House Of Commons
Tuesday, May 29th, 1906.
The House met at quarter before Three of the clock.
Message to attend the Lords Commissioners.
The House went, and, having returned,
Mr. SPEAKER reported the Royal Assent to a number of Bills (See page 233).
Private Bill Business
Private Bills Lords (Standing Orders Not Previously In Quired Into Complied With)
laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bill, originating in the Lords and referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders not previously inquired into, and which are applicable thereto, have been complied with, viz.:—Channel Ferry Railway and Quay Bill [Lords].
Ordered, That the Bill be read a second time.
Cheltenham Gas Bill; Edinburgh Corporation Bill. Read the third time, and passed.
Metropolitan Railway Bill (King's Consent signified). Bill read the third time, and passed.
South Suburban Gas Bill. Read the third time, and passed.
South Lancashire Tramways (Extension of Time) Bill [Lords]. As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
Norwich Union Life Insurance Society Bill [Lords] (by Order). Read the third time, and passed, without Amendment.
Local Government Provisional Orders (Gas) Bill. Reported, with Amendments [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill, as amended, to be considered To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 241.]
London County Council (Money) Bill. Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Mersey Railway Bill [Lords]. Reported, with Amendments [Title amended]; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Mersey Docks and Harbour Board Bill [Lords]. Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Railway Bills (Group 4)
reported from the Committee on Group 4 of Railway Bills; That, for the convenience of parties, the Committee had adjourned till Tuesday, 12th June, at half-past Eleven of the clock.
Report to lie upon the Table.
Sunday Closing (Wales) Act (1881) Amendment Bill. Second Reading upon Tuesday, 26th June.
Message From The Lords
That they have agreed to,—Police (Superannuation) Bill; Electric Lighting Provisional Order (No. 1) Bill; Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 2) Bill; Marriages Provisional Order Bill, without Amendment.
New Mills Urban District Council Bill; North East Lincolnshire Water Bill, with Amendments.
That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to amend the Law relating to Patent Agents." [Patents, Designs, and Trade Marks (Registration of Patent Agents) Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act for granting the use of Schoolrooms for Public Meetings." [Elections (Meetings in Schoolrooms) Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to incorporate the West Yorkshire Tramways Company; and to empower that Company to make and maintain tramways, tramroads, and other works; and for other purposes." [West Yorkshire Tramways Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to authorise the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Company to widen certain railways and to construct other works; to acquire additional lands; and for other purposes. [Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act for conferring further powers upon the County of Durham Electric Power Supply Company; and for other purposes." [County of Durham Electric Power Supply Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act for incorporating and conferring powers on the Cumberland Electricity and Power Gas Company; and for other purposes." [Cumberland Electricity and Power Gas Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to extend the time for taking certain lands and for the construction of certain authorised works by the Southport and Lytham Tramroad Company and the Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of the Borough of Southport; and for other purposes." [Southport and Lytham Tramroad (Extension of Time) Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to amend, extend, and define the borrowing powers of the Urban District Council of Newtownards in the county of Down; to improve and enlarge the gas undertaking of the said Council; and to make further provisions for the local government of their district." [Newtownards Urban District Council Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act for conferring further powers on the Scottish Union and National Insurance Company, and for effecting certain amendments of the Acts which regulate the Company; and for other purposes." [Scottish Union and National Insurance Company Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act for uniting into one drainage district the two drainage districts in the parish of War-boys, in the County of Huntingdon, known as the First and Third Drainage Districts, constituted under an Act of the fifteenth year of King George the Third, chapter fifteen; and to amend that Act; and for other purposes." [Warboys (Union of Districts) Drainage Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act for transferring to the Newcastle-upon-Tyne Electric Supply Company, Limited, the undertakings authorised by the Whitley and Monkseaton Electric Lighting Order, 1901, and the Seghill, Earsdon and Tyne-mouth (Rural) Electric Lighting Order, 1902; and for other purposes." [Newcastle-upon-Tyne Electric Supply Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act for rendering valid certain Letters Patent granted to John Caeser Crellin for inventions for (1) An appliance for raising, lowering, supporting, and transporting portions of machinery and the like; (2) Improvements relating to lifting-jacks; and (3) Improved apparatus for raising, lowering, supporting, and transporting portions of machinery and like uses." [Crellin's Patents Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to authorise the closing and sale of certain churches in the city of Manchester, the extinction of certain ecclesiastical parishes and the merger thereof in other parishes in the said City; and for other purposes." [Manchester Churches Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to authorise the Trent Navigation Company to construct certain new works for improving the Navigation of the River Trent between Wilden Ferry and Gainsborough, to confer further powers upon the Company; and for other purposes." [Trent Navigation Company Bill [Lords.]
And, also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to provide for matters consequent on the purchase by the Secretary of State in Council of India of the railways and other property of the Bombay, Baroda, and Central India Railway Company; and for other purposes." [Bombay, Baroda, and Central India Railway (Purchase) Bill [Lords.]
West Yorkshire Tramways Bill [Lords]: Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Bill [Lords); County of Durham Electric
Power Supply Bill [Lords]; Cumberland Elecricity and Power Gas Bill [Lords]; Southport and Lytham Tramroad (Extension of Time) Bill [Lords]; Newtownards Urban District Council Bill [Lords]; Scottish Union and National Insurance Company Bill [Lords]; Warboys (Union of Districts) Drainage Bill [Lords]; Newcastle-upon-Tyne (Electric Supply) Bill [Lords]; Crellin's Patent Bill [Lords]; Manchester Churches Bill [Lords]; Trent Navigation Company Bill [Lords]; Bombay, Baroda, and Central India (Purchase) Bill [Lords]. Read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.
Petitions
Borough Court (Dublin) Bill
Petition from Dublin, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
Building Lands (Scotland) Bill
Petition from Haddington, against; to lie upon the Table.
Coal Mines (Eight Hours) Bill
Petition from Dunnikier, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
East India And China (Opium Trade)
Petitions for suppression; from Edinburgh; and Galston; to lie upon the Table.
Education (England And Wales) Bill (Religious Teaching)
Petitions against alteration of Law; from Adwell and South Weston (two); Alvechurch; Ashurst; Baglan (two); Broadway; Burstow; Chadderton; Colne (two); Felmersham; Felmersham with Radwell; Heanor; Knottingley (two); Manchester; Pen Selwood; Play ford and Culpho; Ruswarp; Stalham: Stamber-mill; Stopsley; Sutton Bridge with Wing-land; Swanton; and Swanton Morley; to lie upon the Table.
Education Of Defective Children (Scotland) Bill
Petition from Haddington, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
Lands Valuation (Scotland) Act (1854) Amendment Bill
Petition from Haddington, against; to lie upon the Table.
Local Government (Scotland) Bill
Petition from Haddington, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
Local Government (Scotland) (No 2) Bill
Petitions in favour: from Caithness; and Haddington; to lie upon the Table.
Poisons And Pharmacy Bill Lords
Petitions for alteration; from Cheltenham; Oxford; and Wigan; to lie upon the Table.
Small Holders (Scotland) Bill
Petition from Haddington, against; to lie upon the Table.
Small Tenants (Scotland) Bill
Petition from Haddington, against; to lie upon the Table.
Street Betting Bill
Petition from Nelson, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
Trades Unions And Trade Disputes Bill
Petition from Aberdeen, for alteration; to lie upon the Table.
Vagrant Children Bill
Petition of the Strand Union, against; to lie upon the Table.
Returns, Reports, Etc
Treaty Series (No 6, 1906)
Copy presented, of Treaty between the United Kingdom and Spain for the Marrige of His Majesty the King of Spain with Her Royal Higness Princess Victoria Eugénie Julia Ena. Signed at London, 7th May, 1906. Ratifications exchanged at London, 23rd May, 1906 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
East India (Accounts And Esti Mates, 1906–7)
Copy presented, of Explanatory Memorandum by the Secretary of State for India [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
Historical Manuscripts (Royal Commission)
Copy presented, of Calendar of the Manuscripts of the Marquess of Ormonde, K.P., preserved at Kilkenny Castle, New Series, Vol. IV. [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
Shop Hours Act, 1904
Copy presented, of Order made by the Council of the Metropolitan Borough of Lambeth, and confirmed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department, fixing the Hours of Closing for Hairdressers' and Barbers' Shops within the Borough [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
Shop Hours Act, 1904
Copy presented, of Order made by the Council of the Metropolitan Borough of Battersea, and confirmed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department, fixing the Hours of Closing for certain classes of Shops within the Borough [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
Trade Reports (Annual Series)
Copies presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 3605 to 3607 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
Trade Reports (Miscellaneous Series)
Copy presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Report, Miscellaneous Series, No. 652 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
Warlike Operations (Killed And Wounded)
Address for "Return of the number of sailors and soldiers killed or wounded in war or warlike operations carried on by the Government of this Country and chartered companies during the years 1898, 1899, 1900, 1901, 1902, and 1903, respectively (exclusive of those carried on by the Government of India), in the same form as the Return granted in Session 1895."—( Mr. Morton.)
Education Act, 1902 (Rates Raised Under Section 18 (1)
Return ordered, "by the County Council of each Administrative County in England and Wales, except London, of particulars as to the amounts received during the year ended the 31st day of March, 1906 (or, if the particulars are not available, then during the year ended the 31st day of March, 1905) from Rates raised under Section 18 (1) (c) and (d) of The Education Act, 1902, over parts
Name of Parish. | Assessable Value according to the Country rate Basis. | Amount of Rate raised under Section 18 (1). | Rate in the£. |
—( Mr.Birrell.)
Wireless Telegraphy
Return ordered, "of Applications for Licences under The Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1904, showing how each Application has been dealt with, and of Statistics of Messages to and from Ships at sea exchanged between the Post Office and the Marconi Company during each quarter from January, 1905, to March, 1906, inclusive."—( Mr. Dickinson.)
Questions And Answers Circulated With The Votes
Dyeing Of Navy Cloth
To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the rule that all cloth goods supplied to the Admiralty must be dyed with vegetable indigo is still in force; and, if so, whether the attention of the Admiralty has been called to the fact that the chemically produced indigo is identical in composition with the vegetable product, cheaper to dye, enters more intimately into the structure of the yarn or cloth, and is equally permanent.
To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he will explain why the employment of synthetic indigo is still prohibited for Navy contracts, seeing that several other Departments of State, when inviting tenders for the same class of material, leave the employment of either plant or synthetic indigo optional; and in view of the expert evidence and practical experience, extending over several years, showing that synthetic indigo is equal to plant indigo as regards application and dyeing, and in view of the fact that synthetic indigo is decidedly cheaper than plant indigo of equal strength, will he consider the advisability of permitting its use in Navy contracts.
only of the area under the Council for purposes of Elementary Education:—
( Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) It has been decided to carry out trials of serge dyed with the synthetic indigo in order to ascertain its suitability for the requirements of the Naval Service.
Delays In The Operation Of The Land Act
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware of the dissatisfaction, both to landlord and tenants, in the operation of the Land Act of 1903 on account of the delays that are taking place in the Land Commissions; whether he is aware that those having charges on their estates, having to meet interest arising, are obliged to meet the difference between the interest in lieu of rent and the amount of the interest on the different charges; whether the Estates Commissioners have money to meet the different estates whose agreements were lodged before September, 1904; and, if so, what is the cause of the delay that has taken place in the proceedings. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) It is, I fear, the case that some inconvenience has been caused, both to landlords and tenants, by the delay which has occurred in making advances. The hon. Member is, I think, mistaken in assuming that this delay is preventable. When the Irish Land Bill of 1903 was introduced the sum of £5,000,000 a year was named as the highest rate at which purchase could take place for the first three years. This rate has been considerably exceeded, and it is estimated that by the end of three years from the commencement of the Act nearly £20,000,000 will have been issued in advances, exclusive of the amount of the bonus.
Evicted Tenants On The Coolroe Estate
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord- Lieutenant of Ireland whether applications for restoration under the Land Act of 1903 have been received by the Estates Commissioners from the Coolroe evicted tenants; whether the landlord has signified his intention to sell to them; and whether any progress has been made as regards restoring them to their homes. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Estates Commissioners have received applications for reinstatement on different estates from six persons in the district in question. It is presumed that the estate specially referred to is that known as the Coolroe Estate, of which the former owner was Mr. James E. Byrne. The Commissioners are negotiating with the present owner, Mr. T. D. Place, for the purchase of the property, and if they should acquire it, the applications of the evicted tenants will receive full consideration.
Salaries Of School Teachers At Handsworth
To ask the President of the Board of Education whether he is aware that there are three schools in Handsworth, near Sheffield, and that whilst the head teacher in the Church of England school draws a salary of £160, the salary of the head teacher in St. Joseph's Catholic School has been cut down to £90, although the number of children in each of these schools is practically the same; and will he have an inquiry made into the action of the local education committee, with a view to equalising these salaries. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) I find that the matter referred to came before the Board of Education a year ago, and a letter was then written on the subject. Since then nothing has been heard of it, and the Board supposed the matter had been settled. If the managers renew the subject I will see that it is carefully investigated.
Irish Agricultural Organisation Society's Grant
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will give an itemised account of the expenditure of the £19,000 paid by the Agricultural Department to the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society up to February 28th last, showing the salary of each individual employed in connection with this grant, expenses of each individual so employed, and to what extent such salaries and expenses were paid out of grant of £19,000; a detailed account of all other purposes to which this £19,000 was devoted; and whether properly audited and vouched accounts of fill moneys paid by the Department to the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society are submitted to the Board. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Department of Agriculture are prepared to give an itemised account showing the salary and expenses paid in respect of each official of the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society employed by the Department for each quarter in the period from April 1st, 1900, to February 28th, 1905, and also the amount paid for any other expenses. This Return will, however, take some time to prepare, as it will embrace a large number of items extending over nearly five years. The grant-in-aid of £2,000 for the year from 1st of March, 1905, to 28th February, 1906, was paid to the society in monthly instalments on the certificate of the representative of the Department who investigated the work done, as indicated in the weekly reports of the several organisers employed by the society, and who carefully examined the claims for remuneration and travelling and incidental expenses before giving his certificate. A similar plan has been adopted with regard to the expenditure of the £3,700 estimated for the twelve months ending 28th February, 1907. The accounts of the Department are sent monthly to the Comptroller and Auditor-General in pursuance of Section 25 of The Agricultural and Technical Instruction (Ireland) Act, 1899, together with all vouchers, to be audited in accordance with the Treasury regulations. The account of the Department's Endowment Fund is published annually in the Appropriation Account, and is certified by the Comptroller and Auditor-General. Statements of all expenditure out of the funds placed at the disposal of the Department, the application of which is subject to the concurrence of the Agricultural Board, are laid periodically before the Board.
Appointments In The Sultan Of Zanzibar's Government
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received any complaints or evidence that vacancies in the Sultan of Zanzibar's Government have been farmed by His Majesty's officials serving in Zanzibar. (Answered by Secretary Sir Edward Grey.) The Answer to this Question is in the negative.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether he will place upon the Table a statement of the reasons which actuated His Majesty's Government to terminate the services of Mr. A. S. Rogers, lately Regent and Prime Minister to the Sultan of Zanzibar; and if such dismissal had the approval or sanction of the Sultan, under whom the Regent was serving. (Answered by Secretary Sir Edward Grey) His Majesty's late Government advised the Sultan of Zanzibar to terminate the arrangement under which Mr. Rogers was acting as First Minister, in pursuance of the policy initiated on the death of the late Sultan of strengthening their direct control over the internal administration of the country. The Sultan is bound, by the conditions he agreed to on his accession, to follow loyally and faithfully the advice given him by His Majesty's Agent and Consul-General in all matters relating to the government and administration of the Sultanate. There are no Papers which could usefully be laid on the subject.
National Bank Of South Africa And Government Accounts
To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether an agreement has been made with the National Bank of South Africa whereby the Transvaal Government account will be kept at that bank until 1909; whether any tenders had previously been asked for from other local banks; whether the National Bank of South Africa is registered under the English Companies Act; and whether the shares are fully paid up, so that creditors have no reserve fund on which to rely in times of financial difficulty. (Answered by Mr. Churchill.) The Answer is in the affirmative. The bank, as part of the agreement, abandoned any claims which it might have against the Transvaal Government under the old concession with regard to such matters as the issue of notes or coinage of money. Tenders were not called for. The bank is incorporated under the Transvaal Ordinance 16, of 1902, under which the shares were to be deemed to be fully paid up.
Cambridge Cottage, Kew, As A Forestry Museum
To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, if he can state whether it is intended to utilise the gift to the Nation by the Crown of Cambridge Cottage at Kew as a forestry museum; and, if so, what steps are being taken to carry this purpose into effect. (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) His Majesty having been graciously pleased to devote the house and grounds of Cambridge Cottage to the service of Kew Gardens, it is proposed to utilise the additional accommodation thus made available for the purposes of a museum illustrative of forestry, pomology, and the diseases of farm and garden crops. Steps will be taken for this purpose as soon as the necessary funds are available.
Navy Shipbuilding Programme
To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, with the statement of the details of vessels now under construction, which is to be issued prior to the discussion of Votes 8 and 9 of Navy Estimates, there will be included details of the four armoured ships which the House is to be asked to sanction; and whether he can now say how many of these armoured ships are to be battleships. (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) I am not in a position to make any statement, as the subject is now under consideration.
Promotion Of Assistant Clerks
To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in view of the fact that a number of unsuccessful competitors at the examination of second division clerkships, held in October, 1905, have been declared successful since the announcement of the result of the examination, due consideration has been given to the claims of assistant clerks for promotion in those offices where second division vacancies exist; and whether, should a further number of second division clerks be required before the result of another, second division examination is known, he is prepared to grant the appointments to assistant clerks, under the provisions of the Order in Council of the 29th November, 1898, as amended by the Order in Council of 15th September, 1902. (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) The Treasury can only approve such promotions on the recommendation of the head of a department. When such recommendations are made the Treasury give thorn every consideration, as may be seen from the Answer which I gave to the hon. Member for Fulham on the 26th March last.† The hon. Member is no doubt aware that the promotion of assistant clerks to the second division is intended to be exceptional and can only be made on the ground of special merit.
Distribution of Vote. | Number of staff. | Amount allocated to each branch. |
Indoor staff: | £ | |
Superintending establishment | 316 | 73,350 |
Port establishment | 579 | 120,670 |
Total Indoor | 895 | 194,020 |
Outdoor staff | ||
Port establishment | 3,099 | 478,840 |
Grand total | 3,994 | 672,860 |
General charges not specifically allocated to either indoor or outdoor staffs, namely: | ||
Non-Established Services, Travelling and Removal Expenses, Vessels, Instruments, Law Charges, Superannuation Allowances, &c. | — | 334,390 |
Grand total of Customs Vote as shown above | — | £1,007,250 |
†See (4) Debates, cliv., 840.
Customs Staff
To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he can give the total of the Customs Vote, the number of those employed on the indoor staff and the outdoor staff respectively, and the amount of the Vote devoted to each branch. (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) As shown on page 3 of the Estimates for the Revenue Departments for the current financial year, the total of the Customs Vote is:—
£ | |
Gross total | 1,007,250 |
Deduct— | |
Appropriations in aid | 54,550 |
Net Total | £952,700 |
The number of the established officers provided for in the Estimates and the amount of the Vote allocated to each branch of the service, are as summarised in the following table:—
Customs Warehouse At Leith
To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will explain why Customs bonded warehouses in Leith are open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. in charge of the warehouse keeper only, the attendance of the officer depending upon the request of the warehouse keeper, notwithstanding the fact that public-houses are situated in very close proximity. (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) The Customs bonded warehouses at Leith, as at all other ports, are under the continuous supervision of the Customs staff during the hours within which such warehouses are allowed to be open. At the more important warehouses at Leith one or more officers are constantly present. At the smaller warehouses, some of which are only occasionally open for business, officers are in constant attendance while operations are in progress; at other times these warehouses are visited at frequent and irregular intervals as business may require, and to an extent sufficient to ensure the due protection of the revenue. None of the Customs bonded warehouses in Leith are in closer proximity than the regulations permit to any premises in which duty-paid stocks of wines or spirits are kept.
Endowment Of Irish Agricultural Department
To ask the (Secretary to the Treasury if he will state the source or sources from which the Department presided over by Sir Horace Plunkett is endowed, and the amount from each source, during the year ended March 31st last. (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) The Endowment Fund, ordinarily so-called, was created by Section 15 of the Agriculture and Technical Instruction (Ireland) Act, 1899. The sums received under the various sub-sections of the section are as follows:—
Source.
1. Sub-section (a)
£78,000 Local Taxation (Ireland) Account.
2. Sub-section (b)
£70,000 Irish Church Temporalities Fund Surplus.
3. Sub-section (c)
Net Receipts in 1905–6 £442 14s. 5d.
Sea and Coast Fisheries Fund.
4. Sub-section (d)
£12,000 Parliamentary Vote.
5. Sub-section (f)
£6,000 Parliamentary Vote.
6. Capital sums were received in the years 1900–1901, 1901–2, and 1902–3 under Sub-sections (e) and (g) amounting to £19,890 5s. and £185,015 15s. 2d. respectively. From miscellaneous sources further annual receipts were derived during the year in question to the amount of £14,000, viz.:—
£ | |
7. From the Local Taxation (Ireland) Account under the provisions of the Agricultural and Technical Instruction (Ireland) (No. 2) Act, 1902 | 5,000 |
8. From the Ireland Development Grant | 7,000 |
9. From the Congested Districts Board (contribution towards the cost of the agricultural schemes carried out by the Department in congested districts) | 2,000 |
The Parliamentary Vote for the Department was in 1905–6 £191,692 (including £18,000 under headings (4) and (5) above and £25,000 for the Congested Districts Board).
Secretary To The Treasury And Civil Service Employees
To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will consider the desirability of holding direct communication with the duly elected representatives of Civil Service organisations similar to the manner in which His Majesty's Postmaster-General receives the representatives of Post Office employees. (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) Any representations from such organisations on matters affecting the interests of civil servants should be addressed to the authorities of the departments in which the officers concerned are employed. In any case in which the Treasury is directly responsible I shall at all times be ready to receive representations from organisations interested in the matter.
The Yardley Charity
To ask the hon. Member of the Elland Division, as a Charity Commissioner, whether he is aware that the governors of the Yardley Charity Estates have neglected and now refuse to furnish the Yardley Rural District Council, East Worcestershire, at the request of the Yardley parish meeting, with the names of the dole beneficiaries, in order that they may publish them in compliance with Section 14 (6) of The Local Government Act, 1894; and that the accounts already furnished are not in the form prescribed by the Charity Commissioners and do not give the necessary details; and whether he will give directions to the charity governors to forthwith furnish the information desired by the parish council in compliance with the statute; and also to furnish detailed accounts for the information of the Yardley parishioners. (Answered by Mr. Trevelyan.) The Commissioners have applied to the Governors of the Yardley Charity Estates for an explanation of the matters mentioned in the hon. Member's Question, and will, if necessary, take steps to ensure compliance with the statutory requirements.
Financial And Industrial Condition Of Poplar
To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he will lay upon the Table of the House the Report of the general inspector on his preliminary inquiry into the financial and industrial conditions of Poplar, recently held; and whether a copy of such Report will be sent to the guardians before the public inquiry opens on June 7th. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) No formal Report has been made to me by the inspector who has been making the preliminary investigation referred to. As a result of that investigation, he prepared a statistical memorandum bearing upon the pauperism in the Poplar Union, and a copy of this memorandum has been sent to the guardians.
Value Of Public Houses On The Estates Of The Ecclesiastical Commissioners
To ask the hon. Member for East Bristol, as Church Estates Commissioner, whether he is in a position to state the approximate value to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners of the 336 public houses which were on their estates in 1905; the total annual rental of the sixty-four leases or tenancies for public houses which have been renewed or extended by the Commissioners since December 31st, 1899; the annual rental of the two new public houses for which leases have been granted by the Commissioners during that period; and whether he can state the names and localities in which they are situated of the public houses whose licences will expire before Christmas, 1910, and which the Commissioners do not intend to suppress. (Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) The Ecclesiastical Commissioners feel that some of the information desired could not be made public without embarrassing them in the management of their estates, and some could not be procured without great labour and expense. I regret, I therefore, that I am unable to supply all the particulars for which the hon. Member asks; but I am able to state that,—(1) the annual rents reserved to the Commissioners on the sixty-four renewed leases of public houses (in which are included hotels as, for instance, the Westminster Palace Hotel) amount to £11,158 19s. 10d, but other properties are in a few cases comprised with the public houses in the same leases; and (2) the rents reserved in the leases of the two new public houses are ground rents only, the buildings being erected by the lessees, and amount to £34 6s. per annum.
Constitution Of The Technological Insti- Tute At South Kensington
To ask the President of the Board of Education whether in view of the criticisms passed upon the proposed constitution of the new Technological-Institute at South Kensington, and of the bearing which the establishment of such an institute may have upon postgraduate training in science, he is prepared to arrange for the adequate representation of other universities besides London on the governing body. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The question presents many difficulties in view of the large number of universities now in existence in the United Kingdom, between whose claims for representation it would be difficult justly to differentiate. But the matter is having my careful consideration.
Stock Issued Under The Irish Land Act
To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been called to the fact that the total amount of stock issued under the Irish Land Act, 1903, is stated in the London Stock Exchange daily official list as £11,000,000, whereas the correct amount at March 31st last was £13,201,444 8s. 9d.; and whether he can say how this discrepancy arises, and give a statement showing when and in what manner the
Guaranteed 2¾ per Cent. Stock. | |||
Details of stock issues to May, 1906. | |||
Date of Issue. | Amount of Issue. | Net Amount of Cash raised. | Note. |
£ | £ | ||
March, 1904 | 5,000,000 | 4,337,122 | A. |
January, 1905 | 6,000,000 | 5,354,332 | B. |
2nd January, 1906 | 1,103,448 | 1,000,000 | C. |
26th February, 1906 | 1,097,996 | 1,000,000 | D. |
6th April, 1906 | 1,000,000 | 920,292 | E. |
14,201,444 | 12,611,746 | ||
A. Offered to public subscription at a fixed price of 87. | |||
B. Offered to public tender subject to a minimum of 88½—average price of tenders £89 8s. 8d. | |||
C. Issued to National Debt Commissioners at £90 12s. 6d.—x.d.* | |||
D. Issued to National Debt Commissioners at £91 1s. 6d.—x.d.* | |||
E. Issued to National Debt Commissioners at £92 0s. 7d.—x.d.* | |||
* The average price of the stock on the day on which the issue was made as certified by the Bank of England. |
Indian Financial Statement— Explanatory Memorandum
To ask the Secretary of State for India whether he will consider the advisability of restoring the explanatory memorandum
various issues have been made, the amount of stock issued on each occasion, and the net amount of cash realised.
( Answered by Mr. Asquith.) Yes. The amount given in the Stock Exchange list is the total which has been offered to public subscription. The figure I quoted in the House represented the total issued up to March 31st last, and included £2,201,444 8s. 9d. stock issued to the National Debt Commissioners. The subjoined Table, which gives particulars of all issues to date, will make the matter clear, and in future, in order to enable the publishers of works of reference to keep their information up to date, I propose whenever stock is issued otherwise than by public subscription to notify the fact in the London Gazette:—
of the current Indian financial year as near as possible to the form of that in 1899–1900, substituting for the tables of revenue and expenditure pages 28–48, Appendix II., the Indian Finance Department's Appropriation Report, also that the amounts of the Home charges be shown in rupees-ten as well as in sterlign, so as to show the actual cost of the charges as borne by the Indian revenue.
( Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) I propose to retain, subject to such modifications in detail as may suggest themselves, the new form which was adopted in 1903. It appears to be an improvement on the form used in 1899–1900, as showing the chief facts with greater clearness and simplicity. The latest Appropriation Report is a document of nearly 200 pages. It has already been printed in the Gazette of India, and will in due course be issued, as usual, as a separate publication. I do not think that any useful purpose would be served by reprinting it specially as an Appendix to the Explanatory Memorandum. It was decided in 1900 to abandon the practice of showing in tons of rupees the charges in England which are, as a matter of fact, paid in sterling; and I see no advantage in reversing this decision.
Irish Harbour Boards
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will give the names of the Irish Harbour Boards whose expenses fall, either partly or wholly, on the local rates, the actual amount borne in each case by the local rates, the valuation on which the cost falls, rate per pound paid, the total number of members on each Board, the number representing the ratepayers, and the manner in which the ratepayers' representatives are selected. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) With the exception of those cases in which the Board of Works are themselves the harbour authorities, the harbour authorities in Ireland are bodies constituted by Statute or Provisional Order prescribing the manner of their selection, and are not under the control of any public department in Ireland. I have no information as to the expenses of harbour boards which fall on the local rates beyond that which the hon. Member will find in the Local Taxation (Ireland) Returns annually laid upon the Table of the House. I am, however, informed by the Board of Works that, in the case of five harbours, loans which have been made by the Board, are secured on local rates in addition to the security of the harbour revenue; and the loan charges either actually or potentially involve a charge on the rates. The amount borne by the local rates in each of these cases during the last year was as follows:—
£ | s. | d. | |
Tralee and Fenit; Pier and Harbour | 4,797 | 10 | 0 |
Arklow Harbour | 1,141 | 14 | 2 |
Wicklow Harbour | 2,773 | 6 | 8 |
Galway Harbour | Nil. | ||
Kinsale Harbour | 276 | 11 | 9 |
In addition, a loan for Ardglass Harbour, of which the Board of Works are the harbour authorities, is repaid in part by the Down County Council, and £234 6 s. 4 d.was paid by the body last year. A reference to the several Statutes and Orders constituting harbour authorities in Ireland will be found in House of Commons' Paper, 325, of 1903.
Unoccupied Land On The Estate Of Richard Thompson, In County Fermanagh
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners have received in connection with the small estate of Richard Thompson, in county Fermanagh, any application for an allotment of unoccupied land on behalf of John Thompson, of Cantytrindle, Ballinamallard; and if the Estates Commissioners will accede to the application. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Estates Commissioners inform me that they received the application mentioned, and have referred it to one of their inspectors for inquiry and report. They are unable to say whether they will accede to the application until they have received and considered their inspector's report.
Fishery Laws Of The Lough Erne District
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the fishing on Lough Erne is open to all His Majesty's subjects, the bed and soil of the lake being vested in the Crown; and whether, seeing that the salmon and trout fishing therein has seriously declined in recent years owing to want of preservation, illegal netting, and destruction of spawning fish in the rivers flowing into the lake, he will consider the expediency of having the fishery laws in the Erne district enforced by the Royal Irish Constabulary, under 7 and 8 Vic, c. 108, s. 1. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The hon. Member is mistaken in assuming that the public have the right to fish in Lough Erne. The bed and soil are vested in the Crown and are under the management of His Majesty's Commissioners of Woods and Forests; and I am informed that the fishing of the lough is also vested in the Crown, subject to certain ancient rights of fishery conveyed by Crown grants, and is under the like management. The duty of protecting the fisheries rests primarily with boards of conservators. The constabulary enforce the fishery laws so far as the public interests are concerned and their other and paramount duties permit.
Labourers (Ireland) Act And Irish Bating
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say how the unions in Ireland, as in the county of Limerick, where the one shilling in the £ limit is reached, or nearly so, will be affected by the Labourers (Ireland) Bill; and whether, without increasing the rate limit, more cottages can be built within the unions under it. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) It is expected that in rural districts in which the existing limit is nearly reached, many additional cottages can be built without exceeding that limit. It is not possible at such short notice to make accurate calculations as regards a given district, but it is estimated that the rural districts in the county Limerick would, by reason of the facilities offered in the Labourers Bill, be able to borrow further sums, amounting to from £20,000 to £25,000 without exceeding the existing limit. I may also refer the hon. Member to Clause 12 of the Bill.
Questions In The House
Osborne Cadets' Expenses
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether a payment of £75 per annum has to be made in respect of each cadet at Osborne by the parent; whether, in addition, there are not charged to the parents term fees amounting to about £24 per annum; whether the parent has not in addition to face charges for examination fees on entry, travelling expenses, uniform, chest, book, sextant, and maintenance during holidays, which together bring up the cost to from £135 to £150 per annum, or from £540 to £600 for the four years' course; and, if so, whether the Admiralty will take steps to cut down the burden on the parents.
The Admiralty are not prepared to reduce the fees charged at Osborne, which are £75 per annum, except in the case of a limited number of cadets admitted at the reduced fee of £40 per annum. It is not known to what additional fees the hon. Member alludes. The expenses incurred on behalf of the cadets in respect of travelling to and from the college, renewals and repairs of clothing, instruments, books, drawing materials, washing, school stationery, sports fund, etc., average at Osborne about £22 a year. The first cost of the outfit, including sea chest and clothing, is about £40. No estimate can be given of the expenses incurred by the parents for clothing and maintenance during the holidays.
Crime In The Army
On behalf of the hon. Member for St. Pancras, E., I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the increase in the number of prisoners committed to military prisons at home and abroad (excluding India), as shown on page 8 of [Cd. 2699] the Report on Military Prisons, 1905; and if he will explain this increase, seeing that the number of committals has gone up from 6,655 in 1896, when the average Army strength at home and abroad (excluding India) was 139,305 to 19,461 in 1905, when the average strength was only 188,570; what action does he propose taking to stop an increase of 192 per cent. in committals to prison in the space of ten years during which the increase in the average strength has been only 35 per cent.
If my hon. friend will kindly refer to the footnote below the figures, which he mentions, he will find the explanation of a large portion of the increase. The increase in the number of men awarded sentences of imprisonment by the commanding officers is due to these men being committed to a military prison, instead of, as formerly, to provost or barrack cells. This explanation also applied to court martial sentences not exceeding forty-two days, which prior to 1902 were carried out in provost prisons, and as these are now classed as military prisons the figures for the latter have correspondingly increased.
Flogging Of Chinese Coolies—Case Of The Crœsus Mine Manager
I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether in the case of Witthauer, the compound manager of the Crœsus mine in the Transvaal, who admitted to the superintendent of foreign labour in the presence of witnesses that he was responsible for the flogging of Chinese coolies in the mines, criminal proceedings have been yet taken to vindicate the law; and, if not, will he explain why.
Lord Selborne has assured the Secretary of State that he is most anxious for the prosecution of Witthauer and that every effort is being made to obtain sufficient evidence on which to prosecute.
Protection Against Chinese Coolies
I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether he can now inform the House what measures His Majesty's Government have decided to sanction for the protection of the inhabitants of the Transvaal from the outrages committed by the Chinese coolies imported by the gold mining companies.
I am not yet able to inform the House, as the question of the measures to be adopted is still under consideration.
asked whether one method of reducing the outrages would not be to alter the fugitive slave law, which made it a penal offence to give food, shelter, or employment to escaped Chinese coolies.
said he was not aware of the existence of any such law. Of course, the coolies had no right to be employed when they were absent from their regular employment. He thought the matter was one which must be taken into consideration in connection with the measures which Lord Selborne would recommend.
asked whether the hon. Gentleman would see whether the original Ordinance had been altered. Under that law, he repeated, the giving of shelter, food, or employment to an escaped Chinaman was prohibited, making outrage and murder inevitable unless the Chinaman was to die.
asked whether these coolies were treated as fugitive slaves.
said he did not quite know what the question meant. It was true that when caught fugitive coolies were sent back to the mines, but he had no knowledge whether any inhumanity was suggested.
, said he would probably be able to make a statement on this matter after Whitsuntide. It had already been decided that the proposals in regard to barbed wire fences should not be carried any further, and the question of the improvement of the police at the cost of the mineowners was now engaging attention.
British Trade In Zambesia
I beg to ask the Under Secretary for the Colonies whether he is aware that the British concession at Chinde is rapidly disappearing owing to erosion; and whether he will instruct the Commissioner to make early arrangements with the Portuguese representatives in Zambesia in order to protect British Trade.
I am aware that the British concession annually suffers considerable loss from erosion, but at the rate at which that erosion is going on it is computed that it will be many years before the concession ceases to be available, and the Secretary of State is of opinion that under these circumstances the arrangements which might be necessary for the protection of British Trade in the event of the complete disappearance of the concession ought to receive very careful and deliberate consideration.
British Central Africa Protectorate
I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, having regard to the fact that the produce of the British Central Africa Protectorate is only allowed to enter the Transvaal Colony free of duty in return for permission to recruit native labour in the Protectorate for the Transvaal mines, and to the fact that owing to the mortality of such natives engaged in the mines the stoppage of such recruiting in the Protectorate is anticipated, the Colonial Office can arrange that the produce of the Protectorate shall continue to enter the Transvaal Colony free of duty; and whether the Colonial Office will consider the desirability of including the British Central Africa Protectorate in the projected South African Customs Union, so as to ensure the permanent free interchange of produce and merchandise between the Protectorate, the Transvaal, and other South African Colonies in order to the development of the said Protectorate.
I hope that it will be possible to arrange that the present free importation shall continue. The necessary provision has been retained in the draft Customs Convention. By the General Act of the Conference of Berlin, and a Declaration of 2nd July, 1890, made under the General Act of the Brussels Conference, it is not permitted in the British Central Africa Protectorate to impose an import duty higher than 10 per cent, ad valorem. So long, therefore, as Great Britain remains a party to these Acts, and the South African Union Tariff exceeds 10 per cent, ad valorem, it is impossible to include the Protectorate in the South African Customs Union.
Congo Free State—Case Of Silvanus Jones
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if any action has been taken or is in contemplation by His Majesty's Government in regard to the case of Silvanus Jones, a British subject of Lagos, sentenced to five years' imprisonment by the appeal court at Boma, Congo Free State, on 15th March, 1904, for alleged complicity in the murder of a woman; if His Majesty's Government are aware that the accused denied the charges against him, that he was unprovided with counsel, and was not given the opportunity of securing such; and if His Majesty's Government will take steps to remove British subjects in the Congo from the position in which they stand towards the Congo executive and judiciary.
Consul Nightingale has recently reported that Silvanus Jones died in hospital last March. He did deny the charges against him, but it does not appear that they were unfounded or false, and the result of the inquiry made by my Predecessor, referred to in the answer to the hon. Member's question of May 18th, 1904 † was to show that Jones must have been aware that criminal proceedings were to be taken against him, and that ho might have engaged counsel if he had desired to do so. He was asked at the trial on appeal whether he had applied I for the assistance of counsel, and replied in the negative. This case is not one which would justify the action suggested in the last part of the Question, for the reason given by the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs in his speech in 1904.‡
Case Of John Alfred Brown
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the British Consular authorities in the Congo State have reported upon the case of John Alfred Brown, a coloured British subject of Freetown, sentenced, on July 19th, 1904, by the appeal court at Boma, to three years'
† See (4) Debates, exxxv., 178.
imprisonment; if he is aware that Brown was arrested and seized in his own house by the executive official of the district, who figures as his prosecutor in the records; that an inquiry was held on the spot by the prosecutor subsequent to Brown's arrest and after his removal, and that the charges brought against him at his first trial at Stanleyville were entirely different to those which were held to justify his arrest; that he was kept in prison for four months without trial; that he was unprovided with counsel at Stanleyville, unable to call witnesses for his defence, and consequently unable to defend himself against the charges made; and whether he proposes to take any action in the matter.‡ See (4) Debates, exxxv., 1276 et seq.
Consul Nightingale reported this casein 1904, when he was Acting Consul at Boma. John Brown admitted having on several occasions beaten the natives under him, and I see no reason to complain of the punishment inflicted on him. I may add that the final sentence would have been heavier if the Court of Appeal had not taken the view that compulsion is necessary in order to induce the natives to work. I have not sufficient information to enable me to answer all the hon. Member's Questions in detail, but I have come to the conclusion that, with the exception of the delay in bringing Brown to trial, he was not on the whole unfairly treated. John Brown was released on March 5th, 1905. I ought to add that, in both this and the previous case, the accused were punished for having taken part in the ill-treatment of natives, which has been the ground of such general complaint in the Congo State. They are, therefore, in a quite different category from other matters which have formed the subject of representations on the part of His Majesty's Government.
Chinese Maritime Customs
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for for Foreign Affairs whether a reply has yet been received from the Chinese Government to the request of His Majesty's Government for more definite assurances in regard to the Imperial edict placing the Maritime Customs under the control of a Chinese administrator.
A telegram has been received from His Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires at Peking to the effect that he was yesterday given a definite promise by the Foreign Board that the Chinese Government would send him a note in a few days, formally recapitulating and reaffirming the specific engagement contained in Articles 7 and 6 of the 1896 and 1898 Loan Agreements that the administration of the Maritime Customs shall continue as at present constitued.
Vaccination Exemption Certificates
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been called to the statement made on April 28th in the Dorchester police court by Captain Gravener, the chairman of the bench, in dismissing an application for exemption under the Vaccination Acts, that he would never grant a certificate of exemption from vaccination; and if he will take into consideration the advisability of making representations with a view to the removal of Captain Gravener from the bench.
I am at the present time in communication with the Lord Chancellor upon this subject.
South African Companies
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if the requirements of The Companies Acts, 1900, especially of Section 12, have been complied with by the following limited liability companies: Rhodesia, Limited (New Company), Gwanda Consolidated Development, Austro-Rhodesia Development, South Africa Gold Dredging, Town Properties Bulawayo, Criterion Development Company, Empress Mines, and Eastern Queen's; if any of these companies are registered in Rhodesia and not in the United Kingdom; and, if so, whether they are exempt from the responsibilities of the Companies' Acts.
Of the companies named in the question Rhodesia, Limited (New Company), Criterion Development Company, and Eastern Queen's are not registered in the United Kingdom. I am unable to say whether they are registered in Rhodesia. Speaking generally, companies registered outside the United Kingdom are not subject to the Companies Acts; but any company, wherever registered, is liable to be ordered by the Court to be wound up, if it possessess assets within the Court's jurisdiction. The remaining companies mentioned in the Question are registered in the United Kingdom, but of them the South African Gold Dredging Company, Limited, alone was registered after January 1st, 1901, and consequently would be the only one to which Section 12 of the Companies Act, 1900, applied. It did make a return under that section, but is now winding up.
Lighting Of The Coasts Of The United Kingdom
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he can make any statement as to the form of inquiry he proposes as to the lighting of the British and Irish coasts.
It is proposed that the inquiry should be by Royal Commission, and should extend to the constitution and administration of the three general lighthouse authorities, but not to the incidence of light dues.
Blackburn Cottage Homes
I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to the proceedings of the Blackburn Board of Guardians on the 5th instant, in the course of which the question of advertising for a foster-mother of the Catholic religion was rejected, in spite of a favourable report to this effect from the Cottage Homes Committee; and whether, in view of the fact that forty-nine of the children in the cottage homes are Catholic, whilst only thirty-eight are Protestant, and that the result of adopting this recommendation would be that the Catholic and Protestant foster-mothers would be equal in number, he will cause an inquiry to be made, so that justice shall be done in this matter to the Catholics of Blackburn.
I have made inquiry on this subject, and understand that the post to be filled up is that of foster-mother in a home in which all the children are Protestants. It seems right, therefore, that she should be a Protestant also. It appears, however, that there are two homes in which both Roman Catholic and Protestant children are received. In both of these the foster-mother is a Protestant. It has been suggested that the foster-mother of one of these homes should be transferred to the post now vacant, and that she should be replaced by a Roman Catholic foster-mother. I have asked the Guardians to consider the matter further from this point of view.
Feeding Hungry School Children
On behalf of the hon. Member for Camberwell I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can say, respecting the working of the Local Government Order of April 27th, 1905, empowering boards of guardians in certain cases to assist in the feeding of hungry children, in how many cases the Order has been put into operation; in how many cases are children now being assisted under it; what is the record of its operations in London; and whether he has received any information bearing generally upon the efficacy or otherwise of the Order in question.
The information I have received on this subject is not sufficiently complete to enable me to give the precise particulars asked for by my hon. friend, but I gather from it that, except in some of the Lancashire and Yorkshire Unions, the applications under the Order have not been numerous.
The Unemployed
I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his correspondence with the Chairman of the Central (Unemployed) Body has satisfied, him that the reply to his letter of May 11th will be received by the date suggested, namely June 1st; and whether any delay occurring in the receipt of this reply would cause a corresponding delay in the introduction of the proposed Bill to amend the Unemployed Workmen Act, 1905.
I find that I shall not receive the Preliminary Report of the Central (Unemployed) Body by June 1st. I understand that it will be submitted to a special meeting of the body on the 8th of that month, and I have every reason to expect that I shall receive the Report within a few days of that date. If this expectation is fulfilled I do not think that the matter referred to in the last part of the Question would be materially affected.
Handsworth School Teachers' Salaries
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether he is aware that there are three schools in Handsworth, near Sheffield, and that whilst the head teacher in the Church of England school draws a salary of £160, the salary of the head teacher in St. Joseph's Catholic School has been cut down to £90, although the number of children in each of these schools is practically the same; and will he have an inquiry made into the action of the local education committee, with a view to equalising their salaries.
I find that the matter referred to came before the Board of Education a year ago and a letter was then written on the subject. Since then nothing has been heard of it, and the Board supposed the matter had been settled. If the managers renew the subject, I will see that it is carefully investigated.
Postal Congress At Rome
I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether the British delegates to the Postal Congress at Rome have been successful in obtaining any reductions or improvements in the postal rates to foreign countries.
I am glad to be able to announce that, although the British delegates failed to obtain a reduction in the initial postage rate of 2½d. to foreign countries, they were successful in persuading the congress to adopt two considerable concessions to the public; the one as regards the initial weight allowed for foreign letters, and the other as regards the charges on; heavier letters. In reference to the first, point, when the new Postal Union Convention of Rome takes effect next year, the unit of weight will be doubled, so that the existing postage of 2½d. to foreign countries will prepay a letter weighing up to one ounce instead of up to only half an ounce as at present. This concession will embrace also letters sent under the Imperial penny post to any part of the British Empire and to Egypt, which letters at present must not exceed half an ounce in weight for a penny. Thus a letter (say) to France weighing one ounce, will in future cost for postage 2½d. instead of 5d.; and a similar letter to India and the Colonies will cost 1d. instead of 2d. As regards the second point, at present an additional 2½d. is charged for every additional half ounce after the first. In future the postage on foreign letters exceeding an ounce in. weight will be reduced to 1½d. for each additional ounce, after the initial rate of 2½d. on the first ounce has been paid. Thus a letter to France, weighing two ounces will be chargeable with a postage rate of 4d. (that is 2½d. plus 1½d.) instead of 10d. as at present. Similarly a two-ounce letter to India, the Colonies and. Egypt will cost only 2d. instead of 4d. A further useful postal reform, which; was adopted on the motion of the British, delegates, was the introduction of a reply coupon, a little postal order to bearer exchangeable in any country for a Union postage stamp. Further, the transit rates have been reduced and simplified. I think the British delegates are to be congratulated on the general success that has attended their efforts.
asked if the proposals had been accepted by the United States.
I think the United States specifically agreed to them. But, in any case, the arrangement is binding on all the countries in the Postal Union.
wished to know when the new regulations would come into operation.
Next year, It has always been the custom of the Postal Union to give a year's notice in order that preparations and postal arrangements may be made accordingly.
Ex-Cabinet Ministers' Pensions
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he can state the nature of the declaration that has to be made by ex-Ministers before they can receive a political pension.
The declaration must state that the applicant's total income is inadequate to maintain his station in life as required by the Act 4 and 5 Will. IV. c. 24, Section 6, re-enacted by the Civil Offices (Pensions) Act, 1869.
Local Taxation In The Western Islands Of Scotland
I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he has yet received the Report of Sheriff Fleming and Mr. A. B. Millar in regard to local taxation in the parishes in the western islands of Scotland; and if the Report is to be published.
The Report has been received and will be laid upon the Table presently.
Barra Parish Rates
I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he is aware that the ratepayers in the parish of Barra have refused to pay the parish rates amounting to 17s. 11d. in the pound; that the school board requisition has not been handed over, and that the clerk to the parish council has had to give his personal guarantee to the bank for certain necessary expenditure; whether he is aware that the whole parish council has resigned; and what he proposes to do to meet this deadlock and to relieve a parish where the rates are 17s. 11d. in the pound.
I understand the facts are as stated. Although several attempts have been made to recover the rates aud the collector has made a door to door visit, the ratepayers refuse to pay, and prosecutions have, I understand, been ordered. The parish council, with two exceptions, have now resigned and the Local Government Board are considering the terms of an Order which they propose to issue under the powers conferred upon them by Section 18 of the Act of 1894.
Killadysert Poor Relief Case
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Mrs. Hore of Killadysert, whose husband was laid up with illness, applied to the Board of Guardians of Killadysert for outdoor relief for her husband and four children, who refused it; and whether he will inquire why outdoor relief was refused to this family, and who was responsible for their not getting it.
The Local Government Board have referred this Question to the officials of the Killadysert Union, who have reported that Mrs. Hore has not at any time applied to the guardians for outdoor relief.
Irish Agricultural Grant
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, if he can state what has been the amount unexpended each year since the formation of the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction, Ireland, out of the moneys voted by Parliament, excluding the sum of £18,000 per annum voted as a grant in aid, and which last year amounted to £190,406, to what fund does this unexpended balance go, under what section of the Act of 1899 is this money so diverted; and in view of the fact that the Department has repeatedly refused grants for objects which, if encouraged, would tend to the development of agriculture and kindred subjects, on the grounds that the Department had no money, he will take steps to ensure that money voted by Parliament will be expended on the specific objects for which it has been voted, and not diverted for the formation of reserve funds which were not contemplated by Parliament.
The unexpended balances out of the moneys voted by Parliament in respect of the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction for Ireland for each year since April 1st, 1900, are as follows—
£ | s. | d. | |
1900–1 | 3,099 | 8 | 10 |
1901–2 | 2,962 | 15 | 2 |
1902–3 | 3,141 | 3 | 4 |
1903–4 | 10,051 | 3 | 7 |
1904–5 | 10,307 | 14 | 1 |
These amounts are determined by the Comptroller and Auditor-General when the audit of the account for the year is completed. The amount in respect of 1905–6 has not yet been determined. The unexpended balances are surrendered to the Exchequer, as shown in the Annual Appropriation Accounts laid before Parliament. The hon. Member would seem to be under some misapprehension as regards the Annual Parliamentary Vote for the Department contained in the Estimates, and the moneys placed at the disposal of the Department under Section 15 of the Agriculture and Technical Instruction (Ireland) Act, 1899, for the purposes specified in Section 16 of that Act. The moneys annually voted by Parliament must be applied for the purposes indicated in the several subheads shown in the Estimates, under which sub-heads the Vote has to be accounted for. The only unexpended portions of those Votes that are not paid back to the Exchequer each year, are balances to credit of the grants in aid. Such balances can be carried forward and can be applied in the succeeding financial year to the purposes for which the grants in aid were voted, and for no other purpose. The details of these balances are also shown in the Appropriation Accounts.
asked the Chief Secretary whether he was aware that in the public balance-sheet of the Department the figures for 1904–5 were not the figures which the right hon. Gentleman had given to the House, and also whether in view of the complicated way the accounts were presented he would direct that the balance-sheet should be issued yearly, so that it might be shown how the money was spent.
I have not the Report before me and cannot compare the figures I have just given; these figures may be assumed to be the most authentic.
asked whether it was to be assumed that the Department issued a balance-sheet before they knew the real state of their affairs.
Does the right hon. Gentleman approve of the system by which a reserve fund is created?
said he could hardly say that without looking at the Act. That Act presented a great many things.
Could not the right hon. Gentleman see that the unexpended money went into such a fund, for instance, as that required for the financing of the Labourers Bill?
was understood to say he must look at the Act before he could answer that Question.
asked whether these matters would be considered by the Committee at present investigating the constitution of the Department.
said it certainly would cover part of the financial arrangements of the Department; whether it would cover all the matters referred to was another thing.
Is the financial management included in what is called the Horace Plunkett category?
[No Answer was returned.]
Irish Sub-Sheriffs
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland who has control of the duties of sub-sheriffs in Ireland; and, if it is permissible for such officials to act as land agents or auctioneers while in the public service.
the appointment of under or sub-sheriffs in Ireland is vested in the high sheriff of each county for the time being. The under-sheriff holds office during the will of the high sheriff, and is answerable to him for the discharge of his duties. Under-sheriffs are in no way under the control of the Irish Government. I am not aware of any statutory provision forbidding under sheriffs to act as land agents or auctioneers.
Irish Poor Law Commission
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what is the cause of the delay in the presentation of the Report of the Poor Law Commission; whether the Report has been ready for publication for some time; and if he can state that it will not be held back until after the close of the Parliamentary session.
The Chairman of the Poor Law Reforms Commission informs me that the delay in the presentation of the Report is due in part to unforeseen difficulties in the preparation of statistics, and in part to the fact that he has had to give a good deal of attention recently to another inquiry in which he is concerned by the direction of the Government. The Report of the Poor Law Reform Commission will, he states, be published long before the close of the Parliamentary session. It is at present almost ready for presentation except for some statistics which have yet to be completed, and these may cause some modification in the recommendations of the Commissioners.
Is not the Report already in the hands of the printers?
Yes, but corrections are to be made in the proofs.
Who is responsible for the delay? This is a pressing matter.
All possible despatch is being made.
Knockanes Police Hut
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland on whom the charges for the additional police hut and policemen at Knockanes, near Headfort, county Kerry, will fall; whether he considers it necessary to retain a force of nine policemen in a small and peaceable district under present conditions; and, if so, what are the grounds on which they are to be continued.
The cost of the four policemen at Knockanes hut is defrayed out of public funds. The force at the permanent station at Headfort also consists of four policemen. The district to be policed by this force is not small, but consists of an area of 180 square miles. The force is considered absolutely necessary for the policing of this large district.
Sir Henry Burke's Property
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on Sunday the 13th instant a notice appeared outside the church of Ballinakill, county Galway, signed by the Rev. Martin Larkin, P.P., asking the tenants on a portion of the property of Sir Henry Burke, of Marble Hill, to meet him on the following Tuesday in reference to the purchase of their holdings; whether he induced some of those present to offer twenty-one years purchase, and had the estate bailiff, named Campbell, present to take down the names of those induced to consent to that offer; and whether, seeing that a portion of the tenants are in arrear, he will see that if they are unduly pressed for recovery of same, and thereby coerced to agree to that price, the estate shall be inspected before any public money is advanced.
The Estates Commissioners inform me that no proceedings for the sale of the particular portion of the estate of Sir Henry Burke which is referred to in the Question have yet come before them, and they have no information as to the matters of fact alleged in the Question. If proceedings for sale should come before the Commissioners, they will take any steps which they may consider necessary and proper in the circumstances, having regard to the powers vested in them.
Promotion In The Dublin Police
On behalf of the hon. Member for St. Patrick's Division of Dublin I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland can he state what was the system of promotion in the Dublin Metropolitan Police Force while Mr. Jones was Chief Commissioner; has it since been departed from, and, if so, for what reason; whether members of the force qualified for promotion have been passed over, and others having less claims to advancement have been promoted in their places; and whether he will take steps to insure that, in future, promotions in the force shall be based on more equitable principles.
The Chief Commissioner informs me that in the time of his predecessor three-fourths of the promotions were made according to seniority from the list of qualified men, and one-fourth of the promotions were made by competitive examination among qualified men, independent of seniority. The latter method of promotion was somewhat of an innovation, and was deemed to have been not entirely satisfactory in practice, seeing that it opened the way for the promotion, in respect of a competitive examination largely in literary subjects, of men whose capacity for police work was not shown to be superior to that of their comrades. The system in question has been departed from by the present Chief Commissioner, who has adopted the general rule of promoting the senior man who is found eligible, reserving a power to give promotion for special merits outside seniority on the result of a competitive examination. The Chief Commissioner informs me that no members of the force who are qualified for promotion have been passed over, and none having less claims to advancement have been promoted in their places. The Chief Commissioner claims that the present system is entirely equitable.
Irish Equivalent Education Grant
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland when he will be able to make a statement as to the equivalent grant of money to be devoted to Irish purposes, in relation to the £1,000,000 to be paid to England and Wales under Clause 12 to the Education Bill.
I stated on Thursday last that the time has not yet arrived for making a statement on this subject. My right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer recently informed the hon. Member for North Londonderry that as the financial arrangements under the Education Bill will not come into force during the present financial year it would be premature to come to a decision in the matter.
Irish Prison Service
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the practice of appointing ex-Royal Irish Constabulary pensioners to the Irish Prison Service; and whether he will consider the advisability of not employing, as a prison warder, a constable who may have been in conflict with political offenders and with the criminal classes.
Pensioners from the Royal Irish Constabulary are eligible for appointment as prison warders, but as a matter of fact very few have been appointed, the reason being that the majority of pensioners are physically unfit for the work. The Chairman of the Prisons Board informs me that out of a total of 380 warders, at no time have there been more than ten or twelve who have served in the Constabulary. Pensioners, however, who have been appointed have proved satisfactory officers, and so far as experience goes it would not appear that the consideration mentioned in the Question has shown any ground why the practice of occasionally appointing eligible pensioners should not be continued.
King's County Uneconomic Holdings
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether a memorial has been received by the Estates Commissioners from a number of tenants occupying uneconomic holdings in Ard, near Killeigh, in the King's County, praying the Commissioners to purchase (for the purpose of the redistribution and enlargement of their holdings) 500 acres of untenanted land on the estate of Mrs. Guise, at Aughanvilla, Geashill; and whether he can say what steps the Commissioners propose to take in the matter.
The Estates Commissioners inform me that they received the memorial in question, and made inquiries from the owner with the object of considering the question of purchase. The Commissioners were informed, in reply, that the owner had already sold the lands in question to a private purchaser. This sale did not take place through the Commissioners.
asked if the right hon. Gentleman was prepared to advise the Estates Commissioners to make a special list of applications for the sale of untenanted land where no legal question arose, and where there were no disputed rights, so as to grant the necessary relief under the Land Purchase Acts.
said he believed the Commissioners were doing that.
West Of Ireland Grazing Farms
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that since the passing of the Land Act of 1903, many large grazing farms in the West of Ireland have been purchased by non-residential graziers; and, if so, what steps the Government propose to take in order to put an end to this practice, which means the sale to individuals of lands which should be utilised for the relief of congestion in Connaught.
The Estates Commissioners inform me that in any case in which a grazier holds on the eleven months system, they make no advance to enable him to purchase the holding, as he is not a tenant within the meaning of the Act. In any case in which a grazier is a tenant within the meaning of the Act, the Commissioners will exercise the discretion given to them by the Act, as to whether such a tenancy should be included in the estate for the purposes of purchase, and, if included, whether the advance prescribed by the Land Purchase Amendment Act of 1888, namely £3,000, should be exceeded. In cases in which new tenancies are created by letting lands to graziers or others in a Congested Districts county, the Estates Commissioners, under Section 53 of the Land Purchase Act of 1903, can only advance a maximum of £500 in each case. If a landlord creates new tenancies on untenanted land, whether in congested or non-congested districts, by putting the untenanted land up for auction in parcels and then selling to the buyers under the Land Purchase Acts, thus depriving the Commissioners of the opportunity of disposing of such parcels to the classes of persons contemplated by the Act, the Commissioners refuse to allow such parcels to be included in an estate for the purposes of the Act.
Darcy Irvine Estate, Evicted Tenant
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether any application has been received from James Somerville, an evicted tenant on the Darcy Irvine estate, county Fermanagh, for re-instatement in his former holding; and whether, in case, as appears to be the fact, his former holding is now relet to another person, the Commissioners will allot him another holding on the untenanted lands of this or some other estate in the county.
The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have received an application for reinstatement from James Somerville, whose former holding is stated to be in the occupation of a judicial tenant. In the event of the Estates Commissioners acquiring untenanted land in the district, his application and the applications of all local evicted tenants will be considered and dealt with.
Steam Trawling Off County Antrim
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that, owing to the representations from fishermen of Portrush, Portstewart, and Magilligan districts as to the losses sustained by them owing to the operations of steam trawlers, an inquiry was held by one of the Fishery Board's officials in Portrush in September last, and that as a result of this inquiry the Fishery Board recommended to the Lord-lieutenant that steam trawling be prohibited within a line drawn between Donagree, county Donegal, and Bengore Head, county Antrim; and will he explain why this recommendation has not so far been given effect to, as at present steam trawlers are still inflicting loss upon the local fishermen.
A by-law embodying the prohibition in question was approved by the Lord-Lieutenant in Council on the 24th instant, and was published in the Dublin Gazette of the following day.
Irish Equivalent Grant
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state what amounts were paid out of the Irish Equivalent Grant during the year 1905, and to what purposes they were applied: also what amount of the same grant was applied during the same period towards primary education in Ireland.
The particulars for the year ending March 31st, 1906, will be found in the Report of proceedings under the Ireland Development Grant which has been laid on the Table of the House (Cd. 2937, of the present year).
Gledstane Estate, Donegal
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the attention of the Estates Commissioners has been called to the matter of Moses Glenn, of Ruskey, Convoy, East Donegal, who was evicted from his farm on the Gledstane estate, for which he paid an annual rent of £30; whether he is aware that the farm has since been let to a planter for £15 per annum; and whether, now that the estate is in the hands of the Commissioners, he will direct them to inquire into Glenn's case, with a view to reinstating him in his farm or to see that the planter will not be allowed to purchase under the Land Act 1903, unless Glenn is compensated for the loss of his holding.
The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have received an application for reinstatement from Moses Glenn, whoso former holding is stated to be in the occupation of a judicial tenant at a rent of £16 per annum. The Commissioners will have enquiry made into the case, but until their inspector's report has been received, they have no knowledge of the facts of the case, and are unable to say what action they may take.
Dublin Corporation And Re-Valuation
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if the revaluation of Dublin was directed by an Act promoted by the Corporation of Dublin itself; if that Corporation has sinee endeavoured to retard the revaluation, or made any representations to him with that view, either directly or through any of the Dublin Members of Parliament; and whether attempts to delay the revaluation have taken place after it was found that the Commissioner of Valuation in revaluing Belfast had put valuations on public-house licences hitherto not taken into account in the valuation of property in Ireland.
The reply to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative, and to the second in the negative. As to the third, the Commissioner of Valuation informs me that he is not aware of any attempt to delay the work of revaluation beyond the fact that, as reported to the public Press, a Motion to ask the Commissioner to proceed at once with the re-valuation was on two occasions defeated at meetings of the corporation. The matter does not rest with the Irish Government, the Commissioner of Valuation being an officer of the Treasury.
Dublin Police And Licensed Traders
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, with reference to the instructions issued to some inspectors of the Dublin Metropolitan Police to make cases against licensed traders, whether he has seen those instructions, and whether he has sanctioned them, if he does not, whether he has caused or will cause his opinion to be conveyed to the Dublin police authorities; and whether he will givn to the House the terms of the instructions in question.
I have neither sanctioned nor seen the document referred to. What the Question described as instructions was contained in a confidential memorandum sent more than a year ago by a superintendent in the Dublin Metropolitan Police to three inspectors under him. The Chief Commissioner informs me that he is satisfied that the issue of this memorandum was an honest attempt on the part of the superintendent to rouse his men to a faithful discharge of their duties under the licensing laws, and in no way intended to suggest to them to take any unfair action. It would be contrary to practice to lay on the Table a confidential memorandum issued by a police superintendent.
expressed a hope that the right hon. Gentleman would get a copy of the memorandum and read it himself; he would then be able to answer the Question.
Guinness's Brewery, Dublin
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can inform the House what is the valuation upon which the brewery of Arthur Guinness, Son, and Company, Dublin, is assessed, and how that valuation compares with the brewery of Bass, Ratcliff, and Gretton at Burton; whether he is aware that public-houses in Dublin are valued under the present valuation without reference to the value of their licences; and if he will represent to the Commissioner of Valuation the need for proceeding with the revaluation of Dublin.
I regret that I have been unable to obtain the information necessary to answer this Question.
Merchants' Quay (Kilrush) Fatality
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that P. Tyrrel, of Arklow, aged twenty-two years, was drowned at Merchants' Quay, Kilrush, on March 16th, 1890, and that the coroner's jury added a rider to its finding expressing their deepest censure on whoever is responsible for the lighting and better protection of Merchants' Quay, Kilrush, and drawing attention to the number of deaths that have occurred in the past few years from the negligence referred to; and whether he proposes to take any steps to prevent the quay being kept in such a neglected condition, without light or protection for those who have to do business on it at night.
I beg to answer this Question on behalf of my right hon. friend. I have seen a copy of the finding of the coroner's jury and of the rider in the case referred to, and I have, as I promised in my reply to the hon. Member on March 27th,† obtained a further report on the place. As the result of representations made by His Majesty's Inspector the dangerous parts of the quay have been fenced, and steps are
being taken to provide life-buoys, to erect lamps to light the quay and the road leading to it and to put a chain along the dock-wall. I am informed, however, that only two drowning fatalities have occurred at this place since 1846.† See (4) Debates, cliv., 1083–4.
South Of Ireland Railway Grant
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether, having regard to the apparent inability of hon. Members representing the localities concerned to agree on the proper allocation of the sum of £93,000 which the Treasury had promised to grant towards railway development in the South of Ireland, he will consider the advisability of diverting this money to help in the drainage of Lough Neagh and the river Bann, and thus relieve the people in that district from the suffering and distress under which they are at present labouring.
I fear that I can hold out no prospect of meeting the hon. Member's wishes in this respect.
Revaluation Of Dublin
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury when the necessary financial arrangements will be made to enable the revaluation of the city of Dublin to be commenced; whether he is aware that for now almost six years this revaluation is overdue, and rates are being levied on an obsolete basis; whether he is aware that under the existing valuation no account is taken of business goodwill or the existence of publicans' licences; and whether action will be taken to enable this system of taxation to be set right by revaluation.
I am not able to state when it will be possible to commence revaluation. It is true that application for it was made some six years ago, but although it has not yet been carried out the valuation lists are kept up to date by annual revision. The Answer to the third part of the Question is in the affirmative.
Belfast Revaluation
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury when the revaluation of Belfast was commenced and when concluded; whether the Commissioner of Valuation in Ireland was supplied with a suitable staff to enable him to make the revaluation; whether the revaluation of Dublin was already overdue before the completion of the Belfast revaluation; will he say why the Commissioner did not at once begin the revaluation of Dublin when he finished that of Belfast; and would the staff which enabled him to revalue Belfast have been adequate for revaluation of Dublin.
The revaluation of Belfast was commenced in December, 1899, and the final lists were issued on June 1st, 1905, but the revision intended to bring these up to date was not issued till March last, and the 975 appeals which arose out of it have not yet been settled. The Answer to the second part of the Question is in the affirmative, but I am informed that very few of the staff were available for the revaluation of Dublin. I may add that there is no time limit under which the valuation is to be made.
Colonial Conference
I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the representation of India at the Conference in 1907 will extend to the different provinces of the Empire, in view of their widely differing character as regards population, wealth, trade, revenue, and other circumstances.
As I have already stated, invitations to the Conference of 1907 have been issued only to the Premiers of the various self-governing Colonies. The practice adopted at the previous Conferences provides for the presence of representatives of different Departments of the Government, and under this arrangement the representation of India will be secured. It is not intended that the Indian Provinces should be separately represented before the Conference, any more than the Australian and Canadian Provinces.
Conventual Laundries
I beg to ask the Prime Minister, in consideration of the increase in the number of religious houses in this country, recently augmented by the immigration of conventual communities from France, and of the fact that factories, workshops, and laundries are conducted in connection with these establishments, whether he will order a Statistical Return of all Monastic and Conventual Residences in Great Britain and Ireland, and arrange for the periodical and efficient inspection of all such institutions, enabling all the members of these communities to share the rights and liberties of British citizens under the protection of the Law, and regulating all business undertakings, whether of paid or unpaid labour, in accordance with the rules enforced in other centres of industry.
I do not think that any such Return is wanted at present, nor do I think that any system of general conventual inspection is required or desirable. I understand that my right hon. friend the Home Secretary contemplates legislation next session, if possible, dealing with convent laundries; and I hope that this will make good any existing deficiencies in the way of public supervision.
I hope the right hon. Gentleman will remember this Question is put by a follower of a Government which negatived any such legislation.
Will the Bill be similar to one intended to be introduced by the late Government?
said he had no knowledge what the provisions of the Bill would be; nor was it certain that a Bill would be introduced.
What does the right hon. Gentleman mean by will be introtroduced next session "if possible"?
If it is found to be within the competence and necessities of the Government to introduce it.
Election Petition Judges
I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether he has considered or will consider the propriety of introducing legislation to enable Election Judges to be nominated each year by the Speaker of the House of Commons, instead of as at present left to a rota; and whether he will consider the propriety of amending the law so as to insure more clearly than the laws as at present laid down appear to do the purity of elections.
When the Election Petitions of this year have been finished His Majesty's Government will be prepared to consider whether an amendment of the law is needed. The nomination of the Election Judges by the Speaker would be to impose on him a somewhat anomalous duty, and this course does not seem practicable.
Business Of The House
asked the First Lord of the Treasury whether he could not put down the salary of the Secretary of State for War as the first order on Thursday in Whitsun week, or on some not much later date. He asked this because he desired to call attention to a subject of great importance involving the whole administration of military law. Of course he could not expect any consideration, as he did not belong to the Party opposite, and the majority must suffer, but as this question affected the welfare of every soldier in the Army—
Order, order. The hon. Member is only entitled to ask a Question.
Then I ask if the opportunity I desire will be given on the first Thursday after Whitsuntide, or soon after.
said he would endeavour to meet the desire of his hon. friend to raise the question of his right hon. friend's salary. There was, however, a little difficulty in meeting the wishes of his hon. friend, which were certainly not extravagant; but he hoped that if his hon. friend would communicate with him a place in the menu of the day which would suit his purpose would be found.
May I ask if I rightly understand that the Chancellor of the Exchequer does not intend to proceed with the proposed drawback on tobacco?
I do intend to proceed with it.
, referring to to-morrow's business, said he understood that the Prime Minister on a previous occasion had indicated that he proposed to take some Bills as well as the Motion for adjournment over the holidays. He hoped that the right hon. Gentleman intended to take the Motion for adjournment first, as it was one of the few occasions on which the House could discuss all subjects with the greatest freedom.
said the Bills he proposed to take were not of a contentious character, and he thought it would be better to take them first. If any of them appeared to give a bona fide opportunity for the expenditure of time it would not be proceeded with. The Bills he proposed to take were:—The Metropolitan Police Commission Bill, the Post Office Sites Bill, the Statute Law Revision (Scotland) Bill, the Fatal Accidents (Scotland) Bill, the Isle of Man Bill, the Dean Forest Bill, and the Indian Railways Acts Amendment Bill.
most earnestly protested against the one opportunity on which any question dealing with matters of administration could be raised being interfered with. The House ought not rashly to fritter away any of its privileges. When once they started on the Second Reading of a Bill there was no knowing how long the debate would last.
reminded the right hon. Gentleman that he had himself on one occasion of the kind introduced the Aliens Bill first.
Under the ten minutes rule.
said that meant twenty minutes, and be did not think that these two or three Bills would occupy more than ten minutes; but he did not wish to infringe on the rights of the House, and if any of the Bills he had mentioned appeared likely to lead to substantial discussion they would not be proceeded with.
Revenue Bill
"To amend the Law relative to Customs and Inland Revenue, and for other purposes connected with Finance," presented by Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer; supported by Mr. M'Kenna; to be read a second time upon Tuesday, June 12th, and to be printed. [Bill 240.]
Finance Bill
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
[Mr. EMMOTT (Oldham) in the Chair.]
Clause 1.
*MR. COURTHOPE (Sussex, Rye) moved to reduce the duty on tea to 4d. He said it was an outrageous thing that tea should be taxed to the extent it was. The duty was economically undefensible. In 1905 the consumption of tea in these islands was roughly 260,000,000 lbs.—or 6 lbs. per head of population, and he did not think he in any way exaggerated the facts when he described tea as an article of universal necessity. In 1901 the consumption was as high as 6.16 lbs. per head of population, but owing to the heavy tax it had since fallen. The wholesale price of the tea which the poor drank ranged from 2½d. per lb. upwards, so that on this tea there was actually an ad valorem duty of 350 per cent. No other article of food—no other commodity in use in this country—was taxed to that extent. We raised a revenue of some £7,000,000 by thus oppressing our poorer brethren, and it was quite time another protest was made against this tax. All other English-speaking countries admitted tea duty free, while as to the continent of Europe, Germany only charged 1½d., Sweden 3d. and Denmark 4d. We had the highest tea duty in the world, and it was time that tea drinkers received more consideration at the hands of the Government. He might be reminded that the duty was increased by the Conservative party. No doubt
it was, but the justification for that was to be found in the extraordinarily narrow limits of taxation which had hitherto been looked upon as open. But that did not alter the fact that the duty was an indefensible one. We got seven-eighths of our tea from India and Ceylon. A very large proportion of our tea was grown by British subjects, and therefore it mattered not, for the sake of his argument, who paid the tax, whether the producer or the consumer, as it fell on British subjects. Therefore, to his mind, it was indefensible. Another argument that would be used was that a penny had been given, and that half a loaf was better than no bread. Yes, when they got that half loaf themselves, but not when somebody else ate it. Although this penny reduction might benefit a certain number, particularly those who bought their tea in comparatively large quantities, it would not benefit a great many of those who bought their tea in extremely small quantities. A reduction of a penny in the lb. could not possibly benefit those who bought their tea in two-ounce packets, for which they now paid l¼d., and they would continue to pay that amount. If, however, there had been 2d. reduction a farthing would have been knocked off, and that would make a considerable difference to the poor women who did their marketing in very small quantities. The Chancellor of the Exchequer on the Second Reading had argued that although they would not gain in quantity they would gain in quality. He was sorry the right hon. Gentleman had so poor an opinion of the intelligence of this House as to use an argument of that kind. There were vast quantities of tea in bond. They could not change the quality of the poorer nature of tea. Poor tea must be grown and would be grown, and it was absolutely certain that if it were grown it would be put on the market, and the people who bought it would get no advantage in quality, quantity, or price from this reduction of the tax. Then it would be said that the right hon. Gentleman could not afford to reduce the tax by 2d. He contended that they ought to be able to afford it by widening and enlarging the basis of taxation and by trying to make the foreigner pay a part of our taxation, as he made us pay a part of his. The other alternative he would suggest was that the 2d. should be taken off tea and the coal duty left as it
was. Whatever might be the merits of the coal duty, whatever the incidence of its burden, it was quite certain that the coal duty had been taken off in favour of a comparatively small class, while the tea duty affected everyone in these islands. He thought it was the hon. Member for North Paddington who calculated that 38,000,000 of the inhabitants of these islands might be classed as poor, and these 38,000,000 were more deserving of consideration—they had more claim to a 2d. reduction— than the class of coalowners and coalminers had for the abolition of the duty on coal. Then he dared say another argument would be used that tea was bad for one. He was not going to argue whether it was bad or good. He knew quite well that if it was allowed to stew it must be bad, but that was not the point. Whether it was bad or good it would be drunk regularly by almost every inhabitant of these islands, and one had to take that into consideration, and not to argue whether they had better drink something else. On all these grounds he thought tea drinkers had a good claim for the reduction by 2d. of the existing duty, and he hoped a great section of the Committee would support this Amendment. He intended to push it to a division, and he would like, though he did it with some reluctance, to remind a great many hon. Members that they had heard a great deal during this session of mandates and so on. He would like to remind them of what they had said—of the pledges they had given in regard to tea, of the tea posters which were all over many of the constitutencies, and of the opinions that they had expressed as to the value of those posters to them. He had here an expression of opinion that the posters of the Anti-Tea Duty League rendered very great service to the President of the Local Government Board. That was only one of many. Now they had an opportunity of showing their gratitude for the assistance given them at the elections by those societies which advocated the prompt abolition of the 2d. war tax on tea. In conclusion he would quote a sentence used two years ago by the President of the Board of Trade. Had the right hon. Gentleman been present he would have invited him to give effect to his words. He said—
"The House of Commons has got to take the Chancellor of the Exchequer by the throat in a Parliamentary sense and tell him that they cannot continue these burdens year by year."
He was exceedingly sorry the right hon. Gentleman was not present to put the pressure on now which he advocated so strongly two years ago, but he hoped he would do so when the time came for a division.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 1, line 20, to leave out the word 'five,' and insert the word 'four.'"—(Mr. Courthope.)
"Question put," That the word 'five' stand part of the clause."
said the only really relevant part of the speech of the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down was that which came at the end. This was not the occasion for discussing the whole question of the tea duty. The question before the Committee was whether it should be 5d. or 4d. Nor was this the time for making a speech upon the fiscal question. It was the case that during the last general election many Members urged that the tax on tea was much too high and should be reduced. Many Members, including himself, expressed their intention of using their utmost efforts to get the duty reduced. What had happened? The Chancellor of the Exchequer had given half of his surplus to the reduction of the tea duty. Was it not the part of the practical man to accept that half for the present, instead of refusing the penny if they could not have the twopence? It was very easy to propose an impracticable Motion like this from the other side, and to invite Members on the Government side to vote for it. But few would walk into such a very open trap. They had to draw the line somewhere. Otherwise, why should they not knock off a shilling from the income-tax, reduce the Army by 10,000 or 20,000 men, and the Navy by a dozen battleships, and claim to be the greatest financial reformers of modern times? The hon. Gentleman knew that his proposal was not practical, but he also knew that it would give him and his friends some opportunity of posing as greater friends of the poor than those who had in reality done more towards the reduction of the tea duty than the hon. Member and his friends. The hon. Gentleman had said that tea drinkers would not profit by the reduction at all. He would join issue with the hon. Member on that ground. The penny had already led to a reduction in many instances. He did not see why such an Amendment as this should be moved at all, because it meant absolutely nothing, and no benefit could accrue from it. There was nothing to recommend it to the Committee, and he hoped it would be rejected. The hon. mover was like a Parliamentary cuckoo, who laid an egg in the Liberal nest, and invited every one to come and see how much larger it was than the eggs of the lawful proprietor.
said that when an alteration was suggested some other alternative should be put forward. In this case he thought the money could be best obtained by leaving the coal duty as it was. They all hoped for great things from having a strong man as Chancellor of the Exchequer, but he was very much surprised at his giving way to the pressure put upon him by wealthy coal owners and tea planters in the way he had done, because there were such strong arguments against adopting that course. He might have said that the consumer did not pay the duty, because the exports of coal since the tax had increased, and there was no doubt that the foreigner paid the tax.
The hon. Member is not in order in discussing the coal tax on this Amendment.
said there was the Anti-Tea Tax Association, which was supported by the hon. Member for Montgomery Boroughs, who was probably a subscriber. The strong probability was that the members of that association would profit by this reduction on the tea duty, because it would go into the pockets of the wholesale tea dealers and the planters. The Chancellor of the Exchequer might have told the tea trade that they had their turn last year; they might very well have waited another year, and had 2d. taken off later on. He thought that course would have been much more agreeable to the trade.
said that as one who in his election address favoured the principle, as far as possible, of a free breakfast table, he could consistently support this Amendment. When hon. Members sitting on the Government Benches were in opposition they spent a great many hours abusing the Government of the day because they did not reduce what they called this iniquitous tea tax, but now they were not at all enthusiastic to carry out the pledges they gave before and during the election. This tax fell heavily upon the poorer classes, who had in consequence either to reduce their consumption of tea or buy tea of an inferior quality. But why should they tax tea, which was a product of our own colonies? Why should they not tax something which was produced outside this Empire? All taxes on the necessaries of life should be avoided as much as possible. There were occasions when for specific purposes it was necessary to put a tax on the necessaries of life, but the taxation of necessaries was wrong in principle. The tea tax produced about £5,500,000 every year. Having suggested that the few duty should be abolished altogether by was only right to suggest how the money raised by it should be replaced. He would suggest that a tax should be placed upon imported goods. He understood that chiefly the blenders would benefit by this reduction.
said there was as keen competition between the blenders as growers, and he must well to the retailer at a penny per pound us.
said his information did not agree with that view. He understood that the blenders would benefit to the extent of one halfpenny, the grocer to the extent of one farthing, and the consumer to the extent of a farthing, but he contended the people who could afford to buy only small packets would get no benefit at all. He thought it would have been better to have left the duty as it was until the Chancellor of the Exchequer was able, as he said he hoped to be, to take off another penny next year.
I never said so.
said he thought it would have been better to have waited till the autumn and then to have taken off twopence in order to obviate the disorganisation to trade by two changes in one year. In view of the pledges given by the Ministerialists at the election he looked to them to support the reduction in the division lobby.
said it was remarkable to see on the other side of the Committee a wonderful unanimity in favour of a reduction of the tea duty to which they had not been accustomed in past years. To the general considerations advanced, the objections to the duty in itself, and the desirability of reducing it as much and as soon as possible he entirely assented. Tea was a necessary of life, and a tax upon it was injurious to producer and consumer. Of the supply, 95 per cent. was produced by our fellow-subjects, and there were good reasons why a Chancellor of the Exchequer should desire to avoid the tax. His predecessor in office—whom he was glad to see back in his place in auspicious circumstances upon which he was sure the right hon. Gentleman would receive universal congratulation—last year used unanswerable arguments on the same lines as those which had been addressed to the Committee. The only question of dispute was as to the reduction of the duty by a penny. Personally he would have been glad to reduce the duty by 2d., but the Committee must look at the financial arrangements of the year as a whole; and he had to look at the amount of money at his disposal. His choice, therefore, lay between a reduction of 1d. or of 2d. He found that, after making adequate provision for a further reduction of the Debt, and if he had to get rid of the coal duty, he had not enough money left, and the hon. Member could not now suggest a supply to enable him to make a reduction of the tea duty by more than 1d. Hon. Members must say, therefore, that he had either given too much to the Debt or that he ought not to have dealt with the coal tax. If hon. Members said that, they were in a logical position. The question which he asked his advisers at the Treasury, and which he anxiously considered before making this proposal, was whether a reduction of a penny, which was without precedent, would really reach the consumer. No Chancellor of the Exchequer would wish to put money into the pockets of the trade; what he desired was to secure that the benefit of the remission should go to the person by whom the article was consumed. He made inquiries whether or not the effect of a remission of a penny would reach the consumer, and he was assured by all the information he could gather that in an article like tea, where a duty of sixpence represented something like 100 per cent. on the actual value of the imported raw material, a reduction of a penny, or 15 per cent., where there were no intermediate processes of manipulation, in the course of which the reduction might be either delayed, intercepted, or neutralised, must speedily reach the consumer. What had happened? The hon. Member had quoted from information that had been given to him that the reduction had gone into the pockets of the blenders. He would like to read a few words from The Times Commercial Supplement, which all must agree was a most admirable and very impartial summary of what went on in the commercial world. On 21st May, under the heading of "Tea," The Times Commercial Supplement said—
According to this authority, which was not prejudiced in favour of the Government, the effect of the reduction had already been felt, and the consumer was receiving it in a reduced price of 2d., or he was paying 10d. now for what he formerly paid 1s. The advice that he had acted upon, therefore, was well-founded, for this reduction of the tea duty was going into the pockets of the consumers. To his hon. friends who might have given pledges to reduce the tea duty, he said that the Government were doing their best to carry this reduction out. They must look in a matter of this kind, however, not to see what was ideally desirable, but what was practically attainable; and, having regard to the whole of the financial arrangements, he asked the Committee without hesitation to believe that the reduction proposed was a reduction which would benefit the consumer."When Mr. Asquith announced the reduction of 1d. in the tea duty (from 6d. per lb. to 5d.) it was asserted in trade circles that this would make no difference in the price charged to the consumer, as the reduction was too small to allow of its being split up into fractional parts. It is, however, already apparent that competition among retailers may have the effect of reducing the prices—as regards the cheapest qualities especially—even to a greater extent than 1d. a lb., notwithstanding a decision of a number of large distributors to keep up quotations and 'improve the quality,' a euphemism for retaining most of the reduction in duty for themselves. It happens that the market value of the cheapest tea is 1d. per lb. less than it was a year ago, and there is an immense quantity of it at present in the bonded warehouses worth from 3½d. to 4d. per lb. With the 5d. duty this tea can be retailed at 10d. per lb., as compared with the hitherto lowest quotation of 1s. per lb. The reduction of 2d. is made up by the 1d. duty and the fall in market value of 1d. Until this large stock is so retailed at a price to stimulate consumption by the poorest classes it will remain in bond. Our market reports show how difficult it is to dispose of this cheap tea, except at such a reduction in price. Retail vendors have in many places already shown their appreciation of the possibility of attracting trade by a cut in prices."
thanked the right hon. Gentleman for the kindly references he had made during his absence from the House at the time of the Budget statement, and now the right hon. Gentleman had added to his obligations by the congratulations so kindly offered that afternoon. He regretted that he was not able to be present at the most interesting occasion of the Budget statement, and he had lost by his absence the opportunity of making a complete survey of the right hon. Gentleman's finance proposals. But this clause was, in a certain sense, the key to the right hon. Gentleman's scheme of finance for the year, and he thought that it illustrated the basis on which he had proceeded and the defects of the arrangements he had proposed. The debate had a strange familiarity to those who had been in the habit of sitting through Budget discussions in recent years. On this occasion, however, he missed some familiar voices that had never been absent from earlier debates on the tea duty, and without them a tea duty debate seemed scarcely to be complete. He wished that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who had such experts on the tea duty among his colleagues, had called them into his counsel, and had caused them to appear on the front bench opposite to give their candid opinion of the present proposal, as they undoubtedly would have done had the proposal come from the late Chancellor of the Exchequer. Their appearance in the discussion how would have added to the merriment of the Committee. Were the premisses on which the right hon. Gentleman had based his argument for the penny reduction correct? He was inclined to doubt it. The right hon. Gentleman had said that in the circumstances of to-day he had only a limited amount of money to distribute, and, unless the Committee were prepared to say that he ought not to have contributed a sum to the Debt or repealed the coal duty, hon. Members could not in logic condemn him for not having reduced the tea duty by more than a penny. But he doubted very much whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not, if he had chosen to make use of them, greater resources at his command than he had disclosed to the Committee. He had studied the right hon. Gentleman's speeches, and he was well aware from his own experience at the Treasury how rash it was for anyone outside that Department, and without access to the sources of information possessed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to prophesy as to what the future had in store for the country, or to hesitate as to the accuracy of the right hon. Gentleman's prophesies. Yet with that preface and excuse he could not help saying that the right hon. Gentleman had apparently taken an unduly moderate view of what he might reasonably and fairly expect to obtain from taxation during the present year. There had been a moderate, but marked, improvement in the closing months of the last calendar year. That improvement had continued, and was emphasised, in the first months of the present calendar year; and it was to that improvement the right hon. Gentleman owed the surplus with which the last financial year ended. With these signs of revival before him the right hon. Gentleman was entitled to anticipate a larger income from existing taxes than that upon which he counted from the financial clearances. He thought that when the financial year closed it would be found that if the right hon. Gentleman had been a little bolder he would not have found his hopes falsified, but would have had money enough to do something more than he had done in other directions. But was the reduction of the Debt and the repeal of the coal tax the best use to make of the money available? He was not one who would criticise the right hon. Gentleman for having increased the provision for the reduction of debt. On the contrary, his criticism would be that the provision made was "the least that could be described as plausible," and something less than a hopeful expectation. A Finance Minister who during his electoral campaign talked with such gravity of the state of the Debt and the national finances, and then, having a realised surplus of £3,000,000 and a prospective surplus of £3,000,000 more, could, provide nothing more out of taxation than a beggarly half-million was not giving even plausible fulfilment of the hopes and expectations which he had held out.
We are reducing the Debt by a larger figure than in any previous year.
said that that had nothing to do with the amount of provision made out of taxation for debt reduction. The right hon. Gentleman had not treated him ungenerously, and he hoped he would not be accused of egotism if he said that, if the right hon. Gentleman was reducing the Debt by a large amount, it was because his predecessor in times of greater difficulty increased the provision not by a half but by a whole million; because the right hon. Gentleman was left with a surplus of £3,000,000, and because he got a windfall in the repayment by China of a debt which had been allocated by every pledge of two successive Chancellors of the Exchequer to the extinction of debt.
The right hon. Gentleman has forgotten that he got a windfall of £1,250,000 from South Africa.
said he did not complain of that reference to South Africa. After elaborate negotiations £1,250,000 was obtained from South Africa, and it was applied to the reduction of debt. In fact it was practically a repayment. But he did not see how that affected the provision which he or the right hon. Gentleman had made out of taxation for the reduction of debt. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had talked on this subject as if we were on the verge of financial disaster. he had painted the picture in colours which were far darker than could be justified, and yet he had made this paltry contribution to an end which he set so high. He ought to have given, not half a million, but one million, or nearer two millions. If the right hon. Gentleman had asked the country to bear its present burdens for a year longer and had devoted the whole of the money to the reduction of debt, he would have taken a bold and strong course, and he would have supported the right hon. Gentleman in it.
said he was anxious to allow every latitude to the right hon. Gentleman under the present circumstances, but he thought he was now going beyond what was allowable on the Amendment.
said he claimed no latitude in discussing this matter, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer had challenged him on a point of logic. He did not blame the right hon. Gentleman for having dealt with the Debt; but the coal tax stood on an exceptional footing, being unlike any other tax in our financial system. It needed close watching, and in his opinion it could not permanently remain a part of our financial system. But that was not to say that when there was a limited sum of money available the coal tax, which affected the smallest number of British subjects, should have first consideration, and that a tax which affected every British subject should be placed second to it. As to the tea duty, in spite of what the right hon. Gentleman had said, he found a special reason for saying that if the tea duty were to be touched at all it ought to have been reduced by 2d. The hon. Member for Montgomery seemed to think that the reduction of the tea duty had always been the work of Liberal Governments. But it was Lord Goschen who brought the tax down to 4d., a point to which no Liberal Government had ever brought it down. Everyone wished to see the tea duty reduced, but wished above all that the advantage should go to the consumer. It was particularly easy to achieve that result in the case of tea, while in the case of most other taxable articles it was difficult to know how much of the reduction would reach the consumer and how long it would be in reaching him. Subject to one condition, the relief to the consumer of tea was immediate and complete; and that condition was that the reduction should be such as was capable of being expressed in terms of the price of those small packets in which tea was sold to the very poor. The right hon. Gentleman did not pretend that the poor consumer of tea in two ozs. packets would get any advantage in price, but that he would get an improvement in quality. If the poor consumer would take his tea to the distinguished Government analyst at Somerset House, he might find a chemical appreciation in the quality of his tea, but that would be the limit of his benefit. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had said that there was an enormous quantity of very cheap tea of the poorest quality in stock—so poor in quality that it could not be sold at all, except at some reduction of the present lowest prices. As long as that stock of poor tea remained unexhausted, said the right hon. Gentleman, there was hope for the consumer. He had only to buy tea which certain of the right hon. Gentleman's colleagues who had expert knowledge of the subject had often described as poison, and he would get some advantage out of the reduction of duty which the right hon. Gentleman had made. He was of opinion that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had frittered away the money at his disposal. He might have done a big thing with the Debt; he might have done something for the income-tax payer, who, patient and long-suffering as he was, had become a little tired of his burden; or he might have done something substantial for the great mass of the consumers by giving a sensible reduction in the tea duty. For one reason or another—of his own choice, or to conciliate different sections of opinion—the right hon. Gentleman had attempted to do a little of many things, and he had not succeeded in doing any of them well. In these circumstances he had no hesitation in voting for the Amendment.
said two statements regarding the tea duty had been made over and over again in the Committee, both of which he would attempt to disprove. The first was that the penny reduction in the tea duty was retained by the blender, and the second was that the very poor would not get the benefit of the reduction. In reply to the first of these statements he would read certain details from the advertisements that appeared in The Grocer, the principal organ of the tea trade, on May 12th, a week after the penny duty came off tea. He would take the advertisements of the four principal houses in the trade, each of which sold £500,000 sterling worth of tea a year. The first one showed that the price of the dearest tea on May 5th was 2s. 2d., and on May 12th 2s. 1d. The intermediate prices between that and the lowest were each reduced a penny, and the lowest priced tea which was on the earlier date 10½d. was on May 12th 9½d. So that the penny did not go into that blender's pocket. In regard to the second dealer, the highest priced tea on May 5th was 2s. 4d. and on May 12th 2s. 3d., the intermediate prices were reduced a penny, and the lowest grades were 10¼d. on May 5th and 9¼d. on May 12th. So that the penny did not go into that blender's pocket. In the case of the third dealer, the highest price on May 5th was 2s., on May 12th 1s. 11d.; lowest price on May 5th 10½d., on May 12th 9½d. So that the penny did not go into that blender's pocket. The fourth dealer's highest price was on May 5th 1s. 5½d., on May 12th 1s. 4½d.; lowest price on May 5th, 11d. on May 12th 10d. So that the penny did not go into that blender's pocket. Thus the whole of the penny in the cases of the four principal tea houses did not go into the blender's pocket. Now he would deal with another class of trade and one which would be admitted to indicate the working class consumption of tea. The best packet tea of the Manchester Wholesale Co-operative Society was sold on May 5th at 2s. 8d. and on May 12th at 2s. 7d.; the lowest price packet tea at 1s. 3½d. on May 5th and 1s. 2½d. on May 12th. That Society's bulk or loose teas were 2s. 6d. and 1s. respectively on May 5th and 2s. 5d. and 11d. respectively on May 12th. So that as far as the Manchester Co-operative Society, which distributed tea among working people, was concerned the penny did not go into the pockets of that society. Then where did the penny go to? The output of the Wholesale Cooperative Society of Manchester last year amounted to 18,401,593 pounds avoirdupois or 8,214 tons, and the amount paid in duty was £460,039 16s. 6d. And so by the reduction of the penny which he had shown did not go into the pockets of the blender, the working men them selves connected with that Society saved by the induction of the tax £76,673 6s. 1d. Coming to the point as to whether the poorer classes got the benefit of the reduction, he thought the best proof of this would be found by an examination of the consumption of lowest-priced teas since the penny duty came off three weeks ago. He had made very careful inquiry among the great tea blenders, and he found that during the three months previous to the reduction the shilling tea sold amounted to 1 per cent of the whole of the tea sold. During the last three weeks the amount of shilling tea sold as compared with all kinds of tea sold had gone up from 1 per cent, to 5 per cent. In other words since the penny duty had been taken off tea the increase in the sale of shilling tea had gone up 450 per cent. By giving these figures he hoped he had at least proved to the satisfaction of the Committee that the penny had not gone into the pockets of the tea blenders and that the poorer classes were receiving the full benefit.
thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer had received valuable assistance of which he stood much in need in the speech of the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down. He did not want to go into the branch of the subject to which the hon. Member had referred, but merely wished to say that on this occasion he intended to pursue the patriotic course of supporting His Majesty's Government. They could not expect a great reduction of this tax from a Liberal Government, because it was one of the facts that stared out from history that no Liberal Government up to the present had had the tea tax below sixpence, and that the beginning and the end of Liberal finance was what was intended to be done by the late Mr. Gladstone. What were the facts about that? The late Mr. Gladstone had a most magnificent opportunity for abolishing the tea tax and he deliberately abstained from doing it, and proposed to give relief to the income-tax and the income-taxpayer alone. They were all pledged to reduce one tax or another, but he felt a difficulty in supporting this reduction of the tea tax, because he was perfectly willing to adopt the logical position taken up by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. As to the coal tax, he had a predilection in favour of cheapening anything which cheapened raw material to the home producers of manufactured goods. For the same reason he was also impelled to point out the differences between tea on the one hand and sugar on the other. He thought that the reduction of the tax on sugar ought to come before the reduction of the tax upon tea, because sugar was an article which formed the raw material of British manufactures. As mere food, sugar was much better for the human frame than tea. A reduction in the tea duty now would be an obstacle to a reduction of the sugar duty hereafter.
said they were all pleased to hear the information communicated by the hon. Member for South Nottingham, and if his information was correct, to the effect that there had been a reduction in the price of tea by 1d. on the pound all round since the reduction of the tax, they would be delighted. But it was a significant and remarkable fact that the process which the hon. Member described appeared to have been going on for some time before the reduction of the tax. This would seem to indicate that the operation had been going on for weeks, whereas the reduced duty had not been in operation for more than a fortnight. These facts would seem to indicate either that there had been a self-denying ordinance on the part of those who might have benefited by the tea duty, or that there had been the fall in prices to which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had alluded. There was no doubt that the tea duty was a harsh, extraordinary, not to say a paradoxical, duty, and there was a general consensus of opinion that it was very much too high, and ought to be reduced, and so far as the Chancellor of the Exchequer had endeavoured to reduce it they accorded him their gratitude. The question was between a reduction of 1d. or 2d., and the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said they had reduced it as much as they could. The question was, did this proposal have the effect of reducing the duty as much as possible? Would it not have been possible to have reduced the duty not by a penny but by 2d., so as to give the consumer an undoubted benefit and an unmistakable measure of relief? There could be no doubt it would have been quite possible to have done that by applying the available balance in the hands of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the reduction of tea, instead of dividing it and applying one part to the reduction of tea and the other to the abolition of the coal duty. The effect of dealing with it in that way had been to make in appearance a reduction in the duty of tea avowedly and ostensibly for the benefit of the consumer of tea, and also a reduction in coal for the benefit of the consumer of coal. But in practice neither thing had happened. Tea was no cheaper on the one hand and coal was no cheaper on the other. He knew that there were certain figures published in the trade papers, and that certain statements were made by experts as to the effect of this reduction of the duty on tea. But in London during the last few days a very representative meeting of the great tea firms of the country had been held, and that meeting passed a unanimous resolution declaring that the reduction of the tea duty would not enable them to make any reduction in the price of tea. It had been suggested that there would be an improvement in the quality of the cheapest kinds of tea. He had no general knowledge of the question, and he had not heard of any demand for improved quality in the tea, but he had a general knowledge of a general demand for a reduction in the price. A reduction in the price had been asked for, but that had not been achieved. The ideal thing of course would be the abolition of the tea duty, and that apparently could not be realised. But if they could not realise the ideal, could they not endeavour to idealise the real? He thought they could, and that they should have gone a great way in that direction if, instead of splitting what might have been a real gift to the tea consumers and giving them a reduction of a penny, the right hon. Gentleman had given a reduction of 2d. It was for that reason he hoped this Amendment would be pressed to a division. If it were he should have great pleasure in supporting it.
said that as representing a large working-class constituency who felt very keenly the high tax on tea, he desired cordially to support the Amendment. There were always plenty of arguments to be found against the revision of taxation. It was part of the duty of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to defend himself from any arguments in favour of the reduction of taxation, and there never was a more eloquent or ingenious Chancellor of the Exchequer than the present occupant of that office. But they wanted to get him and the Liberal Party to go back to their high ideals of the past. One of those ideals which they used to put most commonly before the country was the free breakfast table. Where was the free breakfast table now? This Budget, owing to the careful and cautious Estimates of the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, who framed them in no electioneering spirit, gave the Liberal Party an opportunity of once more unfurling the old banner of a free breakfast table; but unfortunately the Chancellor of the Exchequer, notwithstanding the large surplus at his disposal, had failed to realise this old ideal and tradition of the Liberal Party. He had introduced what he called a humdrum Budget, but so far as the tea duty was concerned he (Mr. Corbett) ventured to think it was a very foolish Budget. They were told by experts when the Budget was introduced that this reduction of a penny would do no good to the consumer. Experts were sometimes mistaken; but in this case they were not, for the price of tea had not been reduced, and the consumer had not benefited at all, the only gainers from the reduction of the tax being the tea merchants. They had to regard this matter from the point of view of the poorest consumers, and so far as their case was concerned they were no better off after this reduction than they were before. If hon. Members once realised that the poorer classes used tea three times a day, it would be seen that even a duty of a penny on the pound would press very hardly upon them. He should certainly vote in favour of the Amendment.
said he did not desire to detain the Committee long, but he thought some of the statements that had been made were worth traversing. The statements of the hon. Member for Nottingham, if entirely correct, were very serious indeed, and destroyed any argument that might be advanced concerning the tax on tea. But he ventured to question the accuracy of the figures. Another hon. Member had suggested that the reduction in the price of tea took place before the reduced tax came into operation. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was probably aware that the generally accepted figure for low-priced teas during the last ten years had been 4¾d. or 5d. a lb. The right hon. Gentleman had said that the price of this large stock of low-priced tea was reckoned at 3¾d. to 4d. If there had been that reduction in the price of tea since the duty was taken off, then his hon. friend behind him was quite right in saying the reduction in the price of these teas was due not to the reduction of the tax, but to the fact that there was a very large stock of low-priced teas on the market. He did not think in the history of the tea trade there had ever been so large a stock of low-priced teas, and he thought when the right hon. Gentleman came to examine the question he would find that the reduction of price was due to that, and not to the penny he had taken off the duty. These phenomena occurred in every trade, and it was quite possible that in regard to the tea trade it had synchronised with the penny being taken off the duty. It had been pointed out, and with truth, that this tax fell much more heavily upon the poor than on the rich man. The most careful calculations showed that the consumer of the high-priced tea paid only 20 per cent. duty on the value of the tea, but the consumer who bought the cheap tea sold at 1s. per lb. paid a duty equal to 160 per cent. of its value. This was the largest tea-consuming country in the world, and the tea was largely consumed by the poor classes. Every penny put on the tea duty struck the poor man in his tea basket. He thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer would receive plenty of assurances from people in the City and the poor buyers throughout the country that the price of tea had not been reduced at the little village store. The Manchester Co-operative Store had probably done a good stroke of business, but they were premature in putting forward their advertisements, and they got their reward, because tea was placed at a lower price by virtue of the fact that there was an immense amount of cheap tea on the market. This had made tea 1d. per lb. cheaper, and therefore the Chancellor of the Exchequer was able to say that the price of tea had gone down. He thought some other way ought to be found of raising the revenue than that of putting a tax upon the one necessary of the poor man's breakfast table. [An HON. MEMBER: Who put the tax on?] He agreed that both Parties were responsible for the tea tax, but he had always been opposed to high taxes upon the necessaries of life. He would much prefer an income tax from top to bottom, applied to the man who earned £30 a year and the man who had £14,000 a year. Such a tax would be much fairer than a tax upon the necessaries of life. The view he was putting forward on this question he had always held, and he had expressed it before in the House. When they made appeals to hon. Members to support an Amendment of this kind it was not because they wanted the support of the Labour Party. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer would reduce the tea duty by 2d. next year there was not a single Member sitting on the Opposition Benches who would not support him, although he could not promise their support to the proposals which the right hon. Gentleman might make for transferring the burden of taxation.
said he had listened with great pleasure to the speech of the hon. Member for Gravesend, because it proceeded entirely upon an assumption which he shared, namely, that a tax of this kind fell almost entirely upon the consumer. If this were not the case the hon. Member's impassioned appeal to get rid of the tax would be beside the point. His hon. friend had appealed to him as if he was putting something on instead of reducing the burden of the tea duty. He regretted very much that he was not able to reduce it more. It might be perfectly true that there happened to be an unusually large supply of cheap tea on the market, but the opinion of the expert which he had read, and other evidence, showed that the concurrent causes of the reduction were the abundance of the supply and the penny reduction. His object in intervening was to ask the Committee to allow them now to proceed to a decision upon this point.
said that the present reduction of a penny would never be felt by the poorer labouring classes. In the large centres, such as London, Liverpool, and Manchester, where competition was keen, he had no doubt that with the present reduction a difference would be felt, but he did not think the question, as it affected the more distant parts of the country, had been taken fully into consideration. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer had reduced the tax by 2d. instead of 1d. he would have earned the gratitude of those least able to voice their views in that Committee. The Committee was perfectly well aware that there were an enormous number of commodities necessary for life brought into the various large cities from abroad, and he contended that if the Chancellor of the Exchequer was at a loss for a corresponding tax to take the place of that upon tea, and one which would be spread more evenly over all breakfast-tables, he had an immense choice among these foreign imported commodities. He would call attention to the fact that the breakfast-tables of Britain involved an expenditure of something like £146,000,000 upon foreign imported meat, frozen beef, mutton, etc., upon which no tax was paid, whereas if but a tax of only 1 per cent. was levied upon these articles it would not only have the effect of allowing the Chancellor of the Exchequer to reduce the tea tax another penny, but would also afford protection to those agricultural classes which he represented in the distant parts of the country. He was perfectly convinced that if the tax upon tea were reduced by 2d. all classes would benefit. He would be delighted if the Chancellor of the Exchequer would assure them that the pledges of hon. Members on the Ministerial side were going at last to be considered by the Government. He hoped the right hon. Gentlemen would try and give them a free breakfast-table. It had been said that the price of tea to the consumer had actually been reduced to the extent of the penny which had been taken off. He would remind the Committee, however, that they had been face to face with similar reductions before, and it was only natural that those chiefly interested should compete with each other in trying to get the largest number of sales. A very trifling alteration in the quality would make up the whole difference of this penny reduction in taxation. Even if they took the figures which had been given as applying to the large towns as correct, he still contended that the benefit of the reduction of 1d. failed to reach those consumers of tea in the distant parts of the country, more especially in Ireland. In order to voice the sentiments of those of the agricultural class who lived away in the remote counties of Ireland, he had called attention to the question to show that they would not benefit by the reduction, although he was perfectly convinced that 2d. was a real reduction that would be felt by the poor people, who would benefit by it as much as those who lived in the large towns. He hoped a sufficient number of hon. Members would support the Amendment in the lobby to enable them to take this small step in the direction of a free breakfast-table.
said he did not go back one stop from the pledges he had given; he was absolutely opposed to all taxes upon the food of the people, and he would do his utmost to bring about an abolition of the tea duty. The question, however, to be considered was the best way in which this abolition might be brought about. He contended that the Amendment, coming as it did from the opposite side of the Committee, must arouse suspicion in view of the past experience they had had of the way in which the Unionist Government had dealt with the question. He was asked to support an Amendment to reduce the tax from 5d. to 4d., but he felt that if he did he should be false to the pledges he had given. They laughed, but it was so. He was asked to vote against the Government and so defeat the present proposals of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. They were asked to destroy the present Budget, and that meant practically that they would place in power Gentlemen who had already dealt with the tea duty in a somewhat remarkable manner. It was because he believed that they would eventually reach the goal at which they were aiming by keeping in power a Chancellor of the Exchequer who was pledged to reduction that he should certainly vote against the Amendment.
said he could not understand why the Government, being pledged to abolish the tea duty, came down to the Committee and gave the absurd reason put forward by the Chancellor of the Exchequer for breaking their pledges. He was going to vote for this Amendment because he believed the duty upon tea was a tax upon food. It was not only a tax upon food, but a tax upon one of the poorest sections of the people. It was a tax which from its very nature fell with very great hardship upon the poorest section of the people. He believed from the figures which had been given that it would not be impossible to take the 2d. off tea at once. The hon. Member for South Nottingham had stated that in the last three months there had been an increase in the quantity of shilling tea sold—that instead of being 1 per cent. of the total, as it was three months ago, it had risen to 5 per cent. There was a perfectly reasonable explanation of these figures. It was well known that during the two months before the introduction of the Budget very little was done in the way of taking cheap tea out of bond. Tea merchants knew that the duty could not be increased, and that it might be reduced. After the Budget they filled up their stocks, and the consequence was that there was a very much increased demand. That accounted for the whole difference in the figures given by the hon. Member. In the higher qualities of tea the amount of the duty made little or no difference. He believed the arguments deduced from the figures given by the hon. Member to be entirely fallacious. The Chancellor of the Exchequer commenced his business with a very handsome legacy secured for him by his predecessor, and he had proceeded to make a mess of it by producing a Budget which did the country no good. It gave relief to practically no portion of the taxpayers. In dealing with the tea duty the important thing to keep in mind was the unit of payment in the coins of the realm. Therefore, in order to get the benefit of a reduction in the tea duty the buyer had to take at least half a pound. Poor people did not deal in half-pounds of tea, and it was impossible for them to get any advantage from this supposed relief of taxation. He was not going to suggest to-day—it would not be in order on this Amendment—that the whole of the revenue from tea should be got from a tax on automobiles, but he thought that would be a better way of raising the money. Supposing it were decided to take £1,000,000 off tea, the proper way to do it would be to divide the commodity into two qualities—the better class half, and the lower class half—and to leave the duty alone on the higher class half which paid a comparatively small portion of the tax in relation to its value, while taking 2d. off the cheap tea of the poor people if the tax could not be taken off altogether. The tea tax was one of the most unjust taxes, for while the poor man paid 150 per cent., the rich man only paid 20 per cent, on the value of the article. The tax in the case of the cheaper qualities of tea was altogether out of proportion to its value.
said he hoped the time would come when the tea duty, if they were still to have it, would be treated in a totally different way from that which obtained at present. He did not see why there should not be an ad valorem duty on tea instead of the present rule of thumb specific duty with all its want of logic, and all its burden on the working people of the country. A large quantity of the tea consumed by the working classes was tea dust, the value of which was 1½d. per pound. The tax on that tea was 5d. per pound, and the tax was just the same on the tea worth 3s. per pound, which was consumed by the well-to-do classes. It was an abominable outrage committed on the poor people of this country. He did not think it ought to pass the wit of man to devise a more equitable method of taxation. There was no difficulty in finding other articles on which to place taxes. Why should not the Chancellor of the Exchequer tax diamonds? They came in free at present, and surely they could bear a tax. Why should not the right hon. Gentleman tax some of the multitude of foreign manufactured goods which came into the country, competing with our own products and destroying the employment of our people? He hoped the hon. Gentlemen opposite who had given pledges to their constituents in favour of reducing this heavy burden on the food of the people would march into the lobby in support of the Amendment.
said the tax on tea fell much more heavily on the poor than on the rich, from the fact that the duty was the same on all qualities of tea, irrespective of the price. There were plenty of luxuries used by the rich which could very well be taxed. The taxes would be paid by the rich, and the foreigner would pay some of the revenue so raised.
AYES.
| ||
Abraham, William (Rhondda) | Crossley, William J. | Laidlaw, Robert |
Acland, Francis Dyke | Davies, D. (Montgomery Co. | Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester) |
Adkins, W. Ryland | Davies, Timothy (Fulham) | Lambert, George |
Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. | Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S. | Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm. |
Agnew, George William | Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S. | Lamont, Norman |
Ainsworth, John Stirling | Dickinson, W.H. (S. Pancras, N | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid |
Alden, Percy | Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P. | Layland-Barratt, Francis |
Allen, Charles P. (Stroud) | Dodd, W. H. | Leese, Sir Joseph F.(Accringt'n |
Armitage, R. | Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne) | Lehmann, R. C. |
Ashton, Thomas Gair | Dunne, Major E. M. (Walsall) | Lever, A. Levy (Essex, Harwich |
Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry | Edwards, Enoch (Hanley) | Lever, W.H. (Cheshire, Wirral) |
Astbury, John Meir | Elibank, Master of | Levy, Maurice |
Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth) | Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward | Lewis, John Herbert |
Balfour, Robert (Lanark) | Erskine, David C. | Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David |
Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight) | Essex, R. W. | Lough, Thomas |
Barker, John | Evans, Samuel T. | Lupton, Arnold |
Barlow, John Emmott (Somerset | Everett, R. Lacey | Lyell, Charles Henry |
Barlow, Percy (Bedford) | Faber, G. H. (Boston) | Lynch, H. B. |
Barnard, E. B. | Ferens, T. R. | Macdonald, J.M. (Falkirk B'ghs |
Barran, Rowland Hirst | Findlay, Alexander | Mackarness, Frederic C. |
Beale, W. P | Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter | M'Arthur, William |
Beauchamp, E. | Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry | M'Callum, John M. |
Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham) | Fuller, John Michael F. | M'Crae, George |
Beck, A. Cecil | Fullerton, Hugh | M'Kenna, Reginald |
Bellairs, Carylon | Gibb, James (Harrow) | M'Micking, Major G. |
Benn, J. Williams (Dovonp'rt) | Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert Jn. | Maddison, Frederick |
Benn, W.(T'w'r Hamlets, S. Geo | Goddard, Daniel Ford | Mallet, Charles E. |
Berridge, T. H. D. | Gooch, George Peabody | Manfield, Harry (Northants) |
Bethell, J.H. (Essex, Romford) | Grant, Corrie | Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston |
Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon) | Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward | Marnham, F. J. |
Billson, Alfred | Griffith, Ellis J. | Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry) |
Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine | Gulland, John W. | Massie, J. |
Black, Alexander Wm. (Banff) | Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton | Menzies, Walter |
Bolton, T.D. (Derbyshire, N.E.) | Hall, Frederick | Micklem, Nathaniel |
Boulton, A. C. F. (Ramsey) | Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis | Molteno, Percy Alport |
Bramsdon, T. A. | Hardy, George A. (Suffolk) | Mond, A. |
Bright, J. A. | Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) | Montgomery, H. H. |
Brodie, H. C. | Harwood, George | Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall) |
Brooke, Stopford | Haslam, James (Derbyshire) | Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen) |
Brunner, J.F.L. (Lanes., Leigh) | Haworth, Arthur A. | Morley, Rt. Hon. John |
Bryce, Rt. Hn. James (Aberd'n | Hazel, Dr. A. E. | Morrell, Phillip |
Bryce, J. A. (Inverness Burghs) | Hedges, A. Paget | Morse, L. L. |
Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn | Helme, Norval Watson | Murray, James |
Buckmaster, Stanley O. | Henderson, J. M. (Aberdeen, W. | Napier, T. B. |
Burnyeat, J. D. W. | Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Hon., S. | Newnes, F. (Notts Bassetlaw) |
Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas | Higham, John Sharp | Newnes, Sir George Swansea) |
Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Chas. | Hobart, Sir Robert | Nicholls, George |
Cairns, Thomas | Hobhouse, Charles E. H. | Nicholson, Chas. N. (Doncast'r |
Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Holden, E. Hopkinson | Norton, Capt. Cecil william |
Cawley, Frederick | Holland, Sir William Henry | Nuttall, Harry |
Chance, Frederick William | Hooper, A. G. | Paul, Herbert |
Channing, Francis Allston | Hope, W. Bateman (Somerset N | Perks, Robert William. |
Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R. | Horridge, Thomas Gardner | Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke) |
Clarke, C. Goddard (Peckham) | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Pollard, Dr. |
Coats, Sir T. Glen (Renfrew, W.) | Hyde, Clarendon | Price, C.E. (Edinb'gh, Central) |
Cobbold, Felix Thornley | Isaacs, Rufus Daniel | Price, Robert Jn. (Norfolk, E.) |
Collins, Stephen (Lambeth) | Jacoby, James Alfred | Radford, G. H. |
Collins, Sir W. J. (S. Pancras, W | Johnson, John (Gateshead) | Rainy, A. Rolland |
Corbett, C H (Sussex, E. Grinst'd | Johnson, W. (Nuneaton) | Raphael, Herbert H. |
Cory, Clifford John | Jones, D. Brynmor (Swansea) | Rea, Russell (Gloucester) |
Cotton, Sir H. J. S. | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire | Rea, Walter Russell, (Scarboro ' |
Craig, Herbert S. (Tynemouth) | Kearley, Hudson E. | Rees, J. D. |
Cremer, William Randal | King, Alfred John (Knutsford) | Renton, Major Leslie |
Crosfield, A. H. | Kitson, Sir James | Richardson, A. |
Question put.
The Committee divided:—Ayes, 255; Noes, 150. (Division List, No. 104.)
Ridsdale, E. A. | Stanger, H. Y. | Ward, W. Dudley (Southamptn |
Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) | Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh. | Wason, Jn. Cathcart (Orkney |
Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) | Stewart, Halley (Greenock) | Watt, H. Anderson |
Robertson, Rt. Hn. E.(Dundee | Strachey, Sir Edward | Wedgwood, Josiah C. |
Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradf'rd | Straus, B. S. (Mile End) | Weir, James Galloway |
Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside) | Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon) | Whitbread, Howard |
Robson, Sir William Snowdon | Taylor, Austin (East Toxeth) | White, George (Norfolk) |
Roe, Sir Thomas | Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe) | White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire) |
Rogers, F. E. Newman | Tennant, E. P. (Salisbury) | Whitehead, Rowland |
Rose, Charles Day | Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire) | Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) |
Rowlands, J. | Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.) | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer |
Runciman, Walter | Thomas, D. Alfred (Merthyr) | Williams, W. L. (Carmarthen) |
Russell, T. W. | Tillett, Louis John | Williamson, A.(Elgin and Nairn |
Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) | Tomkinson, James | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.) |
Schwann, Chas. E. (Manchest'r) | Torrance, A. M. | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid) |
Sears, J. E. | Toulmin, George | Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh, N. |
Seaverns, J. H. | Trevelyan, Charles Philips | Yoxall, James Henry |
Seely, Major J. B. | Verney, F. W. | |
Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford) | Vivian, Henry | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. Whiteley and Mr. J. A. Pease. |
Shaw, Rt. Hon. T. (Hawick B.) | Walker, H. De R. (Leicester) | |
Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John | Wallace, Robert | |
Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie | Walters, John Tudor | |
Spicer, Albert | Walton, Sir John L. (Leeds, S.) |
NOES.
| ||
Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.) | Ffrench, Peter | Meysey-Thompson, E. C. |
Acland-Hood, Rt Hn. Sir Alex F. | Fletcher, J. S. | Mooney, J. J. |
Anson, Sir William Reynell | Forster, Henry William | Morpeth, Viscount |
Anstruther-Gray, Major | Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East) | Murphy, John |
Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H | Gill, A. H. | Nannetti, Joseph P. |
Balcarres, Lord | Ginnell, L. | Nicholson, Win. G. (Petersfield |
Balfour, Rt. Hn A J.(City Lond.) | Glover, Thomas | Nolan, Joseph |
Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey) | Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.) | O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid |
Banner, John S. Harmood- | Hamilton, Marquess of | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) |
Baring, Hon. Guy (Winchester) | Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil | O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W. |
Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N. | Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd | O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool) |
Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks | Harrison-Broadley, Col. H. B. | O'Grady, J. |
Beckett, Hon. Gervase | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Hare, Patrick |
Bignold, Sir Arthur | Hazleton, Richard | O'Malley, William |
Black, Arthur W.(Bedfordshire | Healy, Timothy Michael | O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens |
Boland, John | Helmsley, Viscount | Parket, Sir Gilbert (Gravesend) |
Boyle, Sir Edward | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | Parker, James (Halifax) |
Brace, William | Hervey, F. W. P.(Bury S. Edm'ds | Pease, Herbert Pike(Darlington |
Bridgeman, W. Clive | Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury) | Percy, Earl |
Butcher, Samuel Henry | Hill, Henry Staveley (Staff'sh.) | Powell, Sir Francis Sharp |
Carlile, E. Hildred | Hodge, John | Reddy, M. |
Cave, George | Houston, Robert Paterson | Redmond, John E. (Waterford) |
Cavendish, Rt. Hn. Victor C.W | Hudson, Walter | Richards, Thomas (W. Monm'th |
Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Hunt, Rowland | Richards, T. F. (Wolverh'mpt'n |
Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey- | Jackson, R. K. | Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) |
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm. | Jenkins, J. | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn J A(Worc. | Jowett, F. W. | Royner, Colonel Sir Robert |
Clancy, John Joseph | Joyce, Michael | Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter |
Clarke, Sir Edward (City Lond. | Kennedy, Vincent Paul | Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool) |
Clough, W. | Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col. W | Salter, Arthur Clavell |
Clynes, J. R. | Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich) | Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert |
Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H.A.E. | Lee, Arthur H.(Hants., Fareh'm | Scott, AH (Ashton under Lyne) |
Condon, Thomas Joseph | Liddell, Henry | Shackleton, David James |
Cooper, G. J. | Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham) | Sloan, Thomas Henry |
Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Lowe, Sir Francis William | Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East |
Cowan, W. H. | Lundon, W. | Smith, F.E.(Liverpool, Walton |
Craig, Capt. James (Down, E.) | Lutterell, Hugh Fownes | Snowden, P. |
Delany, William | Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester) | Starkey, John R. |
Devlin, Chas. Ramsay (Galway | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Steadman, W. C. |
Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon | MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S. | Sullivan, Donal |
Dolan, Charles Joseph | MacVeigh, Chas. (Donegal, E.) | Summerbell, T. |
Doughtly, Sir George | M'Calmont, Colonel James | Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G.(Oxf'd Univ. |
Du Cros, Harvey | M'Killop, W. | Thomas, W. Mitchell-(Lanark) |
Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness | Magnus, Sir Philip | Thorne, William |
Fell, Arthur | Marks, H. H. (Kent) | Valentia, Viscount |
Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey | Mason, James F. (Windsor) | Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire) |
Walsh, Stephen | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord | Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George |
Wardle, George J. | Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E.R. | Young, Samuel |
White, Patrick (Meath, North) | Wlison, J. H. (Middlesbrough) | |
Wilkie, Alexander | Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Courthope and Mr. Ashley. |
Williams, J. (Glamorgan) | Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm |
Clause 1 agreed to.
Motion made and Question proposed, "That Clause 2 stand part of the Bill."
said that the clause dealt with the tobacco duties, and he proposed to move to omit it. There was no doubt that the differentiation of duty between tobacco leaf and stripped tobacco had done no harm to the consumer, and had provided a good deal of employment for the British workman. They had it in the words of the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself that since this duty on stripped tobacco was imposed that tobacco had come in more and more in a raw condition and less and less in the condition of stripped tobacco. The figures for the last three years were rather extraordinary. During the year ended March 31st, 1904, we imported 53,000,000 lbs. of stripped tobacco, and 33,000,000 lbs. of leaf. During the following year, that was after the differentiation, we imported 21,500,000 lbs. of stripped, and 82,000,000 lbs. of the raw leaf, and in the year that had just concluded we only imported 12,000,000 lbs. of stripped and 76,000,000 of the raw leaf. The computation made by his right hon. friend the Member for West Birmingham was not disputed that on an average a man stripped 5,000 lbs. a year. Calculating on this basis, we find that the leaf imported last year found continuous employment for 15,000 people in England. The employment of people during the two years that the differentiation existed had more than doubled. The increase was 110 per cont. in the amount of employment given to British workpeople who were engaged in stripping tobacco. One was led to inquire under these circumstances why was this duty being taken off? One looked naturally to the utterances of the right hon. Gentleman who was responsible for the Finance Bill, and they found that one of his reasons was that the stripping industry in this country was carried on under very bad conditions. Why not improve the conditions instead of killing the industry? The remedy of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was like cutting off a man's legs in order to prevent his feet getting wet.. Another reason was that this duty violates the sacred shibboleth of our policy of free imports, but what had happened in this case was a standing proof of the fallacy of that policy. The only effect of the change would be, not to benefit the revenue or the consumer, but to throw thousands of British workmen out of work and to give the work they were now doing to the foreigner. Those who bought tobacco were bound to pay something for the price of stripping, and surely it was more satisfactory that the tobacco purchaser in this country should pay the wages for stripping tobacco into British pockets rather than into foreign pockets. He hoped the Committee would vote against Clause 2.
joined in the hope expressed by the hon. Member for Rye. The policy of transferring the stripping trade which, had now been secured by the British manufacturer to the foreigner was one to which he gave the most determined opposition. Tobacco leaf, like cabbage leaf, had a stalk, and the question was whether tobacco leaf should be sent over here unstripped or whether it should be stripped in America or elsewhere and sent over here in a state fit to be used in manufacture. The duty upon stripped tobacco had almost entirely transferred this work of stripping the leaves to England, instead of leaving it to be done in the United States and other countries whence the tobacco came. The duty upon stripped tobacco had had a most remarkable result, and this result had taken place much more quickly than those who advocated a change in our fiscal policy would have anticipated. Three years ago 5,000 people were employed in stripping tobacco in England, but in consequence of the slight change in duty there were now 15,000 people engaged in that industry. These 15,000 people were earning a livelihood; it might be a poor one, but still it was a livelihood. It was said that this was not a high class process of manufacture, and that therefore it ought not to be encouraged, but he did not think the Committee should look only after the high-class manufacturers and the highly paid artisans of this country, and not think of the poor manufacturer and the more poorly paid artisan. It was true that they might be engaged in a sweated industry, but if they took away from those people this work, they took away the only work which they were engaged in doing, and the only industry which they had the chance of performing. It was true that it was a badly-paid industry, and that the work was performed under bad conditions, but it seemed to him that the Government ought rather to see that those conditions were improved, and the wages increased, than to take away the work from English people and place it in the hands of foreigners. It was obvious that if the differentiation was abolished the foreigners would get this work which now employed an additional 10,000 people, although the same profits, if not larger profits, would be made by the tobacco magnates of this country. The tobacco kings of Bristol were making out of tobacco the most enormous profits. The profits which they earned, indeed, were startling, and amounted to hundreds of thousands of pounds. It might even be that the change now proposed might slightly increase those profits, but it was the interest of the Committee to look after the men engaged in the industry, and to see that the work they were engaged upon was not sent abroad. If the duty was taken off stripped tobacco, the Americans would get the work, and although there might be a slight benefit gained by the tobacco monopoly, there would be no benefit gained by the consumer, and these ten or fifteen thousand people would lose their work. On these grounds he would certainly vote that this change should not be made, because, as he had said, it would rob these people of their work and their pay.
invited the Chancellor of the Exchequer to explain his reasons for making the proposed change, as to which he avowed himself entirely in the dark. The history of the duty, which he himself put on when in office, was very simple. When, two years ago, he had to frame his first Budget, with a deficit of four millions to meet, he did not think it worth while to consider any additional taxation which would not bring in at least a million a year. When he had met the deficit he found he had not the working margin necessary for safety, and he then said to his advisors that now they had come to the day of small things; if they had a change to propose which would bring in half a million a year that would be exactly what he wanted. They advised him that he would find such a change in the tobacco duties, and they expressed the opinion on grounds of justice and equity that that change should have long ago been made. He agreed with the proposal, with the result that he was able to obtain substantially the money he expected. Now the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed to upset that arrangement. Why did the right hon. Gentleman make the change at all? Granting that it had, as was alleged, some protective effect, was that a sufficient reason for throwing the trade into confusion again, and reopening the whole question? Did hon. Gentlemen opposite think that the other duties on manufactured tobacco should also be taken off? The present scale of tobacco duties was so protective that it had practically eliminated all foreign competition in manufactured tobacco in the home market, and when the great American trust attempted to invade that market, the home manufacturers formed a trust of their own, and beat their rivals out of the field. His first question, then, to the Chancellor of the Exchequer was, why did he strain at a gnat and swallow a camel, why did he trouble about this small matter between strips and leaf while he re-enacted the substantial and widespread protection which existed in the whole scale of the tobacco duties? His second question was, why, having decided on altering the rate of differentiation between strips and leaf, had the right hon. Gentleman fixed upon a halfpenny as the exact measure of differentiation which justice and equity demanded? When his right hon. friend the Member for West Birmingham asked the right hon. Gentleman to state in a Return his reasons for the change, the right hon. Gentleman gave the most extraordinary answer that a Chancellor of the Exchequer had ever offered to the House, namely, that he could not do it, because all his calculations were in his own head.
If the right hon. Gentleman read my next sentence he would find that I said the whole of the material was contained in the Report of the Departmental Committee which the right hon. Gentleman himself appointed.
said he was aware of that. When he imposed that differentiation his first consideration, and he frankly admitted it, was to obtain the sum of money his financial necessities demanded. But he was advised by members of that Committee and by his own financial advisers I that the differentiation was not unfair, and it surprised him and awakened a legitimate curiosity on his part to hear the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer say that in the Report of that same Committee ho (Mr. A. Chamberlain) would find all the materials which would prove to him that this differentiation should have been3½d. Hestudied the Report very carefully two years ago, and had some recollection still of what was in it, and the right hon. Gentleman would not deny that there was a great deal of information there relating to tobacco, and that several varieties of tobacco were dealt with in the Report. But there were many other varieties known to the market which were not dealt with in the Report, and for the right hon. Gentleman to refer the Committee to the labours of that Committee for information was like setting them to search for a needle in a haystack, and he did not think that the needle was there after all. He would ask the right hon. Gentleman to unlock the recesses of his mind and lay bare to the Committee the process of logical digestion by which he had converted the details of that Report into an argument for his differentiation of ½d. He rejoiced that after all that had been said during the last two years, and after all the stress of the contests in these debates, the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, however much he desired to upset the decision of his predecessors upon this point, had himself been forced to the conclusion that a differentiation was needed and that nothing less than a differentiation would be satisfactory. When he had heard the observations which the right hon. Gentleman would, he hoped, make upon this matter, he might have himself some further obser- vations to address to the Committee, but as he was at this time merely a searcher after truth he would detain the Committee no longer.
said perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would not mind his replying on this occasion as it was a question which had been a matter of controversy between them before. If the right hon. Gentleman asked why the differentiation between leaf and strips was put at ½d., the answer was contained in the obvervation just made by him that his first consideration in 1904 in imposing a differentiation in duty of 3d. was to obtain money. The first consideration of his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in making this differentiation of ½d. instead of 3d. was that he wished to have a duty productive of revenue instead of a duty which, while it had been very disagreeable to the trade, did not bring in any revenue. In 1904 the right hon. Gentleman opposite, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, was warned that the duty of 3d. would not bring in revenue when the existing stock of strips was exhausted. There were then in stock 142,000,000 lbs. of strip?. And it was quite true that while that stock was in existence the right hon. Gentleman could get this extra duty of 3d.
Hear, hear.
Yes, but at what a price. It involved a loss of 3d. a lb. to the owners of those stocks. They had to enter into competition with owners of new imported leaf upon which there was no differential duty of 3d., and the result was that this duty of 3d. was charged on the stock of strips. In the course of the debate when the right hon. Gentleman reduced the differential duty of 3d. to 1½d. he was again warned that such a duty would be destructive of the importation of strips. The reply to that was that it was rather a beneficial thing to put an end to the importation of strips, because it would enable the stripping to be done in this country. They had now to consider the question of revenue. The reason why this differential duty had been reduced to ½d. was that they wanted revenue, and it had been fixed at ½d. because it was believed that such a duty would be productive of revenue. The next point put by the right hon. Gentleman was why the sum of ½d. was fixed by, not 1d. or 1½d. Well, they had had experience since 1904, they had seen that the duty of 3d. had been absolutely non - productive of revenue, and they had seen the operation of the differential duty of 1½d. which was subsequently placed upon the stocks in bond. They had seen as the effect of that, that the amount of strips taken out of bond had steadily declined, and that the amount of leaf taken out of bond had steadily increased. They had to remember that the strips taken out of bond were strips which were held in this country in bond at the time of the Finance Act of 1904. There was no market in the world for strips except the British market, and, there being no market for these strips which were in bond in 1904, unless they had been taken out of bond and sold they would have rotted in the bonded warehouses. Consequently the owners had to sell them, but in spite of the urgent compulsion upon the owners to sell these strips they had not been able to do so in competition with other owners of strips with a differential duty of 1½d., and the result was that in the experience of the revenue authorities the drawback on that stock was seriously increased. The right hon. Gentleman when supporting his differentiation of duty in 1904 gave to the Committee an example. He took four specimens of leaf and strips which had been tested for sand and moisture for the purpose of estimating the duty upon strips and leaf respectively. He showed by those samples that there was more sand and moisture in the leaf than in the strips, and he concluded that the duty cost on a given quantity of loaf was 3d. per lb. higher than on the same quantity of strips. The right hon. Gentleman chose samples of a particular kind of tobacco, that of "Bright Virginia;" but if he had taken another kind of tobacco, that known as "Western Leaf," which was a stouter plant, and the sand in which was of a muddier kind than that in "Bright Virginia," he would have shown, not that the duty cost on leaf was higher than on strips, but that it was practically equal. They had to look at tobacco as a whole, and, on the whole range of tobacco, the Drawback Committee found that stalks were generally 1 or 2 per cent, moister than the rest of the leaf. They took, not four samples as did the right hon. Gentleman, but a very large number of analyses of sand in different kinds of tobacco, and, working from those figures and from the statements of the Drawback Committee, they found that some differentiation was justified. It was almost impossible to settle a figure of equality; but looking at the result of these calculations and taking them as a guide, they came to the conclusion that, on balance, some slight, but very slight, differentiation might be made in favour of strips as against leaf. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had made such a difference—namely, ½d.—as would ensure that the existing holders of leaf would be able to find a market, for their goods without suffering loss.
asked whether the right hon. Gentleman suggested that the ½d. should be removed as soon as they had disposed, of their stocks, and what was the revenue that it was estimated would be received, from the differential duty.