that the Strand authorities were satisfied. | classed as such, inasmuch as it was not [Mr. W. F. D. SMITH-"Hear, hear."] He a personal residence of the Sovereign, made no apology to the House for intro- nor was it adapted to, or used for, ducing local considerations into this dis- any such purpose. It was just as cussion, because the whole Bill was a much occupied for the public service as local one, and the amount of relief the Foreign Office, the Admiralty, and to be obtained in this matter rested the other buildings upon which the an increase upon the aggregate of justice or in- Treasury had allowed justice done in certain localities. Dealing in the assessment. Parliament, which with Westminster, which had afforded governed the country, was, in fact, the most glaring instance in support the beneficial occupier of this of the present Motion, he might state, Palace of Westminster, and he could without going into details, that the not imagine that Parliament, because value of 32 Government properties in it happened to meet in Westminster, that district, i.e., the value fixed for would consent much longer to deprive rating purposes by the Government the ratepayers of Westminster of what itself, and for which alone the contribution he claimed as their just and equitable had for many years been made in aid of due-namely, a fair rate on the buildthe rates, was £43,632. It was proposed ings occupied by Parliament. Under by the Vestry, on fair principles of these circumstances he could assure the valuation, that the amount should be increased to £88,122. The actual increase which the Government had the increase of assessments which had allowed amounted to £34,423, or over been made, and which, with the exception £10,000 short of the estimated fair indicated, left altogether out of account rateable value. But in addition, this this great dwelling-house of the increase of valuation left entirely out of representatives of the nation. account an element of great importance to Westminster, and one for which he the right hon. Gentleman and the House that the Westminster local authorities were very far from being satisfied with But the right hon. Gentleman, in asserting that Westminster was satisfied," had said, "I have it in black and white." He (the Speaker) also had something in black and white which he would venture to read to the House. It was a statement made to him by a member of one of the Westminster deputations which attended at the Treasury. He could assure the House that it was reliable and accurate, and he himself vouched for it : asked a generous consideration by the House. This Palace of Westminster in which we sit was left by the Treasury as the most conspicuous instance in all London of under-valuation, because it was assessed only in respect of Speaker's residence and the rooms occupied by other officials and servants of the House. This rateable value was "In all we waited upon the Surveyor to the Treasury three times. We had asked to be allowed fixed at £7,392. But if the whole Palace to state our views on the under-valuation of were valued, as it should be, a fair esti- Government property to him, but we no sooner mate would be an increase in the assess-proceeding was to be reversed, and he was to interviewed the Surveyor than we found the ment of £45,000, which would give another 3d. in the £ in aid of the rates. The Treasury made exception to rating the Palace of Westminster as a whole, because it was, they said, a Royal Palace, but, he would ask, was there ever a contention thinner or more untenable? Buckingham Palace, Balmoral Castle, and Osborne were residences of the Sovereign; but in no sense could this be VOL. XXXII. [FOURTH SERIES.] lay his views before us. He lectured us in a hard to assure him that we had no intention of gross At occasions. After the second interview, which the law, or rather of the absence of a we thought had closed our business with the law, Government property was not Treasury, the Surveyor wrote to say that he legally rateable. This fell with a heavy proposed to deduct one-fourth of the values of the barracks instead of the usual hand upon certain of these individuals; proportion of one-sixth to arrive at the rateable, and they were thereby, owing to the because this was the practice in the case of accident of containing within their area lunatic asylums. We therefore waited upon him Government property, compelled to make again when he abandoned this proposition. the close of the interview he read out a long a contribution to the Consolidated Fund, document, couched in most effusive terms, the fund that maintained the nation, which he had prepared. It stated that we entirely out of proportion to the rest of were satisfied that the values conceded were the individuals. Was this just? Was fair, and that we appreciated the handsome manner in which we had been treated by the it not an inequality and an abuse which Treasury. Some of us demurred to subscribing that House should be ready to level up to the fairness of the values. We suggested a and to remove that House which was qualification such as fair under the circum- the last Court of Appeal against all instances.' Mr. Vincent Griffiths told us, however, that unless we were able to agree that the justice, if not for individuals, at least values conceded were fair, it would be perfectly with regard to systems which affected useless for him to try to get the Chancellor of individuals, however few and scattered the Exchequer to confirm the new valuations. the latter might be. But hon. Gentle Taking up the document containing the values, he said it might as well be torn up if we could men might say this would need a Bill; not agree that the values were fair. Faced and some sacred and hidden constituwith the loss of an additional £35,000 to the tional principle might be violated or rateable value of the parish, which we had after much trouble obtained, we signed the effusive document. I am entitled to speak only for myself, but I may say I signed it, not because I thought the values conceded were adequate, but because I was anxious not to risk the loss of the £10,000 per annum to the parish which it will now receive over and above the former Treasury contributions in lieu of rates. My signature at last was obtained by the pressure involved in the threat of that loss." tampered with in such a Bill. He wished that hon. Gentlemen on all sides of the House would be content to con fine their tampering with the Constitution within these harmless limits. They would then have more of the time of the House to devote to the rectification of old irregularities that had escaped notice, and to the curing of new but irritating complaints that must from time to time The position would be easily understood. arise in the most vigorous and perfect They were forced into signing the docu- organisms. He thought a change in the ment prepared in the Treasury by having law would be more satisfactory; but it the threat held over their heads that if was not essential to the remedying of they did not sign it they would get no this glaring injustice. The real remedy relief at all. They were one party to the was for the Government to wipe out the suit, the other party were the judge. blot in the Treasury Minute of 1874 and They were suppliants, and, naturally, to allow their property to be assessed in they grasped at the crumbs thrown to accordance with the whole spirit of that them. But there, in the House of Minute and of the Report of the Comis Commons, which was not the suppliant, sion of 1858 by the same authorities and but the Master of Departments, he under the same conditions as those which asked, was that the way in which a applied to the property of the rest of great Department should deal with such the ratepayers all over the country. a question? was that the sort of satis- As to " 'tampering with the Constitufaction--that "black and white" docu- tion," all he could say was that he wished ment-obtained under such circum- all tampering with the Constitution was stances, on which the right hon. Gentle- confined within such harmless limits, man was entitled to rely as an answer because then more time in that House to the further just claims he was urging? could be devoted to the removal of old He begged leave to return for a moment irregularities which had escaped notice to the general question. The local rating and caused irritating complaints-comauthority was the unit, the collective in-plaints which must, from time to time, dividual, of the financial system. Was arise in the most vigorous and perfect it just to mulet one of these individuals organism. There was no need of an Act out of proportion to the rest for the re- of Parlioment to remedy this great inlief of the whole? By the operation of justice. It could be done easily if the Mr. Burdett-Coutts. net. Government would honestly and fear- with the Equalisation of Rates Act lessly remove the blot in the Treasury passed last Session. It had been said Minute of 1874, and consent to have that Government offices were of benefit this property in their occupation assessed to the districts in which they were by the same authority and under the placed. As matters stood, so far as the same conditions as the property of the Strand was concerned, it was very much rest of the ratepayers was assessed. the reverse. These large buildings de*MR. W. F. D. SMITH (Strand) creased, to a large extent, the night thought that the constituency which population of the district, and the rates he had the honour to represent might were, therefore, owing to the action of be classed with the constituency of the Equalisation of Rates Act, considerhis hon, Friend who had just sat down. ably above the average. Apparently, the No district had stronger claims than the Government allowed that their property Strand in this matter. The amount of should be rated on the same basis as property assessed was nearly £100,000 private property. ["No, no!"] He There were two points to which he hoped they would before the discussion wished to draw attention, and these were concluded. He hoped that there would with reference to the Courts of Justice be a clear statement to that effect, and, and Somerset House. He was perfectly further, that Government property would aware that, as to the Courts of Justice, stand the same chance of being raised as there was a particular local difficulty the rates on private property were raised. in the way. In the Liberty of the Rolls MR. J. CALDWELL (Mid Lanark) the Government paid on the site of the said, the other great towns did not Courts of Justice £2,194 net, the amount possess the great Government buildings being estimated at £13,800. He need which London possessed, and which led not here point out the great loss of rating to a great outflow of money. This was which the district had to bear. In the a question which could not be met by parish of St. Clement Danes the Govern- Resolution-it was far too important a ment paid an £10,377 net, the amount matter to be decided in that way. They being estimated at £57,017. Then, as must proceed by Bill. Was there no to Somerset House, in St. Mary-le-Strand, Government property? No betterment the surveyor of the parish's estimate was in Westminster and Buckingham Palaces? £28,860, that of the Government £20,000 If these buildings involved a loss they only. If the property adjacent was of a would expect to find the rates higher in different character he could understand Westminster than in other parts of this, but Somerset House was surrounded London. [An HON. MEMBER: "So they by offices of enormous value-property are."] He doubted that. In Westof practically the same quality as Somer- minster they reaped the advantage of set House, and of the same description. land being more valuable in consequence He could not see where the difficulty of these buildings. Then they had could lie with the Government surveyor, St. James's Park and Hyde Park or why he could not come to a satisfac- made for them and kept up without tory settlement with the local valuer. cost to the public. If great cities It came to this, that in the Strand Union like Glasgow and Liverpool wanted alone, the difference between the sur- a park they had to pay for it. veyors was something like £10,000, and There was the British Museum; did not this figure would have been increased if the people of London get the benefit of the Strand Surveyor had taken into having that Institution at their very account the unfinished Admiralty build- doors? If the rating of Government ings. He need not go farther as to the property was to be considered, on the one Treasury Memorandum of 1874. The hand, they should, on the other consider very same promises which had been made the benefits of the property to London this year by the Government had been on the betterment principle. made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer were going to ask for more rates on in 1874. He rose only to call attention account of the Government property, he to some facts connected with his own did not see why the ratepayers of the constituency, and to show the very great United Kingdom should not propose hardship which was inflicted by the that a considerable portion of Hyde action of the Treasury in conjunction Park and the Green Park should be If they leased for building purposes. In every to be paid by the general communityone of the divisions of London in which or by that great part of the community Government property was situated there which did not enjoy the benefits of the was a large amount of comparatively presence of Government buildings-inunrated property, but the existence of cluding the small cotters of the Highthose buildings was a great advantage in lands of Scotland and the poor peasantry many ways to the districts in which they of Ireland, of whose distressed condition were. What would be the effect, for they heard so much in the House on the instance, if St. James's Park and the previous night. An hon. Member had ground on which Westminster Palace stated that this was not a London quesstood were leased for building purposes? tion as against the provinces. That Why, that the property of the neighbour- might be true in the letter, but it was hood would be greatly reduced in value. not true in the spirit. It was a question It was scarcely fair, therefore, that the of London and the other places in which rest of the community which had not there was Government property against the advantages to be derived from the the rest of the country in which there presence of Government buildings in their was no such property. But what would midst, should be called upon to pay the London be if it were not the seat of Govincreased rating proposed in this Motion. ernment? What would Westminster be *MR. W. P. BYLES (York, W.R., without the Houses of Parliament, or if Shipley) said, the Debate had failed to Parliament was removed, say to Oxford, convince him that the case of those who where it was once held? Why, it introduced and supported the Motion was obvious that the value of its prowas a just one. There was another side perty, that its rents, its trade, and its to the question than that which had been prosperity generally would be greatly presented. The Motion had been intro- reduced. The same argument might be duced and seconded by London Mem- applied to all other places in which bers, who were supported by the hon. Government buildings were situated. Member for Woolwich, the hon. Member Devonport would be a desert and a for Devonport, the hon. Member for swamp but for the dockyard there. Westminster, and the hon. Member for There was no place in the kingdom now the Strand Division, in all of whose without Government property which constituencies Government works or would not gladly welcome any of the buildings were situated. So that if he great national buildings referred to, had had no views at all on the question even without the power of rating them, he should have been inclined to sus- because it was well known that the pect, in these circumstances, that the presence of such establishments increased Motion covered an effort on the part of local trade and raised the value of local a section of the community to obtain an property. London enjoyed those advanadvantage at the expense of the com- tages to a large degree, and might well munity as a whole. Much had been be content. The provinces to a very said about the right of a parish to claim large extent regarded London as a pamthe full rates which should accrue pered child of fortune. When, therefrom Government buildings situated fore, he heard the representatives of in it, and about the extent to London crying out for more money from which such parishes were now deprived the public funds-from the pockets of of a fair source of local revenue. But the people of other parts of the kingdom, not a word had been said about those his suspicion was aroused. He should who were to pay the increased rates Vote against the Motion. which were claimed for those buildings in London, Woolwich, Devonport, and other places. The whole of the Debate seemed to have proceeded on the assumption that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had a treasure-house filled with gold, out of which he could easily grant the increased rates claimed on the public buildings. But every one seemed to have forgotten that the rates would have Mr. J. Caldwell, MR. G. C. T. BARTLEY (Islington, N.) said, that as one of the pampered children of fortune representing London, he wished to say a few words in reply to the reply to the remarks of the last two speakers. It appeared to him that they had not regarded the question from a fair point of view. What was the claim made? Simply that those buildings which were used for national purposes should be rated in exactly the same way as only the Metropolis. The figures showed other property. It was neither reason that out of a total of £190,000 given in able nor fair that a particular parish or respect of Government buildings London town should suffer simply because Gov- received £80,000, leaving £110,000 to ernment buildings, used for the public the rest of the country, and therefore benefit, happened to be situated in it. the greater part of the money went to In some cases the existence of such districts and municipalities outside buildings in a district might be an London. Besides that there was not a advantage, but not in all. Somerset town which had not its post office and House, for instance, did not in any way surveyor of taxes' house, and in respect add to the prosperity of the Strand. of those they would be sufferers and The only fair way to pay rates and would benefit by the change. He would taxes in those districts was, that they like, if possible, to be a peacemaker should be paid out of the public Exchequer between the Secretary to the Treasury and the burden thrown upon those people and the Metropolitan Members, and he who used them. The Motion did not would ask the hon. Member for Islington apply to London only, but to an immense to omit the word "legislation" from the number of places besides. The hon. Motion. He believed in principle that Gentleman opposite said that they had the Motion might then find favour with great advantages in the parks, but the the Secretary to the Treasury. They parks had nothing to do with the ques- could not go further than the Treation; there were two or three royal sury Minute of 1874. In the case of parks, but they paid for Battersea Park, disagreement some fair tribunal of Victoria Park, Hampstead Heath, and arbitration between the Government other parks because they were public and the local authority would have to places of general use. The question of be decided upon. He believed it might building over these places was of course be possible to come to some arrangement quite out of the question. What they in regard to that, and if so, he hoped his had urged for years was, that there should hon. Friend would not insist upon his be no special valuer for the Government property as there was at present. The appointment was a costly one, and was an absolute mistake. The valuation of these properties ought to be strictly on the lines of the valuation of other properties subject to the appeal to which other properties were subject. Technical difficulties might be got over by an Act of Parliament. They had come to the conclusion that the fair system was the one proposed, and they were encouraged in that view by the action of the Secretary to the Treasury. It was obvious that a system by which all these properties should pay no rates could not be maintained; the right hon. Gentleman had given way to a great extent, but he had not given way to the satisfaction of the localities. The localities would never be satisfied until the system was uniform. The right hon. Gentleman, by going as far as he had done, had, practically, cut the ground from under himself, and the next step must be that these properties should be assessed as other properties were. MR. HARRY LAWSON (Gloucester, Cirencester) said, the issue was an eminently practical one, and it was impossible to contend that it was one that concerned VOL. XXXII. [FOURTH SERIES.] Motion verbatim, but would withdraw the words "by legislation," and then he did not think a Division would be challenged in the House. MR. G. C. T. BARTLEY said, they did not mind a Division. MR. HARRY LAWSON said, that what they wanted was to arrive at a fair conclusion to this controversy; it was not a question of one side scoring eff tho other, but of obtaining a proper contribution from the Government property in London and elsewhere. He suggested that the House should agreed to a Resolution admitting the liability of Government property, and leave it to those interested to settle with the Treasury what a proper tribunal should be to decide in case of disagreement between the Government and the local authority. What MR. T. GIBSON BOWLES (Lynn Regis) said, the basis of the argument was that the Government had no right to expect exceptional treatment. they proposed was that the Government should submit themselves to the valuation of an ordinary local valuer. The Government. when it suited them, were only too ready to accept that valuation. They taxed him on the valuation of the 4 F |