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

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 constabulary, it 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 metropolitan polio* district 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 the 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
praises* 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 the corpora-
his office the Chief Commissioner of
Probably the reason why the corporation ob-
jectedPtt'ilo:lnYPolito. of State,
rtrt m
torSetah: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
the 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.