HC Deb 24 July 1893 vol 15 cc308-9
MR. STANLEY LEIGHTON (Shropshire, Oswestry)

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the Parliamentary subventions towards the support of the County Constabulary Forces are made subject to a Report that the several forces are sufficiently maintained and carry out their duties efficiently; whether he can state for what length of time orders of the Newcastle-Emlyn County Court in Cardiganshire have remained unexecuted, in consequence of organised resistance having been offered to the County Court bailiff and the police; and if he can state how many orders of the County Court still remain unexecuted?

* THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Asquith,) Fife, E.

The subventions to the County Police, which are now-paid from the Exchequer contribution account, are paid upon a certificate from the Secretary of State in terms which are prescribed by the County Borough Police Act, 1856—namely, that the Police Force Has been maintained in a state of efficiency in point of number and discipline for the year ending 29th September. The number of Orders for distraint of tithe, issued by the Newcastle-Emlyn County Court, and now unexecuted, is 141. These Orders are of various dates, from September, 1891, to dune, 1893. There is no doubt that the main reason for this state of things is that, under the Act, 1891, the bailiff has no legal power to make a forcible entry for the purpose of levying the distress, and that the tithe-payers have, in several eases, been successful in excluding him without violating the law. It is the ease that on one occasion—5th May last—he was assaulted by a person who has since been convicted. On that occasion I thought the police protection given was inadequate, and so informed the Chief Constable, who has since assured me that in future he will take every possible precaution to prevent the repetition of violence. He states, that since that date he has had no application from the County Court for police protection to the bailiff, and that previous to that date he had had application, not merely for protection, hut for assistance in effecting an entrance which, as I am advised, is not a duty that devolves on the police.