RAILWAY COMPANIES CLAUSES CONSOLIDATION BILL. (Hansard, 13 February 1845)

§ Lord G. Somerset
moved the Order of the day for a Committee on the Companies Clauses Consolidation Bill.

§ Mr. Aglionby
hoped the noble Lord would not press the Committee to-night. There were several Clauses requiring explanation, and which could not be satisfactorily disposed of so hastily. Many 446 hon. Members were absent who took much interest in the subject of these Bills.

§ Lord G. Somerset
said, the hon. Members had had sufficient notice, as he had on the previous night explained the course he meant to take. It was most important that these measures should pass speedily, or they could not be carried at all during the present Session. He trusted, therefore, that the hon. Member would consent to their passing this evening through Committee, and when the Report was brought up on Wednesday next, he (Lord G. Somerset) would be happy to give every opportunity for explanation and amendment. The Clauses embraced no new principles. They were nearly all Clauses taken from other Bills, some of them modified and simplified, and the only thing new in the Bill immediately before them was the Arbitration Clause, which allowed parties, in cases up to a certain quantity of land, to decide by Arbitration instead of going before a Jury. The noble Lord concluded by reiterating his disposition, by private communication or otherwise, to do everything in his power to meet the views of the hon. Member for Cockermouth, but he hoped the hon. Gentleman would consent to go into Committee to-night.

§ Mr. Aglionby
said, one of his objections to these Bills was that the railway companies were not compelled to adopt these Bills, but they had power to adopt one or other, or parts of all, without taking any one complete. He also objected to each of the Bills referring to Clauses contained in the other Bills, and thought that, even at the risk of repetition, each Bill ought to be made complete in itself, by containing all the Clauses which it enacted.

§ Lord G. Somerset
said, the first point referred to by the hon. Member had already engaged his attention, and he should endeavour to embody the suggestion in the Bills.

§ Mr. Aglionby
thought the whole Bills should be referred to a Select Committee upstairs, consisting chiefly of Gentlemen of the legal profession. If that were done, he was sure many of the Clauses would be considerably modified; as an example, he might instance the 41st Clause in the second Bill, which required that where a railway crosses a public footpath a convenient ascent and descent should be founded by the railway company for the accommodation of the public in crossing the railroad by this footpath. He was aware that this 447 Clause was not a new one; and he would tell the House how it worked. In one case with which he was acquainted, the railway crossed a public footpath in a level field. The railway was some twenty feet above the level; and the convenient ascent and descent provided by the company was a ladder at one end for the public to go up, another at the other end for them to go down. He merely gave that as an illustration of his objection to the way in which the Clauses were worked. When the proper time came, he should certainly endeavour to have some Clause more stringent introduced for the benefit of the public.

§ Mr. Hawes
wished to know how it was proposed that these Acts were to be made to apply to Private Bills—whether they were to be rendered compulsory or not?

§ Lord G. Somerset
said, that question had not escaped his attention. His own opinion was that it should be compulsory on railway companies to adopt them as model Bills. But this was considered by others to be too hazardous an experiment at first; and, therefore, what he proposed to do was, that the Bills should be formed, and then that by a Standing Order of the House, the Committees on Private Bills should report to the House whether these Bills had been incorporated by the companies or not.

§ Mr. Hawes
could not conceive a course more liable to objection than this. If the Government really had confidence in their own Bills, they ought to render them compulsory; but the course which was proposed to be taken showed that the noble Lord had no confidence in the measures he was himself recommending.

§ Lord G. Somerset
had every confidence in the general outline of the Bills, as he had no doubt that if they were once passed by the House, ninety-nine out of every hundred Railway Companies would be but too happy to incorporate these Clauses into their Bills. But if it should be the opinion of the House that these Bills ought to be made compulsory, he should not be very sorry; though, for the reasons he had given, he did not think proper to recommend it in the present instance.

§ Mr. Wakley
thought that these Bills ought to be referred to the consideration of a Select Committee up stairs. Consi- 448 dering the object these Bills were intended to fulfil, was it possible they could be satisfactorily carried through the House without being subjected to the consideration of a Committee? Ought not these Bills, which were intended to save the public expense, and to save a very considerable portion of the time of the House, to be made perfect as model Bills, and ought they not afterwards to be made compulsory? He was sure the gentlemen of the learned profession would not object to serve on such a Committee as that proposed, and he would undertake to serve on it himself, for he was of opinion that the speeches of the learned gentlemen would be compressed within a reasonable length.

§ Lord G. Somerset
said, if the Bills were sent to a Select Committee, it was clear they would be of no use during the present Session. It was, therefore, for the House to determine whether they would take the Bills, with such emendations as might be suggested in the House, without sending them to a Committee up stairs, or whether they would give them up for the present Session. It appeared to him that there was something like a contradiction in the opinions of the gentlemen opposite; one Member contending that the Bills ought to be made compulsory, and another arguing that the Clauses were so imperfect that they ought not to be passed at all.

§ Mr. Jervis
said, the great evil of which they had at present to complain was, that one railway company modelled their Bill upon that of some preceding company, with the alteration of certain words, which appeared at first to be unimportant, but which affected the whole legal bearing of the clauses. He, therefore, agreed with the noble Lord that it was of great importance that model clauses should be framed, not by a Select Committee of the House, which he thought was the most unfit tribunal that could be selected; but that they should be settled on the responsibility of Government, with the advice and concurrence of their law officers, and that then they should be applicable to all railways. The noble Lord said there was a difficulty in the way of making these Bills compulsory, but he did not say wherein the difficulty lay. He was sure it did not lie on the part of the public. Take the case of landowners for example. If there was one clear uniform model Bill 449 by which railway companies would be authorised to purchase land, the landowners would not need to seek after the Private Bill. They could at once refer to the model and see how they would be affected by the operation. But if these Bills were not compulsory, the owners of land through which the railway passed, would never know whether the Company had adopted this model Bill or not; and they would be put to as much trouble, expense, and inconvenience as they were at present.

§ Mr. Wakley
wished to know if the Law Officers of the Crown had been consulted in the framing of these Bills?

§ Lord G. Somerset
said that they had not; but they had been submitted to a very competent Officer of this House. He saw that it was impossible in the present feeling of Gentlemen opposite, of which he did not complain, to pass the Bills through Committee to-night. How far it might be in his power afterwards to render them compulsory, he could not at present say. For himself, as he had said, he was rather of opinion they ought to be compulsory. He thought, therefore, it would be the most judicious course to move that the Chairman report progress; and by Monday next, if not sooner, he would inform the House whether he would render the Bills compulsory or not.