REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE FRUIT INDUSTRY. 533 



generally, but only to what are considered to be market gardens or 

 nurseries, and Mr. Bell stated that it only applied, in fact, to 4,749 acres 

 of fruit land, pure and simple, in England and Wales, and to 27,413 

 acres of market gardens, in which flowers, vegetables, &c, as well as fruit, 

 were grown for sale. It appears that no certain definition either of 

 "market garden" or "nursery" exists for this purpose, and Mr. Bell 

 was of opinion that much land which ought to come under the special 

 rule escaped. Having regard to the uncertainty of the operation of the 

 rule, and of the incidence of the tax, the Committee hold that its con- 

 tinued existence in the case of market gardens is detrimental to the fruit 

 industry. They further see no reason why one particular branch of 

 agriculture should be taxed in a different way from all other branches. 

 The abolition of the rule would result in a very small loss to the Treasury, 

 while it would be a great advantage to the industry, and would remove a 

 source of considerable irritation. The Committee recommend that it be 

 abolished in the case of market gardens, as it was in the case of hop 

 gardens in 1853. As regards nurseries, however, they feel that a similar 

 recommendation would not be reasonable. So much capital is invested 

 in the business, and the goodwill is such a large item in the assets, that 

 nurseries must be regarded as more analogous to ordinary commercial 

 undertakings than to farming concerns, and a tax on one-third of the 

 rent of the land would be disproportionate to the profits of the business. 



43. (c) With regard to local rating, besides the ordinary complaints 

 that the rates are too high, and always rising (a subject beyond the power 

 of the Committee to deal with), the chief grievance is that assessments 

 are raised much too soon after fruit has been planted. This is the 

 grievance brought forward by Mr. Kiley and others, and marked (c) 

 above. There can be no doubt that the complaint rests on a real basis of 

 fact. Many overseers and assessment committees doubtless believe that 

 the profits of fruit growers are immense, and directly fruit has been 

 planted they rush up the assessment. This is most unfair, as the profits 

 from fruit do not arise for a considerable period after the planting, 

 especially in the case of orchards. Small fruit yields a return much 

 sooner, and it is a common practice now to plant small fruit between the 

 orchard trees, thus getting a much quicker return ; but in the case of 

 all fruit plantations there is probably no return for a year or two, in 

 fact there is generally a loss. The increase of the assessment, more- 

 over, affects not only the rates, but also the income tax in most cases. 

 The Committee think it should be definitely laid down that the assess- 

 ment of a farm should not be raised in consequence of the planting of 

 fruit for a period — of five years after the planting in the case of 

 small fruit, of seven years in the case of a mixed plantation, and 

 of twelve years in the case of orchards. 



44. (d) The last of the taxation grievances are those affecting glass 

 houses, which were prominently brought before the Committee's notice by 

 Mr. Rochford, of Cheshunt ; Mr. Sams, of Worthing ; and Mr. Templeton, 

 of Clydeside. These grievances are of two kinds, concerning income tax 

 and local rates respectively. With regard to income tax, it was pointed 

 out that, whereas in the case of all dwelling houses one- sixth was allowed 

 for repairs, this and nothing more was allowed in the case of glass 



