OBSERVATIONS. (Hansard, 11 March 1861)

§ MR. A. F. EGERTON
said, he hoped the House, before going into Committee, 1728 would allow him to make some allusion to the scale of payment to witnesses for attendance at sessions and assizes, by which the course of justice, at least in the North of England, was materially interfered with. There were two classes of witnesses whom the reduced scale of allowances seriously affected—the police-constables and the pawnbrokers. As to police-constables, it was well known that, whenever they attended from the country to give evidence before the Court at Liverpool they were out of pocket, and the consequence was that they were not very anxious to apprehend offenders. As to pawnbrokers, hon. Gentlemen who knew anything of the administration of justice, knew that their attendance as witnesses was often indispensable; but under the present scale it was found very difficult indeed to induce them to come forward. Two suggestions had been made as to the manner in which the question should be treated. The first was that the Government should raise the scale of allowances, and that the increased sum should be taken out of the Consolidated Fund. The other suggestion was that the Government scale should be maintained as at present, but that the justices of peace should be empowered to raise the scale, the difference being paid out of the county rate. There was one objection to that plan, that in doing so the increase would fall wholly on the land, whereas the prosecution of offences ought to be borne out of the general taxation of the country. He thought, however, the objection was rather theoretical than practical, as the increase would be hardly felt. He observed that the right hon. Gentleman the Homo Secretary was not in his place, but he hoped the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary would be able to give him a satisfactory answer.

§ SIR JOHN PAKINGTON
said, he rose to express his satisfaction that the hon. Gentleman had brought the question before the Government, and to correct the only mistake which his hon. Friend appeared to labour under, when he said that this inconvenience applied only to the north of England. He (Sir John Pakington) asserted, without fear of contradiction, that the evil was felt in the whole of England. The right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary was not in his place, but he observed that the real offender—if offender he were— was in his place, for the present scale of allowances was made when his right hon. Friend the Member for Morpeth(Sir George 1729 Grey) was in the Home Office. He did not bring any charge against the right hon. Gentleman, but he thought the right hon. Gentleman must now be satisfied that the practical effect of that scale was that the administration of justice was impeded all over England; and that a feeling was now at work among policemen and others that it was their interest to overlook offences rather than to incur the expense of bringing them to justice.

§ SIR GEORGE GREY
said, that the scale was adopted while he was Home Secretary. Since then a Commission had reported on the subject, and had completely borne out the propriety of the allowances. The question was, however, a very difficult one, owing to the inapplicability of any one scale to the entire country; and he believed that it was still under the consideration of his right hon. Friend (Sir George Lewis).

§ COLONEL WILSON PATTEN
asked if they were to understand that the Government would name a time for dealing with the subject?

§ MR. CLIVE
added, that if his right hon. Friend had been present he would, no doubt, have been able to answer the Question. The subject had been under his anxious consideration, and he would probably ere long be prepared to announce an arrangement by which the inconveniences now complained of might be put an end to.