Lords Sitting of 15 March 1881

MINUTES.
SELECT COMMITTEE—Highway Acts, The Lord Hartismere added.
PUBLIC BILLS—Second Reading—Peace Preservation (Ireland) (46).
Report—Alkali, &c. Works Regulation (3349); Rivers Conservancy and Floods Prevention (44).

LONDONDERRY AND LARNE RAILWAY BILL.

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
  LORD WAVENEY, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, explained that he had taken up the measure in consequence of the statement of the Chairman of Committees the other day with reference to the undesirability of sanctioning narrow-gauge railways in Ireland. The present Bill proposed a narrow-gauge line, and their Lordships must remember that the ordinary gauge of Ireland was much wider than the ordinary gauge of England, and there was considerable difficulty in raising funds in Ireland for the prosecution of the broad-gauge lines. About four years ago a narrow-gauge line was introduced in Ireland, and that line had proved a very great success. The consequence had been that the narrow gauge had become more generally adopted throughout Ireland; but there had never been any idea of establishing a competition between the broad and narrow gauges. The present Bill proposed to continue the line sanctioned by Parliament last year, from the River Ban to Londonderry; and as the district through which the proposed railway would run was a very mountainous one, and very difficult of access, he hoped their Lordships would assent to this Bill, as, in all probability, a broad-gauge railway would prove too expensive to be carried out.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Lord Waveney.)
  THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES)said, he thought it was his duty to call the attention of the House to the object of this Bill, as he felt that he could not take upon himself the responsibility of sanctioning the introduction of two different gauges. He was of opinion that they ought to be extremely careful about allowing the introduction of two different gauges into Ireland. The line was to join one of narrow gauge 10 miles, granted on condition that, if extended, it should be
  1040
  made on the national guage, and the present Bill proposed to continue the narrow gauge for a distance of 48 miles further; and, therefore, if that was done, he considered it would be admitting the principle that narrow-gauge lines might enter into competition with the national gauge of the country. He thought, therefore, that it was his duty to call the attention of the House to the subject, as he certainly would not himself take the responsibility of doing anything which would sanction the introduction of the narrow gauge. He did not think it necessary to say much more; but he might observe that the district through which the line would pass was an uninhabited district, there only being one country village, or small town, on the map; therefore, it was impossible that the new line could have any local traffic to support it, and could only pay by through traffic in competition with the broad gauge on each side. He should not take it upon himself to move the rejection of the Bill, but would leave the matter in the hands of their Lordships.
  LORD SUDELEYsaid, the Board of Trade had, at the request of the noble Earl the Chairman of Committees, carefully considered the question, and were of opinion that there was nothing in the Bill which ought to prevent their Lordships giving it a second reading, and sending it to be considered in the usual course by a Select Committee on its merits. The noble Earl objected to the Bill on two main grounds—first, the proposed narrow gauge; second, because it proposed to repeal certain clauses of a former Act. On the first point, which was one of principle, the noble Earl thought that the Bill, if passed, would introduce the narrow-gauge system on to what he regarded as a trunk line, where a break of gauge ought not to be permitted. He contended that the narrow lines which had hitherto been sanctioned and constructed had been only short feeders in mountainous and hilly districts, where broad-gauge lines could not be made; whereas he said that this railway, joining on to the Ballymena, Portglenone, and Larne Railway, was a totally different matter, and would form nothing more nor less than a main artery from Londonderry to Larne, and was a far more considerable advance on the narrow-gauge system than Parliament had hitherto sanctioned. The

  1041
  Board of Trade, with all respect to the great authority and experience of the noble Earl the Chairman of Committees, after going fully into the whole matter, had arrived at an opposite conclusion from that which he entertained. They did not look upon the line as a trunk line, and regarded it merely as an extension of the present system. It was perfectly true that the line of 48½ miles, when joined to the 35 miles already sanctioned, would form a very important railway of 83 miles, and would join Londonderry and Larne; but it was not a trunk line in the true acceptation of the word. There was, at present, the Belfast and Northern Counties broad-gauge railway running round the coast of Londonderry and Antrim, which was the strategic great trunk line on which troops and military stores could always be carried. It was impossible that the proposed railway could enter into serious competition as a main artery, as, owing to its peculiarly slight construction, its steep ascent of 1,400 feet, with its gradient of 1 in 40, and its sharp curves, the speed must be very much restricted. The Board of Trade looked upon the proposed line as one, in all respects, carrying out the principle under which their Lordships' Resolution of 1879 considered it desirable narrow-gauge railways should be permitted. The railway was, in every sense of the word, intended to meet the local requirements of the district, to open up a route of considerable importance hitherto unsupplied with railway communication. It passed over a mountainous range, and it was evident that if it was to be constructed it must be made on the most economical system known, and could not be made on the broad gauge. It was, in fact, not a question in this district of having a narrow versus a broad gauge, but of having a railway or doing without one. The second objection raised by the noble Earl, and on which he had laid great stress, was that the Bill proposed to repeal certain clauses of the Ballymena and Portglenone Act of 1879. This was really a question affecting the merits of the Bill, upon which he did not propose to enter. It was full of intricate and contentious matter, which both sides viewed in a different light; it was impossible to fairly discuss it in the House, and it could only be settled by hearing both sides before a Select Committee.
  1042
  The Board of Trade expressed no opinion on the merits of the Bill, or as to how it affected neighbouring railways; but merely expressed their approval of the principle of a narrow-gauge extension. He hoped their Lordships would pass the second reading.
  EARL CAIRNSpointed out that, according to the law regulating railroads in Ireland, the standard gauge was 5 feet 3 inches. This rule had only been relaxed in the case of certain short lines calculated to lead to the extension of the mineral resources of the country. There were already two lines between Belfast and Londonderry, and in their case the law requiring a gauge of 5 feet 3 inches had been complied with. If the Bill passed, their Lordships would virtually repeal this general law in the interest of parties who were desirous of competing with lines laid down in accordance with the requirements of the law.
  EARL SPENCERwas of opinion that it was very desirable in Ireland to encourage a healthy competition with existing lines, and, with that end in view, to allow a narrow gauge in cases where the standard gauge was impossible, in consequence of the great expense which it would involve. In the district to which the Bill referred, a broad gauge of the usual standard could not be made, the character of the country being such that the expense of making a gauge of that kind would be enormous. He trusted their Lordships would agree to allow the Bill to go to a Select Committee.
  On question, agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly.

HIS IMPERIAL MAJESTY THE EMPEROR OF ALL THE RUSSIAS.

  ADDRESS TO HER MAJESTY.
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, on Sunday last a report of one of those fearful crimes, crimes which are not only dangerous to society, not only dangerous to the cause of order, but most dangerous to the cause of liberty, reached this country. After many abortive attempts on the life of the Emperor Alexander II., success has at last attended the assassins, chiefly owing, as it seems, to the generous and courageous impulses of the illustrious victim. Alexander II. succeeded to the Throne in 1855, at a moment of such difficulties

  1043
  as shattered the strong physical and mental powers of his Predecessor. He had the moral courage, notwithstanding the pride of a Military Monarchy, to put an end, in the interest of his subjects, to a war which had not been successful. The master of innumerable soldiers, a judicious and a kind-hearted man, those who knew him best are convinced that he remained to the end of his life desirous of peace, although he was sometimes overborne by the public opinion of his people, by the not unnatural ambition of his Army, and by the force of circumstances. My Lords, this is hardly the place or the time to discuss either the success or failure of the internal measures of a foreign Government; but I think that it is impossible not to respect a reign which has extended over more than a quarter of a century, which began with an almost general amnesty, in which during its continuance attempts were made to entirely re-model the civil administration of the country, to purify the Courts of Justice, and to establish and greatly extend the local self-government of the country in substitution for centralization, to entirely reform the Land Laws of an enormous Empire, cover the Empire with a network of railways, to promote education, to secure the freedom of the Press, and, above all, to free 23,000,000 of agrarian slaves and restore to them their full legal rights. It is hard that one who had done so much, and attempted more for the good of his country, should be the victim of an outrage which has filled with indignation all civilized countries. Messages of condolence by Sovereigns, by Governments, by Parliaments of States, both in Europe and beyond the Atlantic, have been sent. There may be in this country a difference of opinion as to the exact political relation that ought to exist between Russia and ourselves; but there is absolutely no difference of opinion as to the indignation and detestation with which the people here view a crime like this, and as to their deep sympathy with the people of Russia, who have in such an untoward manner lost their Sovereign. My Lords, I may mention that Her Majesty has already expressed personally her sentiments of grief and sorrow for what has passed—the untimely death of one with whom she was not only related, but also connected by the marriage of two of her children; and Her Majesty has given the Government
  1044
  orders to convey those sentiments in a still more formal way. I feel perfectly certain that your Lordships are desirous that we should, in the name of England, Scotland, and Ireland, record in the most solemn manner our participation in similar sentiments, and that your desire is that such sentiments should be conveyed to the Emperor and people of Russia.
  Moved, That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty to convey to Her Majesty the expression of the indignation and deep concern with which this House has learned the assassination of Her Majesty's relative and ally His Imperial Majesty the Emperor of All the Russias, and to pray Her Majesty that she will be graciously pleased to express to His Majesty the present Emperor, on the part of this House, their abhorrence of the crime, and their sympathy with the Imperial family of Russia and with the Government and people of that country.—(The Earl Granville.)
  THE EARL OF BEACONSFIELD: My Lords, I am sure your Lordships will express with earnestness your respectful sympathy with Her Majesty the Queen in the affliction which has fallen so unexpectedly upon her. The relations between the Queen of this country and the Emperor Alexander II.—the most beneficent Prince that ever filled the Throne of Russia—were of a peculiar nature; they cannot rank among the ordinary ones which exist between Sovereigns. Between Her Majesty and the Emperor there existed ties of intimate and lifelong friendship strengthened by domestic relations of great felicity and satisfaction. This friendship, although it had to endure, by the ordinance of Providence, great trials, was one which, on more than one occasion, was exercised in a beneficial manner by both Sovereigns for the welfare of the two countries. The horrible murder of a Prince and an ally, of a connection so near and dear, must have been the cause of much agitation to Her Majesty. It has disturbed the feelings of all Europe—Europe which, as one nation, is alarmed and indignant. But of all countries of Europe, I know none—not even Russia itself—that can have heard of this catastrophe with greater horror and greater sympathy than our own. The Emperor of Russia had one daughter, to whom he was passionately attached, and who returned to him an adoration quite equal to his own. That daughter is a Princess of England. It was yesterday, in high festivities of Court, we beheld with pride and grati-

  1045
  fication the brightness of her intelligence, the naturalness of her demeanour. My Lords, her woe must be very great. My Lords, I know all your Lordships will feel that in a case like this consolation is vain. But though solace may be impossible, sympathy will have a voice; and I cannot but believe that when it is now offered to our Sovereign and her suffering child, it will be appreciated, coming, as it does, from this illustrious and ancient House.
  On question, agreed to, nemine dissentiente.
  Ordered, That the said Address be presented to Her Majesty by the Lords with White Staves.

HIS IMPERIAL MAJESTY THE EMPEROR OF ALL THE RUSSIAS.

  MESSAGE OF CONDOLENCE TO H.R.I.H. THE DUCHESS OF EDINBURGH.
  EARL GRANVILLE: I have now the honour to ask your Lordships to agree to a Message of Condolence to Her Imperial and Royal Highness the Duchess of Edinburgh, on the great loss she has sustained by the assassination of her father, the Emperor of All the Russias. The noble Earl has just alluded in feeling and touching terms to the festivities which he said appeared to have been almost but yesterday. Yet it was seven years since that marriage took place; and when the Emperor of Russia confided his only daughter to an English Prince, he said—"It is for her happiness; but the brightness of my life is gone." During those seven years political circumstances have sometimes made the position of a Russian Princess in this country one of some delicacy. During that time no act has been done or word spoken by the illustrious lady which could diminish the affection for her of the Queen and the Royal Family, or the respect of the people of her adopted country. The Duke of Edinburgh stated to me last Sunday that on the very morning of that day the Duchess of Edinburgh and her brother congratulated each other on the greater sense of security which reigned in their father's home. In the afternoon of that day the fatal news arrived. I doubt whether this House has ever voted with more sincerity a vote of deep sympathy than they will do that which it is now my duty to propose.
  Moved to resolve, That this House do condole with Her Royal and Imperial Highness the Duchess of Edinburgh, Grand Duchess of Russia, on the heavy loss which she has sustained in the death, under circumstances of so painful a character, of His imperial Majesty the Emperor of All the Russias.—(The Earl Granville.)
  THE EARL OF BEACONSFIELDseconded the Motion.
  On question, agreed to, nemine dissentiente.
  Ordered, That a message of condolence be sent to Her Royal and Imperial Highness the Duchess of Edinburgh, Grand Duchess of Russia; and that the Duke of Richmond and the Duke of Bedford do attend Her Royal and Imperial Highness with the said message.

PEACE PRESERVATION (IRELAND) BILL.—(No. 46.)
(The Lord President.)
PEACE PRESERVATION (IRELAND) BILL.—(No. 46.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
  EARL SPENCER, in rising to move that the Bill be now read a second time, said: My Lords, I must remind your Lordships that it is only a short time ago since I addressed you on another Bill respecting the maintenance of the peace of Ireland. It is therefore not my intention, nor would it be your wish, that I should enter again into the condition of that country. The Bill that I am now asking you to pass is really only a second part of the measure which your Lordships passed nearly a fortnight ago. I then stated the reasons why it was the painful task for the Government to ask you to pass so extreme a measure for Ireland. Those reasons apply to the present Bill, as they applied to the former. I do not wish, for one moment, to convey to you that the present is a Bill of such importance to the restoration of peace in Ireland as the other. There have been occasions when the state of peace in Ireland has been disturbed very nearly as much, if not quite as much, as it has been disturbed during the last few months, When there was a measure in Ireland relating to the carrying of arms; but I may venture to say that there has never been an Act so stringent as the first Act which your Lordships have passed—there has never been an Act of that force in Ireland without peace and order being restored; but there is this difference between the two measures—the measure which you recently passed

  1047
  only operates for a year or a year and a-half; but this measure is to be of a more lasting character, although it is only of a temporary character also; but it continues in force for five years, instead of a year and a- half, and that is a most important difference. I need not refer at length to the outrages that I thought it necessary to bring before you the other night to show the condition of that country. These outrages are of various kinds; but they all show that the people of Ireland, at this moment, in their excitable condition, are not fit to be intrusted with the possession of arms, which they now have. Your Lordships will remember how fearful the use of arms has been. We have not only the use of revolvers, which have been imported so much lately into this country—and I confess I would like to see some Act, not only in Ireland, but in Great Britain, regulating the possession of this most dangerous weapon—but also frequent evidence of the use of firearms by parties of various size which commit outrages and intimidate well-disposed people. Besides the outrages, it is only necessary to refer to some of the speeches that have been made lately, during the last few months, to show what the possession of arms may lead to. There are many speeches which have been delivered referring to 100,000 men with rifles slung on their shoulders in America conspiring with success, and the Irish people are invited to follow their example. There are also speeches in which reference is made to the use of revolvers. "Pills" are recommended to be used, and we all know what they mean; but even stronger indications and more direct incitements to the use of dynamite have been made. I shall not detain your Lordships with any further description of the reason why this Bill is brought before the House. The measure is almost identical with the measure which was in force up to the beginning of last year. There are certain variations in the measure; but the provisions in it are nearly the same as those passed in 1875. The Lord Lieutenant will have power to proclaim certain districts, and upon that proclamation he will be empowered to make certain regulations with regard to the holding and carrying of arms and ammunition. And now, my Lords, the principal differences that have been introduced are—a summary jurisdiction and punish-
  1048
  ment of three months, instead of a reference to the Quarter Sessions or Judges in Assizes, who formerly might have given a longer sentence. With regard to carrying of arms, there is also a power given to the Lord Lieutenant to prohibit the importation of arms. We thought this was desirable, for in many cases in previous Acts it was found necessary to proclaim a single port or a city. We propose, however, to give the Lord Lieutenant power to regulate the importation of arms without specially proclaiming every port. There is a provision enabling the Lord Lieutenant to give the value of the arms that are sent in. That was introduced in "another place," and it is thought that it is a just thing to do, and also that it will encourage the peaceable delivery of arms throughout Ireland. These are the chief matters which are introduced in this Bill. I was nearly forgetting one most important one, and that is the provision relating to dynamite. I have referred to the incitement made in speeches for the use of this most dangerous explosive; and we thought it was desirable to clear up any ambiguity that might exist as to whether previous Acts really included dynamite. That is made clear in the Act, and I think your Lordships will agree it is a most important matter. I should like to point out to your Lordships a matter which is, I think, encouraging to the application of these Acts in Ireland. It would be premature to say how far these Acts will restore peace and tranquillity in the country; but I think I am entitled to give you some information which shows that though the first Act has only been in force a fortnight, there has been a considerable improvement with regard to the commission of crime in Ireland. So soon as the people of Ireland were aware that the Government were determined, the outrages began to decrease. I have here a Return of the months of December last year, and January and February of this year, which are satisfactory evidence of the decrease already. In December last year the total of agrarian crime was 867; that was made up of 432 threatening letters, and the remainder of other kinds of crime. In January the total was 439, of that number 251 being threatening letters, and 188 other kinds. In February the total diminished to 170, 80 being threatening letters, and 90 other crimes. That is to say, that the crime of an agrarian nature

  1049
  has diminished by one-half in January over December, and again in February over January by another half. That is a very satisfactory matter. I should now like to say one or two words with regard to the lesson which I think the Irish people may learn. Parliament has now been discussing for more than nine weeks those matters connected with the tranquillity of that country; and I think that the Irish people were misled by the speeches made last autumn as to the power of those who led the agitation. Threats were made by the leaders of that party that the Parliament of the United Kingdom would never pass these measures which were necessary for restoring order. I find these were the words of one of their leaders. In October last year I find reported in The Irish Times that Mr. Parnell said—
  "They cannot suspend the Habeas Corpus Act without an Act of Parliament, they cannot pass a Coercion Act without an Act of Parliament, and so long as we are able to stand in Parliament I will undertake to say they will pass neither one nor the other."
  Well, but both these measures have been passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom; and yet Mr. Parnell, and those who support him, remain Members of Parliament. I think the Irish people ought to learn that when the Parliament of this country are determined to carry through any measure necessary for the peace and tranquillity of the country, they will do so, and that they are a powerful body, and that those who merely boast of their power in local meetings are weak, and cannot carry through the most simple motion. I shall not detain your Lordships any more. I sincerely trust that this measure will complete the necessary work of restoring peace and tranquillity in Ireland. It will, I believe, coerce only the few, and restore practical liberty to the many. I sincerely trust that the well-disposed people of Ireland, who, I believe, are very much more numerous than people suppose, instead of remaining in fear at home, will now have confidence restored, and that the terror which has reigned during the last few months will be destroyed.
  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 on Thursday next.

ALKALI, &c. WORKS REGULATION BILL.—(Nos. 29, 33.)
(The Marquess of Huntly.)
ALKALI, &c. WORKS REGULATION BILL.—(Nos. 29, 33.)

  REPORT OF AMENDMENTS.
  Amendments reported (according to Order).
  VISCOUNT MIDLETONproposed an Amendment in Clause 9, with the view of adding to the Bill a second Schedule, in which should be included various works which the Commission had recommended should be subjected to inspection. His belief was that two or three additional Inspectors would be sufficient to carry out that Schedule throughout the United Kingdom. The expense would be about £2,000 a-year, and the public benefit that would accrue from such a system of inspection would, he was convinced, be more than commensurate with its cost. If, however, the Government still intended to oppose the insertion of the second Schedule, which was really the third part of the Bill of last year, as recommended by the Commissioners, he did not see that he had much chance of inducing them to carry any measure which contained those provisions through the House of Commons.
  Amendment moved,
  In Clause 9, page 4, line 8, after ("carried on") insert ("and in any works mentioned in the second schedule to this Act")
  At the end of the Bill insert as a new schedule:—

  SCHEDULE II.
  "(1.) Salt works, that is to say, works in which the extraction of salt from brine is carried on;
  "(2.) Arsenic works, that is to say, any works in which arsenic or any of its oxides or sulphides are prepared;
  "(3.) Copper works, that is to say, any work in which ores are treated for the purpose of extracting copper, and which is not subject to the provisions of the Alkali Acts, 1863 and 1874, including any works in which the manufacture of sulphuric acid is carried on in conjunction with copper works;
  "(4.) Galvanising works and tin-plate works, that is to say, any works in which iron is treated with acid previous to receiving a coating of tin or zinc;
  "(5.) The following description of glass works, that is to say, glass works in which common salt or sulphate of soda is used in the manufacture of glass;
  "(6.) Lead works, that is to say, any works in which are contained lead, or any material or product containing lead, is treated for the purpose of the extraction of lead;
  "(7.) Nickel works, that is to say, any works in which nickel ore is treated for the purpose of the extraction of nickel;
  "(8.) Speller works, that is to say, any works in which ore is treated for the purpose of the extraction of zinc;
  "(9.) Salt glazing potteries, that is to say, any works in which earthenware or pottery is made, and in which the salt glazing process is carried on;
  "(10.) Tar dye works, that is to say, any works in which the manufacture of colouring matter from tar or substances derived from tar is carried on;
  "(11.) Tar distillery works, that is to say, any works in which tar is distilled or its products treated so as to give off noxious or offensive vapours;
  "(12.) Any other works in which are conducted processes giving off acid of sulphur, nitrogen, or chlorine."—(The Viscount Midleton.)
  THE MARQUESS OF HUNTLYcould not assent to the proposal of the noble Viscount, who, he thought, could hardly be aware of the large number of copper, glass, lead, and other works scattered throughout the country, which he wished to place under inspection. The expense and the labour which that would entail would be great. In the first place, it would require several additional Inspectors, for whose appointment there was no provision in the Bill. The measure went a long way in dealing with a most important subject; but at present there was no machinery to carry out the object of the noble Viscount.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYconcurred in the opinion that the proposal of his noble Friend was too large. If it had been reduced within more moderate compass a case might have been made out for extending the provisions of the Bill in some degree. It was easy to pass the Bill through that House; but if they weighted it too heavily, and arrayed against it too large an army of opponents "elsewhere," there was a danger that a Bill which was sadly wanted would not become law. He, therefore, advised his noble Friend to acquiesce in the course suggested by the Government.
  VISCOUNT MIDLETONwould not press his Amendment to a division; but would throw on the Government the responsibility of passing a most imperfect measure on a matter urgently requiring legislation.
  Amendment negatived.
  Amendments made; and Bill to be read 3a on Thursday next, and to be printed as amended. (No. 49.)

RIVERS CONSERVANCY AND FLOODS PREVENTION BILL.—(No. 44.)
(The Lord President.)
RIVERS CONSERVANCY AND FLOODS PREVENTION BILL.—(No. 44.)

  REPORT OF AMENDMENTS.
  EARL SPENCER EARL SPENCER moved, in Clause 6, page line 15, after ("rate") insert—
  ("Also if it appears to be required by the special circumstances of the case for enabling the conservancy board to execute outfall works beyond the limits of their district.")
  The noble Earl pointed out that the Amendment might be necessary to enable the Boards to improve outfalls, without which improvement upland works might be useless.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Amendments made; and Bill to be read 3a on Thursday next.
  House adjourned at Seven o'clock, to Thursday next, half past Ten o'clock.