The Sun.
London, England, 1861-03-21 00:00:00

RECIPROCITY IN NAVIGATION WITH FO-

REIGN COUNTRIES.
Mr. LIDDELL gave notice that, after Easter, he would
call attention to those portions of the report of the com-
mittee on the Merchant Shipping Act which related to
reciprocity in respect to navigation with foreign countries'

COUNTY RATES AND EXPENDITURE BILL.
Sir J. TREL A WNY, in moving the second reading of
this bill, said he did not require the house to pass it in its
present form, but merelyby the second reading to affirm its
principle, which was to afford ratepayers greater control in
the management of rates for counties. The bill contained
123 clauses, of which about thirty were important
to his purpose. The first clause was essential
to the object he proposed to accomplish, and it provided
that a board should be constituted for the purpose of dealing
with county expenditure, which was to be elected by the
Board of Guardians. One magistrate and one guardian
were to be members of this board, and they should each be
rated at the value of £lOO a year in the county where they
resided. He proposed also to give guardians the
power of dealing with the expense of the constabulary, re-
pairing prisons, and other matters of a financial character.
However, it was his intention that magistrates should re-
tain as much power in reference to such subjects as would
induce them to take an interest in county business, which
thsy might not be inclined to do if they did not possess
certain authority. With regard to gaols, which came in
the same category as constabulary, he proposed that what
related to them should be placed in the hands of the
financial board for the establishment of which the
bill provided. As regarded temporary repairs he would
give the board the power of making them where they were
of a temporary character. With respect to pauper lunatics
the bill provided that magistrates still retain the same
functions as at present, but committees should be formed to
secure an economical course in reference to the expenditure.
These were the principal points of the bill, and he did not
propose to go into details. In considering the objections
to the bill, he said he was aware that it had been asserted
by the opponents of the measure that the present system
worked very well ; but what he complained of was that the
magistrates were a fluctuating body, and there was no se-
curity for their having the• same magistrates for four
consecutive quarter sessions. The hon. baronet then referred
to the large increase in county expenditure to show
the necessity that existed for its being placed under more
responsible and efficient control.
Sir M. RIDLEY moved, as an amendment, that the bill
be read a second time that day six months. He said that
the bill brought forward in 1850 was similar to the present,
and the committee who reported on the bill considered it
would have the effect of excluding a numerous body of gen-
tlemen in the country from attending county business.
He did not oppose the election principle, but it
was a very serious matter to attempt to infuse,
in any considerable degree, a new element into
an ancient institution, which practically had not been
found an inoperative or exhausted statute. He believed
the present bill, se far from simplifying the checking of
accounts, would have an effect directly contrary, and create
confusion, from the conflicting interests that would be
brought into contact by its provisions. If the measure
were passed into law, in his opinion, it would affect most
injuriously the proper discharge of county business, and
utterly fail in remedying the evils which some members
considered to exist.
Mr. W. E. FORSTER said that he did not pledge him-
self to the details of the bill, but he felt bound to support
its principle. He thought the time had arrived when they
should do away with the anomaly of money being disposed
of without any protest by the taxpayers, which does not
exist in regard to other disbursements of money, whether
for imperial or local purposes. lie might be asked
why this question was agitated at present, and his reply
was that a number of sources for county expenditure had
arisen which had not existed some years ago, as might be
shown by the appointment of constabulary and other
charges with which hon. members were acquainted.
(Hear, hear.) He objected to one detail of the bill, that
which provided for the election of one magistrate on the
board which the hon. baronet proposed to constitute.
It was very desirable they should have a judicial element
on that board, but he thought magistrates would object to
the principle of election, and he thought the better plan
would be to allow them to make the selection from their
own body themselves. He concluded by expressing a hope
that the house would agree to the second reading, and any
alterations that were considered desirable could be made in

committee.
Mr. PACKE opposed the bill on similar grounds to
those of the hon. baronet who had moved the amendment,
and that the measure was too crude to be brought forward

in its present state.
Sir J. SHELLEY .supported the bill, and he thought the
objections raised to the bill would be more appropriately
considered in committee. Great authorities, including the
late Sir Robert Peel, had approved of the principle on
which the bill was based, and he thought the time had
arrived for settling the subject to which it related.
Mr. PHILLIPS said that ho thought the hon. baroiet

(Sir J. Trelawny) should have brought forward some in-
stance to show that the present system was defective, but
ho was unable to do so. Ho defended the mode of dealing
with county expenditure, and entered into details to show
that such expenditure was legitimately increased, in conse-
quence of disbursements that were imperatively required.
He did not see the propriety of affirming the principle of
the bill which the hon. baronet (Sir J. Trelawny) asked them
to do when they disapproved of the details ; that he consi-
dered a very clumsy mode of legislating. He felt bound,
therefore, to oppose the motion for the second reading of
this bill.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said that when it was asserted that
by the principle of the constitution taxation and repre-
sentation were coincident, it should be remembered that
there were many local objects to which that principle was
not applied. In fact the church rate, which was voted by
the vestries, was one of the few local taxes in which the
popular element of the coincidence of taxation and
representation was introduced to any considerable
extent. The theory of the constitution was to
leave the management of local affairs to local
authorities. He admitted, however, that it was
desirable when practicable to introduce that element as soon
as possible, and he would vote for the second reading, re-
serving to himself ample powers of objection to the details
in committee. He considered that these details at a first
glance appeared to require considerable amendment, for
some of them related to matters which had been previously
settled. It had been said that Government should take up
this subject, but the fact was that bills were frequently
pressed on their adoption, which, unless they were of
great importance, sthey were unable to introduce to the
house in time to get them passed. It was therefore neces
sary that the Government should be cautious before taking
up any measure that proposed to effect an alteration in our
existing administration of business, local or otherwise.
He believed that the magistrates discharged their duties
in reference to local expenditure in a very creditable
manner, but at the same time he believed that in some
places there was some dissatisfaction expressed. at the
powers of county magistrates. However, there was not
that pressing demand for the measure that would induce
him to take the bill out of, the hands of the hon. baronet,
who must wend his way through the intricacies of a clm-
mittee—(laughter)—when he would find serious objections
to some of the most important details. (Hear, hear.)
Colonel W. PATTEN said he had come to the house
with the intention of supporting this bill, but when he
heard from the right hon. hart. (Sir G. C. Lewis) who said
he would vote for the second reading, but made a speech
against the measure, that the Government would not take
it up, he thought there was no chance of its success. There
was a feeling in some places against the existing system of
the administrati(m. of county finance, and he was anxious to
give effect to that feeling. At the same time the bill was
very imperfect, and its radical defect was that it would in-
troduce into the administration of county expenditure con-
flicting jurisdiction, which could net be expected to work
satisfactorily.
Mr. BARROW, whose name was on the bill, defended
the principle, which he considered was just and expedient.
He contended that much discontent prevailed in many
counties in reference to their local expenditure, and that
that discontent was of long standing ; in support of which,
he referred to the fact that during the last 10 years num-
bers of petitions were presented from month to month, and
week to week, during the sitting of Parliament, all pray-
ing for some bill of a character similar to the present, al-
though no such measure was then before the house. He
contended that they should apply to ct this subj e the same
principle as was applied to other descriptions of taxation,
of separating the financial and administrative departments.
Mr. B. OSBORNE said that whatever else would result
from this discussion, it would show the tenant farmers who
were their friends, and this was a tenant farmer's
question.
He strongly condemned
referencethe conduct
pursued pursued by the Government in
measure of this description, and censured the
speech of the Home Secretary. That right hon. baronet
had not stabbed his friend's bill, but he lowered it into
some dark corner, and there smothered it. (Laughter.) He
adverted to Cornwall to show the dissatisfaction entertained
towards the present system. In that county the whole of
the magistrates had lost the confidence of the consti-
tuency. Attention and interest were concentrated on the
subject of the establishment of financial boards. Indeed, if
that subject were not satisfactorily arranged before next
election, the return of members for that county would depend
very much on the opinions entertained by candidates on this
subject. He contended that Government should take up
the subject, considering that they had nothing tae o—
(laughter) ; and he called on the house to put a pressure
on them to compel them to introduce a measure on this
tcoenvsiudbelireed timer
loading to nothing more e, as
than question.
an it a , whichwaste
ohe h
Mr. DEEDES opposed the bill, and. condemned the
course pursued in reordto