HC Deb 07 May 1855 vol 138 cc198-225

Order for Committee read.

House in Committee; Mr. FITZROY in The Chair.

The following Votes were then agreed to—

  1. (1.) 35,941l, Law Charges, England.
  2. (2.) 250,000l., Prosecutions at Assizes, c.
  3. (3.) 1,100l., Crown Office, Chancery.
  4. (4.) 2,050l., Crown Office, Queen's Bench.
  5. (5.) 15,900l., Sheriffs' Expenses, &c.
  6. (6.) 6,000l., Registrar of Admiralty.
  7. (7.) 8,415l., Insolvent Debtors Court.
  8. (8.) 13,850l., Treasurers of County Courts.
  9. (9.) 23,254l., Police Courts of Metropolis.
  10. (10.) 101,218l., Metropolitan Police.
  11. (11.) 4,226l., Queen's Prison.
  12. (12.) 3,342l., Lord Advocate and Solicitor General.
  13. (13.) 7,755l., Expenses of Criminal 199 Prosecutions under authority of Lord Advocate.
  14. (14.) 7,198l., Court of Justiciary.
  15. (15.) 1,593l., Queen's and Lord Treasurer's Remembrancer.
  16. (16.) 57,000l., Sheriffs and Procurators Fiscal, &c.
  17. (17.) 11,530l., Procurators Fiscal not paid by Fees.
  18. (18.) 4,318l., Sheriffs' Clerks.
  19. (19.) 2,250l., Solicitor of the Crown, &c.
  20. (20.) 11,166l., General Register House, Edinburgh.
  21. (21.) 1,119l., Commissary Clerk, Edinburgh.
  22. (22.) 51,720l., Criminal Prosecutions (Ireland).
  23. (23.) 1,294l., Court of Chancery (Ireland).
  24. (24.) 1,338l., Court of Queen's Bench.
  25. (25.) 1,311l., Court of Common Pleas.
  26. (26.) 1,320l., Court of Exchequer.
  27. (27.) 200l., Clerk of Taxing Officers.
  28. (28.) 5,232l., Registrars to Judges.
  29. (29.) 1,906l., Office for Registration of Judgments.
  30. (30.) 300l., High Court of Delegates.
  31. (31.) 3,146l., Insolvent Debtors Court.
  32. (32.) 267l., Clerk to the Court of Errors.
  33. (33.) 1,600l., Police Justices of Dublin.
  34. (34.) 31,000l., Metropolitan Police of Dublin.
  35. (35.) 638,511l., Constabulary Force.
  36. (36.) 1,942l., Four Courts, Marshalsea
  37. (37.) 17,526l.,., Court of Session (Scotland).
  38. (38.) 18,770l., Inspection and General Superintendence of Prisons.

MR. FRENCH

said, there were two inspectors of prisons appointed by the Irish Government, at salaries of 535l. each, but this was not all they received, for the Irish counties paid an additional sum of 600l., to each gentleman. The counties also paid local inspectors, and he wished to know whether the inspectors of English prisons, who received salaries of 700l., received any additional sum from the counties?

SIR GEORGE GREY

The inspectors of English prisons receive no additional payment, but they do not perform the duties chargeable upon the Irish inspectors in relation to the counties.

MR. FRENCH

said, he very much doubted whether the services of these gentlemen were wanted in their double capacity.

MR. KEOGH

said, that a Bill was about to be brought in, containing an alteration which he thought would meet the views of the hon. Member.

Vote agreed to.

(39.) 375,479l., Prisons and Convict Establishments.

MR. HENLEY

said, he wished to know whether the diminution in this estimate had arisen either from an increase in the number of prisoners sent abroad, or from the large number discharged with tickets of leave?

SIR GEORGE GREY

said, that the estimate of prisoners last year, for which the Vote was taken, had not been reached and the present vote consequently exhibited a diminution. The system of granting tickets of leave and letters of licence was being carefully watched. He had ordered returns to be made out, of every prisoner convicted even for vagrancy, who was known to be the holder of a letter of licence, in order that it might be revoked, upon the ground that the object for which it had been granted had not been accomplished. In cases were parties were only committed for trial it would not be fair to withdraw the licence, and it would be merely suspended until the result of the trial was known. The number of ticket-holders recommitted was positively, but not comparatively large; but returns were being collected which would give the Committee full information on the subject.

MR. HENLEY

said, he was glad to think, from the diminution of the number of prisoners, that crime was decreasing. Was the number of convicts sent out greater or less than usual?

SIR GEORGE GREY

Much the same. Western Australia is the only colony to which convicts are sent under sentence of transportation, Convicts are sent to Bermuda and Gibraltar to assist in the public works, as they are sent to Portland, Chatham, and Portsmouth. A fixed number are sent to Western Australia—about 600 or 700 a year, care being taken not to send more than the state of the labour-market requires.

Vote agreed to.

(40.) 166,174l., Maintenance of Prisoners.

SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE

said, he observed that a sum of 5,000l. was set down for the maintenance of jnvenile offenders in the Philanthropic Society Establishment at Redhill, and 2,000l. for all other similar institutions. He imagined that the Philanthropic Institution at Redhill was not one of the institutions licensed under the Act of last year. He wished also to know what Government proposed to do with respect to reformatory institutions under the Act of last year. In many counties a move was being made to establish such institutions, and the promoters wished to know if they could hope that Government would take part in the expense. It was provided by the Act that the parents of the children committed could be charged with a certain amount of the cost; hut the law did not provide very satisfactory means for recovering the amount, or enforcing that provision of the Act. This uncertainty made those persons who were interested in the success of these institutions anxious to know if Government proposed to introduce a Bill during the present Session to remedy this defect.

SIR GEORGE GREY

said, the children sent to Redhill were not sent under the Act of last Session. With regard to institutions under that Act, the Treasury would pay the whole cost of the maintenance of the inmates, as distinct from the expenses of the establishment, and 5s. a week per head was considered a fair sum. The principle of making parents, at whose instigation or from whose neglect children had fallen into criminal habits, defray the expense of their maintenance in reformatories, was just and expedient; but it was very difficult to enforce the obligation without increasing the number of prison inmates, by committing persons for the nonpayment of those charges, and as long as the Treasury paid the 5s. a week, there was little motive for any one to enforce payment from the parents. Where they were well known, it was a matter for the discretion of the magistrates whether they would compel the payment or not, but the greatest number of these criminal children came from the streets of large cities, and did not in many cases even know who their parents really were. He hoped to propose an amendment of the law, with the view to facilitate the recovery of the expenses from the parents, but ho did not expect that to any great extent the provision could be enforced.

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON

said, he was struck with the disproportion of the amount granted for the establishment at Redhill and for the others. He could not help expressing his disapprobation that the Redhill establishment, which was the oldest and the best in the country, should not be open for the reception of juvenile offenders under the Act of last year. Government had now become so much connected with that institution that he could not think this was satisfactory, especially as a difficulty was felt in the magistrates having often no place to commit the boys to. He rose also to ask on what principle the boys were sent to Redhill, and to whom their selection was entrusted? He wished further to ask whether the rule of the Philanthropic Institution to send all boys abroad at the termination of their sentence was concurred in by the Secretary of State? He had had the honour, a short time ago, of forwarding to the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir G. Grey) a very strong opinion from the county with which he was connected (Worcestershire) pressing upon him that the public funds ought to furnish some aid, not only for the maintenance, but for the institution of such establishments. It was within his knowledge that several counties, sensible of the importance of the subject, were deterred by a just feeling that the establishments ought not to be left to the benevolence of private individuals. As it was a matter of public interest, he considered that they had a right, after the strong expression of public feeling upon the question last year, to expect that Government would take into consideration how this aid might be afforded.

SIR GEORGE GREY

said, he must explain that the estimate of 2,000l. rested upon a calculation of the number of boys that would be committed to these reformatories at 5s. per week each, but if the number were exceeded, the estimate also would be exceeded, as it was not intended to limit the amount. With regard to the 5,000l. for the establishment at Red Hill, that included a provision for placing the boys in some way of gaining their livelihood. He was not aware of any rigid rule requiring that those boys should be sent abroad, though he could easily understand that they would have a much better opportunity of advancing themselves abroad than in this country. He hoped that a number of reformatories would be established under the Act of Parliament; but, as some of the reformatories now in existence had not been for many months in operation, he thought it would be too much to expect the country to take the whole charge of such establishments, and to withdraw them altogether from local management. He thought the proper course would be to see what was the result of the experiment, before any interference was attempted with existing arrangements.

MR. MACARTNEY

said, he wished to call the attention of the Committee to the injustice that was done to Ireland in throwing the expenses of criminals and witnesses in criminal prosecutions upon the counties. The late Sir Robert Peel, when he proposed the repeal of the corn laws, admitted that Ireland was entitled to relief in that respect, while the late Chancellor of the Exchequer gave a pledge that the matter should be looked into. Now, here was Ireland going to have an increased income tax, besides an increased tax upon spirits, thrown upon her, and yet no relief was proposed in the shape of a transfer of some of these charges to the Consolidated Fund.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, that when the arrangement to which the hon. Gentleman referred was made by Sir Robert Peel, one-half the expenses of prosecutions at assizes and sessions, and certain charges connected with the poor laws in England, and the entire cost of the constabulary in Ireland, were transferred to the Consolidated Fund. This adjustment was not made upon the principle of taking the same local charges in England and Ireland, but of taking different charges in the two countries. If the Committee referred to the Votes, they would find in them a charge of 638,511l. for the constabulary in Ireland; but there was no corresponding charge for the police of England. He doubted whether his predecessor in office had given any pledge on this subject, beyond engaging to take the matter into his consideration; but he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) certainly could not hold out any hope that the Government would propose any alteration in the adjustment of local burdens proposed by Sir Robert Peel.

MR. MACARTNEY

said, he must maintain that Sir Robert Peel distinctly laid it down, that inasmuch as Ireland was essentially a corn-growing country, she was entitled to be relieved of many of her county charges when the corn laws were repealed.

MR. HENLEY

said, that, in reverting to the subject of reformatory schools, he thought that where children were placed in these establishments had attained an age at which they might reasonably be expected to maintain themselves out of prison, their parents, who were earning small wages, should not be required to support children of whose services they were deprived.

SIR GEORGE GREY

said, that it was not his intention to propose any change in the law affecting the liability of parents, but merely with respect to the machinery by which that law was enforced.

SIR JOHN DUCKWORTH

said, he considered that, although 5s. a week might be a sufficient sum for the maintenance of a child in a large establishment, it would scarcely be sufficient in the case of smaller establishments; and he hoped that, as the efficiency of the principle of reformatory establishments was tested by private benevolence, the Government would be as liberal as possible in aiding such efforts.

MR. ADDERLEY

said, he thought parents ought not to be called upon to support children in these reformatories up to so advanced an age as sixteen. The right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary had stated that he was afraid the provision for making parents pay for the support of their children in these reformatories would be inoperative in many instances. This might be so, but even if it were operative in only one case out of twenty, the principle was a sound one and ought to be enforced. It was a monstrous and dangerous principle to lay down, that parents having refractory children should be entitled to quarter them on the public funds for their maintenance. As to the emigration of children from the reformatory at Red Hill, he thought that was a decided mistake. If all that was wanted was to send them to another country, why not send them at once, instead of first maintaining them in this institution? The fact was, however, that this country could not now afford to lose her citizens, her position in this respect being quite different to that in which she stood a few years ago.

SIR GEORGE GREY

said, he thought the hon. Gentleman could not mean that the children immediately after committal should be sent out to the colonies, because that would evidently be a premium to crime. As to the emigration of children from Red Hill, that was left to the discretion of the manager of that institution.

MR. J. G. PHILLIMORE

said, one great defect in our law was, the age at which a child might be made the object of our criminal jurisprudence. Nothing could be more shocking than to see children of seven years old brought before the magistrates, and we might in this follow with advantage the example of the canon law, which fixed the age of nine for girls and ten for boys, until which time children could not be the object of criminal jurisprudence.

MR. BARROW

said, he would point out lo the hon. and learned Member the youthful till-robbers, who, at the age of seven or eight, were extremely clever in their vocation, and ought certainly to be taken out of the hands of their parents.

MR. J. G. PHILLIMORE

said, he was not objecting to a child of that age being taken out of the hands of their parents, but to its being made the object of criminal jurisprudence.

SIR GEORGE GREY

said, the offence must be proved, and to prove the offence legal proceedings must be instituted against the child.

MR. FLOYER

said, that in referring to the vote of 3,620l. for Bethlehem Hospital, he considered that the question of criminal lunatics was in such an unsatisfactory state that unless some change in the law were proposed by next year, he should then feel inclined to move that this Vote be entirely omitted. The Vote was proposed for the maintenance of 107 criminal lunatics in Bethlehem Hospital, whereas in England there were about 600 criminal lunatics under confinement. There seemed to be no principle of selection with regard to those sent to this hospital, while a very large number were kept confined in county lunatic asylums. Now, if the system was a right one, all criminal lunatics should he kept in establishments supported by the public, and not in asylums belonging to the counties. The description of buildings required for criminal lunatics was not at all adapted for other lunatics, and the confinement of the two classes in the same asylum was highly detrimental to the treatment of the latter. The Metropolitan Commissioners in Lunacy had years ago represented to the Government the evils j attendant on the confinement of criminal lunatics in county asylums, but the system had been allowed to go on increasing till it had become a very great source of annoyance, as it interfered very much with the good treatment of ordinary lunatics in those asylums. He would not now oppose the Vote, but if the attention of the Government were not directed to the subject by another year he should certainly feel it his duty to propose its rejection.

MR. BARROW

said, he fully concurred in what had been stated by the hon. Member for Dorsetshire (Mr. Floyer) as to the impropriety of placing the two classes of lunatics in the same asylum.

SIR GEORGE GREY

said, a considerable portion of the expense of maintaining criminal lunatics in private asylums was paid by the public. He concurred in much, however, that had been said by the hon. Gentleman opposite, and hoped to be able I next year to come to some arrangement by which better accommodation might be provided for criminal lunatics at the charge of the Government.

MR. ALEXANDER HASTIE

said, he wished to observe, with reference to 5s. being paid for the maintenance of children in reformatory schools, that he knew of one establishment where this sum was found quite sufficient for the purpose. He observed that a large sum was taken for a juvenile reformatory in Ireland, and complained that no such support was given to similar institutions in England and Scotland.

SIR GEORGE GREY

said, the institution in Ireland was essentially a criminal one, similar to Parkhurst.

Vote agreed to, as was also

  1. (41.) 59,405l., Transportation of Convicts.
  2. (42.) 297,621l., Convict Establishments.

CAPTAIN SCOBELL

said, he wished to know what number of convicts we had now abroad? He wished the Vote were larger, as he thought the ticket-of-leave system would in a few years break down; but at the same time there seemed to be this year a considerable increase in salaries.

SIR GEORGE GREY

said, in consequence of the discoveries of gold in Australia it had been found necessary to raise the salaries of officers in order to retain them in the public service. The reduction in the number of convicts sent to Australia was very considerable. The only place to which they were now conveyed was—as he had stated at an earlier period of the evening— West Australia, and the number did not exceed 500 or 600 annually.

Vote agreed to.

MR. WILSON

said, that the next Vote was that for Education in England, and as a sum had been taken on account, he would postpone it, in order that the discussion on the subject which was expected might take place.

MR. MACARTNEY

said, he hoped that the estimate No. 4 would not be pressed, as several of the items would lead to discussion, and in consequence of the alteration in the business for the night, a number of Gentlemen who intended to take part in that discussion were absent. He would suggest that all the educational Votes should be postponed.

MR. WILSON

said, that the Vote for English education had been postponed at the request of several hon. Members, but he hoped the Committee would go on with the other Votes.

MR. DISRAELI

said, he thought that, considering the number of Votes which had been agreed to without any serious opposition, the Government might well agree to postpone these Educational Votes. He observed that there were seventeen Orders on the paper, and he thought that if the noble Lord at the head of the Government had looked through those Orders, and considered which of them could fairly be brought forward, he might have been able on that evening to have got through a great deal of business. He thought that the noble Lord could safely consent to postpone the Educational Votes, and also the Committee on the Metropolis Local Management Bill. The remaining sixteen Orders were, he thought, enough to satisfy the appetite of any Government, whether a weak or a strong one.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, he would agree to the postponement of the Educational Votes; as to the Metropolis Management Bill, he did not know what course his right hon. Friend the Member for Marylebone intended to pursue.

SIR BENJAMIN HALL

said, that when the proper time arrived he should be prepared to move that the House go into Committee on that Bill. He believed that up to the 46th clause there would be no objection to the Bill, and when that clause was arrived at he would consider the propriety of adjourning the discussion to a future day.

MR. DISRAELI

said, he was always very unwilling to refer to conversations in the lobby or behind the Speaker's Chair, but he had understood that the right hon. Gentleman had undertaken not to proceed with the Bill that evening. The right hon. Gentleman said, that there was nothing in the Bill to provoke discussion before the 46th clause, but he had understood that before arriving at that clause there was an important amendment to be proposed, which involved the consideration of the propriety of altering Hobhouse's Act.

VISCOUNT EBRINGTON

said, he trusted that his right hon. Colleague would not proceed with the Bill that evening; and, indeed, he had understood that it was not his intention to do so.

SIR BENJAMIN HALL

said, he hoped that the House would consent to go into Committee on the Bill when the proper time arrived. He had that afternoon, when he saw that there was a chance of being able to proceed with the Bill, sent a message to the noble Lord who had just sat down, by the hon. Member for Westminster, informing him that such was the case, and he hoped that there would not be any objection to go into Committee on the Bill that evening.

VISCOUNT EBRINGTON

said, that he had believed the right hon. Gentleman to have entered into a distinct understanding not to proceed with the measure that evening.

[Ultimately it was agreed that the Bill should not be proceeded with that evening, and the Educational Votes were postponed.]

The following Votes were then agreed to—

CAPTAIN SCOBELL

said, that he believed the Governor had no salary as such, but had 5,000l. a year as chief consul or superintendent. Two years ago, it was objected that the salary of the Governor (6,000l.) was too large, but now the Governor and Lieutenant-Governor had 7,000l. between them, which was an increase on the former charge.

SIR GEGRGE GREY

said, that Sir John Bowring's expenses were great, and his duties requiring him to be taken away very often from Hong-Kong, it was necessary to have a lieutenant-governor on the spot.

Vote agreed to.

(53.) 16,720l., Land and Emigration Board.

MR. SPOONER

said, he was decidedly of opinion that it was now time that a stop should be put to promoting emigration. He had always thought it bad policy to send out from this country the industrious and enterprising, while the drones were left at home. The Government, he considered, ought rather to check than encourage emigration.

SIR GEORGE GREY

said, that the Vote was not intended to promote emigration, but to protect emigrants against the frauds and impositions to which they might be subject at the different ports of embarkation. With respect to Australian, or what was called Government emigration, no portion of the funds of this country were applied to that object. The money for that purpose was sent over by the colonial authorities, and its administration was entrusted to the Emigration Commissioners, but no inducement to emigrate was held out by the Government, beyond the circumstance of the colonial funds being placed in the hands of the Emigration Board for distribution.

MR. JOHN MACGREGOR

said, that the greatest discontent prevailed in consequence of emigrants arriving at the different ports from a great distance, being sent in vessels not properly suited for the purpose.

MR. SPOONER

said, he thought the statement of the Home Secretary unsatisfactory. The right hon. Gentleman said, that the Vote was merely intended to furnish protection to those who emigrated on their own account, and to provide for the proper distribution of the funds sent from the colonies; but he (Mr. Spooner) considered the sum of 8,700l. for the salaries of Chairman, two Commissioners, Secretary, and establishment, &c., very large for that purpose.

SIR GEORGE GREY

said, that the emigration officers at the ports were appointed for the express purpose of seeing that the ships were seaworthy, and of deciding disputes which might arise. The board had a large sum of money to dispose of; it had the general superintendence of those agents at the ports; it had to answer innumerable letters, and to discharge generally very onerous and important duties. It was not improbable, however, that a reduction would shortly take place in the number of the Commissioners.

In answer to MR. APSLEY PELLATT,

SIR GEORGE GREY

said, that if the colonists who provided the funds in question wished that the agents at the ports should be appointed by themselves instead of by the Emigration Board, he apprehended that the Government would not object.

CAPTAIN SCOBELL

said, he wished to draw attention to the circumstance that there was no Government emigration agent at any port between Plymouth and Liverpool, and would suggest that an emigration agent should be established at Bristol.

SIR GEORGE GREY

said, the subject had been brought under his notice by a memorial from Bristol. He had referred that memorial to the Emigration Commissioners; and he did not think, from the Report which they had made, that it would be desirable to incur the expense which the establishment of such a Board would involve, because he believed that the necessities of the public were already sufficiently provided for.

Vote agreed to; as were the two following Votes—

  1. (54.) 10,500l., Balance to Canada, Destitute Emigrants.
  2. (55.) 10,000l., Captured Negroes.
  3. (56.) 11,250l., Mixed Commissions.

CAPTAIN SCOBELL

said, he wished to obtain some information with regard to the present state of the African slave trade.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, he believed that, with respect to Brazil, the progress that had been made was satisfactory. So far as his information went, and it was confirmed by the statements made repeatedly to him during the last twelve months by the Brazilian Minister at the British Court, the importation of slaves into Brazil had entirely ceased. The result had been, that the capital formerly employed in that abominable traffic had been diverted into other channels—that the trade of the country was becoming more and more developed—that roads were in course of construction, railways were planned, and that improvements of all kinds were going on. He was afraid that to a certain extent the slave trade was still carried on in Cuba, not simply from Africa, but from Brazil, for the Brazilians complained that some of their slaves had been carried off to Cuba. The number of slaves imported into Cuba was incomparably smaller than the number formerly introduced into Brazil, the Brazilian importation having ranged from 30,000 or 40,000 to 60,000 or 70,000. The utmost number supposed to be landed in Cuba was some 2,000 or 3,000, but it was difficult to ascertain the precise number. The Spanish Government had assured Her Majesty's Government that, as far as orders from Madrid could he effective, every effort had been made to stop the importation of slaves into Cuba, and the Governor-General had endeavoured to enforce the law. Of course, means were found to evade the vigilance of the Government, and several cargoes had been landed. On the coast of Africa, on the other hand, the great cessation in the slave trade had given an immense development to legitimate commerce, and every one acquainted with the operations of commerce, as connected with Africa, must know that the quantity of African produce brought to this country, especially palm oil, was a proof that a wonderful improvement had taken place in the commerce of that hitherto unfortunate country. He trusted in the course of a few years to see an entire change in the condition of that coast, which for a long period had been distinguished by nothing but crime and suffering.

MR. ALEXANDER HASTIE

said, that at Havannah we had a consul with 1,600l. a year; and at the Cape of Good Hope we had not only a consul with 1,200l. a year, but an arbitrator with 800l. a year, and a registrar with 500l. a year. Now, if all that force was wanted at the Cape of Good Hope, why was not a similar force kept at Havannah, which was the great seat of the slave trade?

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, that in order to deal with vessels of different nations, we were obliged to have mixed Commission Courts established. There was at the Cape a British Judge, and a Judge of the country with which we had a treaty. Those Judges appointed an arbitrator between them for which the Judges drew lots. Sometimes, therefore, the British Judge appointed an arbitrator, and sometimes the Judge of the other country, whichever it might be. The registrar was an officer who kept the records of the Court.

MR. JOHN MACGREGOR

said, he believed these places were entire sinecures. He did not know of his own knowledge that this was the case, but representations had been made to him on the subject, not only strong, but clear. Instead of having three such officers at the Cape they should be distributed in places where their services would be more effective. He believed that Havannah, Porto Rico, and some other outports of Cuba were the places at which the country ought to have its strongest staff. He knew the Committee must pass these Estimates, but he hoped that before any such Estimates were again submitted they would be well considered, and not be brought forward according to a mere routine which indolence had sanctioned.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, the last lurking place of slavery was Mozambique, to the east of the Cape of Good Hope, and when a vessel was seized there she was taken to the nearest point. If a ship were taken between Mozambique and the Cape, and were taken to Havannah, the sufferings of the negroes would he intense. It would be seen, therefore, that it was absolutely necessary to maintain those Courts at the Cape of Good Hope.

MR. OTWAY

said, he thought it would be satisfactory if the noble Lord would give the Committee some information as to the number of slaves upon whom these Gentlemen were called to arbitrate.

Vote agreed to.

(57). 157,669l., Consuls Abroad.

MR. W. EWART

said, it was his intention to have brought forward a Motion in reference to the examination of candidates for diplomatic service. He hoped there would be no objection to his bringing it on, on going into Committee of Supply upon some other occasion.

MR. JOHN MACGREGOR

said, he did not complain of the Vote, for he must admit that the persons appointed as consuls by the present Government had efficiently performed their duty, much more efficiently than consuls generally had done. What he complained of was the unequal salaries given to various consuls. Some had heavy duties to perform with small salaries, while others who had light duties had high salaries. If any class ought to be remunerated it was those consuls who represented this country in great commercial cities.

SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE

said, that the consul at St. Petersburg, who was in the receipt of 750l. a year, had been reduced to 190l.; while the consul at Archangel, who received 300l., had been reduced to 801. He wished to know why those reductions had been made.

MR. WILSON

said, the payments were regulated on the principle that the consuls were on leave of absence.

MR. AYSHFORD WISE

said, that the Committee which sat on the subject of official salaries in 1850 did not inquire into the salaries of our consuls, but in their report they recommended that that branch of the question should form the subject of a separate inquiry before another Select Committee. He therefore considered that it was now high time that the whole question of our consular establishments should undergo examination and revision. The present Vote was certainly large, but would not be too much if the country derived proper advantage from its expenditure. The cost of the consular department had risen within the last five years from 148,000l. to 157,000l. This year there was 4,600l. more, because that sum had been transferred to the Consolidated Fund; and there was a sum of 32,605l. for the Chinese consuls. The votes for the consular department were scattered over different Estimates, instead of being all brought together—a circumstance which rendered it extremely difficult to analyse this expenditure. Although the House had to vote away millions for the heavy war charges to which the country was now subjected, that was no reason why they should not look carefully into every item of their ordinary expenditure. Indeed, that circumstance should form an additional incentive to the adoption of every practicable economy. Now, at Naples we had a Minister and a Secretary of Legation, who received 4,500l. a year; and at the same place we had also a consul and a vice-consul with 500l. per annum between them. Some persons thought it undesirable that diplomatic and consular functions should be united, but already the separation between the two had been broken through in certain other instances, and it might probably be advisable to establish such an officer as that of Consular Attaché. Certainly, however, the continuance of consular merchants at foreign ports was highly objectionable, and created great jealousy among those English merchants who considered that those of their class who also acted as consuls had undue advantages over them, as regarded intelligence and communications from other countries, in consequence of their double capacity. Formerly our consuls were prohibited from trading, but in 1832 this restriction was, he considered with very questionable policy, repealed. It would be much better that they should be paid higher salaries and required to be unconnected with mercantile affairs. In the Levant we had three consuls general—one with 1,500l., another 900l., and a third 800l. a-year; and we had also in the same country forty-one consuls and vice-consuls, whose salaries were 21,150l., independently of fees. In France, on the other hand, our consular salaries amounted only to 5,500l., and in the United States they were but 5,000l. There was, thus, a great disproportion between the consular expenditure for Turkey and that of these two other countries, and this disproportion was the more remarkable when it was considered that our exports to Turkey were only 2,000,000l. yearly, whereas those to France amounted to 2,500,000l., and those to the United States to even 23,000,000l. He had some time since moved for a return of the amount of fees received by our various consuls, but this information had not yet been furnished to the House, on the alleged ground that it would take a very considerable time to prepare it. Now, he had seen a document which convinced him that the particulars he had asked for might have been made out within less than two hours, for there was a return prepared every year in the Foreign Office of all our consular agents, with the amount of foes received by each, and he could state the contents of that document for the year 1853. At Hamburg the consul received a salary of 1,500l. and fees 512l.; at Genoa the consul's salary was 400l., fees 397l.; at Alexandria the consul's salary was 500l., and fees 500l.; at California the consul's salary was 200l., and fees 1,200l., a year. Now, he thought it would be much wiser that the consuls should be paid handsome salaries, and that the fees received by them should go into a fund in a similar manner to that adopted with respect to fees paid in the courts of law. The present system of small salaries and large fees, and of large salaries and small fees, did not tend either to the advantage of the commercial classes abroad, or to the honour of this country. The last point to which he would call the attention of the Committee was one of the utmost importance; it was with respect to the conduct of some of our small consuls in the Levant. He did not wish to throw a shadow on their personal character, but if the statement which had been communicated to him were correct, he was sorry that any Englishman should be open to the charges that statement conveyed. It was stated to him that Christians—Ionians and others—purchased the right to post up the English arms, and that they did so to avoid the capitation tax; that many of them were poor and worthless men; and that, although they were Englishmen by adoption, they tarnished the English name. For this privilege and protection they paid, he believed, a sort of tribute to the consuls, consisting of Christmas presents. This was, in his opinion, a very objectionable system. He would beg to state the contents of a letter which he had received from a most intelligent Mussulman who was at present in England, and who was ready to make the same communication to Her Majesty's Government, if required. The letter showed what were the feelings of the natives towards the English consuls in the Levant. The writer stated that the English Ambassadors at Constantinople had for a long time past been most unremitting in their exertions for the benefit of the Christain population in Turkey, and that it was to their earnest and well-directed efforts that the Turks were indebted for many steps that had been taken by the Sultan and his Ministers for the removal of abuses in the provinces, and by which Turkey had been largely benefited. The writer went on to say that, while the English Government had inspired the Turkish Government with such an excellent spirit, it had often astonished him that they did not put it in practice themselves; and he then asked why they did not appoint a Secret Commission to investigate the conduct of the British consuls and of their servants? Such a proceeding, he said, would be the means of bringing to light many abuses that were suffered by those consuls to exist without check, and by which the old and vicious Turkish system was perpetuated. Many of the consuls continued practices which even the Turks were ashamed of.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, he must beg to remind the hon. Gentleman that when a question regarded the character of one large class of public servants it was more becoming, before the accusation was made in specific terms, to ascertain whether it rested upon any foundation whatever. The hon. Member had read a letter containing sweeping charges of a very deep character against the British consuls in the Levant. The charge was supported by no one fact whatever. It might come just as well from a person who had no ground at all for making it, as from a person who had some real ground of complaint. All he could say was, that if any person, whether Turk or Christian, Englishman or foreigner, had any complaint to make against any consular agent in the Levant or anywhere else, he knew perfectly well how to address himself either to the Secretary of State in England or to the representative of the Sovereign in the country in which the alleged ground of complaint had arisen; and he also knew that that complaint would be investigated and, if found just, redressed. There was a difficulty in the matter. That he (Viscount Palmerston) knew well, because, having been in the Foreign Office, he was aware that such complaints did reach the Secretary of State. He must, therefore, hesitate to attach any very great credit to the letter which had been read by the hon. Gentleman, although he admitted as being perfectly just that which was stated in the former part of the letter as to the useful exertions made by the diplomatic servants of the Crown resident in Turkey for obtaining justice for all British subjects in that country, and for promoting improvements in Turkish administration. With regard to the consuls established in the Levant, it was well known that their duties were very distinct from the duties of British consuls in any other ports. They were not simply commercial, but were judicial in their character; because, by the treaties which this country had entered into with the Porte, all questions with which British subjects were concerned were to be brought under the cognisance of the consular department; the consequence was, that the consuls in the Levant had duties of a higher description to discharge than those in any other part of the world. With regard to the number of consuls, they must not measure the want of a consul by the amount of exports or imports of any particular country. It was manifest that there might be more imports into one particular port in a country than there might be in twenty or thirty ports in another country; nevertheless, they must have a consul in each port with which British subjects dealt; therefore, it was perfectly futile to take the amount of exports or imports as the rule by which to determine the number of consuls to be maintained. Then the hon. Gentleman forgot the necessity of protection. It was not simply either the number of ports or the amount of exports and imports of a country with which they traded that they had to consider; but they also had to consider what were the institutions and the habits of that country. In a country like France or the United States, where everything was established upon the same kind of system which prevailed in this country, where the transactions were extremely simple, and where official interference was very little required, all that the consul had to do was to go through those consular operations which were essential according to the laws of the country. But in the East the consul, besides his strictly consular duties, had certain judicial and even diplomatic, duties to discharge. He was the channel of communication in all matters of complaints within his cognisance with the centre of the Government. In proportion as our trade extended so must also the number of our consuls he multiplied. Our trade had extended, and therefore an increase from time to time in our consular establishments had been made. This necessarily increased the amount of the estimate for the consular department. This subject was now new to the House of Commons. Not only had it been discussed every year on the Estimates, but only a short time since a Select Committee had been appointed to investigate the consular establishment. The hon. Member (Mr. A. Wise) differed from the hon. Gentleman the Member for Glasgow (Mr. John Macgregor) with regard to the salaries of the consuls, and thought that in many cases they were too large. He (Viscount Palmerston) rather agreed with his hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow in thinking, upon the whole, that the salaries were too low, considering the expenses to which consuls were subjected. He believed that in many instances the consuls, in consequence of the lowness of their salaries, were deprived of the means of showing that hospitality to the strangers and captains of vessels who came to the ports where they were appointed which was expected from them. At the same time the pressure put upon the Government by the House of Commons on different occasions when the consular establishment was discussed did lead them to reduce the salaries of the consuls to what they thought would be the lowest possible amount. The hon. Member for Stafford had also suggested that the fees received by consuls should be paid into the Exchequer, and that those officers should be remunerated by a simple salary; but the fees of the consuls did not correspond with the fees of law officers at home which were paid into the Exchequer. Those latter fees had been considered as personal remuneration, whereas the fees of the consuls enabled them to pay the expense of offices and the salaries of clerks; and to perform the various duties which were considered due from persons in their position. A portion of those fees was received for the performance of notarial acts, and where the aggregate amount of fees was very large it arose solely from the circumstance that the acts done were numerous. But then in proportion as those acts were numerous so must the establishment of the consuls and the number of the clerks be larger; and the scale of remuneration was so arranged that where the fees were very large and numerous the salaries were considerably reduced, after the allowance of the necessary expenses, in order that a fair and equitable rate of payment as between the various consuls might be maintained. The hon. Member had also suggested, what had been often before suggested in that House, namely, that the consular duties should be performed by persons attached to diplomatic missions. He (Lord Palmerston) did not think that would be a good plan, for their duty was of a totally different kind, and their condition was, by international law, perfectly distinct from that of a diplomatic agent. No advantage that he could see would arise from giving a consul a diplomatic character, or from calling a diplomatic agent a consul instead of an attaché. It would make little difference in point of salary, and create great confusion in point of character and position. There was a great deal of truth in what the hon. Gentleman had said with respect to the consuls being merchants. At one time the current of opinion in that House ran all one way, and at another it set just as strongly in a contrary direction. It had been said that all consuls should be merchants, that the business of the office could be performed much cheaper, and, at the same time, more effectually, by respectable merchants established in the various towns, and that opinion was entertained by his late Friend the Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume). To a certain degree some advantage might arise from adopting that plan, but it was open to the objection that in many cases it might create a feeling of jealousy among the other merchants of the place, who might entertain exaggerated notions of the importance of a consular position, and of the advantage it would give to the particular person appointed in commercial transactions. Again, in places where the consul had political functions to perform, it might be imputed to him, if he abstained from pressing the claims which particular individuals might have against the Government, that he was sacrificing their interest in order to make himself agreeable to the Government and to derive advantages therefrom. Generally speaking, therefore, it was better to have consuls who were not connected with trade, and, in all cases in which the considerations to which he had just referred were applicable, consuls were prohibited from trading. The law permitted the Secretary of State to allow trading by consuls where no public inconvenience could arise, but in the majority of cases it was forbidden. On the other hand, when the Government forbade trading, they were bound to give the consul a higher salary, though it might be attended with some little additional expense to the public. Having answered most of the points to which the hon. Member for Stafford had adverted, he would take this opportunity of saying that he was very glad that his hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow (Mr. John Macgregor) had borne testimony to the efficiency of the consular officers as a body. They performed their duties very much to their own credit and to the public advantage; and the House might be quite sure that the nation could not hope for any great extension of trade in countries where commerce had not hitherto penetrated, unless they sent forth these pioneers to protect the interests of those adventurers who explored the regions which British enterprise had not yet entered. No one knew better the importance of the services rendered to the country by the consuls than the British merchant.

MR. BRADY

said, the noble Lord had not adverted to the question of the propriety of continuing the receiving fees.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, that if they were abolished it would be necessary to make allowances for clerks and offices; and therefore, on the whole, it was thought desirable that these fees, which were very small, should be continued, especially as they were in exact proportion to the duty performed.

MR. THORNELY

said, he complained of the hardships inflicted on merchants by requiring so many certificates on landing goods. A number of articles, innocent in themselves, had now become contraband of war, and, if there were fifty different bales of goods which came within the prohibited degrees in a ship, fifty certificates would be required before they could be landed in a friendly or neutral country, and much inconvenience had consequently arisen since the commencement of the war. He would, therefore, suggest that a general certificate should be given on landing a cargo.

MR. WILSON

said, he was aware that complaints had been made on this subject, but the restrictions complained of were rendered necessary for the purpose of preventing the shipment of warlike stores to neutral countries for transmission to Russia. Securities for this purpose were of course expensive; and certificates of the landing of the stores at the countries they were professedly shipped for were essential. As to the suggestion of the hon. Member, with respect to general certificates for entire cargoes, it could not be practically carried out, as it would be impossible to divide the responsibility of the shippers, or cast the whole on the shipowner; the only course was to make each shipper responsible for his own share. Great consideration had been given to the subject, and the utmost had been done to prevent needless inconvenience.

MR. OTWAY

said, he very much objected to the continuance of the fees on obtaining passports. Although, of course, a traveller was subject to the regulations of Sardinia, or any State through which he passed, yet it was very hard that the English consuls should pounce upon Englishmen for fees, and these, he thought, might very well be done away with. The noble Lord at the head of the Government had very eloquently described the functions of consuls, which he had said were not only diplomatic, but also commercial and judicial. He (Mr. Otway) had met with a great many consuls who were always exceedingly civil and attentive, but had never met with one who was appointed because he was eminently qualified for his office. Such appointments were generally given for private considerations. He wished to ask how long reduced salaries were to be paid to our Russian consuls, for he thought that, in the event of the war continuing for some years, it would be absurd to continue such payments.

MR. WILSON

said, that the payments would not continue beyond the second year, when arrangements would be made for discontinuing them. Care was also taken to appoint these consuls to other stations.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, that the observation he had made on the consuls having diplomatic functions to perform was applicable only to the consuls in the Levant, and he could assure the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Otway) that when he was at the Foreign Office he had taken care to appoint gentlemen fully qualified to perform the functions. In addition to their general capacity the consuls in the Levant were selected for their knowledge of the language and habits of the localities, and in some cases gentlemen who had lived there. He wished to advert to one point which the hon. Member for Stafford (Mr. Wise) had touched on. The hon. Member had read a letter, in which it was stated that Ionians and others bribed our consuls and vice-consuls in the Levant to place them under British protection. But all British subjects were entitled to protection from our consuls, and the Ionian States being under the protection of Great Britain, evry Ionian merchant was of course entitled to British protection, therefore it was totally unnecessary for any Ionian to bribe a British consular agent to give him the protection to which he was fully entitled by law.

LORD SEYMOUR

said, he certainly did not think our consuls were overpaid, but he saw that the charge for some of the salaries of three or four consuls general, which appeared last year in these Estimates, had been transferred to the Consolidated Fund. He wished to know why these charges had been withdrawn from the annual scrutiny of Parliament?

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, that by Act of Parliament, certain charges were created on the Consolidated Fund to cover the whole of the diplomatic salaries and pensions. When diplomatic relations were opened with some of the South American republics it was not thought expedient to give them the character of simple diplomatic agents with salaries paid out of the Consolidated Fund. The functions assigned to these agents were of a mixed character, diplomatic and consular; and they were allowed 1l. a day for their diplomatic charges as chargé d'affaires. By the falling in of pensions it was found that there was a surplus on the charge upon the Consolidated Fund, a surplus not required for the diplomatic establishments, and the salaries of those diplomatic agents were therefore transferred to the Consolidated Fund. No additional charge was entailed on the public by this change; on the contrary, it effected a saving.

Vote agreed to; as were also the three following Votes—

  1. (58.) 25,000l., Embassies and Missions Abroad, Extraordinary Expenses.
  2. (59.) 138,609l., Superannuation, or Retired Allowances.
  3. (60.) 2,270l., Toulonese and Corsican Emigrants.
  4. (61.) 2,000l., National Vaccine Establishment.

MR. BRADY

said, this Vote was too small to be of the slightest use. It was fearful to contemplate the ravages which small-pox had made of late years; he considered that the Government ought to organise a complete system of vaccination.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, the Vote was for the support of a central establishment in London, which had existed almost since the days of Dr. Jenner, and which had been originated with the view of supplying proper means for vaccination throughout the country. The question of a systematic measure for enforcing vaccination was a matter which did not lie within the compass of this Vote. Some years ago, however, an Act had been passed which did establish such a system in connection with the Poor-Law Board; and he did not see what the Government could do more.

MR. BRADY

said, the Act had proved to be an admitted failure. At the present time the operator had not the means of knowing with certainty whether what he used was the true vaccine lymph; and many cases had come within his knowledge, in which children had imbibed loathsome, and even mortal diseases, from having been inoculated from unhealthy persons.

MR. COWPER

said, that the Act in question had come down from the Lords, and that this House was, therefore, hardly answerable for its defects. However, a Bill was in contemplation to remedy those defects.

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON

said, he wished to know whether this Vote had anything besides its antiquity to recommend it, and whether the 300l. was divided equally between the President of the College of Physicians, the Senior Censor, and the President of the College of Surgeons? He was disposed to think the country derived the minimum of benefit from this 2,000l. The Act of 1853 was found to be inefficient, and last year an attempt was made to improve it, but without success; and that Act, with all its faults, still remained the only protection against the increasing scourge of small-pox. The subject of vaccination, concerning as it did the welfare of the people, ought not to be lightly passed over, and he desired to hear further explanation.

MR. KENDALL

said, he believed that the evil was owing to the practice which existed in some Unions of ordering poor persons to attend for vaccination on particular days in the week. The parties did not come, and so the thing was neglected.

MR. WILSON

said, he had no doubt the Act of 1853 was beneficial, and last year several hon. Members pointed out its great utility. At the same time he did not deny that improvements might be made in it. The 300l. to which the right hon. Baronet (Sir J. Pakington) alluded, consisted of a fee of 100l. each to the three eminent medical men who had been named. There was an Annual Report from the institution which afforded every information, but he had never before heard its utility called in question.

MR. BRADY

said, he did not find fault with the institution. All he said was, that it was not sufficient, and that the country was deceived in supposing they had an effective vaccine institution.

MR. HENLEY

said, small-pox last year had raged like a pestilence; and therefore they had grave reason for doubting whether the operation of vaccination was efficiently performed under the present system. He did not believe they wanted more Acts of Parliament. What they wanted was, adequate remuneration to medical men. If medical men were paid properly for doing their duty, vaccination would not be performed in so hasty a manner, and the poor people would be more ready to avail themselves of it.

Vote agreed to.

(62.) 325l., Refuge for the Destitute.

MR. COWAN

said, he wished to draw attention to the unfair manner in which Edinburgh had been treated with respect to this Vote. While a pecuniary grant was made to the institution in London, a similar one in the northern capital had actually been compelled to purchase, or promise to purchase, for 5,000l., a building belonging to the State, in which its inmates (400 in number) had been lodged for years. He doubted the propriety of these eleemosynary Votes altogether.

MR. WILSON

said, he must explain that the 325l. was paid to the institution on account of twenty-five women, who had been admitted into the Institution, on being discharged from prison. If the Edinburgh institution had similar cases it would undoubtedly have a claim for similar aid. The building referred to by the hon. Gentleman was the property of the Board of Ordnance. It became necessary to sell it, and of course the Board was bound to get the highest price for it. The parochial authorities had competed for the purchase with the charitable institution.

SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE

said, he wished to know if the Government would extend the principle of contributions to institutions that received female prisoners on their discharge from gaol to all institutions of that nature?

MR. WILSON

said, no general rule had been adopted; the present Vote depended on the peculiar circumstances of the case.

Vote agreed to.

(63.) 4,200l., for Polish refugees and distressed Spaniards.

SIR WILLIAM JOLLIFFE

said, he wished to know what was the decrease in the Vote for this year, and by what department the fund was distributed?

MR. WILSON

said that the Vote, which was formerly very large, had been transferred from the civil contingencies in 1843. Some five or six years ago the House resolved that there should be no further charge made in respect of it: it would therefore cease when the present recipients died off. There was no diminution this year, as none had died within the year. The fund was distributed by trustees.

Vote agreed to.

(64.) 4,371l., Miscellaneous Charges formerly on Civil List.

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON

said, there was an omission in the Estimates of a Vote which ought to be included, as formerly, in the Colonial Estimates. He had last year called attention to the peculiar and painful position in which the Bishop of New Zealand was placed, which was acknowledged by the Government, who granted him an income for the year. The right hon. Baronet (Sir G. Grey) also wrote a despatch to the colonial Government of New Zealand, expressing a hope that the Parliament of New Zealand would pass a Vote for the support of the bishop from the colonial funds. He understood that this hope had been altogether frustrated, and that the Legislature had met and been dissolved without having passed any such Vote. In March last the term for which the income had been granted, expired, and the bishop was now without any income whatever to compensate him for his services as Bishop of New Zealand. He now begged to appeal to the noble Lord (Lord J. Russell), as he had done to his right hon. predecessor, and he would remind the noble Lord that he was the Minister who, twelve or fourteen years, ago, appointed the Bishop of New Zealand, and entered into the arrangements made on his appointment. He trusted that the noble Lord would keep faith with the bishop, and, either by a Colonial Vote, or, if that could not be obtained, by a Vote of that House, would take care that no breach of faith was committed towards that exemplary prelate.

LORD JOHN RUSSELL

said, he would inquire into the circumstances of the case, and would inform the right hon. Gentleman and the House of the opinion that the Government might entertain upon it.

Vote agreed to; House resumed.