HL Deb 27 June 1839 vol 48 cc921-3
Lord Colborne

rose to move the second reading of the High Sheriffs' Expenses Bill. This measure originated in a report of a Committee of the House of Commons in 1830, on the expenses which fell on the High Sheriff. He need not point out to their Lordships, that the office of high sheriff was one of great importance; and yet this office of high ambition, instead of being regarded as an honour, was looked on as a burden, and every person tried to shuffle it off his shoulders. The object of this bill was to regulate and reduce the expenses of the high sheriffs, and throw them on the county-rates. After some discussions and two divisions, the bill had passed the other House. He only knew two objections that had been started against this measure; one was, that the effect of it would be to lower the character and station of the high sheriff, and induce individuals of lower station to take the office. That was an objection far more specious than true. What was the real fact? Why, that individuals, who, from their known standing in the country, and from their landed property, were nominated to the office, deterred by the expenses, used all their influence to avoid it. The other objection was, that the expenses were to be charged on the county-rates. He had all his life been as unwilling as any one could be to throw any charge on the county-rates, but it was the fair quarter on which to throw the expense; and when they looked at the small sum which would be thrown on the county-rates, and that the expenses of the office of high sheriff would be reduced from 600l. or 800l. a-year to 200l. or 300l., he did think, that that was the proper ground on which the expense should be placed. He only asked their Lordships to give this bill a fair consideration. The office of high sheriff was a very arduous task imposed on a very useful class of society— namely, the country gentlemen.

The Duke of Richmond

, in pursuance of the notice he had given, begged leave to move, that "the bill be read that day six months." The very reason for which the noble Lord thought this bill ought to pass into a law, was the very reason, why he (the Duke of Richmond) thought it ought not—because the bill had been re- commended by a Committee of the House of Commons in 1830. His noble Friend was a Member of the House of Commons at that time, and if he had thought this so useful a measure, why had he not introduced such a bill at that time? The noble Lord said, that the high sheriff's office was an office of high honour. He admitted that, and the high sheriff must pay for honour like everybody else. He did not want the expenses on the high sheriffs to be so high as to ruin them. The noble Lord said, that the high sheriffs when appointed used great interest to get off, and that the country gentlemen got made militia officers, by which they became exempt from serving the office. There was very great difficulty to get off, and he had no objection to prevent the being in the militia an exemption from the duty. One objection he had to the bill was this, that the high sheriff was to be paid for his javelin, men; that he was to appoint not more than twenty-two javelin men and two trumpeters, nor less than ten javelin men and one trumpeter, and then the clerk of the peace was to pay for them, and the justices were then bound to pay this sum out of the county-rates. He thought it rather a new principle, that the clerk of the peace was to go into what expense he thought fit, and then that the magistrates were to be obliged to pay for it. He wanted to know why the high sheriff was not to pay for his office, the same as every other person? If the guardians of the poor, if the overseers of the poor, if the jurymen, and if the grand jurymen went great distances to do their duty to their country, and did that duty cheerfully, why was the high sheriff to be relieved? It amounted to no more than this—that they were going to relieve the rich man from the expense, and put it on the county-rates. Now, who paid the county-rates? The landholder, the farmer, and the labourer—ay, the labourer, too, for he paid his quota, and they were going to make him contribute towards this expense. He thought, that if Gentlemen in the country were of opinion that this expense ought not to be paid, they should be straightforward enough to come forward and say, "We cannot afford to pay this expense, and we decline to do so." His Grace concluded with moving "that this bill be read this day six months."

The Earl of Winchilsea

said, this bill would be a most unpopular measure, be- cause it would increase the county-rates. The duties and expense of the office of high sheriff were only borne once, whilst the duties of jurymen and other onerous duties were borne frequently by other classes. On these grounds he should support the amendment of his noble Friend.

The Marquess of Lansdowne

thought it would be hardly worth while to interfere in the appointment of sheriff in the way that was proposed by this bill, and as it would throw the burden of the expense on the poor, and relieve the pocket of the rich man, or of him who ought to be rich, he thought it was better not to be passed. It was true, that very often persons appeared on the roll who ought not to be placed on it, and persons who ought to be on it were omitted. There ought to be greater care in the persons chosen for the office. Those who were appointed were repaid for the expense by the honour of serving the old constitutional office of high sheriff, which he should be sorry to see pass into disrepute, and which was an office which gave a gentleman an opportunity of distinguishing himself by the manner in which he discharged his duty. He had directed a bill to be drawn for the purpose of preventing militia officers being relieved from serving as sheriffs, unless they were on active service, and he really did not think the present bill would afford much relief, while it was of an invidious character.

Lord Colborne

had been convinced, not that the bill was a bad one, but that he had no chance of carrying it. The noble Earl said, why were not the sheriffs to pay their expenses the same as grand jurymen? But the pinch of the case was this, that a grand juryman paid his own expenses, but the high sheriff was called on to pay the expenses of other people. He begged leave to withdraw the bill.

Bill withdrawn.