FINANCE BILL.

HC Deb 23 May 1905 vol 146 cc1140-92

Considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

[Mr. JEFFREYS (Hampshire, N.) in the Chair.]

Clause 1:—

MR. SOARES (Devonshire, Barnstaple)

moved as an Amendment to reduce the tea duty from 6d. to 4d. He was, he said, very pleased that it had fallen to his lot to move that reduction, because if there was one tax to which he objected more than any other it was the tea duty. They had long been anxious for a free breakfast table, but so long as the present Government remained in office the vision of a free breakfast table receded more and more into the dim and distant future. When one considered the incidence of the tea tax he was driven to the conclusion that it was not defensible. It affected the rich infinitely less than it affected the poor. Very few wealthy people had suffered from the heavy duties which had been placed on tea by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but, on the other hand, there could be no doubt that the poorest classes had suffered to a very considerable extent. On the preceding day one of the hon. Members for Ireland complained very bitterly of the effect which the tea tax had on the peasantry of that country, and anyone who knew anything about the poorer classes was bound to admit the existence of the grievance. In his own constituency there were a large number of agricultural labourers who consumed considerable quantities of tea, and this tax had proved to them a very heavy burden. Many of these unfortunate people were in receipt of out relief, and it was well to bear in mind that the increase of the tea duty had not been followed by a proportionate addition to their out relief. This was a class of people who lived very largely on tea and bread and butter, and they were consequently the chief sufferers by the tax. Again, the Colonies had been hit very severely by it. Of course, the burden was borne by the consumer and not by the producer, but when a tax was put upon an article one effect was to reduce the consumption of it and in that way the producers were hit. It was an extraordinary fact that a Government which was always boasting of its interest in the Colonies should have chosen that particularly thick stick with which to beat them. No doubt the money was required by the Government, but the necessity arose to a not inconsiderable extent from the inefficiency of the War Office. If the recent speech of the Prime Minister meant anything at all, it meant that there should be a reduction in the War Office Estimates, but instead of that they had an increase of £1,000,000.

THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

Order, order! The hon. Member is not entitled to go into that.

MR. SOARES

said he did not propose to deal with the Prime Minister's speech. He was only pointing out it was because of the increase in the Estimates that this tea duty was imposed. He would like, however, to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how he reconciled his action in imposing this tea duty with the fiscal views he was known to hold? Did he consider that the tea tax was the best tax which could be imposed in the light of those views?

Amendment proposed— In page 1, line 20, to leave out the word sixpence and insert the word 'fourpence.'"—(Mr. Soares.)

Question proposed, "That the word "sixpence' stand part of the clause."

MR. FLYNN (Cork, N.)

said he was prepared to support the Amendment. Having failed on the previous day to get Ireland excluded from the operation of the tea duty, he certainly felt justified in trying to get it reduced to as low a figure as possible. He had never heard any solid argument in or out of the House in favour of the taxation of tea at such a high rate. The hon. Member who last spoke had suggested that there might be something to be said in its favour if it were an ad valorem duty. Having regard to the fact that tea at 1s. Per 1b., such as was consumed by the very poorest of the poor, bore exactly the same duty as the higher priced teas, he did think no valid argument could be advanced for keeping it at its present level. Undoubtedly a duty of 6d. per 1b. was out of all proportion to the value of the article. Poor people had to consider every penny they spent, and when a protective duty to the extent of at least 50 per cent. was put upon their tea, they were driven to drink bad and deleterious preparations. In the days of the late Mr. Gladstone, who was one of the greatest Finance Ministers this country ever had, they very nearly approached their ideal of a free breakfast table, but since then they had travelled very far in an opposite direction. In the interests of the poorest classes of the country, and especially of the poor of Ireland, he supported the reduction of a tax which pressed the most heavily on the shoulders of those least able to bear it.

MR. MCCRAE (Edinburgh, E.)

said he wished to press the Amendment on the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and to support his hon. friend in his endeavour to get the tea duty back to the point at which it stood before the war tax was put on. They had had increased taxes put upon beer, spirits, tobacco, tea, sugar, and other articles of consumption, and he thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer would agree with him that the first tax of which there should be a remission was the tax on tea. Indeed, the right, hon. Gentleman had already realised that by reducing the duty on tea by 2d. He thought the time had come when they ought to make a protest against these war taxes being retained, especially those taxes which had been placed on the necessities of life. He was not speaking particularly of the taxes on beer and spirits, about the removal of which he was not specially concerned, but in regard to the taxes on tea and sugar he thought they ought to take every opportunity of pressing on the Chancellor of the Exchequer the importance and necessity of at once removing them. Of course they would be told by the right hon. Gentleman that there was a certain amount of revenue to be raised, and a certain amount of expenditure to be met, and that, therefore, it was necessary to look round to see where he could get the money. But he would suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that it would be better for him to direct his attention to the necessity for a reduction of expenditure. That was the best possible economy, and it would prove the easiest way of making a reduction in the taxation which was becoming such a great burden on the people.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN, Worcestershire, E.)

said there could be no advantage in attempting to discuss on each individual Motion the far wider questions which were raised by the Bill, and he would therefore confine his remarks to this particular Amendment. This was a Motion to double the amount of the remission on the tea duty he had proposed. He had this year a much smaller sum than he could have wished for to devote to the remission of taxation, and, for reasons which he had already I explained, he chose the tea duty as the subject of remission, and he was bound to say that under this Bill the proportion of taxation was more favourable to the indirect taxpayer than it had been for a long time. He did not, however, attach much importance to that matter, though in the remission of the year and the amount he had available for remission, it seemed to him obvious that this tax was the best subject for that operation. It was complained that the tax stood above what it was before the war. Sir Stafford Northcote had once laid down the very true dictum that no progress could be made with paying off the burden of a great war except by retaining some proportion, at any rate, of the war taxes. But his defence did not rest on that only. His predecessor, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol, had pointed out that the difficulty of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not to provide for the great and heavy expenses of a war which had lasted longer than any one had anticipated that it would, but to make provision for the increased expenditure that would remain in peace. For the expenditure of the present day they needed the money provided for in this Bill. They could not dispense with the money that would be involved in the further remission asked for, and it was quite impossible for him to accept the Amendment.

It had been suggested by the hon. Member for North Cork that the tea duty should be an ad valorem duty. There was a great deal that was attractive in the idea, but there were great difficulties in its practical application. No one in the tea trade would give him the slightest encouragement in any effort he might make to convert the tea duty into an ad valorem duty, their view being that it would cause much disturbance and interruption; in the trade as well as injustice to dealers and producers of different qualities of tea. An association which had been pictorially very active in this City recently, had not scrupled to use the arguments for a high ad valorem duty; but when a gentleman went to ascertain whether they were in favour of an ad valorem duty, they disclaimed all sympathy with the idea, although they had adopted this as the most effective method of stating their case against the tax. He did not think that was either very honest or very creditable to them. It was said by hon. Members opposite that the Irish people always drank good tea. If that were so, the effect of an ad valorem duty must be pro tanto to encourage them to drink inferior tea and discourage the drinking of the better class teas. On the other hand, if it did not change their taste—and so far as the Irish were concerned he did not think it would—it would impose a heavier tax upon them. He did not feel called upon to answer the Question of the hon. Member for Barnstaple as to how he reconciled the tea tax with his views on fiscal policy. That was not material to the issue before the House. He could only add that he saw no way in which the revenue necessary for the expenditure of the country could be better raised: than the proposals he had put before the House.

MR. SYDNEY BUXTON (Tower Hamlets, Poplar)

said the right hon. Gentleman had rather objected to his hon. friend's action in raising on that discussion the question of national expenditure, but, in his opinion, that was the only opportunity which Members of the House of Commons had of raising that important question and of pointing out that all these extra taxes on tea, sugar, tobacco, and spirits were entirely due to the increased expenditure to which the Government had put the country in connection with the late war. With regard to the tea duty they ought to bear in mind that the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bristol, said that that was specifically a war tax. The unfortunate thing, however, was that although the war was now over the tax was still retained. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had told them that it was necessary to retain a certain amount of taxation in order to pay off the debt incurred in time of war, but unfortunately that was not what the Government were now doing. They were not paying off the extra burdens imposed in time of war, and, therefore, he contended that the tea tax, as it was presumably put on as a war tax, ought now to be dropped. The right hon. Gentleman had referred to the question of the importance to be attached to the proportion which direct taxation bore to indirect taxation. Well, he was bound to confess that he could not agree entirely with the right hon. Gentleman in the conclusions which he had drawn from those figures, but that question they would be able to discuss later on. The right hon. Gentleman had informed the House that he had a better way of raising revenue. Surely it was inconsistent on his part to make a proposal to the country which he believed to be not the best for the consumer and the taxpayers of the country. It was not a position in which he would like to find himself. But apparently the right hon. Gentleman had taken it in order to retain office. The Government were bound by the pledges they had given.

THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

I must remind the hon. Gentleman that the subject of discussion is the tea duty.

MR. SYDNEY BUXTON

said his point was that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had informed the country that he knew a better way of raising the revenue than by means of the tea tax, and they were entitled to ask him what that way was. The Opposition were not responsible for the Chancellor of the Exchequer's inability to take off the 2d. put on as a war tax, and were entitled to protest against its continuance now that the war was over.

*MR. LEVY (Leicestershire, Loughborough)

said the Chancellor of the Exchequer had endeavoured to justify the tax on tea, by his statement that he required the money, but on that ground they could justify any other tax by saying that so much money was required. The answer to that was that the expenditure of the country ought to be kept within reasonable limits. It should be borne in mind in regard to the duty on tea that a great proportion of the tea received in this country was now obtained from our own Colonies, and as the Chancellor of the Exchequer was closely allied to those Members in the House who believed in the preferential treatment of the Colonies, this extra 2d. per 1b. in excess of the duty prior to the war was probably being retained to give to the Colonies in exchange for some advantage which it was suggested they could give to us but which was purely mythical. It certainly did appear unwise on the part of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to keep up the extra duty on tea, a duty which was imposed for the purposes of the war, and the necessity for which ought no longer to be existent. In his opinion the duty was unfair, it was unnecessary, and had pressed extremely heavily upon the working people of the country. They heard a good deal now-a-days about the unemployed, and about people who were starving in all parts of the country, and it certainly did seem to him to be unwise that they should keep up a tax upon tea equivalent to 100 per cent. of its value whilst at the same time they had to legislate to find employment for the people who paid this tax. He thought, therefore, there were very considerable and strong reasons for rejecting the proposal of the Government.

MR. WHITLEY (Halifax)

said the Chancellor of the Exchequer had complained that those who tad proposed the reduction of the tea duty had not suggested any alternative, but he thought that there was an alternative which might well have been used, and that was a revision of the duties upon licences.

THE DEPUTY- CHAIRMAN

Order, order! That is scarcely relevant to the tea tax. At present the Committee is only asked to decide as to the imposition of the tea duty.

MR. WHITLEY

said he had respectfully to submit that in discussing whether the tax on tea should be 4d. or 6d. they were entitled to suggest an alternative method of raising the money, and he was attempting to do so. He was simply pointing out that there was an injustice in the present scale of licence duties, and if the Government would only level up those duties and make them to accord with the views which the Government expressed when the Licensing Bill was before the House they would produce the necessary revenue, and it would be unnecessary to tax the tea consumers of the country.

*MR. HERBERT SAMUEL (Yorkshire, Cleveland)

said the Chancellor of the Exchequer had stated that for his part he attached very little significance to any equality between direct and indirect taxation in the allocation of revenue, but he seemed to think that hon. Members on the opposite side of the House attached very great importance to that subject. As one who had had to trouble the House two or three times on the point, he could assure the right hon. Gentleman that none of them attached the smallest importance to any equality in the total sum raised by indirect or direct taxation. What they did attach importance to was the weight of taxation resting upon individuals, and they held that that weight of taxation should not be greater on the average poor man than it was upon the average rich man. They wanted a Committee of inquiry which would give them some authoritative information upon this question. Those of them who had honestly and laboriously made inquiries had come to the conclusion that the actual burden of taxation was heavier on the working classes than upon the middle and rich classes, and, so long as the contrary was not proved by an official inquiry they should feel it their duty to vote against the present unfair system of indirect taxation. It was a sound principle that each man should pay according to his; ability to pay, and as that principle was not observed in our system of finance, it was their duty to vote against maintaining the tea duty at its present level. The right hon. Gentleman had justified this tax by saying that after the war it was necessary to keep on war taxation in order to meet additional charges which the war had necessitated. The present Government had increased the expenditure of the country by £49,000,000, and out of that total only £4,000,000 or £5,000,000 could properly be attributed to the war. The other £45,000,000 or £44,000,000 had nothing whatever to do with the war; and therefore it was absurd to justify this expenditure by saying that it was necessitated by the war. For these reasons he hoped his hon. friend would press his Amendment to a division.

MR. DALZIEL (Kirkcaldy Burghs)

said he hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not allow this debate to close without giving the House some assurance on the points brought forward by his hon. friend Without discussing the whole question of war taxation, surely they were entitled to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, it was his intention to regard the present taxation as a permanent peace taxation. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had made many statements on this subject, and they wished to know whether if he occupied his present official position next year, he would keep in mind the pledge which had been given to the House, that the tax they were considering was a war tax which ought to be repealed with the least possible delay. With regard to the tea duty he was pleased that the Chancellor of the Exchequer dealt with it as he did, and he ventured to say that that was one of the principal reasons why the Budget was so generally popular, because the great mass of the people benefited by it. It was felt that there was a stronger claim for relief in regard to tea than any other article. The right hon. Gentleman, in introducing the Budget, admitted that he was largely influenced in the course he took by the fact that his proposal would benefit the Colonies. That showed that, after all, there was something in agitation, and there was very little doubt that, but for the vigorous agitation which had been carried on by the Colonies, the importance of the reduction he had made would not have been brought home to him. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had told them about his enormous sympathy with the Colonies, and surely that was a reason why he ought still further to reduce the taxation upon tea.

The case put that afternoon was absolutely reasonable. The Chancellor of the Exchequer could not do anything which would be more gratefully received by all classes than to still further reduce this tax. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer would accept this Amendment he thought they would be able to find some other direction from which to raise the money which would be more acceptable to the House. While they were grateful to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for small mercies they were not unwilling to accept others. This duty was one of the first things which ought to claim his attention. Of course they could not expect the Chancellor of the Exchequer to give them any outline of his policy in regard to a future Budget, but if he would tell them that he was fully alive to the justice of what they were demanding it would be received with satisfaction by the Committee. Some very distinguished authorities were absolutely at loggerheads as to the actual bearing of direct and indirect taxation, and they were to some extent in the dark as to the actual facts. Therefore he suggested that the right hon. Gentleman should listen to the appeal made by his hon. friend and consent to the appointment of this Committee. This had been asked for several times, and he could easily select certain financial experts in the House, thus showing some indication of a desire to meet the reasonable request which had been made from the Opposition side of the House.

MR. FIELD (Dublin, St. Patrick)

said he wished to support the appeal which had been made by his hon. friend for the appointment of this Committee. He thought there ought to be no tax at all upon tea. From a temperance point of view, and because tea was a necessity of life which came from other countries, it ought not to be taxed, more particularly when it was so largely consumed by the working classes. The ratio of indirect taxation was only 50 per cent. in the case of the English taxpayer, whereas in Ireland, with a much poorer population who drank more tea in proportion than the people of Great Britain, the ratio of indirect taxation was 72 per cent. A labourer in Ireland earning 15s. a week paid as much in indirect taxation as a labourer in England earning 25s. to 30s. a week. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would not adopt a non possumus attitude, because there was a very large amount of public feeling in favour of lessening taxation on tea, and the right hon. Gentleman must be aware that he owed to the country and to the House some recognition for receiving his Budget so quietly, not withstanding the large expenditure which it entailed. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would agree to the appointment of this Committee.

MR. J. A. PEASE (Essex, Saffron Walden)

appealed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer to say whether he would consider the propriety of appointing a Select Committee or a Departmental Committee to inquire as to the way the tea tax affected the various classes of the community. On his side of the House they would like to see a Committee appointed to consider the whole question of the incidence of direct and indirect taxation. He was quite in favour of everybody contributing to the funds of the State, and he thought they should do so in proportion to their means. Such a Committee as had been suggested by his hon. friends might ensure a recommendation which would do away with the taxes on necessary articles of life. He believed tea was a necessary article to the working classes as they at present lived in this country. The tax pressed unduly on the working classes, and especially the class he represented. To agricultural labourers with 12s. a week the tax upon tea was a very great burden, and it was more than their means justified.

MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN

said he could not undertake to deal at once with the suggestion of the hon. Gentleman opposite. Nobody who had spoken had contended that an inquiry into the tea tax alone would be of any value. What hon. Members really desired was an inquiry into the circumstances of the whole system of taxation. Those who had given any attention to the subject at all knew that probably a more difficult question to solve could not be submitted to any body of individuals, and the suggestion really was to devolve upon a Committee, he did not know exactly how denominated, duties essentially pertaining to this House—those of seeing that their system of taxation was just and fair. Hon. Gentlemen had some idea that possibly a Committee of that kind could demonstrate to the satisfaction of everybody and place beyond dispute the exact incidence of their present system of taxation. He believed that to be impossible. Great minds, learned men, deep students, had devoted a great deal of attention to that subject, but he was not aware that anyone had arrived at conclusions satisfactory to any other expert, and certainly not to conclusions which were generally acceptable. The task which would be propounded to a Committee would be, he thought, an impossible one, and unless they could show him there was practical work to be done, which he had not yet appreciated, he could not agree to appoint such a Committee as suggested. Of course, if the mover had a definite idea which he would care to discuss with him, he would be pleased to do so. He submitted, with all respect, that it was extremely difficult for a Minister or for the House to discuss a Bill of the present kind if on every clause, and at every stage, wide issues such as would be raised on a Second or Third Reading were raised again and again. He did not believe it had ever been attempted to be done before, and he ventured to submit it did not tend to the efficient discharge of business.

MR. MCCRAE

said the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not quite fair to the House in giving this lecture as to how the debates should be conducted. This was the first Motion on which they could deal with direct and indirect taxation, and the hon. Members who had spoken had conducted the debate with due regard to the rules of the House. With regard to the appointment of a Committee, he thought that all the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said had rather strengthened the suggestion made by his hon. friends. The right hon. Gentleman had admitted that he had not been able to come to a satisfactory conclusion on the question at issue, and that itself was a reason why he should agree to the appointment of a Committee. Great advantage had been derived from the Report of the Royal Commission on Local Taxation. Certainly the Government had not dealt with the question as it might have done, but in the evidence, and in the conclusions which the Commission had laid before the House they had a valuable mine of information. He submitted that the same advantages would follow if the right hon. Gentleman consented to the appointment of the Committee which in this case had been asked. He wished to press on the attention of the right hon. Gentleman that the tea duty of 6d. now proposed included 2d. which was put on for war taxation. While it would not be fair to ask the right hon. Gentleman to outline his future policy with regard to finance, or what he intended to do in his next Budget, he might inform the House as to his views with regard to the tea tax remaining at 6d. in time of peace. The tax was equal to 75 per cent, of the value of the article, and that, he submitted, was far too high a percentage in time of peace. The Committee would certainly appreciate the statement if the right hon. Gentleman could really tell them that he did not consider 6d. the normal duty to be imposed on tea, and that he would take the first opportunity of bringing it back to the old level of 4d. which existed before the war.

MR. GIBSON BOWLES (Lynn Regis)

said the Chancellor of the Exchequer was exceedingly well advised in declining to remit this question to a Committee. What the difference was between direct and indirect taxation no man had ever been able to pronounce with certainty. One school of economists held that one kind of tax was direct, while another school held that it was indirect. The different schools of economists were not agreed, and therefore it would not be reasonable to expect the Chancellor of the Exchequer to agree where the doctors so considerably differed. Could any hon. Member say whether a licence was a direct or an indirect tax? He got no answer. In the rough-and-ready classification adopted by the ordinary financier at the Treasury it was classed a direct tax, but he himself held that it was absolutely indirect because the licensee put the charge on the price of the beer. Customs duties were generally held to be indirect, but he held that in one respect they were very direct. This was a very complicated question which a Committee could not solve. He went further.

THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

You are travelling away from the Amendment before the Committee.

MR. GIBSON BOWLES

said this was a Ways and Means Bill for raising money to meet the supply of the year. In his opinion it did not afford a field on which economists should assert themselves in moving the reduction of taxation. It was in Supply that should be done. Once they had agreed to the grant they must find the ways and means. [An HON. MEMBER: No.] He admitted that there might be different methods. When hon. Members came forward with a proposal to take two pence off the tea duty they should be prepared with an alternative.

MR. HERBERT SAMUEL

We have been ruled out of order on that point.

MR. GIBSON BOWLES

said he did not rule the hon. Member out of order. He thought it was pertinent when a reduction was moved to show that there were other means of raising the money. Many hon. Members opposite were as anxious as he was to reduce the expenditure of the country, but he wished to impress upon them that this was not the best opportunity. It should be done not only in Supply, but when Works Bills were brought before them. Every one of these Bills ought to be strangled remorselessly. He very much doubted whether any reduction of taxation would be in the true interest of economy this year. The present need was to get rid of the load of debt, and that implied rather increased taxation.

MR. HERBERT SAMUEL

said the hon. Gentleman had misunderstood the purpose for which the Committee was proposed. They were dealing now with the tea duty, and the argument that the tax was heavier on the poorer than the wealthier classes. The question of the whole incidence of these taxes should come before the Committee. He was assured that the consumer paid the tea duty. Of course, such a Committee as had been suggested would have to exclude from its purview the coal tax; but it would be its business to assess the proportion of taxation which ought to be borne by certain articles——

THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

The hon. Gentleman is out of order in pursuing that line of argument.

MR. J. H. LEWIS (Flint Boroughs)

said that he ventured to move last year that the tea duty should be reduced from 8d. to 6d. per pound, and he was glad that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had taken his advice. But there was another piece of advice he had given the right hon. Gentleman which had not been adopted. He felt assured that if the right hon. Gentleman had appointed a Committee on the incidence of taxation, the Committee might have approached more nearly than now to a solution of this great problem, which was to adjust taxation so that it should fall on the shoulders of those who could bear it with the least inconvenience. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had, on his advice last year, made this reduction on the tea duty; but he wished that the right hon. Gentleman could have carried it further, because the very poor who bought their tea in very small quantities would not derive much benefit from the reduction. He was glad to hear the Chancellor of the Exchequer, when he introduced the Budget Bill, say that this reduction would be beneficially felt in every household in the United Kingdom. That was sound economic doctrine, because it was undoubtedly the consumer who had to pay this impost, although the foreign producer gained a certain benefit. He ought to say that in the case of tea it was the colonial producer in India and Ceylon. Undoubtedly the tendency of a large tax on a particular article was to diminish consumption. It should be remembered that India was a miserably poor country, and anything which diminished employment in India diminished the chances of these poor natives of obtaining a decent existence. India was the most thickly populated portion of His Majesty's dominions. It had been afflicted with plague and famines, and all the ills which afflicted humanity; and anything which could benefit that country would benefit this country. They heard a great deal about colonial preference and the desirability of doing anything we could for the benefit of the Colonies. He thought the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had conferred, by this reduction of the tea duty, a practical benefit on India. In Ceylon the tea industry had been the industrial salvation of the island, the population of which was the most loyal in the whole Empire. Ceylon, twenty years ago, was in a state of bankruptcy, and the tea cultivation saved it. The tea duty, imposed a few years ago, crippled that colony; and he

hoped the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer would, if not this year, the next, accept a further reduction of the tea duty. He trusted that, by measures of economy, it might be possible to have a further reduction next year of 2d. per 1b. on the tea duty. He had great pleasure in supporting the Amendment of his hon. friend, and he trusted that he would press it to a division.

SIR J. FERGUSSON (Manchester, N.E.)

said that this discussion had been largely academic, but he could not let pass the statement of the hon. Gentleman opposite who urged that such a tax as the duty tea fell wholly on the consumer. He was old enough to remember that the late Earl Russell said he was quite convinced that moderate indirect taxation fell in equal proportions on the producer and the consumer.

MR. J. H. LEWIS

said he had only quoted the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and was following his lead. He was sorry that the right hon. Gentleman opposite did not also follow the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes, 217; Noes, 157.

AYES.
Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel	Blundell, Colonel Henry	Davenport, William Bromley
Allhusen, Augustus Hen. Eden	Bond, Edward	Denny, Colonel
Allsopp, Hon. George	Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F (Middlesex	Dickson, Charles Scott
Anson, Sir William Reynell	Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn	Dixon-Hartland, Sir F. Dixon
Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hon. Hugh O.	Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John	Doughty, Sir George
Arrol, Sir William	Brymer, William Ernest	Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-
Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John	Campbell, J. H. M. Dublin Univ.	Doxford, Sir William Theodore
Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir H.	Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.	Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton
Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy	Cavendish, V. C. W. Derbyshire	Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas
Bailey, James (Walworth)	Cayzer, Sir Charles William	Fardell, Sir T. George
Bain, Colonel James Robert	Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.	Fellowes, Rt. Hn. Ailwyn Edw.
Balcarres, Lord	Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. A. Worc.	Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. Manc'r
Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r	Chapman, Edward	Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.
Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)	Clive, Captain Percy A.	Finlay, Sir R. B Inverness B'ghs
Balfour, Rt. Hon. G. W. (Leeds	Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.	Fisher, William Hayes
Banbury, Sir Frederick George	Coddington, Sir William	Fison, Frederick William
Banner, John S. Harmood-	Cohen, Benjamin Louis	FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose
Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor)	Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole	Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon
Bartley, Sir George C. T.	Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge	Flannery, Sir Fortescue
Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir Mich. Hicks	Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim, S.)	Flower, Sir Ernest
Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.	Cripps, Charles Alfred	Forster, Henry William
Bignold, Sir Arthur	Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)	Galloway, William Johnson
Bigwood, James	Dalkeith, Earl of	Gardner, Ernest
Bill, Charles	Dalrymple, Sir Charles	Garfit, William
Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick	Macdona, John Cumming	Seely, Charles Hilton(Lincoln)
Gordon, Hn. J. E. Elgin & Nairn)	Maconochie, A. W.	Seton-Karr, Sir Henry
Gordon, Maj. E. (T'rHamlets)	M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)	Sharpe, William Edward T.
Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby	M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh, W	Shaw-Stewart, Sir H. (Renfrew).
Goschen, Hon. George Joachim	Majendie, James A. H.	Sinclair, Louis (Romford)
Goulding, Edward Alfred	Malcolm, Ian	Skewes-Cox, Thomas
Graham, Henry Robert	Manners, Lord Cecil	Sloan, Thomas Henry
Gray, Ernest (West Ham)	Marks, Harry Hananel	Smith, H C (North'mb. Tyneside
Greene, Sir E. W (B'rySEdm'nds	Martin, Richard Biddulph	Smith, Rt. Hon. J. P. (Lanarks
Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury	Melville, Beresford Valentine	Spear, John Ward
Grenfell, William Henry	Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.	Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)
Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.	Mitchell, William(Burnley)	Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk
Hamilton, RtHn LordG(Midd'x	Molesworth, Sir Lewis	Stanley, Edward Jas.(Somerset)
Hamilton, Marq of(L'nd'nderry	Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)	Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord(Lancs.)
Hardy, L. (Kent, Ashford)	Moore, William	Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart
Hare, Thomas Leigh	Morpeth, Viscount	Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.
Haslam, Sir Alfred S.	Morrell, George Herbert	Stock, James Henry
Hay, Hon. Claude George	Morrison, James Archibald	Stroyan, John
Heath, Sir Jas. (Staffords.,N. W)	Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer	Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley
Heaton, John Henniker	Mount, William Arthur	Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)
Helder, Augustus	Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.	Thorburn, Sir Walter
Hickman, Sir Alfred	Muntz, Sir Philip A.	Thornton, Percy M.
Hogg, Lindsay	Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)	Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.
Horner, Frederick William	Myers, William Henry	Tritton, Charles Ernest
Hoult, Joseph	Nicholson, William Graham	Tuff, Charles
Howard, Jn. (Kent, Faversham	Parker, Sir Gilbert	Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward
Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham	Pease, Herb. Pike (Darlington)	Walker, Col. William Hall
Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil	Percy, Earl	Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.
Hutton, John (Yorks., N. R.)	Pilkington, Colonel Richard	Warde, Colonel C. E.
Jebo, Sir Richard Claverhouse	Platt-Higgins, Frederick	Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E (Taunton
Jessel,Captain Herbert Merton	Powell, Sir Francis Sharp	Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.)
Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H.	Pretyman, Ernest George	Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd
Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh)	Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward	Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne
Kerr, John	Purvis, Robert	Whitmore, Charles Algernon
Kimber, Sir Henry	Pym, C. Guy	Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)
Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.	Quilter, Sir Cuthbert	Willoughby de Eresby, Lord
Laurie, Lieut.-General	Randles, John S.	Wilson, John (Glasgow)
Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)	Rankin, Sir James	Wilson-Todd, Sir W. H. (Yorks.)
Lawrence, Sir Jos. (Monmouth)	Reid, James (Greenock)	Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath
Lawson, Jn. Grant (Yorks., N. R	Renwick, George	Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson
Lee, A. H. (Hants., Fareham)	Ritchie, Rt. Hn Chas. Thomson	Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart
Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage	Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)	Wrightson, Sir Thomas
Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.	Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)	Wylie, Alexander
Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.	Robinson, Brooke	Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George
Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)	Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye	Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong
Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Bristol, S.)	Round, Rt. Hon. James
Lowe, Francis William	Royds, Clement Molyneux	TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir
Loya, Archie Kirkman	Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford	Alexander Acland-Hood and
Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)	Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander	Viscount Valentia.
Lyttleton, Rt. Hon. Alfred	Samuel, Sir H. S. (Limehouse)
NOES.
Abraham, William (Rhondda)	Cameron, Robert	Elibank, Master of
Allen, Charles P.	Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)	Ellice,Capt E.C(SAndnw'sB'ghs
Ashton, Thomas Gair	Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.	Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)
Atherley-Jones, L.	Causton, Richard Knight	Emmott, Alfred
Austin, Sir John	Channing, Francis Allston	Esmonde, Sir Thomas
Barry, E. (Cork, S.)	Cheetham, John Frederick	Field, William
Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.	Clancy, John Joseph	Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N. E.)
Bell, Richard	Crean, Eugene	Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond
Blake, Edward	Crombie, John William	Flavin, Michael Joseph
Boland, John	Dalziel, James Henry	Flynn, James Christopher
Brigg, John	Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan)	Gilhooly, James
Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)	Delany, William	Gladstone, Rt. Hon. Herb.John
Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson	Devlin, Chas. Ramsay (Galway	Goddard, Daniel Ford
Bryce, Rt. Hon. James	Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.	Grant, Corrie
Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn	Dillon, John	Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick
Burke, E. Haviland	Dobbie, Joseph	Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton
Burt, Thomas	Donelan, Captain A.	Hayden, John Patrick
Buxton, Sydney Charles	Doogan, P. C.	Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.
Caldwell, James	Dunn, Sir William	Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

Higham, John Sharp	Mansfield, Horace Rendall	Schwann, Charles E.
Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.	Mooney, John J.	Shackleton, David James
Holland, Sir William Henry	Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)	Shipman, Dr. John G.
Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)	Murphy, John	Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)
Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.	Nannetti, Joseph P.	Slack, John Bamford
Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)	Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway, N.)	Spencer, Rt. Hn. C. R (Northants
Jacoby, James Alfred	Nolan, Joseph (Louth,South)	Stanhope, Hon. Philip James
Johnson, John	Norton, Capt. Cecil William	Stevenson, Francis S.
Joicey, Sir James	O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)	Strachey, Sir Edward
Jones, Leif (Appleby)	O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.)	Sullivan, Donal
Jones, William (Carnarvonshire	O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)	Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)
Joyce, Michael	O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)	Tennant, Harold John
Kearley, Hudson E.	O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.	Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)
Kilbride, Denis	O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)	Thomas, D. Alfred (Merthyr)
Kitson, Sir James	O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)	Thomson, F. W. (York, W. R.)
Labouchere, Henry	O' Dowd, John	Toulmin, George
Lambert, George	O'Malley, William	Trevelyan, Charles Philips
Langley, Batty	Parrott, William	Villiers, Ernest Amherst
Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)	Partington, Oswald	Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)
Layland-Barratt, Francis	Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)	Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)
Leese, Sir Jos. F. (Accrington)	Philipps, John Wynford	Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)
Leng, Sir John	Power, Patrick Joseph	White, George (Norfolk)
Levy, Maurice	Pries, Robert John	White, Luke (York, E. R.)
Lewis, John Herbert	Priestley, Arthur	Whiteley, George (York, W. R.)
Lloyd-George, David	Rea, Russell	Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)
Lough, Thomas	Reddy, M.	Wilson, Fred. W.(Norfolk, Mid.)
Lundon, W.	Redmond, John E. (Waterford)	Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)
MacNeill, John Gordon Swift	Richards, Thomas (W. Monm'th	Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh.,N.)
MacVeagh, Jeremiah	Rickett, J. Compton	Young, Samuel
M'Crae, George	Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)	Yoxall, James Henry
M' Fadden, Edward	Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)
H'Hugh, Patrick A.	Roche, John	TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr.
M'Kean, John	Runciman, Walter	Soares and Mr. Cawley.
M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)	Russell, T. W.
M' Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin	Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

Question put "That Clause 1 stand part of the Bill."

The Committee divided:—Ayes, 215; Noes, 157. (Division List No.171.)

AYES.
Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel	Carlile, William Walter	Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r
Allhusen, Augustus Hen. Eden	Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.	Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.
Allsopp, Hon. George	Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire	Finlay, Sir R. B (Inverness B'ghs
Anson, Sir William Reynell	Cayzer, Sir Charles William	Fisher, William Hayes
Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O.	Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.	Fison, Frederick William
Arrol, Sir William	Chamberlain, Rt Hn. J. A (Worc.	FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose
Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John	Chapman, Edward	Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon
Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.	Clive, Captain Percy A.	Flannery, Sir Fortescue
Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy	Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.	Flower, Sir Ernest
Bailey, James (Walworth)	Coddington, Sir William	Forster, Henry William
Bain, Colonel James Robert	Cohen, Benjamin Louis	Galloway, William Johnson
Balcarres, Lord	Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole	Gardner, Ernest
Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r	Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge	Garfit, William
Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)	Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim, S.)	Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.
Balfour, Rt. Hon. G. W. (Leeds	Cripps, Charles Alfred	Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn)
Banbury, Sir Frederick George	Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)	Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby
Banner, John S. Harmood-	Dalkeith, Earl of	Goschen, Hon. George Joachim
Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor)	Dalrymple, Sir Charles	Goulding, Edward Alfred
Bartley, Sir George C. T.	Davenport, William Bromley	Graham, Henry Robert
Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir Mich. Hicks	Denny, Colonel	Gray, Ernest (West Ham)
Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.	Dickson, Charles Scott	Greene, Sir E. W (B'ry S Edm'nds
Bignold, Sir Arthur	Dimsdale, Rt. Hn. Sir Joseph C.	Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury
Bigwood, James	Dixon-Hartland, Sir F. Dixon	Grenfell, William Henry
Bill, Charles	Doughty, Sir George	Hall, Edward Marshall
Blundell, Colonel Henry	Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-	Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.
Bond, Edward	Doxford, Sir William Theodore	Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x
Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn	Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton	Hamilton, Marq of (L'nd'nderry
Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John	Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas	Hardy, L. (Kent, Ashford)
Brymer, William Ernest	Fardell, Sir T. George	Hare, Thomas Leigh
Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ.	Fellowes, Rt. Hn. Ailwyn Edw.	Haslam, Sir Alfred S.
Hay, Hon. Claude George	Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.	Skewes-Cox, Thomas
Heath, Sir Jas. (Staffords., N. W	Mitchell, William (Burnley)	Sloan, Thomas Henry
Heaton, John Henniker	Molesworth, Sir Lewis	Smith, H C (North'mb. Tyneside
Helder, Augustus	Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)	Smith, Rt. Hon. J. P. (Lanarks
Hickman, Sir Alfred	Moore, William	Spear, John Ward
Hogg, Lindsay	Morpeth, Viscount	Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)
Horner, Frederick William	Morrell, George Herbert	Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk
Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry	Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer	Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset
Hoult, Joseph	Mount, William Arthur	Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.
Howard, Jn. (Kent, Faversham	Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.	Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart
Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham	Muntz, Sir Philip A.	Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.
Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil	Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)	Stock, James Henry
Hutton, John (Yorks., N. R.)	Myers, William Henry	Stroyan, John
Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse	Nicholson, William Graham	Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley
Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton	Parker, Sir Gilbert	Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)
Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H.	Pease, Herb. Pike (Darlington)	Thorburn, Sir Walter
Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh	Percy, Earl	Thornton, Percy M.
Kerr, John	Pilkington, Colonel Richard	Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.
Kimber, Sir Henry	Platt-Higgins, Frederick	Tritton, Charles Ernest
Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.	Powell, Sir Francis Sharp	Tuff, Charles
Laurie, Lieut.-General	Pretyman, Ernest George	Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward
Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)	Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward	Walker, Col. William Hall
Lawrence, Sir Jos. (Monmouth)	Purvis, Robert	Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H
Lawson, Jn. Grant (Yorks., N. R	Pym, C. Guy	Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E (Taunton
Lee, A. H. (Hants., Fareham)	Quilter, Sir Cuthbert	Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.
Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage	Randles, John S.	Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd
Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.	Rankin, Sir James	Whiteley, H. (Ashton und.Lyne
Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.	Reid, James (Greenock)	Whitmore, Charles Algernon
Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham)	Renwick, George	Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)
Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Bristol, S.)	Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson	Willoughby de Eresby, Lord
Lowe, Francis William	Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)	Wilson, John (Glasgow)
Loyd, Archie Kirkman	Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)	Wilson-Todd, Sir W. H. (Yorks.)
Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)	Robinson, Brooke	Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath
Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred	Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye	Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson
Macdona, John Cumming	Royds, Clement Molyneux	Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart
Maconochie, A. W.	Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford	Wrightson, Sir Thomas
M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)	Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander	Wylie, Alexander
M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh, W	Samuel, Sir H. S. (Limehouse)	Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George
Majendie, James A. H.	Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)	Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong
Malcolm, Ian	Seton-Karr, Sir Henry
Manners, Lord Cecil	Sharpe, William Edward T.	TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir
Marks, Harry Hananel	Shaw-Stewart, Sir H. (Renfrew)	Alexander Acland-Hood and
Martin, Richard Biddulph	Sinclair, Louis (Romford)	Viscount Valentia.
NOES.
Abraham, William (Rhondda)	Cheetham, John Frederick	Goddard, Daniel Ford
Allen, Charles P.	Clancy, John Joseph	Grant, Corrie
Ashton, Thomas Gair	Crean, Eugene	Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick)
Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry	Crombie, John William	Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton
Atherley-Jones, L.	Dalziel, James Henry	Harcourt, Lewis
Austin, Sir John	Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan)	Hayden, John Patrick
Barlow, John Emmott	Delany, William	Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.
Barry, E. (Cork, S.)	Devlin, Chas. Ramsay (Galway	Henderson, Arthur (Durham)
Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.	Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.	Higham, John Sharp
Bell, Richard	Dillon, John	Holland, Sir William Henry
Blake, Edward	Dobbie, Joseph	Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)
Boland, John	Donelan, Captain A.	Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.
Brigg, John	Doogan, P. C.	Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)
Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)	Dunn, Sir William	Jacoby, James Alfred
Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson	Elibank, Master of	Johnson, John
Bryce, Rt. Hon. James	Ellice, Capt E. C (S Andrw's B'ghs	Joicey, Sir James
Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn	Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)	Jones, Leif (Appleby)
Burke, E. Haviland	Emmott, Alfred	Jones, William (Carnarvonshire
Burt, Thomas	Eve, Harry Trelawney	Joyce, Michael
Buxton, Sydney Charles	Field, William	Kilbride, Denis
Cameron, Robert	Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N. E.)	Kitson, Sir James
Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)	Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond	Labouchere, Henry
Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.	Flavin, Michael Joseph	Lambert, George
Causton, Richard Knight	Flynn, James Christopher	Langley, Batty
Cawley, Frederick	Gilhooly, James	Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)
Channing, Francis Allston	Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John	Layland-Barratt, Francis

Leese, Sir Jos. F. (Accrington)	O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.	Stanhope, Hon. Philip James
Leng, Sir John	O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)	Stevenson, Francis S.
Levy, Maurice	O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)	Strachey, Sir Edward
Lewis, John Herbert	O' Dowd, John	Sullivan, Donal
Lloyd-George, David	O'Malley, William	Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)
Lough, Thomas	Parrott, William	Tennant, Harold John
Lundon, W.	Partington, Oswald	Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)
MacNeill, John Gordon Swift	Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)	Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr
Mac Veagh, Jeremiah	Philipps, John Wynford	Thomson, F. W. (York, W. R.)
M'Crae, George	Pirie, Duncan V.	Trevelyan, Charles Philips
M'Fadden, Edward	Price, Robert John	Villiers, Ernest Amherst
M'Hugh, Patrick A.	Reddy, M.	Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)
M'Kean, John	Redmond, John E. (Waterford)	Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)
M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)	Richards, H. C. (Finsbury, E.)	Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)
M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin	Rickett, J. Compton	White, George (Norfolk)
Mansfield, Horace Rendall	Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)	White, Luke (York., E. R.)
Mooney, John J.	Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)	Whiteley, George (York, W. R.)
Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)	Roche, John	Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)
Moulton, John Fletcher	Runciman, Walter	Whittaker, Thomas Palmer
Murphy, John	Russell, T. W.	Wilson, Fred. W.(Norfolk,Mid.)
Nannetti, Joseph P.	Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)	Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)
Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway, N.	Schwann, Charles E.	Young, Samuel
Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)	Shackleton, David James	Yoxall, James Henry
Norton, Capt. Cecil William	Shipman, Dr. John G.
O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)	Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)	TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr.
O' Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.)	Slack, John Bamford	Russell Rea and Mr. Toulmin.
O' Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)	Soares, Ernest J.
O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)	Spencer, Rt. Hn. C. R (Northants

Clause 2:

MR. WHITLEY

said the words he proposed to leave out appeared to him to be mere surplusage or else words put in to create a very fine and subtle distinction between "increased" and "additional" duties. The clause said, "additional" duties and Customs imposed by Clauses 2, 3, 4 of the Finance Act of 1900, including the increased duties mentioned in the fifth clause of that Act. He deprecated this legislation by reference, and could not see why the first words of the clause were not sufficient of themselves. But even if they were not, he thought it would have been much better drafting to put in "additional and increased" duties. He begged to move.

Amendment proposed— In page 2, to leave out the words 'including the increased duties imposed by Section 5 of that Act.'"—(Mr. Whitley.)

Question proposed "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."

MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN

pointed out that Clause 5 of the Finance Act of 1900 stood upon a different footing to Clauses 2, 3, and 4. Clause 5 enacted duties some of which were described as "additional" and some as "increased," and unless in the present Bill they included the reference to the increased duties the form of the clause would merely repeal the additional and not the increased duties in the original Act.

MR. WHITLEY

asked whether the duties mentioned in Clause 5 were not levied before 1900.

MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN

said those articles were taxed before 1900, but by that Act the spirit duty by which the duty on those articles was fixed was raised, and therefore it became necessary to increase the duty on those articles.

MR. WHITLEY

said he thought the right hon. Gentleman had rather thrown the blame back on the Act of 1900. The matter, he thought, could be remedied in the present Bill, if, as he understood, the first part of Clause 5 recited only the additions to the existing duties imposed an account of the war, whilst the second part of the clause recited the new duties, the additional duties, imposed.

MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN

said the hon. Member was quite accurate.

MR. WHITLEY

thought it was a pity that a method of this kind had been adopted, because it prevented the Committee from arriving at the actual amount of the duties imposed on these articles on account of the war, especially the minor articles. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman at some future time would see his way to treat these articles on the same basis as tobacco, beer, and spirits. He begged leave, after the right hon. Gentleman's explanation, to withdraw his Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

MR. FLYNN

said that by Section 2 of the Finance Bill an additional duty of 4d. a 1b. was placed on all tobaccos. Had it been placed on high-priced cigars he would not say anything more about it, but it was imposed on all kinds of tobaccos, especially those cheap tobaccos which were imported into Ireland, in respect to which lie thought the increased tax of 4d. ought to be repealed. By the extent to which the price of an article was increased the industry concerned in the manufacture of that article was penalised, and the growing industry of tobacco manufacture in Ireland had been seriously injured by the imposition of this additional duty. Ireland was not so rich in industries that she could afford to have any of them interfered with or handicapped, and he submitted that it would be perfectly easy by means of a sub-section to relieve the Irish tobacco industry of this imposition. A certain class of Irish tobacco was largely consumed by the working classes both of this country and of Ireland. Many working men would rather forego their breakfast or dinner than their pipe, and it was no abuse of language to say that to many of the poorer classes tobacco had become a necessity of life. It was one of the few alleviations of their lot of unremitting toil, and the working classes of Ireland felt it rather hard that this modest luxury and almost necessity should be taxed more heavily for the purpose of carrying on a great war to which they were always opposed. But the war had been over for nearly three years, and yet the taxes were maintained. He had not moved in reference to the Customs duties on beer and spirits; it was only right that they should bear their fair share of taxation, but he did claim an exemption in favour of Irish tobacco. The Chancellor of the Exchequer would probably give the stereotyped reply that money must be obtained. The amount involved, however, was so small, in comparison with the Budget as a whole, that he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would see his way to make the moderate concession asked for. He begged to move.

Amendment proposed— In page 2, line 8, at end to add the words, 'Provided, however, that the additional duty of fourpence the pound imposed by Section two of the Finance Act, 1900, shall not apply to un-manufactured tobacco imported into Ireland as from the first day of July, nineteen hundred and five.'"—(Mr. Flynn.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there added."

MR. FIELD

said he had just received a telegram from the tobacco manufacturers in his constituency asking him to support this Amendment. The manufacturing aspect of the question should not be lost sight of. It was the duty of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to co-operate with any attempt to prevent American trusts from monopolising the retail businesses in the country, and Irish manufacturers were seriously handicapped in their endeavours to compete with those trusts by the taxation they had to bear. The duty of 4d. operated gravely against the manufacture of tobacco, and the small allowance asked for by this Amendment would be of great assistance. He submitted that Ireland had an exceptional case for relief in this matter and that the growing of tobacco should be encouraged in every possible way in order the more successfully to cope with the foreign competition which was daily becoming more formidable.

MR. FLAVIN

joined his hon. friend in protesting against the continuance of this war taxation upon the poorest of the poor. The question was of importance from the point of view, not only of taxpayers generally, but of consumers of tobacco, English and Irish, in view of the fact that the Imperial Tobacco Company of America had secured practical control of the retail market. There was absolutely no competition, consequently no protection for the poor consumers, other than that supplied by the independent Irish tobacco manufacturers. But because the Irish manufacturers had to face the increased duty of 4d. the American combine were placing on the market an imitation of Irish roll tobacco at cost price in order to destroy the independent firms who had stood out from the combination. He believed in healthy competition and fair profits. The practical control of the tobacco trade by one syndicate was a serious matter for the working men of the country. Great credit was due to firms like Gallahers', who had had the wits, energy, and capital successfully so far to stand outside the ring, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer ought to encourage such firms in their endeavour, even at loss and injury to themselves, to give the people the benefit of healthy competition. He was sorry that the average English manufacturer did not show a more enlightened spirit, and this was only an example of the way in which they took a selfish and narrow view of this matter as opposed to the welfare of the masses. He appealed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the grounds he had stated, first, in the interests of the poorest of the poor, and, secondly, in the interests of those independent firms who had stood outside the combination, and who were placing a good article on the market. He thought such firms ought to be encouraged. The Imperial Tobacco Company had made up its mind to drive all independent men inside their trust or else ruin them by unfair competition. In the interests of Irish industries the Chancellor of the Exchequer ought to do something to protect them, and thus increase the amount of employment in Ireland.

MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN

said he agreed with the hon. Member that in the progress of our commercial life and the world's commercial life trusts and great combinations were beginning, and probably would continue, to play a much larger part than had been the case in the past. Consequently, it would be necessary for any Government to watch their operation, and to see whether any regulation was necessary to prevent great private combinations from becoming a public danger. He did not think that case had arisen yet, but the matter was one which any Government must keep under observation. Other countries had deemed it necessary to have such legislation in contemplation, and in some instances had actually passed legislation on this question. He thought in the near future they might have to direct their attention to the new state of things which had been created. He thought he could show to the hon. Member that the particular Amendment now before the House was not the proper method by which his object should be pursued, and that it would not attain the end at which he aimed. He had spoken of the trade which was of special interest to the Chancellor of the Exchequer because it furnished a large portion of the revenue. He had stated that the tobacco trade in Ireland was at the mercy of a foreign combination. He thought he was wrong in saying that any foreign combination seriously menaced that trade. No doubt there had been a fight between a foreign and a home combination, which arose out of the attempt made to invade our own market by a great foreign trust. There was a sharp battle, but not a very long one, and it resulted in the defeat of the foreign combination, which came to an agreement with the home combination practically to the extent that they should not invade our market. Whatever disturbance there now was in the trade was not due to a foreign combination, but was largely due to a domestic combination. The hon. Member was mistaken in supposing that the combination he alluded to included all the British firms. The Imperial Tobacco Company was a very powerful and a very large combination, but if the hon. Member made inquiries he would find that a very considerable number of firms still stood outside that combination in this country.

MR. FLAVIN

Yes, but they are trying to force them inside.

MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN

said there was still a considerable number of firms in England who had stood outside. The hon. Gentlemen's Amendment would favour Irish firms in regard to Irish trade, and one of his arguments was that it would enable them to resist this combination. He wished to point out that it would give no assistance to firms which stood outside the combination in the rest of the United Kingdom. The hon. Member who moved the Amendment pleaded for it on the ground that it would encourage Irish manufactures. He was glad to think that this was a most prosperous industry in Ireland, employing many hands, and he hoped it was profitable both to the country and to the people who carried it on. The Amendment would introduce a complication into their system which would be extremely difficult, because it would pick out for special favour one or two manufacturers to the detriment of all other manufacturers, whether forming part of the combination or not. As a matter of fact it would be protective in its nature as against the foreign manufacturers. He hardly needed to pursue that question, because, as they were all aware, the Government was not going to propound any changes of that character during the present Parliament. He was not insensible to the possible danger of these great industrial combinations, nor to the fact that they were a proper subject for the attention of the Government, because they might, in the course of their development render changes in our laws necessary which were not necessary when such great combinations were unknown. It was evident, however, that they could not deal with that question by a single small Amendment of this character, and he assured the hon. Member that it would not produce the result which he desired.

MR. FIELD

asked the right hon. Gentleman to answer his point as to the encouragement of tobacco-growing in Ireland.

MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN

said he was afraid that the question of tobacco-growing in Ireland would not be in order upon this Amendment.

THE DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

No, it would not be in order.

MR. FLAVIN

said in regard to this matter they were not selfish and did not want any special treatment. What concession they made to the Irish manufacturers he was quite willing should be given to other manufacturers. He was glad to hear from the right hon. Gentleman that some manufacturers in this country stood outside the combination. He suggested that they should also give them exemption and encourage them to stay outside the combination. The Chancellor of the Exchequer must be aware that the Imperial Tobacco Company were already in possession of the greater part of the tobacco trade of the United Kingdom. The proper time to tackle this trust was not after it had ruined all its opponents by unfair competition, but before it had grown to a fully-developed tree.

MR. O'MARA (Kilkenny, S.)

said this Amendment was intended to provide an exemption in accordance with the provisions of the Act of Union. His hon. friend thought the Amendment should be used to help independent tobacco firms who stood outside the combination. He wished to point out that on the Second Reading of this Bill it was amply proved that Ireland could not be successful in its industries unless some abatement was made in the taxes imposed upon the country, and there was no tax upon which an abatement could more properly be allowed than on the tobacco tax. This was an article which was specially mentioned in the Act of Union. He was quite ready to admit that but for the Act of Union the argument of the Chancellor of the Exchequer and his predecessors would have a great deal of weight. It was said that the poor man in Ireland was no worse than the poor man in England in regard to this tax, and, that therefore there was no injustice. His answer to that was that the representatives of the Irish nation were in the Imperial Parliament because of the policy of the Act of Union. The present Chancellor of the Exchequer and his predecessor had repudiated the Act of Union, but it might interest the House to know that the Act contemplated an abatement to Ireland on this particular tax. One of the grounds on which the taxation on tobacco and a number of other articles was to be calculated was the relative value of the exports and imports of the different countries. He might mention in passing that they were unable to arrive at the relative value of the exports and imports because the figures could not be ascertained. The figures were absolutely denied to them, so that they were unable to say precisely how much they were overtaxed. He thought no more suitable abatement could be given in the case of Ireland than that proposed by his hon. friend who moved the Amendment. They were entitled to a more sympathetic answer than the Chancellor of the Exchequer had given. When

Ireland was declining in wealth and population, and when taxation was increasing, the least the House of Commons could do should be to give this paltry abatement.

MR. FLYNN

said he should have liked not to press the Amendment to a division, but after the reply of the Chancellor of the Exchequer there was no other course open. Surely this war tax ought not to be continued in a country whose representatives opposed the war, especially when the war had been over for three years.

Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes, 97; Noes, 236. (Division List No. 172.)

AYES.
Abraham, William (Rhondda)	Hutchinson, Dr. CharlesFredk.	O' Kelly, Jas. (Roscommon, N.)
Athenley-Jones, L.	Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)	O' Mara, James
Austin, Sir John	Jacoby, James Alfred	O'Shaughnessy, P. J.
Barlow, John Emmott	Johnson, John	Parrott, William
Boland, John	Joicey, Sir James	Philipps, John Wynford
Bolton, Thomas Dolling	Jones, William (Carnarvonshire	Power, Patrick Joseph
Burke, E. Haviland	Joyce, Michael	Rea, Russell
Burt, Thomas	Kilbride, Denis	Reddy, M.
Caldwell, James	Kitson, Sir James	Redmond, John E. (Waterford)
Cameron, Robert	Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)	Richards, Thomas (W. Monm'th
Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)	Leng, Sir John	Rickett, J. Compton
Cawley, Frederick	Levy, Maurice	Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)
Channing, Francis Allston	Lough, Thomas	Roche, John
Clancy, John Joseph	Lundon, W.	Shackleton, David James
Dalziel, James Henry	Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.	Shipman, Dr. John G.
Delany, William	MacVeagh, Jeremiah	Slack, John Bamford
Dillon, John	M' Fadden, Edward	Stanhope, Hon. Philip James
Dobbie, Joseph	M' Hugh, Patrick A.	Sullivan, Donal
Donelan, Captain A.	M'Kean, John	Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)
Doogan, P. C.	M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)	Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr
Duncan, J. Hastings	M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin	Toulmin, George
Dunn, Sir William	Mooney, John J.	Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)
Ellice, Capt E. C (S Andrw's B'ghs	Moss, Samuel	Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)
Emmott, Alfred	Murphy, John	Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)
Eve, Harry Trelawney	Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway, N.)	White, Luke (York, E. R.)
Field, William	Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)	Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)
Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N. E.)	O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)	Wilson, Fred. W.(Norfolk,Mid.)
Goddard, Daniel Ford	O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.)	Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)
Grant, Corrie	O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)	Young, Samuel
Hayden, John Patrick	O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)
Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.	O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.)	TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.
Henderson, Arthur (Durham)	O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)	Flynn and Mr. Flavin.
Higham, John Sharp	O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)
Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)	O' Dowd, John
NOES.
Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel	Ashton, Thomas Gair	Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Manch'r
Allhusen, Augustus Hen. Eden	Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John	Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)
Allsopp, Hon. George	Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.	Balfour, Rt. Hon. G. W. (Leeds
Anson, Sir William Reynell	Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy	Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.
Arkwright, John Stannope	Bailey, James (Walworth)	Banbury, Sir Frederick George
Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O.	Bain, Colonel James Robert	Banner, John S. Harmood-
Arrol, Sir William	Balcarres, Lord	Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor
Bartley, Sir George C. T.	Guthrie, Walter Murray	Pirie, Duncan V
Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir Mich. Hicks	Hall, Edward Marshall	Platt-Higgins, Frederick
Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.	Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.	Powell, Sir Francis Sharp
Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.	Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x	Pretyman, Ernest George
Bignold, Sir Arthur	Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nderry	Pryce-Jones, Lt-Col. Edward
Bigwood, James	Hardy, L. (Kent, Ashford)	Purvis, Robert
Bill, Charles	Hare, Thomas Leigh	Pym, C. Guy
Blake, Edward	Haslam, Sir Alfred S.	Quilter, Sir Cuthbert
Blundell, Colonel Henry	Hay, Hon. Claude George	Randles, John S.
Bond, Edward	Heath, Sir Jas. (Staffords., N. W	Rankin, Sir James
Boscawen, Arthur Griffith	Helder, Augustus	Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne
Bowles, Lt-Col. H. F (Middlesex	Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.	Reid, James (Greenock)
Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn	Hickman, Sir Alfred	Renwick, George
Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John	Hogg, Lindsay	Ridley, S. Forde
Brymer, William Ernest	Horner, Frederick William	Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas.Thomson
Butcher, John George	Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry	Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)
Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ.	Hoult Joseph	Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)
Carlile, William Walter	Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham	Robinson, Brooke
Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.	Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil	Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye
Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire	Hudson, George Bickersteth	Royds, Clement Molyneux
Cayzer, Sir Charles William	Hunt, Rowland	Runciman, Walter
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.	Hutton, John (Yorks., N. R.)	Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn J. A (Wore.	Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse	Samuel, Sir H. S. (Limehouse)
Chapman, Edward	Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H.	Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)
Clive, Captain Percy A.	Kimber, Sir Henry	Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)
Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.	Langley, Batty	Seton-Karr, Sir Henry
Cohen, Benjamin Louis	Laurie, Lieut.-General	Sharpe, William Edward T.
Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole	Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)	Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)
Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)	Lawrence, Sir Jos. (Monmouth)	Shaw-Stewart, Sir H. (Renfrew)
Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)	Lawson, Jn. Grant (Yorks., N. R	Sinclair, Louis (Romford)
Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge	Lee, A. H. (Hants., Fareham)	Sloan, Thomas Henry
Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim, S.)	Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage	Smith, H C (North'mb. Tyneside
Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)	Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.	Smith, Rt. Hon. J. P. (Lanarks
Dalkeith, Earl of	Llewellyn, Evan Henry	Soares, Ernest J.
Dalrymple, Sir Charles	Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.	Spear, John Ward
Davenport, William Bromley	Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham)	Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)
Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan)	Lowe, Francis William	Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset
Denny, Colonel	Loyd, Archie Kirkman	Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.
Dickson, Charles Scott	Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)	Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart
Dimsdale, Rt. Hon. Sir Joseph C.	Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred	Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.
Dixon-Hartland, Sir F. Dixon	Macdona, John Cumming	Stroyan, John
Doughty, Sir George	Maconochie, A. W.	Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley
Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-	M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)	Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)
Doxford, Sir William Theodore	M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh, W	Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)
Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton	Majendie, James A. H.	Thorburn, Sir Walter
Fardell, Sir T. George	Malcolm, Ian	Tollemache, Henry James
Fellowes, Rt. Hn. Ailwyn Edw.	Marks, Harry Hananel	Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.
Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r	Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.	Tritton, Charles Ernest
Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.	Middlemore, Jn. Throgmorton	Tuff, Charles
Finlay, Sir R. B (Inverness B'ghs	Mildmay, Francis Bingham	Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward
Fisher, William Hayes	Mitchell, William (Burnley)	Tuke, Sir John Batty
Fison, Frederick William	Molesworth, Sir Lewis	Vincent, Col. Sir C. E H (Sheffield
Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond	Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)	Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)
Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon	Montagu, Hn. J. Scott (Hants.	Walker, Col. William Hall
Flannery, Sir Fortescue	Moon, Edward Robert Pacy	Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.
Flower, Sir Ernest	Moore, William	Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E (Taunton
Forster, Henry William	Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)	Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd
Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S. W.	Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)	Whiteley, George (York, W. R.)
Galloway, William Johnson	Morrell, George Herbert	Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne
Gardner, Ernest	Morrison, James Archibald	Whitmore, Charles Algernon
Garfit, William	Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer	Willoughby de Eresby, Lord
Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick	Mount, William Arthur	Wilson, John (Glasgow)
Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn)	Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.	Wilson-Todd, Sir W. H. (Yorks.)
Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby	Muntz, Sir Philip A.	Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath
Goschen, Hon. George Joachim	Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)	Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm
Goulding, Edward Alfred	Myers, William Henry	Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson
Graham, Henry Robert	Nicholson, William Graham	Wrightson, Sir Thomas
Gray, Ernest (West Ham)	Norton, Capt. Cecil William	Wylie, Alexander
Greene, Sir E. W (B'ry S Edm'nds	O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens	Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong
Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury	Partington, Oswald
Grenfell, William Henry	Pease, Herb. Pike (Darlington)	TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir
Greville, Hon. Ronald	Percy, Earl	Alexander Acland-Hood and
Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton	Pilkington, Colonel Richard	Viscount Valentia.

Question proposed, "That the clause stand part of the Bill."

MR. LOUGH (Islington, W.)

said he wished to move that Clause 2 should be left out of the Bill. That clause reimposed the war taxes on beer, spirits, and tobacco imposed in 1900. The House was beginning to be tired by the constant reiteration of these taxes put on ostensibly for a short period. The present Chancellor of the Exchequer had got to admit full responsibility for what had been done in that regard by his predecessors. The additional duties on beer, spirits, and tobacco, for the purposes of war expenditure had caused very great inconvenience to traders, and there was a pledge on the part of the predecessor of the right hon. Gentleman that they would not be permanently retained. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer had devoted his mind to getting rid of these additional taxes I he might have done so by this time. There was a definite pledge given that when special money was raised for a great emergency, as soon as that emergency was over the special taxation would cease; and yet the Chancellor of the Exchequer renewed these taxes every year. The nation had a right to expect some relief from the war taxation in time of peace. An effort ought to be made to practise economy. The truth was that the Government had seemingly forgotten their pledges in regard to this matter, and he asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer not to treat it in a perfunctory manner, but to tell the Committee when he could see his way to sweep away these war taxes.

He did not think the Chancellor of the Exchequer was getting as much money from the duties on beer and spirits as he would get if the extra duties were taken off. The extra beer tax, which was now renewed, was practically 1s. per barrel. He would ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much his predecessor got from the beer tax in 1900, when the duty was 1s. per barrel lower, compared with what he got from that tax this last year. And what amount did the spirit tax produce before the additional 6d. per gallon was imposed, compared with that now received by the revenue. It was admitted that a tax could be raised above a point of productivity. He believed that great distress had been caused to the brewing trade by the extra tax on beer, and that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had lost revenue, rather than gained it, by the additional tax. The right hon. Gentleman should have taken warning from the experience of one of his predecessors who lost revenue by raising the wine duties by 25 per cent. He would be very glad if the Chancellor of the Exchequer would give some pledge that in a reasonable time these war taxes would be removed.

MR. WHITLEY

said he wished to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he could inform the Committee what effect these additional taxes had had upon the consumer. His impression was that these additional taxes on beer and spirits had led to the deterioration of the quality of these articles, and that the persons who sold these articles had to recoup themselves at the expense of the public. In the case of spirits especially, it led to the consumption of immature spirits which was provocative of violent crimes. Then the beer duty had also lowered the quality, which was to the detriment of the consumers. He was sorry that the present Chancellor of the Exchequer had given up the practice of his predecessors, in bringing forward these new taxes, in warning the House of the necessity of exercising the strictest economy. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol lectured the House annually in the interests of economy; but the present Chancellor of the Exchequer accepted the existing high level of taxation, and did not propose any substantial reduction in taxation. The Amendment raised the whole question of war taxation; which would now appear to be annexed for the permanent requirements of the nation.

MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)

said he did not attach the same value as did his hon. friend to the annual lecture of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol when Chancellor of the Exchequer. At one time, he himself was inclined to praise the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol as a sound financier; but all the right hon. Gentleman's statements evaporated in smoke. Only the other day the right hon. Gentleman delivered a vigorous address in the interests of economy; but why should he not make any effort in the House of Commons itself? He, himself, liked the method of the present Chancellor of the Exchequer better, although he regarded the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol as one of the ablest Members of the House. He objected to the continuance of war taxation, unless it was for the purpose of paying off war expenditure. War taxation should not, otherwise, be maintained in time of peace.

MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN

said that it would be a futile proceeding on his part to pretend to forecast the course of the revenue or expenditure, or to indicate in advance what might be the character of the Budget next year. He had not the figures for which the hon. Member for West Islington asked, but he could give them if a Question was put on the Paper. It was, however, certain that a tax might be raised to such a high point as to diminish its value as a revenue producing engine, though he did not believe that the disappointment experienced in recent years had been due to the level at which these taxes had stood. Other circumstances had arisen to influence their productive power, such as changes in the social habits of the people and bad conditions of trade in the last year or two. He was surprised to hear an expression of sympathy with the brewers from the hon. Member for West Islington, and he could only wonder what the hon. Member would have said if he had selected these duties on beer and spirits for reduction this year in the Budget. It was said that the beer-drinker now received a less desirable article than previously. He did not believe that there was any proof to support the suggestion that a more "thirst-producing" article was being manufactured and consumed in consequence of these war duties. What had actually happened was that the price of a glass of beer had remained the same, though the amount of water in it had been increased. In the case of beer and spirits, therefore, there was no reason to suppose that a slight rise in the tax had seriously affected the consumption, or that there had been a deterioration in quality in the sense of adulterating beer with the object of producing thirst in the consumer. It had, however, led to the sale of a greater proportion of lighter beer. He declined to make any hazardous prophecies as to circumstances he was unable to forecast, but he could not dispense with these duties in the present year.

MR. BUCHANAN (Perthshire, E.)

said that the Government had no right, without adequate explanation, to continue taxes specifically put on for war purposes; and on that principle alone this clause ought to be opposed. The Government had no right to continue in time of peace taxes which were imposed for war purposes. He thought the Committee ought to take this opportunity of expressing its opinion on the larger principle, and on the fact that the right hon. Gentleman had not submitted this year any scheme or indicated any date when it might be anticipated that they might be relieved of this war taxation.

MR. LOUGH

thought he had some reason for complaint that the figures for which he had asked, and which would have been of very great use in this debate, had not been given. He also complained that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had mixed up in his arguments two facts which ought to have been kept separate. The right hon. Gentleman had mixed up the elasticity of revenue with the promotion of consumption, which was quite a distinct matter. He asked the Committee to note that the right hon. Gentleman had not disproved his statement that the increase in these taxes had not had the desired effect, and that the violent action of the Government had simply resulted in the decline of revenue. With regard to those of his friends who might hesitate to support proposals of this kind, which would mean a reduction of the tax on beer and spirits, he would remind them that excessive taxation on those commodities did not promote increased temperance but simply made those who craved for liquor poor as well as drunken. In view of the answer he had received from the right hon. Gentleman he must press his Amendment.

Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes, 237; Noes, 160. (Division List No. 173.)

AYES.
Agg-Gardner, James Tynte	Denny, Colonel	Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)
Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel	Dickinson, Robert Edmond	Lawrence, Sir Joseph (Monm'th
Allhusen, Augustus Henry E.	Dickson, Charles Scott	Lawson, John Grant (Yorks. N R
Anson, Sir William Reynell	Dimsdale, Rt. Hn. Sir Joseph C.	Lee, Arthur H (Hants.,Fareham
Arkwright, John Stanhope	Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon	Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage
Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O.	Doughty, Sir George	Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.
Arrol, Sir William	Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-	Llewellyn, Evan Henry
Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John	Doxford, Sir William Theodore	Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.
Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H	Duke, Henry Edward	Long, Col. Charles W (Evesham)
Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy	Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart	Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S.
Bailey, James (Walworth)	Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton	Lowe, Francis William
Bain, Colonel James Robert	Ellice, Capt E. C (S. Andrw's Bghs	Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)
Baird, John George Alexander	Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas	Loyd, Archie Kirkman
Balcarres, Lord	Fardell, Sir T. George	Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)
Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Manch'r	Fellowes, Rt Hn Ailwyn Edward	Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred
Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)	Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J (Manc'r.	Macdona, John Cumming
Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds)	Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.	Maconochie, A. W.
Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.	Finlay, Sir R. B. (Inv'rn'ss B'ghs	M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)
Banbury, Sir Fredk. George	Fison, Frederick William	M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh, W
Banner, John S. Harmood-	Fitzroy, Hn. Edw. Algernon	Majendie, James A. H.
Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor)	Flannery, Sir Fortescue	Malcolm, Ian
Bartley, Sir George C. T.	Flower, Sir Ernest	Marks, Harry Hananel
Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir Michael Hicks	Forster, Henry William	Melville, Beresford Valentine
Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.	Foster, Philip S (Warwick, S. W.	Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.
Bignold, Sir Arthur	Galloway, William Johnson	Middlemore, John Throgmorton
Bigwood, James	Gardner, Ernest	Mildmay, Francis Bingham
Bill, Charles	Garfit, William	Mitchell, William (Burnley)
Bingham, Lord	Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.	Molesworth, Sir Lewis
Blundell, Colonel Henry	Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn)	Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)
Bond, Edward	Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby	Montagu, Hn. J. Scott (Hants.)
Boscawen, Arthur Griffith	Gorst, Rt.- Hon. Sir John Eldon	Moon, Edward Robert Pacy
Bousfield, William Robert	Goschen, Hn. George Joachim	Moore, William
Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F. (Middles'x	Goulding, Edward Alfred	Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)
Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn	Graham, Henry Robert	Morpeth, Viscount
Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John	Gray, Ernest (West Ham)	Morrell, George Herbert
Brown, G. M. (Edinburgh)	Greene, Sir E W (B'ry S Edm'nds)	Morrison, James Archibald
Brymer, William Ernest	Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury	Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer
Bull, William James	Grenfell, William Henry	Mount, William Arthur
Butcher, John George	Greville, Hon. Ronald	Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.
Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ.	Guthrie, Walter Murray	Muntz, Sir Philip A.
Carlile, William Walter	Hall, Edward Marshall	Murray Col. Wyndham (Bath)
Carson, Rt. Hn. Sir Edw. H.	Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x	Myers, William Henry
Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire	Hamilton, Marq of (L'nd'nderry	Nicholson, William Graham
Cawley, Frederick	Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd	Parkes, Ebenezer
Cayzer, Sir Charles William	Hare, Thomas Leigh	Pease, Herbert P. (Darlington)
Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)	Haslam, Sir Alfred S.	Percy, Earl
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)	Hay, Hon. Claude George	Pilkington, Colonel Richard
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J A (Worc.	Heath, Sir James (Staffords. N W	Platt-Higgins, Frederick
Chapman, Edward	Helder, Augustus	Powell, Sir Francis Sharp
Cheetham, John Frederick	Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W.)	Pretyman, Ernest George
Clive, Captain Percy A.	Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.	Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward
Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.	Hickman, Sir Alfred	Purvis, Robert
Cohen, Benjamin Louis	Hogg, Lindsay	Randles, John S.
Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole	Hoult, Joseph	Rankin, Sir James
Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow	Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham	Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne
Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)	Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil	Reid, James (Greenock)
Cox, Irwin Edw. Bainbridge	Hudson, George Bickersteth	Remnant, James Farquharson
Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.	Hunt, Rowland	Renwick, George
Cripps, Charles Alfred	Hutton, John (York, N. R.)	Ridley, S. Forde
Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)	Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse	Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson
Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)	Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H	Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)
Dalkeith, Earl of	King, Sir Henry Seymour	Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)
Dalrymple, Sir Charles	Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.	Robinson, Brooke
Davenport, William Bromley	Laurie, Lieut.-General	Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye
Round, Rt. Hon. James	Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart	Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne
Royds, Clement Molyneux	Stock, James Henry	Whitmore, Charles Algernon
Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander	Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley	Willoughby de Eresby, Lord
Samuel, Sir H. S. (Limehouse)	Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)	Wilson, John (Glasgow)
Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert	Thorburn, Sir Walter	Wilson-Todd, Sir W. H. (Yorks.)
Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)	Tollemache, Henry James	Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath
Seton-Karr, Sir Henry	Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.	Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm
Sharpe, William Edward T.	Tritton, Charles Ernest	Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson
Shaw-Stewart, Sir H. (Renfrew)	Tuff, Charles	Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart
Sinclair, Louis (Romford)	Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward	Wrightson, Sir Thomas
Sloan, Thomas Henry	Tuke, Sir John Batty	Wylie, Alexander
Smith, H C (North'mb. Tyneside	Vincent, Col. Sir C E H (Sheffield)	Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong
Smith, Rt Hn J. Parker (Lanarks	Walker, Col. William Hall
Smith, Samuel (Flint)	Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H	TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir
Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)	Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C E. (Taunton	Alexander Acland-Hood
Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset)	Welby, Sir Chas. G. E. (Notts.)	and Viscount Valentia.
Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.	Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd
NOES.
Abraham, William (Rhondda)	Harcourt, Lewis	O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)
Allen, Charles P.	Hayden, John Patrick	O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.
Ashton, Thomas Gair	Hemphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H.	O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)
Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry	Henderson, Arthur (Durham)	O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)
Austin, Sir John	Higham, John Sharp	O'Dowd, John
Barlow, John Emmott	Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.)	O' Kelly, James (Roscommon, N
Barry, E. (Cork, S.)	Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)	O' Mara, James
Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.	Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.	O'Shaughnessy, P. J.
Bell, Richard	Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)	Parrott, William
Blake, Edward	Jacoby, James Alfred	Partington, Oswald
Boland, John	Johnson, John	Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)
Bolton, Thomas Dolling	Joicey, Sir James	Phillipps, John Wynford
Brigg, John	Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)	Pirie, Duncan V.
Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson	Joyce, Michael	Rea, Russell
Burke, E. Haviland	Kearley, Hudson E.	Reddy, M.
Burt, Thomas	Kennedy, Vincent P. (Cavan,W	Redmond, John E. (Waterford
Buxton, Sydney Charles	Kilbride, Denis	Reid, Sir R. Threshie(Dumfries
Caldwell, James	Kitson, Sir James	Richards, Thos. (W. Monmouth
Cameron, Robert	Lambert, George	Rickett, J. Compton
Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)	Langley, Batty	Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)
Causton, Richard Knight	Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.	Robertson Edmund (Dundee)
Channing, Francis Allston	Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)	Robson, William Snowdon
Clancy, John Joseph	Layland-Barratt, Francis	Roche, John
Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)	Leng, Sir John	Runciman, Walter
Crean, Eugene	Levy, Maurice	Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)
Cremer, William Randal	Lewis, John Herbert	Shackleton, David James
Crombie, John William	Lloyd-George, David	Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)
Dalziel, James Henry	Lough, Thomas	Shipman, Dr. John G.
Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan	Lundon, W.	Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)
Delany, William	Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.	Slack, John Bamford
Devlin, Chas. Ramsay (Galway	MacVeagh, Jeremiah	Soames, Arthur Wellesley
Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.	M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)	Spencer, Rt. Hn. C. R (Northants
Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles	M 'Crae, George	Stanhope, Hon. Philip James
Dillon, John	M'Fadden, Edward	Strachey, Sir Edward
Dobbie, Joseph	M'Hugh, Patrick A.	Sullivan, Donal
Doogan, P. C.	M'Kean, John	Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)
Duncan, J. Hastings	M'Kenna, Reginald	Tennant, Harold John
Dunn, Sir William	M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)	Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)
Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)	M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin	Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)
Emmott, Alfred	Mansfield, Horace Rendall	Thomas, David A. (Merthyr)
Eve, Harry Trelawney	Mooney, John J.	Thomson, F. W. (York, W. R.)
Field, William	Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)	Tillett, Louis John
Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N. E.)	Moss, Samuel	Toulmin, George
Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond	Moulton, John Fletcher	Trevelyan, Charles Philips
Flavin, Michael Joseph	Murphy, John	Ure, Alexander
Flynn, James Christopher	Nannetti, Joseph P.	Wallace, Robert
Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry	Nolan, Col. J. P. (Galway, N.)	Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)
GladStone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John	Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)	Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.
Goddard, Daniel Ford	Norton, Capt. Cecil William	Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney
Grant, Corrie	O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)	White, George (Norfolk)
Griffith, Ellis J.	O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.)	White, Luke (York, E. R.)
Gurdon Sir W. Brampton

Whiteley, George (York, W. R.	Wilson, Fred W. (Norfolk, Mid.)	TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr.
Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)	Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)	Buchanan and Mr. Soares.
Whittaker, Thomas Palmer	Young, Samuel

Clause 3:—

MR. FLYNN

said the Amendment he was about to move raised much the same principle as his previous Amendment, and an equally good case could be made out for relief in connection with the Excise duties as with the impositions already dealt with. He submitted that it was not unreasonable to demand that an exemption should be allowed from the additional duty on whisky consumed in Ireland—for that was what the Amendment amounted to. Probably the hon. Baronet the Member for the Camborne Division would not agree with the suggestion that the duty on so wholesome and exhilarating a beverage as whisky should be struck off. But there was good and bad whisky.

SIR WILFRID LAWSON (Cornwall, Camborne)

What is good whisky?

MR. FLYNN

said that good whisky was a pot-distilled spirit sufficiently matured to decompose the element known as fusel, and resulting in the fragrant, mellow liquor known as Irish malt whisky. A duty of 11s. per gallon on such an article was altogether opposed to any principle of fair play or justice. In 1853 the duty in Ireland was only 2s. 3d. as against 7s. 10d. in Great Britain, but between then and 1860 the duty was increased to 10s. in both countries, and now stood at 11s. Therefore, while the duty had increased in England and Scotland by 33 per cent., in Ireland the increase had been no less than 400 per cent. Could that be called fair treatment? He submitted that instance of the dual system of taxation to the consideration of the hon. Member for Durham. If whisky was to be drunk it was better that a good wholesome liquor should be consumed, but a high tax tended to bring on to the market a large quantity of immature, raw, and impure spirit, which produced intoxication, led to acts of violence, and often resulted in insanity. He regretted the form of the Bill precluded him from moving a larger reduction of the duty, but, especially as there could be no Customs difficulty in this connection, he hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would accede to the moderate suggestion he now made.

Amendment proposed— in page 2, line 15, at the end, to add the words, 'Provided, however, that the additional duty of sixpence per proof gallon imposed, by Section 7 of the Finance Act of 1900 shall not apply to spirits consumed in Ireland.'"—(Mr. Flynn.)

Question proposed, "That those words, be there added."

MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN

said this Amendment was one of a series placed on the Paper by the hon. Member for Cork, intended to raise the same point in different forms, and directed towards securing for Irish manufacturers or consumers a privileged position as compared with manufacturers or consumers of similar articles in other parts of the United Kingdom. The question of the establishment of different rates of Customs or Excise duties in the two countries had already been discussed at length on two occasions. He had never contended that such a differentiation was impossible, or denied that it had existed. But it must not be assumed from that that there was no objection to it, or that it would not be a troublesome and costly proceeding. The percentage of collection was much decreased by the unification of arrangements which now prevailed. If this proposal was carried out the disadvantages would be great and the benefit small. Even if the Committee thought that some article of consumption should be taxed at a lower rate in Ireland that in England, he could not think that it would be this article that they would select for preferential treatment.

MR. MOONEY (Dublin County, S.)

said he could not follow the right hon. Gentleman when he said that the cost of collection would be very much increased. The Customs authorities knew where the spirit was going to and consequently there would be no difficulty. When the right hon. Gentleman introduced his Budget he spoke of the loss sustained by the revenue in regard to the spirit duties, which he attributed to a wave of sobriety which had been passing over the country. One thing which had caused great anxiety to medical men all over the kingdom was the extraordinary increase in the percentage of insanity; and a good deal of that insanity was alleged to have been caused by the consumption of raw and immature spirits. In most of our great manufacturing centres an epidemic of methylated-spirit drinking was breaking out. The fact that this tax stood at such a high rate led to the putting on the market of a spirit which must be bad for the consumers. If they put such a high tax on the spirit the vendor could not keep it long enough to enable him to get rid of the fusel oil. It was not the distiller who paid the increased price but the bonder. If a bonder had two sorts of whisky, one only two years old and the other ten years old, the ten year old whisky, when he came to pay the duty upon it, must be a dearer article than the whisky he had kept for two years only, and the result of that was

that when they put a high duty on the bonder he must reduce the age of the whisky, and he had to sell it before it had had time to mature. Once they put a high tax on whisky they reduced the consumption in a way, but they also, at the same time, brought into the market more raw spirit. Medical men had asserted that one of the greatest causes of the increase of lunacy amongst the poorer classes was the consumption of this raw spirit. The time had come for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to put an end to this additional tax. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon had held out the same promise. He did not know whether the present Chancellor of the Exchequer called it a temporary tax or an additional tax. Surely it was about time that this additional tax, put on for a specific purpose which was now over, was taken off. It was a just claim that the tax in Ireland should be restored to the figure at which it stood before the war.

Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes, 73; Noes, 283. (Division List No. 174.)

AYES.
Austin, Sir John	Joyce, Michael	O' Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)
Barlow, John Emmott	Kennedy, Vincent P. (Cavan, W	O' Dowd, John
Barry, E. (Cork, S.)	Kilbride, Denis	O' Kelly, James (Roscommon, N
Blake, Edward	Lambert, George	O' Mara, James
Boland, John	Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.	O' Shaughnessy, P. J.
Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)	Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)	Parrott, William
Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton	Leng, Sir John	Rea, Russell
Channing, Francis Allston	Lundon, W.	Reddy, M.
Clancy, John Joseph	Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.	Redmond, John E. (Waterford
Crean, Eugene	MacNeill, John Gordon Swift	Rickett, J. Compton
Cremer, William Randal	MacVeagh, Jeremiah	Roche, John
Delany, William	M'Fadden, Edward	Slack, John Bamford
Devlin, Chas. Ramsay (Galway	M'Hugh, Patrick A.	Stanhope, Hon. Philip James
Dillon, John	M'Kean, John	Sullivan, Donal
Dobbie, Joseph	M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)	Thomas, David A. (Merthyr)
Doogan, P. C.	Murphy, John	Ure, Alexander
Dunn, Sir William	Nannetti, Joseph P.	Wallace, Robert
Eve, Harry Trelawney	Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway, N.)	Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)
Field, William	Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)	White, Luke (York, E. R.)
Flavin, Michael Joseph	Norton, Capt. Cecil William	Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)
Gilhooly, James	O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)	Young, Samuel
Hayden, John Patrick	O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.)
Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.	O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)	TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.
Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)	O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)	Flynn and Mr. Mooney.
Jacoby, James Alfred	O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.
Joicey, Sir James	O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)
NOES.
Abraham, William (Rhondda)	Cust, Henry John C.	Hunt, Rowland
Agg-Gardner, James Tynte	Dalkeith, Earl of	Hutchinson, Dr. Chas. Fredk.
Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel	Dalrymple, Sir Charles	Hutton, John (Yorks. N. R.)
Allen, Charles P.	Davenport, William Bromley	Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse
Allhusen, Augustus Henry E.	Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan	Johnson, John
Anson, Sir William Reynell	Denny, Colonel	Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)
Arkwright, John Stanhope	Dickinson, Robert Edmond	Kearley, Hudson E.
Arnold-Forster,Rt.Hn.Hugh O	Dickson, Charles Scott	Kennaway, Rt. Hn. SirJohn H.
Arrol, Sir William	Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles	King, Sir Henry Seymour
Ashton, Thomas Gair	Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon	Kitson, Sir James
Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John	Doughty, Sir George	Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.
Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt.Hn.Sir H.	Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-	Langley, Batty
Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy	Douglas, Charles M (Lanark	Laurie, Lieut.-General
Bailey, James (Walworth)	Doxford, Sir William Theodore	Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)
Bain, Colonel James Robert	Duke, Henry Edward	Lawson, John G. (Yorks. N. R.)
Baird, John George Alexander	Duncan, J. Hastings	Layland-Barratt, Francis
Balcarres, Lord	Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart	Lee, Arthur H (Hants., Fareham
Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r.	Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton	Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage
Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)	Ellice, Capt E C (S. Andrw's Bghs	Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.
Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds.)	Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas	Llewellyn, Evan Henry
Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.	Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)	Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)
Banbury, Sir Frederick George	Fardell, Sir T. George	Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Bristol, S.)
Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor)	Fellowes, Rt. Hn. Ailwyn Edw.	Lowther, C. (Cumb. Eskdale)
Bartley, Sir George C. T.	Fergusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J (Manc'r.	Loyd, Archie Kirkman
Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir Michael Hicks	Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.	Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred
Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.	Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N. E.)	Macdona, John Cumming
Bell, Richard	Finlay, Sir R. B. (Inv'rn'ss B'ghs	Maconochie, A. W.
Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.	FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose	M 'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool
Bignold, Sir Arthur	Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond	M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W
Bigwood, James	Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon	Majendie, James A. H.
Bill, Charles	Flannery, Sir Fortescue	Malcolm, Ian
Bingham, Lord	Flower, Sir Ernest	Marks, Harry Hananel
Blundell, Colonel Henry	Forster, Henry William	Melville, Beresford Valentine
Bolton, Thomas Dolling	Foster, P. S. (Warwick, S. W.)	Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.
Boscawen, Arthur Griffith	Galloway, William Johnson	Middlemore, John Throgmorton
Bousfield, William Robert	Gardner, Ernest	Mildmay, Francis Bingham
Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F. (Middlesex	Garfit, William	Molesworth, Sir Lewis
Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn	Goddard, Daniel Ford	Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)
Brand, Hon. Arthur G.	Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.	Montagu, Hn. J. Scott (Hants.)
Brigg, John	Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn	Moon, Edward Robert Pacy
Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John	Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon	Moore, William
Brown, Sir Alex H. (Shropsh.)	Goschen, Hn. George Joachim	Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)
Brown, G. M. (Edinburgh)	Goulding, Edward Alfred	Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)
Brymer, William Ernest	Graham, Henry Robert	Morpeth, Viscount
Bull, William James	Gray, Ernest (West Ham)	Morrell, George Herbert
Burt, Thomas	Greene, Sir E W (B'ry SEdm'nds	Morrison, James Archibald
Butcher, John George	Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)	Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer
Caldwell, James	Grenfell, William Henry	Moss, Samuel
Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ.	Gretton, John	Mount, William Arthur
Carlile, William Walter	Greville, Hon. Ronald	Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.
Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H	Griffith, Ellis J.	Muntz, Sir Philip A.
Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire	Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton	Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)
Cayzer, Sir Charles William	Guthrie, Walter Murray	Myers, William Henry
Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)	Hall, Edward Marshall	Newnes, Sir George
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.	Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x	O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. A (Worc	Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nderry	Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury)
Chapman, Edward	Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd	Parkes, Ebenezer
Clive, Captain Percy A.	Hare, Thomas Leigh	Partington, Oswald
Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.	Haslam, Sir Alfred S.	Pease, Herb. Pike (Darlington)
Cohen, Benjamin Louis	Heath, sir James (Staffords. NW	Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)
Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole	Helder, Augustus	Percy, Earl
Compton, Lord Alwyne	Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W.	Philipps, John Wynford
Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)	Henderson, Arthur (Durham)	Pilkington, Colonel Richard
Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)	Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.	Pirie, Duncan V.
Cox, Irwin Edw. Bainbridge	Hickman, Sir Alfred	Platt-Higgins, Frederick
Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim, S.)	Higham, John Sharp	Plummer, Sir Walter R.
Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)	Hogg, Lindsay	Pretyman, Ernest George
Cripps, Charles Alfred	Hoult, Joseph	Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward
Crombie, John William	Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham	Purvis, Robert
Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton	Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil	Randles, John S.
Cubitt, Hon. Henry	Hudson, George Bickersteth	Rankin, Sir James

Reid, James (Greenock)	Shipman, Dr. John G.	Walker, Col. William Hall
Remnant, James Farquharson	Sinclair, Louis (Romford)	Walrond, Rt. Hn Sir. William H
Renwick, George	Sloan, Thomas Henry	Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)
Richards, Thos. (W. Monm'th)	Smith, H. C. (North'mb. Tynesde	Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E (Taunton
Ridley, S. Forde	Smith, Rt Hn J Parker (Lanarks)	Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.)
Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson	Smith, Samuel (Flint)	Wharton, Rt. Hn. John Lloyd
Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)	Soares, Ernest J.	Whiteley, George (York, W. R.)
Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)	Spear, John Ward	Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne
Robinson, Brooke	Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset)	Whitmore, Charles Algernon
Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye	Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lancs.)	Willoughby de Eresby, Lord
Round, Rt. Hon. James	Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart	Wilson, F. W. (Norfolk, Mid.)
Royds, Clement Molyneux	Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.	Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)
Runciman, Walter	Stock, James Henry	Wilson, John (Glasgow)
Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford	Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley	Wilson-Todd, Sir W. H (Yorks.)
Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander	Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)	Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)
Samuel, Sir H. S. (Limehouse)	Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)	Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm
Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)	Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)	Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson
Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert	Thorburn, Sir Walter	Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart
Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)	Tollemache, Henry James	Wylie, Alexander
Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)	Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.	Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong
Seton-Karr, Sir Henry	Tritton, Charles Ernest
Shackleton, David James	Tuff, Charles	TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir
Sharpe, William Edward T.	Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward	Alexander Acland-Hood
Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)	Tuke, Sir John Batty	and Viscount Valentia.
Shaw-Stewart, Sir H (Renfrew)	Vincent, Col. Sir C E. H (Sheffield

Question, "That the clause stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.

Clauses 4 and 5 agreed to.

Clause 6:—

MR. FLYNN

said that his Amendment ought to be received with sympathy by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, There was a great deal of parrot talk with reference to equality of taxation, but hon. Members might not be aware that for half a century after the Union Ireland was exempted from the income-tax. In 1853 it was imposed for seven years; but more than fifty years had now elapsed; and yet it had not been repealed. Both Sir Robert Peel and Lord Palmerston had declined to extend the income-tax to Ireland. Mr. Gladstone, when Chancellor of the Exchequer, did. Lord Beaconsfield, however, spoke strongly against it; and his was admittedly one of the first names in the litany of hon. Gentlemen opposite. Other Englishmen had also expressed similar opinions. The repeal of the tax would not involve any change in Customs or Excise; and he, therefore, hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would consider the question. Every penny taken out of the country in the form of income-tax was a drain on Irish resources and on employment in Ireland.

Amendment proposed— In page 2, line 35, after the word 'charged, to insert the words 'in Great Britain.'"— (Mr. Flynn.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN

said that on each clause, as it had been discussed the Committee had been asked to accord to Ireland some advantage over the other parts of the United Kingdom. He had not been inclined to accept any other proposals, and it seemed to him that the income-tax payer had the least claim of all to preferential treatment. He could quite understand rich man living in Ireland if they could be exempt there from income-tax. Wealthy people would be inclined, perhaps, to put their fortunes in any refuge where they would be free from taxation; but he could see no ground for granting this remission to rich men because they happened to live in Ireland. They had been told that one of the defects in the present financial system as it affected Ireland was that so small a portion of the taxation came from the direct taxpayers, and yet the hon. Member would have him abandon the most important source of direct taxation.

MR. O'MARA

said the right hon. Gentleman had repudiated the suggestion and the plea that Ireland was entitled to any exemption or abatement whatsoever, but he could not expect the Irish Party to agree with him in that. They took their stand on the fact that by the Act of Union they were so entitled. The right hon. Gentleman could not have it both ways. At the present time Ireland was exempt from the tax on armorial bearings and the house tax. They were either entitled to exemptions and abatements or they were not. If they were not why were they exempted in those two matters, and if they were entitled then the right hon. Gentleman's argument did not hold good. He claimed that they were entitled, and that the country was pressed down by the system of taxation forced upon it by Great Britain. It was not justice that a poor country like Ireland should be taxed in the same way as a rich country like Great Britain. Everyone in the House would acknowledge that the income-tax was one of the best tests of the capacity of a country to pay taxes, but while the proportion of income-tax paid was only one to thirty-two of that of Great Britain, in relation to taxation as a whole it was one to fifteen. Ireland was so poor a country that some exemption should be granted from the heavy taxation under which even Englishmen were groaning. If her proportion of taxation were reduced to the ratio of one to thirty-two it would be only just and fair, and in accordance with what was contemplated under the Act of Union.

THE ACTING CHAIRMAN (Mr. WHITMORE, Chelsea)

The hon. Member is now repeating what he was saying when I called him to order.

MR. O'MARA

said he would merely point out that the income-tax afforded one of the readiest means in existence of granting an abatement or exemption to Ireland. That country could be exempted from the income-tax just as she was exempted from the house tax, and every Irish representative would rejoice if such an exemption were made. It was a striking fact that for fifty-three years after the Union there was no income-tax at all; it was first levied in England for the specific purpose of lightening the burdens on English industries, and Sir Robert Peel did not allow it to be extended to Ireland. At the time of the great famine a sum of £2,000,000 was granted to the people of Ireland to meet the ravages of the famine, and Mr. Gladstone proposed the imposition of an income-tax for a certain number of years to repay that money to the Imperial Exchequer. But the amount had been repaid over and over again and still the tax remained. On every possible ground, moral and economic, Ireland was entitled to exemption or an abatement.

MR. FIELD

held that it could not be denied that the income-tax pressed with undue severity upon Ireland. Irishmen, however, objected not only to the tax itself but to the manner in which it was assessed. The whole subject, as it affected Ireland, deserved far more attention than it had hitherto received. In England there were local assessment committees acting in conjunction with an official assessor, but in Ireland there was an official appointed by the Government upon whose valuation——

And, it being half-past Seven of the clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.

The Clerk at the Table informed the House of the unavoidable absence of the Chairman of Ways and Means from the remainder of this day's Sittings.

Whereupon Mr. Jeffreys, the Deputy-Chairman, took the Chair as Deputy-Speaker, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Committee report Progress; to sit again this evening.