HL Deb 17 July 1863 vol 172 cc940-1
THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE

rose to move the adoption of a new Standing Order in relation to Provisional Orders under the Inclosure Acts, or under the Land Drainage (1861) Act. The noble Earl said, that it was not by any means his wish to preclude those who had any objections to urge against any Provisional Order from being heard before the Committee; but under the existing system there was no security that great injustice might not be done to the promoters of these orders by their modification behind their backs, and the insertion of conditions which would deprive them of all their value. In the case of an inclosure of land near London a few years ago, a Select Committee of the House of Commons inserted a provision that fifty acres of land should be set apart as a recreation ground.

Moved, That when a Petition is presented to this House, praying to be heard by Counsel against any Provisional Order under the Inclosure Acts, or under the Land Drainage Act, 1861, contained or referred to in any Bill before this House, such Bill may be referred to a Select Committee, and the Committee may hear the Petitioners, the Inclosure Commissioners if they shall think fit to appear, and such Persons as shall appear in support of said Provisional Order; and the Committee may, if they think fit, recommend that such Provisional Order be not confirmed, but the Committee shall not in any way modify or alter the terms of such Order.

LORD REDESDALE

must oppose the proposition of the noble Earl, as at variance with the principles upon which private Bill legislation was conducted, and likely to be injurious both to the promoters and opponents of this class of Bills. It would operate unfairly to promoters, because Committees might be induced to reject their Bills simply because they had not power to insert Amendments which they thought necessary; and it might affect opponents equally injuriously, by leading Committees to reject necessary Amendments rather than throw out the Bills. Alterations were not made in these Bills behind the backs of the promoters, as the noble Earl seemed to imagine. In the very case to which he had referred, the promoters strongly opposed, before the Committee of the House of Commons, the modifications which were proposed.

THE MARQUESS OF BATH

said, there was a distinction between the Orders under the Inclosure and those under the Drainage Acts.

LORD WODEHOUSE

said, he certainly thought some such provision as that suggested by his noble Friend ought to be adopted, for many of these schemes were introduced into Parliament by common consent, and any ex parte alterations which were subsequently made were, in fact, a violation of that consent, and hence a great injustice to the original parties to the scheme.

LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY

said, that great inconvenience might be the result of the Resolution, no matter how desirable its operation might be in some respects.

LORD REDESDALE

observed, that any scheme upon which a Bill was founded must always be understood by the parties to be subject to such provisions and changes as Parliament might think fit to adopt respecting it.

THE EARL OF HARROWBY

said, that something in the nature of a "Wharncliffe Meeting" might be introduced to prevent the evil that had been suggested.

THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE

said, that after that expression of opinion from their Lordships, he would withdraw his Motion; but he still hoped that something would be done to avoid the danger of orders being made behind the backs of the parties affected by them.

Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.