HC Deb 11 June 1888 vol 326 cc1685-6
MR. DIXON (Birmingham, Edgbaston)

(for Sir JOHN LUBBOCK) (London University) asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether there is any statutory authority or description of what is meant by "self-contained" industrial dwellings; whether he is aware that, in the case of the "Yorkshire Life and Fire Insurance Company v. Clayton," the Master of the Rolls, in giving judgment, held that— The word 'tenement is what is in law a house, although it is at the same time part of a house; and, again— I understand the word 'tenement' in this collocation to mean a legal house, as distinguished from an ordinary house; and that— Separate legal houses, let separately, held at separate rents, were within the principle of the exemption; and, whether, under that decision, all tenements, although they may be parts of houses let to separate tenants at rents showing the value to be under the annual value of £20, are exempt from House Duty?

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. GOSCHEN) (St. George's, Hanover Square)

There is no statutory definition of "what is meant by self-contained industrial dwellings," there being no special legal provision as to Inhabited House Duty on such dwellings. I have read the case of the "Yorkshire Life and Fire Insurance Company v. Clayton," to which the hon. Member refers. It does not bear directly upon this particular question, but on the exemption of business premises from House Duty. So far as it has any relevance to the present Question, it seems to me to load to a conclusion diametrically opposite to that which the hon. Member seeks to draw from it. That was a case where exemption from Inhabited House Duty was claimed for part of an inhabited house, because such part was separately let and used solely for business purposes. The Judges held that, though the two parts of the house were separately let and were separate tenements, yet this was not sufficient to entitle the business portion to exemption. It was not enough that part of a house should be separately let—it must be physically divided in some clear and unmistakable manner; it must be structurally separate in order to entitle it to exemption. That is precisely the distinction which the Government has always maintained with regard to industrial dwellings.