HC Deb 04 August 1881 vol 264 cc917-8

Order for Second Reading read.

MR. COURTNEY, in moving that the Bill be read a second time, said, that, owing to the present state of the law, pedlars were exposed to great inconvenience. They obtained hawking certificates from the places in which they resided; but when they went into other districts they were bound to obtain an endorsement. If they visited three or four different districts in one day, they were obliged to obtain a separate endorsement in each. The opinion of the police authorities had been asked on this matter, and they had reported in favour of a relaxation of the law; consequently, it was now proposed that the certificates obtained in the district in which the pedlars resided should be deemed sufficient, without endorsement, to enable them to carry on their trades in other districts.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Mr. Courtney.)

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR

said, he did not want to oppose the Bill, which was a very reasonable one; but he wished to bring under the notice of the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary of State for the Home Department that which in the suburbs of London—and, in fact, in the suburbs of all large towns—was an intolerable nuisance to the respectable poor. Pedlars were in the habit of going through the streets where these persons resided, knocking at every door, and inquiring whether the inmates desired to purchase any of their wares. In some small streets sometimes as many as 20 summonses of this kind were answered in a day. It appeared to him it would be a good thing if the Home Office authorities would direct the attention of the police to this matter, which was really a very serious grievance.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time, and committed for To-morrow.