COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 22 April 1885)

§ COLONEL MAKINS
appealed to the hon. Member not to press the Motion at 427 that time, as the House had been taken entirely by surprise, and many hon. Members who desired to take part in the discussion were absent. There would be other opportunities for proceeding with the measure; and he would venture to suggest to the hon. Member that if he would fix a day for taking the Committee stage those who were opposed to the Bill would be prepared to discuss it then. He might also point out that the Bill seriously affected the interests of the Water Companies, In the funds of these Companies many Trustees had invested on the faith of Acts of Parliament; and there was no precedent of such a Bill being passed in opposition to the views of the Water Companies.

§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKE
said, that, as the House was aware, the Government supported this Bill; but, in the present circumstances, he would suggest to his hon. Friend to be content with the Motion he had made, and not to insist on taking the clauses that day, as he thought it was desirable that the House should have time to consider what Amendments should be moved.

§ MR. RITCHIE
pointed out that private Members could only get their Bills forward when they were fortunate enough to obtain such an opportunity as the present. If hon. Members were taken by surprise they had only themselves to blame. The Bill had now been a very long time before the House, its principle had been approved, and he could not see why the right hon. Baronet should appeal to his hon. Friend to postpone the clauses.

§ MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS
said, he hoped that the hon. Gentleman the Member for Finsbury would comply with the appeal that had been made to him. He had blocked the Bill for some time past, as it was a Bill on which a considerable amount of discussion should take place. No fair hearing could be given to the opponents of the Bill when it was brought on as unexpectedly as it had been that day. If the hon. Member in charge of the Bill would agree to postpone this stage, and give due Notice of the day when it would be taken, he would agree to remove his block, and to use his influence with his Friends to do the same.

§ SIR EDWARD WATKIN
hoped that the hon. Member for Finsbury would be content with getting the Speaker out 428 of the Chair, and would then report Progress at once. That would be a step gained, and was all that the hon. Gentleman could desire under the circumstances.

§ MR. W. M. TORRENS
said, the Bill was read a first time last year, and the present Bill was identical with that, and was virtually the same Bill. The hon. Member for East Kent (Mr. Akers-Douglas) said that he had blocked the Bill with the object of obtaining for it a fair hearing; but he was under the impression that the process of blocking a Bill had exactly the contrary effect. As, however, he had been appealed to by the President of the Local Government Board and his hon. Friend the Member for Hythe, he was quite willing to yield to what appeared to be the general wish of the House, and would move to report Progress as soon as the Speaker had left the Chair.

§ MR. COOPE,
who had given Notice that he would move, as an Amendment— That the Bill be referred to a Hybrid Committee:—That the said Committee do consist of Eleven Members, Six to be nominated by the House, and Five by the Committee of Selection. That all Petitions against the Bill, presented not later than three clear days before the sitting; of the Committee, be referred to the Committee, and that such of the Petitioners as pray to be heard by themselves, their Counsel, Agents, or Witnesses, be heard upon their Petitions, if they think it, and Counsel heard in favour of the Bill, against such Petitions:— That the Committee have power to send for persons, papers, and records:—That Five be the quorum of the Committee; said, the Bill affected property to the value of about £30,000,000, and it proposed to adopt an entirely new system of rating for water. It had been decided over and over again that the annual value of property was the only fair means of levying the rate. As hon. Members were aware, parochial rating was considerably under the real value, and it would be very unfair to adopt it in this instance. He held that it would be unjust to go into Committee on the Bill without first giving all parties interested in its provisions the opportunity of making their views known by counsel.

§ MR. WARTON
seconded the Amendment. The Water Companies, he said, understood at the time of their establishment that they were to have the right to charge according to the value of the houses supplied with water. In 429 the Dobbs case the Judges had laid down that the annual value of property-was its net annual value. The Companies' charges must, consequently, be based on such net annual value. But it was a mistake to suppose, as the framers of the Bill appeared to do, that this meant the rateable value of houses for parochial purposes, for the net annual value of premises was almost always greater than the rateable value. It was far better that the Bill should go before a Committee, which would examine it dispassionately, than that hon. Members should be tempted to give an unjust vote in order to court popularity.

§ COLONEL MAKINS,
in supporting the Amendment, said, that he did not join in the view taken by the hon. and learned Member for Bridport, who was a little too lavish in imputing motives to Gentlemen on the other side. He believed that the House, if it did inflict an injustice, would do so from ignorance or inadvertence. His reason for supporting the Amendment was that, if the Bill passed, it would affect different Companies very differently. The method of rating was very different in various parts of the Metropolis. In some places the rateable was equal to, or even more than, the annual value; in other parts it was considerably less. Therefore, if the Bill were to pass it would not affect one Company at all, while another might be very severely handled. It would be only right that all these points should be carefully examined by a Select Committee, with the aid of gentlemen representing the different Companies of the Metropolis. He hoped the hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill would consider that point and accept the Amendment, which could not in any way prejudice the passing of the measure he had in hand. If it were passed after an inquiry at which the Companies were heard they would not feel that they had been ill-treated by legislation behind their backs without getting an opportunity of explaining their position.

§ MR. WARTON
rose, and was addressing the House, when—

§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKE
rose to Order, and said that the hon. and learned Member had exhausted his right of speech by having seconded the Amendment which had been negatived.

§ MR. WARTON
That does not exhaust my right.

§ MR. SPEAKER
said, that the hon. and learned Member was out of Order.