HC Deb 19 February 1858 vol 148 cc1740-1

said that, under the 19th and 20th Vict., c. 69, the Government was authorised to pay out of the Consolidated Fund one-fourth part of the expense of the County Police, if the Government Inspector should report that it was in a state of efficiency. Upon the passing of the Act, the Magistrates for the county of Northumberland engaged themselves in rendering the Police as effective as possible; but the Inspector refused the required certificate, not upon the ground that the Police was in an inefficient state, but upon the ground that, in his opinion, it was not sufficiently numerous, he understood that in the similar cases of the West Riding of Yorkshire and of Newcastle-upon-Tyne certificates had been granted, and he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary whether there was any objection to lay the correspondence upon the subject on the table of the House?


said, it was true that the authorities at the Home Office had felt it their duty to refuse to contribute to the payment of the Police Force in the county of Northumberland, in consequence of the Government Inspector having reported that, although they were in a high state of discipline, they were not sufficiently numerous for the performance of the duties which they had to discharge. He had also to state that the payment of an allowance for the Treasury had been refused for the Police in the West Riding of Yorkshire, and the police in the borough of Newcastle-upon-Tyne; but the Magistrates having promised that the number of men would be increased in those two cases, he had given orders that the contribution should be given to them for the future if that promise were fulfilled. He would have no objection to lay before the House the correspondence bearing upon that subject.