Mr. Balfour's general reply showed both judgment and force. Of
course there were plenty of omissions in the Bill, but how could any one Bill deal with all the aspects of so com- plicated a problem ? Omissions need not make men vote against a Bill, unless they were of a kind that would prevent the point being dealt with in subsequent legislation. The City could just as well be dealt with after as before this Bill. All they would have to do would be to give to the area now governed by the City a municipal organisation such as was now being given to Kensington or Poplar and to transfer to the London County Council all the special attributes of the City. As to there being any sinister design against the equalisation of rates, he pointed out that two out of the three equalisation measures had been passed by his own party. The Bill itself, under which the majority of the new municipalities would be strongly interested in main- taining equalisation, showed that there was no dark design in the mind of the Government. Mr. Balfour ended his speech with the declaration that his Bill was a conscientious endeavour to carry out a policy which was common to every London reformer who spoke with authority on the subject. On the division the numbers were 118 for the Opposition's amendment, and 245 against,—a majority for the Govern- ment of 127.
Previous page
