WOODS, FORESTS, ETC. (Hansard, 22 February 1850)

§ LORD J. RUSSELL

I now rise to move for leave to bring in a Bill to make better provision for the management of the Woods, Forests, and Land Revenues of the Crown. I don't intend, especially in the absence of my noble Friend the Member for Bath, who was chairman of the Committee on this subject, but who is unable to attend the House, to enter at present on any long explanation of details. I shall only state generally the reasons which have induced Her Majesty's Government to think that the department may be better managed by means of the separation now proposed than by the continuance of the present system. 'Till 1832 there were different offices for the management of the land revenues of the Crown, the woods and forests, and for the department of the Surveyor General of the Works. It was thought expedient to unite these offices under three commissioners. But experience has shown that the combination of these offices has led to the imposition of very large and undue charges on the Land Revenues of the Crown for the purpose of public works, and that the First Commissioner of Woods and Forests being a person connected with a political party, is not so well fitted for the management of the department of the Woods and Forests as a person would be who was totally unconnected with a political party. What we propose, therefore, is to have in the first place three commissioners, two of them salaried, who shall have the management of the Land Revenues of the Crown and the Woods and Forests, and that none of them shall be capable of sitting in the House 1319 of Commons. With respect to the Office of Works, however, we propose that it should be a political office, namely, that there shall be a First Commissioner of Works, and that the office should be capable of being held with a seat in the House of Commons. It is believed that an officer of that description, responsible, and holding a seat in the House of Commons, will be able to exercise a control over public works which have of late years occasioned very considerable expense, and which certainly deserve being made a special subject of attention on the part of a Minister of the Crown. By this proposed separation we get rid of what has frequently happened, namely, that when large expenses have been incurred for certain public works, the sums were raised by making them a charge on the Land Revenues of the Crown; whereas, the object being the formation of public parks, or the improvement of streets in the metropolis, or in Dublin or Edinburgh, the expense should rather have been thrown on the general revenue of the country. And there was no saving to the country effected by making such expense a charge on the Land Revenues of the Crown; because, whether it came out of the Crown lands or out of the general revenue, it was the same thing in the end. But it was certainly calculated to keep from the public view the large expenses incurred in those cases. According to the statement I have now made, the Land Revenues will be in future managed as a department of the revenue. The persons employed in that office will have only to consider how best to manage the rents they receive from that property which is leasehold, and also what is the best mode of managing the Woods and Forests; and they will have nothing to do with the consideration of any expenses except such as any owner of property would think it necessary to incur for the preservation and improvement of his property. On the other hand, the Commissioner of Works, who will be a political officer, will have to consider what sums it will be necessary to provide for public works which it may be requisite either to begin or to carry on—in what manner Hampton Court, and the parks which may be used for public recreation, should be kept in order and ornamented so as to be suitable for their object—and any other expenses which the Government may think it right from time to time to recommend, and the House of Commons may think it right to adopt. He will be ready 1320 to explain the grounds on which these expenses are proposed to be incurred; and his whole attention will be directed to public works, and not to the landed estate of the Crown. These are large public question, and lead to debate in this House. With respect to the salaries, the sum will be the same as that at present applied to the purpose. The First Commissioner of Woods and Forests now receives 2,000l.; and there are two other commissioners with 1,200l. a year each. It is proposed that of the Commissioners of Land Revenue, to consist of three persons, the first shall receive 1,400l. a year, the second 1,000l. a year, and the third, who will be some person in the public service, shall not receive any salary. Of the department of Public Works, it is proposed that only one shall receive a salary. He will receive 2,000l. a year, the salary which is now received by the First Commissioner of Woods and Forests. The money to be paid in salaries will be just the same as the amount at present paid. Therefore no additional expense will be incurred; and the change does not make it necessary to have any more persons representing the departments in the House of Commons than may now sit there. The new arrangement will, I hope, be found to bring the expenses incurred for public works more specifically under the notice of Parliament, and to secure a better management of accounts. I shall not detain the House by any further remarks, and shall simply move for leave to bring in the Bill.

§ MR. CARDWELL

was glad, as a Member of the Committee, that this subject had occupied the attention of the Government. He agreed with the noble Lord in thinking that there was no department of the public service in which there was greater scope for improvement. He thought the proposed arrangement was calculated to promote economy in the public service. The suggestion of the noble Lord as to showing, on the face of the estimates, the sum expended on any improvement for public works, was one with which he entirely concurred, for the greatest possible security would thereby be afforded that the money would be well laid out. He quite concurred in the propriety of separating the two departments. The objections discovered by the Committee did not apply to any particular period or to the time of any First Commissioner: it was but just to say this; but undoubtedly the evils and objections of every kind to which the system had naturally 1321 given rise did require the most searching and vigorous reform. After the Committee had sat one Session, a gentleman from Sheerness, connected with the Admiralty, and acquainted with the sale and purchase of timber, had been specially sent to report upon the New Forest. That gentleman reported, that with regard to the Queen's timber, there was systematic plunder carried on with the utmost audacity; that the general impression was, that the Queen's forests were fair game; that in consequence, when prosecutions were taken into court it was impossible to obtain convictions; that the whole public mind of the neighbourhood was poisoned with the idea that it was no fraud to take the Queen's property; and that there was no check on the system of receiving money, a smaller quantity of trees being entered in the accounts than were actually cut down. In answer to question 345— Did you find a difference of 785 loads between the actual measurement of trees cut down in 1848 and the estimated contents? he replied— Yes; 804 loads were the estimated contents, but the actual measurement was 1,539 loads. Respectable persons would not attend the sales, because there was such an understanding between those who sold the timber on the part of the Crown, and the corrupt purchasers in the neighbourhood, that respectable persons had no chance. In answer to question 392— Did it appear to you that a large quantity of timber had been stolen in broad daylight, in the most open manner? he replied— I believe so; no doubt of it; early and late, in the daylight and the dark, just as it suited. Were the loads properly marked in many instances?—I don't think so in many; some of them were marked, but not what I consider properly. Did you find that more trees were cut down than were authorised by the Treasury warrant?—In every case. In every case that came under your observation?—I have looked back for three or four years, and I find it has been the custom, for some years at all events. Without saying more at present, he would only add, that with the reform proposed by this Bill, such a system could not prevail; and he trusted that the details of the measure would be such as effectually to carry out the object in view.