Lords Sitting of 2 April 1860

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Trustees, Mortgagees, &c.
2a Stamp Duties; Income Tax.
3a Dwellings for Labouring Classes (Ireland); Stamp Duties; Income Tax.

THE TYNE HARBOUR OF REFUGE.
THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEwished to correct a statement he had made

1711
the other evening with reference to the sum expended on the works now in progress at the mouth of the Tyne. He had read from the Report of the Harbour of Refuge Commissioners that the sum of £750,000 was recommended by them as the total cost of efficient works for a good harbour of refuge at the mouth of the Tyne. That was quite correct; but he stated incidentally that £500,000 of this sum had been already expended, which he found was not the fact. The sum actually laid out was only £142,000.

PARLIAMENTARY BOROUGHS (IRELAND).—MOTION FOR RETURNS.
THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE moved an address for—
"Return of all Towns in Ireland, exclusive of Parliamentary Boroughs, containing a population of 3,000 or upwards, specifying the County in which each such Town is situated, and showing the Number of Occupiers rated at above £4 and under £6, and at £6 and upwards but under £8, and at £8; And also,
"Returns showing the Area, Population, Income Tax, Number of Occupiers rated at various Amounts, Number of Parliamentary Voters, &c. in each County in Ireland, and showing the Area, Population, Income Tax, the Number of Tenemenuated at various Amounts under £10, Number Voters, &c. in each Parliamentary Borou Ireland."
The noble Marquess said that the Irish Reform Bill which had been introduced into the other House of Parliament was, in his opinion, so complete a mockery that he could not understand why the Government had taken the trouble to bring it forward. So strongly did he entertain that view with respect to it, that if it should ever come up to their Lordships' House, which he hoped would not be the case, he should deem it to be his duty to oppose its passing into a law. For his own part he had not heard that any desire for Parliamentary Reform had been exhibited in Ireland, or that the question was one which had taken the slightest hold of the minds of the Irish people. But if it were deemed necessary that some alteration in the electoral system in that country should be made, he thought due consideration should be shown for those large constituencies which were not adequately represented. He might also observe that there were in Ireland boroughs so poor and having constituencies so small that they were to a great extent naturally subject either to proprietary or to other corrupt influences; while
1712
on the other hand there were populous places in Ireland that were at present either wholly unrepresented or very inadequately represented. It was most expedient in any measure of Reform which might be passed that such cases should be placed upon some more satisfactory footing than that upon which they at present stood. He held, for example, in his hand a Return of no less than sixteen boroughs not one of which had a constituency exceeding 300 registered electors, and that number, it must be borne in mind, was considerably larger than the number who voted at the last election. He might add that of the sixteen boroughs to which he had alluded six had a constituency of less than 200, so that they afforded a good ground for the hand of the Reformer to work upon. And how, let him ask, was it proposed to deal with these cases in the Government measure? According to certain returns which had been laid before the House, the result of the change which that measure proposed to effect would be that not one of those boroughs would have a constituency of 400; that twelve would still have a constituency of less than 300, and four a constituency of less than 200. That being the proposed operation of the measure, he could not, as he had said before, look upon it otherwise than a perfect mockery of Reform, to disturb the existing system for the attainment of such a result as that. Now he would not completely abolish the representative system in all such small places; what he should propose in most cases would be to group those boroughs in such a way as that they might have a constituency somewhat respectable in point of numbers—in such a way, for instance, as that no constituency should number below 500, while the population which it represented should not be less than 12,000. He had said that the large constituencies in Ireland were inadequately represented, and he might, in support of that opinion, mention the county of Cork, which, with a population of 563,000 and 15,700 electors, had altogether only six Members; the county of Down, which, with a population of 328,000 and a constituency exceeding 11,000, had only three Members; Tipperary, which, with a population of 331,600 and 9,467 electors, had only four Members; and Galway, which, with a population of 297,000 and a number of electors exceeding 5,000, had only two Members. There was also the county of Dublin, which, although the

1713
number of its inhabitants wag not more than 143,000, yet was of greater importance, and which, with a constituency of 6,200, returned only two Members. Those were, in his opinion, points well worthy the attention of the Government in dealing with the subject of Irish Parliamentary Reform.
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLEsaid, the noble Marquess had not merely anticipated the discussion of that Reform Bill which he had expressed a hope would not come up to their Lordships' House from the House of Commons, but had, to a certain extent, sketched out a counter-measure of his own. Now, while his wishes with respect to the fate of the Government Bill were quite different from those which his noble Friend entertained, he must decline following him into a discussion of the details of that or any other measure which might be introduced on the subject. The Government Bill involved, he was prepared to admit, no proposals of immense magnitude. It was not, for instance, of a character "to take away one's breath," if he might be allowed the use of an expression which he had of late on one or two occasions seen in print. He might, however, observe that the Irish people would not, in all probability, be disposed to think that equal justice had been dealt out to them if the small boroughs in that country were, as the noble Marquess suggested, to be disfranchised, while no such course was to be adopted with regard to boroughs of the same description in England. The noble Marquess seemed to be of opinion that it would be advisable that a certain number of those boroughs should be grouped together, but in order to effect that object it would be necessary to alter the proportion of the borough to the county representation, inasmuch as no substitute could otherwise be found for those boroughs he wished to see disfranchised. He might add that the population in boroughs and that in counties in Ireland stood to one another in proportions different from that which was the case in England or Scotland. The county population in Scotland, for instance, was 2,000,000, of which the town population exceeded one-half; while in Ireland, with a population of 6,000,000, the town population did not exceed 1,000,000. Under these circumstances, the noble Marquess would see that there would be considerable difficulty in adopting in Ireland the changes which he recommended. There could, of course, be no objection to the Returns re-
1714
quired by the noble Marquess, on the understanding that the population should be taken according to the last Census.
LORD MONTEAGLEsaid, he did not think the Irish Reform Bill was a measure in itself of very great importance; indeed all reference to Ireland might very well have been omitted in the present legislation, were it not that if that had been the case the Irish people might have thought they were treated with neglect. But whatever might be the character of the Reform Bill for Ireland, in other respects it would not be denied that it contained some very great anomalies. Some of its provisions were of a very extraordinary character, and he could not help calling attention to one which had attracted considerable notice—he meant that clause which provided that Irish Peers should in future be enabled to sit as representing Irish constituencies in the House of Commons. On that clause there was undoubtedly an extraordinary unanimity of opinion as well on this side of the water as on the other. How it was possible to conceive that such a power should be granted to Irish Peers he could not imagine. Irish Peers had already the privilege of representing their own body in the House of Lords, and now it was proposed that they should enjoy another franchise,—namely, that of representing their own counties and boroughs in the other House of Parliament. How could that clause recommend itself to the House of Commons? It was too much to suppose that the present Irish Members would commit political suicide by supporting a clause the effect of which must be to create the most formidable competition against themselves in every constituency throughout the country.
THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEsaid, he did not now propose that any disfranchisement should take place in Ireland, except to the extent which was contemplated in England, by depriving constituencies of one Member when the population was below a certain amount. The boroughs of Athlone and Portarlington each returned a Member to Parliament. He found that under the Government Reform Bill four additional voters would be added to the constituency of Athlone, which would thus amount to 258; the increased roll of voters for Portarlington would number 140. He did not believe that by grouping these boroughs together, and allotting one of their Members to some large constituency, any injustice would be done to the 398 voters

1715
of whom the joint constituency would then be composed.
Motion agreed to.

SMITHFIELD MARKET.—QUESTION.
LORD EBURYrose to inquire, Whether it is the Intention of Her Majesty's Government to allow any Part of the Site of Old Smithfield Market to be appropriated for Building Purposes? The noble Lord said he had always taken a deep interest in the affairs of the metropolis, and had spent twenty years of his life in endeavouring to remove the vested interests of Smithfield Market from that great centre of the town. Having got rid of them he had since been employed in endeavouring to prevent their resettling themselves on that at present vacant space of ground in the shape of a dead-meat market. He had attended with deputations to both the noble Earl (the Earl of Derby) and the noble Viscount now at the head of the Government to ask that they would not allow old Smithfield to be covered with buildings. He might state that Smithfield had been granted to the Corporation of London, to be held so long as it was used as a cattle market; but when that was removed to another locality the site of Smithfield reverted to the Crown, and the Crown now claimed the right to hold it. He believed that the Corporation of the City at first demurred to the Government interpretation of the terms of the charter; but there could not, he thought, be any doubt that when the market was removed to Copenhagen Fields—whither, however, it ought not to have been removed, for he contended that it ought to have been removed wholly out of town—the ground reverted absolutely to the Crown. When that removal took place he formed one of a deputation to the noble Earl at the head of the last Government, requesting that the area should not be built over, and both from that noble Earl and more recently from the Government of the noble Lord now in power he received the assurance that there was no intention to build over the area. This was so far satisfactory, because there was no part of London where there was so dense and squalid a population as that which was found in the immediate neighbourhood of Smithfield and the adjacent localities of Snow Hill, Clerkenwell Green, Long Lane, Cow Lane, and field Lane. It was most important to the health of the people in those localities that this open space should
1716
be kept clear of buildings. That large population had no other space whatever for their children to play on. But, although he had received an assurance from both Governments, neither of them had taken a step in the matter, but had left the ground in the same state in which it was left when the market was removed some years ago. The Government having done nothing in the matter the City authorities had proposed that the space should be appropriated to a dead-meat market, and for other purposes to which they might think proper to apply it. Their Lordships should recollect that there were no squares or open places in the City for the recreation of the people. He thought the Government should have taken possession of the ground in the name of the Crown, have railed it off, and have made it into a playground for the poor children of the neighbourhood. The reason why he had asked the question of which he had given notice was because he understood a plan had been submitted by certain parties for making a great railway terminus on the site of Smithfield. The company was not in posse but in esse, for an Act had been obtained from Parliament for making a railway which should bring the Great Northern and the London and North Western Railways to that part of the town, and the company had proposed to the Government a plan under which they would occupy the greater part of Smithfield. He hoped he should receive an assurance from the noble Duke that the Government did not mean to sanction this covetousness on the part of the Corporation of London. He wished to know whether the Government would persevere in keeping the space vacant, and further, whether they would take possession of it in the name of the Crown.
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLEsaid, the noble Lord was probably aware, though he had not stated it to the House, that the City had at that moment a Bill before the other House of Parliament sanctioning the formation of a dead-meat market on the site of Smithfield. Communications had taken place between the City authorities and the Home Office on this subject; and, though no decision had yet been come to by his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State he was bound to tell the noble Lord that the proposition had been received not unfavourably. At the same time he might state that the matter was still under consideration, and no answer which would at all compromise the Government had yet

1717
been given. He did not know at what stage the Bill had arrived, but he apprehended that some arrangement, involving the sanction of the Crown, must be come to before the Bill reached their Lordships' House.

STAMP DUTIES BILL.

  INCOME TAX BILL.
  BILLS READ 2a; 3a; AND PASSED.
  Orders of the Day for the Second Reading, and for Standing Orders Nos. 37 and 38, to be considered in order to their being dispensed with in the said Bill, read.
  THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE: If I rightly understand the wish of the House, from the desire which was expressed on a former day by two or three noble Friends, and from the tacit assent of the remainder, I apprehend that it is not now desired to enter into a discussion at the present moment either of this measure or of the Income Tax Bill; but that a discussion should take place on the general financial scheme of the Government when some three or four other Bills are brought before us after Easter. If that be the feeling of the House, I shall act more in conformity with it by abstaining from debating the question, or from defending an enactment which there is no desire at present to assail. I shall, therefore, simply explain to your Lordships that the general scope of this Bill is to extend to various other articles of agreement in writing that principle of penny taxation which has been adopted with vary great success for some years, and has produced, on the whole, a very considerable revenue. It was first adopted in the case of the Post Office by my noble Friend (Lord Monteagle) when Chancellor of the Exchequer in a former Government. It was carried further by my right hon. Friend the present Chancellor of the Exchequer, who imposed an uniform rate of 1d. on receipt stamps; a step further was made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer of the late Government when he imposed a similar stamp on bankers' cheques; and we now propose to extend the principle considerably further by imposing a small tax, varying from a penny to sixpence, on various other documents. I do not now enter into the question of stamps for a higher amount which are to be found in the present Bill. I am quite aware that objections have been raised to the measure on the ground that it interferes with trade and creates impediments of an undesirable nature. It is
  1718
  impossible to deny that any tax, however small, must have that tendency; but when it is believed—whether rightly or wrongly, I purposely abstain from entering into that question—that the general measures of the Government are largely calculated for the relief of the trade of the country, we have thought it not unfair that it should be called on to contribute a compensation to the revenue to an extent which it is well able to bear. With this short explanation, I beg now to move the Second Reading of these Bills, with the intimation that, if your Lordships should be willing to agree to it, I shall then move the suspension of the Standing Orders Nos. 37 and 38, with a view to both Bills being read a third time and passed.
  Motion made and Question proposed. That the Stamp Duties Bill be now read the second time.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly; Committee negatived; Standing Orders Nos. 37 and 38 considered, and dispensed with; and Bill read 3a and passed.
  THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLEthen moved that the Income Tax Bill be now read the second time, and said as their Lordships had been kind enough to allow him to pass the former Bill without a single word of observation, he would not further intrude upon their Lordships' time even with any explanation of the only two remarkable features in this Bill—that was to say the imposition of an additional penny in the tax, and why it was only imposed for one year. He apprehended that these points would all be raised in the discussion that was to take place after Easter, and, therefore, he would abstain from expressing any opinion whatever on them now.
  Bill read 2a; Standing Orders read, and dispensed with; Bill read 3a and passed.
  House adjourned at a Quarter before Six o'clock, till To-morrow, Three o'clock.