HOUSE

OF COMMONS. Wednesday, February 18, 1852. MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILLS.-1° Copyright Amend

ment.

20 County Rates; Public Houses (Scotland); Enfranchisement of Copyholds; Commons In

closure.

COUNTY RATES.

Order for Second Reading read.

posed to amend, and in its amended state to re-enact. The 55th Geo. III. had this defect, that having ascertained the rateable value of the property in each parish in a county, it gave an appeal in the event of a grievance, but without stating the number of days' notice which should be given. The 56th Geo. III. stated the length of notice, but omitted to state the party to MR. FRESHFIELD said, that the ob- whom it was to be given; and the 57th ject of the measure of which he now moved Geo. III. stated very inartificially the the Second Reading was, to consolidate the party to whom notice should be given. existing laws relative to the County Rates, The framer of the Act intended not only and to introduce some Amendments. Un- to remedy that defect, but to remove ander this Bill not a single shilling could be other evil. By the Act 55 Geo. III. raised which was not already imposed un- c. 51, the magistrates at session might der the Acts of Parliament now in force; give relief in the event of an appeal, nor would any person be subjected to any but it was stipulated that the cost should liability to which he was not already sub- in no case fall upon the county stock. ject. It was absolutely necessary that the This was considered very unjust; but, inlaw should be rendered consistent with it- tending to repeal the provision, the framer self. It might be known to many Members recited an Act in which there was no that the 55th Geo. III. c. 51, under which such clause, and the consequence is, the rates were levied, caused great dissatisfac- provision still remains in force. The hon. tion in consequence of the inequalities and Member for South Devonshire, by his Bill, irregularities which took place in the gave an appeal, but confined it to the next working of that Act, and there was a very session after the rate should be allowed, general complaint that many parishes were and no appeal after that, except against not rated in due proportion. They were the assessment-not against the basis upon indebted to the late Member for Kinsale which the rate was assessed; and therefore (Mr. Hawes) for the proposal of a Spe- the next rate or assessment would be made cial Committee which was appointed on this on the former standard, against which no subject. After a long investigation, and relief could be obtained, and the parish, eight different reports, in the county of should there be twenty rates, was comSurrey, the result was to convince the ma-pelled to incur the expense of twenty times gistrates that they were not bound to re-appealing against twenty rates, and yet ceive from the various parishes the ac- remain liable to be rated upon the same counts, as they returned them, of the amount of rateable value, because after rateable value of the property of the that basis had been confirmed, no power parish, but that they had the power of in- of correcting it existed, but by going vestigating what was the rateable value. again through the original form, and estabThe consequence was, that in the county lishing a new basis. These were some of of Surrey the basis for the rates was in- the inconveniences which he intended to creased from 2,000,000l. to 2,200,000l.; remove by the present Bill. In the Acts in other words, the county rental liable to be consolidated, the terms county rate, to poor-rates upon which the county rate basis, and assessment, were used as idenwas assessed had been understated to that tical, although they related to distinct amount. These proceedings having be- parts of the object to be attained for income public, they attracted the attention of stance, the basis was the several amounts his hon. Friend the Member for South of the rateable value in each parish, Devonshire (Sir J. Y. Buller), whose assist- the aggregate of which would be the ance he had in promoting the present county rental. The county rate is the sum measure; and he introduced a Bill which multiplied by the number of pounds in had for its object the appointment of a the basis or county rental, which will give committee of magistrates, who were to the sum to be raised for the county expendecide what was the rateable value of the diture; thus, suppose the expenditure to property in each parish. The committee be provided for should be 8,300l., and the was to consist of eleven members, or not county rental, that is, the aggregate of less than five, and three were requisite to the rateable value in the county to be two constitute a quorum. That Act he promillions-the rate to be declared would be VOL. CXIX. [THIRD SERIES.]

2 A

one penny in the pound sterling; and, the acts of the Legislature had sought to lastly, the assessment would be the pro- remedy. The deduction was not necessary portion to fall upon each parish according to the interest of any parish, if every to its rental; and assuming parish A to parish was rated by the same rule; but stand in the basis as having a rateable in some parishes 10 per cent was derental of 8,000l., it would be assessed to ducted for repairs, in others 25 per cent, pay 8,000 pennies, or 331. 6s. 8d. One and some have deducted so much as 50 object of this Bill of consolidation would per cent, and have made deductions upon be to keep these parts of the transaction the rent of land even where there were no distinct, but placed in their natural order. farm buildings. So long as they permitted He proposed, therefore, that a basis should these deductions, rating could not be made be formed on the machinery of his hon. upon any uniform principle. His object Friend's Act, the 8 & 9 Vict. c. 39. was, therefore, to establish a principle The parishes will be rated in a certain applicable alike to every parish it was a proportion, and one month would be given question between each parish individually to them to deliver any objections to that and all the other parishes, and not beproportion. The committee to be restrain- tween counties and the parishes within. ed from reporting to the session within The hon. Member then gave illustrations the month, and they are only to report in argument to show that it was immaafter the objections have been argued and terial upon what sum a parish was assessdecided. When the sessions have framed ed, whether above or below the real value a basis, there will be an appeal, not only of the property rateable, provided that all to the next session, but at any time when the other parishes were made subject to the varying value of property shall render the same rate of proportion. relief just. Besides this, it is proposed that there should be constituted a committee, to be called the County-rate Committee, appointed by the magistrates year by year, and changed from time to time, as it may appear right. The committee should have the power to investigate the claims of any parish to be relieved in consequence of the altered state of the parishes; but no determination upon their part should be binding until reported to the magistrates in sessions. He was bound to call the attention of the House to the fact that he proposed, with a view to an equal rating, material changes in the mode of estimating the relative value of property in the several parishes. He especially directed the attention of the House to the 6th clause. At present the county rate was assessed upon such property as was liable to be assessed for the relief of the poor by the 6 & 7 Will. IV. It was enacted, that in the first place should be ascertained the gross estimated rent, the rent at which the property might be expected to let to a tenant from year to year, repaying all rates and taxes-and from that estimated rent should be deducted the annual average cost of repair and insurance, and other expenses (if any) necessary to maintain such rent, and then the remainder would constitute the rateable value. That provision of deducting for repair and insurance, he hoped to prevail upon the House to alter it was, in fact, the great source of the inequality which so many of

MR. BOUVERIE would not, on the part of the Government, oppose the second reading of the Bill; but he confessed that he had strong misgivings as to the benefi cial operation of it. The measure appeared to him to be liable to several objections. A preliminary one was this: while the Bill professed to consolidate the law, it only consolidated a portion of it, leaving many important points untouched. The Acts of Parliament relating to assessment were very complicated, and it was desirable that they should be carefully considered; but he did not think it desirable to consolidate some and leave others untouched, for that would create greater confusion than before. There were other details in the Bill to which he objected. Its main feature was to alter the phraseology of the law of assessment, which would make it unfamiliar to those who were in the habit of dealing with it as it at present stood. The Bill also proposed to make a great alteration in the principle upon which rating is at present based. In the measure brought in by an hon. Member, for assessing the poor-rate, an attempt was made to get at the net annual value, making deductions for repairs and insurances. He did not mean to say there were not difficulties in achieving this, but he did mean to say that the principle was the correct one. Unless the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Freshfield) was prepared to show that all property was subject to a fixed charge, his argument as to the variations of the de

ductions was worth nothing. For different | was tolerably good; but with respect to kinds of property different amounts of de- the poor-rate valuations, it was certainly duction should be permitted, and it would true that there often existed a great inework great injustice to say, "You shall quality. Great good would be effected if only be allowed so much, no matter what a stricter supervision of the different parois your real expenditure." Onekind of pro- chial assessments was introduced. He obperty might require only a deduction of per jected to the principle which his hon. cent, another a deduction of 10 per cent. Friend (Mr. Freshfield) now proposed, that MR. H. HOPE tendered his thanks to of establishing a different basis for the the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Freshfield) for county rate and the poor-rate. If they the labour he had bestowed upon this Bill. once admitted that principle, it would be The method of arriving at the net annual impossible to have the same assessment valuation of property was one which had for the county rate and the poor-rate. an especial reference to the new Reform Every county and every parish would then Bill. The elective franchise was to be be necessarily put to the expense of havbased upon the net value. He know no ing a double assessment for these two rates. means of obtaining a just estimate of that There was nothing to prevent the machinnet value, unless by a very troublesome ery of the present law being improved, and expensive process, namely, appeals but he did not think that any further upon assessments. He did not know whe-power given to the magistrates would add ther, when the proper time arrived, the to the strength of the present law. Government would consider the question; but this he knew, that the Reform Bill could not be established on the present basis by which assessments were made. He trusted that his hon. Friend would give them some means not only of arriving at the gross annual valuation, but also the means of testing the proper reduction on the net annual value.

MR. HENLEY thought the difficulties which had been raised in the course of the debate were of so formidable a nature that his hon. Friend (Mr. Freshfield) must be a courageous man if he should attempt to encounter them. It seemed to him that the Reformers of England had a very discouraging prospect held out to them by the hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume), MR. HUME was pleased that this dis- who said that no rateable value for the cussion had taken place, not because this franchise could be had until all the proBill could be made more valuable for the perty in the kingdom had been valued by purposes for which it was intended, but the same persons. If that were so, it because it had served to show a difficulty would be impossible to have an equal rate, which would attend the working of the even in one county, for by the time the Reform Bill, if not attended to in time. In party had gone through the whole county the assessments for the poor-rate, allow he would have to begin again, such would ances were made for repairs, but in the have been the variation in value of proincome tax no such thing was done. He perty by buildings and other improvements could point to parishes where the same va- in the meanwhile. The only thing they luable land was assessed at two widely could hope to reach was an approximation different rates. The noble Lord at the of value. They could not get anything head of the Government would find it im-like an equality, and therefore they must possible to have a fair representation on the rateable value unless there was a general valuation of the whole country by the same individual. It appeared to him that the Government ought to ask the hon. Gentleman to suspend his Bill, and then bring in a general Bill by which all the parishes would be rated equally.

MR. CORNEWALL LEWIS said, that the present law required that the valuation for poor-rates should be equal as between different tenants in the same parish, and that the valuation for the county rates should be equal as between the different parishes in the county. For estimating the county rate the machinery

be content if now and then there were some apparent inequalities. He had had something to do with the making of county rates in his time, and he knew there were descriptions of property which required very large deductions; and he could not conceive any principle so unjust as to take cottages in towns let at high rents as the measure of value on which the assessment was to be made, and to put on the same footing with them land on which hardly any buildings were erected. All he could say was that he thought the time of the House was wasted in discussing such a measure.

MR. HUME explained that what he

MR. FRESHFIELD said, he felt no alarm or nervous affections in consequence of the hon. Member's caution. The Bill was one of the most simple in operation, and he anticipated no difficulty or serious obstruction to its passing through the House.

Bill read 2°.

PUBLIC-HOUSES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Order for Second Reading read.

Mr. FORBES MACKENZIE moved that the Bill be read a Second Time, and that it should be afterwards referred to a Select Committee. He felt perfectly satisfied that if it were referred to a Select Committee, the result would be a Bill which would please all parties.

wanted was, not that local parties alone it. With that view the meeting unanishould assess the value, but that they mously agreed that a Committee should be should do it in connection with an officer appointed on the subject, and that they of the Crown, acting in accordance with ought to have the authority and countenance certain rules by which the valuation might of the Government in some way or other, be made as equal as possible. in order to obtain a full and fair, and not a partial, inquiry. A division took place in the meeting on the point whether they ought to reject the Bill, and recommend the appointment of a Committee, not fettered by any of the clauses of the Bill, but open to the examination of witnesses in a perfectly full and fair way. That proposition met with considerable support; but on a division whether the Bill should be proposed to be read a second time or not, he (Mr. Hume) was bound to say that twelve voted in favour of it-those twelve, however, differing among themselves as regarded the merits of the Bill-and sixteen for rejecting the second reading, and in favour of an independent Committee. He thought it was important to state to the House one or two facts which he hoped would regulate the votes of hon. Members on the question now before them. The Bill proposed to appoint a Committee of Justices of the Peace, and to invest them with the power of granting licences; and that was done with the view of reducing the number of licences for the sale of spirits. He had obtained certain returns bearing on this question from two or three places in Scotland. For the last eight or ten years a Committee had been in existence in Edinburgh, who were exceedingly anxious to put down the vice of drunkenness, and through whose exertions the number of spirit licences had been considerably reduced. It appeared that the number of licences in that city in 1830 were 872, and in 1851 they were 516, showing a reduction of 356 in that period. In the county of Edinburgh the number of spirit licences in 1830 was 706, and in 1850 it was reduced to 449, making a total of 613 licences less in the city and county in 1851 than in 1830. He would now ask if, in consequence of that reduction of licences, there had been any commensurate benefit? None; the vice of drunkenness had been continued. The parties addicted to it had been driven into holes and corners to gratify their propensity, and in that and various other ways the vice of drunkenness had been carried on, and continued to increase. What benefit, therefore, could accrue from a proposition which aimed at a reduction of the licences all over the country? In Renfrewshire the spirit li

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a Second Time.' MR. HUME said, that this Bill was opposed generally by the people of Scotland. He was extremely unwilling to take up the time of the House, but he hoped they would excuse him whilst he stated shortly why he objected to the Bill. He objected to it on principle, because it was supposed by the promoters that by limiting publichouse licences the tendency to excessive drinking, which he was sorry to say had been too common in Scotland of late years, would be discouraged. He was as anxious as any individual connected with that part of the Kingdom could be that a remedy should be found, if possible, for the excessive drinking habits which obtained there; but he believed this Bill would only add to the difficulties in the way of preventing the evil, because it would give to a few persons only the power of granting licences, which they might exercise with partiality or caprice; and that proceeding would only add to the evil. He might inform the House that the Scotch Members had a meeting yesterday to consider the provisions of the Bill. Twentyeight members were in attendance, of whom not one approved of the measure. The hon. Member for Peeblesshire (Mr. F. Mackenzie) himself only approved of one clause. All agreed on one point, that it was the duty of Members connected with Scotland to ascertain, if possible, the extent of that demoralising vice of drunkenness, and to contrive the best means of removing

714 cences in 1828 amounted to 1,203, and in | and in 1851 this number was reduced to 1850 to 877, showing a decrease of 326: 6,000. By allowing the unrestricted sale and yet the vice of which they complained of beer in London, drunkenness had dehad increased more perhaps in that county creased one-half; while under the other than in any other in Scotland, although it system the vice had been on the increase was but fair to say that it was attributed in Scotland. He would therefore ask the to the number of Irish labourers that had House to reject the Bill, and to appoint a been introduced. Looking at those facts, Committee instead, to inquire into the he submitted, the reduction of licences causes of the increase of drunkenness in would not have the effect which was ex- Scotland, and of the decrease of it in Engpected of putting an end to drunkenness. land. He would offer himself as a witness In Sutherlandshire and Ross-shire he was before that Committee, and he thought he told the trial had also been made, and had should be able to prove that the system been equally unsuccessful. Now, let him adopted in Scotland was likely to increase ask the House, with those results before instead of decreasing the vice. He would them, whether they were not in condi- not at that moment go into the question tion to avail themselves of the benefits of the education of the people; but he of the different systems which prevailed would say, that by the liberal conduct in England? In the city of London there adopted in London, in opening public was no limitation in the licensing of beer- places of recreation for the people, such shops except as respected the situation of as the National Gallery, the British Muthe premises where the beer was proposed seum, and the parks, they now had it in to be sold. He (Mr. Hume) looked back their power to spend their leisure in a safe with great satisfaction to the improvement and pleasurable way, instead of in publicwhich had taken place in this metropolis houses. He admitted that there never in the habits of the people. They no was a man more desirous of improving longer saw the streets crowded with the morals of the community than Lord drunken people as was the case about Kinnaird, whose Bill this was commonly 1830, and as is the case now in Glasgow called; but he (Mr. Hume) submitted at and Edinburgh. Twenty or thirty years the same time, with all due deference to ago to such a height had the vice of the promoters, that they were taking a drunkenness reached, that no man could wrong course. They might reduce the pass a spirit shop in London without see- number of public-houses in Scotland; but ing numbers of wretched creatures at the unless some other places of recreation were door waiting for some one to treat them given to the people, experience showed to a glass of gin, or reeling away drunk. that drunkenness would not be decreased. In 1831 the number of persons taken into He would now say that the noble Lord custody by the police for being drunk (Lord John Russell) did all his power to was 41,736, of whom, in round numbers, comply with a request made by him (Mr. 22,000 were males, and 18,000 females. Hume) on behalf of the people with regard Since that period considerable alteration to the throwing open of the Tower and had taken place. A great number of our great cathedrals and abbeys. The places of public amusement and recreation right hon. Gentleman the President of the had been opened, and the monopoly in the Board of Control, then Under Secretary sale of spirits and beer had been discon- for the Home Department, was the organ tinued. What had been the effect? Why, of communication between him and the an actual reduction of the number of per- noble Lord, and he congratulated them sons taken into custody for drunkenness; both on the success of the measures they for he found that in the course of the last then adopted, by which, as they now saw, year the number of such persons was only drunkenness had been so much decreased. 23,6000, or, in round numbers, 13,000 Let them, therefore, pursue such a course males and 10,000 females. In other words, as would enable them to gain information while the population of the metropolis in as to the means of carrying out the same the twenty years from 1831 to 1851 had system in Scotland. He would now reincreased 542,000, the decrease in the commend the withdrawal of the Bill, with number of drunken persons in it amounted the view of having a Committee appointed to no less than 18,000. Again, in 1831, to inquire into the question of drunkenness the number of disorderly persons taken in Scotland, its causes, and the best means into custody in the metropolis amounted of repressing them. He was one of those to 10,000, 7,000 males and 3,000 females; who, thirty-five years ago, foretold that