HC Deb 13 June 1864 vol 175 cc1669-90

SUPPLY considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

The following Votes to complete were agreed to:—

  1. (1.) £2,928, to complete the sum for the Office of the Comptroller General of the Exchequer.
  2. (2.) £22,903, to complete the sum for the Office of Works and Public Buildings.
  3. (3.) £20,225, to complete the sum for the Office of Woods, Forests, and Land Revenues.
  4. (4.) £14,651, to complete the sum for the Office of Public Records, &c.
  5. (5.) £213,810, to complete the sum for Poor Law Commissions.
  6. (6.) £41,867, to complete the sum for the Establishment of the Mint.
  7. (7.) £26,647, to complete the sum for the Inspectors of Factories, &c.
  8. (8.) £4,235, to complete the sum for the Exchequer and other Offices in Scotland.
  9. (9.) £4,434, to complete the sum for the Household of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland.
  10. (10.) £11,695, to complete the sum for the Offices of the Chief Secretary for Ireland.
  11. (11.) £2,782, to complete the sum for the Office of Inspectors of Lunatic Asylums, Ireland.
  12. (12.) Motion made, and Question proposed,

That a sum, not exceeding £17,431, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 33st day of March, 1865, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of Public Works in Ireland.

SIR COLMAN O'LOGHLEN

said, he would take that occasion to ask, What the intentions of the Government were with respect to any change in the Office of Public Works in Ireland?

MR. PEEL

said, the Government did not propose to make any change in the Board of Public Works in Ireland at present. Sir R. Griffiths, who held the position of its chairman, and who had several other important public duties to perform, was desirous of resigning a portion of his offices, the labours of which at his advanced age he found to be somewhat too heavy, and a Bill had been introduced by the Government for the purpose of making it sufficient if the Commission of Public Works consisted of two persons only, instead of three, as required by law. That Bill had, however, been abandoned, it having been considered that a better course would be that Sir R. Griffiths should retire from the chairmanship; that one of the two remaining Commissioners should be appointed to that office, and that Sir R. Griffiths should act as an ordinary Commissioner. His colleagues would thus continue to have the benefit of his advice, and the arrangement would, he thought, be found to be generally satisfactory, besides rendering it unnecessary to make any change in the law.

MR. BUTT

remarked, that the Board of Works was one of the most unpopular institutions in Ireland, and the reason why it was so was, that there was no real responsibility. He thought the arrangement stated to be in contemplation amounted to an evasion of the Act of Parliament, which required that there should be three Commissioners, for it was evident that Sir R. Griffiths was to be merely a consulting member of the Board.

MR. MONSELL

said, he could not but express his regret that Sir R. Griffiths, who was so popular in Ireland, and who discharged his duties so satisfactorily, should be obliged to surrender any portion of them because of decaying vigour. The best course to pursue with regard to the Office of Works in Ireland would, he thought, be to place at its head an able man, to furnish him with an efficient staff, and to make him responsible for the manner in which the works were executed.

MR. BLAKE

said, he wished to have some information from the Government with respect to the office of Inspector of Fisheries in Ireland. He had himself been the victim of the ill temper of Mr. Barry, who was an old man of eighty, and seldom went out of doors, and was so irascible that if a person differed from him upon any point, he would not only not get his business done, but would be insulted, as he (Mr. Blake) had been. He had already had occasion to bring his conduct under the notice of the House, and he should be compelled to do so again unless he received a satisfactory answer from the Secretary of the Treasury that it was not intended to continue him in his office.

MR. PEEL

said, that a Commission was at present inquiring into the subject of the Deep Sea Fisheries, and there was no intention to change the existing arrangements before its report was received.

MR. BUTT

said, he wished to call attention to the fact that, whilst the Inspecting Commissioner of Fisheries received £600 per annum, the legal member of the Board, who had to discharge very important judicial functions with regard to the rights of property which yielded £200,000 a year, had only £350 a year salary. Questions of vast importance to the owners of property came before him for decision, and he knew of an instance where an eminent Irish barrister was taken before him to plead at a fee of 150 guineas, with appropriate refreshers. He thought the salary was ridiculously low for the discharge of such important duties. He should move the reduction of the Vote by £500, in order to bring the question before the Committee.

Whereupon Motion made, and Question proposed, That the Item of £500, for the Salary of the Inspecting Commissioners of Fisheries, be omitted from the proposed Vote."—(Mr. Butt.)

MR. PEEL

said, the principle upon which the legal Commissioner was paid only £350 per annum was this. In the case of the legal member of the Fisheries Commission for Scotland, his salary was limited by the Scotch Act to three guineas per day, and not more than £350 per annum, and the Home Office recommended to the Treasury that a similar limit should be applied in Ireland. When Mr. Morris was appointed, the Government did not know the full extent of the responsibility that was to devolve upon him. An application had been made to the Treasury for an increase of salary, but it was desirable not to revise it until they had had further opportunities of considering the importance of the duties to be performed.

SIR COLMAN O'LOGHLEN

said, he trusted her Majesty's Government would re-consider the amount of salary with as little delay as possible. It was preposterous to suppose that £350 was an adequate salary when they paid the Secretary to the Commission £500 a year.

MR. BLAKE

said, he regretted to learn that Mr. Eden, one of the ablest members of the Commission, whose judgments were marked by signal ability, only received £100 for his labours in Ireland, over and above the salary of £500, which he received for the duties in England that he still continued to discharge.

MR. HENNESSY

said, he could not but complain that no Member of the Irish Government was present during the discussion of the Estimates relating to Ireland, especially as there was a Motion of the hon. Member for Limerick county on the books complaining of a failure of justice. It had been stated that the legal Commissioner only received £350, and there ought to be some explanation given in respect to this matter, for a very exceeding failure of justice was said to have taken place. Decisions had been given involving hundreds of thousands of pounds, and it now appeared that those decisions were illegal. In fact, the gentleman who had given them, and who had been appointed by the Government, had declared that his decisions were illegal and improper. That being the case, it was a very serious matter, and he thought the Attorney General for Ireland should have been present to give the necessary explanations. The Vote for the Irish Chief Secretary's office created discussion in former years, but they had taken a silent vote for it that night, and in the Chief Secretary's absence. To enable some Member of the Irish Government to be present to answer the necessary inquiries, he moved that the Chairman report Progress.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Hennessy.)

MR. W. WILLIAMS

said, he hoped the hon. Gentleman would not press his Motion, and thus mar their chance of getting rid of Committee of Supply that night.

MR. MONSELL

said, he wished to point out that the Scotch Fishery Commissioners bad no judicial functions to perform, so that the analogy sought to be established failed altogether. The Secretary to the Treasury overlooked the fact that persons whose property was at. stake, and was ultimately forfeited, had a right to expect that their cases would be decided by a competent tribunal. It was understood that one of the Irish Commissioners should be a barrister of the highest eminence, and he put it to the right hon. Gentleman whether he thought the services of such a gentleman were to be had in Ireland at £350 a year. The Fisheries Bill had so far worked well. The receipts for fish in one district had increased from £105 last year to £710 this year, and the value of the nets from £49 and £98 to £128 and £180. The Government ought to pay an adequate sum for the services rendered.

MR. LONGFIELD

said, the salary required augmentation. He was sorry Mr. Morris had resigned, but he hoped the Government would give him something more than his salary for the services he had rendered, and that they would materially increase the pay of his successor.

THE CHAIRMAN

rose and said, that he must remind the Committee that the discussion was irregular, as it referred to an item in the Vote that had been passed.

MR. BUTT

said, that in that case he would withdraw his Amendment, and raise the discussion on the Report.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn,

Question again proposed, That the Item of £500, for the Salary of the Inspecting Commissioners of Fisheries, be omitted from the proposed Vote."—(Mr. Butt.)

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, he would request the hon. Member for the King's County to follow the example. Any observations which he thought necessary might be made upon the Report.

MR. HENNESSY

said, he hoped that when the Report was brought up the Attorney General for Ireland would follow the example of the noble Viscount and be in his place.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

Original Question put, and agreed to.

(13.) £26,512, to complete the sum for the Commissioners of Audit.

(14.) £14,125, to complete the sum for the Copyhold, Inclosure, and Tithe Commission.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

suggested that the sum was large for the mere duties of a tithe commission, which must be small.

MR. PEEL

explained that the duties of the Commissioners were not only with regard to tithe, but to inclosures of land as well, and were very heavy.

SIR COLMAN O'LOGHLEN

said, he wished to know what was the meaning of the items for newspapers and railway guides.

MR. PEEL

said, the Commission was required to advertise, and, therefore, the newspapers were necessary. It also sent agents over the country, and, therefore, needed railway guides.

Vote agreed to.

(15.) £9,290, to complete the sum for Imprest Expenses under the Inclosure and Drainage Acts.

(16.) £50,955, to complete the sum for the General Register Office.

(17.) £11,440, to complete the sum for the National Debt Office.

(18.) £2,795 to complete the sum for the Public Works Loan Commission, and West India Islands Relief Commission.

MR. ARTHUR MILLS

requested some explanation as to the purposes to which the money was devoted, and what the Commissioners did.

MR. J. A. SMITH

said, he wished to know if there was any prospect of the Commissions terminating.

MR. PEEL

said, the same persons filled both Commissions. The Public Works Loan Commission had a sum of £360,000 advanced annually out of the Consolidated Fund, of which £60,000 went for works in Ireland; latterly they had also the further annual sum of £250,000 to advance for improvements of harbours. All these advances were repaid by instalments. The West India Islands Relief Commission was appointed under an Act of Will. IV., for the purpose of administering funds amounting altogether to about a million, which was advanced for the relief of the planters of Jamaica after the emancipation of the negroes, and to the planters of Barbadoes, St. Vincent, and St. Lucia. The money was repayable by instalments, extending over thirty years, of which eighteen had expired, and the duties of the Commissioners were to take measures to obtain the payment of these instalments. The cost of the Commission was about £1,000 a year.

Vote agreed to.

(19.) £5,172, to complete the sum for the Lunacy Commission.

(20.) £1,223, General Superintendent of County Roads, South Wales.

MR. CAIRD

said, the Vote bore a striking resemblance to the Vote rejected some years ago for Highland roads and bridges, and ought to share the same fate.

MR. AUGUSTUS SMITH

said, he should oppose the Vote, as the people of South Wales ought to support their own roads, and pay for their superintendence.

MR. PEEL

said, the Public Works Loan Commissioners some years ago advanced £250,000 to construct roads in South Wales, the repayment of which was spread over a period of years. These instalments had been regularly paid, and there were still twelve years over which the repayment would extend. The business of the superintendent was to superintend the financial operations of the county Boards, to make out the estimate for the repair of the roads, and to see that the sum required for the payment of the instalments was duly provided for. The office of superintendent would be abolished when the whole of the loan had been repaid.

MR. O'REILLY

observed, that when similar loans were advanced in Ireland it was not found necessary to have a superintendent to recover the debts.

MR. DILLWYN

said, he believed the office of superintendent was created in consequence of the exceptional legislation applied some years ago to South Wales.

MR. CAIRD

remarked, that the annual instalments payable by the counties should include the cost of superintendence.

MR. DARBY GRIFFITH

said, he would take upon himself the responsibility of moving the rejection of the Vote.

SIR WILLIAM MILES

said, he should support the Vote, which he trusted the Committee would pass.

MR. H. A. BRUCE

said, the money was borrowed some years ago; and it was the duty of the superintendent to see that the roads were not starved, and that the proper preparations were made, when necessary, for providing the money necessary to pay off the instalments of the borrowed principal.

Vote agreed to.

(21.) £1,453, to complete the sum for Registrars of Friendly Societies.

(22.) £14,823, to complete the sum for the Charity Commission.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

said, he wished to know what were the duties of the Commissioners?

MR. H. A. BRUCE

stated, that there were no less than 50,000 charities in Great Britain, with an income of nearly £3,000,000; and that no officers could perform their arduous duties with greater industry and zeal than those in whose favour the Vote was sought.

Vote agreed to.

(23.) £4,442, to complete the sum for the Local Government Act Office.

(24.) £1,244, to complete the sum for the Landed Estates Record Offices.

COLONEL DUNNE

said, he rose to ask for an explanation of the Vote. The Keeper of the Records in Dublin received a salary of £400 a year. Who was he?

MR. PEEL

said, there used to be an auditor of the Land Revenues who had charge of the records. The office was abolished, the accounts were transferred to the Board of Audit, and the office of Keeper of the Records was created. It was connected with the sale and purchase of the Crown lands.

COLONEL DUNNE

said, he wished to know whether the Keeper of the Records was Mr. Harding?

MR. PEEL

said, he did not know the name of the officer in question.

MR. AUGUSTUS SMITH

said, that if the office was connected with the sale and purchase of the Crown lands exclusively, it ought to be a charge against the revenues of the Woods and Forests.

MR. HENNESSY

said, that perhaps the Attorney General for Ireland could tell the Committee the name of the Keeper of the Records.

MR. O'HAGAN (THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND)

could only say that it was not a legal office, and that he had never heard of it before.

MR. ESMONDE

The answer is, Non mi ricordo.

MR. HENNESSY

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland can tell us.

SIR ROBERT PEEL

It is Mr. W. Harding.

COLONEL DUNNE

The Secretary to the Treasury just now told us it was not Mr. Harding.

SIR ROBERT PEEL

It is, though.

MR. SCULLY

Yes, he kept a cellar in the Custom House at Dublin. He had known Mr. Harding for thirty years. It was singular that no Member of the Irish Government knew the name of the Keeper of the Records. That came of hating no Irishman connected with the Government of Ireland. He saw the index finger of the right hon. Baronet the Secretary for Ireland pointed at the noble Lord at the head of the Government, but the noble Viscount knew perfectly well he was not born in Ireland. He was the Civis Romanus of England. The noble Lord was an English Gentleman, but he became an Irishman when it suited the purposes of those about him. The truth was that there was no Irishman in the Cabinet. The Lord Lieutenant who was sent over to Ireland in an ornamental character was an Englishman, and, as for the Chief Secretary, he was as much an Irishman as he (Mr. Scully) was an Englishman, because his mother was an Englishwoman.

MR. MASSEY

said, he hoped the hon. Gentleman would confine his remarks to the subject before the Committee.

MR. BUTT

said, to constitute a Keeper of Records there must be two things — records to be kept and a man to keep them. But the Attorney General for Ireland had never heard of those records, for the keeping of which the House was asked to vote £1,000 a year.

SIR COLMAN O'LOGHLEN

said, the office had been formerly called the Quit Rent Office, but recently its name had been changed. The Landed Estates Office was, in fact, the old Quit Rent Office.

MR. SCULLY

said, he believed those offices were entirely different. He wanted to know whether there was really a Quit Rent Office.

MR. PEEL

said, the object of the office was to record the transactions connected with estates in which the Crown had an interest, and the Crown's landed interest in Ireland consisting chiefly of quit rents, the deeds to be recorded were very numerous.

Vote agreed to.

(25.) £446, to complete the sum for Quarantine Expenses, and

(26.) £24,000, to complete the sum for Secret Service.

(27.) £254,165, to complete the sum for Printing and Stationery.

MR. AUGUSTUS SMITH

said, that this Vote was constantly increasing. While the expense of the printing of papers ordered by Parliament amounted only to about £17,000, the cost of papers laid upon the table "by command," as it wag called — that is, by the departments when they wish to conceal the printing done for themselves, was no less than £15,000. A paper moved for by the hon. Member for Edinburgh, and printed only last April, contained a Treasury Minute relative to the slovenly manner in which the departments sent their papers to the printer. It was a shame after all the competitive examinations which they had, that the departments could not be got to turn out their papers in a correct form, and that the public should be saddled on that account with an expense which on the computation of the Controller of the Stationery Department amounted to £15,000.

MR. PEEL

said, that the Vote was considerably less than last year, although the business which gave rise to the expenditure was constantly increasing. Although the nominal amount of the Vote was £344,165, yet in reality it should be reduced by £65,000, which came back into the Exchequer as the proceeds of sales, profits of the Gazettes, and other receipts. The Treasury Minute had been promulgated in consequence of the slovenly way in which the manuscripts had been prepared for printing.

MR. HENNESSY

said, that the careless way in which the papers were sent to the press was not the fault of the clerks, but of the heads of the departments, who, it was shown, sent in the first part of the composition of a blue-book before the second part was even thought of.

SIR COLMAN O'LOGHLEN

said, the expenses of Parliamentary printing greatly depended on the number of Returns which were moved for by hon. Members. Only a day or two ago an immense blue-book had been printed concerning convictions for game offences, which he believed was a great waste of public money. The cost of stationery for the War Office and the Admiralty last year was £76,000, while in the two great departments of Customs and Inland Revenue the cost was only £57,000. He thought the former amount required some explanation,

MR. SCULLY

said, he thought that a vast saving might be effected, and benefit conferred on Members, if the latter could be provided with only just the blue-books they required. Every Session tons of papers were sent to Members' houses which they never read, and of which they were somewhat troubled to dispose. It would be much better to circulate lists of papers printed, and let Members have what they wanted. The expenses of printing for the different departments were prodigious, and might be considerably cut down, and he thought the printing for the different departments might be advantageously consolidated.

SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBY

said, this item was an illustration of the fact, that when once an expenditure got to a high figure there was no bringing it down again. From the year 1835 to the time of the Crimean war the Vote under consideration never exceeded £260,000. In the following year it increased to £400,000, and had never been less since that time. The discussions which had taken place showed that the House was not so much to blame as was generally supposed, for the printing which took place under its direction was not liable to much complaint. He should like to know from the Chancellor of the Exchequer who was the party who exercised any control over the departmental expenditure. Of late years some of the departments had taken to printing neat essays at the public expense, which few persons ever read. In the old Tory days of Lord Liverpool a much stricter control was exercised over the departments in these matters than was exercised at the present time.

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

said, he wished to know what saving had been effected in the Stationery Department in consequence of the reduction of the paper duty. It was stated by the controller, that the moderation of the present estimate was owing, in a great degree, to the reduction of that duty, but the amount was larger this year than in the preceding year.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

observed, that if the hon. Gentleman wished to ascertain the direct effect of the repeal of the paper duty on the estimate, it could no doubt be supplied by the Stationery Office. That effect, however, was not to be measured by the amount saved in duty, because it had effected a still more important result by extending the operations of trade. With respect to the question of the hon. Baronet (Sir Henry Willoughby), he had to state that the ex- pense of printing ordered by the House was entirely within its own control. The only control exercised over the Government Departments was that of the Treasury, and that control was not less than it was forty or fifty years ago. In looking at the expense of printing regard should be had to the circumstance that the different establishments had been very much enlarged, and that their business had considerably increased. The enormous demand for information was quite new in our history, which although it led to increased expense could not be regarded with unmixed dissatisfaction. No doubt the dissemination of information had been the means of bringing up a feeling of affectionate loyalty amongst the people towards the system under which they lived. The practice now adopted was this. The controller exercised his best discretion with regard to printing, and discharged his duties with proper vigilance. Whenever he thought that the expenses incurred by one department were extraordinary in amount he called the attention of the Treasury to the fact; but with so much other business pressing upon them it was difficult for the Treasury to give the necessary attention to the matter. He was glad the attention of the House had been called to this expenditure, and thought that some time it might form a very proper subject of inquiry.

MR. PEEL

observed, that the whole expenses of printing and stationery were now in one Vote; but formerly the printing and stationery of a department were included in the estimate for that department. The change had the effect of increasing the item now under consideration; but, of course, the vote of each department was reduced at the same time.

MR. HADFIELD

said, he should be very sorry to see any curtailment of the information given to the House and to the public.

COLONEL W. STUART

said, he observed from a note in the estimate that there was some Return which had been in preparation for the last three years, and had been corrected twenty times. He should like to know what it was. Perhaps it was one of the missing despatches.

MR. PEEL

said, he was unable to inform the hon. and gallant Gentleman of the exact nature of the Return to which he had just referred.

Vote agreed to.

(28.) £101,300, to complete the sum for Postage of Public Departments.

SIR COLMAN O'LOGHLEN

said, the Vote contained an item of £190, postage for the Lord Chancellor. The postage for the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland only amounted to £50, and none was charged for the Lord Chancellor of Ireland.

MR. HIBBERT

observed, that the postage for the Poor Law Commissioners was increased from £4,305, its amount last year, to £5,280. The Commissioners interfered in so many small matters that they made themselves unbearable to Boards of Guardians, and thus it was that the expense for postage increased.

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

said, he wished to ask what was the reason the sum for the postage of the Admiralty had increased from £13,945 to £17,000?

LORD CLARENCE PAGET

said, that the estimate was founded on the expenditure of the past year. The correspondence was increasing in every department, as greater information was required from public officers.

MR. DARBY GRIFFITH

said, he wished to notice that in the postage for inland letters there was a jump from 2d. to 4d. if a letter exceeded the weight of an ounce in the slightest degree. He wished to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the 3d. adhesive stamp, which was already in use for colonial purposes, might not be allowed to be used for letters weighing more than one ounce, and not more than an ounce and a half?

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, that he had not had any communication with the officers of the Post Office on the proposal now made, but he would communicate with them in reference to it. He was, however, not certain that it was worth while to interfere with the existing system which, on the whole, worked very well.

MR. SCULLY

hoped the right hon. Gentleman would inquire into the general question, so as to ascertain whether it would be desirable to adopt uniformly a rate per ounce or half-ounce. At present one could divide the contents of a letter and send the parts separately cheaper; than he could send them together. He noticed that the sum paid for postage last year for the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland was £45, and that the sum of £50 was now asked for. The postage of the ! Irish Office was also increased from £220 to £275. The postage of the Chief Secretary for Ireland had nearly doubled, it having increased from £710 to £1,390.

SIR ROBERT PEEL

said, that the correspondence of the department had enormously increased. Last year the active measures taken to ascertain the state of the country and every part of Ireland had, no doubt, nearly doubled the correspondence.

Vote agreed to.

(29.) £25,115, to complete the sum for Law Charges, England.

(30.) £144,923, to complete the sum for Prosecutions at Assizes and Quarter Sessions.

(31.) £184,050, to complete the sum for Police Counties and Boroughs, Great Britain.

SIR WILLIAM MILES

said, he wished to call attention to the deductions which had been made by the Treasury in the one-fourth contributed by the Government to the pay and clothing of the county police. For five years after the Act of 1856, regulating the county police, came into force, the one-fourth allowed by Government had been given in the gross expenses of pay and clothing of the constabulary; but in 1862 a notice was issued by the Treasury which, much to the surprise of the counties, made certain deductions from the sum upon which that one-fourth had previously been paid. The deductions made were for the amounts paid by the counties for lodgings, medical attendance, superannuation allowances, and for fines. The result had been great dissatisfaction, and strong representations had been made to the Treasury on the subject; and eventually the two first items were struck off, deductions were confined to payments of the superannuation fund and to fines. That was literally a question of what was the legal construction of stoppages. There was great dissatisfaction, and small as the sum was the principle was great. He trusted that the Government would yield to a simple demand for justice. The hon. Baronet concluded by moving— That the deductions now made were contrary to the provisions and intentions of the Act of Parliament, 19 & 20 Vict. c. 69, which never contemplated that payments made by the police to the Superannuation Fund and fines should be taken account of in calculating the amount to be paid by the Treasury.

LORD LOVAINE

said, there could be no doubt that the original compact, when the counties were induced, or rather com- pelled to raise the police force, was that one-fourth of the amount of the cost of each force should be repaid by the Treasury.

MR. PEEL

said, he found it necessary to examine with great care the claims of local jurisdiction, and in repaying one-fourth of the county police he could not help thinking that they were justified in making the deductions in question. They found there was a tendency in making the claims to place new charges in the account, which had not formerly been included. The practice was growing up in many of the counties of increasing nominally the pay of the constables, either by converting the allowances to which the Government did not contribute into pay, or by granting an increase of pay, but stopping it to defray rents which had not previously been required to be paid; and thus, while no benefit was derived by the constables, an increased amount was obtained from the Government. Thus, in Hampshire, until September, 1862, the superintendents and superior officers had never been charged anything for the rent of their stations. Since that date their pay had been increased; but the increase was stopped from them under the plea of being a payment for rent of the stations. Thus the nominal pay was increased, and the portion to be paid by the Government was also increased, but the police had no corresponding benefit. Under these circumstances the Treasury thought it necessary to institute a strict examination, and to require the county officers to give in detailed returns for every item. His hon. Friend complained of the deduction on account of stoppages of fines; but if £10 was stopped out of a constable's pay in the year, why should not the Government have the benefit of one-fourth of that amount when it paid one-fourth of the pay from which that £10 was stopped? It might be that the county would raise the entire £10 for the pay of the constable, but it was not what the county raised, but what it paid that the Government were to keep in view. And with regard to the superannuation, if they contributed one-fourth, the Government would be paying what they were not authorized under the act to do. There was, moreover, a precedent in the case of the Civil Service When deductions on account of the superannuation Fund were made in the Civil Service, the amount was not considered a portion of the pay, and no income tax was charged on the deductions. However, he was willing to refer the question to the Law Officers of the Crown, and if they were of opinion that the Government ought to pay one-fourth of the deduction for superannuation deductions, he would have no objection.

SIR WILLIAM HEATHCOTE

said, he had no doubt that the proposal just made would prove satisfactory to his hon. Friend; but, at the same time, he wished to point out the fallacy into which the hon. Member the Secretary of the Treasury had fallen. He said the Act of Parliament threw upon the Government the payment to the counties of one-fourth of their expenses in certain matters, and introduced the instance of the income tax as an analogy to what the Government had to pay in this case. But the income tax was not a case in point; for when the income tax was to be levied, it was the duty of the officials to ascertain what the man received into his pocket. In this case, on the other hand, what was to be considered was the amount paid by the county. If the Government were advised that the allowances were equitable, and would act upon such advice, he was sure the result would prove satisfactory to his hon. Friend.

MR. HENLEY

said, the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Peel) had brought into the discussion matters which might be analogous, but which certainly were not relevant. The right hon. Gentleman claimed credit for the Government that they had saved £100,000 in the matter of prosecutions; but every one knew that that attempt at saving had been the cause of much greater mischief. Since the cutting down of the allowance to witnesses, it was almost impossible to get a second conviction. Constables, gaolers, and others who could prove former convictions against thieves were oftentimes troubled with very short memories, because they knew that in giving proof their expenses would not be adequately defrayed. That was the result of the economy—not economy, but parsimony—of the hon. Gentleman. It was a mean and nasty exercise of power not founded on right or reason, but on the principle of "We won't pay." Hence thieves got off, and there was more expense incurred in the end. Nothing could be more unfair than the conduct of the Treasury with regard to the immediate question under discussion, for what did the right hon. Gentleman say? His argument was that he had learned that certain coun- ties had entered upon queer practices with regard to payments to their constables; but instead of trying to put m stop to these improper practices, the Government proposed to make an entire change in an unjust direction.

MR. HIBBERT

said, he would bear testimony to the illiberal treatment of police officers who were witnesses upon prosecutions, and to the injurious consequences arising there from.

SIR WILLIAM MILES

said, that having raised the question be would rather leave it to be dealt with fairly by the Treasury, and therefore would not press his Amendment.

Amendment withdrawn.

Vote agreed to.

(32.) £1,188, to complete the sum for the Crown Office, Queen s Bench.

(33.) £8,700, to complete the sum for the High Court of Admiralty and Admiralty Court, Dublin.

(34.) £2,358, to complete the sum for Expenses of late Insolvent Debtors' Court.

(35.) £62,580, to complete the sum for the Courts of Probate and Divorce and Matrimonial Causes.

(36.) £112,000, to complete the sum for the County Courts.

SIR COLMAN O'LOGHLEN

drew attention to the circumstance that, while the costs of erecting and repairing courthouses in England and Scotland were placed upon the Estimates, in Ireland the charge was paid out of the county rates.

COLONEL DUNNE

said, that there were other cases in which Ireland by local taxation paid for what in England was paid for out of the national purse.

MR. PEEL

said, the Estimates set forth the authority or Acts of Parliament under which the provision for repairing and building county court-houses was made.

Vote agreed to.

(37.) £2,900, to complete the sum for the Office of Land Registry.

(38.) £14,633, to complete the sum for the Police Courts (Metropolis).

(39.) £106,894, to complete the sum for the Metropolitan Police.

(40.) £17,850, Revising Barristers, England and Wales.

(41.) £786, Compensations under Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Act.

(42.) £13,143, to complete the sum for Compensations under Bankruptcy Act, 1861.

(43.) £2,577, to complete the sum for the Salaries of the Lord Advocate and Solicitor General, Scotland.

(44.) £13,174, to complete the sum for the Court of Session, Scotland.

(45.) £7,811, to complete the sum for the Court of Justieiary, Scotland.

(46.) £2,800, to complete the sum for Criminal Prosecutions under authority of the Lord Advocate.

(47.) £680, to complete the sum for the Salaries, &c., Exchequer, Scotland, Legal Branch.

(48.) £26,231, to complete the sum for Expenses connected with the Sheriff Court, Scotland.

(49.) £14,105, to complete the sum for Salaries of the Procurators Fiscal, Scotland.

MR. WHITESIDE

inquired what was the precise nature of the duties of a Procurator Fiscal? He wished to know whether they were analogous to the duties of a coroner in England?

THE LORD ADVOCATE

said, the Procurator Fiscal in Scotland is the public prosecutor for the county. He acts directly under the instructions of the Sheriff; and his duty is, in case of death under suspicious circumstances being reported to him, to cause an inquiry to take place, and, if he sees fit, to apply to the Sheriff for a warrant of examination, or to apprehend in case of suspicion attaching to any one. If the matter be serious, and there seems to be sufficient ground for proceedings, he reports the examination to the Lord Advocate or his Deputies. It is under the Sheriff's warrant that all these proceedings take place. His duty is to take precognitions, which are not generally taken on oath, and the Advocate Depute either indicts or takes the advice of the Lord Advocate. The proceeding differs from that of a coroner's inquest. The investigation is not public in the first instance, but takes place under judicial responsibility, and ultimately under the responsibility of the Lord Advocate. stated the other evening, and expressed the view of those most competent to form a judgment on the subject, that although it is quite true that these investigations before trial are not public, they are in many instances a great advantage—indeed, they are a double benefit. In the first place, they secure, I think most efficiently, the conviction of the guilty, and conduce most effectually to the protection of the innocent; for there can be no doubt whatever that preliminary investigations before coroners and grand juries have sometimes resulted in the escape of the real criminals, and, in other cases, attached a stigma to the names of parties altogether blameless. Such is the nature of the functions of the Procurator Fiscal, and, in my opinion, the system works admirably.

MR. WHITESIDE

Do the Procurators Fiscal act of their own motion, or are instructions issued to them?

THE LORD ADVOCATE

In cases of sudden death, there are instructions from Crown Counsel or from the Lord Advocate to the Procurator Fiscal to make inquiry. In other cases, complaint is usually made to the Procurator Fiscal.

MR. WHITESIDE

The inquiry before the Procurator is private?

THE LORD ADVOCATE

The inquiry is not public until the, whole investigation has taken place. It is confined to the department of the Public Prosecutor.

Vote agreed to.

(50.) £10,250, to complete the sum for Salaries of the Sheriffs Clerks, Scotland.

MR. WHITE SIDE

asked whether it was intended to bring in a measure for the regulation of the duties of the Sheriffs Substitute and the Sheriffs Depute? He had received a very well Written pamphlet on the subject.

THE LORD ADVOCATE

I may remind the right hon. and learned Gentleman that in 1853 the whole of this subject received the most careful consideration before a Select Committee; and the Act of 1857, which now regulates the Sheriffs Courts, was based on the Report of that Committee. believe the Act has given general satisfaction, and it is not my intention to propose any alteration in it.

Vote agreed to.

(51.) £3,000, Expenses in matters of Tithes, &c., Scotland.

(52.) £11,778, to complete the sum for the General Register House, Edinburgh.

(53.) £1,295, Commissary Clerk Office.

(54.) £1,472, Accountant in Bankruptcy.

(55.) £45,134, to complete the sum for Law Charges and Criminal Prosecutions, Ireland.

(56.) £3,717, to complete the sum for the Court of Chancery, Ireland.

MR. WHITESIDE

said, that the appointment of examiner in chief was in the hands of the Master of the Rolls; and that Judge, believing that there could be no worse mode of taking evidence than by an examiner sitting in a back room, would not appoint anybody to that office, which was vacant. He (Mr. Whiteside) wished to know whether it was intended to persevere in this mode of taking evidence?

MR. O'HAGAN

said, he hoped that under the Bill for the reform of the Court of Chancery the duties of the examiner would in the main be transferred to another office. He hoped this explanation would satisfy the right hon. Gentleman.

MR. WHITESIDE

said, it by no means satisfied him. He wanted to know whether the practice of taking evidence in writing was to be continued?

MR. O'HAGAN

repeated that the Bill provided for the mode of taking evidence hereafter; but depositions in writing would be still necessary in some cases.

Vote agreed to.

(57.) £7,462, to complete the sum for the Courts of Queen's Bench, Common Fleas, and Exchequer, Ireland.

(58.) £6,000, to complete the sum for Process Servers, Ireland.

(59.) £3,932, to complete the sum for Registrars to the Judges, &c., Ireland.

(60.) £1,200, to complete the sum for Compensations to Seneschals, &c., of Manor Courts in Ireland.

(61.) £1,360, to complete the sum for the Office for Registration of Judgments, Ireland.

MR. WHITESIDE

said, that the law of judgments in Ireland was in a very confused and unsatisfactory state, and he hoped the system in Ireland would be assimilated to that of England after the Committee upstairs had reported.

MR. O'HAGAN

said, the law in Ireland was in a disgraceful position, and he would exert himself to improve it.

MR. HADFIELD

said, that no expenses ought to be incurred in reference to these offices than what would be absolutely necessary.

MR. WHITESIDE

said, he thought that some stop ought to be put to the publication of the "Black List," which inflicted a great deal of injustice upon some parties.

MR. HADFIELD

said, it was an inconvenience which landed proprietors had to submit to, but he trusted the nuisance would be removed.

Vote agreed to.

(62.) £100, Fees to Commissioners of High Court of Delegates, Ireland.

(63.) £4,403, to complete the sum for the Court of Bankruptcy and Insolvency, &c., Ireland.

(64.) £7,650, to complete the sum for the Court of Probate, Ireland.

(65.) £7,819, to complete the sum for the Landed Estates Court, Ireland.

MR. WHITE SIDE

said, that some of the Judges of the Court were quite unnecessary, and that the first opportunity should be taken of reducing their number.

Vote agreed to.

(66.) £1,150, Consolidated Office of Writs, Dublin.

(67.) £420, Revising Barristers, Dublin.

(68.) £36,000, to complete the sum for Police Justices, &c., Dublin.

(69.) £536,535, to complete the sum for the Constabulary Force, Ireland.

(70.) £1,714, to complete the sum for the Four Courts, Marshalsea Prison, Dublin.

(71.) £13,980, to complete the sum for Inspection, &c., of Prisons, Reformatories, and Industrial Schools.

(72.) 300,627, to complete the sum for Government Prisons and Convict Establishments at Home.

MR. KEKEWICH

said, he wished to call attention to the outbreak which took place at the Dartmoor prison in November last, and to ask why the military had been withdrawn from the prison, and whether any means had been adopted to obtain the immediate assistance of the military in case it should be required.

SIR GEORGE GREY

said, that in the outbreak to which the hon. Gentleman referred the convicts in general took no part. It arose from the attempt of thirteen convicts to make their escape, but they were all captured, and none of the other prisoners had given them any assistance. The number of convicts had since been reduced. With regard to the other question, during the Russian war the troops had been withdrawn from most of the prisons, and a civil guard substituted. Since the occurrence in question a telegraphic communication had been established between the prison at Dartmoor and the residence of the Commander-in-Chief at Plymouth, so that he might readily send troops to the aid of the prison authorities whenever it might be required.

MR. KEKEWICH

said, he thought it only fair to the officers of Dartmoor Prison to state, that on the occasion of the outbreak in November last they exhibited the greatest bravery and determination.

Vote agreed to.

(73.) £218, 28, 6, fo complete the sum for Maintenance of Prisoners in County Gaols, &c.

(74.) £16,380, to, complete the sum for Transportation of Convicts.

(75.) £101,783, to complete the sum for Convict Establishments, Colonies.

MR. HENNESSY

said, he wished to know whether information had been received at the Colonial Office to the effect, that one of the Australian colonies had resolved to send 600 convicts to England in retaliation for our sending convicts to Australia.

MR. CARDWELL

replied, that no such information had been received.

Vote agreed to.

House resumed.

Resolutions to be reported To-morrow;

Committee to sit again on Wednesday.