HC Deb 26 June 1854 vol 134 cc696-702

Order read for resuming Adjourned Debate on Amendment [19th June], proposed in Schedule A, to leave out the words "Salaries of Sheriffs and Sheriffs Substitute, per Act 16 & 17 Vict. c. 80. Retiring Allowances to the Sheriffs Substitute, under the Act 1 & 2 Vict. c. 119."

Question again proposed, 'That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Schedule."

Debate resumed.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, there seemed to him no reason why there should be any prolonged discussion on the Amendment. The principle of salaries was a clear one. There was, however, another question behind it, respecting which several hon. Members had given notice of Amendments. The hon. Member for Antrim, for instance, proposed to strike out of Schedule B all salaries and allowances now chargeable in lieu of fees of office surrendered by the present holders; the hon. Member for the University of Dublin proposed to exclude from the operation of the Act all offices holden for life, or during good behaviour, and all offices the salaries of which were fixed by Statute and charged on the Consolidated Fund; while the hon. Member for Cork proposed to secure the rights of a number of present holders of offices. He did not perhaps agree in the views of all those Gentlemen, or admit that the title of an office-holder was in any way prejudiced by the voting of his salary; but, at the same time, he thought it had been the general practice of the Government and Parliament to rule every doubtful question of this kind in favour of the title of the office-holder. He did not, therefore, think it would be worth while to occupy the time of Parliament in debating a question of that sort, and he proposed to move a clause on the third reading of the Bill, which he hoped would substantially meet the views of different Gentlemen who had given notice of Amendments. The offices which involved the discharge of judicial functions properly so called, irrespective of present or future holders, would nut be removed from the Consolidated Fund by the Bill, if they were now on the Consolidated Fund. As to offices that were not judicial, but held for life or during good behaviour, and the salaries of which were charged upon the Consolidated Fund, he proposed that they should remain on the Consolidated Fund during the incumbency of the present holders. That was a concession which would meet the objection at which mainly those Amendments were aimed, and he trusted it would be satisfactory to the Gentlemen who proposed to move these Amendments. They would postpone in seine degree an important object of public policy, namely, bringing salaries of this description under the constant notice of Parliament, and that most important step could not be taken so long as they remained on the Consolidated Fund.

COLONEL DUNE

said, the hon. and learned Member for Youghall (Mr. I. Butt) not being competent to move the re-committal of the Bill, as he had given notice, in consequence of having spoken on the debate, it devolved on him (Colonel Dunne) to do so. The object of the Motion was to leave out of the Bill all those offices which were judicial in Ireland; so that the holders might not be subjected annually to capricious objections in Parliament. A further object was to put in other names to those which were already in the schedules. The objection to the Bill as it stood was, that certain situations, not judicial, and certain salaries, had been capriciously left out of it. One of these was the office of Commissioner of the Board of Audit, and he (Colonel Dunne) could not see why, when the Board itself were included, the Commissioners' salaries should not be subjected to periodical revision by Parliament. Another office omitted was that of Paymaster of Civil Services in Ireland. There were also the Clerks of the Hanaper, of the Crown, and of the Peace. A large number of offices should be put into the Bill besides those included; and as the whole schedule required further consideration, he moved the re-commitment of the Bill.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

was sorry the Chancellor of the Exchequer had given way on the Bill. A vast number of salaries in England and Ireland were dealt with by the Bill without a word of objection. All the objections came from Ireland, and he was nut surprised, because he had witnessed on all occasions in that country a grasping desire to get hold of the public money. Only the Judges should be independent of the Crown and of Parliament, but the salaries of all other officers should be brought under the consideration of the House every year. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had, in his (Mr. Williams's) opinion, stultified the Bill by the course he had taken.

MR. V. SCULLY

said, all that was desired was, that justice should be clone to the Irish officials. He suggested that the clause should be so framed as to do injustice to no holder of office, whether for life, whether during pleasure, or whether by patent. All he said was, that the schedule did not carry out the principle which the right hon. Gentleman proposed to regard.

MR. GEORGE

said, that the exemption of existing interests from the operation of this Bill would not reconcile him to the proposed insertion of many offices in the schedules. He thought that no offices of a freehold character, or which were held during good behaviour, should be subjected to the uncertainty of an annual Vote in Parliament; but that the salaries of those holding them should, like the salaries of judicial officers, still remain charged upon the Consolidated Fund.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

MR. I. BUTT

moved, "That the Bill be recommitted." This Bill consisted of two parts—one transferring the salaries of certain officers from the Consolidated Fund, and rendering them subject to a vote of that House; and the other subjecting to a similar ordeal the salaries of the officers engaged in the collection of the revenue. Now, with respect to the latter part of the Bill, no objections had been raised; but there was considerable opposition to the former portion, and the changes which the Government had already made in the schedules showed that it still required much consideration and discussion. What he would propose, therefore, was, that the Bill should be divided into two portions. The one which was not objected to could then be immediately sent up to the House of Lords, through which it would be passed in a few days, because that House could not alter it without a breach of the privileges of the Commons; and the revenue Estimates, which were now waiting its passing, could then be at once brought before that House. They could then fully discuss the other and less unobjectionable part of the Bill.

Motion made and Question proposed, "That the Bill be recommitted."

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, that he had no doubt that the reasons urged by the hon. and learned Gentleman in favour of the recommitment of this Bill were entirely satisfactory to his mind; but nevertheless he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) could not admit their validity. Indeed, he had never heard a Motion made which was less consistent either with the facts or the arguments by which it was supported. The great object of the hon. and learned Member, according to his own statement, was to avoid delay, and in order to attain that, he proposed to throw out a portion of a measure which had now reached very advanced a stage in that House. The hon. and learned Member talked of the great objection of including two incongruous subjects in the same Bill; but he did not oppose it on that ground on the second reading, in Committee, or on the bringing up of the report. It was said that there must be further discussion, because the schedules had been altered two or three times. This statement, however, was quite inaccurate; the schedules had not been altered, although, no doubt, some modifications of detail had been made to meet the views of hon. Gentlemen who had raised objections; and yet, after the Government had evinced their anxiety to disarm this opposition, hon. Members came forward, and asked that the Bill should be recommitted, and the field of discussion opened afresh. He could not admit that there was any incongruity in the objects of the Bill. On the contrary, he should have thought that he was neglecting a public duty, if, when he was rearranging the charges for the collection of the revenue, he had not taken the same opportunity of also bringing the charges upon the Consolidation Fund under the annual revision of Parliament. Indeed, the importance of the Bill in relation to the former charges was but trifling in comparison with its value as regarded the latter; because the charges for the collection of the revenue had always been under the effective control of the Treasury, while those upon the Consolidated Fund were removed from the control either of the Treasury or of that House. The effect of that was seen in the existence of such cases as that referred to on a former occasion, when a person had continued to receive, until the present time, the salary for an office that was abolished in 1827. These were the kind of cases that induced him to think that the salaries of such offices should not be placed upon the Consolidated Fund, He had endeavoured, in regard to the details, to meet the objection of every hon. Member, in so far as he could without sacrificing the principle of the Bill. That principle was a very broad and plain one, and it was one from which he was sure the House would not flinch. The recommittal of the Bill would throw back to a serious extent that part of the Bill which he looked upon as practically the most important, and therefore he could by no means consent to such a proposition.

MR. NAPIER

said, he had not the slightest wish to throw difficulties in the way of the measure, but he thought it was absolutely necessary that the Bill should be recommitted, in order that it might receive the full consideration to which, from its importance, it was entitled. After justifying the lateness of the opposition now offered to this measure, on the ground that he and others were, until recently, unaware of its contents, and supposed it to refer simply to the charges incurred in the collection of the revenue, the right hon. Gentleman called the attention of the House to an instance of the injustice with which Ireland was dealt with by it. By this Bill it was actually proposed to place upon the Consolidated Fund the salaries of the taxing officers of Scotland, which were not now upon it; while it was proposed to remove the salaries of similar officers in Ireland, which were now so secured, from that fund, and to subject them to the uncertainties of an annual Vote of that House. It was proposed to include in the operation of this Bill many patent offices, the salaries of which were fixed by Act of Parliament. Now, he thought that salaries which had been so fixed ought not to be changed by anything but another Act, and should not be placed at the mercy of a Resolution of one branch of the Legislature.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

opposed the Motion. The whole of the present opposition to the Bill had arisen from the Chancellor of the Exchequer having unfortunately yielded to the request of some hon. Members, that the Masters in Chancery might be withdrawn from the schedules. His acquiescence on that occasion had encouraged other claimants for various exemptions, and amongst these the Irish Members had certainly been the most unfortunate. He certainly could not see why they should object to the salaries of the Irish legal officers being placed under the revision of Parliament, for past experience of the manner in which the House had exercised its authority with respect to the official salaries which now came under its annual revision was quite sufficient to show that no one would object to them without good reason. And if there was good reason for objecting to them, he could not see why the Irish Members should wish to withdraw them from Parliamentary control.

MR. GROGAN

said, this Bill had been smuggled through the House in such haste that there had been no opportunity of calling attention to the case of the holders of Irish offices, who would be very unfairly dealt with under its provisions. An object which had hitherto been concealed now appeared to be really the most important that was aimed at—that of repealing several Acts of Parliament, by which the holders of these offices were placed on the Consolidated Fund. He protested against the manlier in which it was attempted to hurry the measure through, and hoped that his hon. Friend near him would press his proposition to a division.

MR.G. A. HAMILTON

should be sorry if the House went to a division on the supposition that this was only an Irish question. He thought it very objectionable that the salaries of revising barristers in England and Wales should be removed from the Consolidated Fund, and made the subject of an annual Vote of that House. Equally or more objectionable would it be to deal in this way with the clerks and other officers attached to the judicial establishments of Scotland. Another class was that of Irish officers holding their situations during good behaviour, who would have the same right to complain.

MR. J. WILSON

observed, that the principle of subjecting the salaries of offices held during good behaviour to an annual Vote was by no means new. It had already been acted upon in the case of the officers of that House, in conformity with an Act passed some tune back; and if hon. Gentlemen would look at the Estimates for this year, they would find that some of their highest officers appeared upon them in this way. A great many concessions had already been made on the present Bill, and the present Motion seemed to show the inexpediency of ever making concessions.

MR. V. SCULLY

said, he did not think the Government had made any concession at all. He would wish to see the subject referred to a Select Committee, but mean while would give his support to the proposition of the hon. Member for Youghall.

Question put.

The house divided:—Ayes 53; Noes 90: Majority 37.

Another Amendment proposed, in Schedule B, to leave out the words "exclusive of the salaries of the Board."

Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Schedule," put, and agreed to.

Bill to be read a third time on Thursday, at Twelve o'clock.