LEAVE. FIRST READING. (Hansard, 19 February 1867)

§ MR. PERCY WYNDHAM
, in moving for leave to bring in a Bill to assess Mines, Wood Lands, and Plantations, to local rates, explained that the object of the Bill was to put an end to certain anomalies in 650 the law which now existed. Mines, wood lands, and plantations were not at present assessed to local rates, and he believed it to be very desirable that they should be, as the revenue derived from them was great, and there was a considerable percentage of pauperism arising from those who were employed in mines. He cited the case of Ulverston, in Lancashire, where one-fourth of the property in the union was not rated, although it brought in £50,000 per annum, and belonged to people who were best off in the whole community. He also cited other cases of a similar nature which were simple instances of what was going on in a great many unions. Whatever difference of opinion, he added, might exist as to the expediency of legislating with the view to the removal of those anomalies, there could be no doubt that the House had at its disposal all the information with which it was necessary it should be furnished for the purpose. In 1856 a Committee sat, which continued for two Sessions, and in their Report recognising the fact that coal mines were rated to the poor, they said they could not see any reason at all why other mines should be excepted. Evidence was given before that Committee against the principle of rating mines, the owners urging that they should be encouraged by the Government, and that even grants should be held out to encourage people to embark in those speculations; but when the question was brought before the House last Session he understood the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton (Mr. C. P. Villiers) to Bay that the object might be obtained without legislation, as there was a probability that the ruling of the Judges on the point might be overruled by an appeal to the House of Lords. The exemption of mines from rating was nothing more than a protective exemption of this description of property, and in Cornwall it had had the effect of keeping capital in a stagnant and unproductive state. In other parts of England, where vast mining wealth bad been discovered, the exemption was in favour of the richest property in the country. In the Bill which he proposed to introduce, he followed the example of the right hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Board of Trade. It would simply extend the law with reference to rating coal mines to other mines. With regard to wood lands and plantations, he proposed that they should be rated on the value of the land upon which they stood. There was great difficulty in any other mode of assessment. 651 The hon. Member concluded by moving for leave to bring in the Bill.

§ MR. GATHORNE HARDY
would offer no opposition, on the part of the Government, to the introduction of the Bill. No doubt there was great justice in many of the remarks of his hon. Friend; but, at the Same time, his hon. Friend was slightly in error in saying that the question of mine rating was finally settled. He (Mr. G. Hardy) had reason to believe that cases were now being prepared to go before the Exchequer Chamber and the House of Lords, with the view of seeing whether the dicta of some of the Judges would be revised. It was notorious that within a year or two exemptions which had been supposed firmly established in the lower courts had been set aside by the highest tribunals of the country, and it might prove to be so in this case. At the same time, it was very desirable that they should have before them any means by which they might get rid of any unfair means of exemption. At this stage of the Bill he would only say that, on the part of the Government, he would not oppose its introduction.

§ MR. BAGNALL
referred to the Report of the Government Inspector of Mines in North Staffordshire, to the effect that the mode of assessing coal mines was most unjust, and yet this Bill proposed to extend that system of injustice. Unless the hon. Gentleman laid down some other principle of assessment, he should give the Bill every opposition in his power. The House ought to recognise the principle that the working of mines was really tantamount to selling the estate piecemeal.

§ MR. COLVILE
said, that as the representative of a considerable mining constituency, he felt it his duty to tell the hon. Member, who had asked leave to bring in this Bill, that, though it might be discourteous to oppose its introduction, if it resembled in its provisions that brought in last year by the Member for Shoreham, he should offer it his most determined opposition in all its future stages. The hon. Member was entirely mistaken in the view he had formed of mineral property as a subject for rating, and assumed that it could be assessed at its annual value, like land or houses. In this case the value of the fee was constantly increasing, and the income derived from them comparatively steady, whereas in mines the fee, by the exhaustion of the corpus, was continually diminishing, and their profit most uncertain. A mine was 652 really nothing but a terminable annuity, and it would be unjust and impossible to rate it at its annual value, which to-day might be worth thousands a year, and tomorrow nothing. The only sound principle of rating to be applied to mines is to rate the royalty, or dues paid to the lord. On this principle the lead miners of Derbyshire had for years past been rated, the dues being paid in kind, and they thus contributed to the maintenance of the poor and highways, and he believed were even virtuous enough to pay church rates. The mining interest complained that they were unjustly treated in being thus singled out. The whole system of rating was replete with anomalies, and might well be the subject of comprehensive legislation; but no such injustice had been proved in the exception of metallic mines from rating as to warrant special legislation on the subject. The hon. Member who introduces this Bill, though not a Member for a maritime constituency, resided in a county bordering on the sea—he asked him why, if the rating question was disturbed, that shipping should not be rated? What was there that made larger calls on the poor rates than a harbour full of ships? And then came a question of which he (Mr. Colvile) felt very strongly. Why should not game be rated? In one union in Derbyshire there were no less than 40,000 acres of grouse moor, which are mostly let for sporting purposes, but of which the tenant of the pasturage pays all the rates, and the tenant of the game goes entirely free, yet the system of game preserving produced much pauperism. He (Mr. Colvile) was quite prepared to go into the whole question of rating; but if metallic mines alone were singled out, he should offer the Bill his strenuous opposition.

§ MR. PEASE
thought mines should be rated, because they threw a large population into a district which was specially liable to come on the poor rate, but they ought to be rated on their own basis. He hoped the Bill, if pressed forward, would be made more like that of the hon. Member for Shoreham.