Kingsbury County independent. (DeSmet, Kingsbury County, S.D.) 1894-1929, 1909-12-10

Il was uIluSudi diliilidtlOu LII tuG QQQll0
| galleries, which were crowded with
peeresses, members of the house OF
commons, ambassadors and others. But
In the house itself complete calm pre-
vailed. There was one of that tense
excitement or exuberant enthusiasm
so distinctive of a similar occasion In
the lower house. The vote was called
on Lord Transformers amendment that
the house was not justified In giving
its consent to the bill. 1t had been
submitted to the Judgment OF the coun-'
try. Nearly Is officials We're occupied
In clearing the house, the tellers for di-
vision being Earl Waldegrave, viscount
Churchill, Baron Denman and Lord
Colebrooke.
When the vote was announced just
before midnight as $50 to rs In favor of
he amendment a few mixed cheers
were heard. Owing to the crowded
state of the chamber the tellers had
some difficulty in forcing their way
through to Lord Loreburn, lord high
chancellor. The Earl of Crewe imme-
diately moved an adjournment and the
house rose.
An eager n expectant crowd was
awaiting the result in the central hall,
and when the figures of the vote be-
came known there was q slight attempt
at counter demonstr;- tions. The off,
GERS, however. speedily cleared the hall
and In a few minutes the Hobbies and
precincts were empty.
Provisions of Budget.
The English budget is the annual bill
providing for the raising OF revenue to
meet the expenses of the government
Under h leadership OF David Lloyd
present liberal government proposed,
however, a radical change In the a
ner Of raising revenue.
The most important one was a series
Of taxes on land values, which lave
been denounced by the British land
holders as having been inspired by
Henry Georges Progress and Pover-i
ty." The LAM taxes proposed In the
budget were small. but 1t was provided
that there should be a general valua-
ton Of all the lands In England. This
valuation, Ii Is alleged, was to be madei
the basis for future increases In land
value taxes, until the whole annual
value Of the land should ultimately be-
absorbed. A
In his speeches in favor Of the budget.
Lloyd-George boldly declared the pur-l
pose Of the government to force unused
land into use, n to make war on pov-
erty in that manner. The result was that
nearly all the large landholders in Eng
land have opposed the budget bitterly.
Liquor Taxes lrritate.
Aside from the taxation of land
values the budget proposed heavily in
creased licenses for liquor selling.
This feature Of the license Is known
as the monopoly value" and the Ill
censing bill OF last ear provided forl
the extinction without compensation
of this value after a term of years.
That is to say, that at the end or a.
period of years-14 was the number
provided for In last years bill-the JUS
tices should have the power to wipe out
any license without compensation to
the holder. Last years bill also pro-
vided for an increased scale OF license
duties.
When the bill was thrown out the
liberals threatened to attain the same
end-the reduction in the number OF
licenses, and the increase OF the reve-
nue-by means of taxation, and this is
what the licensing features of the new
budget propose to do.
Attacked All Along the Line.
The liquor trade has been attacked
all along the line In the measure Of
the present session, which II is now be-
ieved wilitRe thrown out by the lords.
Beginns1uCSSth the manufacturer it
provide-~s~-stmu heavier ad valorem
duty. At present the duty on spirits
Is about $2.75 a gallon--I am giving
round figures to avoid the confusion
caused by translating English currency
into cents Inc fractions OF q cent, but
this figure Is within a few cents OF
the actual amount. The budget proposes
to add about SO cents a gallon to this
tax. Then under the present law the
distiller has to pay a manufacturers
tax Of $3.50, no matter what his pro-
duction may be, and the brewer a man.
ufacturer's tax of SIS. Under the bud
get proposals the distiller would have
to pay a tax of $50 on his first $4,000
gallons, and a further tax of $50 on
each additional $4,000 gallons, while
the brewer would have to pay SIS on
his first 100 barrels and SO on each
additional so barrels.
IT is the retailer, however, who will
be hardest hit IL the budget passes. The
present scale of license duties for sale
for consumption on the premises ranges
from $3.50 a year for premises rent
ing at less than $50 a year, to $500 on
premises renting at $500 a year and
upward. 1t Is proposed to substitute
for these comparatively light duties q
tax equ-l to so per cent on the rental
value of the premises. This is for full
licenses. Beer houses now pay a fiat
tax of $17.5 a year, but Ii is proposed
that they shall be taxed a third OF their
rental value every yea
Revenue Not Increased.
On the whole it is expected that the
new taxes IL passed will not bring In
much additional revenue. Some of them
those which are only straight addi-
lions TO existing taxes-go into effect
immediately the budget bill Is intro
duced in the house of commons. and,
therefore, have been in operation for
nearly six months. The revenue, how
/ ever, has not been appreciably in
creased. This is partly due, of course,
to the fact that large quantities OF
spirits were withdrawn from bond in
anticipation of the increase, but the
liquor dealers assert hat the econsump-
ton has fallen off heavily in conse-
quence of the increased prices which
they were compelled to charge their
customers. 1t is also asserted that the
new taxes will have the effect of driv-
ing a number of the smaller places
which are now only earning a hand to
mouth living for their proprietors, en-
tirely out of business, but this, OF
course, is just what the temperance re-
formers, who are very powerful in the
| liberal party, desire.
One of the features in the bill as orig
inally introduced reused such a storm
of opposition that the government was
compelled TO modify it. This was the
-