Lords Sitting of 7 August 1877

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading— Metropolitan Board of Works (Money) * (183); Prisons (Scotland) * (184); Public Libraries Acts Amendment (No. 2)* (185); Destructive Insects* (188).
Second Reading—Canal Boats (176); Prisons (Ireland) (178).
Committee—Report—Superannuation (Mercantile Marine Fund Officers) * (172); Treasury Chest Fund* (173).
Report—Building Societies Act (1874) Amendment* (163).
Third Reading — Saint Catherine's Harbour, Jersey * (158); Legal Practitioners * (142); Solway Salmon Fisheries* (162), and passed.

JUDICATURE ACT —DESPATCH OF CIVIL BUSINESS—LIVERPOOL ASSIZES.

  PETITION.
  THE EARL OF HARROWBYpresented a Petition from the Chamber of Commerce of Liverpool, praying for increased provision for the despatch of the civil legal business of the Liverpool Assizes. The noble Earl recapitulated the leading statements of the Petitioners, who represented the inadequacy of the existing arrangements for transacting the civil business of the Courts of the County of Lancaster.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORadmitted the importance of the subject, not as regarded the County of Lancaster only, but the Kingdom generally, and he was not, therefore, surprised that his noble Friend should have referred to the statements in the Petition. The question had for a considerable time. occupied the attention both of the Judges of the land and of those responsible for any legislation proposed on the subject. It was, in fact, that very question which had led to the appointment of the Judicature Commission. Ten or eleven years ago the late Lord Derby told him that representations had been made to him of there being what was equivalent to a denial of justice in Lancashire; and it was in consequence of those representations that Lord Derby advised that a Commission should be appointed to inquire into the whole Judicature of the country. That Commission recommended that in Liverpool and Manchester there should be four sittings in the year for the trial of civil causes; that the duration of those
  526
  sittings should not be limited; and that two or more Judges should sit at the same time for the hearing of those causes when that course should be found convenient. The difficulty, of course, was to provide the requisite number of Judges, and that recommendation of the Commission was not one of the changes adopted on the passing of the Judicature Act. None of the changes effected by that Act had met the evil, which consequently had gone on increasing—and he must add that the question was not now a question as to Liverpool and Manchester only. He had received representations from the county of York to the effect that a Winter Assize for the transaction of civil business was required at Leeds also. At the Winter Assizes for Liverpool and Manchester criminal as well as civil business was disposed of. In 1874 the number of days' sittings at the three Assizes was 72, and the number of civil cases to be disposed of 484. Their Lordships could well suppose that those 484 cases were not disposed of. In 1875 there were 69 days for 459 cases, and in 1866, 74 days for 510 cases. Of these 510 cases, a large proportion were special jury cases, involving questions of great importance and large sums of money. To dispose of those cases in 74 days, it would have been necessary to dispose of one in each of the seven hours of the judicial day. These figures must be enough to show that the present accommodation for the transaction of civil business in the County of Lancaster was clearly insufficient—and, as a matter of fact, the business could not be got through, and arrears must be left. The question, then, was—how was the evil to be remedied? Taking the present duration of the Assizes, if in the place of one Judge they had two or three Judges sitting at the same time for the trial of civil causes, they would double or treble the number of cases heard. There were two objections to that plan, one of which was urged in the Petition read by his noble Friend. The Petitioners objected that it would be extremely inconvenient for solicitors and others who had to transact business that the number of Courts sitting at the same time should be increased. He did not, however, attach much weight to that objection, because he thought that the ingenuity of the solicitors would devise a way of getting

  527
  over that difficulty; and if only one Judge were to sit, he must be a local Judge and sit throughout the year. But there was another objection which had more in it—namely, the want of judicial power. Of course, if two or three Judges were to sit at Liverpool and Manchester, in order that the business disposed of might be doubled or trebled, they must have more Judges. Where were they to be had? There was a strong feeling both in Parliament and throughout the country that the present arrangements for gaol delivery were not what they ought to be. It was quite obvious that there were many prisoners lying in prison for three, four, and five months without an opportunity of having their cases heard. In that respect there was a great difference in different parts of the country. Within the district of the Central Criminal Court there were in each year 12 sittings for the trial of prisoners, so that except under special circumstances no one committed for trial at the Central Criminal Court had to wait more than a month for his trial. But in other parts of the country persons committed after the month of June had to wait perhaps five months for their trial at the Winter Assizes. There was a strong demand that there should be throughout the country a more frequent general gaol delivery—one every quarter. He thought that desirable, but in order to provide it there must be some additional judicial strength. Again, there were the trials of civil cases in London and Middlesex. He was glad to say, looking at the changes effected by the Judicature Act, that in their Lordships' House, with the exception of six cases in respect of which there were particular reasons for delay, all the causes entered up to the 10th of June last had been disposed of. In the Privy Council every cause had been disposed of; and in the intermediate Court of Appeal, notwithstanding a temporary diminution of judicial strength owing to the illness of two of the Judges, there were no arrears. In the Courts sitting in banco he understood that the arrears were not considerable; and in the Chancery Division since the appointment of an additional Judge the arrears had been considerably diminished. The difficulty arose in the civil business of Lancashire and of London and Middlesex and in the gaol deliveries throughout the country. Out of London, however, the great de-
  528
  ficiency was not felt continuously, but during the Spring, Summer, and Winter Assizes, which lasted about 20 weeks. During that time there was a considerable want of judicial power. That, as it appeared to him, could be supplied in only one or other of two ways. You might provide that while the Judges of the land should go through the country on Circuit and try the graver criminal offences, the other criminal business should be disposed of by Commissioners. In the minds of many there was a great objection to that course. Without going into the difficulty of drawing the line between the cases to be tried by the Judges of the land and the cases to be tried by the Commissioners, he doubted very much whether it would be desirable to engraft on our judicial system a permanent organization of paid Commissioners who would not be judges. The other mode was an addition to the Judges of the land. He did not deprecate that plan on the ground of expense only, for he thought that nothing was more dangerous than to add to the judicial strength till such a measure was absolutely required. To have too many Judges was an evil in itself. It tended to lower the dignity of the judicial office, and it was likely to cause an undue drain from the Bar. The Government were, however, quite alive to the serious inconvenience arising from the state of things he had described. The subject occupied, and would occupy, the most careful attention of the Government, and should they find—especially after the experience of the Circuits of the present year—that there was not a sufficient number of Judges they would not hesitate to propose to Parliament such an addition to the judicial strength as circumstances might require.

  CANAL BOATS BILL—(No. 176.)
  (The Lord President.)
  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDON THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDON, in moving that the Bill be now read the second time, said, that the Bill, which had come up from the Commons, was intended to prevent or to mitigate the evils which had been found to exist in the condition of that scattered

  529
  and shifting population which was employed in the navigation of boats and barges upon our canals and rivers. The mischiefs which arose from the dwelling of whole families in the close cabins of these boats, both in a sanitary and moral view, were very great; and the children of these families were almost entirely debarred from the advantages of that elementary education which had been provided by law for the rest of the poorer classes of children. The Bill proposed to provide against, or, at any rate, to mitigate, these evils. For this purpose it enacted that after 12 months from the passing of the Act, no canal boat should be used as a dwelling, unless registered as the Act provided. The owner, on registering his boat, was to state the number of persons of specified age and sex for whom his boat was to be used as a dwelling, and it was made penal to use the boat otherwise than according to the registration. The Local Government Board was authorized to make the necessary regulations for the registration, fixing the number of persons, for promoting cleanliness, and preventing infectious disease. The Sanitary Authority of the district within which the boat might at any time be, on being informed that an infectious disorder existed on board, was authorized to take the necessary steps for preventing the spread of the disease. For the purposes of education, the children and parents in a canal boat were deemed to be resident in the place to which the boat was registered as belonging; but, if the parent satisfied the school board of that place that the child was actually attending school, or was under efficient instruction, in accordance with the Acts in some other place, he would receive a certificate to that effect, and would then be deemed to be under the bye-laws of that place. In addition to this very reasonable provision for the education of this neglected class, there was another of great importance. Any company or association, proprietors of canal boats, or being owners or lessees of any canal, were empowered, notwithstanding any Act or Charter regulating the company, to appropriate any portion of their funds to the establishment and maintenance of a school or schools wherein the children of persons employed in canal boats might be maintained and educated, or educated only, but with this restriction—that the children should
  530
  not be maintained gratuitously, but the lodging or education might be wholly or partially gratuitous.
  Moved, " That the Bill be now read 2a." —(The Lord President.)
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

  PRISONS (IRELAND) BILL—(No. 178.)
  (The Lord President.)
  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDON, in moving that the Bill be now read the second time, explained that it was drawn, as far as the circumstances would permit, on the same lines as the English Bill, though, in some respects, it had an advantage over the English Bill. The principal difference was this—the English Bill transferred the management of prisons from the local authorities to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whereas this Bill placed them under the General Prisons Board, subject to the control of the Lord Lieutenant.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a." —(The Lord President.)
  EARL SPENCER EARL SPENCER, while protesting against the haste with which a Bill of so much importance was being pressed through their Lordships' House, and at so late a period of the Session, congratulated the Government in having been at last successful in securing the assent of Parliament to a measure of such importance. There was no subject of greater importance than the proper treatment of criminals. The subject had been many years before Parliament; the first Bill on the subject having been introduced by the late Lord Naas. Every successive Government had endeavoured to pass the measure. There was certainly great necessity for it. In some prisons there were very few prisoners, and in many the discipline was very lax. It had even been reported that criminals travelled from one county to another, that they might be subject to the more lax discipline. But while he admitted that a necessity had been shown for passing some measure dealing with the

  531
  subject, he was bound to say that he considered the present Bill too centralizing. He should have preferred seeing the English Bill coupled with a County Boards Bill for England, and this Bill for Ireland with another Bill for the improvement of the Grand Jury system in that country—for he objected to too much centralization, unless accompanied with more local self-government. With these views he might be allowed to differ with Her Majesty's Government in the mode in which the Bill was conceived. He quite admitted the necessity of a measure of the kind, though he would have preferred a Bill on the lines drawn up at different times by preceding Governments. He should liked to have seen much greater power given to the Lord Lieutenant to close unnecessary gaols, to regulate authority and discipline in the various prisons, and to remove the longer-sentenced prisoners to a central prison, as was already successfully done in Scotland, where the longer-sentenced prisoners were removed from local prisons to a central prison at Perth. He could not help thinking that a Bill might have been devised on a plan which might have carried out all the excellent objects of the present Bill, without giving such a blow to the local self-government of the country. He would be glad to have some information in reference to the Prisons Board, and whether the 10th clause would deal with the present Board; and he would suggest that the Reports to be made to Parliament and the Secretary of State should also be sent to the Grand Jurors—the local authority in Ireland. In that country there was an anomalous body called Local Inspectors, and he never could see the necessity for having such officers. He hoped that power would be taken to abolish them, as he thought that the Visiting Justices and the Government Inspectors would be amply sufficient to carry out all the provisions of the Bill. Some clauses had been added to the Bill which he considered were wholly unnecessary. He trusted that the Bill would be a success, and that the evils which existed in different parts of Ireland, under the present system, would be quite eradicated.
  THE EARL OF LIMERICKsaid, that he would have been glad if more time could have been given to consider this Bill, which was only printed and issued
  532
  yesterday. He thought that the Bill would greatly tend to economy in the management of the prisons in Ireland, and that it would promote uniformity of discipline.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accodingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

CLAIMS OF PEERAGE.

  STANDING ORDER NO. 86. AMENDED.
  THE EARL OF REDESDALE THE EARL OF REDESDALE, after pointing out the great importance of preserving all evidence, documents, and papers so that they could be produced in the cases of Claims to Peerage, moved—
  "That Standing Order No. LXXXVI. (formerly 128.) be amended by inserting after the first paragraph thereof the following words, viz. ('In all Claims of Peerage the following directions shall be observed with regard to documents delivered in at the Bar in evidence, and the examination of those documents when printed by order of the House:
  ",'1. In the case of documents in public custody within the United Kingdom, officially certified copies thereof (or officially certified extracts or excerpts of such documents, if deemed sufficient by the Committee,) shall be delivered in by a witness, who will be required to swear that he has examined them with the originals, and that the copies are correct. (With regard to documents in public custody in England, the originals, as heretofore, must be produced at the Bar by an officer of the Department having custody of the same):
  "' 2. In the case of documents in private custody, the original documents, and copies thereof, shall be delivered in by a witness, who will be required to swear that he has examined the copies with the originals, and that the copies are correct:
  "' 3. In unopposed Peerage Claims the print shall be examined against the original documents where the same have been delivered in, or, in other cases, against the officially certified copies, by a competent examiner appointed by the Crown Agent. In opposed Peerage Claims, the Crown Agent shall, if he think fit, appoint a competent examiner for the purpose of the above examination. The cost of the examination shall be borne by the Petitioner adducing the evidence, and shall be paid by him from time to time whenever the Crown Agent shall deliver to him or to his agent an account of such charge, or of any portion of the same.' ")
  Motion agreed to; Standing Order to be printed, as amended. (No. 186.)

JUDICIAL BUSINESS—APPEALS.

  STANDING ORDERS AMENDED.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR, in moving—

  533
  "That Standing Order No. III., applicable to Appeals, be amended by inserting after the word ('limited') the following words ('by-Standing Order No. V.'):
  "That Standing Order No. IV., applicable to Appeals, be amended by inserting after the word (' Respondent') in line 20. the following words (' Ordered, that in the event of such sureties or such substitute not being deemed satisfactory by the Clerk of the Parliaments, the Appellant or Appellants shall, within three weeks after the presentation of the Appeal, present a petition to the House in the matter of the said Bond or Recognizance'):
  "That Standing Order No. X., applicable to Appeals, be vacated, and the following Order be made a Standing Order in lieu thereof:
  ("'ORDERED, That the Clerk of the Parliaments shall appoint such person as he may think fit as Taxing Officer, and in all cases in which this House shall make any order for payment of costs by any party or parties in any cause without specifying the amount, the Taxing Officer may, upon the application of either party, tax and ascertain the amount thereof, and report the same to the Clerk of the Parliaments or Clerk Assistant: And it is further Ordered, that the same fees shall be demanded from and paid by the party applying for such taxation for and in respect thereof as are now or shall be fixed by any resolution of this House concerning such fees; and the Taxing Officer may, if he think fit, either add or deduct the whole or a part of such fees at the foot of his report: And the Clerk of the Parliaments or Clerk Assistant may give a certificate of such costs, expressing the amount so reported to him as aforesaid, and in his certificate regard shall be had to the sum of 200 l. where that amount has been paid in to the account of the Fee Fund of the House as directed by Standing Order No. IV.; and the amount in money certified by him in such certificate shall be the sum to be demanded and paid under or by virtue of such order as aforesaid for payment of costs,' ")
  said, that when the Bill of 1875 for the improvement of the Judicature of the country was passed complaints were made of the great expenses attendant upon Appeals to that House, and a promise was given that some alteration should be attempted. That had now been done by the experienced officer who attended to the Judicial Business of the House. These new Orders would make the scale of costs of Appeals to that House the same as in Appeals to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The reduction would be considerable and beneficial to the suitors, as well as making the costs uniform in both Courts; he, therefore, begged to move that these Orders be agreed to.
  Motion agreed to.

  COSTS OF APPEALS.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORacquainted the House that the Clerk of
  534
  the Parliaments had laid upon the Table revised Forms of Bills of Costs relating to Appeals, in accordance with the alteration of the Practice under the Appellate Jurisdiction Act of last Session.
  The same was ordered to lie on the Table.

  DESTRUCTIVE INSECTS BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill for preventing the introduction and spreading of Insects destructive to Crops—Was presented by The LORD PRESIDENT; read 1a. (No. 188.)
  House adjourned at a quarter past Six o'clock, till To-morrow, Two o'clock.