§ Order for Second Reading read.
§ MR. LUTTRELL (Devon, Tavistock), in moving the Second Reading of the Bill, said, this Bill had been introduced in he House of Commons before, and had received considerable support. An agitation had been going on in the country for a reform of the Magistrates' Bench. The system that existed at present was not a popular system, and without a popular system they would never command popular sympathy. There were many reasons for the reform of the present system. Many people believed that the law was made by the rich man and administered against the poor; and, again, men were often appointed to the Bench not because they were suited for 152 the Bench, but because the Bench was supposed to be suitable for them. One reason why the poor man was not in sympathy with the administration of the law was that there had been a property qualification; and he would like to know if it was the intention of the Home Secretary to support a proposal, or himself introduce a measure, for the abolition of that qualification? But even if they had a Bill abolishing that qualification, it would not be a complete solution of this question. So long as they allowed the Lords Lieutenant to appoint Magistrates, they did not abolish the property qualification. For Lord Lieutenants were themselves appointed on a property qualification, and so long as the power of the Lord Lieutenant was retained, so long would they have that qualification exercising control of the country. He did not wish to enter into detail, but he would say that the Bill proposed the abolition of the objectionable qualification, and it proposed to make the Chairmen of Boards of Guardians and Chairmen of Urban Sanitary Authorities Justices of the Peace by virtue of their offices. It also proposed that the County Council and the Town Council should have a voice in the selection of Justices. He would appeal to gentlemen on either side to support the Bill, and let it pass the Second Reading.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Mr. Luttrell.)
§ MR. A. F. JEFFREYS (Hants, Basingstoke)said, Magistrates in the counties at the present time conducted the business of the country with great ability and in a thoroughly efficient manner. It was a great advantage, he thought, to the poor that they could have their cases decided by several Magistrates instead of having only one. The property qualification was a very useful provision, because it makes it certain that a Magistrate will have his residence in the county in which he acts, and also because it gave him reasons for staying there to discharge his duties.
It being half an hour after Five of the Clock, the Debate stood adjourned.
Debate to be resumed upon Wednesday next.