Next, in Committee of Ways and Means, a resolution was proposed imposing a tax of 5 per cent. on mineral royalties, replacing the duty on ungotten minerals. The Chancellor of the Exchequer explained that mineral properties when not worked would be chargeable with increment duty, but not with undeveloped land duty, and that, as regarded future mines, the Government proposed that the increment duty should take the form of an annual commutation. All mineral properties would be valued, and the value treated as equivalent to twelve and a half years' purchase, the customary computation. When the minerals came to be worked, this annual equivalent would be deducted from the sum the owners actually received, and increment duty charged on the balance, if there was any. The proposal was denounced as Socialistic and confiscatory by Mr. Lambton (U., Durham, S.E.), whose family was largely interested in mineral rights, while Mr. Markham (L., Mansfield, Notts) defended it from the standpoint of owners of collieries, citing instances of the large mineral rents drawn by four dukes in and near his own constituency, and declaring that wayleaves were almost "legal blackmailing." Ultimately the resolution imposing the mineral rights duty was accepted by 127 to 52, and that imposing the increment value duty by 120 to 44.

Next day (Sept. 23) the remaining stamp duties were disposed of after a less exciting debate. An attempt to exempt from the doubled stamp duty on bonds to bearer all Colonial securities (those issued by Colonial governments, including provincial governments, being already exempted) was resisted by the Government as involving too great a loss to the revenue, and was defeated by 200 to 69, the clause being afterwards passed by 216 to 64. For the proposed stamp duties on contract notes a graduated scale was substituted, approved by the Stock Exchange Committee, for transactions involving sums ranging from 1,000l. to 20,000l. Divisions on all the clauses were taken. Mr. Bottomley advocated taxation of all gambling transactions in stocks and shares, which the Chancellor of the Exchequer resisted on the plea of injury to business.

On the tea duty there was a more heated debate. Mr. Gwynn (N., Galway) moved a reduction of 1d. per lb., suggesting the taxation of aerated waters as an alternative; Mr. Snowden (Lab.) laid stress on the fresh taxation imposed by the Budget on the poor; the Chancellor of the Exchequer, however, could not afford this concession, and the amendment was rejected by 170 to 117, and another, giving 1d. per lb. preference to tea grown within the Empire, was also rejected by 216 to 85.

The spirit duties followed. An attempt to exempt spirits required for medical purposes was rejected as impracticable, by 159 to 84; another, reducing the duty from 3s. 9d. to 1s., advocated by Sir W. Bull (U., Hammersmith) on the ground of the heavy fall in consumption, was strongly supported in the interest of Irish and Scottish distillers, but was rejected after closure by

a majority of only 18 (112 to 94), and on a motion by Mr. Mooney (N.) for reporting progress the majority fell to 13 (110 to 97). The clause was eventually passed by 117 to 84 and the House sat till nearly 5 A.M., but resumed business seven hours later, at noon on Friday, September 24. The beer and tobacco duty clauses were passed at once without discussion, in consequence, as Mr. Austen Chamberlain said later, of the exhaustion of the House; for the motor spirit duty further discussion was promised, after an angry scene; but the clause imposing it was eventually passed after the rejection of an amendment, and complaints by Mr. Healy and others that the Government was interfering with an infant industry, deterring American motorists from visiting the British Isles, and injuring the business of omnibus proprietors. A concession was made for the medical profession (post, p. 241) and for cars used by the Army motor reserve. The last clause of the Bill was reached and passed; but new clauses and certain postponed clauses still awaited debate.

On Monday, September 27, after confirming on Report the resolutions dealing with the mineral rights and increment value duty and the estate duty deductions the House debated a resolution moved by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, charging on the Consolidated Fund in each year a sum equal to half the proceeds of the land value and mineral rights duty, such sum being so apportioned between the local authorities and to such separate accounts as Parliament might determine. The apportionment, Mr. Lloyd-George explained, would be discussed in 1910; the relations of imperial and local finance would have to be dealt with very seriously, and, after seeing deputations from various municipalities, he had decided to postpone the final allocation. Mr. Balfour commented severely on this postponement. If such taxation were levied at all, the proceeds should go to the localities; the Government had compromised with protestors by giving the local authorities half; let them at least indicate their principles of division. Were the proceeds of the mineral duties to be given to localities which had no more to do with the development of mining than Argentine or the Pacific? To collect money at random without apportioning it was utterly unsound finance. It looked like a bribe reserved for the more deserving constituencies; they knew what these would be in the view of the Government. The Chancellor of the Exchequer remarked on the advance in Mr. Balfour's views; if the taxes were given to the locality it was just to levy them, if given to Imperial purposes it was theft. (Mr. Balfour and other Opposition members protested.) The doctrine that remote parts of the country had no concern in the development of other parts was a curious kind of Unionism." Increment values due to the growth of towns arose outside them. All the best informed authorities advised giving the municipalities time to agree on their proposals. After considerable discussion the

66

Chancellor of the Exchequer enumerated five alternative suggestions: (1) that the taxes should be spent where they were raised; (2) distribution according to rateable value; (3) according to population; (4) according to rateable value in different zones a proposal made by the London County Council; (5) apportionment for specific purposes-a plan which had given the country many secondary schools. The Government ought not to be asked to decide prematurely. Eventually the resolution was agreed to. (It was confirmed next day after an ineffectual protest by Mr. Rutherford (U., West Derby, Liverpool) that to levy money not appropriated to a specific purpose within the year was a violation of the practice of Parliament.)

The postponed clauses were then taken (Sept. 27). On Clause 25 (exemption of land held for public or charitable purposes) Sir P. Magnus (U., London University) moved an amendment giving total exemption to universities, secondary schools, and institutions for promoting literature and the fine arts. The clause only exempted land actually occupied and used for public purposes, and imposed increment duty when sales took place. Sir William Anson (U., Oxford University) laid stress on the desirability of open spaces near schools, like those secured by the governing bodies of Harrow School and Dulwich College, and by Oxford University beyond the Cherwell. All Souls' would have to pay 1,000l. a year, he was told, on its undeveloped land. The taxation would diminish the amount available for professorships; it would fall also on the teachers, and on the parents and the students, by diminishing educational endowments, which saved the State great expense in secondary education. The Chancellor of the Exchequer laid stress on the exemptions already accorded to these institutions (p. 239) amounting to two-thirds of the new taxes, besides the concessions under Schedule A. Exemption of the universities would involve exemption of ecclesiastical institutions, and the tax would be whittled away. Mr. Bonar Law (U., Dulwich) pleaded the case of Dulwich College, the Governors of which estimated, he said, that the undeveloped land tax would take 1,000l. a year out of a revenue of 1,900l.; Mr. Massie (L., Cricklade, Wilts) pointed out that not only the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, but the foreign religious orders, would claim exemption as "charitable institutions," and the State now spent largely on education and the Poor Law; and Mr. Balfour condemned Mr. Massie's fear that the exemptions asked for might somehow assist religion, and contrasted the total exemption of football grounds and golf links with the partial exemption accorded to educational institutions by the Government. Eventually the amendment was rejected by 176 to 54. An amendment moved by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, making it plain that the exemptions accorded to public bodies were from reversion duty and undeveloped land duty was carried, on a division, after unsuccessful attempts to obtain further concessions. A modifica

216]

tion was made as to friendly societies, further definition being promised so as to exclude co-operative or other trading societies, and the clause as amended was passed.

Clause 71, reducing the Annual National Debt charge by 3,000,000l., was attacked by Sir F. Banbury, who declared that, capitalising the annual charge for old-age pensions, the Government had increased the National Debt by 300,000,000l.; but, after a defence by Mr. Lloyd-George, it was carried by 164 to 48. The clauses imposing the mineral rights duty were passed next day, September 28, after various unsuccessful attempts at amendment, and some concessions, which will be mentioned later (p. 239). In the debate, the Opposition maintained that the tax would be passed on to the consumer, the Liberals that it was a tax on rent and would fall on the lessor. The clause actually imposing the duty was carried by 192 to 58. On the day following there was further discussion, largely of a technical character, on a clause exempting minerals being worked on April 30, 1909, and continuing to be worked; and, after other clauses affecting the mineral rights duties had been passed with some amendment, a number of exemptions were granted from the land duties, which will be found summarised on a later page. Two other Ministerial concessions must also be noted the permission to pay in land part of the death duties on land, which Mr. Balfour, speaking for himself alone, commended as a way of getting land for small owners, though Sir Edward Carson considered it to be preliminary to land nationalisation; and some further relief to landowners in regard to deduction from income tax, which was savagely criticised by Mr. Snowden (Lab., Blackburn).

The other new clauses were disposed of next day, October 1; only one of these was moved by the Government. It gave to owners of properties under 5001. in value the right to deduct, in assessing the value for death duty, charges created to secure unpaid purchase money or advances. This was intended to meet the case of Irish purchasing tenants and members of building societies; but Mr. T. Healy (N.) and Mr. J. W. Hills (U.) respectively declared it inadequate. Mr. Dillon (N.), however, emphatically repudiated Mr. Healy's view, and the clause was passed. Unsuccessful attempts were made by Unionist members to get the Bill amended in respect of (1) the repeated payments of death duties in the case of a rapid succession of property among a series of relatives; (2) the charge of duty on tobacco used for making insecticide; (3) the assessment of income tax on the joint incomes of husband and wife (rejected by 119 to 46); (4) the cocoa duties, which Mr. Hunt (U., Ludlow, Shropshire) challenged as a protective tax on food, but his proposal was rejected by 130 to 47; (5) a proposal to allow for "wasting securities" in income tax assessments, which was opposed by the Government partly on the ground of want of time, and rejected by 143 to 36; and other points of less importance. Outside the

House, meanwhile, the prospect of the ultimate success of the Bill had been further diminished by the announcement that several leading City financial houses, including Messrs. Rothschild, Gibbs, Schröder and Stern, were inviting signatures to a petition praying the Lords to refer the Budget to the electorate. During these days an important development in the State control of wireless telegraphy had been announced by the Postmaster-General in reply to a question on September 30. Arrangements had been made for the transfer to the Post Office of all the Marconi coast stations, and of all Lloyd's wireless stations for communication with ships; and also for the use by the Post Office, free of royalty, of all existing Marconi patents and any further patents for fourteen years. For this the Marconi Company was to receive 15,000l.

It was the fault rather of the political situation than of the Church Congress that the addresses delivered at the latter were little concerned with the topics of most urgent political interest. The Congress sat at Swansea from October 5 to October 8. Welsh disestablishment was eloquently deprecated by the Bishop of St. David's, who mentioned the shifting of population in the rural districts, and the weakening of the stringency of the old Nonconformist doctrines through the advance of English and therefore of current thought, as special reasons for maintaining the State Church; and he was supported by the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of St. Albans, Lord Hugh Cecil and others. The debate on Socialism, though naturally containing little that was novel, drew from the Bishop of Truro a repudiation of Lord Rosebery's description (p. 203), and other speakers expressed considerable sympathy with some Socialist aspirations and aims. Among the other subjects dealt with were the Church's title to her endowments, the growing neglect of public worship, and recent psychological research, in its bearing on Christianity, the latter drawing from Dr. Stephen Paget a fierce attack on "Christian Science."

Two others among the customary October assemblages had more bearing on current politics. At the annual general meeting of the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants (Oct. 4-9) at Leicester, considerable dissatisfaction was expressed with three Labour Members of Parliament, Messrs. Hudson, Wardle, and Bell, the latter the secretary of the Society, for supporting the Great Northern and Great Central Amalgamation Bill (p. 75) and with Mr. Bell for opposing the Right to Work Bill. The action of Messrs. Hudson and Wardle was condoned; a resolution calling on Mr. Bell to resign was discussed in private, and rejected, but arrangements were made to transfer the Parliamentary work of the Society to a second secretary; and Mr. Bell severed his connection with the Society at the end of the year. Shortly afterwards he was appointed to a post connected with the new Labour Exchanges.

The Miners' Federation meeting at Newcastle (Oct. 5-8) was