HC Deb 26 February 1875 vol 222 cc944-64
SIR GEORGE JENKINSON

, in rising to call the attention of the House to the hardships caused to the ratepayers of various parishes by the present system of partial and piecemeal abolition of Turnpike Trusts, as well as the injustice of the present system of maintaining Turnpike Roads of which the trusts have been abolished, which is, moreover, constantly increasing as trusts expire, thus throwing a large additional burden on to owners and occupiers of real property only; and to move— That it is expedient that legislation should take place without further delay, dealing in a comprehensive manner with the future maintenance of roads, said, the time had arrived when it was necessary that some legislation should take place on the subject, after the many promises to that effect that had been made from right hon. Gentlemen on the front benches on both sides of the House. He had, in the course of last Session, presented as many as 32 Petitions in favour of early legislation in the direction he had pointed out. He had also on the 16th of June last placed upon the Paper a Resolution similar to the one he now asked the House to adopt; but owing to the exigencies of the Government at the close of the Session, he had consented to postpone the matter till the present Session. The great evil was, that legislation for the maintenance of roads on an equitable basis did not take place pari passû with the abolition of tolls, because their abolition threw the whole burden of the repairs of the great arterial roads upon one class of persons in the parishes through which the roads passed, although they had been made and used for Imperial purposes. The Turnpike Acts Continuance Bill came before the House every year so late in the Session, that it was impossible for the subject to be then fairly and adequately discussed; and he hoped the discussion on his Motion would show the country the interest that was felt by this House in the subject. The question had been investigated by several Committees of that House, and on each occasion legislation had been recommended. The first Committee sat in 1836, another in 1864, again in 1869, 1871, 1872, 1873, and in 1874; and the late Under Secretary for the Home Department (Mr. Knatchbull-Hugessen), and the present President of the Local Government Board, had spoken in favour of legislation. The former right hon. Gentleman said, that unless a remedy were soon provided, it would be impossible to provide one at all. The Select Committee of 1873 reiterated the regret of the Committee of the preceding year that, notwithstanding the frequent re-monstrances of previous Committees, nothing had been done by Parliament in the matter. In 1870, when he himself brought forward a Resolution on the subject, he was strongly supported and seconded by the present President of the Local Government Board. His right hon. Friend was then in the cold shade of Opposition; but he hoped that now that he had got into the full sunshine of office, he would do something towards carrying out what were his views in 1870. He held in his hand a Return of the trusts which had expired during the last 10 years, and of the trusts which would expire during the next 10 years. The total number of trusts which had expired during the last 10 years was 429, representing 8,300 miles of road. During the next 10 years, there would expire no less than 166 trusts, representing 3,742 miles. That decrease in the number of trusts, of course, implied a corresponding increase in the rates paid by the rural parishes. Having endeavoured to convince his right hon. Friend the President of the Local Government Board of the injustice under which the rural districts suffered, he wished now to make an appeal to the stony heart of his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He hoped that his right hon. Friend would be inclined to give them relief by yielding to them some licences locally collected. He had specially in his mind the carriage licences, which, though they would not make up for the total increase of expenditure from the abolition of tolls, when complete would be a very great help in that direction. There would be no difficulty in collecting the licences, in passing them to the Treasury, as at present, and in the Treasury paying them to the county treasurers in the proportion in which they were collected in each county. Those separate amounts were somewhat considerable, being, for instance, £10,791 for Gloucestershire; £8,483 for Wiltshire; and the total amount of the licences collected for carriages in England and "Wales was £476,294. If this sum were paid over to the treasurers of the different counties in that proportion, there would be no difficulty in distributing it under the auspices of the Courts of Quarter Session among the different parishes. They would also be very glad to receive the dog duty, which amounted to £294,000; but they would be grateful for the carriage licences, if they did not receive a larger sum. The expenditure of the different turnpike trusts on roads was £937,000 in 1870; and in 1872 it was £787,000. The expenditure had thus diminished in three years by about £150,000, which simply represented a corresponding increase in the local rates, and, therefore, in the amount paid by the owners and occupiers of real property through which passed roads used by all classes of the community, and for all sorts of purposes. It was true that some relief had been afforded to the rural districts in the shape of increased contribution to police rates and payments in aid of the maintenance of lunatics; but if that increase went on at the rate of £150,000 in three years, it would soon swallow up the very slight boon given last year. A relief in the local expenditure could be obtained from local sources, and he therefore hoped that his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be able to hold out some hope of giving this point his favourable consideration. There was another point to which he wished to direct attention. The great reason why turnpike trusts were unable to pay the interest on their debt arose from the change in the mode of conveyance. It must be remembered that the railways had of late years monopolized the traffic of the country, and taken it away from the main arterial turnpike roads, together with all the advantages which resulted to the inhabitants from the passage of the traffic through the rural districts. It became a question, therefore, from the inability of the local authorities to deal with the question, whether the railways were sufficiently rated, and whether the amount of rates they paid was applied in a proper ratio to the purposes for which it was levied, and to which it ought to be applied. He would like to see one uniform system of rating laid down by the central authority, and a mileage rating of railways according to their earnings, so that there might be one practice throughout the Kingdom. The whole question of the rating of railways and the application of that rating was one deserving investigation by a Select Committee, or by some other mode of inquiry. The modern practice of sending traction engines with enormous loads over the roads had also increased the expenditure of the parishes from the damage done both to roads and bridges. The subject of the maintenance of the roads was a dull and dry one, but it was one which was viewed in the country districts with great soreness. Both parties, when in Opposition, had promised redress, but when they got into office nothing was done. He regretted that a measure on the subject was not to be brought forward by the Government this Session, and he trusted there would be such an expression of opinion on both sides of the House as would show the Government that the question could no longer be neglected. The hon. Baronet concluded by moving the Resolution.

MR. HARDCASTLE

seconded the Motion, and called attention to the hardship of the present system as it affected thoroughfare parishes. As an instance, he would mention the case of the parish of Prestwich, which adjoined the city of Manchester. It contained 1,909 acres, and had 1,378 ratepayers. Prior to the cession of turnpike tolls it had to maintain only one and a-half miles of road, but owing to the expiration of turnpike trusts six miles more of road either had been or shortly would be thrown open, and these six miles would be of the most expensive kind of roads to be found in the country, because over them would pass the whole of the traffic between Manchester, with its 500,000 of inhabitants, and the district of Bury and Rossendale, with their 200,000 or 300,000 inhabitants. Those roads were paved on both sides and macadamized in the middle. They would be subject to rapid destruction both by the amount and the rate of the traffic which passed over them, and it was calculated that their maintenance would more than double the rates of the parish. Then on the other side of Manchester were the parishes or townships of Levenshulme and Heaton Norris, lying between the city and Stockport, which would be affected in a similar way. Those cases were not exceptional. On the contrary, examples of the same kind might be found in the neighbourhood of all large towns, and especially near London—for instance, the parishes of Leyton and Woodford, which lay between the East End of London and Epping Forest. An enormous amount of summer pleasure-traffic, which was rather a nuisance than a benefit to the inhabitants, passed through these parishes, which were bound to maintain roads to accommodate it at a very great expense. This state of things was certainly one of great hardship to the ratepayers, and imperatively called for a remedy on the part of the Government. The old plan was that those who used the roads should pay for them, and this had at least the advantage of simplicity. He did not say there might not be rural districts in which, from the parishes being of the same character, there would be a give and take between them, but that did not meet the case of such districts as he had alluded to, and if the Government thought that the old simple plan should be departed from it was for them to invent another which might be more complicated, but which would at any rate relieve the ratepayers from the exceptional burden now thrown on them. For his own part, he saw no objection to the re-imposition of tolls in some cases; but whether this was done, or the burden was thrown on the Consolidated Fund or the county rate, was for the Government to consider. He trusted, however, that the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Local Government Board would give his early attention to the subject, with a view to relieve the ratepayers from the injustice of which they had at present reason to complain.

Amendment proposed, To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "it is expedient that legislation should take place, without further delay, dealing in a comprehensive manner with the future maintenance of roads,"—(Sir George Jenkinson,)

—instead thereof.

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be loft out stand part of the Question."

MR. PEASE

said, the question introduced by the hon. Baronet opposite the Member for North Wiltshire (Sir George Jenkinson) had been so frequently debated that he had heard with considerable disappointment that the Government were not disposed at the present time to take any action on it. In almost every county recent legislation had established a state of things such as that described by the hon. Baronet, and in his own county (Durham) the farmers bitterly complained of having to maintain the roads in the neighbourhood of towns. Many of the farmers thought that the towns might fairly be called upon to contribute; but the towns, on the other hand, alleged, and with great force, that the amount of their obligations was already as much as they could sustain, and no one who had looked into the question would come to the conclusion that the towns could contribute. It could not be said that there was no grievance in the case of persons who were rated for the maintenance of roads which had only come upon them by the abolition of turnpikes, and his own view of a very difficult question was, that power might be given to the Quarter Sessions, or some other local authority, to reestablish tolls in various places of a temporary character, under the supervision of some Department in that House.

MR. GREGORY

said, that in the part of the country which he represented there were three large towns, Brighton, Hastings, and Tunbridge Wells, which for a large portion of the year were for the most part occupied by large bodies of visitors, who came there for purposes of health and recreation. In the vicinity of Hastings and St. Leonards, for example, there was a highway district consisting of 21 parishes, 14 of which were more or less traversed by roads, which were formerly turnpike, and the whole of these parishes would have to contribute to the repair of such roads. It was an undeniable injustice that those parishes should be charged for the maintenance of those roads, the cost of which was double, or more than double, the cost of maintaining an ordinary highway, and much of this was in consequence of the carriage traffic and increased wear and tear caused by the influx of strangers to those fashionable watering-places, which contributed nothing whatever to the maintenance of the roads. He was averse, however, from making that anything like a question between town and country. On the whole, he was favourable to the solution of the difficulty suggested by the hon. Baronet the Member for North Wiltshire, and thought it but fair that the duty on carriages should be applied to the maintenance of the turnpike roads, or if the Chancellor of the Exchequer-was not in a position to give up this, he thought there would be no great hardship in re-imposing the horse duty for the same object in the shape of an increased duty on carriages. At all events, he trusted the Chancellor of the Exchequer would see his way to afford some relief to the ratepayers.

MR. R. YORKE

said, that agricultural gatherings of all kinds manifested an eager interest in the question of the management of roads and the extinction of turnpike trusts. He therefore thought it might be considered that turnpikes were doomed, although they represented a good principle—namely, the principle of a direct payment for a benefit directly received. What had proved fatal to turnpikes was the dislike of Englishmen, when riding along a road at a rapid pace, to be suddenly called upon to pull up, and to "stand and deliver." If, however, turnpikes were abolished, the cost of maintaining the roads fell by common law on the ratepayers of the parishes, and it had been proposed by some to relieve them by spreading the burden over a larger area. As a ratepayer, he should lament the adoption of that course, and would much prefer, if there was only one alternative, that turnpikes should be maintained exceptionally in districts where the highway board did not at present exist, but he thought the Government would do well to consider the proposition of the hon. Baronet, whether the taxes on horses and carriages might not be applied in aid of the maintenance of the roads, and in relief of local taxation. The system that prevailed in South Wales had worked well, and its extension to England had been recommended on high official authority. He hoped the Government would make some concession on the subject, for they could hardly be aware of the uneasiness that at present existed on this subject, and the importance that was attached to the finding of a remedy for the grievance to which he referred. That was certainly the case in the part of the country he represented, and he should view with great satisfaction the introduction of a remedial measure by the Government.

LORD GEORGE CAVENDISH

said, the subject was of wider interest than might at first sight appear. Individual Members of the House were of small importance, yet the House was great and famous; and so, though one of those roads might seem of no moment, our national system of roads was of very great importance. It was too late now to advocate a return to the system under which those who used the roads paid for them. In England, while some road trusts comprised 100 miles, other insignificant trusts only covered four miles or less. The result was, that a former Home Secretary had to pay three tolls in going from his house to the railway station. He wished that at least one Member of the present Cabinet suffered the same inconvenience, and then the evils of the system would be clearly impressed upon the Government. While it was impossible to go back to the old state of things, he regretted that a general measure had not before been passed. Five or six years ago the Committee of which he was a Member expressed their belief that the roads would go thoroughly out of repair unless a general measure were introduced. It was impossible that parishes should keep in proper repair some of the great through roads, and in his part of the country roads had been allowed to get out of repair, under the impression that a general measure would be soon introduced. The right hon. Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board had the good fortune to represent a county where the traffic was light, and road material was abundant. Some years ago Lord Eversley was boasting how good the roads were in Hampshire, and was met by the reply—"Yes, but then the soil in your county is fit for nothing but to make roads of." In the Midland and Northern Counties it was of the utmost importance that a different system of management should prevail. He could only reiterate the hope he had often expressed, that the Government would soon take up the matter. It was no Party question, and he believed that both sides of the House would willingly assist the Government in passing a measure that would remedy the present state of things.

MR. WILBRAHAM EGERTON

said, as a Member of the Turnpike Committee, he could confirm what had been said by the noble Lord. The Highway Boards had worked well in his county. The cost of the highway system was £1 10s. a-mile, as against between £4 and £5 a-mile for the turnpike system. The parish system worked well where there was a light soil and good gravel; but on a clay soil, which necessitated the bringing of materials from a distance, it was impossible to carry on the system satisfactorily. In his part of the country they had tried it and failed. The failure of the highway system was owing to the fact that too great a length of road was often placed under one surveyor. Every surveyor ought to be able to look over his road once a fortnight, and should not have more than 250 or 300 miles of road at the outside. The House had been told that the Government did not mean to deal with the subject of local taxation this year. They might not be able to treat the subject comprehensively until they dealt with the question of local taxation. But, at any rate, they could make the Highway Act compulsory, and remedy the grievances which existed under a system by which the whole burden was thrown upon the parishes. The right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary had told the House last Session that he intended to take up the question of the road system of Scotland. He (Mr. Wilbraham Egerton) trusted we should not have one system of legislation on this subject for Scotland and another for England. He admitted the Highway Act was not perfect, but a compulsory measure might be brought in which, without much difficulty or discussion, might make the working of the Act satisfactory. Such a measure could be easily passed before the close of the Session.

MR. SCOURFIELD

said, that having boon connected from the first with the South Wales system of maintaining roads, he could state that it had worked extremely well. The whole of the present difficulty strongly illustrated the great evil of taking a partial view of a subject. If a comprehensive system, such as that he had referred to, had been adopted several years ago, most of the evils of which people complained would never have been heard of. The toll system was founded upon a just principle—one that he highly approved of—that people should pay for what they got, in contradistinction to another principle which was much more popular—that of putting your hand into other people's pockets. There was one thing of which Chancellors of the Exchequer had reason to complain. The existing system having been found to be attended with some inconvenience, hard words were used of it; it was called "barbarous and antiquated," and people came to the conclusion that it ought to be abolished, and some other system adopted in its place. It was to that word "some" that he took objection. When people complained of the evil of the old system they ought to point to a specific remedy and not call upon the Government to find it for them. In South Wales they consolidated the trusts, and that did away with a great part of the evil. There was no injustice in making people pay for value received, but there was in extracting by a hap-hazard process perhaps more than one ought to pay. When some paid more than they ought, they were not to be consoled by the doctrine of averages. It was no consolation to a man who went without his dinner to know that others had eaten a great deal more than was good for them. In South Wales some assistance was granted to the county rate, but with very strict limitations, the burden was shared between owners and occupiers, and, what was of great importance, an Inspector was appointed by the Government, who exercised a general supervision over the roads. The Bill by which that was effected was brought in by one of the ablest administrators this country ever knew, Sir James Graham; it was framed with great care, a most efficient Inspector was appointed, Captain Harness, who held the post for many years, and all they had now to do was to work upon the lines which he had laid down. He did not think blame could be thrown on the present Government for not dealing with this matter, because the difficulty connected with it had been enhanced by the neglect of former Administrations.

SIR THOMAS ACLAND

said, they could not expect the Government to deal hastily with the question, which, after all, was one inextricably mixed up with the larger question of local government. He thought some middle way might be found between the abolition and the retention of the toll system. Why should not parishes be grouped? It seemed to be admitted on all sides that mere parochial management as regarded roads was unsuited to the wants of the present day. The more closely he had directed his attention to such local questions as sanitary matters, the management of roads and education, the more he was convinced they would not be solved until landlords fairly faced the difficulty, by either taking on themselves permanent improvements, or a fair share of the annual charge upon the money raised for such improvements. The landlords were acting unwisely for the public advantage, and for the reason that if a landowner or magistrate, ex officio a member of the Board of Guardians, went to a board meeting to advocate any great improvement, he was immediately met by this argument on the part of the occupiers—"You will not pay the rates: they will all fall on us; your property will be immensely benefited, and you will not contribute to the improvements which contribute to that result." What was the consequence? The only way in which local improvements could be effected was by sending round the hat. But sending round the hat came to this—that a few liberal persons would pay, and others less liberal would not. Until the question of local government was fairly faced as a question of enlarging the areas and grouping the parishes, he felt satisfied that there was no use in airing crotchets about turnpikes, or calling upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer for more subsidies from the public funds. Until then, it was idle to press upon the Government to deal with a portion of the subject, and he trusted they would take time to consider the question of local administration in all its bearings, and give them a good system of county government in another year.

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

said, he must repeat what he had said on a former occasion, that, having regard to the many important subjects which had already been set down for legislation that year, and the amount of time which must necessarily be required for the perfection of measures dealing with those subjects, the Government did not think it expedient that the matter of highway legislation should be proceeded with at present. He could not complain of the manner in which the hon. Baronet the Member for North Wiltshire (Sir George Jenkinson) had brought forward the question; nor did he complain of the very natural suggestion that the Government having been in office for nearly a year should be prepared to take the matter up. Neither did he complain of the reference to statements of his in which he had freely given vent to the opinions he had held, and still held, as to what ought to be done; but with reference to the fact that he seconded the Motion in 1870 calling on the then Government to make certain Amendments in the Highway Act, he must remind hon. Members that the question was not then as now mixed up with the greater questions of local administration and taxation in which the country was interested, and with which the Government was expected to deal. His hon. Friend had done justice to his subject; he had done good service in bringing the matter under the notice of the House, and he (Mr. Sclater-Booth) was glad to have heard the opinions of hon. Members on the subject; but he trusted that the hon. Baronet would not, in the circumstances, press his Motion to a division. He did not think that the urgency of the question was so great as his hon. Friend appeared to suppose, while, at the same time, he believed that the question was beset with greater difficulties, and was of a more formidable character, than his hon. Friend seemed to imagine. The feeling as to the urgency of legislation on this subject was not, he believed, by any means so general as the hon. Baronet appeared to think. Moreover, it was evident that, in all human probability, the subject must occupy the attention of the House in connection with more comprehensive legislation. No doubt, in many counties, there was a feeling of anxiety and irritation at the burden cast on parishes by the rapid progress of the dis-turnpiking system; but that was no means universally the case. There were many counties—his own among the number—in which the turnpikes had disappeared, and the maintenance of the roads had been put upon the rates without any serious complaint on the part of the ratepayers, who had recognized the fact that, in many instances, there was no practical distinction to be made between a turnpike road and a parish highway. It was also felt that, under the Highway Act, a remedy was, to a certain extent, available to every county, because where highway districts were in force, it was provided that the charge of a dis-turnpiked road should fall on the district instead of on the parish. He did not think it would be advisable by a short Bill to make the Highway District Act compulsory, as had been suggested, for the proposal would be distasteful to many districts, and there was the greatest divergency of opinion as to what a district should consist of. In his opinion, unless by means of the district system, they could spread the repair of the roads over a larger area, nothing effectual would be done. But in connection with that, the question was, whether the result would not be to create confusion in local administration, unless the areas within which the roads were to be managed and charged were identified with the areas for the management of sanitary and other matters which were worked out under local management and by local means. If he could see his way to that identification, he should be very anxious to proceed without delay; but, as it was, he thought that an amendment of the law in the direction suggested by hon. Members who had spoken would rather prejudice the future decision of the question. Therefore, although the grievances complained of were serious, he did not think that, as compared with some other subjects brought forward by the Government, they called more urgently for immediate consideration. The question of local government was inextricably mixed up with highway management, especially within the last three or four years, and they could not deal with one without considering, to a great extent, what should be the future arrangements as to the other. Allusion had been made to the possibility of taking a tax—for example, the carriage tax—from the Imperial Exchequer, and applying it to the repair of the roads. But, if that were done, it would be extremely difficult to maintain the exemption now enjoyed by traders and agriculturists in respect to their carts and waggons. It might be true that the heavy engines of steam locomotives which passed over and injured the roads should contribute towards their repair; but, in order to collect the tax from them, there must be a uniform system of authorities throughout the Kingdom; and while people were far from agreed as to the area which should be adopted for the management of highways, they had got but little way towards the solution of the question. The limited proposal recommended by the hon. Member for Mid-Cheshire (Mr. Wilbraham Egerton) would not meet the case, but would rather prejudice any future and more comprehensive measure. From the expression of opinion elicited that night, and from the general growth of feeling in regard to local administration and local taxation, the hon. Member for North Wiltshire might be satisfied that that question could not rest, but must come forward frequently, from time to time, until it was settled. In the case of South Wales the whole question connected with the highways must come before Parliament before long, while the question of locomotives on roads also called for speedy legislation. He hoped, therefore, that his hon. Friend would not press his Motion, especially when he assured him that the Government were most willing to deal with the entire subject as soon as they had the opportunity and the power to do so, for the pressure of Public Business was so great it was impossible to take it up in the present Session. His hon. Friend referred to the recommendations of Select Committees; but he did not draw a distinction between Select Committees appointed specially to consider the subject and those of the Turnpikes Annual Committee. In 1864 and 1867 the general feeling was in favour of rapid abolition of tolls, and the recommendations of those two Committees resulted in a change which gave the Turnpike Committee a much greater share in administrative matters connected with roads. Under their guidance a vast number of obsolete tolls had boon swept away, in the majority of cases to the advantage of the community. He would not say that, in some peculiar cases, some modified system of tolls might not be established, though he could not say that he desired to see it done. There was no doubt that the heavy traffic to and from railway stations might, in some instances, press severely on the ratepayers of a particular parish, and all he could say was, that if counties would divide themselves into larger districts, that grievance would be, to a great extent, mitigated, and individual parishes would have much less to complain of. The representations which had been made, from time to time, by the Turnpike Continuance Committees, certainly deserved the very serious attention of the Government, as their recommendations came with great weight and authority; but, at the same time, there had been so much difference of opinion that he thought the delay of a year; and even of two years, which had been complained of by hon. Members who had spoken, would not be objected to if it should result in the production of a more complete and satisfactory measure than the Government could hope to be able to introduce that Session.

MR. BROMLEY DAVENPORT

said, that this was a matter that pressed very much on the poorer class of ratepayers, and a question that ought to be legislated upon as soon as possible. There was in his neighbourhood a very wealthy class of persons who used the roads very much, and who should contribute more to the maintenance of them; and with respect to the Manchester people, he might add that they used the roads very much indeed. He saw no good reasons why the farmers of a district should be compelled to pay for the repair of roads which were chiefly used by others, who could well afford to contribute to their maintenance. He hoped, therefore, the Government would, do something to obviate the injustice under which owners and occupiers, in that respect, laboured.

MR. WHITWELL

said, he was disappointed at the course taken by the Government. He trusted the Motion would be pressed to a division so that the House might have an opportunity of recording its opinion that the time for legislation on the subject had arrived. A very strong feeling prevailed throughout the country that the question ought to be dealt with without delay.

MR. STORER

said, that Agricultural Chambers had of late felt increasing interest in the question, since the maintenance of turnpike roads had been thrown upon the public rates. He was therefore not only disappointed, but he regretted that they had received no assurance as to any particular time when the matter would be brought forward by the Government. Members of the Government had made the subject of local taxation the ground for attacking the late Government; and they were most deeply pledged to deal with it when they came into office. Now, however, it was understood that the question could not be undertaken for some Sessions to come. This was one of the questions upon which the Government had met with much support at the last Election, and the country wished to know when it was to be dealt with. Great interest was taken in it, and he hoped they should receive some assurance from the Government with respect to it.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, he wished to advert to an impression which had got abroad that he had said that the question could not be dealt with for some Sessions to come. He did not know how that impression got abroad; but it was an entirely false one. His right hon. Friend the President of the Local Government Board was known by his antecedents, as well as by his official connection with the subject, to take a deep interest in the question, and he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) could bear him witness that it was one which he had brought under the attention of the Government in connection with other matters that were within his Department. Further, the subject was one to which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had paid great attention, and it had also been under the consideration of the Government; and though it was impossible to bring forward a measure that Session upon the subject, yet the Government looked upon it as one which required the earliest attention after those which were now before Parliament. The Government had already before them quite as much work as they were likely to get through that Session, and it was not for the interest of the country that they should attempt to crowd more business into one Session than they could get through. Of course/if it should be found that in the present Session they were able to approach any other questions than those that were now before them, they would be ready to do so; but, at the present moment they did not wish to make promises beyond what they could clearly see their way to perform. Without any hesitation he could say that that was a matter that the House also recognized as one of very great and pressing importance, and as one that they would be prepared to deal with as early as it was possible to do so, though he could not hold out any prospect of dealing with it that Session, but he entirely repudiated the idea that the Government proposed to put it off for two or throe years. He hoped the hon. Baronet would not deem it necessary to press his Motion to a division, because a false impression would thereby be conveyed to the country at large.

MR. JOHN BRIGHT

I rise, Sir, for the purpose of suggesting to the hon. Baronet the Member for North Wiltshire (Sir George Jenkinson) that he had better not divide the House upon this question. He is perfectly consistent in all that he has done and in all that he has said upon the matter, and I am not at all surprised that he is a little disappointed at the answer he has received from that bench. But then he must bear in mind that "a good many things have happened" since he brought this question before the House—and for that we have very high authority—and that which was perfectly fair, apparently, when he sat on this side of the House and we on that, can hardly be said now to be perfectly fair. I believe the right hon. Gentleman and his Colleagues are taking the right course—they are taking the course that we took. You observe that the arguments of the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board are exactly the arguments which were used from that Bench when we sat there; and yet when hon. Gentlemen opposite were on this side of the House they had no tolerance for us when those arguments were used. We knew perfectly well, as they know, that this question is a very great question; that what you have touched to-night is only the fringe of it; that no Government can go on giving large sums of money from the Consolidated Fund for all the various objects for which local taxation is raised, and that some Government will have before long to turn its attention to the great question of local government in counties. You have no difficulty in dealing with any matter in the boroughs, because in the boroughs there is a responsible and powerful administration, and by passing an Act of Parliament you can order the mayor and town council in every borough to do what you call upon them to do. But when you come to deal with the counties outside boroughs you are perfectly powerless. You have to deal with something like chaos, and until you remove that chaos and establish some wise and honest system based upon the election by the ratepayers of competent authorities you will be every Session in the same difficulty you are in now. Now, you Gentlemen on that side of the House behaved very unfairly to the late Government. There is no doubt on this question—I can say—having authority to speak and a perfect knowledge of the matter—that the late Government was as anxious as this Government can be to deal with the whole question of local administration, but they proposed to deal with it by degrees, working up through successive stages various Bills for the establishment of county administration. You would not give us time, you pretended not to believe us, you fought, and by a majority on one occasion of nearly 100 defeated the late Government, although that Government was as honest and disposed to do its duty in the matter as the Government which is now in office is. I will not deal with this Government as you dealt with us, and I hope there is no Gentleman on this side of the House who will do it. We know how difficult the question is, and we know it cannot be done this year or next; and the right hon. Gentleman did not go too far when he said the Government thought it might be two Sessions before the question could be dealt with. I shall be very satisfied if it be dealt with within two Sessions; and if the Government takes it up in the same spirit that we did, I shall be prepared to give them my hearty support. I would suggest to the hon. Gentleman not to divide the House, and so add to the great complexity in which this question is involved.

MR. DISRAELI

The right hon. Gentleman who has just sat down, whom we have not often heard of late, has addressed us in a style which generally characterizes his observations, not exactly with venom, but with a certain degree of acidity which is certainly unnecessary in this discussion. The right hon. Gentleman accuses us of having behaved with great unfairness to the late Government. He says—"When we proposed a policy such as you are now advocating, you defeated us by a majority of 100." [Mr. BRIGHT: Hear, hear!] "Hear, hear," says the right hon. Member; but as we were in a great minority in the last Parliament, if the late Government were defeated by 100 majority, it must be that they were defeated by their own Friends. It is their own Friends, then, who must accept all the invective which the right hon. Gentleman has just poured forth. It was their own Friends who prevented them from following the wise and prudent policy which—I must say, though many things have taken place since—I cannot recollect to have been advocated by the right hon. Gentleman and his Colleagues. The right hon. Gentleman has assumed that all those prudent and well-informed observations that have fallen from my right hon. Friend the President of the Local Government Board were merely an imitation of speeches that were made by the right hon. Gentlemen with whom he was then acting in political connection. I must say for myself that I found much more novelty in the observations of my right hon. Friend than the right hon. Gentleman did. I have no recollection of those pleasing prospects from the right hon. Gentleman and his Colleague on which he has dilated with so much vehemence. I do remember an extraordinary proposition, brought forward in order to relieve the ratepayers of this country, and that was that we should appropriate to their use an ancient source of the Imperial revenue; and though the right hon. Gentleman and his Colleagues were then supported by a large majority, such was the adverse feeling of the House that the proposal never was absolutely and formally proposed by the Government who originated it. I entirely reject the version—the historical version—which the right hon. Gentleman has given of the conduct of the late Government and the late Parliament with respect to local taxation. I have shown to the House that if the right hon. Gentleman and his Colleagues were disappointed and defeated in their plans by this vast majority, it must have been because they bad lost the confidence of their own Friends, and were pursuing a policy which those who ought to have supported them declined to countenance. I hope my hon. Friend the Member for North Wiltshire (Sir George Jenkinson) will consider the intimation that has been given from both sides of the House, and not force the House, by a division upon the Resolution, to any declaration which might at all embarrass those who are not shrinking from the responsibility of dealing with the great question which is before us—namely, the local administration of the country—who have shown by the measures they have brought forward that they are advancing to a solution of that question, and who, perhaps, when they bring further measures forward will not be defeated, as the right hon. Gentleman was, because they lost the confidence of their own supporters.

MR. PELL

said, he thought that the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Bright) had missed his mark when he said that the present Government had followed in the steps of the late one upon the subject. He (Mr. Pell) recollected perfectly well when the late Government gave their support to an attempt to pass an Instruction to the Turnpike Acts Committee, with the view of making highway districts compulsory throughout the Kingdom—an attempt to do indirectly by an Instruction that which should be sanctioned only with all the formalities of an Act of Parliament. Their action in the matter was most unconstitutional, and was only defeated by sheer obstinacy on the part of the Opposition.

SIR GEORGE JENKINSON

said, that after the very distinct assurance they had received from the Government, he would withdraw his Motion.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.