DEATH DUTIES BILL,

Feilding Star, Volume xv, Issue 335, 9 June 1894, Page 3

DEATH DUTIES BILL,

(Per Press Association.) London, June 8. Speaking in the House of Commons Sir W. Harcourt said the objections taken by the colonies to the estate duties were founded on a misapprehension. He de« dared that there was no intention to impose any tax on the colonies, and the only question was whether personal pro. perty in the colonies belonging to persons domiciled in England and subject to lagacy and succession duties should be subject also to estate duty. The views of the colonies on ihe matter would receive the careful consideration of Government. Messrs Perceval O'Connor (on benalf of New South Wales) and Herbert Tupper have been appointed a Committee to draft a strong protest against the colonies having to pay estate duties twice. They will point out that the proposal is calculated to seriously interfere with the investment of British capita], and will also remind Mr W. Harcourt that Great Britain has not asked the colonies to share the expenses in connaction with the Imperial naval defence, although at the conference in 1887 the colonies expressed themselves willing to contribute. Sir John Hall, of New Zealand add easing a meeting of the Colonial party in the House of Commons, said he questioned whether it was advisable for £ew Zealand to establish a protectorate oyer Samoa. On the subject of estate duties he thought Sir W. Harcourt's proposals would alienate the loyaiity of the oplomea. Mr O'Connor, af Sydney speaking before the Colonial party, said they would win the jrraitude of the colonies if they could succeed in obtaining for them relief from the estate duties. It was urged that another Colonial conference should be held either at Melbourne, Sydney or Capetown in 1697.