Lords Sitting of 8 February 1866

MINUTES.
Several Lords took the Oath.
SELECT COMMITTEE—On Private Bills; Standing Order Committee appointed; Opposed Private Bills—Committee of Selection appointed.
PUBLIC BILL—First Reading—Sale of Land by Auction [H.L.] (2.)

PARLIAMENTARY OATHS.
  OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD RAVENSWORTHsaid, that he had given a pledge on one occasion during the last Session of Parliament that, as it had been admitted upon all sides that some amendment was necessary in the law regulating the oaths administered to Members of Parliament, he would ask their Lordships to deal with the question in a comprehensive manner. But, since Her Majesty had been pleased to call attention to the subject in Her Speech, and as the Government had already given notice to consider the whole subject of the oath taken by Members of Parliament, he considered himself absolved from the engagement he had entered into. Still, he would say that, if the Government proposed a uniform oath for Members of all creeds, they would experience more difficulty than might at first sight be expected. He had given much attention to the subject, and would, of course, give all due consideration to the proposal of Her Majesty's Government when it should be laid before Parliament. He had been, from the moment of his first entrance into Parliament, an advocate for the removal of all religious disabilities, and his opinions upon that subject still remained unaltered; but he would venture upon that occasion to express a hope that the Government, in any new oath they might propose, would take care not to interfere with the authority and pre-eminence of the Established Church, or to derogate in any way from her position as the Church of this nation.
THE CATTLE PLAGUE—DAY OF FASTING AND HUMILIATION.

  QUESTION.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVON: I wish, my Lords, to ask the noble Earl opposite (Earl Russell) a question which some may think, perhaps, not very important in itself, but which is certainly important as showing the spirit by which Her Majesty's

  189
  Government is actuated in dealing with the present calamity. I noticed in the papers of this morning a report of the proceedings in Convocation; and though your Lordships may, perhaps, think that an odd place whence to gain any information respecting the cattle plague, I wish to ask the noble Earl a question bearing upon a statement made by the most rev. Primate. The most rev. Primate was stated to have said that he had had a correspondence with the Secretary of State for the Home Department respecting the appointment of a day of fasting and humiliation in consequence of the pestilence upon our cattle; and that the right hon. Gentleman had declined to accede to the request, among other reasons on this ground—and I will quote the most rev. Primate's words as reported—
  "Her Majesty's Government do not think it expedient to appoint a day, because national fasts are only observed in event of calamities affecting the whole of the nation, whereas the cattle plague is as yet only partial."
  Now, my Lords, I have no intention of going into the question of the expediency or inexpediency of appointing a day of national fasting and humiliation; but if Her Majesty's Government are influenced by the reason assigned by the right hon. Baronet for refusing the proposal, I cannot help saying that I regard it as one of the most extraordinary reasons I ever heard of. Such an idea would indeed go very far to justify the belief, which is very prevalent at the present moment, that Her Majesty's Government are in a great measure indifferent to the class upon whom this great calamity has fallen, and that if any other branch of the community had been similarly affected they would have acted with more vigour. There is, I know, a class of doctrinaire philosophers in this country who believe that if every head of cattle in this kingdom were swept away the laws of trade ought not to be disturbed, and that everything ought to be allowed to find its level: but this I am sure is not only not the general feeling of the country, but is generally repugnant to the common sense of the community. The cattle plague is a calamity affecting not merely the agricultural classes—not only those who live on the land and by the land—but it affects every class throughout the country. Indeed, if it continues much longer unchecked, I doubt very much whether Her Majesty's Government will not feel its effects in every department of the revenue and the Excise. Meat, milk, cheese—
  190
  articles of prime necessity—may possibly rise to famine prices, and the other concerns of ordinary life may become so affected that Her Majesty's Government and the Chancellor of the Exchequer may not improbably be among the first to realize the wide-spread nature of the calamity. I wish, therefore, to ask the noble Earl, Whether the reason assigned in the newspaper reports, as one of the reasons for which the proposal of the most rev. Primate was rejected by the Secretary of State, is correctly attributed to the right hon. Gentleman? If, indeed, Her Majesty's Government needed a reason for the view which they seem to have adopted, I could suggest at least a truer and a more intelligible one; for I could understand their declining to appoint a day of fasting and humiliation on the ground that the cattle plague was likely to bring us fasting enough, and that we have already ample humiliation in the position which Her Majesty's Government have occupied during the last three months.
  EARL RUSSELLsaid, that he intended to lay upon the table of the House so much of the letter of the most rev. Primate, and of the reply of the Secretary of State for the Home Department, as referred to the subject of the cattle plague. The noble Earl would then see that one of the reasons given by his right hon. Friend for declining the proposal was, that there was already in use a prayer sanctioned by the most rev. Primate by which the nation humbled itself before Almighty God, and prayed for the Divine protection in consequence of the cattle plague. He thought the noble Earl would have done well to have waited for the production of the correspondence before indulging in such an invective against Her Majesty's Government.
  THE BISHOP OF LINCOLNcould not help expressing his regret that the Government should have refused the request of the most rev. Primate. He could assure their Lordships that in the district with which he was connected, and which had suffered, and was still Buffering, severely from the cattle plague, the appointment of a national fast would be viewed with great satisfaction. It was true that the form of prayer to which the noble Earl referred was used in the churches each week, but a large proportion of the population felt that a day of national supplication and humiliation was needed. As it was, they were now taking the matter into their own

  191
  hands, and in many instances parishioners had requested their clergymen to assemble their congregation for the purpose of intercession.

SALE OF LAND BY AUCTION BILL— [H.L.]

  PRESENTED. FIRST READING.
  LORD ST. LEONARDSsaid, he rose to call the attention of their Lordships to the law relating to biddings at sales of estates by auction, and would conclude by introducing a Bill upon that subject. In point of fact, there was scarcely an occasion on which an estate was put up for sale by auction without some one being employed to bid on the part of the owner. It was a matter—and he believed the only matter—on which there was a conflict between the common law courts and the equity courts; for while the former held that a sale was actually void if any bidder was employed on the part of the owner, it was maintained by the latter that the owner might appoint a person to bid for him up to a certain value, for the purpose, not of unduly stimulating other persons to go on bidding, but of preventing the sacrifice of his property. The law as to auctions of real estate was the only instance yet remaining which was not construed alike in the courts of law and of equity; and it was quite time this discordance should be put an end to. If a man put up an estate by auction, with the common condition that the highest bidder should be the buyer, and should appoint also a person to bid for him, the courts of law would hold that sale to be void, on the ground that the seller, by his "puffer," had bid for himself. A court of equity, on the contrary, if no unfair advantage was taken by the use of a "puffer," would decide that the sale was good. It was discreditable that such a conflict should exist, and he therefore begged to introduce a Bill to amend the present law upon the subject. By the provisions of his Bill an auctioneer was forbidden to bid at the sale of any property cither on account of himself, the owner of the property, or any other persons; but the owner of the estate was permitted to engage a "puffer," who might bid up to a certain price, provided that such price was communicated to him and to the auctioneer in writing before the commencement of the sale. Those provisions would enable a man to insure that his property should not be sold at a price far below its real value, and yet would prevent the public
  192
  from being induced to give more than the estate was worth by fictitious bidding on the part of either the auctioneer or the "puffer." Great mischief had resulted in past times by allowing auctioneers to bid; and there were numerous instances in which sales had been declared invalid from this practice. There had recently been a decision in a case before the present Lord Chancellor, in which it appeared that the auctioneer and the "puffer" bid eleven times before any bonâ fide purchaser began to bid, and then the property was immediately knocked down to that bidder. His noble Friend on the Woolsack rightly held that this sale was void. He was aware that Lord Loughborough, when Lord Chancellor, had spoken with something like disrespect of the idea that the biddings of one man influenced those of others; but he (Lord St. Leonards), on the contrary, believed that all men were influenced more or less at auctions by the biddings of those around him. In the first place, the biddings at an auction gave some indication of the real value of the property; and, in the second place, a little bit of vanity induced a man to show that he possessed the longest purse. He therefore thought it absolutely necessary that the public should be protected from being taken in by fictitious biddings. In sales under the Court of Chancery, where a bidding was reserved, the sum below which the estate was not to be sold was stated in a sealed paper, which was placed in the hands of the auctioneer, who was not allowed to open it till the sale was commenced. If the bids stopped short of the price stated in that paper, he announced to the persons assembled that no sale had taken place. That was very proper, and this Bill provided that where there was a reserved bidding, as in sales under the Court of Chancery, the sum below which the estate was not to be sold should be stated in writing and delivered to the auctioneer, so that there should be no misunderstanding; and where the biddings were real, but did not come up to the sum fixed, he was to announce that no sale had taken place; but he would then be at liberty to receive any bidding equal to or beyond the sum fixed as the value. An auctioneer acting contrary to the directions of this Bill would be liable to an action for the damage which any real bidder might sustain. There was another provision in the Bill of a different nature. It was not one man in a hundred who knew the extremely

  193
  important conditions under which auctions took place, and the expense incurred in making up the title was often very onerous. When he came into the hands of his own solicitor, the buyer generally found he had some £200 to pay for making out the title. That expense ought to fall on the seller. The noble and learned Lord concluded by presenting a Bill for amending the Law of Auctions of Estates.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that the subject to which the noble and learned Lord had called attention was one of considerable importance, and he thought their Lordships were indebted to the noble and learned Lord for the care he had bestowed on it". His noble and learned Friend would not, he hoped, think that he was treating the proposed enactment with disrespect if he declined at present to enter into a discussion upon it; for it was precisely one of those measures with respect to which, until one saw the Bill and entered into its consideration, clause by clause, it was impossible to say more than that its general object seemed advisable.
  Bill read 1a [No. 2.]

  OPPOSED PRIVATE BILLS.
  The Lords following, namely—

  L. Steward

  L. Colchester

  L. Colville of Culross

  L. Stanley of Alderley

  were appointed, with the Chairman of Committees, a Committee to select and propose to the House the Names of the Five Lords to form a Select Committee for the Consideration of each Opposed Private Bill.

  PRIVATE BILLS.
  Standing Order Committee on, appointed: The Lords following, together with the Chairman of Committees, were named of the Committee:—

  Ld. President

  V. Eversley

  D. Somerset

  Ld. Steward

  M. Winchester

  L. Cameys

  M. Lansdowne

  L. Saye and Sele

  M. Bath

  L. Colville of Culross

  M. Ailesbury

  L. Sondes

  E. Devon

  L. Foley

  E. Airlie

  L. Dinevor

  E. Hardwicke

  L. Sheffield

  E. Carnarvon

  L. Colchester

  E. Romney

  L. Silchester

  E. Chichester

  L. De Tabley

  E. Powis

  L. Wynford

  E. Verulam

  L. Portman

  E. Saint Germains

  L. Stanley of Alderley

  E. De Grey

  L. Aveland

  E. Stradbroke

  L. Belper

  E. Amherst

  L. Ebury

  L. Chamberlain

  L. Churston

  V. Hutchinson

  L. Egerton

  PRIVATE BILLS.
  Ordered, That this House will not receive any Petition for a Private Bill after Thursday the 22nd Day of March next, unless such Private Bill shall have been approved by the Court of Chancery; nor any Petition for a Private Bill approved by the Court of Chancery after Tuesday the 8th Day of May next:
  Ordered, That this House will not receive any Report from the Judges, upon Petitions presented to this House for Private Bills, after Tuesday the 8th Day of May next:
  Ordered, That the said Orders be printed and published, and affixed on the Doors of this House and Westminster Hall. (No. 1.)
  House adjourned at Six o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter before Five o'clock.