HL Deb 11 February 1864 vol 173 cc454-60

Message from the House of Commons of Tuesday last on the Subject of Railway Schemes (Metropolis) considered. Then—

EARL GRANVILLE

Your Lordships will recollect that last year much alarm existed on the subject of the proposed railways through the metropolis, and that there was considerable discussion in your Lordships' House as to whether there should be a preliminary inquiry on the subject of the railways in the metropolitan district; and also whether that inquiry should be carried on by a Committee, or a Royal Commission appointed by the Government. Ultimately it was decided in the first instance that a Committee should be appointed. That Committee sat, and reported several special recommendations. They pointed out various things that ought not to be permitted, and they suggested r various things which ought to be done, and laid down certain principles which ought to govern railway communication in the metropolis. One of their recommendations affected the future conduct of this House with reference to these Bills, and the Committee thought it desirable that there should be a preliminary inquiry, sifting the whole of the schemes which might be proposed. I anticipate, therefore, no opposition now to the appointment of the Committee which I propose. Another point discussed in the matter was as to the manner in which these Bills might be dealt with by both Houses; but, after a full review of this point, and looking to the delicate consideration involved in it, and wishing to avoid any appearance of dictating to the other House, it was thought better to confine the recommendations of the Committee entirely to what could be done in our own House. Certain recommendations were made with reference to reports to be made on these Bills by the Board of Trade and other public Departments, and those have been complied with. A Report of the Board of Trade is already before your Lordships, and to-morrow I shall probably be able to lay before you a supplementary Report of an engineering character, describing the effect of those schemes. The Board of Works and the Corporation of London have also published reports, as recommended by the Committee. The Government are most anxious to act in the spirit of the Resolutions adopted by the Committee of your Lordships' House last year, and they therefore thought that a Committee ought to be appointed in the other House, and your Lordships asked to appoint a Committee of this House—both Committees to sit together and draw up a joint Report. That certainly is going somewhat further than your Lordships' recommendations; and I must add that the precedents for a Joint Committee of this kind are of ancient date, and are rather meagre. There was one in 1695; and there was one in the reign of George III. to conduct an inquiry as to the state of the King's health; but in this latter case the Commons insisted on having double the number of Members on the Committee as compared with the number from your Lordships' House, and this made it impossible to do more than examine witnesses jointly. It became impossible to have a joint Report, and each House therefore presented its separate Report. The fact that your Lordships have power to examine witnesses upon oath, while the Commons do not possess that power in such matters as will form the subject of the proposed inquiry, affords another advantage that will be gained from a Joint Committee. I cannot help thinking that this is an exceptional case, in which the experiment of such a Committee may be very well made. This year the alarm in the metropolis is greater than it was last, and I think it desirable that a body having the authority of a Joint Committee should have the subject before them for calm and mature consideration. I should have been glad if the Members of the Government were not to be called to take any part in the inquiry; but an opinion has been expressed that the Government should give every assistance in their power, and we yield to that opinion. I am glad to be able to state to your Lordships that I believe my noble Friend the Chairman of Committees will find time, notwithstanding his other engagements, to serve on this Committee. If your Lordships agree to my Motion, I shall afterwards move the names; and it is proposed that, after the Message to the Commons, the Committee should meet on Monday next. The noble Earl then moved— That a Select Committee be appointed to join with the Select Committee appointed by the House of Commons, as mentioned in the said Message, to consider the best Method of dealing with the Railway Schemes proposed to be sanctioned within the Limits of the Metropolis by Bills to be introduced in the present Session, and to report their Opinion whether any, and, if any, what Schemes should not be proceeded with during the present Session.

THE EARL OF DERBY

I am not surprised, my Lords, that there should be almost a panic in the metropolis when we contemplate the number, extent, and variety of the schemes with which the whole of the metropolis is threatened. I am told that the total estimated cost of constructing those lines is £35,000,000, and that 8 per cent of the capital, has been deposited. No less than 160 streets of the metropolis will be seriously interfered with by these lines, which are to pass in every direction and by every form of construction—some overground, some underground, and some on the level; they are to run in every possible direction, and appear to have been brought forward without any general scheme, or without any reference one to another. This being the case, I think it is expedient that the matter should be taken up in the way the noble Earl has suggested. Though the course he pro- poses—the appointment of a Joint Committee—is not one for which there is a precedent of very recent date, I do not object to try the experiment. Neither do I object to members of the Government serving on the Committee; for if I entertained any feeling on the subject of the interference of the Government, it is one of regret that they did not in the first instance take a more active and prominent part— that they did not themselves lay out for consideration what appeared to them to be the best general scheme for accommodating the traffic throughout the metropolis, without having the slightest reference to this company or to that, but considering only the convenience of the public. Then, if such scheme was approved, applications might be received from companies to take it on something like the French system of concession by the Government. That, no doubt, would be a great innovation on our practice, and with regard to other parts of the country, I would not have supported it, but, with regard to the metropolis, the question is so large that it would have been better to have it decided in such a manner as to exclude all private interest or personal consideration from any influence in the decision. I have to present to your Lordships two petitions on this subject— one from the Institution of British Architects, and the other from the Architectural Association—in which they represent the great inconvenience which will arise from the conflict of railway interests; and they also state that no adequate street thoroughfares have been proposed. They express their opinion that the question of street communication should be first and forthwith considered and determined, and that lines of streets should be laid out, having reference more especially to railway termini, and they suggest that all railway projects should be postponed until the question of the great leading thoroughfares have been considered; and they pray that a Committee or a Commission should be appointed on the subject. I cannot say I concur in the entire prayer of the petitioners, because, I think, its practical effect would be to put off the construction of metropolitan railways for an indefinite period; and I do not envy this preliminary Committee the labour they will have to go through. I am glad my noble Friend the Chairman of Committees will be able to find time to serve on the Committee, for his doing so will give the public additional confidence in the mode of conducting the investigation. I should rather like to know on what principle the Committee are going to act—whether the Government are themselves going to put forward any general scheme, which possibly it would be desirable to recommend to the Committee?

EARL GRANVILLE

said, he might, as an individual, have some notions as to what the Committee ought to do, but he did not think it would be prudent of any one who was likely to serve on the Committee—a Committee on which he would be happy to have the noble Earl's (the Earl of Derby) assistance—to make his views on the subject known to the public beforehand— views which might be modified or entirely changed by the evidence.

LORD REDESDALE

said, he entirely approved of a joint Committee under the circumstances—not, however, as an experiment, but by way of exception, for he considered this to be an exceptional case. The precedents for such a Committee were of ancient date and exceptional character, and appeared to refer to proceedings in which both Houses were jointly concerned, and in which concerted action was necessary, such as when a peer was to be tried on impeachment. The only other course they could take except that now proposed was to appoint separate Committees for both Houses. But inasmuch as the inquiry proposed was an exceptional one of a preliminary character, to determine what Bills, out of a large number, should alone be submitted to the consideration of Parliament, a great difficulty would arise in the event of those Committees arriving at opposite conclusions. A joint Committee was therefore the only feasible plan by which the important subject in question could be satisfactorily considered and disposed of. He did not consider that the appointment of a Royal Commission would be attended with much advantage, inasmuch as it was found in practice that the reports of these bodies on railway matters possessed little weight, and he doubted whether a Commission would have the requisite boldness to deal effectively with these schemes, and decide which should and which should not go forward. Under all those circumstances he was of opinion, that the course proposed for adoption, though an exceptional one, was the best, and he trusted that the joint Committee would be able to present a Report that would give satisfaction. He hoped, however, that in assenting to it, it would be upon the distinct understanding that it should not be considered a precedent for the future action of that House. It was a ease of considerable difficulty, and lie hoped that a satisfactory report would be, the result.

THE EARL OF CARNARVON

said, lie admitted that in dealing with these schemes it would be of great public advantage to take such a course as would prevent unnecessary litigation and competition. It gave him much satisfaction to hear that the noble Lord the Chairman of Committees had consented to act on the Committee. But he should be most unwilling to assent to the appointment of a joint Committee, unless it was distinctly understood that the inquiry being an exceptional one, the appointment of a joint Committee should be considered as an exceptional course, and should not be drawn into a precedent in reference to the course of dealing with ordinary railway Bills. They were now practically entering into a new era of railway legislation, and the appointment of this committee would, at all events, have the effect of preventing the construction of useless or improper works, and putting a stop to unfair or unnecessary competition. But the greatest caution would be necessary in dealing with the double machinery at present in use for sifting the merits of private Bills. He was far from saying that the present system of railway legislation was satisfactory; and, though his own experience was limited, he defied any noble Lord who had served upon railway committees to say he had risen from this task with any feeling of satisfaction. At the same time, it was not so easy to suggest a remedy, and their Lordships should be cautious in adopting any course which might commit them to a policy of joint Committees. This House had always been jealous of any unnecessary or arbitrary interference with private rights; and in dispensing with any of the existing machinery by which their Lordships exercised control over companies of enormous power, backed by enormous capital, there must be great care that private interests should not hereafter be seriously compromised.

THE EARL OF DERBY

wished to ask a question in regard to the working of the Committee. Was it intended that those railway schemes should be represented by separate counsel before the Committee? Or did they propose to pass judgment upon their merits without according to railway companies the right of being heard by learned counsel? If it were intended to allow those companies to be represented by counsel, they would be imposing upon the Committee the necessity of hearing lengthened arguments and speeches previously to their coming to a decision upon the several schemes. At the same time it might be considered rather unfair to the promoters of those railway projects, if they were to refuse hearing any representation on their behalf.

EARL GRANVILLE

said, he could not of course answer as to what course the Committee would be likely to take in regard to hearing counsel upon the merits of the respective railways proposed. Last year, however, the Committee practically avoided going into the merits of particular schemes. They confined themselves to a consideration of what they believed to be consistent with general legislation upon railway communication.

Motion agreed to.

Then it was moved,

That such Select Committee should consist of Five Lords, Three to be a Quorum, agreed to. The Lords following were named of the Committee:—Ld. PRESIDENT, E. ROMNEY, V. EVERS-LET, L. REDESDALE, L. STANLEY of ALDEBLBT. That a Message was Ordered to be sent to the House of Commons, in answer to their Message of Tuesday last, to inform them of the Appointment of the said Select Committee by this House, and to propose to the House of Commons that the joint Committee do meet in the Painted Chamber on Monday next, at Half past Three o'Clock.

House adjourned at a quarter before Eight o'clock, till To-morrow, half past Ten o'clock.