§ (1) Any conveyance or transfer operating as a voluntary disposition inter vivos shall be chargeable with the like Stamp Duty as if it were a conveyance or transfer on sale, with the substitution in each case of the value of the property conveyed or transferred for the amount or value of the consideration for the sale.
§ (2) Notwithstanding anything in Section twelve of the principal Act, the Commissioners may be required to express their opinion under that Section on any conveyance or transfer operating as a voluntary disposition inter vivos, and no such conveyance or transfer shall be deemed to be duly stamped unless the Commissioners have expressed their opinion thereon in accordance with that Section.
§ (3) Sub-section (2) of Section fifteen of the principal Act, which enables certain instruments to be stamped after execution, shall apply to conveyances or transfers 460 operating as voluntary dispositions inter vivos as if those conveyances or transfers were specified in the first column of the table in paragraph (d) of that Sub-section, and the grantor or transferor were specified in the second column of that table.
§ (4) Where any instrument is chargeable with duty both as a conveyance or transfer under this Section and as a settlement under the heading "Settlement" an the First Schedule to the principal Act, the instrument shall be charged with duty as a conveyance or transfer under this Section, but not as a settlement under the principal Act.
§ (5) Any conveyance or transfer (not being a disposition made in favour of a purchaser or incumbrancer or other person in good faith and for valuable consideration) shall, for the purposes of this Section, be deemed to be a conveyance or transfer operating as a voluntary disposition inter vivos, and (except where marriage is the consideration) the consideration for any 461 conveyance or transfer shall not for this purpose be deemed to be valuable consideration where the Commissioners are of opinion that by reason of the inadequacy of the sum paid as consideration or other circumstances the conveyance or transfer has been made with a view of conferring a substantial benefit on the person to whom the property is conveyed or transferred.
§ (6) A conveyance or transfer made for effectuating the appointment of a new trustee or the retirement of a trustee, or under which no beneficial interest passes in the property conveyed or transferred, shall not be charged with duty under this Section.
§ Mr. HILLS moved to leave out after the word "transfer" the words "operating as a voluntary disposition," and to insert the words "purporting to operate as an immediate gift."
This Clause proposes to place for the first time a Stamp Duty on gifts. A few nights ago we proposed to tax gifts made within three years. We now mean to extend that principle, and to tax all gifts that pass between people. The object of my Amendment is to obtain from the Government a definition of the class of transactions that they intend to cover by this Clause. Its words are extremely wide, and would include a large class of transactions which I do not think the Government mean to include at all. Take the ordinary case of disentailing and resettling a family property. The disentailing is a disposition of the property, for which at present a stamp of 10s. is sufficient. Take a second case: Assuming a man has made a will which is not very clear, and that after his death the family meet round the table and come to an arrangement which is embodied in a deed. That is a disposition of property between many people which at present only bears a 10s. stamp. If this Clause becomes law as it now stands, the charge will be doubled. I think it is not asking too much to request the Government to confine the Clause to real gifts, where property really does pass between living persons. It cannot be their intention to impose this tax on transactions which are in the sense of a disposition of property. For myself, I think the whole of the tax on gifts is bad, but if we are to have it surely it ought to be confined to actual gifts. I think the Solicitor-General will agree that the words of the Clause include a large class of transactions which are not gifts at all, but are arrangements or dispositions of pro- 462 perty under which in a technical sense the property does pass, although there is no actual parting with the interest. In the disentailing of a family estate the property does not pass in the technical sense as if the fee simple was moved on to somebody else. The property is there. And similarly in a deed of family arrangement—in that case the shares of the different people are valued, but the whole property does not pass in the sense of a gift passing from one hand to another. I am not bound to the words I move though I think they meet the case. I ask the Government whether they intend to confine this new Stamp Duty to real gifts, or do they intend to include all sorts of transactions that are not real gifts.
§ The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Hobhouse)The Amendment of the hon. Gentleman is to leave out certain words and insert the words "immediate gift." The bulk of his speech, however, was not directed so much to what he proposes to insert as to what he thinks should be left out of the Clause. He no doubt raised a point of legal importance, which I leave my hon. and learned Friend the Solicitor-General to deal with; but I should like to deal with the actual Amendment as it stands on the Paper. If the words proposed by the hon. Member were inserted as they stand, the effect of them would be that a person would only have to say that the gift from the donor to the donee was not to be "an immediate gift," and, therefore, the duty would not be payable. It is quite clear, from the purely fiscal point of view, that a Stamp Duty upon these voluntary dispositions cannot be allowed to be the subject of evasion by the introduction, for that is really what it would mean, of the words "immediate gift." Therefore, I think the hon. Gentleman opposite will agree that these words could not be inserted in the Clause.
§ Mr. HILLSI do not want to bind the right hon. Gentleman to the words at all if he will agree to the principles of my Amendment.
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEI am not quite sure whether the hon. Gentleman in raising this particular question does so because he disapproves of the principle of imposing the Stamp Duty on voluntary dispositions. I think, having regard to other duties already passed by the Committee in this Bill, it is quite clear that evasion should be prevented. Perhaps evasions is not the best word. [An HON. MEMBER: 463 "Avoidance."] Yes, avoidance is the better word. It is quite clear that we must have a Stamp Duty on dispositions of property. That is a very important principle to which we on this side of the House attach the greatest value. Undoubtedly, if the Stamp Duty were not imposed on these dispositions of property, it would enable people to avoid the duties already passed by the Committee; and, therefore, whether it is the principle which is insisted upon by the right hon. Gentleman or whether it is the words "immediate gift" that he proposes to put in the Clause, I am afraid, either in one case or the other, the Government would be unable to accept the Amendment.
§ Mr. JOYNSON-HICKSThe right hon. Gentleman probably may modify his view with regard to an Amendment I have on the White Paper as follows:—
"(6) A conveyance or transfer made at the request of beneficiaries under a will, settlement, or trust for sale effecting a distribution of the property in specie, shall not be charged with duty under this Section."
The point is a very simple one and a very common one. The case may occur where a man gives his property to his children, so much stock or so much in Consols, and, instead of having the property sold, the family say they would like to have it divided between them. I am afraid by this provision such transactions might be subject to the duty which the Clause imposes. It is not an uncommon case. The property would have already just immediately before that paid a State duty, and under the provisions of this Bill would also have to pay 1 per cent. Legacy Duty, so that it has already fully contributed to the general Exchequer of the country. If the children sell it again, of course there would then be Stamp Duty on the sale. I submit that this is a very reasonable Amendment. I do not stick to the exact words, but I think it is a bonâ fide case which might be met, and one which if it were not met would hit the family very heavily.
§ Mr. MAURICE HEALYSub-section (6) deals with the case of the appointment of a new trustee, but does not deal with the case where a trustee gets rid of his trust and where the trust is discharged. I suppose that is only a lapse or omission, because it is certainly not covered in the words of the Clause. I only rise to ask the hon. Gentleman the Solicitor-General 464 whether I am right in thinking that this Clause does not cover the case where marriage is portion of the consideration? I have heard it does not, but I am not quite clear about it. I infer from Sub-section (5) that it is intended that this Clause shall not cover a settlement where marriage is portion of a consideration, and that it shall where marriage is not a portion.
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThat is so.
§ Sir E. CARSONThe question before the House is one of very vast importance, because the Motion is really to leave out the words "operating as a voluntary disposition." That raises the very wide question as to how far we are going to tax voluntary arrangements as between parties who are owners or who are interested in property. The Committee is aware that up to this the law has never thought right, as regards taxes, to interfere in any way in the voluntary disposition of property. Therefore we are now for the first time engaged in putting a tax upon voluntary arrangements in connection with property if the property passes. What it is proposed to do seems to me to be a matter which requires very grave consideration, and that is that we should put them on exactly the same position as in the case of sale, or rather in a worse position. In the case of sale you have an arrangement and you have money in hand, while in the case of a voluntary disposition you will have in some way or other to raise the money to pay these duties which are being put on the transaction. That seems to me to be a tremendous change in dealing with property, because it necessitates, as there is no purchase and sale, the raising of money for the purpose of carrying out a gift, and it may be a large amount. You are putting enormous burdens on the subject and enacting that you have on each occasion on which you wish to give a voluntary gift to your son, or family, or anybody else, to have a valuation, and the Government have to have a valuation, and you have to come to terms as to what is the value of the property. That is why I said that henceforward, if this Bill passes, in the case of a voluntary gift of any property the person making the gift is in a worse position than in the case of a sale. Of course, in the case of a sale and purchase, you have an index of what the Stamp Duty would be by the consideration, and you have money in hand for the purpose of paying the tax, and you have no necessity for a valuation. If this tax is to be applied to a mere voluntary gift, 465 as far as I can see, in every case, having regard to subsequent provisions, even where there is a consideration, the Commissioners will be entitled to say that they will not accept that consideration, and insist on a valuation of their own to determine what the purchase money should have been. That is a great revolution in regard to the matter of making gifts, and even as regards conveyances on sale to various parties.
Let me point out another matter to show how matters become cumulative under this Budget. The Secretary to the Treasury says you must draw distinction in some way or other to avoid avoidance, evasion, or whatever you like to call it, of Death Duties. Suppose I give a gift of property to my son, I have to double the present rate of Stamp Duty upon transfer of that voluntary gift, and supposing I die within three years the Death Duties must be paid as well. While the Secretary to the Treasury says that the Government must take care that the revenue is not defrauded by these gifts, I think the House went very far the other night in the Clause which they have already passed, and by which they extended the limit for these gifts from one to three years. Here we are now making an addition to the Death Duties on a transaction that may have taken place when the people were in perfect health and without any anticipation of death. You are also enacting that double the present Stamp Duty must be paid in relation to voluntary transactions. It may be right or it may be wrong to do that, but the Committee ought to do it with their eyes open and to see the extent to which they are going in practically putting an end to the possibility of carrying out anything like voluntary gifts, even between relations. The only solution, probably, is never to have anything but bonds or cash, and if I may give a hint to parties who are considering how to deal with the cumulative provisions of this Budget I advise everybody to have bonds. They can pass by delivery, and then the Government say, quite properly, they should not be taxed. What is to be the meaning of the words "operating as a voluntary disposition"?
There were two cases put, and I should like to ask the Solicitor-General how this Clause will affect them. The first was the disentailing case. Is that a conveyance "operating as a voluntary disposition"? That is a matter of extreme importance, because, of course, all the settled estates, all the large estates, are entailed estates. 466 I believe the Whigs do not entail, but they are a vanishing quantity in politics. There you have undoubtedly a voluntary conveyance; you convey for the purpose of disentailing the property to the trustee. Is that to come under this Clause? And if not, what are the words in the Clause which limit it? Then there was another case, the ordinary case of persons making arrangements as to the division of property where the parties are all interested and where they arrange a conveyance one to the other. Is that a conveyance "operating as a voluntary disposition" and where are the words which limit in this matter? I think that the Committee ought to see that they are now on a part of the Bill which is an entirely novel proceeding. It is very necessary for us to have very full explanation as to how those words "operating as a voluntary disposition" are construed by the Government, and how far the questions which are on the Paper have been met by any alteration.
§ Sir SAMUEL EVANSThe right hon. and learned Gentleman has quite correctly stated what the object of this Clause is. The object of the Clause is to make Stamp Duty payable upon a disposition of property, and I use the word "property" in the meaning of property in the same sense as a conveyance—
§ Mr. MAURICE HEALYDo you mean land and houses?
§ Sir SAMUEL EVANSWe are now dealing with conveyances which are voluntary and of the same character as those which we have already dealt with in the preceding Clause. You have in law two kinds of consideration, namely, good consideration and value consideration; and the right hon. Gentleman says, quite rightly, that we are now imposing Stamp Duties upon transfers of property of the latter description. Take the case of a gift from father to son or of settling property more than three years before death. Up to now there has been no Stamp Duty, except the Deed Duty, payable in respect of transactions of that description. Under this Clause Stamp Duty will have to be paid, just as in a case of transfer on sale. That is a question of principle. That is the proposal of the Government, and I am prepared to argue that it is perfectly sound and right. I see no reason at all why a gift of property of a considerable amount from a father to a son 21 or 22 years of age should escape Stamp Duty. You can give reasons against it, but so you can for not taking Stamp Duty upon transfers on sale. 467 The right hon. Gentleman (Sir E. Carson) said that we are imposing an enormous burden upon transfers of that kind. We are not doing anything of the kind. He must have been thinking of something else. He said that we were making it necessary to raise money upon such proceedings. The duty is only £1 in every £100. Supposing a man has an estate of £10,000 which he wishes to transfer to his son. One may assume that he could put his hand on £100 if he is willing to transfer £10,000 worth of property. Therefore, I think the right hon. Gentleman was rather exaggerating the effect of placing this Stamp Duty on voluntary dispositions. As to the question of valuation, there are provisions already in the Stamp Act, 1891, enabling the Commissioners to assess the duty. There is no difficulty about it. An affidavit by a person interested is usually accepted. There is a reference to that provision in Sub-section (2) of this Clause. It will not be necessary to have a valuation. The Commissioners need only be satisfied. It will not be necessary to translate the property into money for the purpose of calculating the Stamp Duty.
§ Sir E. CARSONWill the hon. and learned Gentleman deal with the point as to death occurring within three years after Stamp Duty has been exacted?
§ Sir S. EVANSThe Stamp Duty would be payable under this Clause.
§ Sir E. CARSONAnd the Estate Duty?
§ Sir S. EVANSIf it comes within the provisions of the Act with regard to Estate Duty. In reply to a further question put to me, a disentailing assurance may be simply a disentailing deed, or it may be a disentailing deed plus a transfer of property or a settlement of property. I am authorised to say that if it is merely a disentailing assurance for the purpose of barring entail, an exception might and ought to be made, and I am quite willing to insert after the words "inter vivos" some such words as "other than a disentailing assurance merely by way of barring entail." But if the disentailing assurance is also a transfer of property it comes within the provision. The next question put was what would happen in case there was a distribution of property which might be sold by the trustee under the will, but where the distribution took place amongst the beneficiaries instead of there being a sale of the property. I am 468 not at all sure that that would be a voluntary disposition. But I think there is a case for that, and I think the case could be properly met by excepting in express terms the deeds necessary for carrying out such a distribution as I have described.
§ Mr. MITCHELL-THOMSONOn the broad question of principle the Solicitor-General and the Secretary to the Treasury have given us the sole defence which has ever been offered of this Clause, namely, that it is intended to do something to stop the avoidance of Death Duties by transfers inter vivos. Does the Solicitor-General say that is not the intention of the Clause?
§ Sir S. EVANSIt is one of the intentions.
§ Mr. MITCHELL-THOMSONIt is the only intention so far declared. That also was the purpose which the Government gave for extending the 12 months' period to three years. This is a most extraordinary way of facilitating the distribution of property about which hon. Members opposite are so fond of talking. The Government are attempting to facilitate the distribution of property by imposing heavy Estate Duties after death, and by doubling the Stamp Duties on transfers made while the man is alive. The Solicitor-General says that after all there is no particular reason why a son should have any special and indefeasible claim to property more than anybody else. I do not know how the case may be in England, but in Scotland a son or a wife has such an indefeasible claim. In English law I believe there is a process by which you can cut off your son with a shilling. The Scottish law, in a more humane spirit, says that you shall do no such thing. In Scotland if a man dies leaving a son and a wife, the son must come in for one third of the money; nothing can stop him. If a man leaves money in his will to his son you make him pay Estate Duty. If he transfers the money to his son by an inter vivos transfer, you make him pay Stamp Duty. If, having transferred the money to his son, he happens to die within three years, you make him pay both Estate Duty and Stamp Duty. I say that that is an utterly indefensible proposition.
§ Mr. MAURICE HEALYThe Solicitor-General said that this Clause dealt with the same kind of property as the preceding Clause. Does he mean that? In the preceding Clause stocks and shares are expressly exempted, but they are not exempted in this Clause, I believe.
§ Sir S. EVANSI think the hon. Gentleman is right.
§ Mr. COURTHOPEWhen the Solicitor-General is considering the exemptions which he has promised to make in favour of disentailing deeds and so on, will he also consider two other cases; one is a conveyance to a beneficiary on the conclusion of a trust, and the other is the conclusion of a partnership.
§ Sir S. EVANSThe question of a trust is dealt with in a subsequent Sub-section.
§ Mr. RIDSDALEI understand that "conveyance" means a legal document. But if I simply hand over property, or, say, a cheque for £500, to another person, that is a conveyance in ordinary language. Would that come within this Sub-section?
§ Sir S. EVANSThe conveyance is a document. If a man likes to hand over his property to his son in the manner suggested by the hon. Member, and his son is content to accept it in that way, there is no deed upon which Stamp Duty can be claimed.
§ Mr. HILLSI do not think these words ought to be left in the Bill. The Solicitor-General himself admits that they go too far. If I omitted the word "immediate" from my Amendment, and confined its operation to actual gifts, I think it would meet the objections which have been raised. The intention of the Government is only to tax gifts. You do not want to tax the machinery at all. Do the Government accept the words with the omission of "immediate"?
§ Sir SAMUEL EVANSA voluntary disposition of property is a very well-understood thing.
§ Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 216; Noes, 72.
471| Division No. 702.] | AYES. | [7.5 p.m. |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R. | Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale) |
| Agnew, George William | Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S. | Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) |
| Ainsworth, John Stirling | Cleland, J. W. | Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil) |
| Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch) | Clough, William | Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worcester) |
| Allen, Charles P. (Stroud) | Cobbold, Felix Thornley | Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithnessshire) |
| Ashton, Thomas Gair | Collins, Stephen (Lambeth) | Hart-Davies, T. |
| Atherley-Jones, L. | Collins, Sir Wm. J. (St. Pancras, W.) | Harwood, George |
| Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth) | Corbett, C. H. (Sussex, E. Grinstead) | Haworth, Arthur A. |
| Baker, Joseph A. (Finsury, E.) | Cotton, Sir H. J. S. | Hedges, A. Paget |
| Balfour, Robert (Lanark) | Cowan, W. H. | Helme, Norval Watson |
| Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight) | Cox, Harold | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) |
| Barker, Sir John | Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth) | Henderson, J. McD. (Aberdeen, W.) |
| Barlow, Sir John E. (Somerset) | Crosfield, A. H. | Henry, Charles S. |
| Barnard, E. B. | Crossley, William J. | Herbert, Col. Sir Ivor (Mon. S.) |
| Barnes, G. N. | Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Higham, John Sharp |
| Barran, Sir John Nicholson | Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.) | Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. |
| Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.) | Dickinson, W. H. (St. Pancras, N.) | Holland, Sir William Henry |
| Beaumont, Hon. Hubert | Duckworth, Sir James | Hooper, A. G. |
| Bell, Richard | Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | Hope, W. H. B. (Somerset, N.) |
| Benn, Sir J. Williams (Devonport) | Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley) | Horniman, Emslie John |
| Benn, W. (Tower Hamlets, St. Geo.) | Dunne, Major E. Martin (Walsall) | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey |
| Bennett, E. N. | Edwards, A. Clement (Denbigh) | Isaacs, Rufus Daniel |
| Berridge, T. H. D. | Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor) | Jardine, Sir J. |
| Bethell, Sir J. H. (Essex, Romford) | Erskine, David C. | Jenkins, J. |
| Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon) | Essex, R. W. | Johnson, W. (Nuneaton) |
| Black, Arthur W. | Evans, Sir S. T. | Jones, Sir D. Brynmor (Swansea) |
| Bottomley, Horatio | Everett, R. Lacey | Jones, Leif (Appleby) |
| Boulton, A. C. F. | Falconer, J. | Kekewich, Sir George |
| Bowerman, C. W. | Findlay, Alexander | King, Alfred John (Knutsford) |
| Branch, James | Fullerton, Hugh | Laidlaw, Robert |
| Brigg, John | Gibb, James (Harrow) | Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster) |
| Bright, J. A. | Gibson, J. P. | Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester) |
| Brunner, J. F. L. (Lancs., Leigh) | Gill, A. H. | Lament, Norman |
| Burns, Rt. Hon. John | Gladstone, Rt. Hon. Herbert John | Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis |
| Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas | Glendinning, R. G. | Lehmann, R. C. |
| Buxton, Rt. Hon. Sydney Charles | Glover, Thomas | Lever, A. Levy (Essex, Harwich) |
| Byles, William Pollard | Gooch, George Peabody (Bath) | Levy, Sir Maurice |
| Causton, Rt. Hon. Richard Knight | Greenwood, G. (Peterborough) | Lewis, John Herbert |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick | Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward | Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David |
| Chance, Frederick William | Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill | Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas |
| Channing, Sir Francis Allston | Gulland, John W. | Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs) |
| Mackarness, Frederic C. | Radford, G. H. | Taylor, John W. (Durham) |
| Maclean, Donald | Raphael, Herbert H. | Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire) |
| Macpherson, J. T. | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (Gloucester) | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| M'Callum, John M. | Rees, J. D. | Thorne, William (West Ham) |
| M'Laren, H. D. (Stafford, W.) | Richards, T. F. (Wolverhampton, W.) | Tomkinson, James |
| Maddison, Frederick | Ridsdale, E. A. | Toulmin, George |
| Mallet, Charles E. | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Markham, Arthur Basil | Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) | Verney, F. W. |
| Marnham, F. J. | Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford) | Wadsworth, J. |
| Massie, J. | Robinson, S. | Walker, H. De R. (Leicester) |
| Masterman, C. F. G. | Robson, Sir William Snowdon | Walsh, Stephen |
| Menzies, Sir Walter | Roch, Walter FF. (Pembroke) | Wardle, George J. |
| Middlebrook, William | Roe, Sir Thomas | Waring, Walter |
| Molteno, Percy Alport | Rogers, F. E. Newman | Warner, Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Montagu, Hon. E. S. | Rose, Sir Charles Day | Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney) |
| Montgomery, H. G. | Russell, Rt. Hon. T. W. | Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan) |
| Murray, Capt. Hon. A. C. (Kincard.) | Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford) | White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire) |
| Myer, Horatio | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) | White, Sir Luke (York, E. R.) |
| Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw) | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) | Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P. |
| Nicholls, George | Scarisbrick, Sir T. T. L. | Wilkie, Alexander |
| Nussey, Sir Willans | Schwann, Sir C. E. (Manchester) | Williams, J. (Glamorgan) |
| Nuttall, Harry | Seddon, J. | Williams, W. Llewelyn (Carmarthen) |
| O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth) | Seely, Colonel | Williamson, Sir A. |
| Parker, James (Halifax) | Shaw, Sir Charles E. (Stafford) | Wilson, Hon. G. G. (Hull, W.) |
| Partington, Oswald | Shipman, Dr. John G. | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W. R.) |
| Paulton, James Mellor | Snowden, P. | Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton) |
| Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek) | Soares, Ernest J. | Wood, T. M'Kinnon |
| Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton) | Stanley, Hon. A. Lyulph (Cheshire) | Yoxall, Sir James Henry |
| Pickersgill, Edward Hare | Steadman, W. C. | |
| Pirie, Duncan V. | Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal) | |
| Pointer, J. | Strachey, Sir Edward | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Joseph Pease and Captain Norton. |
| Pollard, Dr. G. H. | Strauss, B. S. (Mile End) | |
| Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) | Summerbell, T. | |
| NOES. | ||
| Acland-Hood, Rt. Hon. Sir Alex. F. | Fell, Arthur | Mason, James F. (Windsor) |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Fletcher, J. S. | Mildmay, Francis Bingham |
| Balcarres, Lord | Forster, Henry William | Oddy, John James |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Gardner, Ernest | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Guinness, Hon. W. E. (B. S. Edmunds) | Peel, Hon. W. R. W. |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Hamilton, Marquess of | Pretyman, E. G. |
| Baring, Capt. Hon. G. (Winchester) | Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford) | Randles, Sir John Scurrah |
| Beckett, Hon. Gervase | Harris, Frederick Leverton | Ratcliff, Major R. F. |
| Bridgeman, W. Clive | Harrison-Broadley, H. B. | Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel |
| Brotherton, Edward Allen | Hay, Hon. Claude George | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Bull, Sir William James | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) |
| Burdett-Coutts, W. | Hunt, Rowland | Rutherford, Watson (Liverpool) |
| Butcher, Samuel Henry | Joynson-Hicks, William | Sheffield, Sir Berkeley George D. |
| Campbell, Rt. Hon. J. H. M. | Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H. | Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand) |
| Carlile, E. Hildred | Keswick, William | Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Lanark) |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H. | Kimber, Sir Henry | Tuke, Sir John Batty |
| Castlereagh, Viscount | King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull) | Valentia, Viscount |
| Cave, George | Lambton, Hon. Frederick William | Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire) |
| Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.) | Lane-Fox, G. R. | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Clyde, J. Avon | Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham) | Winterton, Earl |
| Coates, Major E. F. (Lewisham) | Lockwood, Rt. Hon. Lt.-Col. A. R. | Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart- |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham) | Younger, George |
| Craik, Sir Henry | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | MacCaw, Wm. J. MacGeagh | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. J. W. Hills and Mr. Courthope. |
| Faber, George Denison (York) | M'Arthur, Charles |
§ Mr. RADFORD moved, in Sub-section (1), after the word "vivos" ["a voluntary disposition inter vivos shall be chargeable with the like Stamp Duty"] to insert the words "not being a conveyance effecting a resettlement of real estate."
Perhaps after what the learned Attorney-General has said on this matter it is not necessary to move my Amendment. I understand the construction put by the Government upon the matter is that if the deed is one of disentailing pure and simple, then in that case it does not come under the operation of this Sub-section; but, if it is a resettlement of the estate— 472 that is, a gift inter vivos—the duty will be payable. If that is so, I venture to suggest that it is desirable to insert words to make it clear. Whether those words should be inserted or not is a question of high policy which I do not venture to interfere with, but I do say that this is really a very important matter from the point of view of the family life of this country. I happen to know a case which has recently come before the Commissioners for stamping, and where the resettlement of the estate has been stamped at 10s. If this Bill had then been law it would have been stamped 473 at £6,000. The owners of great estates are not always flush of money, and I have a reason to think in some cases if it had been a question of putting down £6,000—say on this occasion—there would have been no re-settlement at all, and the whole history of the family in the county would in future have been different. I put forward this Amendment with a view to suggesting that certain words should be inserted making it quite clear. I beg to move.
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEIt is thought that Sub-section (6) covers the point which is referred to by my hon. and learned Friend the Solicitor-General; but, if it is necessary in any way to put more explicit words in in order to make it quite certain that the duty shall not be chargeable in the case of a disentailing deed—merely a disentailing deed—but shall be charged in the case of a re-settlement, then those words shall be put in. It is really not quite certain, under Sub-section (5), whether the case is not already provided for.
§ Mr. CAVEAre we to understand that it is intended to charge this duty upon the re-settlement of an estate?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEYes; that is so.
§ Mr. CAVEIf so, it is a very serious matter indeed. The point is raised directly by this Amendment, and I had intended to raise it later on. As everybody knows, estates are settled on the present owner for life with remainder to his issue; generally entailed. It is a common practice when the eldest son comes of age to have a re-settlement under which the eldest son gets an immediate allowance, and the estate is then re-settled upon the father for life, and then upon the son for life, and then upon the issue of the son. The result, of course, is to make the son, instead of being a tenant-in-tail, a life-tenant after his father's death, so that the estate remains in the family. I believe it is a beneficial practice, and one that has saved many inheritances from being spent by young men when prematurely entrusted with large fortunes, and it is adopted throughout the country with regard to large estates and some smaller estates, and I have not heard any one objection to the practice, but I have heard a great many who said it is a beneficial practice to families and to the community at large. The effect of the Bill, without this Amendment, would be that on the re-settlement of an estate worth £100,000, 474 £1,000 would have to be paid in Stamp Duty. That is absolutely prohibitive. Taking a large estate of £200,000, Stamp Duty amounting to £2,000 would have to be paid for every re-settlement of an estate upon future members of the family in order to prevent it from being sold, and not only to protect it from being sold, for that could be done in spite of re-settlement, but to protect the remainder-man of 21 or 22 years of age from selling his reversion before he comes of age. We all know it can be done. The remainder-man-in-tail can sell his future estate, subject to certain limitations, without the assent of his father and without the assent of anyone. The case is common of young men who at a certain age are entitled to a large estate anticipating their fortune. It is a very serious matter to put an end to this practice. I do not know whether it is deliberately done or not. If it is deliberately done it is the greatest mistake that was ever made; if it is done inadvertently, of course, we shall have some Amendment, but I would like to point out that it would be a revolution to put upon the practice of re-settlements a prohibitive charge. I do hope the matter will be reconsidered. It is a very serious thing indeed, and certainly a change which ought not to be made. I strongly support the Amendment.
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThe hon. and learned Gentleman has made, as he always does, a very reasoned and a very reasonable speech. But I think he has not considered the whole facts of the case. There is no intention on the part of the Government by means of statute to put an end to the settlement that is necessary in the case of the re-settlement of landed property, but it is thought fair that where adequate protection is given there should be some contribution from that estate. What is the extent of that contribution? Take the case which the hon. and learned Gentleman put. He took the case of an estate worth £100,000, which, under this proposal, would have to contribute £1,000. How often would that have to be done? It would be done in the ordinary average life of father, son, and grandson, which would be about once every 42 years. That is to say, a re-settlement will cover the course of two lives. [An HON. MEMBER: "It would have to be settled for every life."] Not for every life. I do not think it would be necessary, but I am prepared to argue it even upon the term of years suggested by the hon. Member opposite. Supposing it went on every 24 years, that 475 is after all a very short period of individual life. Say it went on every 24 or 25 years. Then in the course of a century the estate would pay about 4 per cent. I really think in the case of considerable landed property value £100,000, to require it to pay every 25 or 30 years a sum of £1,000, or 1 per cent., is really not a very serious tax upon it.
§ Mr. PRETYMANThat is perfectly childish.
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThe hon. Gentleman uses strong and vehement language, but settled estate, like every other form of property, ought to be required to make a contribution to the State.
§ Mr. PRETYMANI am sorry if I misled the hon. Gentleman in making use of a rather strong observation. My reference was not to the taxation suggested, but to the idea of treating this particular tax as if it were the only duty payable. I do repeat the expression that it is childish to talk of this or that particular burden as not being excessive as if it was the only burden which the estate has to bear. I tell the right hon. Gentleman from my own experience that agricultural landed property under the present law has to bear a total burden amounting in many cases to the whole income of the property when the expenses and maintenance are taken into consideration. Here are enormous additional burdens in the aggregate which are placed upon it. Each one in itself may not be crushing, but in the aggregate they are crushing, and the result in a great many cases may be that the right hon. Gentleman will find that instead of over-estimating what these revenues are going to give him he under-estimates them because this duty will not pay at all, as the property will be disentailed. Is that the object of the Government? They have denied that is what they are doing. I heard signs of approval when I said that was the object which would be attained. After all, what we have to do with is, not what the Government's objects are, but what their legislation is going to produce.
I venture to suggest that those who, like my hon. Friend who spoke last and others of us who have actual knowledge and acquaintance with agricultural estates, are better judges as to what the effect of this legislation is likely to be than hon. Members who are theorists in the matter, and 476 who "compartment" their legislation, and whose horizon is limited to the particular item under discussion, and who do not seem to see in a matter like this beyond the radius of their own hats. I say that it is a most serious matter, and I desire to emphasise most strongly the remarks made by my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston against interfering with the present practice of the settlement of landed estates. The effect would be a very serious one, and whatever the object of the Government may or may not be, it will largely tend to put an end to the settlement of landed property.
§ Mr. COURTENAY WARNERI think the speech which has been made by the hon. and gallant Gentleman is rather severe. A great many of us who have had some experience not only in ordinary estates, but of estates which are tied up, find these estates are injured very often quite as much by the strain in the tying up. In spite of the powers given of selling with the consent of the Court of Chancery, the enormous damage which is done to the property by tying up is quite as great in the opinion of some of the holders of land and quite as bad as the damage that might be done by a spendthrift. For the benefit of landowners throughout the country it would be a great thing to do away with this system of tying up, which is a relic of the feudal times, and which is thoroughly ill-adapted to the work of the estates proper. Of course, hon. Gentlemen opposite are attached to the old system and do not like any interference with it, but whether it is the object of the Government or not, anything that discourages in any way the tying up of estates would have my sympathy and that of a great many landlords throughout the country.
Colonel WILLIAMSIf settled land is feudal, unjust and bad, why not put a much higher duty upon it, and say the settlement of land is wrong, and make it penal altogether?
§ Mr. COURTENAY WARNERI never advocate revolution!
Colonel WILLIAMSThat is exactly what all this taxation does. It advocates revolution; it wants to do away with settlements. I believe in settlements, and I very much deplore this extra tax on settled property. If settled property is right, why tax it at all? The right hon. Gentleman opposite said settled property should bear 477 its just share of the burdens of the country. I do not think that anybody wants to get out of bearing his just share of the burdens of the country, but why should so much be required from settled property? The man to whom the property belongs may pay his fair share of the taxation of the country. Why should the settlement be hampered by this extra 1 per cent.? I know from my personal experience that this extra tax is a very considerable extra burden, and will make these Land Taxes a crushing burden.
§ Lord ROBERT CECILI myself am somewhat of a heretic upon the question of settled property, although I do not agree with the violent denunciations we hear from the other side. I doubt myself whether it is such a great advantage as some of my hon. Friends think, but that does not in the least make me more in favour of this proposal. It seems to me that what we have to do is to consider this Bill as a Revenue Bill. The question is whether it is fair to tax such re-settlements as if they were gifts inter vivos. We have nothing to do with whether the settlement is good or bad, and I should certainly be violently opposed to the Government's proposal more violently than I am if I thought they were trying to destroy
§ settlement by this rather petty form of persecution. But why I do not think it is right to tax settlement is this. They are not gifts inter vivos in any sense of the word. They are not going to convey anything to the recipient. Nobody gets any advantage by this, and it is merely a device, bad or good, for securing a particular method of the devolution of land. That being so, upon the mere ground that you are going to tax a gift, you cannot justify this tax. Can you justify it on the ground that it is necessary to discourage the avoidance of the Death Duties? Equally you cannot, because they will be payable just the same. It appears to me that on neither of the grounds on which this tax can be justified, from a revenue point of view, can it be right to tax a re-settlement, and on that ground I shall support the Amendment.
§ Mr. RADFORDI ask for leave to withdraw my Amendment.
§ Leave to withdraw withheld.
§ Question put, "That those words be there inserted."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 66; Noes, 217.
479| Division No. 703.] | AYES. | [7.35 p.m. |
| Acland-Hood, Rt. Hon. Sir Alex. F. | Fell, Arthur | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Fletcher, J. S. | Peel, Hon. W. R. W. |
| Balcarres, Lord | Forster, Henry William | Pretyman, E. G. |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Gardner, Ernest | Randles, Sir John Scurrah |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Hamilton, Marquess of | Ratcliff, Major R. F. |
| Baring, Capt. Hon. G. (Winchester) | Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford) | Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel |
| Beckett, Hon. Gervase | Harrison-Broadley, H. B. | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Bridgeman, W. Clive | Hills, J. W. | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) |
| Brotherton, Edward Allen | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Rutherford, Watson (Liverpool) |
| Burdett-Coutts, W. | Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H. | Sheffield, Sir Berkeley George D. |
| Butcher, Samuel Henry | Keswick, William | Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Lanark) |
| Campbell, Rt. Hon. J. H. M. | Kimber, Sir Henry | Tuke, Sir John Batty |
| Carlile, E. Hildred | King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull) | Valentia, Viscount |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H. | Lambton, Hon. Frederick William | Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire) |
| Castlereagh, Viscount | Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham) | Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid) |
| Cave, George | Lockwood, Rt. Hon. Lt.-Col. A. R. | Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.) | Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham) | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Coates, Major E. F. (Lewisham) | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred | Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart- |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | MacCaw, William J. MacGeagh | Younger, George |
| Courthope, G. Loyd | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | |
| Craik, Sir Henry | Mildmay, Francis Bingham | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Hunt and Sir William Bull. |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Morrison-Bell, Captain | |
| Faber, George Denison (York) | Oddy, John James | |
| NOES. | ||
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Barnard, E. B. | Black, Arthur W. |
| Ainsworth, John Stirling | Barnes, G. N. | Boulton, A. C. F. |
| Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch) | Barran, Sir John Nicholson | Bowerman, C. W. |
| Allen, Charles P. (Stroud) | Beaumont, Hon. Hubert | Branch, James |
| Ashton, Thomas Gair | Beck, A. Cecil | Brigg, John |
| Atherley-Jones, L. | Bell, Richard | Bright, J. A. |
| Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth) | Benn, Sir J. Williams (Devonport) | Brunner, J. F. L. (Lancs., Leigh) |
| Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.) | Benn, W. (Tower Hamlets, St. Geo.) | Burns, Rt. Hon. John |
| Balfour, Robert (Lanark) | Bennett, E. N. | Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas |
| Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight) | Berridge, T. H. D. | Buxton, Rt. Hon. Sydney Charles |
| Barker, Sir John | Bethell, Sir J. H. (Essex, Romford) | Byles, William Pollard |
| Barlow, Sir John E. (Somerset) | Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon) | Causton, Rt. Hon. Richard Knight |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Reddy, M. |
| Chance, Frederick William | Isaacs, Rufus Daniel | Rees, J. D. |
| Channing, Sir Francis Allston | Jardine, Sir J. | Richards, T. F. (Wolverhampton, W.) |
| Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R. | Jenkins, J. | Ridsdale, E. A. |
| Cleland, J. W. | Johnson, W. (Nuneaton) | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Cough, William | Jones, Sir D. Brynmor (Swansea) | Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) |
| Cobbold, Felix Thornley | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Robinson, S. |
| Collins, Stephen (Lambeth) | Kekewich, Sir George | Robson, Sir William Snowdon |
| Collins, Sir Wm. J. (St. Pancras, W.) | King, Alfred John (Knutsford) | Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) |
| Corbett, C. H. (Sussex, E. Grinstead) | Laidlaw, Robert | Rogers, F. E. Newman |
| Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster) | Rose, Sir Charles Day |
| Cotton, Sir H. J. S. | Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester) | Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter |
| Cowan, W. H. | Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis | Russell, Rt. Hon. T. W. |
| Cox, Harold | Lehmann, R. C. | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth) | Lever, A. Levy (Essex, Harwich) | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Crosfield, A. H. | Levy, Sir Maurice | Schwann, Sir C. E. (Manchester) |
| Crossley, William J. | Lewis, John Herbert | Seddon, J. |
| Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David | Seely, Colonel |
| Davies, Timothy (Fulham) | Lundon, T. | Sherwell, Arthur James |
| Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.) | Lupton, Arnold | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Dickinson, W. H. (St. Pancras, N.) | Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs) | Snowden, P. |
| Duckworth, Sir James | Mackarness, Frederic C. | Soares, Ernest J. |
| Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | Maclean, Donald | Stanley, Hon. A. Lyulph (Cheshire) |
| Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley) | Macpherson, J. T. | Steadman, W. C. |
| Dunne, Major E. Martin (Walsall) | MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.) | Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal) |
| Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor) | MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.) | Strachey, Sir Edward |
| Erskine, David C. | M'Callum, John M. | Straus, B. S. (Mile End) |
| Essex, R. W. | McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald | Summerbell, T. |
| Evans, Sir S. T. | M'Laren, H. D. (Stafford, W.) | Taylor, John W. (Durham) |
| Everett, R. Lacey | Maddison, Frederick | Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire) |
| Falconer, J. | Mallet, Charles E. | Thomasson, Franklin |
| Ferguson, R. C. Munro | Markham, Arthur Basil | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| Findlay, Alexander | Marnham, F. J. | Thorne, William (West Ham) |
| Fullerton, Hugh | Massie, J. | Tomkinson, James |
| Gibb, James (Harrow) | Masterman, C. F. G. | Toulmin, George |
| Gibson, J. P. | Meagher, Michael | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Gill, A. H. | Menzies, Sir Walter | Verney, F. W. |
| Ginnell, L. | Middlebrook, William | Wadsworth, J. |
| Gladstone, Rt. Hon. Herbert John | Molteno, Percy Alport | Walker, H. De R. (Leicester) |
| Glendinning, R. G. | Montagu, Hon. E. S. | Walsh, Stephen |
| Glover, Thomas | Montgomery, H. G. | Walters, John Tudor |
| Gooch, George Peabody (Bath) | Murray, Capt. Hon. A. C. (Kincard.) | Wardie, George J. |
| Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward | Myer, Horatio | Warner, Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Gulland, John W. | Nannetti, Joseph P. | Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan) |
| Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale) | Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw) | Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney) |
| Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) | Nicholls, George | White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire) |
| Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worcester) | Nussey, Sir Willans | White, Sir Luke (York, E. R.) |
| Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire) | Nuttall, Harry | Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P. |
| Hart-Davies, T. | O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth) | Wilkie, Alexander |
| Harwood, George | Parker, James (Halifax) | Williams, J. (Glamorgan) |
| Haworth, Arthur A. | Partington, Oswald | Williams, W. Llewelyn (Carmarthen) |
| Hedges, A. Paget | Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek) | Williamson, Sir A. |
| Helme, Norval Watson | Pearson, W. H. M. (Suffold, Eye) | Wilson, Hon. G. G. (Hull, W.) |
| Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton) | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W. R.) |
| Henderson, J. McD. (Aberdeen, W.) | Pickersgill, Edward Hare | Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton) |
| Herbert, Col. Sir Ivor (Mon. S.) | Pirie, Duncan V. | Wood, T. M'Kinnon |
| Higham, John Sharp | Pointer, J. | Yoxall, Sir James Henry |
| Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Pollard, Dr. G. H. | |
| Holland, Sir William Henry | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) | |
| Hooper, A. G. | Radford, G. H. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. Joseph Pease and Captain Norton. |
| Hope, W. H. B. (Somerset, N.) | Raphael, Herbert H. | |
| Horniman, Emslie John | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (Gloucester) |
§ Mr. CAVE moved, in Sub-section (1), to insert after the word "vivos" the words "not being a disentailing assurance, or an appointment under a special power of appointment."
§ Sir SAMUEL EVANSI regret that the Government cannot accept this Amendment. A general appointment is one thing but a special appointment is quite different.
§ Sir EDWARD CARSONI put it to the Solicitor-General that this is not giving any gift at all.
§ Sir SAMUEL EVANSIf it is a case of that kind, it would be covered by the words of Sub-section (6).
§ Mr. CAVEI think the words ought to be inserted in a wider form than has been suggested. The estate may be limited by a future deed, which, of course, will bear the proper Stamp Duty. I think it would be monstrous to charge an ad valorem duty on appointments under special powers. A special power of appointment may arise where the property is settled. The property is settled among children, and the only power of the father is to select among 481 the children. You are not giving the property to new persons, but only redividing it. The property has already borne duty, and it would be monstrous, when you are only redividing it, that it should be charged an ad valorem duty. That is why I want to put these words in.
§ Mr. WATSON RUTHERFORDI hope my hon. and learned Friend will persist in his Amendment. It surely cannot be the intention of the Government to exact two settlement duties on what is practically the same transaction, and that will be the case if the Amendment were not adopted. With regard to the point as to the special power of appointment the intention is clear. Take the case of property which has to go to the children of A in such manner as A by will may appoint. He may execute a deed whereby one of the children comes into some part of the property at once. Under this Clause, as it stands, there would be no relief under Sub-section (6), because it would be perfectly clear the beneficial interest would pass in the property dealt with, and it would, therefore, be charged with the duty. When property has been settled and has paid all the duties it ought to pay and when it has to come to certain children, it cannot be the intention of the Government to impose this heavy duty again on the mere division of a property.
§ Mr. CAVEWill the Solicitor-General accept these words, either here or in Subsection (6): "Disentailing assurance not limiting a new estate."
§ Sir SAMUEL EVANSI think it had better come in Sub-section (6), because that is where the exemptions are made.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Mr. CAVE moved, in Sub-section (1), after the word "vivos" ["voluntary disposition inter vivos"], to insert the words "not being a conveyance or transfer for a charitable or other public purpose."
I want to exempt conveyances for charitable and other public purposes. Supposing land or other property is given by deed to charities, the Bill taxes it 1 per cent. I want to exempt that. You could not ask the donor not only to give the property, but also to pay the Stamp Duty upon conveyance. He would expect the Stamp Duty to be paid by the charity, and that would be very hard upon the charity. They have other uses for their funds, and I think they ought to be exempt from this new Stamp Duty. The 482 same applies to conveyances for public purposes, and I think they ought to be exempt.
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEA somewhat similar Amendment was moved the other day, when it was suggested that gifts made for charitable and national purposes should be exempt. The Government were unable to meet hon. Gentlemen opposite on that occasion, although they recognised there was some force in their argument, and they are also quite unable to meet them here.
§ Sir E. CARSONDo I understand that if a man transfers £5,000 stock to a hospital, 1 per cent. would have to be paid?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThat is so.
§ Sir E. CARSONThen, I think it would be much better to sell out and give the money.
§ Mr. WATSON RUTHERFORDTake such an institution as the Liverpool University, to which many donors have given buildings and lands. Hitherto it has passed with a 10s. stamp, because no consideration passes between the parties in the way of money. If I understand the effect of the Bill, unless this Amendment is adopted, there will be 1 per cent. duty payable on the value of that property. We had a case the other day where a man gave land and buildings to the value of £15,000. Who is to pay the duty of £150? The university is hard up for money, and struggling along doing its best. I think it would be a very great mistake to impose any tax whatever upon gifts of that description, and I support the Amendment.
§ Mr. STUART-WORTLEYThere is the case where money has been subscribed to build a church or a chapel. The property is temporarily vested in trustees. Later, there is a further transfer of the property to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, or to the governing body of the denomination. Is that second transaction to bear duty? In my opinion it is not saved by Subsection (6). The second transfer is a mere transfer for administrating purposes, and I would ask the Government whether it is saved by Sub-section (6) or whether it is not necessary to prevent it being hit by a second ad valorem duty?
§ Question put, "That those words be there inserted."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 59; Noes, 206.
485| Division No. 704.] | AYES. | [7.58 p.m. |
| Acland-Hood, Rt. Hon. Sir Alex. F. | Fletcher, J. S. | Oddy, John James |
| Balcarres, Lord | Gardner, Ernest | Peel, Hon. W. R. W. |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Guinness, Hon. R. (Haggerston) | Pretyman, E. G. |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Hamilton, Marquess of | Randies, Sir John Scurrah |
| Baring, Capt Hon. G. (Winchester) | Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford) | Ratcliff, Major R. F. |
| Bridgeman, W. Clive | Harrison-Broadley, H. B. | Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel |
| Brotherton, Edward Allen | Hay, Hon. Claude George | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Brunner, J. F. L. (Lancs., Leigh) | Healy, Maurice (Cork) | Rutherford, John (Lancashire) |
| Burdett-Coutts, W. | Healy, Timothy Michael | Rutherford, Watson (Liverpool) |
| Campbell, Rt. Hon. J. H. M. | Hills, J. W. | Sheffield, Sir Berkeley George D. |
| Carlile, E. Hildred | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Tuke, Sir John Batty |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H. | Hunt, Rowland | Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire) |
| Castlereagh, Viscount | Keswick, William | Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid) |
| Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.) | Kimber, Sir Henry | Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Clyde, J. Avon | King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull) | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Lambton, Hon. Frederick William | Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart- |
| Courthope, G. Loyd | Lockwood, Rt. Hon. Lt.-Col. A. R. | Younger, George |
| Craik, Sir Henry | Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham) | |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | MacCaw, William J. MacGeagh | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Cave and Sir Wm. Bull. |
| Faber, George Denison (York) | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | |
| Fell, Arthur | Mildmay, Francis Bingham |
| NOES. | ||
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Dunne, Major E. Martin (Walsall) | Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs) |
| Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch) | Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor) | Maclean, Donald |
| Allen, Charles P. (Stroud) | Elibank, Master of | Macpherson, J. T. |
| Ashton, Thomas Gair | Erskine, David C. | MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.) |
| Atherley-Jones, L. | Essex, R. W. | M'Callum, John M. |
| Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth) | Evans, Sir S. T. | McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald |
| Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.) | Everett, R. Lacey | M'Laren, H. D. (Stafford, W.) |
| Balfour, Robert (Lanark) | Falconer, J. | Maddison, Frederick |
| Barker, Sir John | Ferguson, R. C. Munro | Mallet, Charles E. |
| Barnard, E. B. | Findlay, Alexander | Markham, Arthur Basil |
| Barnes, G. N. | Fullerton, Hugh | Marnham, F. J. |
| Barran, Sir John Nicholson | Gibb, James (Harrow) | Massie, J. |
| Beaumont, Hon. Hubert | Gibson, J. P. | Masterman, C. F. G. |
| Beck, A. Cecil | Gill, A. H. | Menzies, Sir Walter |
| Bell, Richard | Gladstone, Rt. Hon. Herbert John | Middlebrook, William |
| Benn, Sir J. Williams (Devonport) | Glendinning, R. G. | Molteno Percy Alport |
| Benn, W. (Tower Hamlets, St. Geo.) | Glover, Thomas | Montagu, Hon. E. S. |
| Bennett, E. N. | Gooch, George Peabody (Bath) | Montgomery, H. G. |
| Berridge, T. H. D. | Gulland, John W. | Murray, Capt. Hon. A. C. (Kincard.) |
| Bethell, Sir J. H. (Essex, Romford) | Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale) | Myer, Horatio |
| Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon) | Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worcester) | Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw) |
| Black, Arthur W. | Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire) | Nicholls, George |
| Boulton, A. C. F. | Hart-Davies, T. | Nussey, Sir Willans |
| Bowerman, C. W. | Harwood, George | Nuttall, Harry |
| Branch, James | Haworth, Arthur A. | O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth) |
| Brigg, John | Hedges, A. Paget | Parker, James (Halifax) |
| Bright, J. A. | Helme, Norval Watson | Partington, Oswald |
| Burns, Rt. Hon. John | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek) |
| Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas | Henderson, J. McD. (Aberdeen, W.) | Pearson, W. H. M. (Suffolk, Eye) |
| Buxton, Rt. Hon. Sydney Charles | Herbert, Col. Sir Ivor (Mon. S.) | Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton) |
| Byles, William Pollard | Higham, John Sharp | Pickersgill, Edward Hare |
| Causton, Rt. Hon. Richard Knight | Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Pointer, J. |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick | Holland, Sir William Henry | Pollard, Dr. G. H. |
| Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R. | Hooper, A. G. | Priestley, Arthur (Grantham) |
| Cleland, J. W. | Hope, W. H. B. (Somerset, N.) | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) |
| Clough, William | Horniman, Emslie John | Radford, G. H. |
| Cobbold, Felix Thornley | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Raphael, Herbert H. |
| Collins, Stephen (Lambeth) | Isaacs, Rufus Daniel | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (Gloucester) |
| Collins, Sir Wm. J. (St. Pancras, W.) | Jardine, Sir J. | Rees, J. D. |
| Corbett, C. H. (Sussex, E. Grinstead) | Jenkins, J. | Richards, T. F. (Wolverhampton, W.) |
| Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Johnson, W. (Nuneaton) | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Cory, Sir Clifford John | Jones, Sir D. Brynmor (Swansea) | Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) |
| Cotton, Sir H. J. S. | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Robinson, S. |
| Cowan, W. H. | Kekewich, Sir George | Robson, Sir William Snowdon |
| Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth) | King, Alfred John (Knutsford) | Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) |
| Crosfield, A. H. | Laidlaw, Robert | Roe, Sir Thomas |
| Crossley, William J. | Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster) | Rogers, F. E. Newman |
| Dalziel, Sir James Henry | Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester) | Rose, Sir Charles Day |
| Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis | Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter |
| Davies, Timothy (Fulham) | Lehmann, R. C. | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.) | Lever, A. Levy (Essex, Harwich) | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Dickinson, W. H. (St. Pancras, N.) | Levy, Sir Maurice | Schwann, Sir C. E. (Manchester) |
| Duckworth, Sir James | Lewis, John Herbert | Seddon, J. |
| Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David | Seely, Colonel |
| Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley) | Lupton, Arnold | Shaw, Sir Charles E. (Stafford) |
| Sherwell, Arthur James | Tomkinson, James | Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P. |
| Shipman, Dr. John G. | Toulmin, George | Wilkie, Alexander |
| Snowden, P. | Trevelyan, Charles Philips | Williams, J. (Glamorgan) |
| Soares, Ernest J. | Verney, F. W. | Williams, W. Llewelyn (Carmarthen) |
| Stanley, Hon. A. Lyulph (Cheshire) | Wadsworth, J. | Williamson, Sir A. |
| Steadman, W. C. | Walker, H. De R. (Leicester) | Wilson, Hon. G. G. (Hull, W.) |
| Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal) | Walsh, Stephen | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W. R.) |
| Strachey, Sir Edward | Walters, John Tudor | Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton) |
| Straus, B. S. (Mile End) | Wardle, George J. | Wood, T. M'Kinnon |
| Summerbell, T. | Waring, Walter | Yoxall, Sir James Henry |
| Taylor, John W. (Durham) | Warner, Thomas Courtenay T. | |
| Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.) | Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan) | |
| Thomasson, Franklin | Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. Joseph Pease and Captain Norton. |
| Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) | White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire) | |
| Thorne, William (West Ham) | White, Sir Luke (York, E. R.) |
§ Sir F. BANBURY moved, at the end of Sub-section (1), to insert the words, "Provided that where any conveyance or transfer has been charged with duty under this Section, and where the donor or transferor dies within such period that the property so conveyed or transferred is included as property passing on the death of the deceased the sum paid as Stamp Duty shall be deducted from the Estate Duty, if any, levied in respect of such property."
The object of this is to ensure that where a man gives property away during his lifetime, and has to pay 1 per cent. Stamp Duty on it and then dies within three years of the date of the gift, his executors shall be allowed to deduct that 1 per cent. from the Estate Duty, if any, that may be due. That seems to be a reasonable Amendment, which does not need to be argued.
§ Mr. LLOYD-GEORGEI regret I cannot see my way to accept this Amendment. I do not think it is really a case for the deduction of Stamp Duties. These gifts are made with a view of avoiding the Death Duties, and if a person is to be in a position to make such a gift knowing that his estate will suffer in no event, it will be a great inducement for him to enter into transactions of this kind. In other countries similar and, indeed, very high duties are imposed in these cases in order that they may act as a deterrent. May I make an appeal to hon. Members opposite. I think I have some right to complain. I consented to adjourn early last night on an assurance that we should be allowed to get these clauses by seven o'clock, and I asked that that should be made a firm offer, as a previous arrangement had broken down. Of course, I do not expect seven o'clock to be literally adhered to, but now we are over an hour beyond that. I agree, too, we must make some allowance for the fact that several hon. Members below the Gangway inter- 486 vened unexpectedly; but I think the time has now come for me to make an appeal in the interests of Parliamentary understandings which during an experience of 20 years I have seen made and adhered to without complaint. I do hope we shall be allowed to get on.
§ Mr. PRETYMANI entirely assent to the general statement made by the right hon. Gentleman, but may I point out that we above the Gangway are not responsible for the prolongation of the Debate. There was an unexpected intervention lasting nearly two hours. As a result of that unexpected discussion, I communicated with the Patronage Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Joseph Pease), and informed him it was quite impossible for us to conclude the discussion in the time arranged. It was understood we were to be allowed three and a half or four hours for that discussion, and that that would take us up to seven o'clock.
§ Mr. LLOYD-GEORGEThe words used were seven o'clock. I appeal to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Wellington Division of Somerset (Sir A. Acland-Hood) if that is not so. I know how scrupulously he adheres to these arrangements, and I will willingly accept his interpretation of the arrangement.
§ Sir A. ACLAND-HOODThe right hon. Gentleman is quite right. I said I thought the Debate would last until seven o'clock, and that would allow three and a half hours for it. The information given me was that three and a half hours would be sufficient. But Members of another party, for which I am not responsible, intervened. I cannot be expected to answer for all sections of the House.
§ Question put, "That those words be there inserted."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 51; Noes, 192.
489| Division No. 705.] | AYES. | [8.15 p.m. |
| Acland-Hood, Rt. Hon. Sir Alex. F. | Fletcher, J. S. | Pretyman, E. G. |
| Balcarres, Lord | Gardner, Ernest | Randles, Sir John Scurrah |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Hamilton, Marquess of | Ratcliff, Major R. F. |
| Baring, Capt. Hon. G. (Winchester) | Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford) | Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel |
| Bridgeman, W. Clive | Hay, Hon. Claude George | Ridsdale, E. A. |
| Brotherton, Edward Allen | Healy, Maurice (Cork) | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Burdett-Coutts, W. | Hills, J. W. | Rutherford, Watson (Liverpool) |
| Carlile, E. Hildred | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Sheffield, Sir Berkeley George D. |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H. | Keswick, William | Tuke, Sir John Batty |
| Castlereagh, Viscount | Kimber, Sir Henry | Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire) |
| Cave, George | Lambton, Hon. Frederick William | Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid) |
| Clyde, J. Avon | Lockwood, Rt. Hon. Lt.-Col. A. R. | Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | MacCaw, William J. MacGeagh | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Courthope, G. Loyd | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart- |
| Craik, Sir Henry | Mildmay, Francis Bingham | Younger, George |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Oddy, John James | |
| Faber, George Denison (York) | Parker, Sir Gilbert (Gravesend) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Sir |
| Fell, Arthur | Peel, Hon. W. R. W. | F. Banbury and Sir W. Bull. |
| NOES. | ||
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Falconer, J. | Middlebrook, William |
| Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch) | Findlay, Alexander | Molteno, Percy Alport |
| Allen, Charles P. (Stroud) | Fuller, John Michael F. | Montgomery, H. G. |
| Ashton, Thomas Gair | Fullerton, Hugh | Murray, Capt. Hon. A. C. (Kincard.) |
| Atherley-Jones, L. | Gibb, James (Harrow) | Myer, Horatio |
| Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth) | Gibson, J. P. | Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw) |
| Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.) | Gill, A. H. | Norman, Sir Henry |
| Balfour, Robert (Lanark) | Gladstone, Rt. Hon. Herbert John | Nuttall, Harry |
| Barker, Sir John | Glendinning, R. G. | O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth) |
| Barnard, E. B. | Glover, Thomas | Parker, James (Halifax) |
| Barnes, G. N. | Gooch, George Peabody (Bath) | Partington, Oswald |
| Barran, Sir John Nicholson | Gulland, John W. | Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek) |
| Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.) | Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale) | Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton) |
| Beaumont, Hon. Hubert | Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worcester) | Pirie, Duncan V. |
| Beck, A. Cecil | Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire) | Pointer, J. |
| Bell, Richard | Harwood, George | Pollard, Dr. G. H. |
| Benn, Sir J. Williams (Devonport) | Haworth, Arthur A. | Priestley, Arthur (Grantham) |
| Benn, W. (Tower Hamlets, St. Geo.) | Hedges, A. Paget | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) |
| Berridge, T. H. D. | Helme, Norval Watson | Radford, G. H. |
| Bethell, Sir J. H. (Essex, Romford) | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Raphael, Herbert H. |
| Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Malden) | Henderson, J. McD. (Aberdeen, W.) | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (Gloucester) |
| Black, Arthur W. | Herbert, Col. Sir Ivor (Mon. S.) | Rees, J. D. |
| Boulton, A. C. F. | Higham, John Sharp | Richards, T. F. (Wolverhampton, W.) |
| Bowerman, C. W. | Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Branch, James | Holland, Sir William Henry | Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) |
| Brigg, John | Hooper, A. G. | Robinson, S. |
| Bright, J. A. | Hope, W. H. B. (Somerset, N.) | Robson, Sir William Snowdon |
| Brunner, J. F. L. (Lancs., Leigh) | Horniman, Emslie John | Roe, Sir Thomas |
| Burns, Rt. Hon. John | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Rogers, F. E. Newman |
| Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas | Jardine, Sir J. | Rose, Sir Charles Day |
| Buxton, Rt. Hon. Sydney Charles | Jenkins, J. | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Byles, William Pollard | Johnson, W. (Nuneaton) | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Causton, Rt. Hon. Richard Knight | Jones, Sir D. Brynmor (Swansea) | Schwann, Sir C. E. (Manchester) |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Seddon, J. |
| Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R. | Kekewich, Sir George | Shaw, Sir Charles E. (Stafford) |
| Cleland, J. W. | King, Alfred John (Knutsford) | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Clough, William | Laidlaw, Robert | Snowden, P. |
| Cobbold, Felix Thornley | Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster) | Scares, Ernest J. |
| Collins, Sir Wm. J. (St. Pancras, W.) | Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester) | Stanley, Hon. A. Lyulph (Cheshire) |
| Corbett, C. H. (Sussex, E. Grinstead) | Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis | Steadman, W. C. |
| Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Lehmann, R. C. | Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal) |
| Cotton, Sir H. J. S. | Lever, A. Levy (Essex, Harwich) | Straus, B. S. (Mile End) |
| Cowan, W. H. | Levy, Sir Maurice | Summerbell, T. |
| Crosfield, A. H. | Lewis, John Herbert | Taylor, John W. (Durham) |
| Crossley, William J. | Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David | Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.) |
| Dalziel, Sir James Henry | Lupton, Arnold | Thomasson, Franklin |
| Davies, David (Montgomery, C.) | Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs) | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Maclean, Donald | Thorne, William (West Ham) |
| Davies, Timothy (Fulham) | Macpherson, J. T. | Tomkinson, James |
| Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.) | MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.) | Toulmin, George |
| Dickinson, W. H. (St. Pancras, N.) | M'Callum, John M. | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Duckworth, Sir James | McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald | Wadsworth, J. |
| Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | M'Laren, H. D. (Stafford, W.) | Walker, H. De R. (Leicester) |
| Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley) | Maddison, Frederick | Walsh, Stephen |
| Dunne, Major E. Martin (Walsall) | Mallet, Charles E. | Walters, John Tudor |
| Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor) | Markham, Arthur Basil | Wardle, George J. |
| Elibank, Master of | Marnham, F. J. | Waring, Walter |
| Essex, R. W. | Massie, J. | Warner, Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Evans, Sir S. T. | Masterman, C. F. G. | Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan) |
| Everett, R. Lacey | Menzies, Sir Walter | Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney) |
| White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire) | Williams, W. Llewelyn (Carmarthen) | Wood, T. M'Kinnon |
| White, Sir Luke (York, E. R.) | Williamson, Sir A. | |
| Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P. | Wilson, Hon. G. G. (Hull, W.) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. Joseph Pease and Captain Norton. |
| Wilkie, Alexander | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W. R.) | |
| Williams, J. (Glamorgan) | Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton) |
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Mr. Caldwell)The Amendment in the name of the hon. Member for Cork—[To insert at end of Sub-section (1) the words "Provided that, in estimating such value, there shall be deducted the amount or value of any debt, money, or stock upon which Stamp Duty is chargeable and paid under Section fifty-seven of the principal Act"]—is outside the scope of the Clause. This Clause deals with gifts, and Section fifty-seven of the principal Act deals with debt.
§ Mr. MAURICE HEALYI think, Sir, you have misconceived the scope of my Amendment, which only carries out the intention of the Government on this Clause. I do not wish to extend what the Government desires; I only wish to secure that they shall not get more than they want. This Clause applies to voluntary dispositions, practically all the Clauses of the Stamp Act relating to conveyances on sale.
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANI quite understand the hon. and learned Member's point, but obviously the subject is not on this Clause specifically, and if it is to be gone into, it would have to be put down as a new clause.
§ Mr. MAURICE HEALYMay I again suggest to you, Sir, that Clause 53 as it stands applies for the purposes of the imposition of this duty on voluntary conveyances, all the sections of the Stamp Act which relate to conveyances on sale. That is quite clear. It provides that, "Any conveyance or transfer operating as a voluntary disposition inter vivos shall be chargeable with the like Stamp Duty as if it were a conveyance or transfer on sale, with the substitution in each case of the value of the property conveyed or transferred for the amount or value of the consideration for the sale." I am simply endeavouring to correct the wideness of that general enactment by providing that one of the clauses relating to conveyance on sale shall not apply. I do not see why that should not be in order.
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThat would have to be provided for by a new clause. When we are upon a special matter of this kind which will affect not merely voluntary dispositions, but others, it would have to be done by a new clause.
§ Mr. MAURICE HEALYThat objection does not at all apply to my second Amendment providing for the deduction of any Stamp Duty payable in respect of any charge or covenant created by the conveyance or transfer. Do I understand you, Sir, to rule against my second Amendment as well as my first?
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThe hon. Member's second Amendment is practically the same thing.
§ Mr. MAURICE HEALYOh, no; it is wholly different from the first Amendment, and is in no sort of way related to it. My first Amendment deals with a charge existing at the date of the transfer, and my second Amendment deals with a charge created by the transfer—a wholly different thing.
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANIf the hon. Member will proceed I will consider the point.
§ Mr. MAURICE HEALY wished to move, at the end of Sub-section (1), to insert the words "Provided that from the amount of the Stamp Duty there shall be deducted any Stamp Duty payable in respect of any charge or covenant created by or contained in the conveyance or transfer."
If a man conveys property worth £5,000 to his two sons he pays under this Clause a duty of 1 per cent., that is, £50. If he conveys the property to one of his sons and charges it with £2,500 there will be, first the duty of £50, and secondly there will be the duty of £1 5s. per cent. on the £2,000.
§ Mr. LLOYD-GEORGEThis is really a point which will involve a serious alteration in the general law, and it has been discussed over and over again. It means that you are to eliminate the charge before you arrive at the consideration money upon which you charge the stamp.
§ Mr. MAURICE HEALYThe right hon. Gentleman has entirely misconceived the position. I do not intend to raise the point which was discussed earlier in the evening. I am supposing that the property is free from any charge when the vendor makes his conveyance, but that he himself creates the charge.
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThat is really the same point, and the discussion on it would only be a repetition.
§ Amendment proposed: In Sub-section (5), to leave out the words "been made with a view of conferring," and to insert instead thereof the word "conferred."—[Sir F. Banbury.]
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEIn any case the words depend upon the previous words "in the opinion of the Commissioners." They are quite as capable of determining whether it is with a view of conferring or whether it actually confers.
§ Sir F. BANBURYSupposing the Commissioners think it has been done with a view of conferring benefit, and it is found that no benefit has been conferred. If my words are put in it limits it to the fact that a benefit has been conferred, whereas now it is left uncertain.
§ Mr. LLOYD-GEORGEI will consider the matter. I do not think there is any substance, but I will consult the draftsman about it.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Sir F. BANBURYI have an Amendment to insert at the end of the Subsection the words: "Provided that a conveyance or transfer made for a nominal consideration shall not be charged with duty under this Section where such conveyance or transfer is made to secure the repayment of an advance or loan." Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will give an undertaking on Report stage to insert these words, or words to carry out the object of the Amendment.
§ Mr. PRETYMAN moved, at the end of Sub-section (5), to insert the words, "or a disentailing assurance not limited to a new estate."
§ Mr. WATSON RUTHERFORDI hope the hon. and gallant Gentleman will not press it exactly in these words, because they were very hurriedly stated, and I do not think they are right. The intention of the Government is that a disentailing assurance should not pay duty. I am afraid if these words are used a lot of them will have to pay.
§ Mr. LLOYD-GEORGEThe intention of the Government is that they should not be charged. The best plan is to have these words inserted now, and we will have them amended afterwards if necessary.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Mr. MAURICE HEALYI have an Amendment on the Paper in Sub-section (6) after the first word "trustee" ["appointment of a new trustee "] to insert the words "whether the trust is expressed or implied."
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANWe have passed that part of the Sub-section, and we cannot go back upon it now.
§ Mr. MAURICE HEALYThen I shall move the Amendment in the form of a proviso at the end of the Sub-section. I beg to move the next Amendment I have on the Paper to insert after the words last inserted in Sub-section (6) the words "or from a trustee to a beneficiary." I understood from what the Solicitor-General said at an earlier period of the evening that he was disposed to accept these words.
§ Mr. LLOYD-GEORGEI think I can accept these words subject to consideration on Report.
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThey cannot be inserted here, but if the hon. Gentleman will bring them up on the Report stage they will be inserted.
§ Mr. MAURICE HEALYI will withdraw the Amendment on the assurance of the right hon. Gentleman that they will be inserted on Report.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Mr. MAURICE HEALYI beg to move to insert at the end of the Sub-section the words, "Provided that this Sub-section shall have operation whether the trust is expressed or implied."
§ Mr. LLOYD-GEORGEIf it is at all necessary I shall have these words inserted on Report.
§ Mr. MAURICE HEALYI thank you very much for that assurance, and I shall withdraw the Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Question put, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 192; Noes, 47.
493| Division No. 706.] | AYES. | [8.45 p.m. |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Ashton, Thomas Gair | Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.) |
| Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch) | Athertey-Jones, L. | Balfour, Robert (Lanark) |
| Allen, Charles P. (Stroud) | Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth) | Barker, Sir John |
| Barnard, E. B. | Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale) | Pirie, Duncan V. |
| Barnes, G. N. | Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worcester) | Pointer, J. |
| Barran, Sir John Nicholson | Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire) | Pollard, Dr. G. H. |
| Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.) | Hart-Davies, T. | Priestley, Arthur (Grantham) |
| Beaumont, Hon. Hubert | Harwood, George | Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) |
| Beck, A. Cecil | Haworth, Arthur A. | Radford, G. H. |
| Bell, Richard | Hedges, A. Paget | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (Gloucester) |
| Benn, Sir J. Williams (Devonport) | Helme, Norval Watson | Rees, J. D. |
| Benn, W. (Tower Hamlets, St. Geo.) | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Richards, T. F. (Wolverhampton, W.) |
| Berridge, T. H. D. | Henderson, J. McD. (Aberdeen, W.) | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Bethell, Sir J. H. (Essex, Romford) | Herbert, Col. Sir Ivor (Mon. S.) | Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) |
| Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon) | Higham, John Sharp | Robinson, S. |
| Black, Arthur W. | Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Robson, Sir William Snowdon |
| Boulton, A. C. F. | Holland, Sir William Henry | Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) |
| Bowerman, C. W. | Hooper, A. G. | Roe, Sir Thomas |
| Bramsdon, Sir T. A. | Hope, W. H. B. (Somerset, N.) | Rogers, F. E. Newman |
| Branch, James | Horniman, Emslie John | Rose, Sir Charles Day |
| Brigg, John | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Bright, J. A. | Jardine, Sir J. | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Brunner, J. F. L. (Lancs., Leigh) | Jenkins, J. | Schwann, Sir C. E. (Manchester) |
| Burns, Rt. Hon. John | Johnson, W. (Nuneaton) | Seddon, J. |
| Causton, Rt. Hon. Richard Knight | Jones, Sir D. Brynmor (Swansea) | Shaw, Sir Charles E. (Stafford) |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Sherwell, Arthur James |
| Channing, Sir Francis Allston | Kekewich, Sir George | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R. | King, Alfred John (Knutstord) | Snowden, P. |
| Cleland, J. W. | Laidlaw, Robert | Soares, Ernest J. |
| Clough, William | Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster) | Stanley, Hon. A. Lyulph (Cheshire) |
| Cobbold, Felix Thornley | Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester) | Steadman, W. C. |
| Collins, Sir Wm. J. (St. Pancras, W.) | Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis | Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal) |
| Corbett, C. H. (Sussex, E. Grinstead) | Lehmann, R. C. | Straus, B. S. (Mile End) |
| Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Lever, A. Levy (Essex, Harwich) | Summerbell, T. |
| Cory, Sir Clifford John | Levy, Sir Maurice | Taylor, John W. (Durham) |
| Cotton, Sir H. J. S. | Lewis, John Herbert | Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.) |
| Cowan, W. H. | Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David | Thomasson, Franklin |
| Crosfield, A. H. | Lupton, Arnold | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| Crossley, William J. | Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs) | Thorne, William (West Ham) |
| Dalziel, Sir James Henry | Maclean, Donald | Tomkinson, James |
| Davies, David (Montgomery Co.) | Macpherson, J. T. | Toulmin, George |
| Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.) | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Davies, Timothy (Fulham) | M'Callum, John M. | Wadsworth, J. |
| Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.) | McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald | Walker, H. De R. (Leicester) |
| Dickinson, W. H. (St. Pancras, N.) | M'Laren, H. D. (Stafford, W.) | Walsh, Stephen |
| Duckworth, Sir James | Maddison, Frederick | Walters, John Tudor |
| Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness) | Mallet, Charles E. | Wardle, George J. |
| Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley) | Markham, Arthur Basil | Waring, Walter |
| Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne) | Marnham, F. J. | Warner, Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Dunne, Major E. Martin (Walsall) | Massie, J. | Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan) |
| Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor) | Masterman, C. F. G. | Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney) |
| Essex, R. W. | Menzies, Sir Walter | White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire) |
| Everett, R. Lacey | Middlebrook, William | White, Sir Luke (York, E. R.) |
| Falconer, J. | Molteno, Percy Alport | Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P. |
| Findlay, Alexander | Montgomery, H. G. | Wilkie, Alexander |
| Fuller, John Michael F. | Murray, Capt. Hon. A. C. (Kincard.) | Williams, J. (Glamorgan) |
| Fullerton, Hugh | Myer, Horatio | Williams, W. Llewelyn (Carmarthen) |
| Gibb, James (Harrow) | Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw) | Williamson, Sir A. |
| Gibson, J. P. | Norman, Sir Henry | Wilson, Hon. G. G. (Hull, W.) |
| Gill, A. H. | Nuttall, Harry | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W. R.) |
| Gladstone, Rt. Hon. Herbert John | O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth) | Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton) |
| Glendinning, R. G. | Parker, James (Halifax) | Yoxall, Sir James Henry |
| Glover, Thomas | Partington, Oswald | |
| Gooch, George Peabody (Bath) | Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Joseph Pease and Captain Norton. |
| Gulland, John W. | Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton) | |
| NOES. | ||
| Acland-Hood, Hon. Sir Alex. F. | Fletcher, J. S. | Randles, Sir John Scurrah |
| Balcarres, Lord | Gardner, Ernest | Ratcliffe, Major R. F. |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Hamilton, Marquess of | Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel |
| Baring, Capt. Hon. G. (Winchester) | Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford) | Remnant, James Farquharson |
| Bridgeman, W. Clive | Hills, J. W. | Ridsdale, E. A. |
| Brotherton, Edward Allen | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Burdett-Coutts, W. | Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H. | Rutherford, Watson (Liverpool) |
| Carlile, E. Hildred | Keswick, William | Tuke, Sir John Batty |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H. | Kimber, Sir Henry | Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire) |
| Castlereagh, Viscount | Lambton, Hon. Frederick William | Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid) |
| Clyde, J. Avon | Lockwood, Rt. Hon. Lt.-Col. A. R. | Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Corbett, T. L. ((Down, North) | MacCaw, William J. MacGeagh | Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart- |
| Courthope, G. Loyd | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Younger, George |
| Craik, Sir Henry | Oddy, John James | |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Parker, Sir Gilbert (Gravesend) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Sir |
| Faber, George Denison (York) | Peel, Hon. W. R. W. | F. Banbury and Sir Wm. Bull. |
| Fell, Arthur | Pretyman, E. G. |