§ Mr. Lamb, in moving the second reading of the Bill, stated, that its principle object was to consolidate former Acts relating to the Metropolitan Police. There were some alterations, however, introduced into this measure, which it was his duty shortly to advert to. In the new arrangement which was proposed, economy was an object of much consideration, and, with a view to diminish expense, it was thought that one of the Metropolitan Police-offices might be got rid of. It was supposed that the Whitechapel-office could be spared with the least inconvenience, and therefore a clause had been introduced into the Bill for doing away with that office. He understood, however, that the abolition of the office had excited some discontent amongst persons residing in that part of the metropolis, and as his Majesty's Government had no other object but to render the police establishment as efficient as possible at the least possible expense, if it was felt that the abolition of the Whitechapel-office would produce any serious public inconvenience, he had no disposition to press it. It was proposed to have one Magistrate at each of the Police-offices, but in effecting that arrangement some difficulties had presented themselves. In the first place, it was found that in some cases it was necessary, under Acts of Parliament, that convictions should be made by two Magistrates. Upon looking into the law, however, he found that the principle had been so little attended to, that he could see no objection to the introduction of a clause empowering one Police Magistrate to 134 convict. It was also an objection, that when one Magistrate had to discharge the duties of the office, he could not be expected to give night attendance, and this would give additional power to the police Inspectors, under whose authority innocent persons might be incarcerated for the night. He felt this was an objection to the proposed arrangement, but, upon reflection, he did not think that it could lead to much practical inconvenience, for he understood that, in the City of London the attendance of the Magistrates at night was dispensed with without any inconvenience or complaint. The present Bill also introduced some regulations for oyster-shops selling soda and ginger-beer, which were put under the same regulations as beer-houses with respect to the hours of opening and closing. He should only detain the House to add, that as the Metropolitan Police Act was nearly expired, he hoped that no unnecessary delay would be thrown in the way of the present measure. Any suggestions for its improvement it would be his duty to attend to when the measure was in Committee.
§ Mr. Haweswas glad to see, that the design of the Bill was to introduce economy into the police system. He would not object to the second reading of the Bill if the hon. Member would consent to have a Committee appointed to consider the institution of the police generally.
§ Mr. Lambhad no objection to have a Committee appointed, but he thought that, as its inquiries would take up a long time, it would be better to defer it for the present Session. At any rate, he hoped that the present Bill would be suffered to pass before the Committee was appointed.
§ Mr. Haweswould trust entirely to the hon. Member's promise of having a Committee appointed to inquire into the subject, and hoped that some fresh measures of police would be founded on the Report made by that Committee. He would not, therefore, oppose the second reading of the present Bill.
§ Mr. George Frederick Youngwished to know if the Lambeth-street Office was to remain or not? If it was not, he had a few observations to make in opposition to the present Bill.
§ Mr. Lambsaid, whether that office was to be dispensed with or not, would be determined afterwards.
§ Bill read a second time.