HC Deb 22 May 1862 vol 166 cc2020-2

Order for Second Reading read.

Motion made and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."

MR. HUMBERSTON

said, that though this was a private measure, it involved considerations of public importance. It empowered the Company to lay down their poles and wires along the turnpike road, and thus to curtail its width, by merely giving fifteen days' notice. This might occasion very considerable inconvenience. There were other clauses which required consideration. He thought that further notice should be given to hon. Members, that they might become acquainted with the provisions of the measure to which they were asked to assent, and he therefore moved that the second reading be deferred for a week, in order that the public might know that it was before the House, and should be referred to a Committee, before whom they could be heard.

Amendment proposed, to leave out the word "now," and at the end of the Question to add the words "upon this day week."

Question proposed, "That the word 'now' stand part of the Question."

MR. HENLEY

seconded the Amendment. The company took power to erect these wires and posts over every highway in the kingdom, and a Bill which contained such a provision ought to be a public one, and not be brought before the House as a Private Bill. Nobody had notice that it was coming on. Great bodies had looked out for themselves, and had taken care to protect themselves, but what protection was afforded to the public? These undertakings had already been declared by the law courts to be a public nuisance, and they now asked Parliament to allow them to do that which the law forbade. The fact that other companies had obtained analogous powers was no reason why they should take another step in a wrong direction. This should be a public Bill; and as a week's delay would enable the Government to consider the whole question, he should support the Amendment.

SIR FREDERIC SMITH

thought the proposal to postpone the second reading unreasonable. He was astonished the right hon. Member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley) should support the Amendment. He was defending the monopoly obtained by the existing Company, who charged for messages on a scale double that which was proposed to be charged by the new Company. The Bill had gone through a Committee of the House of Lords, and been fully discussed there. He hoped his hon. Friend would not press the Amendment against a good measure. The proper tribunal for deciding the question was the Select Committee, who would hear all parties.

LORD ALFRED CHURCHILL

said, it was very unusual to oppose the second reading of a Bill that had gone through a minute investigation in the House of Lords. The provisions introduced by the other House were amply sufficient to protect the owners so property. If they wished to benefit the commercial interests, by securing cheap telegraphic communication, they should support the Bill, to which there was a tremendous opposition by the other Company, that had its agents at work all over the country.

MR. MILNER GIBSON

said, as the Bill had passed through a Committee of the House of Lords, it came to them recommended rather more strongly than a Bill introduced in the ordinary way. He thought the Bill should be read a second time. All the promoters asked was, to have their case investigated in Commit- tee, and then the House might deal with the measure as it thought fit. But it would be a strong, and hardly a fair, measure to throw the Bill out on the second reading.

SIR JOHN SHELLEY

would assent to the second reading; but thought the whole subject of electric telegraphs so important, that it ought to be dealt with by some public measure. As a landowner in Preston, he had himself been very much annoyed by the way in which the telegraphic wires had been laid down. Some person or department ought to have a control over the operations of the companies.

LORD HOTHAM

said, the object of the postponement was to enable the Government to determine whether this should be treated as a Public Bill, but the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade had not said a word upon that point.

MR. HODGSON

said, he had a strong opinion that competition between Electric Telegraph Companies was a very good thing. He sent a message of twenty words the other day to Manchester, and he paid 1s. At the same time he sent a message of the same length to Edinburgh, and he paid 4s. He asked the reason, and the clerk said there was a competing company to Manchester, but none to Edinburgh. He thought it would be extremely hard on this Company if, after making a large outlay in preparing to submit their Bill to Parliament, and passing successfully the scrutiny of the Standing Orders Committee, their further proceedings should be delayed on the grounds alleged in this instance.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Main Question put, and agreed to.

Bill read 2°, and committed.