The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1874-09-12 00:00:00

THE REPEAL OF THE RAILWAY
PASSENGER DUTY.

On Tuesday a meeting in favour of the repeal of the
Railway Passenger Duty was held in the Freemasons'.
hall, Edinburgh. The Lord Provost, who presided,
stated the objects of the meeting, and said he was
strongly in favour of the repeal of the duty.
Mr. H. S. Ellis, ex-Mayor of Exeter, mentioned a
number of reasons why the duty should be repealed,
and said it was not to be expected that the railway
companies should carry on their affairs solely for the
public and regardless of their own interests, lie
looked with confidence to the public to sympathize
with the railway companies and help to carry them
through their difficulty. If this tax was a right one
there was no reason why other commercial undertak-
ings should be exempted, but he was sure that if such
a thing was attempted, if they were to tax the gross
receipts or other commercial undertakings, or of
bankers, or stock or share brokers, the burden would
goon be found to be unbearable.
Sir Thomas Gladstone then moved—
That while stage coaches, omnibuses, tramways, and
steamboats are free from passenger duty, it is unjust that
railways, affording a more speedy and convenient means of
communication, compelled to provide exceptionally expen-
sive appliances for the public safety, taxed with the per-
formanes of onerous duties on behalf of the Post Office, and
constituting an investment less profitable than the exempted
conveyances, should be subjected to a passenger tax, reit-
dered ooubly burdensome by its being levied as well on the
working expenditure in the conveyance of the passengers, as
upon the net revenue derived from the traffic."

This motion, he said, comprehended the whole ques-
tion, and very lucidly expressed the object they had
in view. With regard to the sympathy of the public,
on which his friend Mr. Ellis appeared to rely, he con-
fessed that he did not entertain the earns inclination to
reliance as Mr. Ellis did, unless that public happened
to be of the shareholding world, for wherever money
could be most easily found for the purposes of the
Government the more ready was the public to ac-
quiesce in its being gathered there. They must rely
upon themselves. They had a strong claim on the
Government, but it wasonly by the reiterated expression
of opinion in the most determined and distinct terms
that they could hope for the success of the under-
taking they had before them. They had justice on
their side, and they were not afraid of going before
the Government in support of their claims. The tax
crippled the power of the companies to be of service
to their fellow-countrymen in affording them increased
facilities, for they had to pay the tax twice over, a
tax upon the gross earnings, and a tax again in the
shape of income-tax on the net revenue. With such
taxes it was impossible for them to treat with the
liberality they could wish the demands which were
constantly made upon them.
Bailie Cousin seconded the resolution. He said he
was no shareholder in any railway in the country, and
he had no personal interest in the railways, but be had
no hesitation in saying that the removal of the tax
complained of must prove a great benefit to the public.
They were constantly hearing of improved modes of
conveyance anti additional safety for the public, but
he would ask how they could approach railways which
were paying, perhaps, 2 per cent., and some of them
no dividends at all, and ask them to lay out more
money for the safety and convenience of the public
while such a tax lay upon them? The steamboats on
the Clyde carried their tens of thousands of passengers,
and yet there was no tax upon them. The tax not only
bore heavily on the proprietors of the railways but
stood in the way of those improvements which tended
iwomote the comfort of the public.
'1 he motion was unanimously agreed to.
Sir Antonio Brady said he had come with the
greatest possible pleasure to advocate what he believed
to be just—namely, to endeavour to get rid of a most
obnoxious tax. He believed that if the railways were
united on the subject, and the Illaßs of the shareholders
were, with one accord, to may that the tax was to be
removed, no Chancellor of the Exchequer could turn a
deaf ear to the calm reasoning and appealing of the
public as to the justice of the claim made by them. No
mercantile establishment could go on if it were taxed in
the same way as were the railways. The railways paid
income-tax, and what was more, they paid for the
various local rates and local taxes due from land from
which the tramways and other means of conveyance
were absolutely free. He held that the passenher tax
operated against the public interest as being a tax on
the production of an article of necessity and as a res-
traint tending to interfere with public convenience.
He believed that the railways had done more forciviliza-
tion than anything else in our day. He would not
even except the electric telegraph, which conveyed a
message for a shilling, while the railway companies
carried artisans at a penny a mile. The railways
added third-claas carriages to express trains in order to
give extra facilities to the public, and he appealed to
his countrymen to come forward and relieve the rail-
way interest from an impost which was levied poor-
tially, unfairly, and unjustly. He concluded by
moving,

" That the passenger tax operates against the public
Interest, as being a tax on the production of an article of
necessity, and Is a restraint upon trade, tending to diminish
public convenience."
- - - - •

Mr. Hill, chairman of the Caledonian Railway,
seconded the motion. He said be thought that every
one must sympathize with the railway shareholders,
who were, in many cases, receiving no dividend, and,
in other cases, very small dividends, and who were,
nevertheless, taxed.
The motion was unanimously agreed to.
Mr. George Harrison, a director of the North
British Railway, moved

_ .
" That memori.ils In terms of the above resolutions, and
praying for the repeal of the tax, he signed by the Lord Pro-
vost on behalf of the meeting. and forwarded to the First
Lord of the Treasury and the thanceller of the Exchequer.
Mr. Charles Cowan seconded the motion. He said
he thought there IV/19 no tax more unjust, more
obnoxious, and more unfair than the one which they
were met to condemn.
The motion was unanimously agrees to.