§ (BY ORDER.)
§ MR. TULLY
said he wished to move the Instruction standing on the Paper in his name in regard to this Bill. The words he wished to have omitted dealt with the proposal of the company to acquire certain common lands in the urban district of Tottenham. Some year ago the Tottenham Urban District Council secured the passing of an Act of Parliament which gave them the right to certain common lands to be used as a recreation ground, but the Great Eastern Railway Company now proposed to take away those rights. This was a very serious matter. This company, like other companies, seemed to wish to deal with the public in a very arbitrary manlier. Its Bill was pock-marked with proposals to interfere with public rights over footpaths and common lands. This was the first clause which suggested such an interference, and, unless the hon. Member for Lewisham, who was in charge of the Bill, could give a guarantee that a similar quantity of land in the same neighbourhood would be handed over to the Tottenham Urban District Council to be used as a recreation ground, he should feel bound to press his opposition to a division. The company were acting in an arbitrary and high-handed manner, and, if the proposals contained in the Bill were sanctioned, he submitted that there would be a most unfair interference with public rights.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That it be an Instruction to the Committee, when dealing with Clause 10, page 8, line 3, to leave out from 'In,' to 49 'thereabouts', in line 15 (inclusive).—(Mr. Tally.)
§ MR. PENN (Lewisham)
said the history of the case might be put in a nutshell. The company required, for the widening of its lines, just over an acre of land, which, as the hon. Member had stated, was common land. The company were at present in negotiation with the Tottenham Urban District Council in regard to the terms on which they should have this land, and they were on the eve of a satisfactory settlement. The Tottenham Urban District Council had very properly lodged a petition against the Bill in order that it might have a locus standi when the Bill went before a Committee, where the whole matter could be threshed out. The suggestion that the company should give an equal amount of land was scarcely applicable to this case. Prima facie, of course, it was undesirable that the area of recreation grounds in populous localities should be diminished, but this case stood on a very different footing. The ground proposed to be taken was rough common ground, which, in the ordinary sense, could not be termed a recreation ground; and what he understood would be done was to devote the money which the company proposed to pay for this acre of land to improving and laying out the remainder of the common land. This would be a great benefit to the locality, and he trusted the House would realise, from what he had said, that so far from the company desiring to act in a highhanded manner, they were anxious to do their best in the public interest.
§ MR. CAINE
said it was all very well to suggest that the matter could be threshed out upstairs, but he wished to point out that that would involve the Tottenham Urban District Council in considerable expense. This was a matter which could well be settled on the floor of the House. There was no part of London to which working people were flocking in larger numbers. There was also no part of the Metropolis so short of open spaces. Tottenham was almost entirely inhabited by working classes—by unskilled rather than by skilled labourers—and he would remind the House that between 4.45 a.m. and 5.15 a.m. each week-day something like 4,000 of these men travelled from 50 Tottenham into London for their work. It would easily be understood therefore that there was a strong feeling, on this side of the House at any rate, against the action of railway companies in taking away land already allocated for public purposes, and he hoped that the mover of the Instruction would divide upon it unless he got an ample assurance that other land would be given in exchange for it, and that, if possible, the area of this piece of common land should not be reduced.
*MR. J. W. LOWTHER
said the point of difference was this, that it was agreed that if the railway company took this land other land would be substituted for it. That was agreed to by both the railway company and the Tottenham District Council.
§ MR. CHANN1NG (Northamptonshire, E.)
said he understood the hon. Gentleman to say that the railway company was to pay money for the land taken to the district council, which money was to be used in improving land at present in their possession.
*MR.J. W. LOWTHER
said that the Report of the Board of Agriculture, to which any Committee to which this Bill would be remitted would attribute the greatest importance, very distinctly stated that in their opinion the ordinary rule which required a railway company to substitute other land would not be so beneficial for the district as would be the payment of a sum of money to the district council to be applied by them in the purchase of additional land for recreation purposes or for the improvement or enlargement of existing recreation grounds in the district. As the Tottenham District Council was an elected body, surely they might be trusted to decide as to how best to meet the re quirements of their own district. He should have thought they were a much better body for that purpose than the railway company, and it would be advisable to leave to them the decision as to what additional land, if any, they were to purchase, or what improvements were to be made on existing recreation grounds.]
§ SIR JOHN BRUNNER (Cheshire, Northwich)
said that the land at Totten- 51 ham was of very small value, and a very small amount of money would be given for it; but when the district council came to buy other land they would have to pay a very large sum. It seemed to him that the purchase of the necessary land ought to be imposed on the railway company and not on the council.
§ MR. SYDNEY BUXTON (Tower Hamlets, Poplar)
said there was another point. The House viewed with great suspicion any attempt to take away open spaces by any company, more especially a railway company. The hon. Gentleman the Member for Lewisham spoke of the necessity of taking this land to widen the lines, but Clause 10 showed that the land was required not for that purpose, but for purposes of minor moment. The railway company might take land, therefore, at some other spot, and not necessarily at this particular spot. Unless the hon. Gentleman gave the House some assurance that the same space of land would be given in place of that taken, he would vote for the Instruction.
§ MR. KEIR HARDIE (Merthyr Tydvil)
said there was in London an association known as the "Commons and Footpaths Preservation Society" to which many hon. Members belonged and subscribed, and which performed a- very useful and necessary work in preserving playgrounds and recreation grounds in and around London. The executive of that association had considered this Hill, and had passed a resolution that a clause should be inserted providing that the railway company should secure for the Totten-
|Abraham, Wm. (Cork, N. E.||Crean, Eugene||Gilhooly, James|
|Allan, William (Gateshead)||Crombie, John William||Gurdon, Sir William Brampton|
|Allen, C. P. (Glouc., Stroud)||Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)||Hammond, John|
|Ashton, Thomas Gair||Delany, William||Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil|
|Austin, Sir John||Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles||Harwood, George|
|Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)||Donelan, Captain A.||Hayden, John Patrick|
|Bell, Richard||Doogan, P. C.||Hayne, Rt-Hon. Charles Seale-|
|Blake, Edward||Dully, William J.||Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.|
|Boland, John||Edwards, Frank||Holland, William Henry|
|Brand, Hon. Arthur G.||Farquharson, Dr. Robert||Hope, John Deans(Fife, West)|
|Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson||Fenwick, Charles||Horniman, Frederick John|
|Burt, Thomas||Ffrench, Peter||Jacoby, James Alfred|
|Buxton, Sydney Charles||Field, William||Jameson, Major J. Eustace|
|Caldwell, James||Flannery, Sir Fortescue||Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea|
|Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)||Flavin, Michael Joseph||Jordan, Jeremiah|
|Carvill, Patrick G. Hamilton||Flynn, James Christopher||Joyce, Michael|
|Clancy, John Joseph||Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co)||Kearley, Hudson E.|
|Condon, Thomas Joseph||Furness, Sir Christopher||Kennedy, Patrick James|
§ ham District Council a similar area of land in lieu of that proposed to be taken away. He trusted the hon. Member for Lewisham would give an assurance that not only compensation would be paid to the Tottenham District Council for the land taken, but that an area of land equal to that taken would be given for playgrounds for the children.
§ MR. COURTENAY WARNER (Staffordshire, Lichfield)
said that every airhole stopped up in London was a detriment to the surrounding districts. He had a considerable interest in a district in the neighbourhood of Tottenham, and he hoped the railway company would not be allowed to take this land without substituting a similar area of land for it.
§ SIR. BLUNDELL MAPLE (Camberwell, Dulwich)
thought the question was not thoroughly understood. The population in this district was increasing enormously, and the railway company were, for the safety of the travelling public, compelled to get land for increasing the size of the lines. The railway company were perfectly prepared to pay to the district council what was right and proper for the land, and the details could be discussed in Committee upstairs. If the time of the House was to be consumed in discussing petty details of private Bills there would be none left for the consideration of national and Imperial affairs.
§ Question put.
§ The House divided:—Ayes, 110; Noes, 133. (Division List No. 66.)
|Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth||Norton, Capt. Cecil William||Roche, John|
|Lambert, George||O'Brien, Janus F. X. (Cork)||Shipman, Dr. John G.|
|Langley, Batty||O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid)||Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarshire)|
|Layland-Barratt, Francis||O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)||Soares, Ernest J.|
|Leamy, Edmund||O'Connor, Jas. (Wicklow, W.)||Spencer, Rt Hn C. R(Northants)|
|Leng, Sir John||O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)||Strachey, Edward|
|Levy, Maurice||O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)||Sullivan, Donal|
|Lewis, John Herbert||O'Dowd, John||Tennant, Harold John|
|Lough, Thomas||O'Kelly, J. (Roscommon, N.)||Thompson, E. C. (Monaghan, N.|
|Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.||O'Malley, William||Wallace, Robert|
|M'Hugh, Patrick A.||O'Shaughnessy, P. J.||Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)|
|M'Kenna, Reginald||O'Shee, James John||Warner, Thos. Courtenay T.|
|Markham, Arthur Basil||Partington, Oswald||Wason, E. (Clackmannan)|
|Mellor, Rt. Hon. John William||Paulton, James Mellor||White, Luke (York, E. R.)|
|Mooney, John J.||Pirie, Duncan V.||Wilson, John (Glasgow)|
|Morton, Edw. J. C. (Devonport)||Priestley, Arthur||Young, Samuel (Cavan, East)|
|Murnughan, George||Reddy, M.|
|Newnes, Sir George||Redmond, William (Clare)||TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. Tully and Mr. Caine.|
|Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway, N.)||Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)|
|Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)||Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)|
|Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. E.||Hain, Edward||Pilkington, Richard|
|Aird, Sir John||Halsey, Thomas Frederick||Platt-Higgins, Frederick|
|Allsopp, Hon. George||Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'd.||Purvis, Robert|
|Anstruther, H. T.||Haslett, Sir James Horner||Bandies, John S.|
|Arcbdale, Edward Mervyn||Heath, James (Staffords., N. W.||Rasch, Major Frederic Came|
|Bailey, James (Walworth)||Hogg, Lindsay||Reid, James (Greenock)|
|Bain, Colonel James Robert||Hope, JF (Sheffield, Brightside||Renshaw, Charles Bine|
|Balfour Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds||Horner, Frederick William||Rentoul, James Alexander|
|Balfour, Maj K. R (Christch'ch)||Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry||Renwick, George|
|Bartley, George C. T.||Howard, Capt J (Kent, Faversh.||Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Staly bridge|
|Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin||Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil||Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Chas. T.|
|Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol||Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick||Ropner, Colonel Robert|
|Bignold, Arthur||Johnston, William (Belfast)||Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter-|
|Boulnois, Edmund||Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)||Round, James|
|Brookfield, Colonel Montagu||Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W (Salop)||Royds, Clement Molyneux|
|Carlile, William Walter||Kimber, Henry||Russell, T. W.|
|Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lanes.)||Kitson, Sir James||Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-|
|Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)||Laurie, Lieut.-General||Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)|
|Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)||Lawson, John Grant||Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert|
|Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.||Lee, Capt. AH,(Hants. Fareh'm||Sharpe, William Edward T.|
|Chamberlain, J. Austen(Worc.||Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage||Sinclair, Louis (Romford)|
|Charrington, Spencer||Leighton, Stanley||Skewes-Cox, Thomas|
|Churchill, Winston Spencer||Long, Col. Charles W (Evesham||Smith, Jas. Parker (Lanarks.)|
|Cochrane, Hon. Thos H. A. E.||Long, Rt. Hn. Walter(Bristol, S||Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)|
|Coghill, Douglas Barry||Lonsdale, John Brownlee||Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)|
|Cohen, Benjamin Louis||Lowther, Rt. Hn. W. (Cum. Pen||Stevenson, Francis S.|
|Col lings, Rt. Hon. Jesse||Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)||Stroyan, John|
|Colomb, Sir John C. Ready||Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth||Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr|
|Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)||Macartney, Rt Hn W. G. Ellison||Thomas, J. A. Glam., Cower|
|Cripps, Charles Alfred||Macdona, John Gumming||Thorburn, Sir Walter|
|Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton||Maconochie, A. W.||Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray|
|Dickson, Charles Scott||M'lver, Sir Lewis (Edirb'gh, W||Valentia, Viscount|
|Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.||Malcolm, Ian||Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H|
|Doxford, Sir William Theodore||Maxwell, Rt Hn Sir H E(Wigt'n.||Warr, Augustus Frederick|
|Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin||Mildmay, Francis Bingham||Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney|
|Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton||Moore, William (Antrim, N.)||Welby, Lt.-Col ACE (Taunton)|
|Fardell, Sir T. George||Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)||Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd|
|Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edwd.||Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.||Willox, Sir John Archibald|
|Finch, George H.||Murray, Rt. Hon. A. G. (Bute)||Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks.)|
|Fisher, William Hayes||Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)||Wortley, Rt. Hn. C.B. Stuart-|
|Fletcher, Sir Henry||Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)||Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong|
|Flower, Ernest||Nicol, Donald Ninian|
|Garfit, William||O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens||TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Penn and Mr. Banbury.|
|Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)||Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay|
|Gordon, Maj Evans-(Tr.H'ml'ts||Parker, Gilbert|
|Grant, Come||Peel. Hn. Wm. Robt. Wellesley|
§ The following Instructions also appeared on the Paper:—
(Mr. KEIR HARDIE.)—That it be an
Instruction to the Committee to insert the following Clause:—
It shall not be lawful for the Company by any rule, bye-law, or order, to in any way restrain, or punish, or dismiss any person in their service from acting or for having acted as an elected member of any public body, or for acting in the interest of any registered trade union, co-operative society, benefit society, or of any lawful organisation in which such person has an interest, during the hours in which such person is not bound by the terms of his contract of engagement with the Company to devote himself to the Company's service.
(Mr. JOYCE.)—That it be an Instruction to the Committee to insert the following Clause:—
All works and undertakings carried out by the Company under the provisions of this Act shall he subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the Fair Wages Resolution of the House of Commons in all respects as if such works and undertakings were a Government contract, and any failure to observe this condition shall subject the Company to a penalty of twenty-live pounds for each day over which the offence lasts, such penalty to be recoverable by the workmen affected or by any registered trades union whom said workmen may authorise to act in their name.
(Mr. J. P. FARRELL.)—That it be an Instruction to the Committee to insert the following Clause:—
Where the Company propose to erect dwellings outside London under the provisions of this Act they shall issue free of cost a pass to enable tenants of such dwellings to travel to and from the station nearest the new dwellings to that nearest their former residence.
§ *MR. SPEAKER
The next Inst motion standing on the Paper, in the name of the hon. Member for North Kerry, is not in order. It proposes to give a mandatory direction to the Select Committee to set aside the form of clause which is prescribed by the Standing Order with regard to houses of the working classes. That is altogether an abuse of the use of Instructions. The next throe Instructions, standing in the names of the hon. Members for Merthyr Tydvil, Limerick, and North Longford, are out of order because they seek to take the occasion of a private Bill and the time of private business to discuss general questions which apply equally to all railways.
§ MR. FLAVIN (Kerry, N.)
asked by what means were railway companies to be compelled to give proper housing accommodation.
§ MR. KEIR HARDIE
inquired under what circumstances and conditions would it be in order to introduce the question raised by his Instruction.
§ *MR. SPEAKER
It would be in order in a resolution on a Tuesday. It would be in order on a public Bill dealing with the question, but it is not in order upon a private Bill affecting a particular private company.
§ MR. KEIR HARDIE
said that the Instruction was intended to deal with a particular order issued by the Great Eastern Railway Company, and which, so far as he knew, had never been issued by any other company.