Lords Sitting of 28 July 1846

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a. Books and Engravings; Sugar Duties (No. 2); Tithe Amendment Act.
2a. Gauge of Railways; Small Debts.
Reported. Battersea Park.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Lord Campbell, from Leeds, and several other places, in favour of the Small Debts Bill.—By the Bishop of Norwich, from the Enon Chapel Congregational Temperance Society, New Church, Marylebone, for the Better Observance of, and against the Sale of Intoxicating Liquors on the Sabbath.—By Lord Brougham, from Messrs. Watts, complaining of the Baths and Washhouses Bill.
The House met at Five o'clock.

BATHS AND WASHHOUSES.
LORD BROUGHAMpresented a petition from William, Joshua, and Thomas Watts, proprietors of the cold and swimming baths in the City-road, known as Peerless-pool, complaining of the Baths and Washhouses Bill. The petitioners stated, that the Bill had been introduced under the false pretence of providing baths and washhouses for the use of the poor—an inestimable benefit (the noble and learned Lord observed), but at the same time one which ought to be established upon a due principle, and supported from proper funds. The washhouses of which the petitioners complained were to be established by means of the poor-rates, a revenue which was levied for a totally different purpose, and which was never intended for any other purpose than the sustenance of the poor. These new baths under the Bill were, he understood from the petition, to be created partly for the use of the middle classes, who were to pay for them at least to some extent; there would therefore be a probable deficiency in the receipts; this deficiency, as the petitioners stated, was to be made up out of the poor-rates. It was of this that the petitioners complained. They were ratepayers, and they had a right not merely to ask, as they did, for compensation, but they had a right to demand that the Bill be rejected altogether.
The EARL of RADNORsaid, that it would be much more convenient if the noble and learned Lord would not speak

105
when a petition was put into his hands as if he spoke from a brief; for he believed that the Bill would be found to be very different from what the noble and learned Lord anticipated. It was true that money for this purpose was to be raised on the security of the poor rate; but then it was a loan, which was to be repaid out of the profits of these baths and washhouses.
The BISHOP of LONDONsaid, that he believed these baths and washhouses would return from seven to ten per cent., and therefore he thought that no fear ought to be felt with respect to the proposed mode of raising this money. He hoped that the noble and learned Lord would not oppose the Bill, for he was convinced that it would confer the greatest benefit on the working classes.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEobserved that any measure whatever which might be introduced for the establishment of baths and washhouses must materially affect the interests of individuals; and that happened in the case of schools, colleges, or any other public establishment of a similar character. He believed that the establishments intended to be created under the Bill would very speedily maintain themselves; it was quite a mistake to suppose that they were to be maintained out of the poor rates.
Petition to lie on the Table.

GAUGE OF RAILWAYS BILL.
The EARL of CLARENDONmoved the Second Reading of this Bill, the object of which merely was to carry into effect the recommendations made by the Commissioners on this subject. There were certain Amendments which, as he should propose them in Committee, he should not think it necessary to mention now.
LORD KINNAIRDsaid, that he should oppose the Bill, but he would reserve his objections to the Committee.
The EARL of SCARBOROUGHsaid, that he could not find one word in the Report of the Commissioners which would justify this Bill. He had paid considerable attention to this subject, and he found that accidents were much more numerous on the narrow gauge than on the broad gauge. The noble Earl then read some extracts from returns showing the number of passengers killed and wounded on the lines adopting the broad narrow gauge.
LORD BEAUMONTcomplained of the unsatisfactory nature of the Report made by the Gauge Commissioners, who had indicated
106
in their report that an intermediate gauge would be the best course which could be adopted; that the broad gauge was next preferable; but that the narrow gauge was least preferable of all; and yet, in their report they had passed over both the best and second-best courses, and recommended the adoption of the worst of all. He thought it would have been better if the Commissioners had not meddled with the subject at all. With regard to the Bill before the House he should not move its rejection; but if any other noble Lord would make that Motion, he would vote for it.
LORD REDESDALEdid not think the narrow gauge was the worst of all, nor did the Commissioners express such an opinion; they stated that the broad was superior to the narrow in point of power and speed. Their Lordships were only interested in the question of speed; but those interested in the conveyance of merchandise, and the economical management of railways, saw many advantages in the narrow gauge over the broad. The fault of the Commissioners was, that they did not say what medium gauge should be adopted; at the present moment Parliament stood without a guide between the two systems. He should recommend the President of the Board of Trade, during the vacation, to obtain a report from all the great engineers of the country of what gauge would be the best; he believed their report would be nearly unanimous as to what gauge they ought to lay down for all lines in future. He trusted that powerful Company, the London and Birmingham, would have the courage to adopt of themselves a better system; he advised them to do it for their own advantage; he was perfectly confident the public would not be content to travel at the limited rate of speed of the narrow lines, when they saw the superior rate that could be attained on the broad. Parliament, too, was composed of persons who liked to travel fast, and it would be difficult for it to stand long against the quicker rate. If it was decided that a medium gauge of six feet would be preferable to the narrow, and it was proved that it could be laid down, and acted on, Parliament might say that all other lines should be made upon that gauge only. If that was followed out, the country would have a uniformity of gauge, instead of proceeding upon the present miserably confused system, which was getting worse and worse every year, instead of better. He

107
should not oppose the Bill; on the contrary, he thought it desirable at the present moment that it should pass, as it was desirable to place a check on speculation entered into merely for the purpose of what was called "invasion."
The EARL of CLARENDONadmitted that nothing could be more desirable than a uniformity of gauge; nothing could be a greater mistake than not adopting it. But they were not now adopting a system for the first time; the question was, how should they deal with existing circumstances? How were they to meet the difficulties in which they had rashly entangled themselves? Their Lordships must remember that above 2,000 miles of railroad had been laid down upon what the noble Lord called the worst gauge in existence; but it was by no means proved that it was the very worst. The Commissioners entered minutely into the qualities of the two gauges, and they stated, that except in the point of speed, the narrow gauge was at least equal to the broad, if not preferable, on account of its cheapness and convenience for the conveyance of luggage. Moreover, it had been shown that all the foreign engineers who came to this country to examine the different systems before laying down lines on the Continent, after comparing the two gauges, had everywhere adopted the one the noble Lord called the worst. Though it might be very desirable for Parliament to get a body of engineers to make a report, yet he did not believe the result would do anything but increase the confusion. There was not a single engineer who had not been examined before some Commission or Committee, and there were scarcely two of them who agreed in opinion respecting the gauges. The Bill was strictly founded upon and confined to the Resolutions introduced by the late Government, and unanimously adopted by both Houses of Parliament; he had no option but to frame the Bill in exact accordance with those Resolutions, and to submit it for approval; it was most desirable it should pass, and he certainly intended to persevere with it.
LORD KINNAIRDthought further inquiry ought to be instituted. The noble Earl asked how were they to deal with existing circumstances; no inquiry had been made as to the mode of dealing with them. Would the Government support him if he moved for a Committee to inquire into the possibility of establishing an intermediate gauge? Evidence could be produced
108
that it was perfectly possible to alter the narrow gauge to six feet; at the speed of fifty or sixty miles an hour the narrow gauge was not safe; he did not think the public would long endure the comparative inferiority. In Committee, he should be inclined to move the rejection of the Bill; there were companies in process of amalgamation, from Inverness to London, anxious to lay down a broader gauge, and he feared, when they came before Parliament, this Bill might be made an obstacle in their way.
LORD PORTMANwas not surprised that engineers should report in favour of an intermediate gauge, as the whole lines would have to be reconstructed. As an inhabitant of the west of England, he was anxious that the recommendations which had been offered should be carried out, and the means of communication perfected with that part of the country. He should be glad to see the Government empowered to carry out the recommendations to which he referred.
LORD CAMOYSfeared the alteration to the intermediate gauge would be most expensive, as it would be most expensive. It was a question for consideration whether the Bill should not be postponed to next Session.
EARL GREYdiffered from his noble Friend who had spoken last, for he thought it absolutely necessary that something should be done without one day's delay. It was admitted, on all hands, that the break of gauge was not only an inconvenience, but a great national misfortune. Wherever it occurred, it was found detrimental to the public interest. It was notorious that attempts were making, which, if successful, might lead to break of gauge where there was none at present. There was an attempt to purchase a line in the west of England, for the purpose of hermetically shutting the Great Western. One clause in the Bill prevented the accomplishment of such a design by prohibiting any change of gauge in the mean time. He could not help thinking the present arrangement as to the gauge of railways very imperfect. The Commission of last year worked in a very unsatisfactory manner. They recommended measures which would go to perpetuate the break of gauge; but he should not be satisfied with any permanent arrangement which did not do away with that evil. How it should be corrected he was not prepared to say; but so far as an inexperienced person could judge, he thought

109
there were many reasons in favour of an intermediate gauge. A Commission appointed in 1838 recommended an intermediate gauge for adoption in Ireland; and many engineers, not taking a strong interest in any existing railway on either the broad or narrow gauge, had stated, upon reasons which appeared to him exceedingly good, that an intermediate gauge would be attended with very great advantage. Mr. Cubitt had stated, that at no very great expense it would be practicable to alter the present gauges to an intermediate gauge. The Commission of last year dismissed that suggestion in far too summary a manner. They had had enough of Commissions; and he thought that the engineers of the different lines might be able to suggest an arrangement which would be satisfactory.
LORD KINNAIRDhad feared that the first clause would prevent the question from being opened again; but after what had been stated, he did not intend to persevere in his proposition.
Bill read 2a.

SMALL DEBTS' BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, after presenting several petitions in favour of this Bill, moved that it be now read a Second Time. The scheme proposed in the present Bill had its origin in the Report made by the Law Commissioners in 1833. The present Lord Chief Baron and Mr. Justice Wightman were members of that Commission, which, after a diligent examination of the whole subject, recommended a plan identical with that now submitted for their Lordships' approbation. The recommendation could come from no higher authority. In 1839, a Bill was introduced in the House of Commons for the amendment of the law relating to the recovery of small debts, which was referred to a Select Committee, of which the late and the present Home Secretaries of State were Members. The whole subject was reconsidered, and the result was the adoption of the scheme set forth in the Report of the Commission above mentioned; and the Bill, as altered by the Committee, was adopted by the House of Commons, but the pressure of business prevented the Bill being carried into effect during that Session. At the commencement of 1842, he (the Lord Chancellor) introduced a Bill founded on the same principle, and designed to carry the same plan into effect; but it was stopped in its progress by the announcement that the late Government meant to carry into effect a
110
similar Bill; and in the June of that year a Bill was brought in by his noble and learned predecessor, embodying the identical provisions of the present one. The Bill passed through that House, and went down to the Commons; but, owing to the pressure of public business it met the same fate as the antecedent one. Nothing further was done upon this subject until June of this year, when the Bill to which he was now calling their Lordships' attention was introduced by the noble Duke the late President of the Council. Upon examination it was found to contain the same provisions as those recommended in the Report of the Commission of 1833, with the Report of the Committee of 1839, and with the various Bills brought in by successive Governments. Knowing, therefore, how much the country stood in need of such a measure, and seeing that successive Governments had directed their attention to the same object, and having had repeated and numerous applications for separate Acts of Parliament for the establishment of local courts, which had been stopped by the expectation of a general measure, he thought it his duty, notwithstanding the late period of the Session at which they had arrived, to urge on their Lordships the necessity for carrying this measure into effect. Having stated the origin of the Bill, he would now shortly describe its nature; and he would in the first instance mention what was the present state of the law. County courts for the recovery of small sums were of very early origin; the earliest of which they had any record, was in the reign of King Edward I. The amount over which they could have jurisdiction was fixed at not exceeding 40 s., then no inconsiderable sum, and stated in the Report of the Law Commissioners to be equivalent to 20 l. of the present day. The nominal amount had never since been altered—the county courts were still confined in their jurisdiction to 40 s. But although the amount remained the same, the expenses of prosecution were very much altered; sometimes the expenses amounted to 6l., so that it was little wonder a man would rather forfeit a debt of 2l. than incur costs amounting to 6l. There were many courts of a similar character which existed by prescription. Manorial courts were of very ancient establishment, and though the sum they had jurisdiction over was small, the costs were always large. The difficulty and hardship of proceeding in these courts, led to many applications for local Acts of

111
Parliament, for the purpose of establishing others in the districts in which they were found necessary. In consequence, courts of conscience, or courts of request, as they were called, had been established in many places. It frequently happened that these courts were presided over by commissioners altogether ignorant of the law; but unfortunately too often acquainted with the parties who came before them. It would be, therefore, necessary to appoint competent judges in whom the public could place confidence. If anything were wanting to show the necessity there existed for establishing judicatories for this purpose, it was abundantly manifest in the number of these courts of request which had obtained private Acts of Parliament. The process for obtaining one of these Acts was a slow and an expensive one to the petitioners, and the maintenance of the courts involved a considerable expense. Taken altogether, there were about 100 of these small debt local courts, of which since 1801 forty-six had been established under local and separate Acts of Parliament. A map had been published, by which their Lordships would at a glance see those which existed, and those places in which the want of them was felt. That want was especially experienced in the manufacturing districts, where the population was dense. Many of these districts, as well as many of the central districts, were now without any such court, and the greatest inconvenience was sustained. Having thus stated the evil, about which there could be no dispute, the next question was, how to provide an adequate and an efficient remedy. The number of judges at present presiding over these courts, he had not been able to ascertain, because many of them had no judges at all, but were presided over by commissioners, and in many cases one judge presided over several of these courts. He proposed to restore the original jurisdiction to these courts, namely, giving them power to decide now, for the same amount as they did, in fact, though not in name, in King Edward's time, namely, 20 l. When the debt was over 20 l. their jurisdiction would not apply. It might be said that parties could now apply to the superior courts at Westminster Hall for the recovery of any sum between 2l. and 20 l.; but the fact was, that the expense attending process in those courts was so great, that where the sum was under 20 l., the judges discouraged proceeding there. These superior courts were inapplicable to small matters, so that
112
there was, in some instances, what amounted to a denial of justice. The scheme he proposed was, that the Queen in Council should divide the country into districts, and establish courts in those districts according to the wants of the people. In the densely populated manufacturing parts, those districts would be, of course, much smaller than in the more thinly populated agricultural counties. His object was to place those courts within a reasonable distance of one another; but although there would be a very large number of districts, it did not follow that there would be a corresponding large number of judges. He could not state exactly the number of districts; but he did not think it right that a poor man in a rural district should be obliged to travel more than ten miles to get justice. As regarded the number of judges, he could not fix it; but, as he had already observed, they would not correspond with the number of courts, for these courts would not require to be always sitting; once a week or once a fortnight might be sufficient, according to the occasion; and when the judge had disposed of the business in one place, he could go to another. In this way justice would not be denied, delayed, or obstructed. He proposed to continue the present judges in all cases; and that as many more might be appointed as were needful for the due discharge of the business. He thought a much greater number of those judges would not be requisite than those which were actually in existence. There were at present forty or fifty judges in these courts, who were duly qualified—he meant in such of these courts as had been established by recent Acts of Parliament. It had been suggested that the appointment of these judges ought to rest with the Lords Lieutenant of the various counties; but he did not think such a disposal of patronage would be proper, for he could not see how Lords Lieutenant of counties could be competent to select fit and proper persons to preside over legal tribunals. He was of opinion that the appointment should rest with the Lord Chancellor or the Secretary of State for the Home Department for the time being. He did not covet the office, for he had often found such selections an invidious and a disagreeable task. There were clauses in the Bill by which the provisions of various recent Acts of Parliament, in regard to the recovery of small sums, were reenacted. In proposing this Bill, he did not mean to trench in any way on the recent

113
Acts respecting insolvency or bankruptcy, which had of late years obtained the sanction of the Legislature, though he must at the same time observe, that he by no means approved of these Acts, which were inconsistent and contradictory in many of their provisions; and it frequently happened under them, that three or four totally different systems were applicable to the same case. These Acts, he must say, in passing, required revision. He would not say more at present. The evil he proposed to remedy, was great in its nature, and generally felt—it had crept throughout the country, and required an immediate remedy. He trusted, therefore, that their Lordships would concur with him, notwithstanding the lateness of the Session, in the propriety of passing this measure into a law before its close.
Bill read 2a.
House adjourned.