§ Twenty years shall be substituted for ten years as the limit of time for taking expenditure into account for the purposes of paragraph (b) of Sub-section two of Section sixteen of the principal Act.
§ Notwithstanding anything in Sub-section one of Section twenty-six of the principal Act the Commissioners may, on the request of the owner of any pieces of land which are contiguous, value those pieces of land together for the purposes of that Act, 982 although those pieces of land are under separate occupation, if they are satisfied that in the special circumstances of the case it is expedient to do so.—[Mr. Hobhouse.]
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause be read a second time."
§ The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Hobhouse)If the Committee will look at the Clause as it stands they will see that it has reference to Section 16 (2) of the principal Act. Under that Section the owner of the land which is included in any scheme of development, if he has incurred any expenditure upon roads or sewers, and only upon those two forms of expenditure, is entitled with respect to every £100 of expenditure on roads and sewers to claim that one acre shall be treated as developed land on which no Undeveloped Land Duty is 983 charged. I think it is clear that expenditure of that sort is not temporary, but is a permanent expenditure, and, that being the case, I think it is desirable to extend the benefit of the expenditure to a period longer than ten years. We propose to extend the period from ten years to twenty years, and to give owners in respect of every £100 of expenditure on roads and sewers an extended period of twenty years.
§ Mr. PRETYMANI am quite sure that the extension of the period is a concession very much desired. It really arises out of a promise made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to a deputation of agents he received, or at a conference with builders. So far as the actual proposal of the Government goes, while not desiring to detain the Committee with regard to it, yet I think I shall be in order in mentioning that Sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 16 of the Act appear to lay down perfectly clearly that the expenditure on roads and sewers shall be a deduction. I should like to call the right hon. Gentleman's attention to the fact that in administration there is in some cases a difference between what the valuers have termed capital expenditure and ordinary expenditure. Of course, it is obvious that it is impossible to differentiate between what is capital expenditure and what is not. Supposing the amount is £1,000, one man may construct his road in one year, while another may construct it by instalments. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will issue instructions with regard to the points, otherwise it might give rise to expense in the law courts. Another point on which we ought to be quite clear is that the Clause has reference to expenditure and the Undeveloped Land Duty. The assessment under which the Undeveloped Land Duty arises is taken every five years. But this expenditure is continuous, and, as in the case of Income Tax, although there is only a quinquennial assessment, yet where there is a clear claim for reduction or abatement, or where, on the other hand, there is an increase in the value of any property, immediate claim is made to have the assessment altered accordingly without waiting for the quinquennial assessment. But in the administration of this Clause the valuers or the Department are claiming that where an assessment for Increment Value Duty has once been made it cannot be altered for a further five years, and this abatement cannot be claimed in respect of expenditure which 984 is subsequently incurred until the next five years' period has arrived.
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEI see.
§ Mr. PRETYMANThe right hon. Gentleman understands?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSECertainly.
§ Mr. PRETYMANI am sure the right hon. Gentleman will agree with me that these points are matters of administration. As far as the intention of this House went it was that this should be an exemption of one acre for every £100 of expenditure for roads and sewers, irrespective of when the expenditure was incurred, that the abatement should be available to the owner of the land as soon as the expenditure had been incurred, and that he should not be taxed four or five years simply because at the moment the quinquennial assessment had not arrived. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will give us an assurance that instructions will be issued on both of these points to the officials of his Department.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODI am rather sorry to see this further process of whittling down the Increment Tax on undeveloped land. It seems to me that this exemption from the tax in respect of land on which £100 has been expended is, or was originally, an unscientific exemption. It affects land that is very valuable, and to which £100 bears a very small proportion compared with its full value, just as it affects the outskirts of towns where the expenditure of £100 may be something like one-fifth of the whole value of the land. Here you are giving a further extension of this ten years period to twenty years. I want the Secretary to the Treasury to explain to us whether it is not possible now for a land lord who owns land in a very populous neighbourhood, worth, perhaps, £4,000 a year, to expend £100 on sewering and on roadmaking of a character not really intended to develop that property, and, therefore, to entirely exempt that very valuable land from an increase from the halfpenny tax. I think there is a danger that the owner of a site right in the centre of London might spend £100 in that way, and thereby exempt that very valuable land for ten years from taxes that might amount to hundreds of pounds a year. Under this new Amendment the period is extended to another ten years, increasing the temptation to the landlords to spend this money more or less uselessly, and so be enabled to hold the land out of the market for longer than at present.
985 I do think, when the halfpenny tax is doing such very valuable work in forcing land into the market in and around our towns, that it would be really deplorable if at this time of the day the Government should further increase the exemptions, and allow landlords greater liberty to withhold land from the building trade, and thus increase unemployment in the country. The hon. Member for Chelmsford wants to include, as well as this capital expenditure of £100 per acre, casual expenditure, which may be upon estate management or upon the wages of the people whose business it is to look after the estate, and casual expenditure of that sort, which may occur annually, but which is not represented by the permanent improvement of the property. I should very much deplore any extension of this £100, which allows the landlord to claim for anything except road making and sewering and improvements, which definitely add to the value of the property. The original reason for this exemption is perfectly simple. It is that when a landlord spent a certain amount of capital money on his property that money was not bringing in any immediate return. That was right so long as it was on a permanent improvement, and not merely the casual annual expenditure on the estate. If once we open the door to allowing the landlord to claim every expenditure which is not really useful to the further development of the estate we are starting on a bad example, and we are doing away with a good deal of the benefit of the halfpenny tax. I do hope, therefore, that the right hon. Gentleman will not accept any expenditure as capital expenditure, and will make some arrangement which will prevent landlords juggling with this exemption from this tax and exempting their valuable land at a relatively small cost to themselves.
§ Sir ALFRED CRIPPSI do not think the hon. Member who has just spoken has appreciated, from a business point of view, what Undeveloped Land Duty is, and on whom the burden falls. The person who finds himself under a serious disadvantage is the builder, who in the ordinary way takes land for the purpose of development. He finds, owing to certain difficulties, that he is unable, perhaps, to develop it for a period of years. It is said, for instance, that in the case of Glasgow it takes 100 years to develop land. Therefore the effect is not to encourage building and the employment of labour but to discourage 986 building to the utmost. That is the business way in which it operates. The hon. Member, according to the views he has put forward, would attempt to fine builders still further. The person who makes the expenditure on the land is very seldom, practically never, the landlord at all. It is done by the builder and is a pure business transaction. Land may be used for agriculture or building purposes. Those are the two great purposes for which you use it. Why should not the builder who has expended money under those circumstances for the purpose of developing land have the advantage. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will maintain the principle there is in this Clause. What was said by the hon. Member for Chelmsford (Mr. Pretyman) as to valuations is fully justified. Thus under the Metropolitan Valuation Act, beside quinquennial valuation, you have revisions by which you can value from time to time in order that justly you may get the valuations in accordance with the facts. So, too, in a valuation of this kind there should be some principle in administration. If you want to impose new rates or taxes, according to the conditions which yearly prevail, you must allow for the changes which take place from time to time, and both ways. Sometimes that has been enormously to the benefit of the local authorities, and another time it has told fairly the other way. I hope, whether it tells for the taxpayer or against him, that the right hon. Gentleman will maintain the principle that where changes do take place we should allow for them in these provisional valuations, as they are called.
§ Mr. EDWARD WOODThe Clause proposed deals with a point on which I had placed an Amendment on the paper. I think, if I may say so, that the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Mr. Wedgwood) is a little led away by an amiable obsession on the subject of landlords holding up land. I should like to point out another reason, in addition to that mentioned by my hon. Friend, why I do not think that the supposed danger to which he drew the attention of the Committee would be a very general one. If anybody, whether he be landlord or builder were to invest a large amount of money in making roads or sewers for the express purpose of evading the Undeveloped Land Duty all that money would, for practical purposes, be lying idle, and he would, therefore, be losing interest. What he would gain on Undeveloped Land 987 Duty he would lose in interest on his money. The Secretary to the Treasury claimed that he was meeting a reasonable grievance. That is so, and my only criticism of this new Clause is that it does not go far enough. As I understand the principle of the Budget and of all this taxation, whatever it may be in practice, is that, at all events in theory, it is intended to exempt all that part of the value which is due either to expenditure or to the brains, foresight, or skill of the man who owns it. If that is the principle, why fix a time-limit? If it is reasonable to grant exemption for ten or twenty years, by what logic do you fix the time-limit, rather than to make the exemption for that individual to the amount expended permanent. The right hon. Gentleman, I think, used the words that it was a "permanent expenditure." I ask whether there is any reason in logic or justice why in return for that permanent expenditure the man should not get permanent credit?
§ Mr. BARNESI have no doubt my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Mr Wedgwood) is duly grateful to the hon. Member opposite (Mr. E. Wood) for instructing him in the matter of land values, but I fancy that my hon. Friend knows as much about the question as the hon. Member can tell him. The hon. Member, after stating that the builder and not the landlord would pay the tax, said that the builder bought the land from the landlord, but that he still regarded him as a builder and not as a landlord. I regard him as a landlord, as he has bought the land. The object of this tax was to induce landlords to part with rather than to hold up land, and I have supported it loyally because I believed it would have that effect. If, however, we are to have the builder substituted for the landlord, it seems to me that we are not getting much "forrader." At the point reached by the hon. Member opposite we had succeeded by the operation of this tax in inducing the landlord to part with the land. He has presumably parted with it more cheaply than he would have done but for the tax. [An HON. MEMBER: "NO."] If he could have got a larger sum, why has he not got it? He has been getting all he could for his land hitherto. The effect of this tax is to increase the available supply of land in the market, and by that means to reduce the price. I think it is fair to assume that the man referred to as the builder, has obtained the land more 988 cheaply than he would have done but for the operation of this tax. Having regard to that tax, it is perfectly clear that the builder——
§ The CHAIRMANIt is important that we should not begin to discuss the principle of the original tax. This is an Amendment, and, except in so far as the principle of the original tax affects this new Clause, the question of the original tax does not arise.
§ Mr. BARNESI was following the hon. Member's argument, but I will not pursue it. I look with considerable suspicion upon this Amendment because it extends the exemption for another ten years, and therefore tends to nullify the principle of the tax. I agree with my hon. Friend that we ought to protect ourselves even at the twelfth hour against the further plea put in by the hon. Member for Chelmsford (Mr. Pretyman). Another reason for looking on the Amendment with suspicion is that it is a further exemplification of the too great willingness of the Treasury Bench to make bargains with the Front Bench opposite.
§ Mr. JOHN WARDI understand that this Amendment exempts from Undeveloped Land Duty, land on which £100 per acre has been spent in the way of road-making or sewering. I take it for granted that the hon. Member for Chelmsford knows that that will exempt from the duty practically all building sites round almost any of our towns. I have got out contracts for road-making, and I know how it works out. Take an estate for cottage property, with a depth of building land of from seventy to seventy-five feet, which would be a very good site for cottage property in or near towns, especially near London. If on that estate a road is made, not put in first-class repair or done as permanent work, but merely the channels, kerbing, gullies, surface water, sewer and rough macadam surface, just the doing of that work, which is necessary for the development of the estate, will enable the landlord to hold that land up for ever without being called upon to pay any Undeveloped Land Duty. If that is the effect of the Amendment, the whole object of the Undeveloped Land Duty is unquestionably defeated. I do not know whether the hon. and learned Member opposite has any great technical knowledge of the question, or whether he was only trying to bluff us with the suggestion that the builder buys a big estate, makes his own roads, and 989 does this, that, and the other. I will only say that that is not the case. On all the estates with which I have had anything to do, what has happened is that a big firm of land speculators has bought the land. I could give the case of an estate sold by an hon. Member opposite to a big firm of estate agents, for whom I do not know; they proceeded at once to lay out the estate with roads of the ordinary seventy or eighty feet depth, and they must have already spent the ordinary £100 per acre. Am I to assume because they have done that on an estate near Clapham Common they are to be exempted from the Undeveloped Land Duty, no matter how long they hold the estate? This is always done on big estates. I could take the hon. Member to an estate at Isleworth, giving him chapter and verse to show that the Undeveloped Land Duty has had a serious effect in pushing into the market land which otherwise might have been held up, because, there being no rates or taxes to pay on it, there was no necessity to get rid of it. The moment, however, there was an idea that Undeveloped Land Duty might be charged on it, there was a necessity to get rid of it, and the fact actually altered the price of the estate. I do not know whether the owner thought that the Budget would affect him more than it really will do, especially when the hon. Member for Chelmsford has got a few more slices out of the Government. I could take Members to a dozen great estates round London where speculators have bought the land and laid out £100 per acre on roadwork. They may hold up the land for twenty or thirty years before it is all covered, and the probabilities are that the prices will go on increasing, particularly if the land is to be exempt from Undeveloped Land Duty when £100 per acre has been spent. It is of no earthly use to the builder at all. It will never assist him to get the site at anything like a reasonable price. Therefore I say that the suggestion of the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Bucks is absolutely outside the business. Where one estate is bought up by a great monied man, laid out with roads, the man himself proceeding to build without introducing the leasehold builder—what we call the speculative builder, the jerry builder, or the "field-ranger"—where one estate is developed in that way hundreds are developed in the way I have suggested. The speculative land purchaser or dealer takes land, and expending a certain amount of money upon it, waits till the frontages of these 990 roads develop so that he can get the highest possible price according to the demand in the locality for houses. That is the situation as it exists, and not as the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Bucks imagines. Under those circum stances, I do suggest that those who have supported this Undeveloped Land Duty from the beginning to the end have cause for complaint unless the right hon. Gentle man who has charge of the Amendment can really explain this point to us. Can not the right hon. Gentleman imagine a case of the site value being so improved that the Undeveloped Land Tax will amount to more than the interest on £100 per acre expended on the land? Supposing the site is not a quarter of an acre—call it a fifth of an acre—and therefore the proportion, I suppose, must be at the rate of £100 per acre, or one-fifth of £100——
§ The CHAIRMANI must remind the hon. Gentleman it is not a question of £100 per acre. It is a question as to whether ten years shall be made twenty years. He has said very little about that point, and it is the only point in the Clause before us.
§ Mr. JOHN WARDI do not know whether one is entitled to discuss the matter as a general proposition in dealing with the new Clause. You want a number of these suggestions which have been put to the right hon. Gentleman answered before you can say whether it would be fair or unfair to extend the time from ten to twenty years. At any rate, before I vote for the proposition I desire to hear something more satisfactory than has already been said relating to the subject.
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThe hon. Gentleman who has just sat down has argued as if this Clause were in place of something in the original Act. It is something of an extension, but it is not an extension in the sense which he has suggested to the Committee. I may also refer to what the hon. Gentleman the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme asked me. He is a little bit afraid of the shearing off of something from the results of the operation of this particular tax. He may rest assured if he will look at Sub-section (b) of the original Act. He will there see: "That the owner of the land has to show to the Commissioners of Inland Revenue that his expenditure has relation to definite schemes for developing the land before he can claim the present ten years' relief." Similarly 991 in future the owner will have to show the Commissioners, who, after all, are the persons interested, in a satisfactory collection of this tax, that the expenditure upon which he embarked had reference to some specific scheme which is of a character to develop the land before he can claim any exemption at all. I think the Commissioners may be trusted to take care of the interests of the revenue. The hon. Gentleman opposite to me asked me two administrative questions. First, he asked me whether this was a question of capital value expenditure? As long as the expenditure has relation to a specific object it may be either capital or annual. He will not have to wait for the quinquennial valuation. As Boon as he has expended £100 he can claim relief in respect of one acre.
§ Mr. J. WARDNo matter what the value may be?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEIt must be £100 in respect of any one acre. Any one area of land measuring an acre in size can obtain relief in this respect so long as the expenditure is £100 per acre. That is the law as it stands. This Amendment merely extends the existing law to the case of twenty years. Anyone in this House who knows anything about the actual consideration of these matters will know that expenditure of this sort is not permanent in the way the hon. Gentlemen opposite suggests. Expenditure can only, as I have already suggested, get this relief, which has reference to a specific object, and which is clearly for the purpose of developing the land and bringing it into the market at an early period. If that land is not developed in accordance with the original Section, it ceases to get any relief and goes back to the character of undeveloped land. The expenditure is cancelled in respect of this land.
§ Mr. PRETYMANOnly in respect of this exemption?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEYes, in respect of this particular matter. All we propose to do is to extend the relief from ten to twenty years. We do not touch in any way whatever the principle of the Act as laid down in the Finance Act of 1909.
§ Mr J. WARDJust one word to the right hon. Gentleman relating to that one point. Do I understand then, that the law as it stands at present is that if £100 per 992 acre is spent, that the Undeveloped Land Duty does not apply, no matter what is the capital value of that acre of land?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThat is as it stands at present.
§ Mr. J. WARDWell, then the law requires altering.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODThe Secretary to the Treasury has made matters rather worse by accepting the suggestion from the other side that annual expenditure should also add up to make this £100 per acre——
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEPray do not misunderstand me. I am not accepting anything from the other side. That is the law as it stands at present. I am making no concession beyond this ten to twenty years. I am merely giving the practice and the law as it stands at the present moment.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODYes, there seems to be some difference as the law stands at present. What I understood the hon. Gentleman the Member for Chelmsford to explain was that while you read the law one way the valuers were refusing to take into account, I think he said, the annual expenditure towards the £100. If the law is delightfully uncertain at present, by all means let it remain rather on our side than theirs. I would like, a straight answer to one point. Is it possible for a man to spend this more or less imaginary £100 per acre on the salary of an estate agent.
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEOh, no.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODIs it simply the actual contract for making the road and sewers?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEAs I understand it, if the salary of the agent was bonà fide expended, or partly expended, in the proper business of oversight of the construction of the roads or sewers, as, for instance, in the position of a clerk of works with a view to getting the best possible results, I think it would be pro tanto a proper deduction, but only to that extent.
§ Mr. W. F. ROCHWould advertising also?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSENo.
§ Question put, "That the Clause be now read a second time."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 277; Noes, 45.
981| Division No. 82.] | AYES. | [8.16 p.m. |
| Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour) | Guest, Major Hon. C. H. C. (Pembroke) | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) |
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Guest, Hon. Frederick E (Dorset, E.) | O'Malley, William |
| Addison, Dr. C. | Gulland, John William | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. |
| Adkins, W. Ryland D. | Hackett, John | O'Shee, James John |
| Alden, Percy | Hall, Frederick (Normanton) | O'Sullivan, Timothy |
| Allen, Charles P. (Stroud) | Hancock, John George | Palmer, Godfrey Mark |
| Anderson, Andrew Macbeth | Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) | Parker, James (Halifax) |
| Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry | Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil) | Pearce, Robert (Staffs., Leek) |
| Atherley-Jones, Llewellyn A. | Harmsworth, R. L. | Pearce, William (Limehouse) |
| Baker, Harold T. (Accrington) | Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) | Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) |
| Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.) | Harvey, T. E (Leeds, West) | Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton) |
| Balfour, Sir Robert (Lanark) | Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N. E.) | Philips, John (Longford, S.) |
| Barran, Sir John N. (Hawick B.) | Harwood, George | Pollard, Sir George H. |
| Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.) | Haslam, James (Derbyshire) | Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H. |
| Beale, W. P. | Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth) | Price, Sir Robert J. (Norfolk, E.) |
| Beauchamp, Edward | Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry | Pringle, William M. R. |
| Benn, W. W. (T. H'mts, St. George) | Haworth, Arthur A. | Radford, George Heynes |
| Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine | Hayden, John Patrick | Raffan, Peter Wilson |
| Black, Arthur W. | Hayward, Evan | Rainy, A. Rolland |
| Boland, John Pius | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Henderson, J. M. (Aberdeen, W.) | Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) |
| Bowerman, C. W. | Higham, John Sharp | Reddy, M. |
| Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North) | Hinds, John | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Brigg, Sir John | Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Redmond, William (Clare, E.) |
| Brocklehurst, W. B. | Horne, Charles Silvester (Ipswich) | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Brunner, J. F. L. | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Roberts, George H. (Norwich) |
| Burke, E. Haviland- | Hudson, Walter | Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs) |
| Burns, Rt. Hon. John | Hughes, Spencer Leigh | Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford) |
| Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas | Hunter, W. (Govan) | Roche, Augustine (Louth) |
| Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, North) | Isaacs, Sir Rufus Daniel | Roche, John (Galway, E.) |
| Buxton, Rt. Hon. S. C. (Poplar) | Jones, Edgar R. (Merthyr Tydvil) | Rowlands, James |
| Byles, William Pollard | Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth) | Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter |
| Cameron, Robert | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire) | St. Maur, Harold |
| Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Jones, W. S. Glyn- (T. H'mts, Stepney) | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Joyce, Michael | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) |
| Cawley, H. T. (Lancs., Heywood) | Keating, Matthew | Scanlan, Thomas |
| Chancellor, H. G. | Kellaway, Frederick George | Schwann, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles E. |
| Chapple, Dr. William Allen | King, J. (Somerset, N.) | Seely, Colonel Rt. Hon. J. E. B. |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Lamb, Ernest Henry | Sheehy, David |
| Collins, Stephen (Lambeth) | Lambert, George (Devon, S. Molton) | Simon, Sir John Allsebrook |
| Compton-Rickett, Rt. Hon. Sir J. | Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld, Cockerm'th) | Snowden, Philip |
| Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Lewis, John Herbert | Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West) |
| Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth) | Logan, John William | Summers, James Wooley |
| Crawshay-Williams, Eliot | Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich) | Sutherland, J. E. |
| Crooks, William | Lundon, T. | Taylor, John W. (Durham) |
| Crumley, Patrick | Lyell, Charles Henry | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Dalziel, Sir James H. (Kirkcaldy) | Lynch, A. A. | Tennant, Harold John |
| Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester) | Thomas, James Henry (Derby) |
| Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs) | Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton) |
| Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.) | MacGhee, Richard | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Dawes, J. A. | Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J. | Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander |
| Delany, William | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Walters, John Tudor |
| Denman, Hon. R. D. | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent) |
| Dewar, Sir J. A. | M'Callum, John M. | Ward, W. Dudley (Southampton) |
| Dillon, John | M'Laren, Walter S. B. (Ches., Crewe) | Wardle, George J. |
| Donelan, Captain A. | M'Micking, Major Gilbert | Waring, Walter |
| Duncan, C. (Barrow-In-Furness) | Marks, G. Croydon | Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay |
| Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley) | Masterman, C. F. G. | Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan) |
| Edwards, Allen C. (Glamorgan, E.) | Meagher, Michael | Watt, Henry A. |
| Edwards, John Hugh (Glamorgan, Mid) | Meehan, Patrick A. (Queen's Co.) | Wedgwood, Josiah C. |
| Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) | Menzies, Sir Walter | White, Sir George (Norfolk) |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) | Molteno, Percy Alport | White, Sir Luke (York, E. R.) |
| Essex, Richard Walter | Money, L. G. Chiozza | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| Falconer, J. | Montagu, Hon. E. S. | Whitehouse, John Howard |
| Farrell, James Patrick | Mooney, John L. | Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir T. P. |
| Fenwick, Charles | Morgan, George Hay | Whyte, A. F. (Perth) |
| Ferens, Thomas Robinson | Morrell, Philip | Wiles, Thomas |
| Ffrench, Peter | Morton, Alpheus Cleophas | Wilkie, Alexander |
| Field, William | Muldoon, John | Williams, Llewelyn (Carmarthen) |
| Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward | Munro, R. | Williams, P. (Middlesbrough) |
| Furness, Stephen | Murray, Capt. Hon. A. C. | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W. R.) |
| Gibson, Sir James Puckering | Neilson, Francis | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid) |
| Gill, Alfred Henry | Nolan, Joseph | Wilson, J. W. (Worcestershire, N.) |
| Glanville, H. J. | Norman, Sir Henry | Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton) |
| Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford | Nugent, Sir Walter Richard | Winfrey, Richard |
| Goldstone, Frank | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) | Wood, T. M'Kinnon (Glasgow) |
| Greenwood, Granville G. (Peterborough) | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) | Young, W. (Perthshire, E.) |
| Greig, Colonel J. W. | O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Master of Elibank and Mr. Illingworth. |
| Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward | Ogden, Fred | |
| NOES. | ||
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Grant, J. A. | Paget, Almeric Hugh |
| Ashley, Wilfrid W. | Greene, Walter Raymond | Parker, Sir Gilbert (Gravesend) |
| Baird, John Lawrence | Gretton, John | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) |
| Baker, Sir Randolf L. (Dorset, N.) | Haddock, George B. | Peel, Capt. R. F. (Woodbribge) |
| Balcarres, Lord | Hall, Fred (Dulwich) | Peel, Hon. W. R. W. (Taunton) |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Hambro, Angus Valdemar | Perkins, Walter Frank |
| Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (City Lond.) | Hamersley, Alfred St. George | Peto, Basil Edward |
| Barlow, Montague (Salford, South) | Hamilton, Lord C. J. (Kensington) | Pollock, Ernest Murray |
| Barnston, Harry | Harris, Henry Percy | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Bathurst, Charles (Wolts, Wilton) | Harrison-Broadley, H. B. | Pryce-Jones, Col. E. |
| Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks | Helmsley, Viscount | Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel |
| Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) | Hillier, Dr. Alfred Peter | Remnant, James Farquharson |
| Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Hoare, S. J. G. | Rice, Hon. Walter F. |
| Bentinck, Lord H. Cavendish- | Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Beresford, Lord Charles | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Rolleston, Sir John |
| Bigland, Alfred | Horne, William E. (Surrey, Guildford) | Ronaldshay, Earl of |
| Bird, Alfred | Horner, Andrew Long | Rothschild, Lionel de |
| Boscawen, Sackville T. Griffith- | Houston, Robert Paterson | Royds, Edmund |
| Boyton, James | Hunt, Rowland | Rutherford, Watson (L'pool, W. Derby) |
| Brassey, H. Leonard Campbell | Hunter, Sir C R. (Bath) | Salter, Arthur Clavell |
| Bridgeman, W. Clive | Ingleby, Holcombe | Sanders, Robert A. |
| Burdett-Coutts, W. | Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East) | Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells) |
| Burn, Colonel C. E. | Joynson-Hicks, William | Spear, John Ward |
| Butcher, John George | Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr | Staveley-Hill, Henry |
| Campion, W. R. | Kirkwood, John H. M. | Steel-Maitland, A. D. |
| Carlile, Edward Hildred | Knight, Capt. Eric Ayshford | Strauss, Arthur (Paddington, North) |
| Cassel, Felix | Kyffin-Taylor, G. | Swift, Rigby |
| Cator, John | Lane-Fox, G. R. | Terrell, G. (Wilts, N. W.) |
| Cave, George | Larmor, Sir J. | Terrell, H. (Gloucester) |
| Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. A. (Worc'r) | Lawson, Hon. H. (T. H'mts., Mile End) | Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, North) |
| Clay, Captain H. H. Spender | Lewisham, Viscount | Thorne, William (West Ham) |
| Clive, Percy Archer | Locker-Lampson, G. (Salisbury) | Tobin, Alfred Aspinall |
| Cooper, Richard Ashmole | Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsey) | Touche, George Alexander |
| Courthope, George Loyd | Long, Rt. Hon. Walter | Walker, Col. William Hall |
| Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) | Lowe, Sir F. W. (Birm., Edgbtston) | Walrond, Hon. Lionel |
| Cripps, Sir Charles Alfred | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. A. (Hanover Sq.) | Ward, Arnold S. (Herts, Watford) |
| Dalrymple, Viscount | Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droitwich) | Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid.) |
| Dalziel, Davison (Brixton) | MacCaw, William J. MacGeagh | Weigall, Capt. A. G. |
| Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. S. | Macmaster, Donald | Wheler, Granville |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Magnus, Sir Philip | White, Major G D. (Lancs., Southport) |
| Du Cros, Arthur Philip | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.) |
| Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M. | Mildmay, Francis Bingham | Willoughby, Major Hon. Claud |
| Fell, Arthur | Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.) |
| Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey | Morrison-Bell, Capt. E. F. (Ashburton) | Winterton, Earl |
| Finlay, Sir Robert | Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton) | Wolmer, Viscount |
| Fisher, William Hayes | Mount, William Arthur | Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Ripon) |
| Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A. | Neville, Reginald J. N. | Wood, John (Stalybridge) |
| Fletcher, John Samuel (Hampstead) | Newdegate, F. A. | Worthington-Evans, L. |
| Foster, Philip Staveley | Newton, Harry Kottingham | Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart- |
| Gardner, Ernest | Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield) | Yate, Colonel C. E. |
| Gastrell, Major W. Houghton | Nield, Herbert | |
| Gibbs, G. A. | Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Viscount Valentia and Mr. H. W. Forster. |
| Goldman, C. S. | Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William | |
| Goldsmith, Frank |
| Division No. 83.] | AYES. | [9.6 p.m. |
| Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour) | Ffrench, Peter | Menzies, Sir Walter |
| Allen, Charles Peter (Stroud) | Field, William | Molteno, Percy Alport |
| Anderson, A. M. | Fiennes, Hon. Eustace Edward | Money, L. G. Chiozza |
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Fletcher, John Samuel (Hampstead) | Mooney, John J. |
| Ashley, Wilfrid W. | Forster, Henry William | Morpeth, Viscount |
| Atherley-Jones, Llewellyn A. | Foster, Philip Staveley | Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton) |
| Baird, John Lawrence | Furness, Stephen W. | Morton, Alpheus Cleophas |
| Baker, Harold T. (Accrington) | Gardner, Ernest | Muldoon, John |
| Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.) | Gastrell, Major W. Houghton | Munro, Robert |
| Balcarres, Lord | Gibson, Sir James Puckering | Murray, Capt. Hon. Arthur C. |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Glanville, H. J. | Neville, Reginald J. N. |
| Balfour, Sir Robert (Lanark) | Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford | Newton, Harry Kottingham |
| Barlow, Montague (Salford, South) | Goldman, Charles Sydney | Nolan, Joseph |
| Barnston, Harry | Goldsmith, Frank | Norman, Sir Henry |
| Barry, Redmond John (Tyrone, N.) | Grant, James Augustus | Nugent, Sir Walter Richard |
| Bathurst, Charles (Wilts, Wilton) | Greenwood, Granville G. (Peterborough) | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) |
| Beale, William Phipson | Greig, Colonel J. W. | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) |
| Beauchamp, Edward | Gretton, John | O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool) |
| Benn, Arthur Shirley (Plymouth) | Guest, Major Hon. C. H. C. (Pembroke) | O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.) |
| Benn, W. W. (T. H'mts, St. George) | Guest, Hon. Frederick E. (Dorset, E.) | O'Malley, William |
| Bennett-Goldney, Francis | Hackett, John | Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A. |
| Beresford, Lord Charles | Hamersley, Alfred St. George | Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William |
| Bigland, Alfred | Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose) | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. |
| Bird, Alfred | Harmsworth, R. L. | O'Shee, James John |
| Black, Arthur W. | Harris, Henry Percy | O'Sullivan, Timothy |
| Boland, John Pius | Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) | Paget, Almeric Hugh |
| Booth, Frederick Handel | Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth) | Palmer, Godfrey Mark |
| Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, N.) | Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry | Pearce, William (Limehouse) |
| Brassey, H. Leonard Campbell | Haworth, Arthur A. | Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington) |
| Bridgeman, William Clive | Hayden, John Patrick | Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A. (Rotherham) |
| Brigg, Sir John | Henderson, J. M. (Aberdeen, W.) | Perkins, Walter Frank |
| Brocklehurst, William B. | Hillier, Dr. Alfred Peter | Peto, Basil Edward |
| Brunner, John F. L. | Hill-Wood, Samuel | Phillips, John (Longford, S.) |
| Burke, E. Haviland- | Hinds, John | Pollard, Sir George H. |
| Burn, Colonel C. R. | Hoare, Samuel John Gurney | Pollock, Ernest Murray |
| Burns, Rt. Hon. John | Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas | Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy | Pryce-Jones, Col. E. |
| Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, North) | Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield) | Radford, George Heynes |
| Buxton, Rt. Hon. S. C. (Poplar) | Horne, Charles Silvester (Ipswich) | Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel |
| Campion, W. R. | Horne, Wm. E. (Surrey, Guildford) | Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields) |
| Carlile, Edward Hildred | Horner, Andrew Long | Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough) |
| Cassel, Felix | Houston, Robert Paterson | Reddy, Michael |
| Cator, John | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
| Cave, George | Hughes, Spencer Leigh | Redmond, William (Clare, E.) |
| Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich) | Hunt, Rowland | Remnant, James Farquharson |
| Cawley, H. T. (Lancs., Heywood) | Hunter, W. (Govan) | Rice, Hon. Walter Fitz-Uryan |
| Chapple, Dr. William Allen | Isaacs, Sir Rufus Daniel | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East) | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Clive, Percy Archer | Jones, Edgar R. (Merthyr Tydvil) | Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke) |
| Collins, Stephen (Lambeth) | Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth) | Roche, Augustine (Louth) |
| Compton-Rickett, Rt. Hon. Sir J. | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire) | Roche, John (Galway, E.) |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Jones, W. S. Glyn- (T. H'mts, Stepney) | Rolleston, Sir John |
| Cooper, Richard Ashmole | Joyce, Michael | Ronaldshay, Earl of |
| Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Joynson-Hicks, William | Rothschild, Lionel de |
| Courthope, George Loyd | Keating, Matthew | Royds, Edmund |
| Craig, Captain James (Down, E.) | Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr | Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter |
| Crawshay-Williams, Eliot | Kirkwood, John H. M. | St. Maur, Harold |
| Cripps, Sir Charles Alfred | Knight, Capt. E. A. | Salter, Arthur Clavell |
| Crumley, Patrick | Kyffin-Taylor, G. | Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland) |
| Davies, Timothy (Lincs., Louth) | Lane-Fox, G. R. | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) |
| Cavies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.) | Larmor, Sir J. | Sanders, Robert A. |
| Dawes, James Arthur | Lewis, John Herbert | Scanlan, Thomas |
| Delany, William | Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsey) | Schwann, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles E. |
| Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas | Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich) | Sheehy, David |
| Dewar, Sir J. A. | Lowe, Sir F. W. (Birm, Edgbaston) | Simon, Sir John Allsebrook |
| Dillon, John | Lundon, Thomas | Spear, John Ward |
| Donelan, Captain A. J. C. | Lyell, Charles Henry | Staveley-Hill, H. |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- | Lynch, Arthur Alfred | Strauss, Arthur (Paddington, North) |
| Du Cros, Arthur Philip | Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Wor., Droitwich) | Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West) |
| Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley) | Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs) | Summers, James Woolley |
| Edwards, Allen C. (Glamorgan, E.) | MacGhee, Richard | Sutherland, J. E. |
| Edwards, John Hugh (Glamorgan, Mid) | Maclean, Donald | Swift, Rigby |
| Elibank, Rt. Hon. Master of | Macmaster, Donald | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) |
| Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.) | Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J. | Tennant, Harold John |
| Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.) | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Terrell, G. (Wilts, N. W.) |
| Essex, Richard Walter | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Terrell, Henry (Gloucester) |
| Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M. | M'Callum, John M. | Thomson, W. Mitchell (Down, N.) |
| Falconer, James | M'Micking, Major Gilbert | Tobin, Alfred Aspinall |
| Farrell, James Patrick | Magnus, Sir Philip | Touche, George Alexander |
| Fell, Arthur | Marks, G. (Croydon) | Trevelyan, Charles Philips |
| Fenwick, Charles | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander |
| Ferens, Thomas Robinson | Meagher, Michael | Valentia, Viscount |
| Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey | Meehan, Patrick A. (Queen's Co.) | Walrond, Hon. Lionel |
| Walters, John Tudor | Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P. | Wood, John (Stalybridge) |
| Ward, W. Dudley (Southampton) | Whyte, A. F. (Perth) | Wood, T. M'Kinnon (Glasgow) |
| Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid) | Wiles, Thomas | Worthington-Evans, L. |
| Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay | Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough) | Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart- |
| Webb, H. | Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.) | Yate, Col. C. E. |
| Weigall, Capt. A. G. | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.) | Young, William (Perth, East) |
| Wheler, Granville C. H. | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W. R.) | |
| White, Sir George (Norfolk) | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid) | |
| White, Sir Luke (York, E. R.) | Winfrey, Richard | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Illingworth and Mr. Gulland. |
| White, Patrick (Meath, North) | Wolmer, Viscount | |
| Whitehouse, John Howard | Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Ripon) |
| NOES. | ||
| Armitage, Robert | Harwood, George | Pringle, William M. R. |
| Barnes, George N. | Haslam, James (Derbyshire) | Richardson, Thomas (Whitehaven) |
| Bowerman, Charles W. | Hayward, Evan | Roberts, George H. (Norwich) |
| Byles, William Pollard | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Rowlands, James |
| Chancellor, Henry George | Higham, John Sharp | Smith, Albert (Lancs., Clitheroe) |
| Crooks, William | Hudson, Walter | Snowden, Philip |
| Dalziel, Sir James H. (Kirkcaldy) | Jowett, Frederick William | Taylor, John W. (Durham) |
| Davies, Ellis William (Eifion) | Kellaway, Frederick George | Thomas, James Henry (Derby) |
| Duncan, C. (Barrow-In-Furness) | King, J. (Somerset, N.) | Wardle, George J. |
| Gill, Alfred Henry | Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade) | Watt, Henry A. |
| Goldstone, Frank | Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'rld., Cockerm'th) | Wedgwood, Josiah C. |
| Hall, F. (Yorks, Normanton) | Logan, John William | Wilkie, Alexander |
| Hancock, John George | Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester) | Wilson, W. T (West Houghton) |
| Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil) | Neilson, Francis | |
| Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West) | Ogden, Fred | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. John Ward and Mr. J. Parker. |
| Harvey, W. E. (Derbyshire, N. E.) | O'Grady, James |
§ Mr. BARNESI desire to take your ruling, Mr. Chairman, on a point of Order. It will be within the knowledge of many hon. Members that after you had given orders for the door to be locked a very considerable number of hon. Members, in spite of that order, forced their way through the "No" Lobby. I do not know the number, and it will be impossible to ascertain how many went into the Lobby after your order to lock the door was given. I desire to ask whether this Vote can be counted, having regard to the increased number who got into the Lobby notwithstanding your order.
§ The CHAIRMANI think it would be quite useless to deny that a very considerable number did go through the door after I had given the order to lock the door, but the attendant could not lock the door whilst hon. Members were rushing through; neither could he get to the other door, which he has to lock later on, on the other side of the House. Therefore, there is no reason why I should declare the Division to be out of order.
§ Mr. KEIR HARDIECan no steps be taken to protect the attendant against violence.
§ The CHAIRMANI shall mention the matter to the authorities of the House, because it was quite obvious that many Members did vote after I had given the order to lock the door.
§ Question, "That the Clause be added to the Bill," put, and agreed to.