The Sun. — London, England, 1856-03-11 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. ROUSE OF LORDS—(YikaNuokr). The Lola CIiANCILLOE taok his seat on the wool. sack at Ise •'clock. CHURCH RATES. Petitions againsttle;holition of Church rates were presented by the Bishop of Llandaff. Lord BROUGNAM presented &petition from Sussex praying for their total abolition. THE FALL OF KARS. Lord MALMESBURY said that as it was understood the armistice which had been agreed to would expire on the 31st of March, unless a peace was agreed to before• hand, and as it was most probable that the noble lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs would be soon afterwards in his place, he gave notice that soon after the leiter holidays he should call the attention of their lordships to the facts referred to in the correspondence that had taken place on the subject of the siege and fall of Ears. The Earl of ZLLENBOROUGH wished also to call the attention of the Lord President of the Council to the necessity of furnishing the house with further information. He observed at the 13th page of the cor respondence a statement was made of the claim of Gen. Williams to have bad a decisive voice in the pure chase of provisions for the Turkish army then at Kara. The precise letter was, however, omitted. There was also in many parts of the correspon dence a fact stated as to the guarantee for prompt payment for the required supplies having been tendered by General Williams. The letters authorising such guarantee were ales omitted. At the end of the report there was also several allusions made to the expedition to Kertch, but the correspon lance upon that point did not appear. He submitted that it was necessary to have all these omissions supplied before they could properly discuss the subject. Lord GRANTILLE said he would make inquiry on the subject. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE expressed a hope that the noble earl who had given notice on the subject of Lars would inform the house more distinctly as to the nature of the motion he intended to bring forward, inaemueh as the notice he bad given was very indefinite. The liar' of MALMESBURY said his intention was to call attention to the subject, and to express his own opiaions as to the cause of the disastrous fall of BALTIC MORTARS. The Earl of DBREY gave notice that he would, to morrow, put a question to the noble lard at the head of the War Department on the subject of the gross frauds practised in the supply of mortars to the Government. He had intended to put the question to-night, but, as the Roble earl was not in his place, be would defer it till to-morrow. LEGAL MEASURES OF THE GOVERNMENT. Lord ST. LEONA.RDS.said that, before their lord ships proceeded to consider in committee the Leases and Sales of Settled Estates Bills, he wished to call attention to the legal Measures proposed by the Government with respect to England and Ireland, and to the administra tion of justice in both countries. He would confine his ob servations within the narrowest possible limits, but he as sured their lordships that few subjects of greater import. ante could be brought under the attention of Parliament. Ms proposed, in the first instance, to call attention to the present power of the Court of Chancery in Eng land. The Court of Chancery consisted of the Lord Chancellor, the Court of Appeal (conducted by the two Lords Justices), the Master of the Rolls, and three 'Tice-Chancellors. The Lord Chancellor and the Master of the Rolls bad an independent jurisdiction, and sat Alone. Since the year 1822 the business of the Court of Chancery had been put upon a new and very differ ent footing to that which fettled in former times. The present system "had been introduced at a very great cost to the country. The principal alteration made was, the abolition lof the Master's-offices ; and this having been accomplished at a very large outlay of public money, the judgee of these courts—the three Vice- Chancellors and the Master of the Rolls—had to exor cise jurisdiction la every case, from its beginning to its filial termination. So that, instead of having masters in different [offices with a certain independent jurisdic tion, the judges had a chief clerk (a very competent person, with a competent salary) and clerks under him, who were in constant communication with the Court, and transacted in a more satisfactory manner the fune tieus formerly discharged by the masters. The whole working, however, of this system, which had cost so much, depended upon not overworking any of those courts. If those courts were once worked so that the chief clerk could not have everything under his immedi ate superintendence, the mischief of the Master's-office would be revived, and all the advantages would be lost for which the public had paid so high a price. In every one of those courts there were two jurisdictions—one a contentious jurisdiction to decide rights between man and wife, and the other simply au administrative juris diction, such as providing, guarding, appointing trustees, distributing funds, dec. In this state of things the bid entered in their lordships' paper for discussion that night bad been introduced by his noble friend. They all knew how tender the law was to interfere with the rights of property. By the law of England a man might dispose of his property in any way he pleased, while it insured that there should always be large estates with proper dignities attached. No court of justice had the power to alter a man's will contrary to what appeared to be hie meaning and intention. In consequence of this a person who wished to alter a will had no remedy bat to apply to their lordships' house, for there was no other relief to which he was entitled. The present measure Was a great inroad upon the law of property, for it gave a power to sell estates, notwithstanding that there was no power in the teltator'e will either to sell or exchange them . This measure was proposed to extend to both England and Ireland. He would, however, re,,uest his noble and learned friend (the Lord Chancellor) to postpone the bill, and not endeavour to carry it through that house until the Court of Chancery (Ireland) Bill, which was before the lower house, had boon legislated upon. Under the provisions of the bill before their lordships, it was proposed to grant power for the sale of certain estates is Ireland. He need, however, hardly inform their lordships that, if the measure before the other house were carried, uo one would have recourse to the present bill, as the former measure was so infinitely before it in beneficial operation. The bill before the lower house possessed manifest advantages. It empowered the Court of Chancery in Ireland to sell estates, granting with such sales a Parliamentary title. The bill before their lordships would give no title at all, aeid it would be folly to suppose that, under these cir cumstances, it would affect Ireland at all. In connection with this question, it was quite impossible to lose sight of what had been proposed by her Majesty's Govern ment in regard to the Court of Chancery in Ireland, for he (Lord St. Leonard.) held the extension sooner or later to England of any measure which was found emi nently advantageous to Ireland quite inevitable ; and he might also add that any measure which worked benefi cially for this country must ultimately be granted to Ire land. This remark did not refer to the Encumbered Estates Court as originally granted to Ireland—that Was an exceptional piece •f legislation, expressly intended to meet a very exceptional case. It would not, perhaps, have faded from their lordships' recol lection, that when that hill (the Encumbered Estates Bill) was first brought before them he had remarked upon it that it was to property what the suspen sion of t . • Labatt' corpus'was to personal liberty; it was, as he had before remarked, intended to meet a most exceptional case, aid he had no hesitation in adding that it had worked the salvation,of Ireland. There was, it ap peared to him, a want of concert between the members of her Majesty's Government in that and the other House of Parliament, and between the Irish and the English ' branches, which was much to be regretted, as it was calculated to lead to difficult:6i in legislation that, with out due care, would involve the two countries in great difficulties. He prayed their lordships particularly to re mark what was proposed in reference to Ireland. It was proposed that every owner of an estate in Ireland might go to the Court of Chancery mall desire that Court to sell his lands, encumbered or unemcumbered, settled or not settled, and upon that sale to give a Parliamentary title. The result of such provision would be that a man who had encumbered his estate might sell it at once without any difficulty, whereas the man who had been careful had to go through all the trouble and expense of search ing and establishing his title. Could such a power be granted to Ireland and denied to Englan i t If the bill passed, the Court of Chancery in Ireland would become the agent for the stale of the estates of every man in Ire land. ',Hear.) No man would purchase without a Par liamentary title, when the seller could make over ono to him by going to the Court of Chancery. He must again repeat that he was quite satisfied the measure would ulti mately have to be extended to England, for English pro perty was already at Some disadvantage, on account of the Parliamentary title granted to Irish landowners. It, however, these advantages were thrown into the hands of the Court of Chancery in Engla.nd,together with the duties which devolved upon that court in connection with eccle siastical jurisdiction, that court, as at present consti tuted, would inevitably and hopelessly break down, and all the trouble and legislation which it had caused in 1852 would prove to have been to no purpose. There were other powers given by several Acts of Parliament, which required the best attention—powers given to persons of limited interests in property to dispose of that property for the benefit of private companies. There was, too, he was sorry to say, a great tendency upon the part of tenants for life, and others having limited interests, to throw the whole expense of the drainage and improve meat of their estates upon the remaindermaa. Expenses were thus thrown upon the corpus which should properly be borne by the tenant in possession for the time being, and h• (Levi St. Leonardo) felt convinced that, with regard to the hill which had called forth these remarks, its effect would be to cause many settled estates to be greatly encumbered, wnich, without that bill, wou l d have descended unfettered to the settlers' children, and others entitled under the settlement, and thus have ena bled them to maintain these stations in life which the set tlers' positions might have entitled them to expect. With respect to the changes proposed by Government in regard to the Couit of Chancery in Ireland, it should be re membered that that court had been reformed in 1550, although it was not until 1852 that the English Court of Chancery had been reformed. At that time there were, in fact, only four masters in all. These four masters, by the Act of 1850, were, in point of effeqt, turned into vice - chancellors, baring, with their clerks; power to transact chamber business, just as in the same way sat in this country the chief clerks of the Master of the Rolls and of the Vice-Chancellor, with the assistance of their clerks, transacted chamber business. The business which it was necessary to carry on in open court was carried on by the Lord Chanoellor and the Master of the Rolls, and in thetransaction of that business they wanted no aid or additional assistance. The administration of real and personal estates, questions relating to the fore closure and redemption of mortgaged estates, as to the appointment of new trustees, and also to all partnership transactions, with many other matters, were all subject to an appeal, disposed of in the Masters'-office, to which the Lord Chancellor and Master of the Rolls, by an order, had also power to direct other matters to be sent. That system worked well, and wanted no change. There were three commissioners of the Encumbered Es tates Court. In a comparatively short time the powers of that court would expire. But the intention of the Go vernment now was to provide that it should, in a new form, endure for ever, with largely extended powers, em bracing the whole of the landed property of Ireland. It was proposed to abolish the Encumbered Estate Courts ; to abolish the masters altogether ; to appoint two ♦ice• chancellors with chief clerks, and to give a chief clerk to the Master of the Rolls, and then to transfer the bu siness of the Encumbered Estates Court to the Court of Chancery, with great additional powers. There never was a scheme more likely to break down than that. Surely the Encumbered Estates Court ought to be allowed to get through its own arrears, and the latter ought not to be transferred to the Court of Chancery. When those arrears had been disposed of, then, if it was thought advisable to continue the scheme of a Par liamentary title, the future business of the Encum• bared Estates Court might be transferred to the Court of Chancery, but no orrears on any account should be so transferred. The Master of the Rolls in Ire land—a most able and painstaking judge, and one who always devoted his whole energies to the performance of his duties—had strongly deprecated the pro posed measure, and said that if it passed it would entirely paralyse all his energies. The report of the commissioners, though drawn up by very able and learned men, was in many respects open to objection. There could be no necessity for Day new court of appeal being instituted in Ireland. The appellate jurisdiction was there exorcised by the Lord Chancellor, to whom an appeal was brought from the Master of the Rolls. He (Lord St. Leopards) hal held the office of Lord Chan cellor of Ireland for five years, and during that period had decided many most important questions, and had never known any complaint raised about the Court of Appeal. It was proposed, however, that in order to make a new court of appeal, there should be an ex- Chancellor added to the Lord Chancellor, if one could be found,- and, if not, a common law judge; and, if neither could be found, then that a new judge should be created to hold office during pleasure. He thought that no judge should ever be called upon to sit in a court of appeal during the pleasure of the Crown. Such a sys tem, if acted upon in this country, would be most ob jectionable. No common law judge could strengthen the Lord Chancellor in his own court of appeal. It would be a most objectionable thing that a common law judge should have the power of deciding against the Lord Chancellor upon matters of equity in his own court. There was also another point deserving of attention. It was proposed that the foes and duties which had been hitherto paid should be abolished, and that the charge should be imposed on the Consolidated Fund. This was a national question, an imperial question, and one which regarded the Courts of England as well as the Courts of Ireland. If persons were to obtain the benefit of a Par liamentary title to the estates they purchased, by the in tervention of the Court of Chancery, it became a ques tion whether they ought not to be subjected to a rea sonable charge for the benefit they so obtained. It was a question in what respect they ought to reduce the fees and duties in courts of justice, and what were the fair and necessary expenses of the administration of justice in the abstract. He admitted that they ought not to tax the administration of justis-e, but the ques tion of fees and duties to be paid for the administrative jurisdiction exercised for private purposes was a very dif ferent matter. He had already adverted to the alteration made in the practice of the Court of Chancery in Ireland in 1850, and it was from a❑ anxious desire that that sys tem, which had hitherto worked so well and so much to the satisfaction of the suitors, might be continued, that he had been induced to make these remarks. He certainly had expected that, long before this, the Masters of the Court would have been able to close their offices with re gard to the arrears. They had already given the Masters most ample powers in order to enable them to wind up the arrears, but such powers bad not been able to effect the t object. The 'LORD CHANCELLOR said that although the house was always ready to listen to the noble and learned lard on subjects such as the present, yet he must say that he thought a large portion of what his noble and learned friend had been stating was extremely inapplicable to the subject before their lordships. He was surprised that, at nearly the last stage of this bill, they should be called upon M discuss the merits of another bill which was in the other House of Parliament. The present measure was introduced by him (the Lord Chancellor) for the purpose of obviating the great expense and delay which had hitherto prevailed in that house with respect to pri vate bills to enable parties to lease and sell settled estates. In fact the bill gave the Court of Chancery the power of doing, cheaply and expeditiously, that which was done at present by that house at a very heavy and unnecessary cost. Such was the sole object of this bill. When it was first introduced its provisions were confined to Eng land only. His attention having been called to the fact that it was important the measure should be extended to Irelaud, he had caused the bill to be altered and made applicable to Ireland as well as England. The noble and learned lord seemed to think that this bill would over en cumber the judges and others connected with the Chan cery in England, but he (the Lord Chancellor) really thought his noble and learned friend was rather chimerical. It seemed to him that, unless they were determined not to have the powers given by the bill, from some appre hension of interfering with the state of settled pro perty, they were perfectly safe in leaving such property in the hands of Chancery. With regard to the extension of the present measure to Ireland, the only argument he had heard which might raise a doubt as to whether it was applicable to that country was, that in the other house of Parliament the Government had introduced a measure for extending the provisions of the Encumbered Estates Court to all estates, whether encumbered or un inctimbered. He held it to be a childish legislation to say that they should not pass a measure with a view to wards extending it to Ireland, because there might be, at the end of the session another measure which would render the first uie I , ss. He thought it would he wise to pass the present measure, which could not possibly do any harm. He must confess that he felt some difficulty in following the noble and learned lord in his discussion about the merits or demerits of a measure which was re ferred to a select committee in the other House of Par liament, and which might never come before their lord ships. It was asked, Why not extent the Encumbered E+fates Court Bill to England ! cut in Ireland they had a general registry of estates, which did not exist in England, and the absence of which he (the Lord Chan cellor) greatly lamented. It was impossible to follow his noble aid learned friend into details which were not before their lordships, and, therefore, he should simply c)ntent himself with repeating the terms of his motion, that this bill be committed. The bill then passed through committee. Upon the motion of Viscount DUNGANNON, a re turn was ordered of all persons now appointed to act as justices of the peace in the several counties in Ireland, the number of stipendiary magistrates located ire each county, and the several sessional divisions, Their lordships adjourned at 7 o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(TERTERHAT.) Th• SPEAKER took the chair at the usual hour. NEW MEMBER. Mr. H. INGHAM took the oaths and his seat for Breton. Sir J. TROLLOPE presented a petition from Spald ing against the recommendations of the Charity Cora missionarr. Sir J. GRAHAM presented a petition from Carlisle in favour of medical reform. Mr. SCHOLEFIELI) presented a petition from Bir• mingham against the Police Bill. Several petitions were presented against the abolition of Church rates until an equivalent had been provided, and also against the opening of the British Museum and National Gallery on Sundays. Mr. WILSON brought up the Navy Estimates. MORTALITY IN THE CRIMEA. Viscount E BRINGTON gave notice that on an early day he should move n resolution to the effect that the excessive mortality in the Crimea had been occasioned througk bad sanitary regulations. OUR RELATIONS WITH AMERICA. Sir E. B. LYTTON gave notice that immediately after the Easter recess he should call the attention of the house to the state of our relations with America. LORD PANMURE'S DESPATCH. Sir DE L. EVANS said, in consequence of a state ment that hall appeared that the Government would have no objection to lay on the table of the house a copy of the despatch to which he had referred, and also that the despatch would be found highly creditable to Lord Panmure, he begged to ark her Majesty's Government whether there would be say objection to its production ? Lord PALMERSTON said he held in his hand a oopy of the telegraphic despatch to which the gallant member had referred. The despatoh was a long use, and con tained matters that it would not be prudent to make public. The hon. and gallant member could, however, himself see it. The word■ of Lord Panmure relating to Captain Dowbiggin were "I recommend young Dow biggin to your attention, if fit, and you have a vacancy." CHURCH RATES. Sir J. PAKINGTON asked whether, as they bad read the bill for the abolition of Church rates a second time, there would be any objection to order returns to be made of bow much had been received from Church rates from certain parishes for tb• last ten years ? In formation was greatly wanted on tke subject. Sir GEORGE GREY said a return similar to that now asked for by the honourable baronet had been made some time ag o . Th e return i n question took considerable time in p repar i ng i n consequence of the Government possessing no power to compel the parishes to make the returns wanted. If the returns would not meet the view of the hon. member, he would have no objection to an appendix to it being made, and at the same time an endeavour would be made to obtain the information asked for. ST. PANCRAS WORKHOUSE. Sir J. PAKINGTON asked the President of the Poor-Law Board what steps bad been taken to carry out the report of D. Jones with respect to the state of St. Pancras Workhouse Mr. BOUVERliisaid he had directed the report in question to be transmitted to the managers of the poor o. SL Pancras. That body had since been changed by their local acts, but active steps were now being taken to ameliorate the conditio l of the inmates and improve the workhouse of the parish of St. Pancras. POSTAL ARRANGEMENTS WITH SPAIN. In reply to a question from Mr. OLIVIIRA, Mr. WILSON said that negotiations were in pre' THE SUN, LONDON, TITESbAi EVENING, MARCH 11. 1856. gress with reference to postal arrangements with Spain, but they were not in a sufficiently advanced stage to be presented to the house. JUVENILE CRIMES. In reply to a question, Mr. SCOTT said that on Thursday he in tended to have brought a motion on with reference t. juvenile crime oa Thursday next ; but as it was doubtful whether he could bring it on on that day, he should do so as soon [as possible after Easter. Ile in tended then to move for a select committee to inquire into the increase of crime amongst juveniles aad females. SALARIES OF CUSTOMS OFFICERS. Sir S. NORTHCOTE asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether any petition had been received by the Treasury ion .the Board of Customs from the officer in the depot of the Receiver-General of Customs for an increase of their salaries it consequence of their official labours, whether any answer had been re turned to that petition, and whether there would be any objection to lay the papers on the table of the house Mr. WILSON considered, under all the circumstances, it would not be desirable to lay the correspondence on the table of the house. BAY ISLANDS. In answer to a question from Mr. M. GIBBON, Mr. LABOUCHERE said that the warrant constitut ing the islands iu Honduras Bay into a colony under the name of Bay Islands, was dated March, 1852, and the first appointment of a presiding magistrate was dateil Aug. Z, 1852. LOCAL DUES ON SHIPPING. In &newer to a question from Sir P. THEESIGER, Lord PALMERSTON said that he proposed to move the appointment of the committee on the Local Dues on Shipping Bill on Thursday next, and as the motion of the learned gentleman ap peared to meet the views of the Government with refer ence to the duties of that committee, he intended to adopt it. POLICE COUNTIES AND BOROUGH BILL. Sir G. GREY, in moving the second reading of this bill said that although when bringing in this measure he made a short statement as to the reasons which had induced her Majesty's Government to introduce it to the house, yet so much misconception had since previled as to the object and scope of the bill and the effect of its provisions, and such determined opposition had been expressed by an in fluential class, not merely with respect to certain clauses, hit as to the whole bill, that he felt it his duty, on the present occasion, to state its nature, provisions, scope, and effect; and also to mention the modifootieas which Government were prepared to make in it on the sugges tion of parties in favour of the bill, who had been good eaough to state their opinions to him with a view of removing objections to the measure, and at the seine time rendering it more efficacious for the detec tion ef crime and the apprehension of offenders. It was necessary to call the attention of the house to what had been done by the louse itself in respect to this measure. In the year 1853 it appointed a committee on the subject, who examined a great variety of witnesses, including seve ral magistrates of counties and boroughs, chairmen of quarter sessions, tenant farmers, landowners, and heads of police, both in counties and boroughs ; and he thought it was impossible to say that those witnesses, many of whom wore well known to members of this house, and aome of whom were themselves members of the house, were not fully entitled by their character and position, to givo an opinion as to the matters referred to the committee which the louse must receive with attention and respect. (Hear.) The committee made two reports. The first consisted solely ef evidence, the second was a report of further evidence, accompanied by a series of resolutions, all of which were agreed to either unanimously or by very large majorities of the committee, and which any one must fuel to have been fully borne out by the evidence contained in their re port. The principal points established before that com• mittee were these. First, it was established by accumulated evidence that the county police, wherever it had been esta blished under the existing acts, which rendered it op tional in the justices of counties to adopt a county consta bulary or not, had been attended with very beneficial re sults, and that those results had been chiefly evinced in the increased prevention and detection of crime, the repres sion of the vagrancy, and the consequent increase in the value of the property both of landlords and occupying te nants. (Hear,) The evidence also showed conclusively the utter inadequacy of the system of paying constables and superintending constables—(hear)—and equally conclu sively the obstructions which were placed in the way of the apprehension of offenders and the repression of crime by the partial application of the existing acts —a police force existing in one county and none in another, afford ing the means of escape to criminals, and thus preventing the detection and punishment of crime. The evidence fur ther went to show that where the police were inefficient it arose from the want of co-operation between the borough and county police force ; and that the expense —or rather the apprehended expense—had hitherto acted as the great bar to tie general adoption of a police force, the evidence going to prove that where a good and an efficient police existed there expense was saved iu many other re poets by the police discharging many duties which in other places were performed by other agencies, and by the pro tection they gave to property, which in other counties was exposed and liable to depredation. (Hear, hear.) Amongst the witnesses who were examined before the committee was an eminent magistrate of Hampshire, the hon. gentle man tie member for the University of Oxford (Sir W. Heathcote), and he bore testimony to the fact that sines The establishment of a rural police in that county there had been much less undetected crime, and that the oneness of housebreaking in the daytime had greatly diminished. A large amount of evidence was given as o the advantages which the county constabulary osnferred en tie poorer classes of the community especially. Witness after witness stated that the poor emit enjoyed the advantage of protection to hie pro perty, without any expense to himself, to an equal degree with the protection which was afforded to the pro perty of the rich ; and Capt. 31'1 - lardy, the chief constable of .:;Isis, gave evidence to the effect that this was the great recommendation of the constabulary in that county. With regard to the expense of establishing a county con stabulary, it appeared from the evidence that the appre bensieue on that subject had been very much exaggerated, Capt. M'flardy stating distinctly, as to Essex, that the saving effected showed almost a balance in favour of the county by the establishment of the existing constabulary, whilst a report from a committee of magistrates for Ramp shire, of which the Speaker of this house was a member, showed that a saving of not less than 1,5001. a-year must save been effected in that counts - The resolutions of the &elect committee of this house were in accordance with the evidence to which he had referred, and were, in effect, that it was most desirable that legislative measures should be introduced without delay by the Government rendering the adoption of an efficient police force on a uniform principle imperative throughout Great Britaie. Several gentlemen is various parts of the house had also urged upon the Go vernment the importance of taking up the report of the committee, and endeavouring to form a police force which, founded mainly upon its recommendations, would establish a more efficient police throughout the country, and render unnecessary those isolated attempts to improve the system which had been justly condemned by the committee in their resolutions. It was in accordance, therefore, with that which he understood to be the general wish of the hoes*, and with his own sense of the duty which devolved upon him in the office he held, being satiokied that there was ample room for improvement both as to the county and borough police, that he had endeavoured during the recess t• frame a bill which would Accomplish the object that the eousmittee and the house had in view, and at the same time Templet, as far as possible, that principle which he was not prepared to infringe, the principle of local management and control in the administration of the police force. (Cheers.) He would now describe the state of the law and the facts as to counties; and next the state of the law and the facts as to boroughs. He would then leave the house to say whether, in its opinion, there was room for improve ment or not, and, with respect to the provisions of the present bill, whether they were such as were calculated to effect the object required. By the existing constabulary acts it was optional with the magistrates of a county to adopt A comity constabulary or not. If any county did adept a const a b u l ary, i t was left to the justices to deter mine how many constables should be provided, subject to this proviso, that the numbers should not exceed one in one thousand of the inhabitants, the Secretary of State having power to make rules for the government, pay, and clothing of the force, and the j astices of appointing a chief constable subject to the approbation of the Secretary of State. In 20 counties, and in two of the ridings of Yorkshire, no county constabulary had yet been appointed, whilst in seven other counties it had only been partially established. In short, he believed that half the surface of England and Wales was at present unprovided with an efficient county constabu lary. The process of establishing a police force in the counties where it now existed had been a very gradual one. The system had generally been extended in this way : a county having established a police force, and the adjoining county having none, the inconveniences experienced by the latter were se great that they had been induced, partly by witnessing the results of the system in the neighbour ing county, and partly by witnessing the inconveniences which arose from thieves and other bad characters being driven within their bounds, to exercise the option given them by act of Parliament, and establish a police force in their tare. Iu the county of Surrey, for instance, within the last two years there was no county con stabulary ; but the metr opo lit an po li o* di s t r i ct abutted on one sid of it, and the Hampshire police on another. Proposals had been made for establishing a county con stabulary in Surrey, but the dread of the expense and the displeasure of the ratepayers were, be presumed, the prinoipal reasons for those proposals not being adopted. Well, there being no county constabulary, a by of housebreakers and burglars, known as the " Frire ley gang," were allowed with impunity to meet at their places of rendezvous to conoo t their schemes of plunder and depredation, and at last they conaumniated their crimes and horrified the whole county by breaking into a clergyman's house and murdering its owner. NV hat was the consequence ? At the next Surrey quarter sessions no tice of motion was given for the establishment of a county constabulary, and he believed the magistrates unanimously —at all events by a very large majority—resolved upon the establishment of a police force in the county. That force had since been established, and he understood it was one of a most efficient character. Bat the question was, whether it was desirable to delay the exercise of the option given by the act of Parliament until some such crime as that he had mentioned had been perpetrated ? (Hear.) He (Sir G. Grey) did not at that moment see his hon, friend the member for the West Riding of Yorkshire (Mr. B. Denison) in his place ; bat that hon. gentleman had given notice of his intention to epposos the second reading of the prevent bill. Well, what was the description given of the west riding of Yorkshire? lathe first place a petition had been presented to the house by his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr. Baines), from certain justices of the peace in the county palatine of Lancaster and the west riding e f Yorkshire, wherein th e petitioners stated that in the county palatine there was a numerous and efficient rune! °lice, established under the 2d and 3d Vict and 3d and 4th Viet., which had for 16 years past been in active opera ; that in the west riding of Yorkshire there was no other police force than the parish constables and 30 super ntending constables, recently appointed under the sth and 6th Vict., chap. 109; that in the west riding a large amount of undetected crime existed, and many offences against good order were committed and remained unpa fished, sad that the efforts of the magistrates to discharge their duties were often rendered useless and of no avail for want of a more active and effioient constabulary ; that in Lancashire, where an efficient police force did exist, tiey experienced no such diffieulty ; and that in their opinion the bill now before the hens, would operate most beeeficially in districts within their jurisdiction, and enable them to discharge their duties as magistrates with greatly increased advantage. That petition Was signed by many magistrates residing on the border of the two coun ties, and the information they gave as to the state of crime in Yorkshire, and as to the difficulty of detecting It, was borne out by other documents, iaclediee e. letter from Mr. J. Peel, of Clitheroe. Two days ego a petition was sent to him by occupiers of land and owners of property in a Tillage in the West Riding, praying that the bill might be passed into law, He also received a letter from Lord Scarborough, who stated that having himself experienced the very great incoavenience the district had suffered by being deprived of the benefit and protection of a rural police, he heartily concurred is the prayer of the petition, which was princi pally sipped by personteresident on his estate. His lordship also added that the parish constables wore perfectly useless in preventing offences. The right hon. baronet then re ferred to the address of Mr. 0. Wilson, the chairman of the Quarter Sessions at Sheffield, on the 10th of March last, in which he made allusion to the great increase which had taken place in the cases of violence at these sessions. He (Sir G. Grey) thought that the state of things disclosed in those different communications was very discreditable to a civilised country, and more especially so when he took into account the great wealth of the West Riding of Yorkshire, to which they particularly related. In consequence of the absence of a county constabulary in Somereetrihire, the magistrates, from a sense of the inefficiency of the parish constables, frequently applied for the assistance of the police in Bath, where there was an admirable borough force. Surely that was a state of things which ought not to be allowed to exist. He would now proceed to advert to the existing law and facts with regard to boroughs. It was said /hat, though the bill might be very useful so far as it related to counties, there was no reason why Parliament should in terfere to provide a more efficient police for any boroughs in the kingdom, and that such an interference on the part of Parliament would be a violation of the first principles of self-government as laid down by the Municipal Act. Now, had Parliament altogether abdicated its functions in this respect, and had it no right to take additional precau tions to render the police for boroughs more efficient than they were at present? The sth and 6th Wm. IV., chap. 76, gave power to the town coiled' of boroughs to appoint a watch committee, which should provide a sufficient num ber of fit persons as policemen to keep peace by day and night, and give ample protection to life and property in the borough. Did Parliament, as was assumed by those who opposed the bill, step there—did it vest the whole authority with regard to the police absolutely in the be ough authorities, and give an implied pledge that it would net in any way interfere with the police for the future? The act did not stop there. There was a provision in the act which, although not regularly cemplieo with, required that a quarterly return should be sent to the Home Secretary by every municipal borough of the numbered police within the borough, and the regulations made for their government by the watch committee, in order that the Secretary of State, who here exercised the central authority which was so much objected to, might see at one glance whether the bo• rough authorities had fulfilled the directions of the statute. Therefore, Parliament did not abdicate its functions. Pri sons were placed under the control of the municipal bodies by the same act, bet inquiries had since been made into the state of prisons, both in counties and boroughs, and acts passed amending that law, and giving to the Home Secre tary the right of supervision over local control and snper inteadence, for the benefit of the community at large, as well as for the benefit of the inmates of the prisons them selves. He did not see why, after that had been done with regard to prisons, without any objection and complaint of the practical exercise of the powers confided by Parliament to the Secretary of State, that there should be an exagge fated apprehension—for so he mast call it—as to the supposed abuse of the powers which it was now proposed to give that Minister iu reference to the police. This question had been argued as if only particular localities were interested in it, whereas it affected the country at large. The public had a direct pecuniary interest in the matter. When the Municipal Act was passed, all the expenses of pri sons and prosecutions were entirely borne by the community within which these prisons and prosecutions were, but Parliament had since thrown a large portion of those expenses on the Consolidated Fund; and therefore if, owing to a deficiency in the police of any county or borough there was a great increase of crime, the additional cost entailed by that fell immediately upon the public. He now proposed to deal with the allegations that there was no evidence to show that the borough police through out the kingdom was not as perfect as it could be, and that there waa no room whatever for the interference of Parlia ment. If these allegations could be satisfactorily proved, he would not be at all disposed to encounter the opposi tion of so manyof his hon. friends for the sake of advocat ing any mere theory. A return was moved for a year and a half ago, giving the number of police and the amount of population in each borough under the Municipal Act. Some slight variation had subsequently taken place, and he had endeavoured to supply that so as to render the re turns as correct as possible. There were several of the smaller boroughs in which no attempt had been made to comply with the requisitions of the Municipal Act. There were eight boroughs with an aggregate population of 32,500, in which there was only one policeman for day and night duty. In 20 other boroughs, comprising a popu lation of 82,000, only two policemen discharged the duties imposed by the act. With regard to the larger boroughs, he was happy to say that the town councils of Liverpool, Birmingham, Bristol, Newcastle, Hull, and some other large and populous boroughs, had adequately fulfilled the obligations imposed upon them by the Municipal Act, and he did not think the present bill would have the effect of making practically any alteration in the system of police already existing in boroughs of that class. He was sorry, however, to find that the same remark could not apply to those boroughs which, though of a secondary class, were very important in respect to the extent of their population. In Ashton-under-Line, with a population of 30,000, there were only seventeen policemen. At Black burns there were only 46 policemen to a population of 47,000 ; at Bolton, there wereouly 27 policemen to a popu lation of 61,000 ; at Oldham, there were but 33 policemen to 53,000 ; at Prestos, there were oily 37 policemen to 30,000 inhabitants. Now, it was impossible to read these numbers without feeling that it was utterly,impossible that the police force in these towns could adequately per form their duties. The amount of the police force was proved to be insufficient by the freqnent applications made from time to time for assistance to the military authorities of the district, or the Horse Guards, or yeomanry, in order to keep the peace epon any extraordinary occasions. It would be found that the chief constable of Lancashire had repeated applicetiona from the numerous towns of that county for aid. The chief constable said on some occasions that aid was given, but on seine others he could not give that aid, owing to the police under him being required in the county • and the more because many of those bo roughs had separate,' themselves from the county, and afterwards came to ask gratuitous assistance from the county which it could not give. In many of the counties he might also state the military outposts—it he might call them so—or detachments, bail been called in and concen trated not only for the purpose of the present war, hot to avoid the serious evil to the habits and discipline of the soldiers from their being so far away from head-quarters. He (Sir G. Grey) had, in consequence of this state of things, thought it his dtet.y to issue a circular en the 28th March last year, to a certain class of boroughs, warning thew that they must net depend for assistance on the counties. That circular was addressed to boroughs with a popula tion of 23,000 an I over, in which the police were not one in 1,0'20 to the inhabitants. From fourteen of those bo roughs he had received an answer favourable to the bill, including Leeds and Wolverhampton, the latter borough enjoying the distinction of having petitioned uneuimously in favour of the present bill ; and he was informed that ii those two. boraughe steps had been taken for the immediate augmentation of the police, whilst other boroughs expressed themselves as satisfied with things as they were. He had received a letter from the Mayor of Stafford, dated the 4th of April last year, which statel that Stafford was tho county town with a po pulatien of about 12,000, the county gaol containing be tween 500 and 600 prisoners on an average, and yet there were but one superintendent and four policemen. At Pres ton there was a large population, and the police force was quite inadequate. Portsmouth he knew had taken a very active part in opposition to this bill ; but he (Sir G. Grey) had several letters from Mr. Emmanuel, a jeweller and silversmith in that borough, praying that the bill might be passed, and stating that the population was between 70,000 and 80,000, while there were only4oor 42 constables for day and night duty, and that during the mouth of Feb. in that year one-fourth of that 'umber were absent, owing either to death or disease. From the Mayor of Plymouth he had a letter, stating that a large number of persons in that borough looked to the bill with satisfaction, and hoped for great advantages from it, adding that the whole force of that town was only 45 to a population of from 55,000 to 60,000. He next came to Derby, and in a local newspaper—the Mercury—of November last, he found a report from the superintendent of the watch committee, which stated that the police force of the borough consisted of one superintendent, one inspector, three sergeants, two constables, and 27 policemen, to a population of 47,000 inhabitants. As to the efficiency of- the police generally, it was an essential ingredient that strict attention should be paid to the regulations under which they acted. lie believed that in many of the large boroughs they had taken their rules in a great measure from those of the metropolitan police, which had been found roost effi cient. Still there were very great anomalies and defects. One was that there was no provision against the pay leant of police constables by fees, Ile thought that if a policeman was paid by fees and not by salary, there would be an unequal administration of the law, and the Door man would be in danger of not having justice done him. In many of those regulations there was a prohibi tion against payment by fees ; in some cases fees were al lowed to be taken. As an instance of that system, there was the borough of Leominster, in which the superinten dent was paid by fees, and in his absence the police could not act, 118 it would be infringing upon his fees. In Nor wich payment by fees had existed, but the town council had abolished the system, and it no longer existed. Ho might say generally that where the police were most effi e:eat, is point ef fact, there was the least opposition to the bill. In the city of Yerk, with a population of 36,000, there were only 29 police. He was not going to state any thing regarding York on doubtful authority. He held in his hand a copy of the York, herald of February 17, 1853, containing a detailed report of a meeting of the city coun cil. The first business brought before the meeting was the reception of the report of the watch committee. No sooner was that report presented, and its adoption moved aid seconded, than a town councillor made a long speech impugning the efficiency of the police, giving very circum stantial details, showing there was ample room for reform. That town councillor (Mr. Charlton) stated that thepower of the police to prevent robberies was not so satisfactory as it ought to be, and that he believed till they altered the system of paying the police by fees they never would be better off. It appeared that the inspector of police in that city was himself the owner of several houses of ill-fame, which were the resort of thieves and other bad characters. (Hear.) That statement was not denied nor attempted to be palliated or defended. Here was a disgraceful abuse years after the Municipal Act had passed, and yet the chief magistrate of this city of York had taken upon him self to attack this bill, He would now proceed to state the previsions of the bill. First as respected counties. By the existing law an option was given to the justices in quarter modems to adopt a county constabulary ; it was pro posed to take away that option and make it compulsory. All the comities would then be subject to the same provi sions which now existed with respect to those counties which, in exercise of the option, had established a consta bulary f roe. It was objected that the county constabulary would then be subject to the Secretary of State for the Home Ie pertinent, but this bill only proposed to place all the counties upon the same footing as those which, for the last, 15 years, had exercised the optional power of appoint ing a constabulary, and ho believed he might say, that in the whole course of that time no difference of opinion had existed between the justices and the secretary of State as to the appointments which they made, and this unanimity of opinion he attributed to the great care with which the justices made laud/appointments, the 'nest efficient men hav ing been sob oted. There was only one instance in which a question had arisen, and that was as to the ago of the party elected to chief constable. In that case the justices were desirous to appoint a person above the age allowed by law, and epee representations being made as to the fit ness of the person appointed, the Home *etretary allowed the letter of the law to be broken, in order that its spirit might not be defeated by the non-appointment of a gentle man in all other respects most efficient for the discharge of the duties of the office. There were ono or two other points in which the law was altered. the first had reference to the power which justices were to exercise on appointing county constabulary, in dividing the counties into districts for the purpose of eiits dieing the rates. The expediency of this was shown by the unequal distribution of the popula tion in agricultural districts a small population being, spread over a large, and in manufacturingclistricts a large nunalaer lying within a narrow compass. There was groat appre hension entertained that the police rate would fall une qually on such counties, and it was therefore thought de airable, as the county constabulary was no longer to he optional, that on the representations of the ratepayers, the justices should be required to exercise the discretion now vested in them by law, and to 'divide the counties into dis tricts, so as to equally proportion the rates. He now came to the provisions of the bill which affected alike boroughs and counties, which contained a declaration as to the duties of the police. The most material was that which em powered her Majesty to appoint inspectors to ascertain the state of the police as regarded numbers and efficiency ; and this power was ingested in accordance with the recoin raendation of the commission of 1839. It was owing to the circumstances reported by that commigsiou, and to other circumstances which had since arisen, that a portion of the police expenses was to be defrayed oat of the Con solidated Fund. It was necessary that some insane should be adopted to see that the police were efficient, and for that purpose inspectors were essential. Ele had heard no objec tion to that provision, and he believed that Parliament would agree in the reasonableness of the proposition. There was another point, with respect to the power to grant su perannuation allowances to the chief constables of counties; there ought to be such a power to reward meritorious otti core, and he therefore anticipated no objection to the ador. tion of the clause. He had now stated all that was neces sary with regard to counties. He trusted that the h also would have no objection to allow the second reading of the bill. Ho had already received many valuable suggestions from hon. members, and he was ready to listm to any others they might think proper to make. Ho had been sur prised to find opposition to the bill from boroughs of a kind which, to him, was wholly uuaccountable. Some boroughs had been in favour, and others had taken no part in the matter. There had been deputations from town coun cils. He would particularly refer to Manchester, which objected only to certain portions of the bill ; and he would, therefore, proceed to consider the reasonable objec tions of those who were favourable to the principles of the bill. llts found great misapprehension prevailing in some quarters as to the beerii g of the provisions of the bill on local government. What was the object of the bill ? It was to provide an efficient police force, having clue regard to local control. It had been Resorted that by this bill the management of the police would be transferred from the town councils and watch committees to the Secretary of State. To that he could give an unqualified denial, and would refer for proof to the bill in the hands of hon. members. By the bill, the management of the polio:: was not to be taken from the local authorities; th To was to be no interference with this appointment or dismissal of constables, and there were no compulsory powers in the bill as to the number of police to be provided. Not wish ing to present a bill to the house theoretically perfect, ho had declined to insert powers to appoint constables cr to determine what number each borough should appoint. The right hon. member for Droitaich (Sir J. Pakington) had suggested that it would be desirable to fix a miuinanin ; but. he (Sir G. Grey) did not think that it would be ad visable; and he emphatically denied that by this bill ho wished to do anything more than establish one nuiform stan dard of police throughout England. By the fourth clause it was provided that constables of boroughs should have the same power in counties which county constables had now in boroughs; be had never heard any objection to that classic), and ho thought that, for the better adminis tration of justice, it was expedient that constables of counties and boroughs should concurrent jaristliction. The fifth clause provided for the performance of the duties of the constables, which were to be regulated by the justices or watch committees, and power was given by the Secretary of State to make such regulations from time to time as might be necessary. He would state the object of this clause being introduced into the bill, and, at the same time, mention that this was one of the clauses to which great objections had been made, which objections, he was bound to think, were entitled to great weight. But the olijectof the clause had been greatly misunderstood by some and mitrepiessented by others. The clause it question had reference to the saving of expense to boroughs and counties, by appointing constables who should devote the whole of their time to the performance of their duties, including those which in a well-regulated po lice force—such as iuipection of weights awl measures, serving notices and precepts, suppression of nuisances, ke. —were performed gratuitously by tho constables; but which could not, it was believed, be enforced by the local authorities without extra pay. It was suggested that as doubts existed on this point they should be removed, and that express powers should he given to impose those duties on the police, and with that view this clause was intro duced. It had been objected that this clause as it stood would give power to tho Secretary of State to determitio the duties of the police. To meet that objection he would pra i ses* the omission of the latter portion of the clause, and leave it to the local authorities to determiue what duties tie police should psi form. The next clause, viz., the sixth, had been greatly objected to by the boroughs ; the counties were not concerned in it. The clause enabled the Secretary of State to make rules for the government, clothing, pay, Ise., of the police in the boroughs, in the same way and to the same extent as they had with respect to the county police for the last 15 years. Apprehensions were enter tained that it was intended by the Secretary of State t• take altogether into his hands the power of regulating and interfering with the local powers of the watch committees. He must again repeat that there was no such intention ; it was only proposed to place boroughs in the same position as counties; and he entertained nodoubt, if the clause passed, that the power would be exercised in the same unobjec tionable maiiner as it had been in the case of the counties for the last 15 years, and would give rise to no interference on the part of the Secretary of State. He would read the re gulations which had been in operation for counties for the last 15 yeti a. (The right hon. gentleman here real some por tion of the regulations.) He is otild venture to say that if the words of the clause appeared too large an 1 too wide, and were he glad to hear any 71434,)113 that 'night be urged ; and if the house thought proper he should be willing to give to Fedi:sweat that power which, as the bill at present steed, Was vested in the Secretary of State. There would be sub stituted for the Bth el:semiotic which would secure thelS4llll6 kind of information being regelerly transmitted from time to time to the Secretary of State. The object was to obtain that ieforrnatiou rege.riling , statistics of crime which Par liament had always asked for, and which he (Sir G. Grey) had pledged himself to endeavour to obtain. If the bill were committed pre forma with the view of having it re printed, he thought it would be found that the whole of the objections had been removed. He insist now ask the house to affirm the principles of the bill, which, though modified, would still retail, a power over local control and management. Amongst the petitions which had been pre sented was one from the Cite of London, which cortainle , struck him with much surprise, because the City of Lou don had no interest direct or indirect in this hill. What wise the case of the City of London? He had not said one word of the constitution of the City police, but he would now state that it was a most efficient force ; but under the City of London Police Act the most extensive powers were reserved to the Secretary of State, who had greater control in its management than the bill before the house hinted at. The corporation could not appoint a ohief of police without the sanction of the Crown, through the Secretary of State ; and when that officer had been appointed, ho could not be substituted without the authority of the Se cretary of State. There was also a power in the City if London Act which gave her Majesty, through the Seers erons power, without the consent of th e corpora his office the Chief Commi ss i oner o f Probably the reason why the corporation ob jectedPtt'ilo:lnYPolito. of State, rtrt m to rSe t a h :bv' e . present bill was because they anticipated the introduction of a nicaeure which would interfere with the coastitution of their own body, and they nosy made common cause with the boroughs against the present bill. (Hear, hear.) He had now stated the rea sons which induced the Government to introduce the bill, and the grounds upon which the Government asked the house to support it. If he lied followed the advice given him by the deputation who waited upon him, and insisted upon the withdrawal of the measure, he should grossly have neglected his duty. (Haar, hear.) He would now leave the bill to the decision of the house, and whether the house should consider it worthy of a second reading or not, lee (Sir G. Grey) should consider that he had dis charged his duty in regard to the pledge he had given to the house, (Hear.) Lord PALMERSTON - seconded the motion. Mr. C. FORSTER moved es an amendment, "That the bill be road a second time this day six months." The right lion. baronet, in an able speech, had consented to remove the most obnoxious clauses of his bill, but he had not done enough to justify the withdrawal of the amend ment of which he had given notice. Even if he had ex cluded the boroughs from the operation of the bill, ho would not have removed all danger, for the principle of centralisation applied this year to counties might next year be attempted to be applied, with greater success to boroughs, for the Government, by dividing the opposition, would have secured an easier victory over each. (Hear, hear.) He quite agreed with the opinion the right hon. baronet had expressed, that it was necessary to have a more efficient police force throughout the country. There could be no doubt about that being a matter of social necessity, and if the object of the right hon. baronet had been simply to impose on counties and boroughs where there was no efficient police sy•ten to raise a force, leav ing the superintendence and management c.f it to the resi dent magistrates, as, under the Municipal Act, the borough police was left to the town council, he would not have opposed it. More than that, he believed that such a pro posal would have met with a general concurrence from all parts of the country. (Hear, hear.) lie did not at all agree with that part of the bill which gave to a policeman of one district the power of moving out of that district in pursuit of an offender, whom he might apprehend and place before a magistrate having jurisdiction in the district were he was caught. There was another portion of the right hon. baronet's statement from which he differed ; that was where he expressed an opinion that there was a jealousy between the county and the borough police. His (h[r. Forster's) experience west di rectly the other way, for he had acted some years as a ma gistrate for the county in which ho resided, and had always found the most harmonious feeling to exist between thorn. The right bon. bart. having given up clauses 5 aid 6, which related to the duties of the police in boroughs, he (Mr. Forster) was relieved from the remarks he intended making on theme objectionable points. He should have been pleased if the right hon. baronet had considered it his duty to give up the inspection clause, for he thought the proposition, from its uncertainty, and from the power it gave the Go vernment to raise or lower the standard of police, was highly objectionable. (Hear.) That clause gave to the Government the power to direct bow many policemen the boroughs should employ, thus palpably interfering with their local rights. The 10th clause empowered the Govern ment to inquire into the efficiency of the county and bo rough police, and the 11th provided that when the Govern. ment had acted upon that inquiry, and directed how many should be employed, one fourth of the expenses incurred should be paid out of the Consolidated Fund. The whole power was placed in the bands of the Secretary of State, who might delude boroughs to increase their number of police, at first by a small number, on the promise to pay part of the expense, and then they would find themselves in this position, that if they did not constantly increase the number according to his directions, he would take away the subsidy, and at any time he pleased throw the whole of the payment upon the borough. (Hear.) Thus he might harass the town-councils, who, he contended, ought not to be placed in such a state of uncertainty. Such a power undoubtedly did away with that unifor mity and order which the bill professed to aim at. One of two things would happen. Either the town-councils— true to those principles of municipal government which they had always so faithfully defended—would refuse all I assistance from Government, or 'they vreltld aomt it M , S .., - the risk of such jealousies and animosities as would inevi. tably render future legislation upon the subject necessary. (Hear.) But was it not a delusion to talk of pecuniary aid from the Government in such a case as that now under consideration, for where was' the money so freely tendered to come from but out of the taxes paid by the people ? The right hon. baronet: had repeated that night a charge he previously made against the boroughs, that they did not maintain a sufficient force to protect the towns in case of riot. Did he seriously mean to imply that a body of police were constantly to be kept up to act, as though a town was in a state of siege? (Laughter.) The charges against the efficiency of the borough police he did not believe to be well founded; he was sure they were not as regarded Wal sall, the borough he had the honour to represent,. The plan that had been constantly adopted in that borough was to get the best men that could be obtained, and all considera tions of favouritism were invariably laid aside. Indeed in every case the successful'candidate for the highest position amongst the police had been a stranger to the town. The great majority of the petitioners who had addressed the house, instead of receiving the bill with pleasure, and as a relief from those evils under which they laboured, looked upon it with alarm and called for its immediate rejection. They saw in it a principle of centralisation which was most obnoxious to an Englishman's views. (Hear.) He (Hr. Forster) knew perfectly well that no improper advantage would be taken by the present Home Secretary, or of.any Cabinet of which he might be a member, of the power this bill would confer upon him ; but it could not be said so confidently how another minister might use the power, and he asked the house therefore to be cautious how it tem pered with the municipal institutions of the country. (Rear.) The boroughs know that they had done nothing to forfeit the confidence of the house, and they felt that they had reason to complain strongly of the course which had been taken in reference to them since 1853. They were mast improperly treated by the committee of that year, which was composed entirely of county members. Looking to the composition of that committee, and to the course of procedure before it, it was never for a moment supposed that the committee was to take into consideration the borough police, and no evidence on behalf of the bo roughs was tendered. When the report came out the bo reughs were astounded by the inaccuracy of the statements contained in it, and demanded a fresh inquiry, but nothing was heard in reply until 1851, when a bill was introduced by the noble lord now at the head of the Government, who was then the Secretary of State for the Home Department —a bill which was withdrawn in accordance with the gene rally expressed wishes of the country. What had occurred since that time to justify the Government in again moving in the matter, and in dragging up representatives of local authorities from all'parts of the country to protest against their proceedings, and to defend., the sights which they thought were secured to them by the Municipal Act of 1815 ? (Hear.) He regretted very much that, as a gene. rat supporter of her Majesty's Government, although, at the sante time, a strictly independent member, ho was obliged to resist the measure which the Government had introduced. Her Majesty's Ministers must bear in mind that it was the Government that had deserted the bo roughs, and not the boroughs who had deserted the Go vernment. (Hear.) If he might venture to make a sug gestion to the - right hors, baronet the Home Secretary, it would be that he, should withdraw the present bill, with a view to introduce another which would be free from the objections to which that now before the house was un doubtedly liable. (Hear.) Captain SCOBELL, in seconding the amendment, said he was asked to be a witness on the committee to which the hon. gentleman who had just sat down had referred, but he refused, knowing how the committee was consti tuted, and that the majority of its members had made up their minds how they should decide before they entered upon the investigation. The feeling in Bath (the town he represented) was universal against the bill ; but if he were not of the same opinion he would not take that view of it in the house. In his own county (Somerset), in which he had taken an active past as a magistrate, the amount of crime was as small as in any of the previous 25 years, with ore exception, and that was a county without any, rural police. In Somerset and Devon counties, without any rural police, the amount of crime in 1811 was 1 in 590. In Gloucestershire, Wilts, and Southampton counties that had the advantage of a rural police, the amount of crime was lin 478. So much for the argument that criminals were driven out of counties by a rural police into counties where there was none, and whore they might with the greater facilities carry on their unlawful pursuits. He ad mitted that in many parts of the country parish constables had not proved an efficient body , of officers, but that was . the fault of the system, not of the men, who were most in adequately paid. A policeman got, perhaps, 601, a year, a parish constable perhaps not 60e. Had it been shown that the public were in favour of this bill? The right hon. baronet had submitted a few petitions and had read letters from a few private individuals, inclading superintendents Of rural police, who were, of course, interested in keeping up a system under which they enjoyed good appointments. But what was such testimony compared with the 100 cor porations who had petitioned the imam under their corpo rate seal. There had been, up to the last returns, 145 pe titions against the bill and only 5 in favour of it, a pretty conclusive proof, he thought, of the state of feeling out of doors. It had been said teat in some of the boroughs the number of police was too small ; if that were the case, and there was no doubt it was so, let it be altered by a proper measure, but not by a bill which conferred such large powers upon the Home Secretary, and swept away all the rights of the municipal corporations. (Hear.) It had been stated that in certain cases one-fourth of the expense of the police was to be paid out of the Consolidated Fund, but that fourth only applied to the p mad clothing of the police, so that all the remaining expenses would fall upon the boroughs, the Government, in reality, not paying more than one sixth of the whole amount of.ttre expeuses incurred. But, oven if that were an advantage, was it to be supposed that th e magistrates throughoet the country would submit to be bribed by a mere money payment to the commission of a great wrong upon those municipal corporations a hick they bad so well defended (Hear.) It was Lerd Grey who gave municipal cot peratious to England, and that was the great glory of his day ; but now a member of his fate ily, and one bearing hisname, was endeavouring to take them away. (Cheers.) If this bill passed, it would be impossible to prophecy what would happen in future times.. An ad ministration was not worth two years' purchase; and who could tell how secceeding Governments might turn upon the people those instruments which this bill would place in their hands. Our statesmen were now endeavouring to make peace abroad, while a member of the Government was attempting to make war at home. (Cheers.) The people would not be silent, for they would not submit to a bill se thoroughly un-English—more fitted for Naples than for the people of this country. (Hear.) Ho (Capt. Scobell) was perfectly sure of this, that if the boroughs accepted the bill in any form, the magistracy would be digging their own graves, for they would soon be swept away by a bill which would propose to have a universally paid magis tracy- just as it was now proposed to have a universal po lice under the direct influence of the House Secretary. He belieied the present bill was part of a plot to carry into effect that object. A return had recently been circulated amongst members, in which it was stated that there were 19 counties that had vastly increased in crime in 1854 as compared with the previous four years, the increase being as much as 11 or 12 per cent. Would the house believe that out of these 19 counties 13 had a rural police, which was supposed to keep crime down ? One had a police partially, and the other five had none. He said reject this bill. The alteration of it was nothing. It. was objectionable in any shape, and if modified now, it would be followed in its principle by measures of a simi lar character. Mr. Y. STRA.CY thought this bill was an honest and earnest attempt to give clue protection to property. Ho believed that this bill , would • provide an efficient force both for the preservation of the peace at home, and, if necessary, for the resistance of an attack from abroad. Sir G. PECHELL said the right hon. baronet had failed to convince him of thenecessity for this bill. Tt would be exceedingly injurious to those towns which were cities in counties. Local acts were provided for efficient police establishments, but all those acts would be superseded by this bill. He regretted to have again to raise his voice against centralisation. i,Constant inroads were being made upon the independence.of the rate-payers of the country, and now up started the right hoe bironet with a bill, the principles of which had been rejected two years ago. He should, therefore, support the amendment. Colonel PACKE said that, from what had fallen from the other side, it might be inferred that this bill was in tended to infringe the rights of he public, instead of its being a bill for the more effectual suppression of crime. One of the greatest benefits of late years conferred on the rural poor was the system of allotments. This bill would give the holder of these allotments protection against de predators, which at this moment they very much needed. Theta was nothing in the bill of which the boroughs could reasonably complain. As to the inspectors, we had poor ' law inspectors, inspectors of gaols, and of everything else upon which that house required information ; and why not then upon police matters. The towns and counties ought to be as one upon police matters. Sir J. WALAISLEY said the objection to this bill was not to the more efficient establishment of police regu lations, but to the interference of the Secretary of State in the matter. The municipal bodies could carry on these regulations without such interference. This bad been proved ample, at all events, in two boroughs, with which he was connected, namely, Liverpool and Leicester. .He could discover no justification for this measure in the speech of the right hen. baronet. He had made out no case at all. Certainly not with regard to the boroughs. The bill was an unjustifiable interference with the regulations of the boroughs of the country, and there were petitions from 150 of the principal boroughs against the bill. How many were there in favour of the bill? Only ten. There might have been errors committed in some of the boroughs, but that was no reason for legislation like this. The wisest thing for that house to do was to foster local self-govern ment. The Government had shown no aptitude for rise administration, certainly not within the last two years. Mr. SMYTHE fully concurred with the right hon. baro net with respect to the necessity of an improved system of police in the West Riding of Yorkshire. With regard to the city of York, he thought they would not have heard much of the squabbles in the town-council of York if it had not been for the interference of the Lord Mayor of York with the right bon baronet. The alterations which the hon. baronet had made in this bill bad removed many of the objections to it, but lie thought he had better withdraw the bill. nod introduce another applying to counties only. Mr. BENTINCK concurred in the general objects of the bill. Any objection which be might have had to it had been removed by the speech of the right boa. gentleman. Mr. W. J. FOX would much prefer that the right hon. gentleman should withdraw the bill altogether and intro due. a new One. Mr. HENLEY complained that this was a measure to take away the constitutional rights of counties and bo roughs, and he'hoped the two bodies would stand together and defeat the measure. He cited several returns.of crime in various parts of the country to show that an improved police had not diminished crime. He was not surprised that the boroughs were at present uneasy in their minds, which they had a good right to be. One right hon. gentleman had attempted to sweep away the property of maritime boroughs, and now came another right hon. gen. tleman who proposed to sweep away the franchises of inland and maritime boroughs alike. He had before shown that the police did not repress crime ; he had farther to state that it would not preserve order ; and he referred to the Hyde-park riots in prof of his assertion. The right hon. gentleman defended his county from the charges brought against the population in a petition ►resented by some clergymen and gentlemen in favour of this bill, and was particularly wroth at the application to them of the obso lete word " criusinous " Sir W. HEATHCOTE contended that the bill would not affect either counties or boroughs so seriously as was represented ; the only point of any importance being that, in return for a portion of their expenses being paid, both were to be subjected to a certain amount of inspection. He regretted that the boroughs were not to be placed on the same footing with counties, where the chief constable had the appointment of all his subordinates, whereas in boroughs the appointment of the constables was in the hands of the watch committees. He also contended, both on the ground of justice and expediency, that the allow- Knee of one•fourth of the expense by Government was not enough to induce the counties and boroughs to institute en efficient police. Mr. J. B. SMITH thought that the bill ought to be mot by a direct negative. If it had come from the other side of the house they would have had a two hours' denuncia tion of Tory tyranny from the right hon. gentleman. The right hon. gentleman had referied to the borough which he (lair. Smith) represented ; but the matter was in the people's hands, and they acted a■ they thought best. Since 1812 there bad been turn-outs, and the police had always been sufficient for the emergency, except when in 1852 the noble lord the member for the City of London had raised an anti-Catholic cry, and the Boman Catholic chapel was burnt down. Mr. RICE rose amid cries of " Divide ;" and said that the committee on the subject had been fairly composed ; and the right hon. member for Oxford could find fault only with one clause. He was not surprised at the opposition from the boroughs. They might take it as an infraction of their rights. But he asserted that there was not a shadow of cause of complaint by the borough members as to the provisions of the bill. The Municipal Act admitted the sauce principle which this bill comprised with regard to the police. He hoped, as far as the influence of the cm* Secretary was concerned, that he would place the counties and boroughs on the ammo footing. He did net see why the rules and regulations for the boroughs should not equally apply to the counties. He would ask hon. gentlemen who resided in counties if they had not there the same power as they had before the police was introduced ? _ _ Mr. DEED ES addreased the house amidst renewed cries el, " Divide." He opposed the bill as being against the principle of local self-management, and coutended there was no necessity for making this a compulsory measure. There had been no petitions from counties presented to the house complaining that the ratepayers had applied te the magistrates of the county for the establishment of a pace, and its being refused ; neither had there been any distur bances in the country calling for this measure, as there were in 1839. The only cause the Secretary of State had alleged for the necessity of this measure was that it was in convenient for one county to establish a police force, and for another county not to do so. Ho thought the rate payers were the best persons te judge of the necessity of the establishment of a police force in their respective coua. ties. He objected to all measures that tended towards centralisation; and if this measure were carried it would ultimately be found te be one of that class. He objected to the inspection of prisons, which had caused a difference of opinion between the county justices and the Secretary of State. and he was apprehensive the same would be the result of the inspection under this bill. Mr. MUNTZ asked the Secretary of State to withdraw this mutilated bill. The great objection to the inspector ship of the police in boroughs was still retained in the bill, but he (Mr. Mintz) was at a loss to understand why it was retained, and why the Secretary of State wished to inter fere in this manner with the boroughs. Mr. WARNER supported the bill, reserving to himself the right of considering its details in committee. Mr. BARROW objected to the compulsory provisions of the bill, and said he should vote against its second read ing. This was an attempt to introduce the thin end of the wedge, and, if permitted, other bills would follow in sub sequent sessions, giving the Secretary of titate fall powers over the management of the police throughout the country. He did not consider the present Police Act had had the effect of dimiuiahiug crime as some hon. members sup posed. Mr. COBBETT objected to the bill. In Sussex consta bulary had been established for 12 years in the eastern di vision, but rot in the west, and he believed if the people of the eastern division were polled they would vote against them, because of the inefficiency of the police in the detec tion of crime. Mr. KNIGHT opposed the bill. He Raid be bad seen the effects of a Government police on the Continent, and was convinced that no plague, pestilence, or famine could be a worse curse to a country than that. Mr. CAYLEY approved of the bill, and read a letter from a gentleman at Wensleydale to the same effect. He was opposed to centralisation, and knew that, under simi lar pretences, great expenditure was often incurred against the wish of the people, but he thought the principle of this bill good, and be should vote for it. Mr. HADFIELD hoped the house would adjourn the debate. He was strongly opposed to bringing all the busi ness of the provinces to London, and should resist these at tempts at centralisation to the utmost of his ability. Sir G. GREY regretted that he could not accede to the suggestions that he should withdraw the bill. He pro posed to take the second reading then, and as all the alte rations proposed could be made most appropriately in committee, he would make the amendments, and let the bill as altered be circulated through the ooantry. If it were.not then approved of there would be an opportunity of rejecting it on the third reading, but he pledged himself that the alterations he should make would not affect the principle of the The house then divided, and the numbers were as fol lows : For ihe second reading .. ' 259 For the amendment Majority ---153 The bill was then road a second time, and will be com mitted, pro forma, next Friday. A. ` Fie' .~~.c..s LOCAL DUES ON SHIPPING. On the motion for bringing up the report on supply, Mr. M. GIBSON called the attention of the house to an arrangement which he understood had been made at an early part of the evening between the Government and the hon. and learned member for Stamford (Sir F. Thesigor). He was informed that the report of the Royal Commis sioners on local dues OH shipping was to be superseded, and that the matter was to be disposed of as though no such in qniry had taken place. He was also informed that the whole subject was to pass off without discussion. Lord PALMERSTON said that what passed in the early part of the evening was this. Ho stated to the hon. and learned gentleman the member for Stamford that in com paring the motion of his right hon. friend the Vice-Presi dent of the Board of Trade with the amendment of the hen. and learned gentleman, he found the difference between them involved so few things that were essential, that he should have no difficulty in agreeing with the amendment, namely, that a committee should be appointed to inquire into the matters which the commissioners were appointed to examine into, and that to the committee so appointed should be referred the report of the commission. As to any discussion, the house must judge for itself when the sub ject was brought forward. (Laughter.) Mr. DISRA.ELI said that as the question was one which would probably excite great interest, perhaps the house would allow him to give his version of the course he under stood it was the intention of the Government to pursue. After the debate on the ministerial proposition to take away the property of the corporations the noble lord at the head of the Government proposed that a committee of inquiry should be nominated. The tone .he seemed to take led him (Mr. Disraeli) to conclude that it was the intention of the Government to attempt to 'get that indi rectly which they failed to obtain directly. When the proposition of the Vice-President of the Board of Trade was first made, it appeared of such an alarming and dan gerous character that he opposed it, for he imagined that it was his intention to induce the house partially at all events to agree with the report of the commissioners. (Hear, hear.) He thought be did not misrepresent the object of the right honourable gentleman when he said that his intention was to propose to the house a committee who should decide that the recommendations of the reps' commissioners should be carried out. To that proposition of the Ministry he (Mr. Disraeli) entertained very strong objections. Upon this the honourable and learned mem ber for Stamford moved an amendment, a moderate and wise amendment, and one which at the same time main tained the principles anti policy which had been asserted and defended on the Opposition side of the house. They (the Opposition) dia [not shrink from inquiry, and they, therefore, assented to the appointment of a committee to inquire into the general question, repudiating the opinion that the committee were to be at all guided by the Opinions of the commissioners, which opinions they believed were founded on principles injurious to the country and inde fensible on the principles upon which property was based. All the honourable and learned member for Stamford wanted was a committee on passing dues and tolls. He understood that in the early part of the evening Govern ment withdrew their motion, agreeing with the honour able and learned member for Stamford that the subject should he investigated by a committee of the house, not in any way sanctioning the recommendations of the cone. inissionete. _ A lengthened discussion on the subject of barrack ass modation took place, in which Mr. Monsoll, Colonel Lind say, Colonel Buck, and other hon. members took part. It led, however, to no practical result. Mr. BARING asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it was the intention of the Government, in the Appropriation Act, to provide that what was voted for one department should not be applied to another— that which was voted for the army, for instance, should not be ap plied to the Ordnance. Unless some provision of this sort wai made the house would really have no control over the stuns voted. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said there were no heads in the Ordnance department which directly reproduced the Ordnance estimates. It would no doubt be desirable to have different heads, and to make them the subjects of specific propositions. The report of the committee of supply was then agreed to. TRIAL OF OFFENCES BILL. The house went into committee on this bill. Clauses 1 to 30 were, with a few verbal amendments, agree(' to. The house then resumed. JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES. Mr. LOWE said he had not introduced anything into the bill which was foreign to its object, but to avoid dis cussion he would take the Easter recess to consider the best means of amending it. He therefore moved that the order be discharged, with the object of reconsidering its provisions. The order was then discharged. Certain returns, on the motion of Mr. RICH, were then ordered, and the house adjourned at a quarter past two o'clock. BIRTHS. OF ♦ IZON. On the 9th inst., at Kensington, the wife of James W. Ridgway, Esq. On the Bth inst., Mrs. John. Moser, of West Hill, Sydenham. OP A DIMWIT% On the Bth inst., at Liverpool Lodge, Briaton•hill, the wife of C. T. Jenkinson, Esq. On the 10th inst., at Beckenham, the wife of Hulbert Wathea, Esq. MARRIED. On the 6th inst. at Mmylebone Church, Jas. Bennett Burrell, corn merchant, of Great Marylebone-street, to Martha Lydia Bigg. On the 12th Jan., at Calcutta, Thomas Black, Esq., Commander of the steam-ship Bengal, to Helen Cecilia, second daughter of Lieut.-Colonel A. C. Spottiswoode, aith Regt. DIED. On the 6th inst. at Clapham, Mr. John Taylor Wedg wood, the eminenehigtorical engraver, aged 74. On the 7th inst., at Peckham, George Yards Sparks, Esq., aged 37. On the Bth hist., at Teddington, Middlesex, Mrs. Eve rard, widow of E. Everard, Esq., late of Middleton Hall, near Lynn, Norfolk, aged 96. On the 9th inst., Mr. Saniael Whitford, of 4, Porter street, Soho, and 8, St. James's-terrace, Camden-town, aged 76. On the 9th inst., at Lyme Farm, Elitism, Kent, Mr. Edward Past)ley, aged 57. On the 9th inst., at 35, Carnaby-street, Golden-square, Thomas Woodward, Esq., aged 84. LONDON: Printed and Published by 11 - 111 DO YOIJ.Nr, , of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at 77 a Sun Office, No. 11 2, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the ecntnty o 1114dleift s Taisdiy, 31 , inli 11, 1561. m e respectfii given for Goldachn of )lay n perfo Stalls (N (Body of West Gal o'clock pr order of a - leniently with the! Royal Lit zit eciock, Stalls, 3s. AR a Piston, Laurent's MR and Costi Camille L formulae aad stalls Kraphlc-h D gen t lenie! Models a Frame In tares dell' past Sin( Eight, by HE Tuesday, 22d. Ea; Entertain relate his strike !" " The Sh Entertain LIFE in himself of expressly T HE lied Irelan 27th insta persons as her Majes 13110 ES Tenders Their L. tiers are of thereof or not contra No ten tided for 1 the said o or to Com or to the ( Tender+ but separn VIII be ps Pattern "Aetnallin The cot tion is cal at Gospor' No tend and it will his behalf result of tl to him an Every b and bears Mast also THE. T' II COMPAI on Frida: GNORGIE THE F TO THE REPORT heas. ANNU tified by the COM/ REPOI and Acc( THE The Bc Lien in xn have it b has been business Novembc previous The Re Novembc Bcus Pnc Nsw Ass COB.RESPO A ssnra CLums B' of Bon Any/a, From From TOTAL A Ne,en NUMBER When 1855, isi Great Br for them Compare ruatio ; result of of a err Steady it Velopmel 1855, th parry's e: TILE FO Years, ending 15th Nov. Total A avw SR or ances in 10 'years. B nlll pi 5 ,808,0' Ravit Past yen date of ' the Col Pleasure of the Noverot then be last fi ye ealenlat been ap report c the Con The Chairm tion of ourned will be T" tion, a' of the follows A v( Which _nrX)3l_ Ihnti; ~~ ~. 1845 1847 1848 1849 1850 1851 1852 1853 1854 855 LOlll