§ Mr. Humebelieved, that no opposition would be made to the production of the papers for which he was about to move. Although the manner of granting hackney-coach and hawkers and pedlar's licenses might in itself be considered a matter of small importance, yet he was anxious to bring the subject before the House, because it would appear that government had exhibited a great neglect of economy in the collection of that part of the revenue. In 1797, the finance committee had recommended in its report, that the two offices for licensing hackney-coaches, and hawkers and pedlars, should be abolished; and that the duties of those offices should be thenceforth performed by the commissioners of stamps. Government did not, however, as the committee advised, transfer the duties of the office for licensing hackney-coaches, and that for licensing hawkers and pedlars, to the Stamp-office; but adopted the plan of uniting the two offices; in consequence of which, the country had been saddled with an additional expense. The number of inspectors had been augmented from 10 to 29, each of whom received a salary of 100l. a-year. No less than five commissioners were maintained, under the present system, at salaries of 300l. or 400l. a year. These commissioners, he was informed, attended in the office only one day in the week; and it frequently happened that four or five weeks elapsed, without the commissioners making their appearance at all. This would not appear very extraordinary, when the House was informed, that most of the commissioners held other offices, and consequently had other duties to perform. One of the commissioners was colonel Thornton, who could not be expected to devote much time to the subject of pedlars' licenses. Another commissioner was Mr. Willimott, the private secretary of the earl of Liverpool, who no doubt gave him sufficient employment. A third commissioner was 748 Mr. Jesse, who also held an important situation in the Board of Works. In this way the public money was expended on persons who could not perform the duties which they were paid to execute. The whole revenue derived from these duties last year amounted to 55,734l. which was collected at an expense of 9,342l. or 16 per cent. The revenue resulting from the duty on stage-coaches amounted last year to 256,590l., which was collected at an expense of 6,792l., or about 2½ per cent. The inspectors for the country, who were 30 in number, were not posted in the most populous districts, where their services would be most required; and many of them either did not perform their duty at all, or executed it by deputy. One of the inspectors, who was stated to be resident in Coventry, in reality lived at Birmingham. Another of these officers was insane, and had actually been in that state at the time of his appointment. It was important that the persons whose duty it was to grant licenses should reside in the most populous parts of the country; but quite a contrary system was pursued. At Sheffield there was no person from whom a license could be obtained; whilst at Leek, an obscure village in Staffordshire, there were two. The hon. member then mentioned several other instances in which the principal towns in different counties were destitute of the convenience of a resident licenser, whilst it was enjoyed by comparatively small places. All this improper arrangement would be remedied if the power of granting licenses were vested in the commissioners of stamps. He knew that in 1797, when it had been proposed to abolish the office for licensing the hackney-coaches, it was objected, that it was an office not only of revenue, but of police, in which latter character it could not be dispensed with. He was of opinion, that the objection could not now apply. The very fact of the commissioners meeting but once a week would preclude the public from deriving any benefit from the office as a police tribunal. The hon. member concluded with moving for an account of the establishment of the hackney-coach and the pedlars' and hawkers' licensing office, stating the numbers and names of the persons employed, by whom appointed, and the security they had given for their offices; and also the names of the other offices (if any) which they might hold.
Mr. Lushingtonsaid, he had no objec- 749 tion to the production of the returns moved for; but, when the hon. member was bringing forward his charges, he ought in fairness to have stated that the revenue derived from the granting of licenses last year was greater than at any former period. That circumstance was to be attributed to the improved manner in which the establishment was conducted. He could not agree to any measure which proposed to abolish the offices of commissioners of hackney coaches, whose services were most beneficial to the public. The commissioners had to control about 3,000 persons, who were not of the most manageable description—he meant hackney-coachmen; and their government of that body was much more efficient than any that could be exercised by persons whose attention was not exclusively devoted to that object. The subject had been repeatedly under the consideration of parliament, who had uniformly determined not to derange the present system.
§ After a short conversation, the motion was agreed to.