§ MR. CROMBIE (Kincardineshire)I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in framing the new clause in the Finance Act to replace the stamp duty, he will consider the advisability of adopting some scheme which will produce sufficient revenue to replace the sum now arising from the operation of Clause 25 of the Companies Act, 1867, in order to admit of the total repeal of that clause, and thus carry out the recommendation of the Committee on this subject.
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Sir M. HICKS BEACH,) Bristol, W.The objects which the Departmental Committee of 1894 (to which I conclude the hon. Member refers) had in view in recommending the repeal of Section 25 of the Companies Act, 1867, have since been secured by the Companies Act, 1898, so that there is now no object to be gained by the repeal. The section does not itself impose any duty; it merely provides an important security against the evasion of existing stamp duties. There is really no connection between such a provision and any proposal that may be made for creating new stamp duty.
§ MR. CROMBIEIs there not a revenue derived from the working of this clause notwithstanding the Act of 1898?
§ SIR M. HICKS BEACHI have endeavoured to explain to the hon. Member that the section to which he refers is an important security to prevent an avoidance 178 of the revenue, and I should certainly object to its repeal.