Sitting of 2 June 1880

MINUTES.
SELECT COMMITTEE — Ancient Monuments, negatived.
PUBLIC BILLS—Ordered —First Heading —Supreme Court of Judicature (District Courts)* [202]; Highways (Horse Rate)* [203]; Employers and Workmen Act (1875) (Extension to Seamen)* [204]; Relief of Distress (Ireland) Act (1880) Amendment* [205]; Bankruptcy* [206].
First Reading —Land Drainage Provisional Order (Frodsham, &c.)* [207].
Second Reading —Hours of Polling (Boroughs) [134]; Valuation of Land [143], negatived.
Several Members took and subscribed the Oath.

CONTROVERTED ELECTIONS—ATHLONE BOROUGH ELECTION PETITION.
Mr. SPEAKER informed the House, that he had received from Mr. Baron Fitzgerald and Mr. Justice Barry, two of the Judges selected, in pursuance of the Parliamentary Elections Act, 1868, for the trial of Election Petitions, a Certificate and Report relating to the Election for the Borough of Athlone.
And the same was read, as followcth:—
The Parliamentary Elections Acts.
Election for the Borough of Athlone, holden on the 3rd day of April 1880.
The matter of a Petition relating to the above-named Election, wherein Edward Sheil is Petitioner and Sir John Ennis, baronet, is Respondent, was tried before us at Athlone on the 27th, 28th, 29th, and 31st days of May 1880, and at the conclusion of the trial on the last-mentioned day we determined, and do hereby certify to the Right honourable the Speaker of the House of Commons, that the said Sir John Ennis, the Member whose Election and Return was complained of, was duly elected and returned as Member to serve for the said Borough of Athlone.
Further we report that no corrupt practice was proved to have been committed by or with the knowledge and consent of either of the Candidates at said Election, and that we have no reason to believe that corrupt practices extensively prevailed at the Election to which the Petition relates.
Dated this 1st day of June, 1880.
J. D. PITZGERALD, Baron of the Exchequer Division of Her Majesty's High Court of Justice in Ireland,
C. R. BARRY, Justice of the Queen's Bench Division of Her Majesty's High Court of Justice in Ireland,
Judges for the time being on the rota for the trial of Election Petitions in Ireland.
And the said Certificate and Report were ordered to be entered in the Journals of this House.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.
  HOURS OF POLLING (BOROUGHS) BILL— [BILL 134.]
  (Mr. Ashton Dilke, Dr. Cameron, Major Nolan, Mr. Henry Samuelson, Mr. Firth, Mr. Barran.)
  HOURS OF POLLING (BOROUGHS) BILL— [BILL 134.]

    SECOND READING.
    Order for Second Reading read.
    MR. ASHTON DILKE,in rising to move that the Bill be now read a second time, said, he must apologize to the House for having been so successful in the ballot that he was compelled to occupy the attention of the House on the first Wednesday set apart for the consideration of private Members' Bills. The Bill which he now ventured to introduce to the House for the extension of the hours of polling had been rejected by only a small majority in the last Parliament, and there was very little doubt that the principle of the Bill was one which was generally acceptable. That principle had already been applied to the Metropolis. In the bye election in Southwark, what struck him most was that the rate of polling was much equalized during the day, though the number of persons polled was not greatly increased, a fact that might be accounted for by the circumstances of the election. But comparing the General Election of 18b0 with that of 1874, as far as the Metropolitan boroughs were concerned, there was an increase of 8 per cent in the numbers polled in the late election. He did not think this increase was attributable to greater excitement having prevailed, as it was smallest in the City, Westminster, and Chelsea, where the election was carried on with vigour, not to say acrimony, and was largest in the boroughs where the artizan population predominated. There was no doubt that in a very large proportion of the constituencies the bulk of the voters consisted of the artizan class, who, to a great extent, were virtually excluded by the present system from the exercise of the right of the franchise. He believed the feeling on the question of the passage of this Bill was stronger than the fooling on almost any other subject of domestic legislation, for it was felt that the present system involved several hardships. It was held to be very unfair that a man should be either de-

    977
    prived of the right of voting at all, or forced, in order to exercise that right, to ask as a favour from his employer that which he believed ought to be conceded as a right. He could not understand that there could be any opposition to the measure from that side of the House, because it was a theory held by the more advanced Members of the Liberal Party that the franchise was not so much a trust as a right, and in debarring a man from the exercise of that right he believed they would be committing a wrong. If there was any difference between the classes of voters found in the North and in the South of England, it was this—that in the North there was a high tone of independence among the artizans and dwellers in towns generally, and large numbers of men, whom the employers would be perfectly willing and pleased to give a day's holiday to for the purpose of enabling them to record their votes, deliberately preferred to incur the loss of a day's wages rather than ask as a favour that which they considered they should have as a right, and which, therefore, they would be more or less degraded in begging as a boon. The House would probably agree with him in thinking that the fact that at the 1874 elections the clergymen and publicans took a very deep interest in those elections, and in 1880 took a much smaller interest, must have greatly outweighed the extra interest felt in foreign policy on the last occasion. It had been said that the question of the extension of the hours of polling solved itself, because in large communities a holiday was general on election days. It was doubtless true that in many constituencies this practice had grown up; but this point applied in a special way to some half-dozen boroughs which were peculiarly circumstanced. Thus, in the case of Newcastle and Gateshead, all the Newcastle voters seemed to live in Gateshead, and all the Gateshead voters in Newcastle, and the same thing largely prevailed in the cases of Manchester and Salford. In such double boroughs, unless they had the elections on the same day in each, a general holiday was of no use. But this was not a question purely of factories and workshops, because there were large numbers of workmen who could not afford a holiday, and who were, as in the case of railway em-
    978
    ployés, more pressed in the discharge of their duties on holidays than on ordinary days. Further, unless public-houses should be closed on the polling day, drunkenness was increased by a general holiday, as men had nothing to do all day after polling. The chief and almost the only objection raised to the Bill last year was that the experiment had not been tried; but now it had been, there having been a General Election, and it was found that there was no rioting or disturbance in consequence of the later hours of polling. Where riots had taken place was at places in counties, and amongst people who had not votes, but who he hoped would have before long. He thought that any temptation now existing to riot or create disturbance would be removed if the hours of polling were extended. With regard to expenditure, he thought that under the Bill it would be decreased and not increased. There might be a slight increase of expense for polling clerks; but this disadvantage would be well counterbalanced by the diminution in the number of polling booths and in the number of cabs required. At present there was a rush in the middle of the day, and more cabs and polling booths were required on that account. They were told that this was a retrograde step, and that the hours of polling were reduced by the Reform Act of l832; but they must now look at the question by the light of the Reform Act of 1867. A strong feeling existed among labourers and artizans that the vote granted by that Bill was of little use—first, because of 1he difficulty of being placed upon the Register, and, in the second place, because of the impossibility of recording their votes in suitable hours. His Bill also applied to elections to school boards and municipal offices. In these elections, which were of frequent occurrence, the change was even more needed than in Parliamentary elections, for people would take greater trouble to record their votes in a Parliamentary election than in a municipal contest. It was considered by many hon. Members on both sides that the measure was not required; but, perhaps, the Home Secretary would state his experience in regard to the boroughs which he had represented. He had been asked why he had not scheduled certain boroughs to which the Bill should

    979
    apply, but there was a difficulty in making out a Schedule; and it had been suggested that the question whether the Bill should apply to a borough should be left to the vote of the municipal authority, but that would be very objectionable for many reasons. He did not think that the hours of polling should be extended in boroughs of a certain population only, because there were large boroughs in the South in which the extension was not required, and small boroughs in the North, with a large proportionate population, in which it was needed. But he was willing to accept a reasonable compromise, such as that there should be a primâ facie case against boroughs of less than a specified population, but that this should be reversible on the petition of the borough or the vote of the municipal authority. In conclusion, he wished to say that Parliament had no right to make an artizan's vote depend on the goodwill of the master, and he did not think that they ought to call upon any master to stop his works and lose money in order that his workmen might record their votes, when the present state of things might so easily be altered in the manner proposed by his Bill. The experiment of extending the hours of polling had been tried on the corpus vile of London. He now asked the House to endorse his measure, even though it should not have a probability of passing into law this Session, in order to lay down a principle in view of a Reform Bill being brought in in the course of two or three years by the Government. He begged to move the second reading of the Bill.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Mr. Ashton Dilke.)
    MR. MARK STEWARTsaid, he rose to move that the Bill be read a second time that day three months. He thought the hon. Member had done himself great credit by the way in which he had brought the subject forward, and, although the House might not agree with all his conclusions, it would be admitted the subject had been treated in a moderate manner. The hon. Gentleman had commenced his speech by saying that he was quite sure that all the Members in that House would agree with the principle of the Bill; but he (Mr. Mark
    980
    Stewart) could not gather very much of what had been called the principle— whether it was the extension of the hours of polling up to 8 o'clock all over the Kingdom, or whether that every man who had a vote ought to have an opportunity of voting. If the latter were the case, he was quite at one with the hon. Member in thinking that every facility should be given, commensurate with order and the interests of the public, for the exercise of the franchise. No doubt, a certain degree of hardship was to be found here and there among printers, shippers, and Sheffield engineers, who ought to exercise the franchise. Where such interests were interfered with, great care must be taken in extending the hours of polling merely to satisfy a small number of the constituencies throughout the country. The hon. Member had pointed out that something like 8 per cent more of the voters in the Metropolitan boroughs had gone to the poll in the last Election than during previous Elections; but the hon. Gentleman seemed to forget that during the turmoil of a General Election there was a much greater degree of interest and excitement than at a bye election, even although the South-wark election had been considered of great importance. In any General Election, indeed, one would find more votes recorded than in a bye contest. He was rather surprised that the hon. Member should have introduced this Bill on his own authority. He should have thought that the Government would have seen fit to introduce it, had it impressed with its justice the Members of the House to the extent that was alleged, especially when there was present that day the Home Secretary, who had so great experience in such matters. The question, indeed, was a very large one, and was not to be debated in a few hours, for it involved considerations apart from the mere extension of the hours of polling from 4 to 8 o'clock. The hon. Member for Newcastle had made no allusion to the Select Committee which had sat on this question in June, 1878. The Report of that Committee was only carried by a small majority, for the subject was by no means unattended with difficulty. They had reported in this fashion, and it was of so much importance that he should read their words;—

    981
    "Your Committee are of opinion that it would be undesirable to extend the hours of polling in all Parliamentary and municipal elections, irrespective of local requirements, in the absence of pressing necessity."
    The Report further said that they could suggest no other remedy than the extension of the hours of polling, and yet, as was seen, did not adopt this conclusion. It was one thing to talk of principles, but it was quite another to carry those principles out. Supposing they agreed that in many large constituencies great modifications as to the hours of polling were necessary, he did not think they were in a position to say to any man that such ought to be applied to the whole country indiscriminately. The question, at the same time, did not press for the immediate solution which the Mover of the Motion had seeemed to think. There was no urgent necessity for it. Other questions of electoral reform had been promised by the Government, and this question could very well be dealt with in connection with it. As to the experience gained in the Metropolitan boroughs on the extension of the hours of polling, he contended that there was no proof that the advantages accruing were commensurate with the disadvantages. Among the main objections to the Bill, the first was that of expense. They all knew how great the expenses were candidates had to incur in contesting large as well as small constituencies. It was all very well to say that the additional expense would only amount to about a few shillings; but, to his idea, it would amount to many shillings—many hundreds of pounds. Take, for instance, the case of 300 clerks being employed on a polling day, as at Leeds. Well, they would not be able to count the votes on the same day on account of the extended hours, in consequence of which their pay and expenses would run on to the second day. Again, there was the question of lighting, and this would be a serious item when an election came off in winter. Next would come the question of the police, as to which body there would be increased expense and great inconvenience, not to speak of the additional expense for committee rooms. There were great risks also of irregularities and disorder committed under cover of darkness in the winter afternoons. As to these men who recorded their votes at the last hour, did they not suppose that among all the
    982
    furore, a great number of these would be attacked, intimidated, and possibly prevented from recording their votes at all? The excitement, too, which in ordinary circumstances would only last a day, would be extended over two or three. The Chief Constable of Sheffield, and other police officials, had come to the conclusion that the extension of the hours of polling would be attended with very disastrous consequences. These disturbances, he asserted, would not be so much among the electors as the non-electors, for it was that class who really perpetrated many of the enormities of which they constantly heard at elections. Political feeling would be encouraged to a marked extent at school board and municipal elections. On the whole, he would rather trust to the consideration and forbearance of employers to accord facilities to their people for voting than to any measure. In his experience, at least, these gentlemen were always anxious to give facilities to artizans and workmen for voting. The fact was, that a polling day was a holiday whether it was given or not; and so imbued were many men with political feeling or prejudice, that they would leave their work in defiance of their employers. The Town Clerk of Manchester—Sir Joseph Heron—affirmed that there were very few in that great constituency who could not go to the poll on account of its being closed at 4 o'clock. The delegates, again, representing something like 140 municipalities, with one exception, were adverse to the proposed extension. He quite agreed that it would not do to make any legislation on the subject permissive, for nothing could be more dangerous than to allow local authorities to have charge of such matters. It would be far better, if Government were resolved to pass some measure, that a hard-and-fast line should be drawn. He could not see, if the hon. Gentleman wished his Bill at once to become law, why he had not selected several large towns in the Provinces, and there given scope to the principle of his Bill. He did not, however, wish to see this retrograde step taken, because it was, no doubt, a step in the wrong direction; for all our recent legislation had gone to shorten elections, and reduce the expense and disorder. He believed that the machinery of the Ballot had secured for the country very quiet elections, and

    983
    if a new element were to be introduced, it would be but to break down the efficacy of a system which had been in force for eight years. Although he was not an advocate of that particular system of voting, it was better than riot and confusion. He had been rather surprised that the hon. Gentleman, as the Member for Newcastle, had not referred to the Report of the Select Committee to which he (Mr. Mark Stewart) had alluded, especially with reference to Newcastle. It was in answer to a communication made by the Clerk of the Committee to the different Mayors and Lord Provosts of boroughs, and was as follows:—
    "If the hours of polling were extended, the officials would have more difficulty in giving constant attention during so many continuous hours, and there would he some risk of disturbance."
    The evidence taken before the Committee also showed that the following towns were opposed to the suggested extension:—Blackburn, Bradford, Burnley, Exeter, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Nottingham, Plymouth, Rochdale, Sheffield, Wolverhampton, Wakefield, and Leamington, and many others; while out of 22 witnesses examined before the Committee, nearly all came from the large towns—namely, 3 from Leeds, 4 from Glasgow, 4 from Sheffield, 3 from Liverpool, 3 from Manchester, leaving 5 for populous districts. From this, he gathered the Committee did not so much regard the matter from the view to be taken by the small boroughs as the large ones. In conclusion, he asked the House whether it was prepared to adopt the Bill as it now stood, or whether it would give further time for consideration, not only of the question generally, but of the particular results of the operation of the Metropolitan Act? There was a much larger measure, he understood, in contemplation with regard to the assimilation of the county and borough franchise, and when the House had that question before it, the whole question, he thought, could be more opportunely considered. He hoped, at least, that the Government would not agree to swamp small boroughs and constituencies with the expense and confusion which would accompany the operation of this Bill. He begged to move the Amendment of which he had given Notice.
    Amendment proposed, to leave out the word "now," and at the end of the Question to add the words "upon this day three months."—(Mr. Mark Stewart.)
    Question proposed, "That the word now' stand part of the Question."
    MR. T. C. THOMPSONobserved, that the hon. Member who moved the rejection of the Bill asked what the principle of the Bill was? He would tell him what it was. The principle of the Bill might be explained in a very few words. It was to give every person entitled to a vote the opportunity of exercising his privilege without expense or inconvenience to himself. There were, he maintained, a great many persons of good character and industrious habits who were prevented from exercising the right conferred upon them by the Legislature by the existence of the rule which closed the poll at 4 o'clock. No doubt, a good many persons would be naturally opposed to this Bill, and he was quite prepared for opposition from a great body of Members in that House. He did not know a more distressing sight than candidates on the election day, with all their eloquence expended, and, of course, some of them would not care to have their labours extended up to a late hour in the evening. Some towns, such as Manchester, Liverpool, and Leeds, were said to be opposed to the Bill; and they opposed it because there was no particular reason in their case why the hours of polling should be extended. But, in that part of the country whence he came, a very different state of things prevailed. They could not expect that in many cases the dinner-hour afforded the necessary time in which large bodies of electors could go to the poll. The fact was, that the objections to the measure were small compared with the advantages that would arise from it. The polling clerks and others connected with the taking of the poll might possibly object. But, take the ease of the mining population in his own and other mining counties; they could not afford the time to come and vote. It was most important to them, one day's wages, and he felt that they should not suffer in the exercise of their rights as electors. As to what had been said about disorder arising if the hours of polling were extended, he appealed to hon. Members opposite to say if it was

    985
    not the non-electors who gathered round the polling places? and he was sorry that there were so many non-voters in the country. He supported the measure in the interests of the working men, who were as well qualified to vote intelligently as any Member of the House. As to the allegation of the hon. Member for the Wigtown Burghs (Mr. Mark Stewart), of a great increase of expense being the consequence of the passing of this Bill, he thought that there was no ground for such an assumption; and oven if the expenses were to be increased, such an objection came badly from a Member of the Party that supported the Government measure of last year, allowing the use of cabs and vehicles for the conveyance of electors to the polling places. From every point of view the Bill was a good one, and he should vote for it even though it enabled no more than 10 zealous working men to record their votes.
    MR. DALYsaid, he had carefully listened to the remarks of the hon. Gentle-man the Member for the Wigtown Burghs (Mr. Mark Stewart), but had failed to see in them anything which really affected the principle of the Bill. The hon. Gentleman had gone into a great many details, and had given numerous extracts from meetings of municipal boroughs, the experience of the police, expenses of lighting—indeed, everything but the principle underlying the Bill. For his part, he considered that the hon. Gentleman took a rather selfish view of the question, since he urged the House not to vote on the principle of the measure, but rather to be influenced by considerations affecting themselves. There was great force in the observations made by the hon. Member for Newcastle (Mr. A. Dilke) with reference to the disorder likely to attend the prolongation of hours in the opinion of some hon. Members. He had considerable personal experience of elections before entering the House. He had been engaged in two contested elections, and he confidently asked hon. Gentlemen by whom was the disorder complained of caused? was it not by those persons who were not entitled to vote? Representing, as he did, the working classes in the City of Cork, he said if they trusted them with the franchise to enable them to send men to represent them in Parliament they ought to give them an independent
    986
    opportunity of exercising that franchise lie knew from personal observation that the lower class of voters regarded the power as a sacred trust, and, as a rule, they exercised that power wisely. Looking at the prospect of the franchise of Ireland being assimilated to that of England, he remarked that in connection with the City of Cork, which he represented, a number of the persons who would be added to the electoral roll would be at a considerable distance from the polling station where they would be able to record their votes. He fully recognised the principle that an opportunity should be found by the Legislature to enable the elector to give his vote without sacrificing his day's wages—the principle that the working man should have an opportunity afforded him of giving his vote either in his dinner-hour or after his day's work. The Government should give the elector an opportunity of being independent in the exercise of his vote, and this could only be done by extending the polling hours, which would be altogether more wholesome in its operations upon the electors than if they were allowed a holiday in which to record their votes by their employers. For these and other reasons he would support the Bill, believing it was a step in the right direction. He had always understood that the more responsibility that was placed upon a class the better they behaved themselves. Speaking from his own knowledge of the immediate surroundings of his own people, he knew this measure would be accepted as a very great boon to a number of persons who would probably be enfranchised by the Bill of the Chief Secretary for Ireland. In England, where there were very great industries, very few men would have the courage or the hardihood to dismiss a workman because he left his work to record his vote; but in Irish cities there were large classes of labourers, dependent for employment upon public bodies, who would be liable to dismissal from the report of the superintendents. In some of those bodies there were political tendencies which were directly antagonistic to the manner in which the humble workmen ought to be allowed to exercise his vote. Therefore, if they intrusted a man with the franchise, he said do not let them make its exercise penal, which might be the case if he had to leave his work in con-

    987
    nection with those public bodies, and thus incur the risk of dismissal. He considered that the principle enunciated by the hon. Member for Newcastle as a most valuable one, and he hoped the House would pass into law a Bill which would be accepted by the working classes as a valuable measure, and, if extended to Ireland, would be recognized as one of the most efficient pieces of legislation ever afforded to that country for some years past.
    MR. CAINEsaid, that, having had considerable experience of electioneering matters in Liverpool, he believed the Bill would materially assist the working men, and would relieve them from the corrupt temptation of being offered half a-day's wages for their vote. The proposed extension of the hours of polling would lighten rather than increase the cost of elections by rendering the conveyance of voters to the poll to some extent unnecessary. It was always difficult to induce the workmen to vote early; and in one borough circulars had been issued by both parties begging the non-artizan voters to abstain from going to the poll during the dinner-hour of the working men, in order that the latter might give their votes. The inconvenience of the present system was very great, and he cordially welcomed the prospect of a change.
    MR. DICK-PEDDIEsaid, he was desirous of saying a few words in support of the Bill, and also on behalf of the small towns, all the other speakers in the course of the debate on this very important Bill for the extension of the hours of polling having advocated it in the interest of the large towns alone. Now, he contended that the claims of the small towns were not less worthy of the consideration of the House. In many small boroughs, by reason of their being small, the electors had to go elsewhere, say, to larger towns near them, to obtain employment, and they could not during the present polling hours go to and from their work during the dinner-hour to record their votes. He represented a group of burghs — the Kilmarnock Burghs—where such was the state of affairs. That group comprised five burghs, one of considerable size, the second even, so large, that if in England it would have had one, if not two, representatives to itself, although, being in Scotland, it was allowed only one-fifth
    988
    of a representative. The others were small boroughs. In these many of the electors had to go two or three miles from the burgh to their daily occupation, and it was impossible that those men could record their votes to any great extent if the hours of polling were not altered. He hoped the hon. Member who had brought in the Bill would listen to no compromise, but would adopt the Bill as it stood.
    An hon. MEMBER suggested that if, on the day of election, the dinner-time of the working men were extended from one hour to two they would have an opportunity of voting, and the dangers which some persons apprehended from an extension of the hours of polling into darkness would be avoided.
    SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTsaid, he had heard with great satisfaction the speeches made in support of this Bill, and especially was he pleased with the able speech of the hon. Member for Durham (Mr. T. C. Thompson). The subject had apparently been exhausted, and he would have indicated the views of the Government sooner if he had not waited to see how much support would be given to the hon. Member for the Wigtown Burghs. He had not observed anyone rise to support the Amendment from the same side of the House as that occupied by the hon. Member for the Wigtown Burghs (Mr. Mark Stewart)— a circumstance which led him to the conclusion that among the Opposition there was little sympathy with the view of the hon. Member. He was not surprised at that, when he remembered what had happened last year in the discussion of this Bill. The hon. Member for the Wigtown Burghs had asked the hon. Member for Newcastle (Mr. A. Dilke) why he did not quote from the Report of the Committee that sat on the question of extending the hours of polling? Now, he (Sir William Harcourt) would quote from the Report of the Committee who sat in 1878. That Report stated that—
    "The artizans had, in many cases, been prevented from recording their votes, and had been put to great inconvenience where they had done so. The witnesses were unable to suggest any other remedy than to extend the hours of polling; and the Committee were satisfied there was no other way of meeting the difficulty."
    Conservative witnesses examined before the Committee were of opinion that there

    989
    was only one way of remedying the evil complained of, except by extending the hours of polling. But who was the Chairman of that Committee? The Chairman was the hon. Baronet the Member for Northumberland (Sir Matthew Ridley), then the Under Secretary for the Home Department. The Report that the Committee issued was altogether a peculiar one, as a reference to it would show. The Chairman of the Committee himself had stated that in many large boroughs there was a difficulty for the working man to get to the poll before 4 o'clock in the afternoon, and he showed exhaustively that the only remedy was the extension of the polling hours until 8 o'clock in the evening. This Committee showed—first, that the grievance complained of, and which the Bill now before the House was intended to remove, was in existence; and secondly, that there was no other moans of meeting it. The Under Secretary of the Home Department then, however, pointed out that the Conservatives were more determined than the Liberals in getting voters to the poll; but that, however, did not appear to be the view of the hon. Member for the Wigtown Burghs. When he (Sir William Harcourt) said that it had been already proved that there was only one way of remedying the evil, and, that being so, he could not see why there was any reason that the Government should not support the Bill now before the House. Having made this statement, he thought he would be only wasting the time of the House if he detained them further. They must not listen to the usual dilatory plea of "Let us see how the extension of polling hours will work in London." Well, of course they had seen how it had worked in London, and only very recently, too, in a very satisfactory manner. A strange case had been made out on behalf of the mining interest, and on behalf of persons employed upon the river and in other industries; but there was one class of men whose position should not be left out of sight—ho referred to those men who were employed upon railways. He had had experience himself of the great difficulty of getting railway officials to vote during the hours at present the law of the land. These men were employed, as a rule, from a very early hour in the morning, and they did not
    990
    return to their homes until late in the evening, when it was impossible for them to record their votes. Therefore, on he-half of the Government, he would give his cordial support to the second reading of the Bill, subject, however, to such modification in Committee as had been shadowed forth by the hon. Member for Newcastle.
    MR. GORSTremarked, that the extension of the hours of polling generally excited the same dislike among Conservatives as was felt by hon. Members on the other side for such devices as voting-papers, though they would undeniably be a convenience to at least a section of each constituency. However, it was the interest of both Parties to give every facility for the record of the verdict of the voters. He thought the opening of the poll at 6 o'clock in the morning would enable clerks and people similarly employed to attend at the booths and vote; but he did not think it would afford any additional facilities to the working classes enabling them to do so. There was no doubt the expenses would be increased; but that was a small matter, as the chief expenditure was connected with the placarding of the walls and the employment of paid canvassers. The keeping the poll open to 8 o'colck at night would, he was afraid, increase the excitement, and in small boroughs that meant the prolongation of the time for bribery, treating, and other irregularities. The principle of the Bill was acceptable to both sides of the House, but its application was open to criticism. There was the preliminary objection to the Bill that it affected only the boroughs and left the counties untouched, although in their case precisely the same arguments might be used. It was, therefore, impossible to regard it as a settlement of the difficulty, and he hoped that it would be taken, if it became law, as only an instalment of a general reform of their electoral system. He advised his hon Friend the Member for the Wigtown Burghs (Mr. Mark Stewart) to withdraw his opposition to the Bill. If, however, he went to a division, he should not be able to vote with him.
    DR. CAMERONsaid, he should not have risen had it not been for the misleading extracts which had been given from the Report of the Committee by the hon. Member for the Wigtown Burghs (Mr. Mark Stewart). He wished,

    991
    however, in the first place, to allude to the remark of the hon. and learned Member for Chatham (Mr. Gorst) in reference to the extension of hours for counties. He quite agreed with him in this view; but it would be remembered that that question had never been brought before the House. So far as the hon. Members whose names were on the back of the Bill were concerned, they would be, he was sure, delighted to extend its provisions in that direction. As to his suggestion in regard to the poll being opened earlier, he might in-form hon. Members opposite that the Returning Officer had generally sufficient difficulty to get his staff to work at 8 o'clock. As to the objection that extended hours would lead to prolongation of treating and scenes of drunkenness, he could only say that the obvious remedy would be to close public-houses earlier on such occasions. In regard to the argument of the hon. Member for the Wigtown Burghs, one would have thought that he was like a political Rip Van Winkle—that he had been asleep during all the recent working of the system in the Metropolitan boroughs. There was no disorder; and it so happened that school board elections had also taken place repeatedly on dark winter nights without any of the disorder that had been spoken of. The hon. Gentleman had quoted from the evidence of the police officers before the Committee, in which they had expressed themselves apprehensive of disorder in the event of the system being set at work; but he had omitted to state that the evidence given by those gentlemen was purely theoretical. They had had no experience whatever on the point, and the only police officer who had any practical experience—Colonel Henderson, chief of the Metropolitan Force—had told the Committee that the extension of the hours of polling would be attended with no danger whatever. Then as to the question of expenses, he begged to point out that it had been shown by the evidence of Returning Officers in school board elections in the Metropolitan boroughs under the extended hours, that the expense on these occasions was much less than in ordinary and Parliamentary elections. As to the objection that it would be impossible to declare the poll on the day of election, he contended that that was not to be taken for granted. In Glasgow,
    992
    where there was an enormous constituency, and a triangular system of voting, the poll, which terminated at 4 o'clock on the occasion of the last election, was declared at a little after 9 o'clock the same evening. He saw no reason, therefore, why even in large constituencies, with an ex-tension in the hours, they should not have a declaration of the state of the poll on the evening of the polling day. Again, the hon. Member had quoted the Town Clerk of Manchester—Sir James Heron —who told the Committee that the working men had no difficulty in getting leave from their masters in order to record their votes. The hon. Gentleman, however, forgot to say that this evidence created so much indignation among the artizans in Manchester that they sent in a protest, and asked to be examined in contradiction of that statement. The same thing might be said as to the Town Clerks' meeting. These gentlemen did not want to have anymore work put upon their shoulders. As a matter of fact, the examination of witnesses in support of the Bill had only ceased when the Committee came to the conviction that it might be taken for granted that any amount of evidence could be produced as to the desirableness of the proposal. As to the modifications in the Bill before it became law, he did not, of course, think this was a fitting time to discuss them; but he trusted the House would not pass this measure simply for the sake of affirming a principle, but with the honest intention of making it law this Session.
    MR. J. RICHARDSONthought so good a case had been made out for the Bill that he did not intend to offer opposition. The hon. Member for Cork (Mr. Daly) had spoken on the measure, and, sorry as he was to disagree with the views expressed by an Irish Member, he could not but say that while Cork, Waterford, Dublin, or Belfast would be fairly benefited by such an Act, there was considerable doubt if this would be the case with smaller boroughs, such as Portarlington with its less than 200 voters, Armagh, Newry, or Carrick-fergus. He was sorry the hon. Member for Newry (Mr. Thomson) was not in his place, because he would, doubtless, confirm this view of the matter. His (Mr. Richardson's) opinion was, that the extension of the polling hours from 4 in the afternoon to 8 in the evening

    993
    would be a disadvantage rather than an advantage in the smaller towns. Public opinion in these places was so strong that he did not think that any employer would keep back any artizan from polling, and no operative suffered inconvenience from the hours of polling in the smaller towns. They lost nothing in wages; they were near the polling booth, and could run from their work and back in a very short time. The four extra hours would be but hours of disorder in those smaller towns of the North of Ireland, where party feeling ran high; and he expressed a hope that some hon. Member better versed in the Forms of the House than he was—perhaps the Home Secretary — would introduce a clause in Committee scheduling the large towns, and not including the smaller towns of Ireland under the provisions of the Bill.
    MR. BARRANsaid, he would remind the House, with reference to the remarks made by the hon. and learned Member for Chatham (Mr. Gorst), that any extension made in the polling hours should equally apply to counties as to boroughs, that in 1870 the Committee which inquired into the subject had only for consideration the circumstances relating to the franchise in boroughs, and it was entirely to evidence bearing upon that point that the Committee addressed itself. The evidence was of three kinds —in the first place, evidence from those most interested in relation to the subject, the artizan and operative class; and to secure the best kind of this class of evidence witnesses were examined from political and industrial associations, from trade councils, and other combinations of working men. The Committee felt that the question, which so much concerned the working classes, demanded evidence principally from the class concerned; and the evidence was so conclusive and unanimous, that after a few sittings the Committee felt that it was unnecessary to call any more witnesses from that class. The argument had been used, and last year it was freely used, that working men should be willing, if called upon, to make some sacrifice in order to exercise the franchise. But here he felt, and he hoped the House would feel, that the question was not confined merely to the working man himself. Three interests were concerned in the time lost by a man who
    994
    had to leave work to record his vote. The employer was subjected to inconvenience; the man himself was frequently called on to sacrifice time, which to him was money; and another and important consideration was that so many persons having to leave their work almost necessitated a cessation of work in the factories on polling days. In consequence of this a great many operatives who had no vote—and a large number of women who were employed—were forced to take a holiday owing to the voters having to break time to reach the polling booth. This was strongly represented by witnesses, who urged the extension of the polling hours from 4 o'clock to 8. Many questions were put in reference to the suggestion whether it would be possible to extend the hours by commencing earlier in the morning—say, at 6 o'clock. Now, to ask a man to vote soon after 6 in the morning was as bad as to ask him to vote at 2 or 3 in the afternoon, for work generally commenced at 6 o'clock or half-past. It was equally an infringement on the working man's time, and it was conceded by the Committee that the proposition to commence polling at 6 o'clock was undesirable. Having completed the evidence of the artizan class, the Committee proceeded to evidence of a very different character—that of the Town Clerks of Leeds and Manchester. These gentlemen were in the habit of going from their homes to their offices, and saw little of the working-class population of their towns, except on days of election; and certainly this intercourse was insufficient for them to form a fair opinion upon the right of the working classes to an extension of polling hours. It was well known that our highly-paid and easily-worked officials were the last men to advise an extension of their own hours of work almost to midnight; and, of course, these witnesses had a strong objection to an increased amount of work and anxiety being imposed upon them. So he was not surprised to find the late Town Clerk of Leeds giving evidence against the extension of the hours, and urging that such an extension must be attended with increased expense. Then there was another class of witnesses, the Chief Constables, who were asked to give evidence in relation to the preservation of the peace. Now, he (Mr. Barran) could speak from experience of

    995
    the first school board election held in Leeds—it was held under his Mayoralty —and he fixed the polling hours from 1 o'clock to 8. On that occasion 30,000 electors polled, everything was done regularly and with order, and by 6 o'clock the following morning the return was made out. Everything went off as smoothly as if the poll had been closed at 4. When the Chief Constable gave evidence expressing anxiety for the peace of the borough if an extension took place, then he (Mr. Barran) might venture to say from his own experience—and it was not inconsiderable in relation to elections—that, so far as the Northern towns were concerned, he had not the slightest fear of any disturbance attending the extension of hours. Objection had been taken to the excitement being kept up by the declaration of the poll being thrown over to the next day. But experience did not justify this objection. In county elections, for instance, the return must come the day following the elections, by which time those engaged in the excitement of the contest had cooled down and calmed their party feelings. If worth anything at all, this argument told in favour of an extension of the hours. Then, as to the question of expense. The Town Clerk of Leeds said that in all probability there would be very little extra expense for an extension of the hours to 8 o'clock. He said the clerks were engaged for the day to do the work, and if required to do a little more, the probability was they would do it without increased expenditure, and that would probably be the case. But though there might be some little doubt whether they could get an increased amount of work for the same pay, he felt sure it would be compensated for by a large decrease in the cost of conveyances. In his own borough he found the item of conveyances a serious and expensive one; and the Bill which passed during the last days of the last Parliament, extending and increasing the use of vehicles on polling days, had offered increased facilities for extravagant expenditure, and had told unfavourably against many hon. Gentlemen who were engaged in the late electoral campaign. But if the hours were extended to 8 o'clock, he felt sure that the expenditure for conveyances would be reduced 50 per cent. And more, he believed the ex-
    996
    tension would have a good moral effect —that the extension of the hours for municipal and Parliamentary elections would increase the interest the people took in political matters; and the greater the number of people who recorded their votes, the larger would be the area of sympathy and good feeling for the institutions of the country. Some dread had been expressed of riots and disturbances; but he believed that now the schoolmaster was abroad among the people the moral tone among those classes by whom disturbances had arisen was much influenced for good. It was evident from the witnesses who came before the Committee, and who represented the class of working men taking the deepest interest in political affairs, that the great bulk of those combining for trade purposes and industries were well-educated, steady working men, and an increase of this respectable class might be looked forward to, together with a continued decrease of the rowdy class. Speaking for his own borough, he might mention that he drove round and about the town, covering a distance of 40 miles, on the day of election, and he was thankful to say he did not see a single drunken man in the whole of that drive.
    MR. WARTONsaid, the Conservative Party had been accused by the hon. Member for Durham (Mr. T. C. Thompson) of being in some way responsible for the distress which prevailed in the country. The hon. Gentleman said the working men had suffered so much distress during the time the Conservatives were in power that they ought to have this boon granted to them in order to compensate them for the wrong they had endured.
    MR. T. C. THOMPSON,interposing, said, his remarks were misrepresented by the hon. and learned Member. He in reality spoke of the distress throughout the country, and said that a clay's wages were of great importance to the working men, in consequence of the distress caused by the Conservative Government.
    MR. WARTONwent on to observe that the hon. Gentleman's explanation perfectly justified his own remarks. He hoped that all the other Party cries used to promote the Liberal cause at the late General Election would be repeated in the House and thoroughly exposed. Adverting to the measure under discussion, he said the grievance brought for-

    997
    ward was ridiculously small. Hon. Members were asked to extend the hours of polling simply in order to suit the convenience of this working man or of that master. In political matters all persons ought to act on the principle of self-denial; but it was proposed that the artizan should not even sacrifice his dinner-hour or half of it, and that the whole Constitution should be changed for his peculiar benefit. He felt quite ashamed of such an argument. The Tory Party were the real Mends of the working men, while those who professed to be their friends gave them this character—that they would not put themselves a little out of the way in order to vote. An hon. Member had supported the Bill on the ground of morality. But in small boroughs there were bodies of men who "hung back," as it was called, until nearly 4 o'clock, and would hang back more effectively if the poll were to be kept open until 8 o'clock, and they could act under cover of darkness. In the interest of morality, therefore, they ought to reject the proposal. It had been said that little boroughs required an extensions of the hours as much as the larger boroughs. But they all knew that in small boroughs the constituency was generally polled out early in the day. In the Metropolis the police could suppress disorders, which could not be done in small country boroughs. For all these reasons, he hoped the House would not assent to the second reading.
    MR. FINDLATERagreed with the hon. Member for Armagh (Mr. J. Richardson) that it would be a calamity if the hours of polling should be extended indiscriminately in all the boroughs of Ireland. The extension should be confined to those boroughs where it could be shown that the voters suffered inconvenience from the present hours. He quite believed that to extend the hours in the smaller boroughs would be to run the risk of disturbance and calamity. An hon. Member had suggested the extension should apply to counties also. So far as his experience of his own county went, he could say that voting was practically over by 2 o'clock. Very few polled after that—in fact, the officials in the polling booths had nothing to do. For these reasons, he hoped that the extension of the hours for polling would not be made general without restriction.
    SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEsaid, all must agree that it was desirable that every proper facility should be given to all classes of electors to exercise the privilege which Parliament had conferred upon them; and if it was necessary for that purpose to extend the hours of polling, it was a legitimate subject of inquiry whether it could be done without causing greater evils than it might cure. He could not help feeling that there were many dangers to which they might be exposed if they were indiscriminately to extend the hours of polling throughout the country. If such a course were taken without a necessity for it existing, it was obvious it would lay them open to the great danger of advantage being taken of the hours of darkness for the commission of practices which above all things they desired to put a stop to. Greater facilities would be given for personation and corruption, and some risk would be involved of greater disturbance and irregularities at the poll. Therefore, they ought to be careful of carrying such a measure into places where it was not proved to be necessary. If it could be shown that there were constituencies in which a fair opportunity could not be given to a considerable number of voters to record their votes without some extension of the hours of polling the case would be very different. He did not know whether it was possible by any other means to increase the facilities of voters. They discussed that subject in the last Parliament in connection with the question of the conveyance of voters. But it would be very advantageous to take a proposal like this in connection with other proposals which might have to be made with regard to our electoral system. He wished to point out, also, that the prolongation of the hours of polling would lead in many cases to a postponement of the hour for the declaration of the poll. Where the polling closed at 4 o'clock the declaration might be made in the course of the evening; but if the poll were kept on until 8 o'clock, in many cases the declaration could not be made before next morning, and thus the excitement would be kept up for another day. These were matters which deserved consideration. He understood that the Home Secretary pointed to the probability of some modifications being introduced in Committee, and that the

    999
    proposer of the Bill was not opposed to such a proceeding. He would, therefore, recommend that they should not oppose the second reading of the Bill, and that the hon. Member for the Wigtown Burghs (Mr. Mark Stewart) should not press his Amendment. Then, before the Bill went into Committee, they might consider the question, with a view to seeing whether they could remove or mitigate the inconvenience complained of; and, if they were to extend the hours of voting, with what safeguards and precaution it should be done.
    DR. KINNEAR,in supporting the Bill, said, he was gratified to hear the hon. Member for Cork (Mr. Daly) describe the Bill as being a great boon for the North of Ireland. He was sure such would be the case in Donegal. There the Bill would certainly be a great convenience to voters, and in the same spirit he believed it would be accepted throughout Ireland; therefore, he approved of the objects of the Bill.
    MR. W. EWARTdid not believe this Bill would be found a boon by the people of Ireland. In his constituency of 20,000 electors there was no difficulty in bringing voters to the poll within the hours allowed by law, and he believed the extension of the hours to 8 o'clock would be an unmitigated evil. It would open the door to frauds of many kinds incident to contested elections, would throw the declaration of the poll to the next day, and largely increase the expense of election contests.
    MR. BURTsaid, it seemed to have been assumed throughout the entire discussion that this was a Bill only applicable to the large boroughs of the country. An extension of the hours of polling was greatly needed in the large boroughs; but it was not altogether peculiar to them, inasmuch as in many small boroughs the necessity also prevailed. He knew that in some small boroughs, and especially in the borough he had the honour to represent, the necessity for an extension of the hour was equally felt. The electors of his borough were over 5,000 in number, and the area covered was very extensive in proportion to the population; and, therefore, the voters found a difficulty in getting to the poll when it was closed at so early an hour. In the Morpeth district an election necessitated the closing of the pits, if all the
    1000
    men were to vote, and the pits could not be stopped without very great disadvantage; and in some other districts the pits could not be closed at all. His contention was that, even if they could, it was not a matter that should be forced upon them; it was the duty of Parliament to afford every reasonable facility for the exercise of the franchise with which the electors had been endowed.
    MR. MARK STEWARTexpressed his willingness to accept the advice of the right hon. Baronet the Member for North Devon (Sir Stafford Northcote). In giving Notice of opposition, he had no intention of resisting the principle of the Bill so far as it referred to allowing the working man to record his vote; but what he did object to was that that principle should be extended to every borough indiscriminately.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    Main Question put, and agreed to.
    Bill read a second time, and committed for Tuesday loth June.

VALUATION OF LAND BILL.— [BILL 143.]
(Mr. Ramsay, Mr. Baxter, Mr. Pell, Mr. Muntz, Mr. Joseph Cowen.)
VALUATION OF LAND BILL.— [BILL 143.]

  SECOND READING.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Mr. RAMSAY,in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, the object of the Bill was to assimilate the English and Scotch systems of valuation. The subject had been so much discussed of late years in the House that he would not reiterate the arguments in favour of the Bill he had formerly used. The fact was that the right hon. Member for North Devon (Sir Stafford Northcote) agreed to accept the principle of the Bill last year, and, accordingly, a similar measure then before the House had been withdrawn. On that occasion he had introduced a similar Bill, and for the sake of those hon. Gentlemen who were not then present he would explain it in a word. The principle was simply that of taking the rent of each tenement as the sole criterion of the value of such tenement. There was, no doubt, great diversity between the practice of England and that of Scotland, At the same time, when dealing with the method on which the whole system of taxation was based, he thought it only

  1001
  fair that the whole system should be considered. The English practice had been described as differing in every parish—so much so, that it might be said to be based on the discretionary power exercised by the different overseers in the several parishes and Unions throughout the country. Nothing was more anomalous than that this should be the foundation for the system of levying the Income Tax, and the practical result in Scotland was equivalent to an additional penny of Income Tax on real estate in that country. If he had no other inducement to offer to the House for accepting the principle of the Bill, he should say that that in itself was a sufficient reason. He thought hon. Members were inclined to give Scotch interests the same consideration as English ones. Having regard to the population of the two countries, one would suppose that the incidence of taxation would be so adjusted that it would not fall most heavily on the poorer country. But such was not the case. Instead of the revenue derived from Scotland being less than a seventh, which was the amount proportionate to its population, it was considerably greater, the revenue derived from Scotland, with its population of 3,600,000, being £7,719,500, as compared with £54,456,718 for England, with its population of some 25,000,000. That was one reason, if there was no other, for so adjusting the incidence of taxation that it would not fall most heavily on the poorer country. In addition to this, they had to consider what effect any such change as was proposed would have on England. He contended that it would be of great use to the people of England, as they would be able exactly to estimate the annual increase in the value of real estate throughout the country. No fair comparison could be instituted between the valuation of real estate in the two countries so long as the systems pursued were so diverse. In England the overseers in the various parishes of their Unions, by means of the assessment committees, prepared the valuation; and from letters he had received from all parts of the country he understood that the Guardians, who were the members of the assessment committees, proceeded to make up the estimate of any particular tenement, not according to its real value, or the rent
  1002
  for which it would actually let, but according to what might be estimated as suitable for local wants. Of that, Scotchmen had no ground for complaint, so far as local rates were concerned; but it was a very different matter when they came to the incidence of Imperial taxation, and it was on that account, and to give to the State the advantage of realizing the annual increase in the value of real estate, and to secure the equal incidence of Imperial taxation throughout the Kingdom, that he would urge the Government to adopt the system of valuation contained in his Bill, which was that of adopting rent as the sole criterion of value. When he bad got the promise to which he had referred from the right hon. Gentleman the Member for North Devon (Sir Stafford North-cote) he was satisfied; but, from various causes, the question had not been advanced. It was not necessary now to ask what were the causes; but, so long as the state of matters to which he alluded prevailed, it was the duty of everyone who felt that an injustice was done to press upon Ministers uniformity of valuation. In the Report of the Board of Inland Revenue for the year ending the 31st of March, 1879, it was stated that whereas in the whole of England other than the Metropolis the property on which the Income Tax was assessed was£l 17,392,385, the gross estimate of the rental for the poor rate assessment was £106,000.000, while the rateable value with which his Bill did not interfere was £91,119,973, so that the gross estimate of rental according to the poor rate was £11,000,000 less than was charged upon the same property for Income Tax. When they found that extreme diversity of practice between the Board of Inland Revenue and the local authorities throughout the Kingdom, he did not think it was creditable that such a system should continue; therefore, the principle of the Bill now before the House should be adopted. In Scotland the amount of valuation was £18,520,000, whereas in England it was equal to £117,392,385, exclusive of the Metropolis, which in a question of that sort might very fairly be excluded from their consideration, because the law in the Metropolis was different from that in use in any other part of the Kingdom. That the result of the present system was one of hardship to Scotland could be seen

  1003
  from the figures he had given. It seemed to him that no fairer cause of complaint than that could be had, and he hoped that the Representative of the Government would be able to assent to the second reading of the Bill. If refused, then he should say that the Scotch Members would require to practice that which they had never done, and endeavour to awaken some interest in the people of Scotland by that course of obstruction which they knew and had been taught how to practice; but that was a course they would enter upon with very great reluctance. Referring for a moment to an argument that had been previously employed, that what might be suitable for Scotland would not be suitable for England, he said the system was working satisfactorily in Scotland, in cases where the valuation was greater than it was in three-fourths of the counties in England; and when he said that, he thought he had said enough to show that the objection was wholly groundless. He was quite aware there was a difficulty in England, because of the different way in which the local assessments were made; but if they waited until they got a satisfactory system for imposing local rates and county government they might wait for a very long time to come; and, therefore, he hoped Her Majesty's Ministers would be prepared to give them what he regarded as simple justice to Scotland. If they did not, then he desired to say he should feel very much disappointed, be-cause he was certain there was not a Member from Scotland who was acquainted with the system in use in that country but would bear his testimony to the satisfactory operation of the law which had been in use there for 25 years and upwards. The Members of the House preferred practice to theory; and when they found a law similar to that he had submitted, which had been in operation for 25 years in Scotland, and had given satisfaction to the people, he thought he had said enough to commend his Bill to the acceptance of the House. The only objection he ever heard to the operation of the Valuation Act in Scotland was in respect of the charge levied on mansion houses in the country. They were said to be less heavily taxed than similar dwellings in other places. But that did not arise from the fault of any of those who were the
  1004
  assessors, but from the fact that the rent when coming to be let was regarded as the real value; and that was the only just way to deal with such cases. He did not see it was necessary for him to further detain the House. The real object he had in view was to secure a uniformity of valuation throughout Great Britain. He did not propose to interfere with the sister country, as the system in operation there was wholly different to that in any part of Great Britain; and, as he had no wish to occupy time, he would move that the Bill be now read a second time.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Mr. Ramsay.)
  MR. SCLATER-BOOTHdenied that any injustice was done to Scotland by the present system of valuation. The hon. Member had not made out any case whatever for his Bill. The hon. Member seemed to have assumed that he was the author of the principle that rent should be the basis of valuation; but that principle was contained in the Scotch Act of 1854—
  MR. RAMSAY: I stated that the system had been in operation in Scotland for 25 years, and I never claimed the authorship of it.
  MR. SCLATER-BOOTHsaid, the hon. Member had forborne to remind the House that on every occasion on which he on the part of the late Government had introduced a Valuation Bill the constant burthen of his song was that his object was to get more and more the principle established that rents paid and received should be the criterion of value, and it was with that view alone that they proposed to associate with the assessment committee an officer of the Inland Revenue. The hon. Member brought forward this measure as one of justice to Scotland; but the Inland Revenue, in levying the Income Tax in England, were not bound by the Poor Law assessment, which their assessment exceeded by at least £10,000,000, and they levied the property tax both in England and Scotland upon a uniform principle. It was quite true that Scotland had gone a step beyond that which was adopted in England—namely, in the identification for all purposes, both local and Imperial, of the value of real property. There was, however, no in-

  1005
  justice to Scotland. The present Bill, however, did not merely propose to extend to England the principle of rent as the basis of valuation. A more preposterous step than to get rid of the whole of the existing machinery, which had worked for the last 15 years in this country with great success as compared with what formerly was the case, he had never heard. The Bill proposed at one coup to get rid of the whole existing machinery by which value was assessed. The real principle of the Bill was the establishment of county valuation boards instead of assessment committees; and though that would work satisfactorily in the Scotch counties, it would in England be attended with great injustice and inequality. No case had been made out for the adoption of such a principle, and he trusted the House would not sanction it by reading the Bill a second time. The principle of rent as the criterion of value had already received the sanction of the House.
  MR. HIBBERTsaid, he was obliged to oppose the Bill. He was not prepared to admit that no improvements should be made in the mode of carrying out the Valuation Act. Five or six Bills had been before the House from time to time, and great improvements had been made. But that was no reason for accepting the Bill now before the House. He did not object to the principle that rent was the criterion of value; but the Bill went much further than that. It proposed entirely to disestablish and get rid of 646 assessment committees, who were so usefully engaged in carrying on the assessment work of the country. The Bill would entirely upset that system, which he was sure the House was not prepared to do. The assessment committees had been doing really good service to the country. When they commenced their work, 12 or 13 years ago, the assessments were in a very unsatisfactory state. A great improvement had now been effected —parish assessments had been brought to an equal valuation, and what was now wanted was to compel uniformity between Union and Union. It was said injustice was done to Scotland. In the Metropolis a considerable increase had of late years occurred under the Valuation Act. With a population of 3,200,000, the gross value of the assessment in the Metropolis amounted to £30,000,000; and in the whole of Scotland, with a population about the
  1006
  same number, the gross value was not £30,000,000, but only £22,000,000, or £8,000,000 less than the Metropolis. He thought the true result of his hon. Friend's proposal would be to increase the pressure on the Government to proceed with their Valuation Bill as soon as possible. It would be practically impossible to carry on the work of assessment by means of such boards as the hon. Member proposed, as in such large counties as Gloucester, the West Biding of Yorkshire, or Lancashire, they would comprise over 300 members. There was no reason for overriding England with the Scotch system, nor for overriding Scotland with the English system. The principle that rent should be the basis of valuation had already been adopted; and he had no doubt that it would be adopted in the Bill which would be brought forward by the Government on the subject of valuation and assessment as soon as possible— most probably next Session. He trusted, therefore, his hon. Friend would not press his Bill to a division, but would rest satisfied with the discussion that had taken place.
  MR. PAGETsaid, he was gratified to hear a protest from the Government against the wholesale disestablishment of existing rating authorities advocated by the hon. Member for the Falkirk Burghs (Mr. Ramsay). He was also glad to learn that the Government proposed, at an early period, to introduce a measure of their own. There could be no difficulty about the matter, which would have been settled last Session, had there been time, by the Bill of the late President of the Local Government Board. That Bill was nearly through Committee, and all contentious matter had virtually been disposed of. He therefore hoped the hon. Member, who was justly regarded as a great authority on this subject in Scotland, would be satisfied with the discussion which had been held, and withdraw the Bill.
  MR. MUNTZsaid, if he had any doubt about the necessity or the desirability there was for the Bill being read a second time, he should have had that doubt removed by the speeches that had just been delivered. The hon. Member for Oldham (Mr. Hibbert) told them they had had 13 years in which attempts had been made to pass a Valuation Bill, and in all those years they had not made any progress; and, therefore all the

  1007
  injustice had continued because neither Party had been able to act upon any fixed principle. A good deal had been said as to the clause in the Bill particularly referring to the assessment committees. Now, he thought that was an essential part of the Bill; but whether continued or not, the great principle of the Bill had nothing to do with that, but was whether those valuations that were made were made on a fixed system, whether they were made on the real value of the property or not. It was said it would be monstrous to interfere with the Metropolis Bill; but the Bill, in his opinion, was very unjust, and a large number of persons were of that opinion, whereas the Scotch system, which had been in operation for 25 years, was generally affirmed. He supported the second reading of the Bill, and believed if it was so read they might have the subject discussed in Committee, when there would be a chance of doing what they had never been able to do before.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURsaid, he must express his disappointment at the manner in which the Bill of his hon. Friend the Member for the Falkirk Burghs had been received by the Government. The rise in the amount of the assessments was no proof of improvement in the mode of assessing; and, seeing that we had in England no fewer than three principles of assessment —one for the poor rate, another for rent, and another for Income Tax—it could not be claimed for any of these three modes any degree of exactness such as the Bill would insure. In the county of Bedford there were differences of 40 and 20 per cent in the assessments for different purposes—that was to say, the gross estimated rental at which Income Tax assessments exceeded the value for local rates was 2097 per cent higher than the gross estimated value in poor rate, and actually 40·54 per cent higher than the rateable value used for levying the poor rate. In Carnarvon the differences were even greater. These diversities had been strongly condemned by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue. Indeed, hardly a Report came to hand in which these valuations were not denounced. In England and Wales the values for Income Tax were, in 1876–77, upwards of £142,000,000, against the £130,000,000 value for poor rate, and £111,000,000 value for levying that rate. ! The result of such variations was to
  1008
  bring on attempts to palm off the lower value for levying the poor rate for the value to levy the Income Tax. The contrast between the value in Scotland, as shown by the rent roll, and the value for the Income Tax, was very great, the Income Tax value being close on the value of the rent roll, so that local taxes and Income Tax were assessed on the like values. This equality fully bore out the assertion of his hon. Friend that Scotland contributed to the Income Tax a far higher ratio of payment according to values than did England. In these circumstances, the objections taken to the details of the Bill on the part of the Government did not justify their opposition to its principle. The valuations had risen in Scotland in a far higher ratio than in England, mainly owing to the excellent Act of 1854, which laid down a uniform scale for making values in that country. Then, again, the contrast of values in the Metropolis with those of Scotland did not hold. It was quite unfair to compare a poor country like Scotland with the concentration of wealth in the Metropolis. He urged the hon. Member for Falkirk to go to a division, in order to show the Government that there was a grievance which urgently required to be dealt with. In his opinion, it was a scandal to the country that action in this direction had not been taken long ago.
  MR. GREGORYsaid, there were two principles in the Bill—the basis of assessment, and the machinery by which it should be carried out. The methods of arriving at value laid down in the Bill were open to criticism in detail, and it could hardly be amended by a Select Committee without altering its machinery, so as to make it virtually a new Bill. After the assurances that had been given, the Bill might very well be withdrawn, and the subject left in the hands of the Government.
  MR. D. M'LARENsaid, that parts of the Scotch Act had been referred to as antagonistic. In point of fact, they were consistent and worked together. One was that the real value of the land or house was to be taken, and the second was that the land or houses should be taken at a rent at which they could reasonably be expected to let. The solution of the supposed antagonism was this—The real rent was to be taken wherever a rent was paid; but wherever a man occupied his own land or his own house the real

  1009
  value was to be taken, as nearly as could be ascertained, in comparison with what other houses or other lands were rented at in the same neighbourhood. Nothing was more common in Edinburgh than for a man to occupy his own house. Perhaps one-half of a street was occupied by owners, and the other half let to tenants. Well, that was to be done with a house occupied by the owner if the assessment was to be only by the real rent? Since no rent was paid no assessment according to the rent could be taken; but hero came in the provision that the real value was to be ascertained by the rental of property of the same kind in the neighbourhood. The same provision applied to land as to houses, and hence the two provisions worked together, and the fact was that the Act was regarded by all parties in Scotland as valuable and equitable.
  MR. DUCKHAMsaid, he should vote for the second reading of the measure.
  LORD HENRY SCOTTsaid, the present condition of things was not the fault of the late President of the Local Government Board, but rather that of the late Parliament; for when the last Government brought forward a Valuation Bill it was obstructed by Amendments which complicated the question with that of county government. He hoped Government would introduce a Valuation Bill this Session, and that they would keep the question of county government quite apart from it.
  MR. POUNDthanked the Secretary to the Local Government Board for announcing the intention of Her Majesty's Government to bring in a Bill to deal with the subject of valuation at the earliest opportunity. He joined in the appeal just made by hon. Member for Lincolnshire (Mr. Heneage) that the Government would see their way to introducing it in the present Session, in order that, although it might not be passed, it might be brought before the Chambers of Agriculture, Boards of Guardians, and other local bodies interested, during the autumn, and thus, having been ventilated and thoroughly discussed by the country, a basis of legislation would be afforded, so that the Government would be able to pass an Act next Session. He considered the subject demanded attention —chiefly on the ground of want of uniformity. There were now, it was well-known, three different assessments:—1,
  1010
  the county rate assessment; 2, the Poor Law assessment; and 3, the Income Tax assessment. It was most desirable that there should be only one. He had an opportunity occasionally of sitting as an Income Tax Commissioner, and he felt bound to say that complaints were made in the constituency which he represented as to the present mode of this assessment. He thanked the hon. Member who introduced the Bill. Scotchmen were well-known in the House for the excellent and quiet way in which they attended to Scotch Business; and on this occasion the hon. Member had departed from the usual practice of attending only to Scotch Business, but had brought in a Bill legislating for England. He understood the reason for so doing after the explanation he gave—namely, that Scotland now paid 1d. too much under the present mode of assessment, and England 1d. too little. If the hon. Member could prove this, he (Mr. Round) thought it a fair question to raise, and, for his part, was prepared to give him and his countrymen their penny.
  MR. STORERsaid, the many attempts that had been made to deal with this question had not resulted in a good settlement, for one distinct and clear reason, which was, that it was impossible to get one assessment for local and for Imperial taxation, because, while a man's income was a fact, the rent paid was not always an indication of the relative value of property when it had to be determined as between one tenant and another. He thought the old basis of assessment should be maintained. Farms were sometimes let at a nominal value, in order to keep them in cultivation; and if they were assessed at their nominal value an unfair burden would fall on occupiers who paid a fair rent. In these cases uniformity must be attained, and the real point at issue was the basis on which the assessment was to be made. He trusted the Government would take this question in hand.
  SIR JOSEPH BAILEYsaid, that, as chairman of an assessment committee, he was by no means satisfied with the present rating of woods. They ought to be rated exactly like other property, at the actual value they had from year to year. It was true they could not get the value of woods for one year; but they could take a number of years, and when it was known what was the worth of the

  1011
  wood on being cut down, any actuary could tell the value from year to year. They could not arrive at the value of a farm in any one year. He believed that in what had been said about the county of Bedford trading and professional income was included in one assessment, and, of course, excluded in the other. He was glad that a promise had been obtained from the Government to bring in a Bill next year; but he hoped that no great change would be made in the assessment committees.
  MR. ALDERMAN W. LAWRENCEexpressed a hope that the Government would take up the question and remove the inequalities which existed in the present system, and which were in nothing more conspicuous than in a comparison of the low valuations of great mansions throughout the country for the purpose of the house tax, and the high valuations of houses and gardens occupied by the middle classes and houses occupied by traders and shopkeepers.
  Question put, and negatived.

ANCIENT MONUMENTS.

  ADJOURNED DEBATE.
  Order read, for resuming Adjourned Debate on Question [25th May],
  "That a Select Committee be appointed, &c."
  Question again proposed.
  Debate resumed.
  LORD HENRY SCOTTexpressed his regret that Sir John Lubbock, who had originally brought forward the question, was not in the House to again take charge of it. If a subject of so much interest was to be dealt with in a new House of Commons, it should only be after full information was before them; and he concurred in the suggestion of his right hon. Friend the Member for the University of Cambridge (Mr. Beresford Hope) that such information should be obtained. He would prefer a small Royal Commission for Committee of the House proposed by his right hon. Friend, which could visit and take evidence of the various localities in which ancient monuments of great interest were to be found. It would certainly, in his opinion, be absurd for the House to legislate on the subject without having before them the information which could be so obtained; and he thought that when those
  1012
  two whose views were so divergent as his noble Friend (Earl Percy) and the right hon. Member for Cambridge University could be brought to an agreement on some such plan as that proposed it would be a pity not to come to some arrangement of the kind that had been proposed.
  MR. FOLEYwas also in favour of a full inquiry, such as that suggested, being instituted.
  MR. ONSLOWhoped that the inquiry would be made by a Commission rather than by a Committee. There was, however, no urgency in the matter, and it might well stand over until the gentleman, to whom reference had been made and whom they would be all glad to see once more among them, returned to the House. He had always opposed Sir John Lubbock's Bill, as it was calculated to interfere with the rights of private property.
  EARL PERCY,in reference to remarks made on a former evening by the hon. Member for Warwick (Mr. A. Peel), said, it was true that in the last Parliament he had withdrawn his opposition to the Ancient Monuments Bill. He had done so, thinking it was only respectful to bow to the decision of the House, although he dissented from that decision. In a new Parliament, however, he thought he was not acting inconsistently in asking that a full inquiry should be instituted.
  MR. RAMSAYjoined in the appeal to the Government to agree to the proposal to refer the Bill to a Select Committee. He thought it was necessary that the inquiry should be made as to the ancient monuments, which might be confided to the care of any Commission. There were some ancient monuments of much interest on his property; and he would consider it a hardship if, without his leave, a stranger should claim the right to interfere with them. He regarded these monuments quite as much his own personal property as any part of his estate. He trusted that if an inquiry were agreed to it would result in the settlement of the question in a satisfactory manner, in reference both to the rights of property and the interests of the public.
  Question put.
  The House divided: —Ayes 63; Noes 148; Majority 85.—(Div. List, No. 15.)

  BANKRUPTCY BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. MORLEY, Bill to amend the Law of Bankruptcy, ordered to be brought in by Mr. MORLEY and Sir CHARLES MILLS.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 206.]
  House adjourned at five minutes before Six o'clock.