THIRD READING. (Hansard, 15 August 1867)

§ LORD REDESDALE
, in moving the third reading of this Bill, said he did so under protest, objecting to every part of it. He believed it to be the very worst measure he ever saw framed.

§ LORD WESTBURY
expressed his regret that the noble Lord (the Chairman of Committees) should entertain such an opinion of the Bill, which must be regarded as one which proceeded on compromise and arrangement between the parties. Although much censure might be cast on the measure, much also would be cast on the law which rendered such legislation necessary, in order to supply a remedy which ought to be supplied in some more efficient manner. He admitted that he regarded the machinery of the measure as very defective; and there were two Amendments which, before the Bill passed, he should like to submit to the notice of the House. Clause 25 proposed that the consents to future proceedings of the mortgagees or debenture-holders should be necessary, but no machinery was provided for the purpose of ascertaining that those consents were duly given. He should move, therefore an addition to the clause by way of Amendment, to the effect that the certificate of a Justice of the Peace of the number of consents from time to time obtained by the company to their proceedings, and of the amount of the mortgages represented by such consents, should be sufficient evidence that those assents had been given.

§ LORD REDESDALE
thought the provision suggested by the noble and learned Lord was open to very great objection. The Bill would, he contended, be much better without it. The provisions of the Companies Act required that one-half the capital of the company should be paid up, but their Lordships all knew how that requirement had been complied with in the case of the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway. Sir Morton Peto gave a bit of paper on one side and got a receipt on the other, and the money was said to have been obtained when not a single shilling had been paid. Such was the manner in which the proceedings of the London, Chatham, and Dover Company were managed; and if the Amendment of the noble and learned Lord were agreed to, it would afford no protection to the rights of the parties concerned. He hoped, therefore, the Bill would be allowed to pass as it stood, and that the proof of the consents having been given would be left to be taken in some other way.

§ LORD HYLTON
, as Chairman of the Committee which sat on the Bill, entirely agreed with the noble Lord, as to the great laxity which seemed to have prevailed in regard to all those matters which it was required should be brought before a Justice in dealing with the affairs of the Company. The facts had been fully proved by the evidence before the Committee. Under those circumstances he could not help thinking that it would be better to reject the Amendment.

§ LORD WESTBURY
said, that if a Justice of the Peace were to grant a certificate in the absence of all evidence he would perform his duty in a most reprehensible manner. The Bill provided no machinery in its present shape to effect the object which he had in view, and if there were no person appointed who would interfere judicially for the purpose of ascertaining the facts, the Company would be left simply to the assertion of the Board of Management for the proof that the consents had been obtained.

§ LORD WESTBURY
briefly adverted to some other provisions of the Bill, observing that when it came up to that House it contained a provision relieving the Imperial Mercantile Association from the operation of the suspending clauses. He proposed an Amendment for the purpose of protecting the interests of the Imperial Mercantile Association, and which he said had been agreed to by all the parties concerned.

§ LORD REDESDALE
said, he gave an unwilling assent to the introduction of the clause. It was true that one of the most disgraceful transactions that could occur had taken place. The authorities of this Railway Company had on the same day and in the same room mortgaged the same property to two different parties without the persons who were interested in advancing the several monies being aware of what had taken place. The whole of the provisions of that Bill proceeded on the extraordinary principle that all legal proceedings against the Company should be hung up for ten years, and the Imperial Mercantile Association had no more right to be excepted from the operation of that principle than any of the other creditors of the Railway Company. He agreed that these parties had been hardly dealt with. The transaction which made that clause necessary was one of the most disgraceful 1539 transactions which had ever taken place in the affairs of any company.