Lords Sitting of 9 July 1878

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading— Charitable Trusts* (150); Commutation of Tithes* (151).
Second Reading—Innkeepers (136).
Committee—Public Health (Ireland) (133).
Committee—Report—Statute Law Revision* (114); Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Ireland), 1877, Amendment* (139).
Third Reading—Parliamentary and Municipal Registration (Consolidated)* (125); Telegraphs* (141); Metropolis Management and Building Acts Amendment* (145); Local Government Provisional Orders (A bergavenny Union, &c.)* (116); General Police and Improvement (Scotland) Act, 1862, Amendment* (124), and passed.

THE EASTERN QUESTION—THE CON VENTION WITH TURKEY—QUESTIONS.
EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he would like to ask the noble Duke the Lord President of the Council, Whether the Convention executed between this country and Turkey had been communicated to the other Powers, either collectively or separately?
THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONreplied, that the Government had not yet received any official report of the Convention having been formally communicated to the other Powers at Berlin.
EARL GRANVILLEasked, if the noble Duke could state whether it had been unofficially communicated?
THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONsaid, that at that moment he could not charge his memory upon the point. He was not prepared to answer the Question.

PUBLIC HEALTH (IRELAND) BILL.
(The Lord President.)

(NO. 133.) COMMITTEE.
House in Committee (according to Order).
Clauses 1 to 37 agreed to.
Clause 38.
VISCOUNT POWERSCOURT, in moving the addition to the clause of words providing better ventilation and supply of pure air to hospitals, and for providing recreation grounds for convalescent patients, explained, that in Dublin some of the hospitals—especially the group known as the House of Industry Hospitals—were surrounded by houses which were a great nuisance, and very detrimental to the health of the inmates of those hospitals; but it was impossible for the sanitary authorities to deal with the nuisance without some statutory power, and it was to that end that he moved this Amendment.
Amendment moved, to add, at end of clause, these words—
"or for the purposes of enlarging or re-building, or more effectually isolating and ensuring the free circulation of pure air in and around any public hospital or hospitals for the reception of cases of disease or injury, and especially of disease among the poor, and for the providing of adequate recreation grounds for the sick and injured poor while under treatment in such hospital or hospitals during the period of their convalescence from such disease or injury."
THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONregretted that he could not agree to the Amendment proposed by the noble Viscount, who, he thought, would see upon consideration that it would not be right to insert such a provision in this Bill. The noble Viscount proposed to give to the sanitary authorities power to take by compulsion land surrounding hospitals, over which those authorities had no control. The hospitals were supported by voluntary contributions. They were not, therefore, the property of the sanitary authorities, who, indeed, had nothing whatever to do with them. If the Amendment were agreed to, it might happen that a sanitary authority would acquire land round a hospital, that the hospital, becoming no longer available for the purpose for which it was originally intended, might be taken away, and that then the sanitary
1052
authority would hold land acquired by compulsion for no purpose whatever. It was quite obvious, unless the sanitary authority was also to have power over the hospitals, they must not have the power which the noble Viscount proposed to give them. They were not entitled or permitted to contribute towards the support of the hospitals, and, therefore, still less ought they to be allowed to acquire land outside them. Hence, he was compelled to oppose the Amendment.
VISCOUNT POWERSCOURTsaid, he would withdraw the Amendment.
Amendment (by leave of the Committee) withdrawn.
Amendments made: The Report thereof to be received on Thursday next.

INNKEEPERS BILL—(No. 136.)
(The Lord Henniker.)

SECOND READING.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
LORD HENNIKER, in moving that the Bill be now read the second time, said, he did not bring it forward in his official capacity, and it was not a Government measure; but it had passed through the other House of Parliament without opposition. The Attorney General had given some consideration to the matter, and allowed him to say that he did not consider the Bill, or anything in it, objectionable. The facts of the case were these—that under the existing law, as declared in a decision of the High Court of Justice in January last in the case of Mullilan v. Florence, an innkeeper or hotel-keeper might retain property which had been left by a defaulting customer, but could not sell it. For instance, if a horse were left with an innkeeper, it might cost him a great deal for its keep, and he could not recoup himself by selling it. Railway Companies were empowered by their bye-laws to act in a very different manner with property left in their charge, and even with articles found in their carriages. The object of the present Bill was simply to do an act of bare justice, and to place the law on a more satisfactory footing. The provisions of the Bill were contained in one clause, which set forth that an hotel or innkeeper should have

1053
the right to sell goods or animals left in his house or on his premises, where the owner was indebted to him; but no sale could take place until six weeks after the property had been so left—the surplus, after the debt and expenses had been met, to be paid on demand to the owner. It was also provided that no sale should take place until a description of the property, with a notice of the intended sale, had been advertised in one London and one country newspaper at least one month before the time of sale. He believed the safeguards in the Bill were ample, and he asked their Lordships to give it a second reading.
Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Friday next.

CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL [H.L.]
A Bill to amend the Charitable Trusts Act, 1853, and the Acts amending the same—Was presented by The LORD CHANCELLOR; read 1a. (No. 150.)
House adjourned at half past Five o'clock, to Thursday next, half past Ten o'clock.