Lords Sitting of 23 August 1881

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Irish Church Act Amendment (227).
Second Reading—Regulation of the Forces (221); India Office Auditor (Superannuation) * (222); Newspapers (Law of Libel) (223); Sale of Intoxicating Liquors on Sunday (Wales) (224).
Committee—Report—Expiring Laws Continuance.
Third Reading—Pollen Fishing (Ireland) * (218), and passed.

REPRESENTATIVE PEER FOR IRELAND.
Writs and Returns electing the Earl of Milltown a Representative Peer for Ireland in the room of the late Earl of Wicklow, deceased, with the Certificate of the Clerk of the Crown in Ireland annexed thereto: Delivered (on oath), and Certificate read.
REGULATION OF THE FORCES BILL.
(The Earl of Morley.)
REGULATION OF THE FORCES BILL.

  (NO. 221.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  THE EARL OF MORLEY, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, that it was principally a measure of details for the amendment and improvement of the present law, and he would be happy to give any explanation which might be required.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Earl of Morley.)
  LORD CHELMSFORDcomplained of the Bill being brought up at such a late period of the Session, but was glad to see that in some respects the present law would be amended. He regarded Clause 22—dealing with courts martial—with the greatest satisfaction, believing that it would largely tend to maintain and improve discipline in the Army. Their Lordships would be surprised, he was sure, if they knew the number of

  717
  courts martial whose proceedings had been quashed, not on account of any illegality, but merely for some irregularity. He would be glad to see the principle of Clause 22 applied more generally throughout the measure.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

NEWSPAPERS (LAW OF LIBEL) BILL.
(The Lord Waveney.)
NEWSPAPERS (LAW OF LIBEL) BILL.

  (NO. 223.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  LORD WAVENEY, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, it was based on the Reports of two Select Committees, and had been fully discussed, and virtually passed unanimously in "another place." The noble Lord proceeded briefly to explain the existing law with regard to libels in newspapers, and the manner in which it was proposed to remedy the defects therein. The Bill was introduced at a very early period of the Session; but the delay arose in consequence of the known inability of private Members in the other House to press forward measures they had brought in. The provisions of the measure had been carefully considered by the Law Officers of the Crown, and were approved of by them. The Bill, whilst it would protect private individuals from injury, would afford security to newspaper proprietors in the matter of the publication of the proceedings of public meetings. He hoped it would receive a second reading at their Lordships' hands.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Lord Waveney.)
  LORD DENMANapproved of the check which the Bill proposed to place upon criminal prosecutions for libel. The only objection he had to the Bill was that, to entitle a newspaper proprietor to protection, it was necessary that the report should be accurate, and he maintained that it was impossible for a perfectly accurate report to be furnished on all occasions. As an instance, he would refer to a passage in Mr. Gladstone's eulogium upon the Earl of Beaconsfield in the House of Commons,
  718
  which none of the newspapers had given correctly. He believed the Bill was in the right direction, and thought that Clauses 2 and 4 were even too hard on newspaper proprietors.
  THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES)said, that the House was giving a second reading to a Bill of which they knew nothing, for although he came down to the House at 3 o'clock he could not obtain a copy of the Bill until 10 minutes to 5 o'clock, and therefore there had been no time to properly consider the provisions of the measure, which was an extremely important one, especially in one respect where it made one man responsible for the act of another, though the man proceeded against might not have spoken the words imputed to him. The editor of a newspaper in which a libel appeared would be irresponsible provided the report of the speech containing the libel was accurate and was published without malice, but the person who made the speech was made liable to an action for damages; and there might be other objectionable provisions in the Bill. Sending up such a Bill at this late period of the Session was not a proper way of treating that House. No doubt, there had been an unfortunate interruption to Business in the other House, and he was sorry for it; but that must not be allowed to interfere with the responsibility of that House in passing Bills of such great importance. He was always opposed to hasty legislation, and he never knew a stronger case than this for more time to be given for consideration—the more so as there was not a single Law Lord present to give an opinion upon the Bill. The Bill might be read a second time, but he hoped that the Government would not press it through, the further stages.
  THE EARL OF N0RTHBROOKsaid, he hoped that the House would not follow the course proposed by the noble Earl. The Bill would not, in fact, make any alteration in the law with regard to the liability of persons speaking at public meetings. It had received the approval of the Law Officers of the Crown, of at least one of the Law Officers of the Party to which the noble Earl belonged, and of his noble and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor, who was not then present, and he hoped it would be proceeded with.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

SALE OF INTOXICATING LIQUORS ON SUNDAY (WALES) BILL.
(The Lord Aberdare.)
SALE OF INTOXICATING LIQUORS ON SUNDAY (WALES) BILL.

  (NO. 224.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  LORD ABERDARE, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, that some objection might be raised by their Lordships to the late period at which the Bill had been introduced for the consideration of their Lordships. He would, however, point out that however late the period of the Session might be it would be found that three years ago a similar Bill with regard to Ireland was brought in on the 12th of August, read a first time on the 13th, and Parliament rose on the 16th of August. The present Bill was brought into the other House of Parliament on the 7th of January, was read a second time on the 4th of May, and on the division which took place on the occasion of the second reading 163 Members voted for the second reading and 17 against. The measure had been hung up in the other House for the past two months, and that, he thought, was a sufficient argument for his now moving the second reading. The Irish people had wished for a similar measure, and he contended that the same measure of justice should now be extended to the Welsh people. The inhabitants of Wales were anxious for the measure now proposed, which was similar to that in existence in Scotland and in Ireland—namely, that the vending of intoxicating liquors should be prohibited on Sundays. When he said prohibited, he meant with the same exceptions—namely, the bonâ fide traveller, the lodger, and the railway traveller. What he desired to show their Lordships was that there was a genuine desire on the part of the Welsh people—an almost universal desire, he might say—that the proposed change should be effected. With respect to Wales, nothing was more clear than that the opinion was in favour of an alteration of the law. In 1878–9 a canvass on the subject was taken, and the results showed that 75,510 householders in North Wales were in favour of Sunday closing,
  720
  whilst only 989 were against it. That decision might be considered unanimous. In a similar canvass taken in South Wales there was no lack of indication that South Wales desired similar legislation. In the parish of Aberdare he found that the number of householders whoso opinion was taken resulted in 4,659 being in favour of the closing movement, and only 210 against it. The population there was mainly composed of colliers, and it was therefore obvious that the feeling of the labouring classes on this question as to drink was decidedly in favour of Sunday closing. Such being the case, there existed, he thought, a sufficient justification for the passing of the measure by their Lordships. The only question, however, which their Lordships had to consider was whether the Principality of Wales was sufficiently distinct from England as to entitle it to lay claim to having separate and distinct legislation. Since the introduction of similar Bills relating to Scotland and Ireland, the Report of the Inland Revenue Commissioners with regard to Scotland and Ireland showed that they had brought about a reduction in the consumption of spirits which amounted to about £5,000,000; so that there had been a diminution of 15 per cent in drinking in Scotland and Ireland. Wales, therefore, he thought, might be considered to have a right to separate and distinct legislation. He was not urging forward the measure on the ground of mere drunkenness on Sundays as compared with other days. There was, however, the amplest evidence that on Saturdays there was a far greater amount of drunkenness than on other days in the week. The next most drunken day in the week was Monday, and there could be no possible doubt that continual drinking did go on from Saturday through Sunday, and so on until and throughout Monday. Now, a measure which broke through this habit was of itself a measure of great importance. Quite apart from the religious aspect of the question, it was of great importance that the day upon which the working man received his wages should be separated from the Monday by the intervening Sabbath, and thereby interrupt a course of continued intoxication. Such being the case, he would ask their Lordships to read the Bill a second time.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Lord Aberdare.)
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

EXPIRING LAWS CONTINUANCE BILL.
(The Earl of Rosebery.)
EXPIRING LAWS CONTINUANCE BILL.

  COMMITTEE.
  House in Committee (according to order).
  LORD DENMAN LORD DENMAN moved the insertion of a clause extending the franchise to women ratepayers, by which, as he said, an act of justice would be done to a large and increasing and intelligent class of Her Majesty's subjects.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, that though the question of women's suffrage and their electoral qualifications was an interesting one, it would hardly find a proper place in an Expiring Laws Continuance Bill. He suggested that the noble Lord could best deal with the subject in a distinct manner on another occasion.
  Clause negatived.
  Bill reported without amendment; and to be read 3a To-morrow.
  House adjourned at Six o'clock, till To-morrow, Three o'clock.