HC Deb 07 April 1873 vol 215 cc719-21

(Mr. Chichester Fortescue, Mr. Childers, Mr. Arthur Peel.)

[BILL 121.] CONSIDERATION.

Order for Consideration, as amended, read.

Motion made, and Question put, "That the Bill be now taken into Consideration."

The House divided:—Ayes 103; Noes 23: Majority 80.

Bill, as amended, considered.

Clause 4 (Appointment of Railway Commissioners).

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

moved in page 2, line 30, after "experience in Railway business," to insert "and not more than two Assistant Commissioners."

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 10 (Explanation of 17 & 18 Viet. cap. 31, s. 2, as to through traffic).

MR. PIM

moved to insert in page 5, line 14, after "through rates" And shall also include the due and reasonable forwarding by every Railway Company and Canal Company which uses, maintains, or works, or is a party to using, maintaining, or working steam vessels for the purpose of carrying on a communication between any port at which the said Railway Company or Canal Company has a terminus, and any other port in the United Kingdom, at the request of the owners of other steam vessels plying regularly between any port in the United Kingdom and any port at which the said Railway Company or Canal Company has a terminus, of through traffic to and from such vessels, at through rates, tolls, or fares. Ho stated that the object of the Amendment was to secure proper competition, particularly in respect to the Irish traffic.

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

said, that he had come reluctantly to the conclusion that he must object to the Amendment. There was no reciprocity. It was proposed that a line of steamers should have a right to forward goods at through rates all over large systems of railways.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment proposed, In page 6, line 32, after the word "board," to insert the words "or chamber of commerce, or any other association of merchants or traders composed of not less than twenty members."—(Mr. Mundella.)

MR. PEASE

opposed the Amendment on the ground that such bodies were irresponsible. If they admitted Chambers, of Commerce, they must admit Chambers of Agriculture, and there would be no end to complaints.

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL

pointed out that Chambers of Commerce not incorporated could not sue or be made to pay costs. Those that were incorporated could apply as a public body; but the unincorporated chambers were wholly irresponsible, and they would have no power to bind the minority He should oppose the Amendment.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The House divided:—Ayes 25; Noes 69: Majority 44.

Remaining clauses agreed to.

Bill to be read the third time upon Monday 21st April.