Lords Sitting of 1 August 1873

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Telegraphs* (266); Militia Pay Acts Amendment* (271).
Second Reading—Public Health Act (1872) Amendment* (257).
Second Reading—Committee negatived—Constabulary Force (Ireland)* (261); Expiring Laws Continuance (258); Railway Regulations* (259); Royal Naval Artillery Volunteer Force* (260); Sanitary Act (1866) Amendment (Ireland)* (262).
Committee—Endowed Schools Act (1869) Amendment (253): Merchant Shipping Acts Amendment (254–269); Conspiracy Law Amendment (256–270).
Committee—Report—Defence Acts Amendment* (255).
Report—Penalties (Ireland)* (242); Langbaurgh Coroners* (248).
Report—Third Reading—Elementary Education Act (1870) Amendment, &c.* (265), and passed.
Consideration of Commons Amendments—Conveyancing (Scotland), negatived.

ENDOWED SCHOOLS ACT (1869) AMENDMENT BILL—(No. 253.)
(The Lord President.)

COMMITTEE.
House in Committee (according to Order).
Clauses 1 to 14, inclusive, agreed to.
Clause 15 (Continuance of powers of making schemes).
EARL BEAUCHAMP(on. behalf of the Marquess of SALISBURY) moved to strike out the clause and insert the following in lieu thereof:—
"The power of making and suppressing a scheme under the principal Act as amended by this Act shall continue as respects unopposed schemes until thirty-first December one thousand eight hundred and seventy-four, and as respects schemes against which a petition shall have been presented to the Committee of Council on Education, as in this Act provided, until the fifteenth August one thousand eight hundred and seventy-four, and no longer."
THE MARQUESS OF RIPON,while disliking the limitation, would not press his objection to a division.
Amendment agreed to.
Then, on the Motion of the Marquess of RIPON the following new Clauses inserted:—
After Clause 8, insert—
(Scheme as to endowments in which schools under 31 & 32 Vict. c. 118. are interested.)
"Where two or more schools are jointly interested in an educational endowment, and one of such schools is a school mentioned in section three of "The Public Schools Act, 1868," the Commissioners shall not, without the consent of the special Commissioners for the time being under "The Public Schools Act, 1868," deal by any scheme with the interest of such last-mentioned school in the endowment, but, with the consent of those Commissioners to the dealing with such interest, may, by a scheme under the principal Act, deal with such interest as well as with all other interests in such endowment."
Clause 12, page 5, line 30, leave out ("of appeal")
After Clause 16 insert the following clause:—
(Application of Act to schemes laid before Parliament during present session.)
"Where a scheme has been laid before Parliament during the present session, but has not at the expiration of such session lain for forty days before Parliament, and no address has been presented by either House of Parliament praying Her Majesty to withhold her consent from such scheme or any part thereof, the Committee of Council on Education may, if they think fit, cause to be published and circulated, in such

1419
manner as they think sufficient for giving information to all persons interested, a notice stating that unless within two months after the first publication of the notice such petition as is in this section mentioned is presented to the Committee of Council on Education such scheme may be forthwith approved by Her Majesty.
"During the said two months a petition praying that the scheme may lie before Parliament during two months as directed by this Act may be presented to the Committee of Council on Education by any governing body, council, or ratepayers, who would if such scheme were approved by such Committee after the commencement of this Act, be authorised by this Act to present a petition praying that such scheme may be laid before Parliament.
"If no such petition is presented within the said two months it shall be lawful for Her Majesty by Order in Council to declare her approbation of such scheme in like manner as if it had lain for forty days before Parliament in accordance with the principal Act.
"Any scheme to which this section applies and which is not approved by Her Majesty under this section shall continue to lie before Parliament, and the provisions of this Act shall apply in like manner as if such scheme had been laid before Parliament in pursuance of this Act."
Amendments made: The Report thereof to be received To-morrow, and Standing Orders Nos. 37 and 38 to be considered in order to their being dispensed with.

CONSPIRACY LAW AMENDMENT BILL.
(The Earl of Kimberley.)

(NO. 266.) COMMITTEE.
Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.
Moved, "That the House do now resolve itself into Committee."—(The Earl of Kimberley.)
LORD CAIRNSsaid, he desired to call attention to the peculiar character of this Bill. It was, as the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Kimberley) stated in moving the second reading, introduced in consequence of the conviction and sentence of certain gas-stokers, who had, as their Lordships would remember, "struck" against their employers some time ago. The sentences passed upon these persons were, undoubtedly, severe; but there was no reason for saying that they were not in accordance with the existing law. These sentences, however, had been made the subject of much comment, and of some discontent. The gas-stokers wore indicted under two counts: the first charging them with an unlawful combination under the Criminal Law Amendment Act, which subjected
1420
the accused, on conviction, to three months' imprisonment; and the second count, under the Master and Servant Act, charging them with a conspiracy to break their contract, for which that statute provided the punishment of 12 months' imprisonment. The accused were convicted on the second count—for the conspiracy—and the Judge, Mr. Justice Brett, passed the full sentence. Now, if these persons had been convicted not for the conspiracy to commit the offence, but for the offence itself, under the 30 & 31 Vict. c. 141 (the Master and Servant Act, 1867), the punishment which could have been inflicted would have been much less severe. It seemed very anomalous that the conspiracy to commit an offence should be dealt with with greater severity than the commission of the offence, and this Bill was in consequence introduced into the other House by a private Member, the hon. and learned Member for Oxford City (Mr. Vernon Harcourt). The measure, when so introduced, was limited to a provision that persons indicted for conspiracy under the Master and Servant Act, should not be liable to a heavier punishment than that allotted to the offence when committed by an individual. While the Bill was in the Commons it was, as stated by the noble Earl (the Earl of Kimberley), enlarged and extended, so as to embrace not only the individual case, but tore-model the whole Law of Conspiracy. Such being the real character of the Bill, he (Lord Cairns) hold that a measure of so important a nature should have been introduced on the authority of the Government, and not by a private Member, than whom the Government had better opportunities of taking the opinions of the Judges, who might be termed the guardians of the criminal law of this country, and who were really the only authorities on whom the Government could confidently rely. Nor had their Lordships' House any opportunity at this period of the Session, and the absence of the Judges on circuit, of requiring, as they had a right to require, their assistance in considering so considerable a change in the law. The Bill drew a distinction between offences indictable by statute and offences indictable at Common Law. Offences against the statute law were left untouched; but of those now indictable at Common Law it selected seven, which were set forth

1421
in a Schedule. The legal consequence was that the Law of Conspiracy was repealed and done away, except as regarded these seven specified offences. The gravity of the delicta majora thus selected could be judged by their Lordships by reading the list; but he thought it would be highly dangerous to exclude all other Common Law offences from the operation of the Law of Conspiracy. For instance, one of the Law Officers of the Crown had been asked, whether sending forged telegrams was an indictable offence? He (Lord Cairns) did not know how this might be now—a conspiracy to do such an act for the purpose of influencing the funds was an indictable offence. This was clear—that if this Bill passed persons who attempted this very serious offence would no longer be indictable for conspiracy. By Common Law, conspiracy was not restricted to combination to effect an illegal thing—it included also a combination to effect a lawful purpose by illegal means. It was doubtful whether, under this Bill, that would continue to be so. He demurred to the general proposition laid down by the Bill, that a person convicted of conspiracy should not be liable to any punishment greater than that provided by statute for an act done by a single person; because in many cases where a number of persons combined to do a particular illegal thing, the offence was much greater on the part of every one of those persons than if only one person attempted to do the same thing. But the Bill, after laying down that unsafe general rule, itself departed from it. An offence indictable by Common Law for conspiracy was not to be punished by more than six months' imprisonment without hard labour; where as an individual might be imprisoned for one, and even for two years. Breach of contract was not punishable criminally, except under the Master and Servant Act—an exception, he presumed, adopted after full consideration. He had a strong feeling against such legislation being carried further. He thought the punishment provided by the Act for an offence committed by an individual was sufficient; and the punishment for conspiracy to commit the same act ought not to be heavier than that on the individual who actually committed it. If the Government were willing to limit the Bill to such a provision he should have no
1422
objection to it; but if the whole Law of Conspiracy were to be dealt with, it had better stand over till next Session.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYexplained that the object of the Government in enlarging Mr. Vernon Harcourt's Bill was to place the Law of Conspiracy on an intelligible footing, by providing that, except as to seven serious offences, the punishment for conspiracy should not be heavier than that for individual offences. At present the Judges had an indefinite power of awarding a much heavies punishment; and when a man, cognizant of the punishment for an individual act, found himself liable to a much severer sentence for conspiring to commit the act, much discontent was aroused. He gladly accepted the noble and learned Lord's admission that the exceptional punishment criminally of breach of contract under the Master and Servant Act ought not to be greater in cases of combination than that assigned to individual acts. He thought the Bill dealt with a large subject in a satisfactory manner; but the noble and learned Lord's opposition had reduced him to the one question, whether he would confine the Bill to that single point rather than lose the measure altogether; and he thought it more advisable to accept the former alternative, considering that, as far as it went, it was a decided amendment of the law.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, the Bill had been extended by the Government after careful consideration, and the limitation suggested by his noble and learned Friend (Lord Cairns) would not meet the dictum of Mr. Justice Brett in the gas-stokers case—that any combination to force the will of another by unjustifiable means was punishable for conspiracy by Common Law. Differences of opinion had been expressed as to this; but their Lordships would not assume that so eminent a Judge had taken a mistaken view. The doubt and uncertainty attending the Law of Conspiracy tended to an arbitrary administration of it, and the Government, especially its Law Advisers, had desired to remove that uncertainty. The Bill as it stood would not affect conspiracy to effect lawful ends by unlawful means, but in cases where neither means nor ends were punishable by law it was desirable that the limits of the Law of Conspiracy should be more clearly laid

1423
down. The conspiracies left untouched were those to cheat or defraud, to extort money, to accuse of crime falsely, to impede the course of justice, and conspiracies contrary to public morals and decency or against the Government. The Home Office and the Law Officers of the Crown, with some assistance from Mr. Wright, the author of a recent work of considerable merit on the Law of Conspiracy, had gone carefully into the matter, in order to satisfy themselves that no kind of conspiracy had been overlooked. If it were consistent with their Lordships' convenience at this time of the Session to go into all the details he should have been prepared to defend them; but, looking to all the circumstances of the case, he considered it might be better to accept the suggestions of his noble and learned Friend than to leave matters in their present state.
Motion agreed to; House in Committee accordingly. Amendments made; the Report thereof to be received Tomorrow; and Standing Orders, Nos. 37 and 38, to be considered, in order to their being dispensed with.

CONVEYANCING (SCOTLAND) BILL. (NO. 204.)
Commons' Amendments considered.
Moved that the Commons amendments to Lords amendments and Commons reasons for disagreeing to certain of the amendments made by the Lords be now considered.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
LORD COLONSAYrose to move as an Amendment that the said Amendments and Reasons be taken into consideration that day three months. The noble and learned Lord stated his objection to the Bill, notwithstanding, or in consequence of, the numerous Amendments that had been made by both Houses. After a highly technical examination of the provisions of the Bill as it stood, the noble and learned Lord said, that in a Bill of this description it was essential that everything should be clear and intelligible, but that the alterations made in the measure at the last moment only confused and complicated the subject. The Bill which had been originally sent into their Lordships' House from the House of Commons was a very different measure from that which had been sent down to the other House
1424
their Lordships, and this had again been materially changed by the Amendments recently made by the Commons. Those persons in Scotland who had taken a warm interest in this subject had not had time to consider the Amendments, and seeing that the Bill was not to come into operation before the 1st January, 1874, he thought that if Government introduced a Bill in February, it might be passed and come into operation in June, that the mere question of a six months' delay ought not to prevent the measure from being carefully and properly considered.
Amendment moved, to leave out ("now") and insert ("this day three months")—(The Lord Colonsay.)
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, the course taken by his noble and learned Friend was neither a usual nor a convenient one. Their Lordships had already affirmed the principle of this Bill, and the desirableness of legislating on the subject to which it had reference, by giving it a second reading. When the House went into Committee, their Lordships had bestowed a considerable amount of attention and care upon the consideration of the details, and many Amendments moved by his noble and learned Friend (Lord Colonsay) were adopted. Some of those Amendments, bearing upon the general scope and object of the Bill, the House of Commons, differing from their Lordships, rejected; but others—and among them some Amendments of great importance—were accepted by the House of Commons, who had therein shown a disposition to approximate towards their Lordships' views. Their Lordships could hardly alter the opinion they had expressed as to its being desirable to legislate upon this subject, but they might disagree with the Amendments sent up from the House of Commons, and insist upon their own—thereby throwing upon the other House the responsibility of the failure of the Bill if they persisted. He certainly could not think that in the case of a Bill relating to an important subject, on which all parties had agreed that it was desirable to legislate—and especially when the general nature of the legislation was also agreed upon—his noble and learned Friend or the House would be pursuing a very consistent course in declining to

1425
take into consideration the Amendments sent up by the Commons.
LORD CAIRNSsaid, there was no doubt that the Bill was one of great importance, and that a great deal of the time of both Houses had been expended in putting it into shape. No doubt some of their Lordships must have a painful recollection of the time they had spent on the Bill in Committee, and it would be in their remembrance that considerable Amendments were made by their Lordships, and made with a great deal of care. They all understood and appreciated the firmness and the candour with which the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack had met the opposition urged against portions of the Bill, and they could remember the form in which it was sent back to the other House, where he had no doubt, from the Amendments there made—although the discussions appeared to have been conducted with closed doors, as they were not recorded in the ordinary channels of information—the most earnest attention was bestowed on the details of the Bill as altered by their Lordships. When the Commons had made the changes they thought requisite, the Bill was sent back to their Lordships, and it was for them to say whether they should turn it out at the last moment, or send it to the House of Commons once more in order that they might again consider the Amendments they proposed to make. The latter appeared at first sight the most promising and plausible course, and there was only one ground on which he regarded it as insecure. The Prorogation of Parliament they were told was to take place next Tuesday; and if their Lordships chose to-night to go through the Amendments and Reasons which occupied 25 pages of print, it was probable the House of Commons might require some days to consider the result of their Lordships' work, and it would be utterly impossible that they could have this time if Parliament were to be prorogued on Tuesday. On the whole, he thought it would be better that the measure should be re-introduced next Session.
On Question, that ("now") stand part of the Motion? Their Lordships divided:—Contents 25; Not-Contents 43: Majority 18.

CONTENTS.

Selborne, L. (L. Chan-

Boyle, L. (E. Cork and

cellor.)

Orrery.) [Teller.]

Camoys, L.

Saint Albans, D.

Gwydir, L.

[Teller.]

Hatherley, L.

Houghton, L.

Lansdowne, M.

Kenmare, L. (E. Ken-

Ripon, M.

mare.)

Methuen, L.

Camperdown, E.

Monson, L.

Cowper, E.

Mostyn, L.

Granville, E.

Ponsonby, L. (E. Bess-

Kimberley, E.

borough.)

Morley, E.

Seaton, L.

Stanley of Alderley, L.

Halifax, V.

Waveney, L.

Sydney, V.

Wrottesley, L.

NOT-CONTENTS.

Buckingham and Chan-

Bagot, L.

dos, D.

Boston, L.

Northumberland, D.

Cairns, L.

Rutland, D.

Chelmsford, L.

Wellington, D.

Colonsay, L.

Congleton, L.

Salisbury, M.

Denman, L.

Amherst, E.

De Saumarez, L.

Bantry, E.

Ellenborough, L.

Beauchamp, E.

Hartismere, L. (L. Hen-

Carnarvon, E.

niker.)

Dartmouth, E.

Hylton, L.

Denbigh, E.

Ker, L. (M. Lothian.)

Derby, E.

Manners, L.

Doncaster, E. (D. Buc-

Oranmore and Browne,

cleuch and Queens-

L.

berry.)

Penrhyn, L.

Leven and Melville, E.

Ranfurly, L. (E. Ran-

Malmesbury, E.

furly.)

Mansfield, E.

Redesdale, L.

Powis, E.

Saltoun, L.

Verulam, E.

Skelmersdale, L.

[Teller.]

Clancarty, V. (E. Clan-

Templemore, L.

Carty.)

Thurlow, L.

De Vesci, V.

Wynford, L.

Hawarden, V. [Teller.]

Resolved, in the negative; Commons' amendments to Lords' amendments, and Commons' reasons for disagreeing to certain of the amendments made by the Lords, to be considered on this day three months.

EXPIRING LAWS CONTINUANCE BILL—(No. 258.)
(The Earl of Morley.)

SECOND READING.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Earl of Morley.)
THE EARL OF CARNARVONcomplained of the practice which had grown up of passing this Bill hurriedly through Parliament at the very close of the Ses-

1427
sion, when there was no opportunity of giving it adequate consideration. Many of the Acts named in it were of the very gravest importance. Many of the Acts, when first introduced, were designed to be merely temporary, but they actually became permanent by being annually renewed through the medium of this Bill. This mode of proceeding was very objectionable; because if these measures required consideration, it was impossible to give them that consideration when they came before the Legislature merely as names in a General Continuance Bill.
THE LORD CHANCELLORwas surprised to hear a noble Lord of such great Parliamentary experience raise such an objection. For many years past it had been the practice in the House of Commons to appoint a Select Committee in every Session to consider these expiring laws, and decide whether they should be continued or dropped altogether. He might assure the noble Earl that the great majority of the Acts contained in the Bill wore of such a nature that they could not be dropped without the greatest inconvenience. All that Parliament wished to declare in passing this Bill year by year was, that there were a number of Acts of a temporary character, the wisdom of whose continuance it was advisable from time to time to consider.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYthought the complaint of the noble Earl (the Earl of Carnarvon) was a salutary protest against a very pernicious practice. The Bill under discussion was merely a means to enable Parliament and Ministers to cheat themselves by smuggling. Acts through quietly against which there was very considerable objection. Thus, Acts which were merely allowed to pass on condition that they were only to be in operation for a year, were continued and re-continued without discussion until they became part of the permanent statutes of the land.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, that in illustration of the necessity of such a Bill, he would point out that the Schedule embraced a measure of such importance as the Preservation of the Peace in Ireland. Parliament could not pursue any other course with respect to such a measure than to make it temporary; because otherwise it would be a practical declaration that the ordinary privileges of the Irish people were to be
1428
taken away permanently. By continuing that Act as long as it was found to be necessary by means of this Bill, not only a great deal of time was saved, but much needless and unprofitable irritation was avoided.
After some remarks from Lord DENMAN and Lord CAIRNS,
Motion agreed to: Bill read 2a acordingly; Committee negatived, and Bill to be read 3a To-morrow.

METROPOLIS—PARLIAMENT STREET.

  QUESTION.
  LORD REDESDALEasked Her Majesty's Government, Whether the buildings in Parliament Street, opposite the new Public Offices, would be taken down before the meeting of Parliament next year, and whether there was any intention of applying to Parliament next Session for power to purchase property in or adjoining Parliament Street, King Street, or Whitehall, for the erection of Public Offices?
  THE DUKE OF ST. ALBANSstated, in reply to the first Question of the noble Lord, that the buildings in Parliament Street, opposite to the new Public Offices, would have to be taken down to enable the drainage and the front of the now Offices to be completed, and that they would be removed with that object before Parliament re-assembled. In reply to the second Question, he had been informed that there was no intention to apply to Parliament for power to acquire property south of the new Home and Colonial Offices, for the purpose of erecting Public Offices thereon. The Crown already possessed a large extent of land in the vicinity of the existing public buildings for the erection of Public Offices. The cost of acquiring property was very great, because compensation had to be paid to the occupiers as well as to the owners of the property, and the Crown ought not to incur such an expense as long as it had property of its own suitable for the purpose.
  In reply to a further Question by Lord REDESDALE,
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, that the Government had no intention of applying to Parliament next Session for power to purchase property adjoining the new offices in Parliament Street, King Street, or Whitehall. It was a

  1429
  question whether any further improvements should be effected at the cost of the Imperial Exchequer or of the Metropolitan Board of Works.
  LORD REDESDALEexpressed his regret that the improvement of Parliament Street would be only half effected.
  House adjourned at half-past Seven o'clock, 'till To-morrow, Twelve o'clock.