The Express.
London, England, 1853-03-17 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, THURSDAY EVENING, MARCH 17, 1 F 53.

hon. gentlemen had notified their intention of proposing.
dHear, hear.) Until the house had decided on those
ifferent proposals it was obvious that the country and the
maaistratis at Quarter Ses.sions coati not know what the
measure was upon which they were called upon to pronounce
an opinion; therefore he should say that for the object put
forward by the right hon. baronet himself, that of letting
I the magistrates and the rstepayers know what was the
exact nature of the measure which it was proposed by par-
liament to pass into a law, th:y ought to go into committee
to arrange the details, and decide upon the shape in which
the bill should be presented for their anal assent at the
third readine.
Mr. B. I)ENISON wished to see the bill become an act
of parliament, but he thought it would facilitate that object
if it were delayed till after Easter, iu order that it might
be fully understood by the country.
Mr. ntelill supported the amendment.
Sir G. GREY saw no purpose to be ;rained by delay.
Al at of those hon. gentlemen who took as interest in the
subject were cow present, and it was not probable there
would be a fuller attendance on the 13th April. (Hear.)
Mr. DARR° At objected to further postponement. The
present bill was in all its material details the sante as that
which came nut of the committee of 18.11, and with which
the country was well acquainted. The alteration in the
first clause might be said in some degree to affect the prin.
I ciple, but that the house had decided on the second read-
ing. The effect of delaying the bill tall atter Easter, would,
in all probability, he to threw it over for the session. (Hear.)
Mr. FRESHFIELD supported the amendment and con-
demned tl.e bill generally, which he said would interfere
with the ailmioistration of justice.
Mr. 11. DRUMMOND said a few words in opposition to
the amendment.
Mr. WALTER thought the bill should be allowed to go
into committee. lie did nut think the bill would have the
effect tne right boo. baronet (Sir J. rakington) supposed.
There were several amendments he had given notice of
which he thought would meet the views of the right hon.
gentleman.
. .

Mr. W. MILES said it must be recollected that the bill
as amended had not been long in the Eauas of members. If
this bill passel, it would give the county boards power over
the question as to the adoption of the rural police,
matter which he thought ought to ba entirely in the
hands of the magistrates. Ile had n 0,.., voted against the
principle of the bill. He thought the principle undeniable
if they could only carry it out. He hoped that the right
hon. gentleman opposite would agree to the postponement.

Mr. E. DENISON appealed ti hon. gentlemen opposite
to allow the hill to go into committee. They had already
consumed, he had almost said wasted, more than an hour
in the discussion as to whether they were to consider
the bill or not. Ile thought as regarded entice the right
hon. baronet was punning a very badeourse. 110 was free
to confess that the bill rcqu'red many emendations, but he
trusted hon. gentlemen would allow them to go into com-
mittee.

fit; J. DUCKWORTII suggested that the amendment
should nut be pressed. Ihe preaminary question had been
suffieteutly discussed, and the only way by which they
could test the merits of the bill wax by going into the de-
tails. Mho right bon. baronet divided, he should feel it
his duty to vote for going into committee.
Illy. V. SCULLY MAI this was a matter in which ,Irish
members had, if po.sible, a greater interest than English
members. Ile should certainly vote for going into cotntnit-
tee. The county rates had greatly increased in Ireland as
well as in England.
Mr. HENLEY said they had been unjustly attacked on
that side of the house; for what were the circumstances
under which they stood ? A bill entirely different from
that which they had now to consider was first brought in
by the right hon. gentleman. This bill contained new
clause., introduced by the government, and was entirely
different from that which canto our of the at lest committee
I two years ago. But this was not all. The hill came out of
the select committee at the end of the session,
and was printed and circulated in the country.
But the right hon. gentleman, instead of following
up the recommendation of the committee, brought in a bill
last session entirely differing both from the former bill and
this bill. lie believed this bill had been circulated about
14 days, and no opportunity whatever had been given to the
magistrates to consider it. By a majority they might force the
bill into c mmitter, but when they got into committee they
could not force progress ; mud he for one should not be die-
, posed to assist in making progress if they were now driven
into it.
Mr. FITZROY said it was not exactly the fact that a
' number of clauses introduced into the bill had been origi-
neted by the government. The bill as presented to the
house differed considerably from that recommended by the
committee of 1851. The noble lord having looked at the
two measures preferred the bill es it came cut of the com-
mittee, and consequently the government informed the
right hon. member for Manchester that they could not con-
, sent to the bill unless it was made like that of 1851. Ile
believed that now the sole difference between the two bills
consisted of the manner in which the board was to be elected
by the boards of guardian% and there was already an
amendment proposed by the right hoc. member for Moe-
peth with regard to that proposition.
Sir J. PAKINOTON said, in deference to what appeared
'the wish of the majority, he should nut persist in his
amendment.
The house then went into committee.
On clause I, which provides that county financial board.
hall be established, . _

hie. HENLEY Moved an amendment, the effect of which
would be that separue boards should be established for East
and West Sussex. The two disi•ions of the county consti-
tuted in effect two distinct counties. The quarter sessions
were held separately, and the two divisions had separate
county rates.
I Mr. BAIN ES apprehended that this amendment could not
be introduced without a great number of other amendments
to meet the cue of other counties. The principle of the
bill was that there should be a county financial board fur
every jurisdiction which was under ono and the same com-
mission of the peace. Each of the three ridings of York-
shire bad its separate commission of the peace, as had like-
wise each of the two divisions of Lincolnshire, and there
were to be therefore separate boards far each of theta.
But it frequently happened in other counties that for the
sake of convenience the magistrates attended to the busi-
ness of only a portion of the county, as in Lancashire,
where there was merges( r not one commission of the peace.
In Suffolk, he underetood, there was the tune thing, but
these were mere conventional arrangements, having no
legal foundation.
Sir J. SHELLEY, as a Sussex magistrate, observed that
the arrangement in that county was merely for conseni-
ence.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE remarked that the circumstances of
East and West Swum were as different as possible. In the
eastern division they had a county police, and in the west
they had not.
Lord PALMERSTON thought more confusion 'would
arise by adopting the amendment than by not adopting it.
Yorkshire and Lincolnshire were divided by lines which
were established and known, and could not be altered, but
in Sussex it was a mere conventional arrangement which
might be changed to-morrow or nest day.
Hr. HENLEY said he felt some difficulty in the absence
of the members for the Western division of Sussex in urg-
ing reasons in favour of the amendment, but he believed
the two divisions, were entirely distinct, and if they had a
country financial board it must make a rate for the whole
county.
Mr. T. M. OIBSON suggested that the amendment
should be postponed till the hon. member for West Sasses

was prima. -
Sir J. PAILINGTON said the right hon. gentleman was
proposing to postpone the first clause. They had better
have postponed the whole bill. Though the amendment
was limited to Sussex, he apprehended there were other
counties that equally required the attention of the Lan-
ca/hire reformers.
Mr. 0111 SON explained that he did sot propose to poet-
pone the clause but the amendment, as it was mid the mem-
bers for Sussex might urge reasons for it. lie had heard no
reasons which justified the amendment.
Mr. W. MILES said, in hie county they had separate
divisions for magisterial business, but they had only one
rate. In Sussex. however, they had two rates, which varied
much in amount. lie held en his hand the treasurer's
return, from which it appeared that the rate for East Sussex
was 41d. in the pound, while that for West Sussex was
only Id. In Snifolk they had four divisions, and there also
the rates varied.
Lord PALMERSTON said the only argument for post-
poning the bill W.lll that the right hon. member for Oxford-
shire had proposed an amendment, and frankly confessed
that he did not know the reasons for it—certainly a very odd
reason.

Sir J. PAKINGTON considered the noble lord had re•
versed tho facts. The right hon. gentleman (Mr. Gibson)
did not know the reason why he wu to resist the amend-
ment.
Mr. BARROW observed that the clause proceeded on the
assumption that magistrates acted duly under the commis-
tobei which they were authorised ; and, if they did, he
to know by what authority the magistrates of Sussex
' UM& Min than one county rate? Ho objected to the
knee Wan coiled on to legalise an illegal proceeding.
Ilk S. V. SHELLEY said, in Sussex there was but one'
eanteniesion and one lord-lieutenant; and although the county
nos wee different, that was owing to there beir.g a police
gift in one division and not in the other. Besides, he us.
Ineetood that the county financial boards might, if they
*aught fit, de all that the justices had done.
Me. HENLEY said the noble lord had put into his
mesa weeds which be uttered. What ho said was.
OM idiet noble lord the member fur West Sussex might, if
be were present, give additional rea.ona. lie hoped the
Med hon. gentleman would consent to postpone the clause.
it G. GREY saw no reason for postponing the clause or
the amendment ; because, to his mind, the reasons were
clear for mot agreeing to the amendment.
Mr. L'ACKE said it would be unjust to proceed with
this clause in the absence of the members for the western
d• 'on of Sussex, who were compelled to be in attendance
at the issues. He begged to suggest the postponement of
the clause.
Mr. DEEDES did not see any neceuity for that, because
if necessary the clause could be altered at a subsequent
nine of the hill. (Hear.)
Mir. NEWDEGATE said that no argument had bees
innW !gains: the amendment MAO that no one knew why
le w•• k! be adopted. (Laughter.)
We 'FREW EN was also quite in the dark as to why the
umnmellment should be adopted. (Laughter.) Theme were
we'd& counties, as Nottinghamshire, Lineehuhire, end
%Ahem where these divisions existed.
Sir J. V. SHELLEY tiered that no exception would be
(made with respect to his own rounty, because he thought it
weld prole disadvantageous to it.
Mr. BAINSB, as chairman of the committee, oli.ervra
that the aim et Sanwa bat not been mentioned. That of
Suffolk, however, hind ; and the principle upon which the