HC Deb 30 July 1896 vol 43 cc1127-9

(1) On and after the first day of January next after the passing of this Act there shall he granted, charged, and paid in Great Britain for every light locomotive which is liable to duty either as a carriage or as a hackney carriage under Section four of the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1888, an additional duty of excise at the following rate, namely:—

£ s. d.
If the weight of the locomotive exceeds one ton unladen, but does not exceed two tons unladen 2 2 0
If the weight of the locomotive exceeds two tons unladen 3 3 0
(2) Every such duty shall he paid, together with the duty on the licence for the locomotive as a carriage or a hackney carriage, and shall in England be dealt with in manner directed, with respect to duties on local taxation licences within the meaning of the Local Government Act, 1888, and in Scotland he paid into the Local Taxation (Scotland) Account, and be dealt with as part of the residue within the meaning of section two, sub-section three, of the Local Taxation (Customs and Excise) Act, 1890.

He said it seemed to him that it was only fair that when these vehicles were of excessive weight they should pay an additional duty, and the Standing Committee appeared to be unanimously of opinion that this should be done. The clause was a very simple one.


objected to the clause. The men who were making this start were public benefactors, and ought not, therefore, to be taxed so heavily. Under this clause, a man with one of these motors might have to pay as much as five guineas, for he would have to pay the Carriage Duty, which might be two guineas, as well as the three guineas extra. It might be argued that these cars would do more harm to the roads than ordinary carriages; but if they were thus taxed on that account, they were not consistent in that line of argument, as the money would be collected in one centre by the Imperial authority, and only be distributed to local authorities according to the rateable value. Thus in our district there might be a hundred motor carriages using the roads, in another only five, and yet the district in which there were a hundred, would, if the rateable values were the same, receive no more than that in which there were five. He thought the present tax on carriages ample, and was opposed to taxing extra those who would be making useful experiments.


said the object of the Bill was to withdraw the obstruction which the existing law presented to the employment of motor ears, and yet in the same Bill it was proposed to fine the people who employed them.


also thought the proposed tax was too heavy.


said he opposed the proposal, as he felt sure it would be followed by a tax on bicycles and tricycles.

Question put,—" That the Clause be read a Second time."

The Committee divided:—Ayes, 125; Noes, 30.—(Division List, No. 358.)

Clause added to the Bill.


said that under the existing law carriages used for pleasure were taxed two guineas, whereas hackney carriages were only taxed fifteen shillings. If a poor man were to try to make a living by running a motor car as a hackney carriage, his tax ought not to be higher than fifteen shillings.


pointed out that a motor car used as an ordinary hackney carriage could not possibly weigh a ton, it would therefore pay only fifteen shillings. A large car used as an omni bus would be so expensive a vehicle that it would be out of a poor man's reach. Heavy vehicles of that kind would be run by companies that could well afford to pay the additional duties.


complained that no distinction was made between the motor carriage used for pleasure and the hackney motor carriage.


said that under the existing law the carriage used for pleasure paid two guineas, and the hackney carriage only fifteen shillings. That state of things would continue.

Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported, with Amendments; as amended, to be considered To-morrow.