HC Deb 08 July 1862 vol 168 cc16-20

Order for Committee read.

House in Committee.

Clause 7 (First Meeting, when to be holden).

MR. J. A. TURNER

said, that he had an Amendment on the paper to the 7th clause, the effect of which would be to leave to the municipal council, instead of to the board of guardians, the appointment of assessment committees in those places where a corporate body existed; but after the decision to which the Committee had come on the 4th clause, he would not now press his Amendment.

MR. ALDERMAN SIDNEY

said, he objected to taking out of the hands of the board of guardians the appointment of the assessment committees.

MR. C. P. VILLIERS

said, he had given notice of a clause which would effect the object which the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Turner) had in view where the municipal boroughs and unions were conterminous.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 8 (Quorum of Meetings).

MR. HENLEY

said, this clause, in connection with the second clause, was one of the most important in the Bill. The second clause empowered the guardians to appoint an assessment committee of as many as twelve, in which case a quorum of three would be too small. He believed five would have been a more convenient number.

MR. C. P. VILLIERS

said, he was willing to introduce words to the effect that the numbers constituting the com- mittee should not be less than one-third of the whole number.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 9 (Committee may employ and pay Clerk and Surveyor).

MR. J. A. TURNER

said, it appeared to him that the 9th clause gave unlimited power to boards of guardians to appoint surveyors and valuers, and necessarily to incur large expenditure. It appeared to be intended by the Bill to complicate matters to that extent that the Poor Law Board would hereafter be justified in stepping in and demanding a more complete control over the local expenditure. He strongly objected to the tendency of the Bill to interfere with local self-government and he should therefore move the omission of the clause.

MR. C. P. VILLIERS

said, that the principal object of the clause was to empower the committees to remunerate the union clerks for their services, and to pay for valuations and surveys.

SIR LAWRENCE PALK

said, the clause raised the whole principle of the Bill. The object of the Bill was to cause a uniform rating according to the Act 6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96. He did not see the necessity of employing so useless and complicated a machinery for the purpose. If it were desirable to have a fresh valuation of the land all over the country, it ought to be carried into effect by a well-considered measure, and in a convenient manner. He objected to the Bill altogether; and if the hon. Member divided the Committee on the clause, he would give him his support. If not, he should move the omission of the words authorizing the committee to employ "such surveyors and valuers as they shall find requisite, at a proper remuneration," and move the insertion of the words "surveyor and valuer."

MR. H. A. BRUCE

said, that the objections made applied rather to Clause 14.

MR. BARROW

reminded the Committee that the guardians were ratepayers themselves, and, for their own interest, would be as economic as possible.

MR. ALDERMAN SIDNEY

said, he had heard no sound argument adduced against the propriety of retaining the clause, and he should therefore support it.

MR. DEEDS

remarked, that the clause was ambiguous, and required further explanation.

MR. KENDALL

said, he thought the Amendment of the hon. Baronet (Sir L. Palk) would be more appropriately considered on the 14th clause.

SIR LAWRENCE PALK

said, if the Committee were of that opinion, he would propose his Amendment on Clause 14.

SIR JOHN TROLLOPE

said, he was in favour of the clause, as he felt that the proper persons to make the valuation were such as resided in the neighbourhood. He was acquainted with an instance in which, under the present system, the valuation of a parish was made in the room of the village public-house, over a map, with the help of the pariah clerk. The valuer never saw any of the land himself. The result was, of course, very unsatisfactory.

MR. HENLEY

did not understand the meaning of the clause. The first part of it enabled the committee to give extra pay when the clerks performed extra work. To that there could be no objection. But as to the second part of the clause, such contradictory statements had been made as to what it was intended to do, that he was perfectly at a loss. It seemed to him that it would enable the assessment committee to have a paid officer at their elbow to do their work for them, instead of doing it themselves. The 9th clause did not seem to mean the same as the 14th.

MR. C. P. VILLIERS

said, he believed the 14th clause gave all the power that was requisite, and he would therefore consent to amend the clause by omitting the latter portion.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 10 (Proceedings to be entered in Books, and signed; such Entries Evidence. Books to be open to Inspection).

MR. HENLEY

said, he thought the clause was one which would lead to great and unnecessary expense in the purchase of books for the purpose of entering a quantity of trivial matters. He should be glad to have an explanation of what was meant by the word "proceedings" used in the clause. Was it intended that all the proceedings of every division which took place in these committees should be recorded? When the valuation was once settled, the document itself would be taken as evidence. He thought it would be quite sufficient to confine the entries to the names of the members who attended.

MR. H. A. BRUCE

said, he should support the clause, in the belief that the ratepayers would like to see all that took place at the meetings of their guardians.

MR. C. P. VILLIERS

said, the guardians at present made an entry of their pro- ceedings, showing the subjects which had come before them and the decisions which had been arrived at. That was all that was required by the clause. There would be very little expense incurred, and the duties of the clerks, who would always be present at the meetings, would be easily performed.

SIR LAWRENCE PALK

objected to the clause, as it would, in his opinion, work very inconveniently. If agreed to, the clause ought to go on to direct that shorthand writers should be present to report all the speeches which might be made by the guardians.

MR. HENLEY

contended that the matter ought to be left to be dealt with under the provisions of the Poor Law Acts.

MR. H. A. BRUCE

said, he was in favour of the clause, as he thought that the inconveniences spoken of would never be experienced in practice.

MR. HUMBERSTON

said, he would move the omission of the word "all" before the word "proceedings," and the insertion of the words "a minute of their."

MR. C. P. VILLIERS

acquiesced in the Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

MR. HUMBERSTON

said, he would then move the omission of that part of the clause which enacted that the clerks of unions should be liable to a penalty in case they should refuse copies of extracts of the minutes of the proceedings of the committees.

MR. C. P. VILLIERS

said, it was a sort of protection to the ratepayers that they should have access to the books, and be able to inspect them. He could understand the hon. Gentleman objecting to the amount of the penalty, but it did not appear to him unreasonable to impose some penalty.

Amendment negatived.

Clause, as amended agreed to.

Clause 11 (Committees to report to the Poor Law Board).

MR. KNIGHT

objected to the clause, on the ground of its centralizing principle.

MR. BARROW

suggested that the clause should be amended, so as to provide that every board of guardians should, in April in every year, send a report of the proceedings of their assessment committee.

MR. C. P. VILLIERS

assented to the Amendment.

MR. J. A. TURNER

said, he could not see the use of the clause, except that it would lead to the Poor Law Board obtaining more power than it at present possessed.

MR. KNIGHT

said, he would move an Amendment, providing that the report shall be sent to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, instead of the Poor Law Board.

Amendment negatived.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 12 (Committee may require Returns from Overseers, &c.)

MR. KNIGHT

said, he considered that one of the most objectionable clauses of the Bill. He did not think that any unpaid parish officers would be found who would place themselves in such a position. The consequence would be that paid officers would be required to discharge these duties, which were then performed by unpaid officials.

MR. C. P. VILLIERS

said, that the clause was taken almost verbatim from the County Rates Bill.

MR. HENLEY

remarked that there was not a word in the clause to define the powers of the committee, or to restrict their operations to the district in which they are to act. He hoped to have the clause altered, so that it should not be of such a general and sweeping nature.

MR. C. P. VILLIERS

said, he was willing to remove the objection by inserting the words "so far as relates to the union for which they act."

SIR JOHN TROLLOPE

said, he would rather suggest the omission of that part of the clause empowering the committee to examine upon oath.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 13 agreed to.

House resumed.

Committee report Progress; to sit again on Friday, at Twelve of the clock.