During the discussion of the Finance Bill in Committee in
the Commons on Monday, Mr. J. Walton proposed a new clause reducing the export-duty on coal from is. told. Relying on the Report of the Royal Commission on Coal Supplies, he contended that it was most undesirable to restrict the export trade artificially, as it was of paramount importance to the country and essential to the prosperity of the coal-producing districts. Not a voice was raised on behalf of the continuance of the duty by any of the subsequent speakers, including several supporters of the Government, and even the Chancellor of the Exchequer was obliged to admit that if the conditions at present prevailing had existed when the duty was imposed, it would probably not have been recommended for acceptance. But in view of the present state of the coal trade—the increase in the number of men employed, in the total production, and in the export of coal—it was impossible to contend that the duty had materially affected the prosperity of the industry. Wages had fallen with the fall in prices, but the wages in 1900 were abnormal and could not continue, and he had not discovered that the miners in the exporting districts fared worse in 1904 than those in the non-exporting districts. For the present, therefore, he saw no reason for remitting the duty and giving up a source of revenue from which the Exchequer derived nearly 22,000,000 a year, and for which, under our present fiscal conditions, be saw no satisfactory substitute. We cannot condemn Mr. Austen Chamberlain for refusing to remit the duty ; to improvise a substitute at this time of day is clearly im- practicable. He made the best of a bad job, the badness of which was shown by the fact that he was left to do it single-. handed. The proposed clause was ultimately rejected on a division by 200 votes against 167, or a majority of 33.
Previous page
