§ Postponed proceeding, resumed.
§ MR. CALDWELLin the Chair.
§ MR. FELL (Great Yarmouth)moved an Amendment to secure that the normal increase in the proceeds of the duties on local taxation licences should belong to and be paid into the local taxation account. He said he regretted very much that the Amendment preceding his had been ruled out of order, because it was of more importance than this proposal, but still this Amendment was of great importance to the local bodies affected. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had explained why this considerable change was to be made. With a great deal of what ho had said they had on more than one occasion expressed concurrence, but in agreeing to this change they had done so on the understanding that the local authorities should not be in any worse position than they were in at the present time, The amount which was payable was a fixed amount, and what was proposed by this Amendment was that the normal increase in those sums which would take place in process of time should belong to those local bodies, and that they themselves should receive the amount which they would receive at the present time.
§ MR. RUNCIMANthought the hon. Gentleman was under a misapprehension. There was no suggestion in the clause that the amount should be a fixed amount. The normal increase of the duties would be seemed to the local authorities.
§ MR. FELLreplied that the precise interpretation of the clause was a matter of dispute, and this Amendment at any rate would make the point clear.
§ MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid the words of the Bill at a later stage made the matter quite clear.
§ MR. FELLsaid that if his words would make the meaning more clear he took it that there would be no objection to their going in. All he said was that in certain places population might increase, and the locality should, he thought, receive the normal increase from these licences. The proposal of the Chancellor was that he might increase this duty, but would the increase of the duty belong to the Exchequer or to the neighbourhood? Where populations were growing institutions were coming up and rates were increasing. Was it not right that the local authorities should be recouped the heavy expenses which they would have to pay through the growth of the locality? If that was intended, it was perfectly clear that it gave them all they wished, but he did not think it was perfectly clear. He thought it would be made clearer by the addition of the words he proposed.
§
Amendment proposed—
In page 6, line 13, at the end, to insert the words, 'but the normal increase in the proceeds of such duties shall belong to and be paid into the Local Taxation Account.' "—(Mr. Fell.)
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
§ MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid that as he under stood it the object which the hon. Member had in view had been specifically provided for by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The right hon. Gentleman had provided for the normal growth of these funds, and the local body would be in no sense damaged by the passing of this Bill. The full amount of the increased duty would come to the Local Taxation Account and would go to the credit of these bodies. That was what he thought the hon. Gentleman desired, and that was provided for by words which were to be found later on in the Bill. He thought the words were perfectly clear, and if that was so it was not necessary to add additional words. Therefore, the Government could not accept the Amendment.
§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid that in referring to these provisions the Chancellor of the Exchequer had spoken 631 of their simplifying the accounts. He did not see how that result would follow, as the equivalent amount could only be arrived at by keeping all the accounts as if the present system continued.
§ SIR F. BANBURYmoved to report progress on account of the absence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who, he said, had been away since a quarter-past eight o'clock.
*THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANdeclined to accept the Motion. He had grave doubts originally as to whether the Amendment was in order, as the Bill provided in accordance with the Amendment; but, he thought he would allow the hon. Member to move it and the answer to be given. A complete answer had been given, and he saw no reason,
§ therefore, for accepting the Motion to report progress.
§ Question, "That those words be there inserted," put, and negatived.
§ Question proposed, "That the clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
§ SIR F. BANBURYthought that they should have the presence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the Question, and therefore he moved to report progress.
§ Motion made, and Question put, "That the Chairman do report progress; and ask leave to sit again."—(Sir F. Banbury.)
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 73; Noes, 253. (Division List No. 263.)
633| AYES. | ||
| Anson. Sir William Reynell | Craik, Sir Henry | Mason, James F. (Windsor) |
| Ashley, W. VV. | Dalrymple, Viscount | Moore. William |
| Balcarres, Lord | Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers. | .Muntz. Sir Philip A. |
| Balfour, RtHn.A.J.(CityLond.) | Duncan. Robert(Lanark. Govan | Nicholson. Win. G.(Petersfield) |
| Banbury,Sir Frederick George | Faber, George Denison (York) | Nield, Herbert |
| Banner, John S. Harmood. | Faber, Capt.W.V. (Hants, W.) | Parkes, Ebenezer |
| Baring,Capt. Hn.G(Winchester | Fell. Arthur | Rawlinson. John Frederick Peel |
| Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry,N. | Fletcher, J. S. | Remnant. James Farquharson |
| Beach,Hn.Michael HughHicks | Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol. West) | Roberts,S.(Sheffield.Ecclesall]) |
| Bignold, Sir Arthur | Gordon, J. | Rutherford, John) (Lancashire) |
| Boyle, Sir Edward | Haddock, George R. | Rutherford. W. W. (Liverpool |
| Bridgeman. W. Clive | Harrison-Broadley, H. B. | Sheffield,Sir BerkeleyGeorge D. |
| Brotherton. Edward Allen | Hay, Hon. Claude George | Sloan. Thomas Henry |
| Bull, Sir William James | Helmsley, Viscount | Starkey. John R. |
| Burdett-Coutts, W. | Hervey, F. W.F.(BuryS. Edmd's | Talbot,. Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Campbell, Rt. Hon.) J. H. M. | Hill,SirClement (Shrewsbury) | Tumour, Viscount |
| Carlile. E. Hildred | Houston, Robert Paterson | Walrond. Hon. Lionel |
| Cave, George | Hunt, Rowland | Williams. Col. R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Cavendish, Rt. Hon. Victor CW. | Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hon. Col. W. | Wilson.A.Stanley(York, E. R.) |
| Cecil, LordR.(Marylelbone. E.) | King,SirHenrySeymour(Hull) | Younger. George |
| Chamberlain,RtHn.J.A.(Wore | Lee, Arthur. H. (Hants, Fareham | |
| Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry | Lockwood, Rt. Hn. Lt.-Col. A.R | TELLERS FOR THE AYES— |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Lowe. Sir Francis William | Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and |
| Corbett, A. Cameron(Glasgow) | Lyttelton. Rt. Hon. Alfred | Mr. Forster. |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down,North) | M'Calmont, ColonelJames | |
| Craig,CaptainJames(Down, E.) | Marks, H. H. (Kent) | |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Rhondda) | Barry, RedmondJ. (Tyrone, N.) | Brace, William |
| Agnew, George William | Beale. W. P. | Bramsdon. T. A. |
| Alden, Percy | Beauchamp, E. | Brigg, John |
| Allen,A.Acland (Christchurch) | Beck, A. Cecil | Bright, J. A. |
| Allen, Charles P. (Stroud) | Bell, Richard | Brocklehurst, W. B. |
| Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury.E.) | Belloc,HilaireJosephPeter R. | Brunner,J.F.L.(Lancs.,Leigh) |
| Balfour, Robert (Lanark) | Benn, SirJ. Williams) Devonp'rt | Burns. Rt. Hon. John |
| Baring,Godfrey(Isle of Wight) | Berridge, T. H. D. | Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas |
| Barker, John | Bertram, Julius | Buxton,Rt.Hn.Sydney Charles |
| Barlow,Sir JohnE.(Somerset) | Bethell.SirJ.H.(EssexRomf'rd | Byles, William Pollard |
| Barlow. Percy (Bedford) | Bethell. T. R. (Essex, Maldon) | Cameron, Robert |
| Barnes, G. N. | Billson. Sir Alfred | Carr-Gomm. H. W. |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Black, Arthur VV. | Cawley, Sir Frederick |
| Chance, Frederick William | Horniman, Emslie John | Redmond, William (Clare) |
| Cheetham, John Frederick | Horridge, Thomas Gardner | Rendall, Athelstan |
| Cleland, J. W | Hutton, Alfred Eddison | Renton, Major Leslie |
| Clough, William | Hyde, Clarendon | Richards, Thomas(W. Monm'th |
| Cobbold, Felix Thornley | Illingworth, Percy H. | Richardson, A. |
| Collins, Stephen (Lambet | Isaacs, Rufus Daniel | Rickett, J. Compton |
| Collins,Sir Wm.J. (S.Pancras,W | Jackson, R. S. | Ridsdale, E. A. |
| Corbett,C.H.(Sussex, EGrinst'd | Johnson, John (Gateshead) | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Johnson, W. (Nuneaton) | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) |
| Cory, Clifford John | Jones,Sir D.Brynmor(Swansea | Robertson,SirG.Scott(Bradf'rd |
| Cotton, Sir H. J. S. | Jones. Leif (Appleby) | Robinson, S. |
| Cowan, W. H. | Jones, William(Carnarvonshire | Robson, Sir William Snowdon |
| Cox, Harold | Jowett, F. W. | Roe, Sir Thomas |
| Cremer, Sir William Randal | Joyce, Michael | Rogers, F. K. Newman |
| Crombie, John William | Kearley, Hudson E. | Runciman, Walter |
| Crosfield. A. H. | Kekewich, Sir George | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Dalziel,.James Henry | Kincaid-Simth, Captain | Scarisbrick, T. T, L. |
| Davies, David(Montgomeryo. Co | King, Alfred John(Knutsford) | Schwann,SirC.E.(Manchester) |
| Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster | Scott, A. H. (Ashton- under- Lyne |
| Davies. Timothy (Fulham) | Lambert, George | Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford) |
| Davies W. Howell (Bristol, S. | Lamont, Norman | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh,S.) | Layland-Barratt, Francis | Silcock, Thomas Ball |
| Dewar,SirJ. A.(Inverness-sh.) | Lehmann, R. C. | Simon, John Allsebrook |
| Dickinson,W. H.(St.Pancras,N | Lever, A. Levy(Essex,Harwich) | Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie |
| Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles | Levy, Sir Maurice | Snowden, P. |
| Duckworth, James | Lewis, John Herbert | Soames, Arthur Wellesley |
| Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne) | Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David | Spicer, Sir Albert |
| Dunne,MajorE.Mart in(Walsall | Lupton, Arnold | Stanger, H. Y. |
| Edwards, Clement (Denbigh) | Luttrell, Hugh Fownes | Stanley,Hn.A.Lyulph(Chesh.) |
| Edwards, Enoch (Hanley) | Lynch. H. B. | Stead man, W. C. |
| Edwards. Sir Frank (Radnor) | Maclean, Donald | Stewart-Smith. D. (Kendal) |
| Elibank, Master of | M'Callum, John M. | Strachey, Sir Edward |
| Erskine. David C. | M'Crae, George | Straus, B. S. (Mile End) |
| Esslemont, George Birnie | M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald | Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon) |
| Evans, Samuel T. | M'Killop, W. | Stuart, James (Sunderland) |
| Everett, R. Lacey | M'Laren, H. D. (Stafford, W.) | Sutherland, J. E. |
| Fenwick. Charles | M'Micking, Major G. | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Ferens, T. R, | Mallet, Charles E. | Thomas,SirA.(Glamorgan, E.) |
| Findlay. Alexander | Manfield. Harry (Northants) | Thomas, David Alfred; Merthyr |
| Foster,.Rt. Hon. Sir Walter | Mansfield, H. Rendall (Lincoln) | Thomasson, Franklin |
| Fuller, John Michael F. | Markham, Arthur Basil | Thompson, J. W. H. (Somerset, E |
| Fullerton, Hugh | Marks. G Croydon(Launceston | Torrance, Sir A. M. |
| Furness. Sir Christopher | Marnham, F. J. | Trevelyan. Charles Philips |
| Gibb, James (Harrow) | Mason, A. E. W, (Coventry) | Ure, Alexander |
| Gill. A. H. | Massie, J. | Wadsworth, J. |
| Gladstone,Rt.Hn. Herbert John | Menzies, Walter | Walker. H. De R. (Leicester) |
| Glendinning, R. G | Micklem, Nathaniel | Walters, John Tudor |
| Gover, Thomas | Molteno, Percy Alport | Walton. Joseph (Barnsley) |
| Goddard, Daniel Ford | Montgomery. H. G. | Wardle. GerogeJ. |
| Gooch, George Peabody | Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall) | Warner, Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Grant, Corrie | Morgan,J.Lloyd(Carmarthen) | Waterlow, D S. |
| Greenwood, G.(Peterborough) | Morse, L. L. | Watt, Henry A. |
| Greenwood, Hamar (York) | Morton, Alpheus Cleophas | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Gulland, John W. | Myer, Horatio | White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire |
| Gurdon,RtHn.SirW. Brampton | Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw) | White, Luke (York. E.R.) |
| Hall. Frederick | Nicholson,CharlesN.(Doncast'r | Whitley,John Henry (Halifax) |
| Harmsworth,Cecil B. (Worc'r) | Norman, Sir Henry | Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer |
| Hart-Davies. T. | Norton, Capt. Cecil William | Wiles, Thomas |
| Harvey. A. G. C. (Rochdale) | O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth) | Williamson, A. |
| Harvey.W.E. (Derbyshire, N.E. | Parker, James (Halifax) | Wills. Arthur Walters |
| Harwood, George | Partington, Oswald | Wilson,Hon.C.H.W.(Hull,W.) |
| Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth) | Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek) | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.) |
| Haworth,Arthur A. | Pearce, William (Limehouse | Wilson, P. W. (St. Pancras, S. |
| Hazel, Dr. A. E. | Pearson,SirW.D.(Colchester) | Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton |
| Harleton, Richard | Philipps,J.Wynford(Pembroke) | Winfrey, R. |
| Hedges, A. Paget | Pirie, Duncan V. | Wood, T. M'Kinnon |
| Helme, Norval Watson | Pollard, Dr. | Young, Samuel |
| Hemmerde, Edward George | Price,-C.E.(Edinb'gh,Central) | Yoxall, James Henry |
| Henderson, J. M.(Aberdeen, W.) | Price,RobertJohn(Norfolk,E.) | |
| Henry, Charles S. | Priestley, Arthur (Grantham) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES— |
| Hobart, Sir Robert | Radford, G. H. | Mr. Whitely and Mr. J. A. |
| Holden, E. Hopkinson | Rainy, A. Holland | Pease. |
| Hope,W.Bateman(Somerset,N. | Raphael, Herbert H. |
§ Question proposed, "That the clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid he would repeat a question with regard to which lie had spoken at an earlier stage of the debate, he thought on the occasion of the Budget statement, as to the simplification of accounts. He gathered from the statements which had been made that it would be necessary to keep all the accounts and make all the calculations, and the question he desired to put—he would not elaborate it—was where the simplification of accounts and calculations came in.
§ MR. ASQUITHsaid the provisional state of things existed. They would merely keep up the provisional accounts until the question of the grants-in-aid of local taxation was dealt with by the House: but so far as the national finances were concerned, there would be only one account presented, and the Legislature would be free in future to devote the licence duties to purely Imperial purposes.
§ MR. HARMOOD-BANNER (Liverpool. Everton)said he hardly wished to oppose this clause as it contained matters with which he agreed. In regard to these grants in aid of local taxation, he had hoped to hear some assurance that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would press the matter forward, as local interests were being injuriously affected. The right hon. Gentleman was taking back these licence duties into his own hands, but, as was so well jointed out by the Local Government Committee of the London County Council in their Report which appealed in The Times that morning—
The increase which is contemplated in the rates of some of the licence duties will probably tend to restrict the natural growth of the proceeds of the duties calculated at their present rates, and consequently to delicate the amounts allocated to local taxation.That was very well put as regarded his position. He thought there could be no question whatever that the position taken up in this Finance Bill would reduce the amount receivable by the municipalities and the county associations, and that the right hon. Gentleman 636 was taking back these licence duties with a view to increasing them and so swelling the Exchequer accounts. There were, he thought, some thirty-seven of these licence duties refreshment licences, dog licences, and all sorts of licences—which would now come into the hands of the right hon. Gentleman for the purpose of being increased and brought into the national finances. He could not put the case better and shorter than by taking the dog tax, which was 7s. 6d. It was perfectly clear that if the Chancellor of the Exchequer increased that tax to £1—he did not suggest that the right hon. Gentleman was going to do it—there would be far fewer dog licences taken out, and the result would be that the local municipalities would receive so many fewer 7s. 6d.'s. The national Exchequer would receive so many more 12s. 6d.'s than it now received, and it would do so at the expense of the municipalities. That was the way in which the right hon. Gentleman carried out his statement that—The increase which is contemplated in the rates of some of the licence duties will probably tend to restrict the natural growth of the proceeds of the duties calculated at their present rates, and consequently to decrease the amounts allocated to local taxation.It was perfectly clear that the local authorities were going to suffer in this matter. So far as the loud bodies them-selves were concerned, he had received a resolution passed by the Association of Municipal Corporations, in which they declared that the effect of the proposal would be to decrease the amount which they would receive. The London County Council and the municipalities contended that not only should the Government not take this tax into their own hands, but they ought to increase the amount receivable from the local taxation fund. A certain amount which was now payable by the Government was being taken off and placed upon the municipalities. When the local taxation grants were first made the expense of maintaining the police fell half upon the Government and half upon the municipality, but when the grants-in-aid were given the municipalities were left to bear the whole of the cost. In the Report of the London County Council it was stated that the expenses which 637 had fallen on the council, in respect to what they had taken over, as compared with the average of the years ending 1892–93, created a deficiency of £'204,000. So also with other county councils and municipalities, the duties were in excess of the grants, and they were left with large deficiencies. They asked that the clause should not be passed without a grant-in-aid to meet these deficiencies; but he, not going so far as that, asked that county councils and municipalities should not be made worse off than they were at present. If a licence which now cost £25 was increased to £100 the tendency would be towards fewer licences. The municipality would get the £25 and the Government £75. By adding to the tax in that way they would be decreasing the. number. He thought he was fully justified in complaining that this clause had been put forward without any alteration to meet that position. In May last the Chancellor of the Exchequer said the change would not impose a penny additional on any of them, but as a matter of fact it did. In the same reply the right hon. Gentleman said—Perhaps the hon. Member had better wait and see the Bill before asserting the converse.He had waited, and he found the Bill quite in accordance with his evil prognostications, and it did not meet the views either of the municipalities or of the county councils. The right hon. Gentleman further said—He had given that undertaking in his Budget speech, and if that did not turn out to be the case the Bill would be amended. If the hon. Member found in the Bill any such clause the clause would be amended to make it clear.What was the right hon. Gentleman's attitude to-day? When they brought forward an Amendment to carry out this promise they were jockeyed out of a discussion. Knowing the generosity and consideration of the right hon. Gentleman, he appealed to him to consider what he said previously when this matter was brought forward. The local authorities had suffered as he had described, and not only was that not to be remedied, but the deficiencies would be increased. They were going to have thirty-six licences taken away from them. In increasing the duties on those licences for national purposes, the 638 right hon. Gentleman was decreasing them for municipal purposes.
§ MR. ASQUITHindicated dissent,
§ MR. HARMOOD-BANNERsaid the right hon. Gentleman shook his head. They all knew that if they increased the price of an article they decreased the consumption. The same thing applied to licences. If they increased the price of licences they would decrease the number, and the municipalities would suffer. The right hon. Gentleman had stated that this was only a preliminary step and that he did not wish to deal with the whole question until twelve months hence. He had shown that the right hon. Gentleman was going at present to commit a rank injustice on municipalities and county councils. The right hon. Gentleman might well pause for a year in order to take the whole matter into consideration with a view to bringing forward a proposal in a generous spirit. The right hon. Gentleman had stated that he had taken motor licences into his own hand for the purpose of increasing them, motors being luxuries which should pay more towards the national finance. He agreed with the right hon. Gentleman in that, but he thought the municipalities and county councils had a right to say that the money obtained from the increased licences should be applied to the creation of a fund out of which they might pay for the improvement of roads. The right hon. Gentleman was taking the motor licences into his own hand not for the purpose of improving roads and remedying the inconvenience which motors caused to the public, but for the purpose of making them luxury taxes to aid the general position of the Exchequer. He hoped hon. Members would consider what was being done in this matter. He did not think this was a proper way to deal with counties and municipalities.
MR. MCKLENNAsaid that the clause as it stood would not affect the finance of the local authorities by one sixpence. Whatever they would get under existing taxation they would continue to get, so far as this Bill was concerned. What the hon. Gentleman meant was that once this clause was passed it would facilitate other Bills which might deprive the local 639 authorities of some of the revenue they now received. The time for meeting that would be when such a Bill was introduced. The hon. Gentleman was perfectly right in raising the point at once, but not a single argument he had used was relevant to this Bill. Treating his warning with the utmost respect and taking it fully to heart, he begged him to allow this clause to pass and to rely on the opportunities he would have hereafter to deal with changes when they arose.
§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid his hon. friend's case was that, if the amount of these individual licences was increased, and it was the expressed intention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer that they should be, their number would be decreased, and that, while the Treasury would benefit, the local authorities would lose. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said it was not his intention that they should lose, but at the same time he had put forward as his sole reason for this clause that he should be free to raise these duties in the future. At an earlier stage when he discussed the Resolution on which this clause was founded, the Chancellor of the Exchequer said that if there was any danger of the local authorities suffering they could amend the clause in Committee; and on that assurance his hon. friend the Member for Liverpool withdrew his opposition and the Resolution was agreed to unanimously. Unfortunately it was found that they on that side of the House and the Chancellor of the Exchequer were alike in the error, and that to carry out the right hon. Gentleman's pledge effectively was now impossible under the rules of the House. The only course now open to them was to reject the clause as a whole, and to defer taking any steps in this direction until they were authorised by Resolution to amend the clause in the sense which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had approved. They could not consent to a further postponement, as the President of the Board of Education suggested, having already lost one opportunity by postponing their action on the Resolution stage. They did not want to be caught in another trap, and they thought it better to act at once. In regard to a number of these licences a considerable 640 rise in the duty would cause a sensible reduction in the number of licences, and thus expose the local authorities to loss.
§ MR. ASQUITHsaid he was sure that the right hon. Gentleman and the Committee generally would believe he was not likely to depart from any pledge which he had given, and he did not in the least desire to do so on this occasion. He had said all along that if there was any ambiguity on the subject, it would be possible to meet it by an Amendment to the clause when it came up for discussion in Committee. It appeared now that under the rules of order they were not able to take any steps in that direction. At the same time, he hoped the Committee would not take the drastic step, and, as he thought, the unreasonable course, of rejecting the clause. What was the situation? Unless there was a change in the law, the local authorities would receive under this clause exactly what they would have received in the past. The purport of the Amendment which the hon. Member for Liverpool would have moved if it had been in order, was to anticipate the possible effect of change in the law raising the scale of licensing duties, and thereby diminishing the receipts of the local authorities. He had it in contemplation in the future to propose, if ho were able, legislation which might have the effect of raising those duties. But unless and until that legislation was proposed and passed, it was conceded that the local authorities would not suffer under this clause. Supposing such legislation was proposed, he was prepared to have accepted, or to have proposed himself, an Amendment to the clause to the effect that, while the local authorities should be entitled, as they would be entitled under the clause, to the whole of the normal increase in those duties if the scale of duties remained unchanged, under no circumstances, whatever change by way of rise or adjustment in the duties was ultimately assented to by Parliament, should they receive a lower sum than they had received during the average of the last three years, including the present year, under the existing system. He was prepared, on behalf of the Government, to give that undertaking now. If they proposed, as he agreed they contemplated proposing. 641 to Parliament an increase of those duties which might have the effect of diminishing the receipts of the local authorities, he would undertake that that should be accompanied by a provision which would secure the the local authorities that they should not receive less than they had received on the average of the last three years. He thought it was a very fair offer, which might to be accepted.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that there were two points in the right hon. Gentleman's speech to which he would like to call attention. He based his speech on two premises. The scheme was that the local authorities were not only to be guaranteed the amount per licence that they now received, but also some proportion of the increased rate on each licence.
§ MR. ASQUITHNo. I guard the local authority from any loss due to a diminished number of licences in consequence of a rise in the rate of licence. But, of course, I do not give them a share in the additional proceeds of the licences due to a rise in the rate.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that if there were no change in the scale, normally the number of licences would increase with the population, and the Exchequer and the local authorities would share in the increased return. But if the scale were changed, then the local authorities were to be deprived of the normal increase, and were to receive a fixed, unalterable amount. The right hon. Gentleman's Bill did not carry out his own intention, and the rules of debate forbade him now to carry out that plan by amending the clause. That ruling startled him. The Resolution which preceded the introduction of a money Bill did prevent the House from increasing the charge on the community; but such Resolutions would be wholly mischievous if they limited the discretion of the Committee of the House on matters which did 642 not in any way increase the amount of the charge on the community. So impressed was he with the general view of this question that he asked as a point of order whether it had been ruled that the Committee had so bound itself in the preliminary committee on the introduction of the Bill as to prevent the Chancellor of the Exchequer from introducing an amendment which added no charge, which did not violate the spirit of the Constitution in any way, but which prevented the House from exercising a free hand.
§ MR. ASQUITHsaid that he was as anxious as the Opposition to have this question decided now, if possible, by the insertion of words in the Bill rather than by a Ministerial undertaking, though one was as binding as the other. In order formally to raise the question he proposed the Amendment standing in the name of the hon. Member for Oswestry. which was to this effect—
Provided that in no case shall the sum payable to any local taxation account be less than that actually paid 'on. the average of three-years to end on March 31, 1907.'That addition would exactly carry out the undertaking he had given to the House.
*THE CHAIRMANwas afraid that that Amendment would not be in order, as an Amendment later in the clause had been decided, and he had put the question that the clause as amended stand part of the Bill. On the substance of the matter he ruled that the Amendment of the right hon. Gentleman would be no more in order than the original Amendment of the hon. Member for Oswestry. He was extremely sorry that this should be the position of affairs, but he had to carry out the rules of order. It was clear that if the proceeds of the public-house licences were less in 1907–8 than they were on the average of the three years preceding there would be, if 643 the Amendment were inserted, a deficiency to be made good, and not allowed for in the Resolution. He must, therefore, adhere to the ruling he had previously given. The simple way of dealing with this matter would be to pass a different financial resolution.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the Chairman's ruling, he could consent to some modification of the original Resolution provided it were understood that the new Resolution should be passed practically sub silentio.
§ MR. ASQUITHentirely agreed with he right hon. Gentleman. They were all the victims of a common error. The modified Resolution, he added, might be brought in first thing to-morrow.
§ Clause, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 17:—
§ MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINmoved to report Progress.
§ MR. ASQUITHasked the Committee to pass the first sub-section, continuing the income tax at the rate of 1s.—[Cries of "No"]—he undertaking to report Progress when the question of differentiation was reached.
§ Motion made, and Question put, "That the Chairman do report Progress; and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Austen Chamberlain.)
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes, 85; Noes, 241. (Division List No. 264.)
645| AYES. | ||
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Craik, Sir Henry | Meysey-Thompson, E. C. |
| Anstruther-Gray, Major | Dalrymple, Viscount | Moore. William |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Doughty, Sir George | Muntz, Sir Philip A. |
| Ashley, W. W. | Douglas, Rt. Hon. A.Akers- | Nicholson. Wm. G.(Petersfield) |
| Balcarres, Lord | Duncan,Robert(Lanark,Govan | Nield, Herbert |
| Balfour,RtHn.A. J.(City Lond.) | Faber, George Denison (York) | Parkes, Ebenezer |
| Banbury,SirFrederick George | Faber, Capt. W. V.(Hants, W.) | Rawlinson,John FrederickPeel |
| Baring,Capt.Hn.G(Winchester | Fell, Arthur | Remnant,JamesFarquharson |
| Barnes, G. N. | Fletcher. J.S. | Roberts,S.(Sherffield,Ecclesall) |
| Barrie,H.T.(Londonderry,N.) | Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West) | Rutherford, John(Lancashire) |
| Beach,Hn.MichaelHnghHicks | Gordon, J. | Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool) |
| Beckett, Hon. OGervase | Gretton, John | Sheffield,Sir Berkeley George D. |
| Bignold. Sir Arthur | Haddock, George R. | Starkey, John R. |
| Boyle, Sir Edward | Harris, Frederick Leverton | Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Bridgeman, W. Clive | Harrison-Broadley, H. B. | Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark |
| Brotherton,Edward Allen | Hay, Hon. Claude George | Turnour, Viscount |
| Bull, Sir William James | Helmsley, Viscount | Walrond, Hon. Lionel |
| Campbell, Rt. Hon. J. H. M. | Hervey,F.W.F.(BuryS.Edm'ds | Williams, Col. R. (Dorset,W.) |
| Carlile, E. Hildred | Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury) | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Cave, George | Hunt, Rowland | Wilson,A.Stanley(York,E.R.) |
| Cavendish,Rt.Hn.Victor C. W. | Kenyon-Slaney,Rt. Hon.Col. W. | Wilson, W.T.(Westhoughton) |
| Cecil,LordR.(Marylebone, E.) | King,SirHenrySeymour(Hull) | Wortley,Rt.Hon.C.B.Stuart- |
| Chamberlain, Rt. Hn.JA.(Worc. | Lane-Fox;, G. R. | Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George |
| Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry | Lee,ArthurH.(Hants, Fareham | Younger, George |
| Coates,E.Feetham(Lewisham) | Lockwood.Rt.Hn.Lt.-Col.A.R. | |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Long,Rt.Hn.Walter(Dublin,S. | TELLERS FOR THE AYES— |
| Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow) | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | M'Calmont, Colonel James. | Mr. Forster. |
| Craig,CharlesCurtis(Antrim,S. | Marks, H. H. (Kent) | |
| Craig, Captain James(Down,E. | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Rhondda) | Allen, A.Acland(Christchurch) | Asquith,Rt.Hn.HerbertHenry |
| Agnew, George William | Allen, Charles P. (Stroud) | Astbury, John Meir |
| Alden, Percy | Ashton, Thomas Gair | Baker, Joseph A.(Finsbury,E.) |
| Balfour, Robert (Lanark) | Goddard, Daniel Ford | Morrell, Philip |
| Baring,Godfrey(Isle of Wight) | Gooch, George Peabody | Morse, L. L. |
| Barker, John | Grant, Corrie | Morton, Alpheus Cleophas |
| Barlow, Sir John E. (Somerset) | Greenwood,G.(Peterborough) | Myer, Horatio |
| Barlow, Percy (Bedford) | Greenwood, Hamar (York) | Newnes, F. (Notts,Bassetlaw) |
| Barran, Rowland Hirst | Gulland, John W. | Nicholson,CharlesN.(Doncast'r |
| Barry, RedmondJ. (Tyrone,N.) | Gurdon,RtHn.SirWBrampton | Norman, Sir Henry |
| Beale, W. P. | Hall, Frederick | Norton, Capt. Cecil William |
| Beauchamp, E. | Harmsworth, Cecil B.(Worc'r) | O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth) |
| Beck, A. Cecil | Hart-Davies, T. | Parker, James (Halifax.) |
| Bell, Richard | Harvey.A. G. C. (Rochdale) | Partington, Oswald |
| Bellairs, Carlyon | Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire.N. E. | Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek) |
| Benn,SirJ. Williams(Devonp'rt | Harwood, George | Pearce,William(Limehouse) |
| Berridge, T. H. D. | Haslam, Lewis(Monmouth) | Pearson, Sir W. D. (Colchester; |
| Bertram, Julius | Haworth, Arthur A. | Pearson,W.H.M.(Suffolk,Eye) |
| Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine | Hazel, Dr. A. E. | Pirie, Duncan V. |
| Black, Arthur W. | Hedges, A. Paget | Pollard, Dr. |
| Brace, William | Helme, Norval Watson | Price,Robert John(Norfolk,E.) |
| Bramsdon, T. A. | Hernmerde,Edward George | Radford, G. H. |
| Brigg, John | Henry, Charles S. | Rainy, A. Rolland |
| Bright, J. A. | Herbert,Col.SirIvor(Mon.,S.) | Redmond, William (Clare) |
| Brocklehurst, W. B. | Hobart, Sir Robert | Rendall, Athelstan |
| Brunner, J. F. L. (Lancs.,Leigh | Holden, E. Hopkinson | Renton, Major Leslie |
| Bryce, J. Annan | Holland, Sir William Henry | Richards,Thomas(W.Monm'th |
| Burns, Rt. Hon. John | Hope.W. Bateman(Somerset,N. | Richardson, A. |
| Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas | Horniman, Emslie John | Rickett, J. Compton |
| Buxton,Rt.Hn.SydneyCharles | Horridge, Thomas Gardner | Ridsdale, E. A. |
| Byles, William Pollard | Hutton, Alfred Eddison | Roberts,Charles H.(Lincoln) |
| Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Hyde, Clarendon | Roberts,John H.(Denbighs.) |
| Causton, Rt. Hn.RichardKnight | Illingworth, Percy H. | Robertson,SirGScott(Bradf'rd |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick | Jackson, R. S. | Robinson, S. |
| Chance, Frederick William | Johnson, John (Gateshead) | Roe, Sir Thomas |
| Cheetham, John Frederick | Johnson, W. (Nuneaton) | Rogers, F. E. Newman |
| Clough, William | Jones, Lief (Appleby) | Rose, Charles Day |
| Cobbold, Felix Thornley | Jones, William(Carnarvonshire | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Collins, Stephen (Lambeth) | Jowett, F. W. | Scarisbrick, T. T. L. |
| Collins,SirWm.J.(S.Pancras,W. | Kekewich, Sir George | Schwann, SirCE. (Manchester) |
| Cooper, G. J. | Kincaid-Smith, Captain | Scott,A.H.(Ashton under Lyne |
| Corbett,(C.H.(Sussex,E.Grinst'd | King, Alfred John (Knutsford) | Seaverns, J. H. |
| Cornwall. Sir Edwin A. | Lamb,EdmundG.(Leominster | Seely, Major J. B. |
| Cory, Clifford John | Lambert, George | Shaw,Charles Edw.(Stafford) |
| Cotton, Sir H. J. S. | Lamont, Norman | Shipman,Dr. John G. |
| Cowan, W. H. | Layland-Barratt, Francis | Silcock, Thomas Ball |
| Cox, Harold | Lehmann, R. C. | Simon, John Allsebrook |
| Cremer, Sir William Randal | Lever, A. Levy (Essex.,Harwich | Sinclair, Rt.Hon. John |
| Crosfield, A. H. | Levy, Sir Maurice | Smeaton,Donald Mackenzie |
| Dalziel, James Henry | Lewis, John Herbert | Snowden, P. |
| Davies,David(.MontgomeryCo. | Lloyd-George,Rt.Hon. David | Spicer, Sir Albert |
| Davies,Bills William (Eifion) | Lough, Thomas | Stanger, H. Y. |
| Davies, Timothy(Fulham) | Lupton, Arnold | Stanley,Hn. A.Lyulph(Chesh.) |
| Davies, W. Howell (Bristol,S.) | Luttrell, Hugh Fownes | Steadman, W. C. |
| Dewar, SirJ.A. (Inverness-sh.) | Lyell, Charles Henry | Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal) |
| Dickinson, W. H. (St. Pancras, N. | Lynch, H. B. | Strachey, Sir Edward |
| Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne) | Maclean, Donald | Straus, B. S. (Mile End) |
| Dunne, Major E.Martin(Walsall | M'Callum, John M. | Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon) |
| Edwards, Clement (Denbigh) | M'Crae, George | Stuart, James (Sunderland) |
| Edwards,Enoch (Hanley) | M'Kenna.Rt.Hon.Reginald | Sutherland, J. E. |
| Edwards, Sir Frank (Radnor) | M'Laren,H.D.(Stafford,W.) | Taylor,TheodoreC. (Radcliffe) |
| Elibank. Master of | M'Micking, Major G. | Thomas,SirA.(Glamorgan,E.) |
| Erskine, David C. | Mallet, Charles E. | Thomas,DavidAlfred(Merthyr |
| Esslemont, George Birnie | Mansfield, Harry (Northants) | Thomasson, Franklin |
| Evans, Samuel T. | Mansfield, H.Rendall(Lincoln) | Thompson, J.W.H. (Somerset,E. |
| Everett. H. Lacey | Markham, Arthur Basil | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Fenwick, Charles | Mar s,G. Croydon(Launceston | Ure, Alexander |
| Ferens, T. R. | Marnham, F. J. | Verney, F. W. |
| Findlay. Alexander | Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry) | Wadsworth, J. |
| Fuller, John Michael F. | Massie, J. | Walker, H. De R. (Leicester) |
| Fullerton, Hugh | Menzies, Walter | Walters, John Tudor |
| Gibb, James (Harrow) | Micklem, Nathaniel | Ward,W. Dudley(Southampton |
| Gill, A. H. | Money, L. G. Chiozza | Waring, Walter |
| Gladstone, Rt. Hn.HerbertJohn | Montgomery, H. G. | Warner,Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Glendinning, R. G. | Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall) | Waterlow, D S. |
| Glover, Thomas | Morgan, J.Lloyd(Carmarthen) | |
| Watt, Henry A. | Wiles, Thomas | Wood, T. M'Kinnon |
| White, George (Norfolk) | Willamson, A. | |
| White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire) | Wills, Arthur Walters | TELLERS FOB THE NOES—Mr. |
| White, Luke (York, E.R.) | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.) | Whiteley and Mr. J. A. |
| Whitley,JohnHenry(Halifax) | Wilson, P. W.(St. Pancras, S.) | Pease. |
| Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer | Winfrey, R. |
THE CHAIRMANruled out of order an Amendment standing in the name of the hon. Member for North Padding-ton, proposing a scale of graduation and differentiation of income-tax, ranging from Id. in the £on earned, and 2d. in the £ on unearned incomes of £160, to Is. 6d. in the £ on incomes (earned or unearned) of £10,000.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURthought it would be convenient if some arrangement could be arrived at whereby they could have to-morrow and Monday for the finishing of the Committee stage on the Finance Bill, on the common understanding that there should be only one day given for the Report stage with no particular limitation as to the hour at which the discussion should be closed. If that met the views of both sides of the House, he begged to suggest it.
§ MR. ASQUITHsaid he thought that would be a very reasonable arrangement, and he was prepared to accept it, subject to this. His right hon. friend the Chief Secretary had to be in Ireland on Tuesday, and he would, therefore, suggest that the Evicted Tenants Bill should be taken on Monday, and that Tuesday should be the second day for Committee on the Finance Bill.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOUROh, yes.
§ MR. ASQUITHI understand that there will be to-morrow and Tuesday for the remainder of the Committee 648 stage, and that there shall be another day, not necessarily limited to the Eleven o'clock Rule, for Report.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he did not know what amount of discussion was expected on the Evicted Tenants Bill, and he must not be regarded as pledging himself on that Bill at all. If the discussion on it lasted more thang 219 a day, the Government would have to arrange for it. But at all events only two days more would be taken for Committee on the Finance Bill, and only one day, not necessarily finishing at 11 o'clock, for the Report stage. The actual days on which that bargain was to be carried out would rest with the Government alone. They could settle what the days were to be. The bargain was about time, and not about particular days.
§ MR. ASQUITHI entirely assent to that, and I move to report Progress.
§ MR. W. REDMONDI understand that the Evicted Tenants Bill will be taken on Monday.
§ MR. ASQUITHYes.
§ Committee report Progress; to sit again To-morrow.