§ On the Question that the House at its rising do adjourn until Monday,
§ MR. T. DUNCOMBEsaid, that he had to entreat the attention of the House to an important matter, and to point out the special position of the House in reference to a Bill now before it, having for its title "To explain and amend the Act of last Session for the better Management of the Metropolis." A statement had been made with regard to that Bill founded on an entire misconception of its nature. It was a Bill which would deprive many parishes of their ancient rights, and deprive many thousands of the ratepayers of the metropolis of privileges which they had enjoyed for 300 years. It had been said that there was an ambiguity in the wording of the Act of last Session, and this Bill was only intended to remove it; but ambiguity was a very convenient word, when Ministers are about to do some great job; and this he considered was what Ministers intended to do by that Bill.
§ MR. SPEAKERsaid, that he must remind the hon. Member that the Bill to which he alluded was one of the Orders of the Day for that night, and it was highly irregular, therefore, for the hon. Member to discuss it on the Motion, "That the House at its rising adjourn until Monday next." The hon. Member had given notice of an Amendment to the Motion for going into Committee, and he ought to postpone his observations until that Motion came on.
§ MR. T. DUNCOMBEsaid, that that was just what he was coming to. He wanted to know when the Bill was to go into Committee. He was afraid that the Order might be read at midnight, and thus all discussion be prevented. His object was to procure the postponement of the Order, that the House might interfere to protect the country from the wrong, the oppression, and the tyranny which were about to be perpetrated. If the House was determined to persevere with the Bill, at any rate it should not be done in ignorance—they should not say to him after Easter, "Why, you should have told us all this before." Well, but the noble Lord at the head of Her Majesty's Government had told them that it was necessary to pass the Bill before Easter. He did not believe a word of it. The noble Lord had been misled—he did not know if the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Public Works (Sir B. Hall) had done it, or if any 2038 one else had done it, but he had been misled—he had evidently not read the Bill. It had been said there was an oversight in the original Bill. There was no oversight—he could prove there was no oversight at all. The Bill was brought in in violation of a direct promise—[Cries of "Order!"]
§ MR. SPEAKERsaid, that the hon. Member might put a question to any Member of Her Majesty's Government as to the time at which the Bill was to be brought on, but it was not in order for him to discuss the merits of the Bill which was the subject of one of the Orders of the Day.
§ MR. T. DUNCOMBEsaid, that he would confine his observations as much as possible within the limits prescribed by the right hon. Gentleman the Speaker. He would only refer to what was the law of the land, and to the conduct of Her Majesty's Ministers with reference to that law. The law to which he referred was an Act of the last Session of Parliament. The preamble of that Act said, that "Provision should be made for the better local management of the metropolis, in respect to the sewerage, drainage, paving, cleansing, lighting, and improvement" thereof. It was not only specified in the Act itself, that the powers conferred by it should not extend to matters relating to the Church and the management of the poor, but such was the express understanding on which the measure was passed; and when a deputation from the parish of Clerkenwell, with the vestry clerk at their head, came down to that House one evening, and, greatly alarmed, called out the right hon. Baronet to have a conversation with them in the lobby, he assured them that the measure would neither affect the Church nor the poor. The parishioners went away satisfied with the right hon. Gentleman, enchanted with his manner, and very possibly deluded and humbugged. The present Bill was of such importance, that it was the duty of the Government to bring it forward only under such circumstances as would insure for it the most careful and minute consideration. He entreated of Her Majesty's Government either to permit it to be referred to a Select Committee, or to postpone it for a month, so that the various parishes, which it was designed to affect might have an opportunity of expressing their opinion upon it. If either of those courses were adopted, the House would hereafter thank him for hav- 2039 ing prevented one of the grossest acts of injustice ever attempted by the occupants of the Treasury bench. There was no necessity for precipitation in the matter at all; nor would any inconvenience result from holding the approaching elections under the old Act, a measure which, if he was rightly informed, had received the sanction, not only of Mr. Welsby and the late Mr. Cowling, but of the Attorney and Solicitor General—all those high authorities being in favour of preserving intact the rights of the already existing vestries.
THE ATTORNEY GENERALsaid, he felt some difficulty in following his hon. Friend, and answering the question he had put, without deviating from the rules that had been laid down for the guidance of the proceedings of that House; but he should deal with the matter in the best way he could under the circumstances. He could assure the hon. Member and the House that the Government had no other anxiety than to preserve the parishes from an impending litigation, which threatened to be not only extensive but expensive. There was no such unanimity on the present Act as the hon. Gentleman appeared to suppose; on the contrary, there was a serious conflict of opinion as to its construction. On the 8th section, which purported to hand over the faculties and functions of the already existing vestries to the new ones, grave doubts had arisen, legal opinion being divided as to whether the particular vestries alluded to by the hon. Gentleman were included in the term "already existing vestries." If the old and the new bodies, standing with equal pertinacity on their presumed rights, were both to make a rate next Easter, the rate would infallibly be disputed by the public, and there would be nothing for it but a tedious and costly appeal to the Court of Queen's Bench. In that state of things the Government thought it better to substitute legislation for litigation, and with that view they introduced the declaratory measure which had proved so distasteful to the hon. Member. The reason why the Bill was pressed forward with such expedition was, that the Government desired to save the parishes from expense—an object which could be attained only by an immediate measure.
§ SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYsaid, he hoped that ample time would be afforded for the consideration of the Bill. It had passed its second reading at a very late hour the other night, on the representation of the hon. and learned Attorney General 2040 that it was a measure of no very great importance; but it was very questionable whether it would not deprive various parishes of their existing rights in relation to their churches and their poor.
§ SIR BENJAMIN HALLsaid, he was prepared to show that the Bill involved no breach of faith towards the parishes, and that it would carry out the intention of the Act of last Session. In order to prevent litigation, it was absolutely necessary that the measure should be proceeded with without delay.
§ MR. A. PELLATTsaid, he must also urge the necessity of avoiding precipitate haste in dealing with the Bill, as its provisions occasioned great disappointment to the metropolitan parishes.
§ MR. MURROUGHsaid, he wished to know what was the latest hour at which the Government would go into Committee on the measure?
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, he could not tell when the first business (the Army Estimates) would be finished, but it was very desirable that his right on. Friend (Sir B. Hall) should have an opportunity that evening of explaining the grounds on which the Bill was based. After twelve o'clock, however, the House could not be expected to listen to such a statement.