The Sun.
London, England, 1849-07-04 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEtiNESDA'Y EVENING,

manner,. No difference haa taken place in ate manage-
toeut of the force since that inquiry, and he could not see
any reasou why another inquiry should be granted. With
regard to the increase of the expenditure, and of
the number of the force, he was willing to
afford all the information in his power,
and that would be desired by the Nylole Lord-
The original Act required that the expenses of
this force should be paid by a county rate of 3d. in the
pound ; and by a subsequent Act 6.1. in the pound
was fixed, and in cases were this was not sufficient the
Treasury was authorised to supply 21 in the pound; and
60,0001. was now paid from the Consolidated Fund. The
counties included in the metropolitan rate were Middle-
sex, part of Sussex, Surrey, Kent, Essex, and Norfolk.
Some of the counties were below the average of the
property-tax valuation. Kent was 22 1-13th below the
average. The Right Hon. Baronet then concluded by
moving, as an amendment, for a return of the increase
of streets and houses in the metropolitan district, and
also of the population in the same, with a view to
account for the increes-e of the police expenditure.
Mr. BRO FHERTON said the Noble Lord had
brought torward this motion with reference to the in-
terests of his constituents in the borough of Maryle-
bone, and protested against the injustice of this rate;
but instead of the rate being unjust in the case of Mid-
dlesex, of Marylebone, it was still more unjust towards
other counties, and it was on that ground he should
support the motion of the Noble Lord fur a Committee
of Inquiry, which he considered absolutely necessary.
In the county of Middlesex the rates were 6,500,0004
Mr. OSBORNE-7 500,0001.
Mr. 811,0 l'HEßTON—Laneashire was assessed at
more than that sum.. In Marylebone the exp,nse was
21,0001. a year, and in Manchester it was 29,0001.; and
in addition to that, they had to pay towards the general
expenses of the police to the relief of the inhabitants
of Marylebone. He hoped the Noble Lord would per
severe in his motion for a Committee of Inquiry, and
he should feel it to be his duty to give to him his bast
support.
Mr. OSBORNE regretted that the Noble Lord who
brought forward this motion had led the House to be-
lieve that this was an attack upon the metropolitan po-
lice, and he hoped they would not go to a division on
the question with an impression of the kind. He did
not agree in the calumny which the Noble Lord bad
thrown on the metropolitan police, because he believed
a more excellent and more efficient body of men could
not be. But, in the motion of the Noble Lord with
respect to the increase of 35,0001. on Middlesex, for
the police force, he entirely concurred. Instead of
6,000,0001. a year, the county was rated upwards of
7,000,0001., and with a surplus of 61,0001. in the hands
of the Commissioners of Police, he was at a loss to knew
why the county should be thus heavily rated. This was
not intended by the constituents of the Noble Lord as an
attack on the police, but they wished to be relieved
from this additional charge.

Sir W. JOLLIFFE did not think the force adapted
to the duty they had to perform in the district between
Woolwich and Kingston, which was thinly inhabited,
and could not be protected by the few policemen ap-
pointed to perambulate that district; and in tact depre-
dations had been committed to a great extent without
the constables being at all aware of it. To prevent this
they ought to be mounted, which would afford them
greater faeilities of detection.
Mr. FIUME said he objected to the grounds upon
which the motion was founded. It should be recollected
that this force cost 328,000/. a year, a part of which
was contributed from the Consolidated Fund, which he
thought a bad principle, as any expenses incurred for
local purposes should be supplied from local funds. He
thought these ought to be made to ascertain whether
those expenses were fairly expended, but he did not
think there was time this session, and the Nuble Lord
should be satisfied that the Government bad called for
preliminary information. He did not agree with the
Noble Lord In the condemnation which he passed upon
the police, but it he persevered in his intention of di-
viding he should vote with him.
Sir DL LACY EVANS said there were just grounds
of complaint on the part of several parishes against this
charge. At present the sixpenny rate must be levied,
although enly twopence might be sufficient, and he
hoped the Gov, rnment would consent to an inquiry
into this absurdity and injustice. If the additional sum
was required, one-third part should be contributed from
the Consolidated Fund.

Sir G. GREY explained.
Sir J. HOGG said the Government had given an as-
surance that a Bill would be introduced to relieve the
metropolitan parishes from the burden that when a four-
penny rate would be sufficient, a sixpenny rate should
nut be levied, but they afterwards abandoned it. He
thought it was but fair each locality should support its
own police, but the metropolitan police were sent on
duty to all parts of the country, and on that ground a
contribution should be made from the Consolidated
Fund.
Sir G. GREY said the grounds on which a motion of
the charge of this force was borne by the Consolidated
Fund was, that the metropolitan police were employed
at the Houses of Parliament and by the Government,
and not because they were sent into the country, for on
those occasions the expense was borne by the locality to
which they were sent.
Mr. THORNELY said he hoped if a Committee was
appointed, that county Members would be placed upon
it to defend the in•erests of their constituents from the
burthen imposed upon them by the, contribution to this
force from the general taxation.

Lord D. STUART replied. He said it was true that
the expense of the police when employed in the country
was borne by the locality to which they were sent, but a
larger force was maintained to enable them to draught
them to the country on these contingencies than would
be otherwise necessary. As he had received no ssiur-
anee from the Government that they would provide a

remedy for this grievance he should divide the House
upon the motion.
Lord R. GROSVENOR said, as the Noble Lord was
determined to divide, ho should vote with him.

The House then divided, when there appeared—

For the motion ... 28
Against it ... ... ... ... 137
nijority ... " ...----109
THE PEOPLE'S CHARTER.

Mr. MUN'IZ presented a petition, numerously signed,
from places in the county of Warwick, in favour of the
People's Charter.
Mr. FOX presented thirty-six petitions from various
places to the same effect.
Mr. F. O'CONNOR having presented a number of
petitions from Nottingham and other places, then pro-
ceeded with his motion to the following effect :—" That
this House, recognising the great principle that labour is
the source of all wealth—that the people are the only
legitimate source of power—that the labourer should be
the first partaker of the fruits of his own industry—
that taxation without representation is tyranny, and
should be resisted, and believing that the resources ot
the country would be best developed by laws made by
representatives chosen by the labouring classes, in con
junction with those who live by other industrial pursuits
—that, in recognition of the above great truths, this
House adopts the principles embodied in the document
entitled the People's Charter, namely, annual elections,
universal suffrage, vote by ballot, equal electoral dis-
tricts, no property qualification, and payment of Mew*
hers." He was aware, he said, of the disadvantages
under which he laboured in bringing forward his mo-
tion ; but it was the cause of justice, and he would not
shrink from doing his duty. He contended that
great questions such as these, affecting, as they
did, the vital interests of the people, ought
to be discussed sessionally, and if ttiey were to be
opposed, let then be opposed by sound argument and
not put down by brute force. Applications were made
'to him to withdraw his motion, in order to allow the
motion of the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire to
proceed; but he felt he would not be doing justice to the
labouring classes had be postponed his motion on any
such account. He contended that any question affecting
the people ought to be discussed sessionally. The Irish
Catholics had discovered that no good was done them by
emancipation, so it was with the Reform Bill in this
country, for no sooner did the party who carried that
measure get into power, than they forgot and abandoned
the people. Every Hon. Member must be made aware
that that House was divided into classes, into officers of
the army and navy, bankers, merchants, traders, and
lawyers, all of whom believed that the interests of the
working classes were opposed to theirs. He contended
that if labour was fairly represented it would conduce to
the prosperity of all classes. Labour was now the great
question on the continent, and although the state of
countries there may be urged as a reason for making no
concessions, he deni,d it was just to do so, If France he
referred to, he should quote that country in favour of his
argument; for they had had two elections for an Assembly
and one for a President since the revolution, 'without any
convulsion having taken place. He should not detain
the House at any great length; for probably he should
be without one before he concluded his speech; but be
that as it may, ho should discharge his duty. He con-
tended that reformation never led to revolution. He
produced the original charter, drawn up by Daniel
O'Connell, and signed by J. A. Roebuck, C. Hindley,
and others, the only difference being that annual Parlia-
ments were preferred before triennial. He denounced
the Irish Members as " lickspittles " who supported
Government on every question, but absented themselves
on the present occasion, when the interests of the people
were at stake. He contended that if they had annual
Parliaments they could settle annual accounts with their
constituents, and not allow political tergiversations to
go on for years, as happened under the present Parlia-
ment. Instead of having that hasty legislation they now
had, men would know what they came into Parliament
for, and instead of having important questions settled by
majorities of 50 or 60, they would be discussed by
the people at large. He remembered a signal instance of
the value of annual Parliaments. At a time when it
was proposed to dissolve Parliament a question was
brought forward for the liberation of all political
offenders, and was only lost by a small majority—whereas
after the election was over, the question was again
discussed, and negatived by a large majority. That
showed that when they were about to appear before their
constituents, they held opinions which they thought
would obtain them favour, but the moment that was
past, they set them at defiance. One great object would
be obtained by holding annual Parliaments. What did
they legislate for, but the mind of the day? aed wss
not seven years now ot grea:er 'length—if he might say
so—than a century in the old Tory tier s? He rose just
now under very unfortunate circumstances. He had no
monster petition, no popular demons ration to back him,
but let them not take that as a sign of the times agsinst
him; for the fact was, that the peop'e, disgusted with the
mode in which their petitions were received, had resolved
to petition no more. The absence of titiens was a
proof that the people had lost all coc,fidence in thet
House. His object was to obtain a fair representation
of the whole people in that House At present there
was only a representatien of classes. If the working
classes were admitted to heir fair share of representation
in that House, and? traei pationi n the privileges of go-
vernment, would that ? He thought