HC Deb 20 June 1871 vol 207 cc310-28

SUPPLY—considered in Committee.

(In the Committee)

(1.) £1,148,387, Post Office Packet Service; no part of which sum is to be applicable or applied in or towards making any payment in respect of any period subsequent to the 20th day of June 1863, to Mr. Joseph George Churchward, or to any person claiming through or under him by virtue of a certain Contract bearing date the 26th day of April 1859, made between the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty's Admiralty (for and on behalf of Her Majesty) of the first part, and the said Joseph George Churchward of the second part, or in or towards the satisfaction of any claim whatsoever of the said Joseph George Churchward, by virtue of that Contract, so far as relates to any period subsequent to the 20th day of June 1863.

(2.) £350,000, to complete the sum for the Post Office Telegraph Service.

(3.) £979,888, Revenue Departments (Customs).

(4). £1,625,625, Inland Revenue Department.

SIR CHARLES W. DILKE

asked the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer what were the duties of the Receiver General of the Inland Revenue Department, and whether it was intended to put an end to that office? A somewhat similar office had been lately abolished, and he should like to know why that one was not dealt with in the same way.

MR. MACFIE

said, he wished to know whether any progress had been made in consolidating the Inland Revenue with the Customs Department?

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

replied that, after full inquiry, it had been resolved to retain the office of Receiver General of the Inland Revenue; but he could not state on what ground the decision had been formed. The amalgamation of the Inland Revenue with the Customs Department would not conduce to the public advantage, and therefore there was no intention on the part of the Government to effect a union between those Departments.

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

said, he would not say whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer was right or not; but he knew that the Receivership of the Board of Customs was abolished with great advantage to the public service, and he thought it might be possible to dispense with such an officer in the Board of Inland Revenue. In reference to another subject, which had been recently investigated by the Select Committee on Public Accounts, in consequence of what was called "the War Office Scandal"—namely, the allowances made by way of poundage to collectors and assessors of income tax—the Committee made two recommendations: one being that the arrangements for remunerating persons in the public Departments for this special service should be re-considered by the Treasury; and the other, that when public money was received by a person in those Departments beyond the salary of his office, the amount should appear in the Estimates. He should be glad to hear the right hon. Gentleman's opinions on these propositions.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

thought the recommendations of the Accounts Committee were perfectly just, and the Government would attend to them.

Vote agreed to.

(5.) £2,470,355, Post Office.

MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK

observed, that last Session and the Session before he submitted a point for the consideration of the Postmaster General as to the giving of more accommodation to the public for the posting of letters in the railway stations of the United Kingdom, and in Post Office railway vans. Last year the noble Lord then at the head of the Department (the Marquess of Hartington) made considerable concessions in the matter, but more accommodation was still required. The absence of letter-boxes for stations was a great disadvantage to persons travelling, and great delay occurred in consequence of letters not being sorted at the railway stations. It would not be right to make a Motion on the subject, without giving Notice, and he would only ask the right hon. Gentleman the Postmaster General whether some additional accommodation could not be afforded?

MR. MONSELL

said, his attention had been directed to the importance of affording larger facilities in this matter, and he had spoken about it to the officials at the Post Office. He would continue to give attention to the subject; but there were obvious difficulties in carrying out a satisfactory scheme, and he feared there would be much danger of letters posted in stations going to wrong places.

COLONEL SYKES

said, the revenue from the Post Office was part and parcel of the permanent Revenue of the country, and whatever surplus was derived from the Post Office ought to be applied in remedying any deficiency in the means of obtaining letters.

SIR TOLLEMACHE SINCLAIR

mentioned that in France letter-boxes had been attached to the trains, so that letters need only be placed in them to be dispatched at once. He thought the difficulty suggested by the Postmaster General might be overcome by labelling letter-boxes in such a manner as to indicate the up and down service.

MR. BOWRING

asked, when the new postal regulations would come into operation?

MR. MONSELL

said, probably on the 1st of August, and, as considerable reductions would be made in the postal charges, no doubt the Revenue would be affected; but he trusted that correspondence would increase to such an extent in a short time as to make good the deficiency. These changes, however, would involve no increase of the present Estimates.

Vote agreed to.

(6.) £45,788, to complete the sum for the Superior Courts of Common Law in England.

(7.) £48,777, to complete the sum for the London Court of Bankruptcy.

(8.) £315,706, to complete the sum for the County Courts.

(9.) £69,477, to complete the sum for the Courts of Probate and Divorce and Matrimonial Causes in England.

(10.) £10,160, to complete the sum for the High Court of Admiralty.

(11.) £3,960, to complete the sum for the office of Land Registry.

MR. GOLDNEY

called attention to the very unsatisfactory state of the office, and expressed the opinion that they were annually voting a sum of £5,000 for what was of very little benefit to the public.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, that nothing but the state of Public Business prevented the Government from dealing with the matter at once.

Vote agreed to.

(12.) £15,226, to complete the sum for the Police Courts, London and Sheerness.

(13.) £154,470, to complete the sum for the Metropolitan Police.

MR. BOWRING

asked, how the new system of supervision under the Habitual Criminals Act was working?

MR. BRUCE

said, it was working very well, and had already been found very useful. The experiment was only in its infancy; but he believed, from the investigation he had made, that it was likely in time to contribute very considerably to the detection and punishment of crime.

MR. STEPHEN CAVE

asked, whether it was intended to amend the Habitual Criminals Act, and to revert to the system of monthly reports of all convicts under inspection who changed their abode from one town to another?

MR. BRUCE

said, the Government did intend to bring in a Bill on this subject; and so far as regarded convicts he should be disposed to recur to the former system of monthly reporting; but he doubted the expediency of extending such stringent regulations to persons simply under supervision.

MR. ALDERMAN LUSK

contended that it was not fair to compel persons simply committed for trial to sit for their portraits, so that the photographs might be sent to different parts of the country, even before the parties had been convicted. The law presumes a man is innocent until he is proved to be guilty.

COLONEL SYKES

observed, that if the photographs were taken with the knowledge of the criminals, the latter might distort their faces in order to prevent a portrait being secured.

MR. BRUCE

agreed that no one had a right to take the portrait of a man only committed for trial, and if that had been done it must have been with the consent of the man himself. With respect to the shrewd suggestion of the hon. and gallant Member (Colonel Sykes), the warders who took the portraits were sufficiently skilled in photographs to avoid taking anything but the man's ordinary expression.

MR. DICKINSON

said, he hoped the Home Secretary would not commit himself to the doctrine that under no circumstances should a prisoner's photograph be taken until after his trial, for the simple reason that many persons awaiting their trial had been previously convicted.

Vote agreed to.

(14.) £295,500, to complete the sum for Police Counties and Boroughs (England and Wales), and in Scotland agreed to.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £361,332, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1872, of the Superintendence of Convict Establishments, and for the Maintenance of Convicts in England and the Colonies.

MR. ASSHETON CROSS

inquired whether the sum of £15,000, which appeared in the Estimate as "New Prison—Commencement of Buildings," had reference to Brixton Prison? in reference to the expenses of which a Motion was on the Order Book for that night. He thought that the whole of the expenditure for the completion of the prison should be made known before the work was commenced.

MR. BAXTER

said, £15,000 would not, of course, cover anything like the expenses of that work, and therefore he had thought it right that the House should not be asked to spend anything until its opinion had been taken on the proposal. If the Bill passed, it would be necessary for Government to bring in a Supplementary Estimate. This, he thought, would be a proper proceeding, because it involved a large sum.

MR. SCLATER - BOOTH

concurred that the whole cost of the work should be shown, and it seemed to him that the £15,000 had been put down for the Brixton Prison.

MR. WHEELHOUSE

asked, whether it was intended to do away with the Milbank Prison altogether?

MR. BRUCE

said, that successive Governments had had their attention called to the unfitness of Milbank for the purposes of a prison. It was ill-arranged; and on a careful estimate of the Director of Prisons last autumn, it appeared that the excess of cost in overlooking this prison as compared with other prisons was not less than £5,000 a-year. Government had accordingly determined to do away with the prison, and to put the prisoners elsewhere. Milbank was only partly applied to the accommodation of convict prisoners; it also received the military prisoners. In removing this prison, it would be necessary to make accommodation elsewhere, and it had been considered most convenient that the accommodation should be supplied partly by adding to the Brixton Prison, and partly by erecting a new prison. He had been under the impression last night, when he stated that the £15,000 in the Estimates had reference to Brixton; that sum, however, was required for the new prison, the site of which had not yet been decided upon. While certain other works were under consideration, it was considered wise not to determine the position of the future convict prison; and it was also considered prudent to delay the settlement of that point until some decision was come to by Government which would determine the remunerative occupation of the prisoners, as there was some hope that the authorities would be able to utilize the convict labour to effect some such national work as the fortification of their arsenals, or the defence of London. There were two circumstances which would lead to a very considerable increase in the number of the prisoners, although, on the other hand, the state of crime might be described as generally satisfactory; one was the absolute cessation of transportation abroad, and the other was the term of punishment inflicted on persons already convicted of felony. The increase which those two circumstances would cause rendered it necessary to look ahead for the next few years, with a view to the proper housing of the prisoners.

MR. ASSHETON CROSS

wanted to know the whole amount of the Estimate in connection with this work, and also the probable cost of the new prison under the Brixton Bill, including the purchase of land.

MR. BRUCE

replied that the cost would very much depend on the nature of the prison erected. If erected for the purpose of accommodating convicts engaged in some temporary work—say at Dover or Chatham—it would be less expensive than if it was to be erected for permanent purposes.

MR. CANDLISH

said, it was apparent that the right hon. Gentleman had determined nothing. The site was not known to him, and its ultimate cost was not known to him. He thought a strong case was made out for postponing the Vote. It would be open to Government to proceed in the matter when their mind was made tip.

MR. BRUCE

said, it was absolutely necessary to provide increased accommodation for the increased number of prisoners during the coming year, and provision must be made not merely in reference to the wants of the moment but in regard to future wants, which could be estimated with tolerable accuracy. It was a matter of indifference to Government whether this Vote of £15,000 was taken now or postponed to some future time, so long as Government was able to carry out the works necessary for the public interest.

MR. CANDLISH

said, he thought it only reasonable that the Committee should know the whole cost and the site of the buildings before voting the money.

MR. WHEELHOUSE

said, that the magistrates in the North of England had been considering how far there was any necessity for providing more convict prison room than actually existed. In Yorkshire there was a strong feeling in the mind of the magistrates that it was very undesirable to continue the Act which made it necessary, after a conviction for felony, to send to penal servitude for seven years. The justices would like to see their way to ordinary imprisonment being inflicted instead of penal servitude.

MR. HERMON

moved that the Vote be reduced by £15,000.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £346,332, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1872, of the Superintendence of Convict Establishments, and for the Maintenance of Convicts in England and the Colonies."—(Mr. Hermon.)

MR. BAXTER

said, that it was quite immaterial whether this sum was granted now or afterwards, and Government would accordingly agree to the Motion just made.

MR. RYLANDS

pointed out that there was nothing to show that the expenditure in Milbank was greater than in other prisons. Both at Chatham and Dartmoor many of the charges were higher than at Milbank.

MR. BRUCE

said, the circumstances of these prisons differed from those of Milbank, which was used partly as a prison for short sentences and partly for the first portion of sentences to penal servitude.

SIR CHARLES ADDERLEY

said, that as the Home Secretary had sent a Circular to the managers of Industrial Schools stating that the Treasury Grants to those schools would be reduced, he desired to have some explanation on the matter. The proceeding appeared to have been rather abrupt, for the Circular Letter was dated the 27th of April, and the reduction was made on the 1st of May. The Treasury payment for children under 10 years of age was reduced nearly 40 per cent, and a similar reduction was made in the case of children over 15 years of age. The reason given for the reduction in respect to children under 10 years of age was that they were hardly capable of industrial training; and the reason assigned for the reduction in the case of children over 15 years of age was that keeping children too long in Industrial Schools was not favourable to their moral or physical development. He had letters in his possession contradicting the reasons assigned in both instances. Indeed, the experience of every Industrial School proved that if children of the class sent there did not begin their instruction at an early age, the purpose for which industrial schools were instituted would be frustrated. It was the neglected state of those children which mainly justified any Treasury aid at all for national education, and which led many to a desire for compulsory education. The Industrial Schools were already the receptacles of compulsory scholars. With regard to children over 15 years of age, he believed that the Circular Letter exhibited a prevalent mistake in the estimation of these schools, arising from their being treated, in consequence of their connection with the Home Office instead of the Education Department, like penal or pauper establishments, and not as schools. In an article on the subject of enlistment in the Army the leading journal on Saturday last adverted to the difficulty which was experienced in getting well-educated adults to that service The Navy could take boys young—it would be expensive for the State to educate Army recruits till they were old enough for the service, and it would be well to see if we could not render the children educated at the public expense in those schools available for military purposes. In his opinion the present payment of 5s. per head was sufficient, and in some cases more than enough; but he thought that the right hon. Gentleman had made a mistake in proposing to reduce the proportion of the grant in the case of such boys under 10 years of age on the ground that they were too young to benefit by Industrial Schools; and in the case of the elder boys on the ground that they were old enough to earn their own living, ignoring the fact that they might be doing so in the school itself, or preparing to emigrate, or for special service. Under these circumstances, he begged to ask the right hon. Gentleman to explain the reasons which had induced him to propose these reductions?

ALDERMAN SIR DAVID SALOMONS

said, he thought that these schools ought to have a wider scope given to them, and that the police should be instructed to keep a sharper eye on vagabond children.

MR. BOWRING

inquired, whether the sum taken in the present Estimates was based upon the old allowance of 5s. a-week, or upon the proposal contained in the right hon. Gentleman's Circular?

MR. BAXTER

replied that the Vote was based on the old allowance.

MR. BRUCE

said, that the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir Charles Adderley) spoke with such authority upon this subject, he having spent the greater part of a most useful life in supporting every institution which tended to reduce crime, that he always differed from him with extreme reluctance. No doubt it was of national interest that these unhappy children should be turned into good citizens, instead of being allowed to become the pests of society; but, at the same time, it should be kept in mind that their cases were exceptional. He would not go so far as to apply to the directors of these institutions the saying of Talleyrand, with respect to fathers of families, "That they were capable of anything;" but, certainly, the tendency in Scotland and many parts of the country was to strain very much the machinery of the Industrial Schools Act, and to send to the schools established under it a vast number of children who had no right to be admitted into them, but who ought to be dealt with under the Poor Law. It had been in consequence of this tendency that the Government had found it necessary to determine that no children should be admitted into them who were under six years of age. The annual sum appropriated to the support of these schools had—increased from £19,000 in 1865 to £115,000 in the present year, which showed the necessity which existed for placing some chock upon the practice of relieving the local burdens by means of these schools at the expense of the Imperial funds. The tendency of these schools was to become more burdensome to the Imperial Revenue, and as he was most desirous that they should be supported by voluntary and local effort, he had determined to reduce the allowance for the children. With regard to the children between 15 and 16 years of age he thought he was justified in making a reduction, for the simple reason, which he thought no one would gainsay, that at that period of life a child could contribute something considerable towards its own support. However excellent the instruction might be it had a prejudicial effect on the character of the children, for nothing could replace the freedom which a child enjoyed in earning a livelihood beyond the walls of an institution. After very careful consideration and consultation with those who were well able to advise him on the matter, he issued a circular announcing the reduction in the allowance to those schools. Many expostulations against the reduction had reached the Government; but managers of several of the most important institutions in the country had expressed their approbation of that step, and mainly because there was a tendency in these schools to cease to be voluntary. At the same time, these were institutions of great national importance, and it would be necessary to watch most closely the effect of the change in them. Nothing could be further from his wish, or that of the Government, than to do anything detrimental to these institutions, which were doing so much good.

MR. MITCHELL HENRY

wished to know how much the Government would save by this reduction, and whether the new system would be applied to Ireland? He feared that the consequence of reducing the grant would be to destroy some institutions that were of great advantage in Ireland.

MR. BRUCE

said, that the reduction would not apply to the Irish Industrial Schools.

MR. STEPHEN CAVE

said, he was inclined to think that the alteration in the amount of the grant was a step in the right direction; though no doubt some difficulty would be felt from the managers being too ready to rely upon Imperial funds instead of upon local rates and subscriptions. Too liberal an allowance would probably do more harm than good. A great deal of mischief would be done by anything that would have a tendency to cause the honest working man to neglect his children. There were constant complaints that a poor man could not bring up his children in the way in which children were educated at these institutions, and that there would be no chance for their being so brought tip unless he should neglect them and turn them into the streets. It was very difficult to answer such allegations. The real excuse for spending public money upon these children was, that if they were let alone in their neglected state they would probably cause a good deal of evil to society at large. This end should always be kept in view, both in the quality of education given, and the selection of the children, so as to avoid giving a premium to the neglect of children, and more trouble should be taken for the same reason, to exact contributions from parents. The cases should be wholly exceptional. If there was a difficulty as to funds these cases would be properly selected; but if there were a large grant, the managers of the institutions would not be careful whom they admitted within their walls.

DR. BREWER

said, he hoped it would be remembered that these Industrial Schools took the place of the prison. They were intended to supersede the necessity of imprisoning children for a greater or less time and exposing them to vicious associations. He did not think that they could draw any hard-and-fast line in respect to the age at which children should be received at or dismissed from school.

MR. CONOLLY

said, he was glad to see the attention paid to reformatories in England, because he should on a future occasion bring to the notice of the House the success which had attended the Reformatory of Glencree, in Ireland, under the management of the monks. The proportion of boys reclaimed was 90 per cent, while in England, under the most favourable auspices, it was not more than 75 per cent. He would ask the Prime Minister for a small grant for the Reformatory.

MR. D. DALRYMPLE

said, he saw in the Vote an item of £320 for the maintenance of criminal lunatics in private asylums. It was highly inexpedient that such lunatics should be confined in private asylums. There was a Bill in "another place" which proposed to transfer criminal lunatics in Scotland to chartered institutions. He hoped before another year some means would be taken to put a stop to this practice.

MR. M'LAREN

said, that the managers of the chartered institutions in Scotland complained grievously of the Bill to which the hon. Gentleman the Member for Bath had referred.

Question put, and agreed to.

(16.) £251,980, to complete the sum for the maintenance of Prisoners, Juvenile Offenders, and Criminal Lunatics.

(17.) £25,410, to complete the sum for Broadmoor Criminal Lunatic Asylum.

MR. SCLATER - BOOTH

said, he would suggest that the Home Secretary should take into consideration a matter which had been pressed by him on successive Secretaries of State—namely, some arrangements for retaining at Broadmoor criminal lunatics of a dangerous character after the term of their sentence had expired. Under the Act of 1869 the Home Secretary had power to order their removal to the asylums of the county to which they belonged. There was no proper provision in the county asylums for lunatics of a dangerous class, and they might well be retained at Broadmoor at the expense of the county or borough to which they might be chargeable.

MR. GOLDSMID

desired to call attention to the case of a person whose sentence had expired and who was sent to his county asylum from Dartmoor. Nearly all the time the medical officers were of opinion that the man was perfectly sane, and yet they were obliged to keep him. He was not sure that the medical superintendent was not liable to an action.

MR. BRUCE

said, he thought if the sentence had expired and the man was sane those who detained him would be liable to an action. With regard to the general question, there was the greatest possible difficulty in providing at Broadmoor for the criminal lunatics sent there, and the managers were most desirous of transferring them to the counties chargeable with their support. There was, however, great force in the appeal of his hon. Friend, and he would undertake to see to it.

Vote agreed to.

(18.) £15,750, to complete the sum for Miscellaneous Legal Charges in England.

MR. NEVILLE-GRENVILLE

asked, how it happened that additional revising barristers were always wanted, and why the number of days during which they were required was always the same?

MR. BRUCE

said, that was the best Estimate that could be made; he would not undertake to say all the money would be spent.

Vote agreed to.

(19.) £55,675, to complete the sum for Criminal Proceedings in Scotland.

(20.) £42,767, to complete the sum for Courts of Law and Justice in Scotland.

SIR COLMAN O'LOGHLEN

said, that in Scotland there were Courts called Sheriffs' Courts; but though the office was one of very great importance—more important, in fact, than that of the Judges of the County Courts in England or Ireland—the sheriff himself did not discharge the duties of the Court, but they were discharged by an officer called the sheriff-substitute. Now it appeared, from what had taken place the other night, that this sheriff-substitute might himself appoint a deputy, of whom the Law Officers of the Crown might know nothing. What he (Sir Colman O'Loghlen) desired to know was, if it was true that the sheriff-substitute had the power to appoint any person as his deputy whom he thought proper, so long as he was a barrister of five years' standing? If such was the case, he thought it was an abuse which ought not to be allowed to continue. In England a County Court Judge could only have a deputy appointed by the Lord Chancellor, and there was the same practice in Ireland. In his opinion there ought to be some power conferred so that in Scotland the appointment of a sheriff-depute might be controlled and the sheriff-substitute might not be allowed to appoint whoever he liked. The power to appoint a sheriff-depute ought either to be in the hands of the Lord Advocate or one of the Judges.

THE LORD ADVOCATE

said, the information on which his right hon. and learned Friend had made his statement was not altogether accurate. In the first place, he was wrong in his assumption that the duties of the Sheriff Court were performed by the sheriff-substitute and not by the sheriff. The office of sheriff was a very important one, and in many of the counties in Scotland the duties were very onerous. The sheriff had, by Act of Parliament and by the terms of his commission, power to appoint a substitute. It was a question whether the power to appoint a sheriff-substitute should continue as at present in the hands of the sheriff, or whether it might not conduce to the public service to transfer the patronage to the Crown. From the sheriff - substitute there was an appeal to the sheriff, and the appeals were very numerous. It was not accurate to suppose that the appointment of the sheriff-depute was made by the sheriff-substitute. There was very rarely occasion to make such an appointment at all; but when the occasion did arise, the appointment was made by the sheriff, and not by the sheriff-substitute. If the sheriff-sub- stitute was ill or unable to attend to his duties from some temporary cause, a deputy was appointed by the sheriff. He did not think there was anything in the present state of matters to call for legislative interference—it might be worthy of consideration, but he had no proposal to submit.

Vote agreed to.

(21.) £22,740, to complete the sum for General Register House, Edinburgh.

SIR EDWARD COLEBROOKE

said, that although this sum seemed a very considerable one, it would appear from the account that it was not a Vote of public money, the expenses of the department in question being more than sufficiently provided for by the receipts and fees. This subject had given rise to dissatisfaction, because the Scotch people felt that they were practically taxed for a larger amount than was sufficient to maintain the establishment. It was urged some time ago that it was quite impossible to introduce any reform of the Register House until all the registers were united, and power was given to the Treasury as soon as that should take place to apply a remedy to the state of things complained of. What was asked for was that the fees should be so reduced that after paying the expenses of the department there should be no surplus to go into the general Exchequer of the country. The public had a full right to the benefit of reduced fees if the receipts of the department would justify it. In his opinion the time had come when the Treasury ought to act upon the power which they had, and reduce the fees.

MR. M'LAREN

asked what was the exact amount paid to the retired officers throughout Scotland, and whether the payments which had been made had been taken out of the fees? The expenditure of the present year was £30,200, while the receipts were £39,500, leaving a balance of £9,300, and there was a similar surplus last year. He feared that out of these balances had been paid the retiring allowances of those registrars whose offices had been brought to Edinburgh. If this was the case, the amount of the retiring allowances ought to be stated in the Estimates. As to the general balance, it was altogether wrong that it should go into the public purse. The Act of Parliament distinctly stated that the surplus was to be applied to the reduction of the fees, and no one could defend the appropriation of the money to any other purpose.

MR. SINCLAIR AYTOUN

said, he quite agreed with the hon. Member for Edinburgh. It was unjust that the landed proprietors of Scotland should contribute in this way a large sum to the national Exchequer. It was the duty of the Government at once to reduce the fees.

THE LORD ADVOCATE

agreed that the fees in this Court ought not to be a source of revenue, it having been provided by the Act of Parliament, passed three years ago, that they should be adjusted so as to meet the expenses of the department as nearly as could be calculated, and he regretted that hitherto no steps had been taken towards their reduction. He was informed by the Secretary to the Treasury that the retiring allowances were paid out of the general funds of the country, but no such account was kept as enabled him to set that amount against the other. The department was not under his control; but he would do all he could to have justice done.

MR. ANDERSON

asked whether steps were being taken to avoid complaints about the backward state of business in the Register House?

THE LORD ADVOCATE

said, he was aware that such complaints had been made, and he was sorry to say not unreasonably. The general explanation was that the establishment was very much under-manned, and the duties placed upon the department had been much increased. This was now remedied to a large extent.

MR. BAXTER

, said, the retiring allowances which were paid last year amounted to £2,646.

MR. M'LAREN

said, then it appeared that even after paying the retiring allowances, they had still a surplus. They had disobeyed an Act of Parliament in not applying that surplus to the reduction of fees, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer had put the money into his pocket. He trusted that it would be paid back.

Vote agreed to.

(22.) £18,987, to complete the sum for Prisons in Scotland, &c.

(23.) £59,403, to complete the sum for Criminal Prosecutions, &c., Ireland.

(24.) £33,903, to complete the sum for the Court of Chancery, Ireland.

(25.) £22,377, to complete the sum for the Superior Courts of Common Law in Ireland.

(26.) £6,470, to complete the sum for the Court of Bankruptcy and Insolvency in Ireland.

(27.) £9,721, to complete the sum for the Landed Estates Court, Ireland.

(28.) £8,526, to complete the sum for the Court of Probate in Ireland.

(29.) £1,540, to complete the sum for the Admiralty Court Registry, Ireland.

(30.) £11,508, to complete the sum for the Office for Registration of Deeds in Ireland.

(31.) £2,316, to complete the sum for the Office for Registration of Judgments in Ireland.

(32.) £73,673, to complete the sum for the Dublin Metropolitan Police.

(33.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £693,260, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1872, for the Constabulary Force in Ireland.

MR. FIELDEN

observed, that a large sum was put down for pensions, and that the increase over the amount asked for last year was £10,442. He objected to the increase, and moved that the Vote be reduced by that amount.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £682,818, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1872, for the Constabulary Force in Ireland."—(Mr. Joshua Fielden.)

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON

said, that the pensions were granted under Act of Parliament, and he scarcely believed that the hon. Member for the West Riding would persist in his proposal to deprive the men of the pensions they had earned, and on the faith of receiving which they had been induced to enter the service.

MR. NEVILLE-GRENVILLE

said, that the amount of pensions was certainly enormous, and was increasing at the rate of £10,000 a-year. It already amounted to £120,000; whereas the pay of the force only amounted to £567,000.

MR. RYLANDS

said, that these pensions were a difficult matter to deal, with, as they were granted under an Act of Parliament; but the Government should take speedy steps to deal with the whole question of pensions and retiring allowances.

MR. M'LAREN

said, he would call attention to the fact that while the sum voted for the whole police force of Scotland was only £45,000 a-year, the pensions to the police force in Ireland amounted to no less than £121,000.

MR. CANDLISH

said, he considered 22 per cent a most enormous amount for pensions and retiring allowances. The police force of Ireland absorbed upwards of £1,000,000, more than twice the amount of England, Wales, and Scotland, and he hoped the whole question would be looked into by the Government, with a view to the reduction of that enormous charge.

MR. ALDERMAN LUSK

thought the Vote a most extravagant one.

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON

admitted that the Vote was a large one; but there were large questions involved. Was the House prepared to accept the alternative of greatly reducing the police force in Ireland, or asking Ireland to defray the whole expense of the constabulary, to whose efficiency everyone bore witness, and to substitute local for Imperial management of the force?

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

Original Question put, and agreed to.

(34.) £35,400, to complete the sum for Government Prisons, &c., Ireland.

(35.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £39,323, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment dining the year ending on the 31st day of March 1872, for the Maintenance of Prisoners in County and Borough Gaols, and for the Expenses of Reformatories and Industrial Schools in Ireland.

MR. VANCE

said, he must object to the system pursued in the Industrial Schools of Ireland. 18,000 Roman Catholic children had been sent there, while there were only 123 children belonging to every other creed. Practically a denominational education was thus given to the Roman Catholic children, contrary to the national system, which he hoped no Government would ever consent to alter. He moved the reduction of the Vote by the sum of £10,000.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £29,323, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1872, for the Maintenance of Prisoners in County and Borough Gaols, and for the Expenses of Reformatories and Industrial Schools in Ireland."—(Mr. Vance.)

MR. GOLDSMID

expressed a warm approval of the Irish Industrial Schools, which had introduced greater habits of industry among certain classes of the Irish people. He cordially hoped that the amount of this Vote would be increased next year.

MR. CONOLLY

said, he had never heard a more unjust statement respecting these schools than that which had fallen from the hon. Member for Armagh. The reformatories had done most excellent work in Ireland. The Roman Catholics were deserving of praise for looking after their juvenile criminals better than their Protestant fellow-countrymen did.

MR. VANCE

said, he would explain that the children in the Industrial Schools were not criminals. The reformatories might have done very good work, but that was not the case with the Irish Industrial Schools.

Question put, and negatived.

Original Question put, and agreed to.

(36.) £4,200, to complete the sum for Dundrum Criminal Lunatic Asylum, Ireland.

(37.) £1,880, to complete the sum for the Four Courts Marshalsea, Dublin.

(38.) £6,670, to complete the sum for Miscellaneous Legal Expenses in Ireland.

House resumed.

Resolutions to be reported To-morrow;

Committee to sit again To-morrow.

And at Seven of the clock the House suspended its Sitting.

The House resumed its Sitting at Nine of the clock.