be to convert it from an assessed tax into a licence duty. Every man who kept a dog should be bound to take out a licence and pay so much for it, and all that could be done in a moment. The abolition of exemption would be another portion of the scheme, and the strict enforcement of the tax upon every one who kept a dog, whatever his condition in life, should be upheld. It would be quite necessary that the aid of the police, who possessed peculiar means of knowledge, should he given to the Revenue officers. At the same time there were other, points of view from which the question might be regarded, especially by those portions of the community who were much attached to the keeping of dogs, and who, therefore, did not suffer from them as others did. To call in the aid of the police in the matter was what he should not like to ask the House to do, unless the people generally considered it would be a fair and reasonable demand. He was not at present in possession of full knowledge to enable him to frame a proposal on the part of Her Majesty's Government, though he did not think it would be at all difficult to do so. It would be necessary that the matter should undergo some independent investigation, not open to the objection that it had pecuniary objects, and he would be glad to see it examined into by a Committee of the House. Such a Committee would give an opportunity for ventilating the question, and for the production of all parts of the case in an impartial and effective manner. If the result of the inquiry was that a plan such as had been more or less sketched should be thought practi- 1837 cable, he should have great satisfaction in proposing it on the part of the Government. And now one word, in the absence of his noble Friend the Secretary for War (the Marquess of Hartington), on the subject upon which his hon. Friend the Member for Stockport had spoken. The remarks of the hon. Member (Mr. Watkin) on the Spencer and Henry repeating rifles had been listened to with great interest by Her Majesty's Government. The accounts which the hon. Member had given of rifles so much approved in the American war, were of a character to draw attention; and he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was safe in promising, on behalf of the Department of whom his noble Friend (the Marquess of Hartington) was head, that they would give their careful attention to all information which could be collected in regard to arms which seemed so exceedingly formidable.
§ MR. BAXTERsaid, that as the Chancellor of the Exchequer desired to know the opinions of Members upon the subject introduced by the hon. Member for St. Andrew's (Mr. Ellice), he had for himself to state his entire concurrence with all that the hon. Member had said. At the same time, he felt very great doubt whether the subject was one of sufficient importance for the appointment of a Select Committee, and was inclined to think that those interested in the subject would be satisfied if the right hon. Gentleman would himself propose such changes in the law as he had indicated in his speech. All that was necessary was to reduce the duty from 12s. to 4s. or 5s., to abolish the exemptions, and to transfer the charge from an assessed tax to a license duty.