HC Deb 20 July 1885 vol 299 cc1315-24

(4.) £66,222, to complete the sum for the Supreme Court of Judicature in Ireland.

MR. GRAY

said, he wished to draw the attention of the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ireland to a matter very small in itself, but of considerable importance to those concerned in it. By a recent Regulation made by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue an Office had been opened in the Four Courts, Dublin, for the purpose, as was stated, of selling stamps and collecting duty. Those who were in the habit of selling the stamps previously raised no objection at first; but subsequently the office adopted a system of selling other stamps, forms, and papers, and those were sold at about half the price which commercial firms in Dublin who had hitherto sold them were able to afford, because, of course, a great Public Department could, by buying large quantities of goods at cost price, and by being content with a nominal profit, always enter into competition with and undersell private firms. He was not aware that there were any reasons of State why that should be done in Dublin; but, as a matter of fact, the Commissioners had entered into a trade competition with the law stationers of Dublin, whom it was, of course, easy to drive out of the field by State competition. Butheasked the right hon. and learned Gentleman whether that was a class of commercial enterprize which held out any hope of great profit or great advantage to the Government, and whether it would not be better to revert to the principle of allowing the ordinary business of the country to be carried on in the usual way? Some months ago a number of the law stationers concerned presented a Memorial on the subject to the late Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Hibbert), who in reply said that the documents were sold at a profit. They might be sold at a very moderate profit, and yet at such a price as an ordinary trader could not afford. Again, although there might be a reason for selling stamps, there was no conceivable reason for selling unstamped documents in Government Offices, and for cutting out ordinary traders who could not carry on business in the same way. One law stationer had written to him a few days ago to say that, in consequence of the change, he had had to destroy and sell as waste for next to nothing over two tons of printed legal forms which he had in stock and which had cost a very considerable sum. The law stationers only made a fair commercial profit on their sales; and he was sure that the Attorney General for Ireland would bear him out in saying that no complaint had been made by the member? of the Legal Profession in Ireland as to the way in which the law stationers of Dublin carried on their business; and why they should be obliged, by the Regulation referred to, to enter into a ruinous competition with a Government Office,hehad no means of knowing. He hoped the right hon. and learned Gentleman would be able to say that henceforward those documents should be sold at a fair trade price, or, at all events, that the matter should be taken into consideration.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. HOLMES)

said, that the law stationers in Dublin, so far as his experience went, had always carried on their business in a satisfactory manner. He presumed that the reason which led to the sale of unstamped documents at the Office at the Four Courts, Dublin, was that it would be for the convenience of practitioners who attended the Courts. The hon. Member had said that a Memorial had been presented to the late Secretary to the Treasury on the subject, and he would take an opportunity of looking into it, and if the circumstances were such as to show that there was a grievance, he had no doubt the arrangement would be altered.

COLONEL NOLAN

said, that some of the items in this Vote appeared to be very much in the nature of illegal payments, inasmuch that they related to appointments made in defiance of the Act of Parliament. The Comptroller and Auditor General had made some comments upon those appoinments, as appeared on the face of the Estimates, and he thought the Treasury ought to see that such remarks from the Comptroller and Auditor General were unnecessary in future, and that some notification would be given to that effect. Ha trusted that the Department would be instructed that in distributing the pay they should confine themselves as much as possible to the provisions of the Act of Parliament.

THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Sir HENRY HOLLAND)

said, his attention had not been called to this matter before; but it should be looked into. There did certainly appear to be some irregularity with respect to the appointment.

Vote agreed in.

(5.) £7,500, to complete the sum for the Court of Bankruptcy, Ireland.

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR

said, he should like to have an explanation of the increase of £300 under Sub-head B for Costs of Official Assignees? He was not aware of any perquisites which would account for this increase.

THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY

said, the amount of a Supplementary Estimate presented in August last had not been struck out of the Estimates, but the error was corrected in the Resolution.

MR. SEXTON

said, he believed that an Official Assignee, who had been in the Public Service for many years and enjoyed a salary, had suddenly disappeared from his Office and left no trace behind him. He read in the newspapers that after the lapse of two monthsheas suddenly re-appeared. Whatever might be the explanation of the matter, it remained one of mystery. He believed that an investigation had been ordered and undertaken by a professional gentleman in Dublin, which examination, however, had been discontinued. The reason given for the discontinuance of the investigation was that there was no fund available for the purpose of the inquiry. But surely the right hon. and learned Gentleman would admit that the absence of the fund must have been patent to the authorities when the investigation was commenced. If there was no fund, why did they begin the investigation, and, having begun it, why did they discontinue it on the ground that there was no fund? He asked what was the result of the examination of the accounts?

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND {Mr. HOLMES)

said, he was not aware of the result of the investigation; but he would refer the matter to the authorities.

Vote agreed to.

(6.) £785, to complete the sum for the Admiralty Court, Registry, Ireland.

COLONEL NOLAN

said, that although there might be some Admiralty cases in Ireland, the number would be insignificant, and it must be altogether unnecessary to keep up the Court. At one time it was very unpopular. He should like to know whether it could not be embodied with some other Court? In Ireland the Admiralty Court, it seemed to him, might very fairly be embodied with either of several other Courts. He should like to have an explanation from the right hon. and learned Attorney General for Ireland as to why it was necessary to keep it up.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. HOLMES)

stated that this had ceased to he an unpopular Court. There was no restriction now as to the advocates who practised before it. As soon as a vacancy in the Judgeship occurred this Court would be merged in the Probate and Matrimonial Division of the High Court of Justice, under the provisions of the Judicature Act. Inasmuch as the salary of the Judge must be paid as long as he lived, it was as well to avail themselves of his services as long as possible.

COLONEL NOLAN

said, that, pending the absorption, if the heads of the Department went on appointing clerks and assistant clerks, tipstaffs, and so on, there would be large pensions and commutations to pay people on the final abolitition of the Court. That was the way the expenditure mounted up in the Civil Service in England. The Government said a Court or a Department or a branch of a Department ought to be done away with or abolished after the death of a particular man, and in the meantime they went on appointing to all the subordinate offices, and the consequence was that when, eventually, the Judge or the Head of the Department died, all the junior men had to be compensated. Those juniors were very often young men who went into the Service knowing that they would soon be compensated, and that then they could obtain other employment. He (Colonel Nolan) thought that, in Offices which were about to be abolished, when a subordinate retired or resigned, his place should not be filled up, otherwise they were enormously and ridiculously increasing the charges on the Estimates. He should like to know from Her Majesty's Government whether it was intended to go on appointing subordinates in connection with the Irish Admiralty Court now that they knew that the Court was to be abolished?

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. HOLMES)

said, that no new appointment to any of the subordinate offices had been made since 1877. He could not, however, say what course would be followed in the event of a vacancy arising. If vacancies arose, it would be a matter for serious consideration whether some of the duties of the officials of the Admiralty should not be transferred elsewhere.

Vote agreed to.

(7.) £12,510, to complete the sum for the Registry of Deeds, Ireland.

MR. GRAY

said, that a complaint was made last year with regard to the management of this Office, and a Committee was appointed by the then Government to investigate the matter. He had taken the liberty of writing to the Government to ask for the Report, which took the form of a Treasury Minute, and that Minute should have been on the Table of the House for 40 days. He had received an explanation, which was satisfactory so far as it went; but the result to the officers of the Department was that all promotion had been suspended for the past 12 months, and those gentlemen were in a worse position than they would have been in if no investigation had ever taken place. The officers complained of the slowness of their promotion and the inadequacy of their pay. The result of their grievance being inquired into was that they now got no promotion and no increase of pay. He earnestly trusted that the Treasury Minute would lie on the Table of the House in the next Session of Parliament. What had been the cause of the delay in presenting it he could not say, but he hoped the House would be permitted to see it next Session. The gentlemen on whose behalf he was speaking wore in the position of not knowing what their prospects were. At present they had all chance of promotion barred against them, in consequence of the investigation which had taken place. A week or a fortnight would have been ample for that investigation; but seeing that the Committee was appointed in January, and that they were now nearly in August, it was an extraordinary thing that they knew nothing of the inquiry.

THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Sir HENRY HOLLAND)

said, the Government understood now that the Committee would report in August. When they did, the matter would receive immediate attention. The Report ought certainly to be laid on the Table next Session.

Vote agreed to.

(8.) £1,538, to complete the sum for the Registry of Judgments, Ireland.

(9.) £90,817, to complete the sum for the Dublin Metropolitan Police.

MR. GRAY

said, he did not wish to raise a very long discussion on this Vote; but really it was a very remarkable one, and one which should not be allowed to pass without a word of comment and protest from an Irish Member. The Dublin Metropolitan Police was exclusively a Governmental or Imperial Force, so far as its management and control were concerned. All the towns in England, with the exception of London, managed their own police, and were able to control the force for ordinary municipal purposes; but the Metropolitan Police in Dublin were a Governmental Force, and were not available for municipal purposes, save the maintenance of order in the streets. He would like to direct attention to the enormous cost of that Force. The Estimate for the present year was a contribution from the Imperial Exchequer of £145,148—it was £146,000 last year— but, in addition to that, the locality had to provide £52,000; so that, in round figures, the Metropolitan Police in Dublin cost £200,000 a-year. That enormous sum only supported something loss than 1,000 constables, and, manifestly, the charge was a most extravagant one for such a result. He (Mr. Gray) had had the honour to sit upon the Royal Commission appointed to inquire into the subject of the housing of the poor; and before that Commission the Dublin Corporation had declared that, if they had the management of the police of the City, they would be much more useful for sanitary and municipal purposes, and that they would be able to maintain the Force for almost the amount they had now to pay as a partial contribution towards it. The £145,000 contributed by the State was thrown away, for out of the money levied from Dublin itself an efficient force for the protection of that Metropolis could be maintained. He failed to see why Dublin should not be permitted to manage its own police force, just as Liverpool, Manchester, Glasgow, and Edinburgh managed theirs. He failed to see why the State should be called upon to pay £145,000 for the maintenance of such an indifferent Force as this. £200 a head for the Force was paid by the State and the locality—a strong example of the enormous expenditure which always took place when the Central Government attempted to manage local institutions which could be much bettor managed by the localities them selves. Eight pence in the pound was levied in Dublin for the management of the Force; but indirect taxes were levied for their maintenance. There was the Carriage Duty charged on all hackney carriages plying for hire. In every place in the United Kingdom except Dublin charges of that kind went to the municipality as a contribution towards the maintenance of the roads that were used by the carriages; but in Ireland the Imperial Exchequer took hold of the local Carriage Duty and put it into the Consolidated Fund as a contribution towards the maintenance of the police. Then there were various charges and fines levied in the Police Courts for various classes of petty offences. In other parts of the United Kingdom those charges went to the borough fund towards the rates; but the Government took them all in Ireland. It took the fines for drunkenness and petty offences, and put them into the Consolidated Fund. There was one tax peculiarly cruel, to which he wished to draw the attention of the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary—because, though they might continue to take the Carriage Duties, the Police Court fines, and the publicans' Licence Duties, all of which were peculiarly local contributions, he thought the right hon. Gentleman ought to take into his serious consideration the circumstances of this particular levy on Dublin City. The pawnbrokers of Dublin had to pay £100 a-year each for their licences. Those gentlemen, he believed, were perfectly content to pay that sum—in fact, they said it kept the trade respectable; that was to say, it kept it in a comparatively small number of hands. The effect, of course, was that pawn-broking facilities in Dublin were not as nearly so good as they were in other parts of the United Kingdom. This tax levied on pawnbrokers was, in fact, levied on those who used the pawnbrokers' establishments—that was to say, it was a tax levied on the very poorest class of the entire community. People might decry pawn broking as they liked, and declare that very often the pawnshop was used for the purpose of procuring drink; but those who best knew the habits and necessities of the poor knew that the pawnbroker was very often of very great assistance to the almost destitute in their hour of need, and that the pawnbroker was, in fact, the banker of the poor. It was, therefore, a cruel thing to levy on Dublin of all towns in the United Kingdom this enormous duty, a duty which fell on the very poorest. He did not suppose the right hon. Baronet knew anything of this—it"would be unreasonable to expect that having only just succeeded to the post of Chief Secretary he should have a definite knowledge of the matter. He (Mr. Gray), however, would press the subject upon the attention of the right hon. Gentleman and the Committee, for he believed that if they realized what a cruel injustice this comparatively petty levy in Dublin was to a poor and defenceless class they would, if the State was to continue to maintain the police as an Imperial Force, so far as this £3,000 or £4,000 a-year was concerned, seek some other means of raising it than levying it upon the people who were least able to bear such an exceptional burden.

THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Sir WILLIAM HART DYKE)

I can assure the hon. Member that several points he has raised will receive my best attention.

COLONEL NOLAN

said, he thought it would be advisable to point out to the hon. Baronet the Secretary to the Treasury that there were two entries in the Estimates, one having reference to the Comptroller and Auditor General, and the other to the Dublin Metropolitan Police, which showed in one paragraph that the provisions of an Act had been overridden, In another paragraph financial irregularities were shown. It was right, to bring these matters before the notice of the Secretary to the Treasury, because it seemed to him that the Acts of Parliament relating to the expenditure of money in Ireland were set at defiance. According to the Comptroller and Auditor General the provisions of the Act had been overridden, not occasionally, but habitually. He thought the point was one worth noticing.

THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Sir HENRY HOLLAND)

said, he was not aware of the point taken by the Comptroller and Auditor General; but sometimes those matters were found to be capable of explanation before the Public Accounts Committee.

Vote agreed to.

(10.) £4,347, to complete the sum for Dundrum Criminal Lunatic Asylum, Ireland.