HC Deb 20 April 1866 vol 182 cc1775-8
MR. HUNT

said, he wished to ask the President of the Poor Law Board, When the Returns moved for by the hon. Member for Lincolnshire will be laid upon the table of the House? The order for making the Returns which related to the electoral statistics of counties was made on the 16th and 21st of last month. The right hon. Gentleman the President of the Poor Law Board was asked last night when the Returns would be ready, and he was reported to have said that the clerks of the unions were not obliged to make those Returns, and that unless some remuneration were given for the extra labour it was not very certain when they would be laid upon the table. It appeared to him that the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman would act as a direct suggestion to the clerks of the unions to take their time in preparing the Returns. He was sure that the Returns would contain much valuable information without which it was impossible fairly to discuss the Franchise Bill. In his opinion, when the House ordered Returns of this kind to be made it pledged itself to vote any money that might be required to insure their being made within a reasonable time, and under such circumstances he did not think it would be unreasonable that some remuneration should be given to the clerks of unions who were engaged in making up the Returns asked for. He therefore wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman, whether he would promise to make some remuneration to those employed in the matter, provided the Returns were made within a reasonable time?

MR. C. P. VILLIERS

repudiated the idea that he had intended by the answer he gave last night to throw out a suggestion to the clerks of unions to delay the Returns. His statement last night was identical with that which he had made on two previous occasions—namely, that the parochial officers were under no obligation to make these Returns, which had no bearing upon, nor connection with, their official duties, and the only reason they had been asked to draw them up was because they happened accidentally to have in their possession the particular books from which the Returns were obtained. When Government desired the Returns which had already been laid upon the table to be made, some remuneration was given, in order to accelerate their progress. As he had already informed the hon. Gentleman during the evening, he had inquired whether there was any precedent for the House voting money for Returns moved for by a private Member, and he had found a precedent for such a proceeding. He had also told the hon. Member that so far from there having been any unnecessary delay in the production of these Returns, 164 of them had been made already. In reply to the Question of the hon. Gentleman, he would now say that an arrangement would be made with the clerks of the unions to remunerate them for their labour in the matter on the same scale as that given in the case of the Government Returns.

MR. DISRAELI

said, that very great anxiety existed throughout the country generally in reference to these Returns, as it was believed that the alterations in the county suffrage proposed by the Franchise Bill were more considerable than those to be made in the borough franchise. As Government had supplied full information with regard to the electoral statistics of boroughs, perhaps they would not think it an unreasonable request that further information should be given with regard to the electoral statistics of counties. He was perfectly satisfied with the explanation given by the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Poor Law Board, as he understood from his statement that the Government had made up their minds that, before the House went into Committee upon the Franchise Bill—if they ever did arrive at that stage of the Bill—the fullest statistical information should be laid upon the table with reference to the county franchise.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

could assure the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Buckinghamshire that every effort would be made by the Government to insure the Returns being laid upon the table of the House within a reasonable time The right hon. Gentleman was mistaken in his assumption that the answer of his right hon. Friend contained anything like a pledge that the progress of the Bill would in any way depend upon the time when the Returns were made. But he hoped that no such difficulty would arise and that a complete Return, or a Return as nearly complete as circumstances would permit, would be made. He also wished to demur to the proposition of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Northamptonshire, as one likely to lead to dangerous consequences if it were supposed that whenever the House had or dered a Return to be made on the Motion of a private Member it must be considered pledged to remunerate those engaged in making such Returns. In his opinion each particular ease must stand upon its own merits, and no general rule should be adopted in the matter. It had been the practice for the House to order from public officers of many classes Returns which were not subjects of special remuneration, and which were yet not subjects of statutory obligation. That might be considered a customary right exercised in the public interests, and he did not think that they should be justified in altogether changing the custom, as otherwise no Return could be ordered on the Motion of a private Member until its cost had been estimated. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by withdrawing his Motion for going into Committee of Supply.

SIR LAWRENCE PALK

said, that the statement made by the President of the Poor Law Board last night was to the effect that unless some remuneration were given to the parochial officers it was very doubtful when the Returns would be made. He thought that in a case of such importance as the present, where the votes of some hon. Members might be determined by the result of the Returns, the Government should make it their business to procure the information as speedily as possible, and to award the remuneration that might be found necessary to insure the result. The Government had granted remuneration from the public purse in the case of the boroughs when they required the information for their own purposes, and it did appear to him to be unfair that a similar course should be refused in the case of Returns which were ordered by a unanimous vote of the House.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

Committee deferred till Monday next.