[BILL 223.] CONSIDERATION. (Hansard, 27 July 1885)

§ MR. W. E. FORSTER
said, he had an Amendment to move, in page 8, Clause 20, which, though dealing with a small amount, was of great importance, and he regretted having to bring it on so late at night. The case was a strong one; and he must make a corresponding appeal to the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) to accept it. He rose to move the omission, in lines 37 to 39, of the words— Have the meaning assigned to it by the Act of the thirty-fourth and thirty-fifth years of Her Majesty's reign, chapter four, and shall also. He thought that few hon. Members could be aware what those words imported; and he, for one, expressed the hope that they would not treat the Colonies in the way they were proposed to be treated by this Bill. In order to see what was the meaning of the words he wished to be excluded, it would be necessary to refer to the Act. It provided that the term foreign security meant and included every security for money issued by or on behalf of any Foreign or Colonial State, Corporation, or Government. It was, he said, certainly an extraordinary thing that we should have an Act of Parliament which defined Colonial Governments to be included in the term "Foreign Government." They all agreed that it was an unfortunate mode of levying tin's tax, and that it ought not to be repeated in future. His objection was that it was wrong in principle, and, besides that, that they were taxing loans made to Colonial Governments, whereas they did not tax loans made to the Imperial Government. He thought they must really look upon the great self-governing Colonies as being in partnership with this country, and say that the loans made for the purpose of developing the resources of their common country, and its defences ought not to be taxed, any more than were Government loans in Great Britain. Take, for instance, the defence of the Australasian Colonies; 193 it would seem almost monstrous that Victoria should be obliged to borrow money in order to have her share in the protection of the Empire by naval or other means, and that we should levy a tax on such loans. It was quite true that the amount was a very small one; but the question came up indirectly—he might say almost inadvertently. The object of the clause of the Act was in itself a very good one; it was that debentures to bearer should pay as much as if they were not made out to bearer, and he supposed that the chief object which the late and the present Chancellor of the Exchequer had in view was that debenture bonds of railway or any companies should not escape equal taxation because they were not made out to bearer, as they were very often in the Colonies, and, to some extent, in England. There was no stamp on the transfer of Imperial Government Stock, and in the case of India there was no tax on a large proportion of the Debt—on £62,000,000, which was inscribed Stock; and as regarded debentures to bearer, there was a composition so trifling that it could scarcely be considered a tax at all. In his opinion, they ought to treat the loans of our great agricultural Colonies in exactly the same manner as they treated Imperial loans, or, at any rate, as they treated the Indian loans. He thought no one would dispute that statement; but, as the law stood, they would be levying a considerably larger tax on Colonial loans than upon Indian Stock. The amount in question, he apprehended, was very small indeed; and although it would be rather difficult for him to estimate it in pounds, shillings, and pence, it could, no doubt, be very easily done at the Treasury, and he could not imagine that it would make much difference to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his Budget. But a very considerable principle was involved here; and its importance, he had reason to believe, was much felt by the Representatives of the Colonies. Certainly, the late Government—and be almost thought the present Government—had been waited on by a deputation from the Agent General of Victoria, and from the High Commissioners of Canada, protesting against this tax, which was contrary to the principle we were more and more acknowledging, of looking on our Colo- 194 nies as partners with ourselves in a great Empire.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Sir MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH)
said, that the Amendment which the right hon. Gentleman had moved did not, as he thought the right hon. Gentleman had stated, in any way apply to Stock or debentures not payable to bearer, which was the general way in which the great self-governing Colonies issued their loans. The Amendment of the right hon. Gentleman simply applied to bonds to bearer. He found that, out of the total amount of Colonial loans issued in London during the last four years, only about £8,000,000 would fall under this clause; and, therefore, the amount involved, as the right hon. Gentleman had stated, was comparatively small. He confessed, however, that he concurred with the right hon. Gentleman in thinking the matter one of considerable importance in point of sentiment. No more than the right hon. Gentleman did he like the idea of looking on our Colonies in the light of Foreign States; and if, at a small cost, the Government could meet the wishes of the Colonies in this matter, they would be glad to do so. He thought there was force in the contention of the right hon. Gentleman that Colonial bonds to bearer might be placed on the same footing as Indian bonds of the same description. He had made inquiry in the matter, and he found, unfortunately, that the duty on Indian bonds was a subject of controversy between the India Office and the Treasury which had not yet been settled. Therefore, what he proposed was not to accept the Amendment, which would not only prevent the increase of the tax the right hon. Gentleman objected to, but also take away the 2s. 6d. which Colonial bonds to bearer in common with British bonds paid, but to allow the whole matter to stand over for further consideration by inserting a clause which would leave the tax of 2s. 6d. on bonds to bearer as it stood. He thought that was a fair offer, and he hoped it would meet the 195 sentiment with regard to our Colonies which the right hon. Gentleman held in common with himself.

§ MR. W. E. FORSTER
said, he was obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for the manner in which he had met his proposal, which he had no doubt would give great satisfaction to the Colonies and their Representatives in this country; but, in accepting the Amendment of the right hon. Gentleman, he must not be understood to preclude himself personally from fully mooting the question. He meant that his contention was that Colonial loans ought not to be taxed any more than Consols.

§ SIR EDMUND LECHMERE
said, he thought there would be great dissatisfaction amongst country bankers that there should be finality about the words "not exceeding 3d." It was hoped that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have offered more liberal terms; and although those words were adopted, he trusted there might be some possibility of a larger amount of remuneration, say a minimum of 4d., being allowed under certain circumstances.

§ SIR ROBERT FOWLER (LORD MAYOR)
said, that perhaps, in view of the position in which the Chancellor of the Exchequer was placed, he was justified in calling upon bankers to take a 196 considerable amount of trouble in this matter; but he did not think he ought to do so without making the remuneration adequate.