Lords Sitting of 19 June 1882

MINUTES.
Sat First in Parliament—The Lord Erskine, after the death of his father.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Local Government Provisional Order (No. 11)*(162); Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (No. 5)*(153).
Second Heading— Election of Representative Peers (Ireland)*(137); Public Health (Fruit-Pickers' Lodgings)*(127); Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 3)*(122); Local Government Provisional Order (Artizans' and Labourers' Dwellings)*(121); Tramways Provisional Orders*(125); Tramways Provisional Orders (No. 2)*(126); Intermediate Education (Ireland) (138); County Courts (Ireland) (105); Somersham Rectory (116).
Second Reading—Referred to Select Committee—Bills of Sale Act (1878) Amendment (60).
Committee—Report—Elementary Education Provisional Orders Confirmation (Finchley, &c.)*(63); Pier and Harbour Provisional Orders (No. 2)*(123).
Third Reading—Pluralities Acts Amendment*(139); Places of Worship Sites Amendment*(141), and passed.
Royal Assent—Documentary Evidence [45 Vict. c. 9]; Military Manoeuvres [45 Viet. c. 10]; Public Health (Scotland) Act Amendment [45 Vict. c. 11]; Militia Storehouses [45 Vict. c. 12]; Commonable Rights [45 Vict. c. 15]; Arklow Harbour [45 Vict. c. 13]; Metropolis Management and Building Acts (Amendment) [45 Vict. c. 14]; Irish Reproductive Loan Fund Act (1874) Amendment [45 Vict. c. 16]; Local Government Provisional Order (Highways) [45 Vict. c. xxvi]; Commons Regulation Provisional Orders [45 Vict. c. xxvii]; Inclosure (Arkleside) Provisional Order [45 Vict. c. xxviii]; Inclosure (Bettws Disserth) Provisional Order [45 Vict. c. xxix]; Inclosure (Cefn Drawen) Provisional Order [45 Vict. c. xxx]; Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Order [45 Vict. c. xxxi]; Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (Ballymena, &c.) [45 Vict. c. xxxii]; Local Government Provisional Orders [45 Vict. c. xxxiii]; Local Government Provisional Orders (Poor Law) [45 Vict. c. xxxiv].

BILLS OF SALE ACT (1878) AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 60.)
(The Lord Coleridge.)

SECOND READING.
Order of the Day for the Second Beading read.
LORD COLERIDGE,in rising to more that the Bill be now read a second time, said, that the object it had in view was
1546
to do away with a great and serious evil, which was increasing yearly to a very large extent—namely, the oppression of poor and ignorant borrowers among the artizan or working classes by the lowest and most unscrupulous class of moneylenders. The latter usually obtained the power to seize at once the property and goods of the borrowers, and this power, created by Judge-made law, had been much extended by the Judges. As a rule, bills of sale had been interpreted by the Courts of this country to pass all property which came afterwards into the possession of the grantor, although it had not been made originally part of the grant in the bill of sale. That must necessarily be very hard upon honest traders; because the result was that a dishonest man who made a bill of sale and passed all his existing property to a money-lender, passed also to him goods which afterwards came to the grantor in the way of his trade, although they might not have been paid for. That operation of bills of sale was, to some extent, controlled by a section in the Bankruptcy Act of 1869, which had this effect—that all goods in the hands of a bankrupt, although he might have given a bill of sale, yet if they were in his order and disposition at the time of the bankruptcy, passed to the general body of creditors. In 1877 the number of bills of sale under £50 was 4,802 in England, and the amount secured by them was £125,597. In 1880, the number was 38,177, and the sum secured £715,000. The smaller bills of sale given to money-lenders were undoubtedly very oppressive, and the interest exacted was often outrageous. He held in his hand a copy of a bill of sale, which contained no less than 21 conditions of forfeiture. It was only with bills of sale of that kind that the measure was intended to interfere. The noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack had sent circulars to the County Court Judges and other officials, asking for their views on the proposed legislation, and, speaking generally, the answers were in favour of it. About 82 answers were received, most of which were, on the whole, in favour of the measure he was now advocating. Last year a Bill similar to the present one was introduced in the House of Commons, and referred to a Select Committee, composed of Members of high character and great authority.

1547
Among the witnesses examined before it was a money-lender, who, with singular frankness, admitted that it would be to the advantage of the poor if they were not able to borrow money on bills of sale. The measure, which had failed to pass in the House of Commons last year, in consequence of the pressure of other Business, had this year been read a third time in that House, with the unanimous approval of the Chambers of Commerce and of the persons interested in the question. Among the chief provisions of the Bill was a clause requiring that every bill of sale should, as a matter of course, be registered, and that to each a schedule must be attached, containing a clear description on its face of the property to which the document referred. Another provision was that property acquired by the grantor after the execution of the instrument should not pass under the bill of sale. By a third clause it was proposed to enact that every bill of sale must be properly attested, and must bear on its face proof that a competent person had explained its contents to the grantor. By another provision, bills of sale for sums under £50 were declared absolutely void. He hoped their Lordships, by passing this Bill, would prevent the granting of such bills of sale as he held in his hand, the conditions of which were oppressive, and the interest on which was excessive. The accommodation furnished by such bills was small, it was granted on ruinous terms, and consequently the whole of the property was often swept away. It was to distinguish such bills of sale as those from the bonâ fide ones granted in mercantile transactions that the Bill was introduced. A good deal of evidence was laid before the Select Committee, to which this matter was referred by the other House, as to the point at which bills of sale should not be allowed, and he would recommend their Lordships to read that evidence, from which they would see that most ruinous rates of interest were charged. There had also been considerable difference of opinion in the answers to the Lord Chancellor's circular, some persons thinking that bills of sale should not be granted for less than £50, and others thinking that the minimum should be higher; but, with a single exception, the House of Commons' Committee was unanimous in fixing £50 as the amount below which no bill
1548
of sale should be granted. He would now ask their Lordships to give a second reading to the Bill.
Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Lord Coleridge.)
EARL CAIRNSsaid, he did not rise to offer any opposition to the second reading of the Bill, indeed he thought it was a measure that it would be as well to pass into law; but, at the same time, seeing how very much it touched the commerce of the country, he thought their Lordships would do well to give the details of the measure a good deal of consideration before they determined to do so. If the Bill was not to go before a Select Committee, it would be all the more necessary. He had received representations from various parts of the country, which satisfied him that there was much difference of opinion with regard to the Bill. He did not see on what principle it was, if a man was engaged in trade, that they should say—"You shall not borrow money on a bill of sale under £50, but you may on a bill above that amount." If there was any advantage at all in giving bills of sale, he could not see why the poor man should be prohibited from availing himself of the advantage, though he quite admitted that it was, no doubt, hard when a man found that articles which he had supplied on credit, perhaps, to a very considerable value, were swept away by means of a bill of sale; but as those instruments were registered documents, people in trade could protect themselves. He would suggest that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee.
LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYasked whether there was no innovation in that part of the Bill which referred to giving a bill of sale on growing crops, and which seemed like an advertisement for money-lenders? He also thought growing crops required some definition. Would bills of sale date from the time seed was put into the ground, or from the time when it came up?
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he was glad no one was going to oppose the second reading of the Bill; but he must express his concurrence in the opinion of his noble and learned Friend opposite (Earl Cairns), that the details of the Bill would require their Lordships' careful consideration. If the Bill could be referred to a Select Committee, as his noble

1549
and learned Friend opposite had suggested, it might be advantageous for that purpose; but if the convenience of their Lordships would not admit of a Select Committee, it was all the more desirable that the Bill should be carefully considered in that House. With respect to the surprising increase alleged to have taken place in the number of bills of sale, particularly for small amounts, since the passing of the Act of 1878, there was, he thought, a simple explanation, which would prevent the inference being drawn which would attribute that increase to the Act of 1878. The law formerly was that a bill of sale must be registered within, he thought, 21 days, and it would be in force in the meantime. But there was nothing whatever to prevent the bill of sale from being re-granted from time to time before the 21 days had expired; and the consequence was, under the operation of that law, that a bill of sale might never be put upon the register at all. It was found, therefore, that numbers of bills of sale were renewed before the expiration of the 21 days, they being, in the meantime, perfectly valid. The Act of 1878, however, provided, very stringently, that a bill of sale must be registered within seven days, and that, if not registered within that time, no renewal of it should be valid. The consequence was that all, or almost all, the bills of sale actually granted were forced upon the register. Therefore, it was not that the Act of 1878 called a number of bills of sale into existence, but that, all being obliged to be registered, the true number and extent of the transactions was disclosed. He doubted whether the Act of 1878 gave any stimulus to that class of transactions. As for the proposal to abolish all bills of sale under £50, he admitted that, if practicable, it was desirable that the State should protect poor persons against the extortions of usurers; but it was a strong measure to compel such persons to go into bankruptcy, or to break up their business, instead of dealing with their property for the purpose of raising money. The evidence to which the noble and learned Lord (Lord Coleridge) had referred might probably justify the conclusions which he had drawn from it; but the provisions of the Bill unquestionably required very careful consideration. For instance, there was a clause enumerating several acts, all depending on the
1550
grantor of the bill of sale, which if the grantor did not do, the grantee could not take possession. Another clause dealt with the contingency of bankruptcy within 12 months after the granting of a bill of sale, and virtually provided that, unless, within that period, the grantee took possession, he must lose the benefit of his security, although, under the former clause, he could not take possession, except in certain circumstances which, as far as he was concerned, might never occur. The restrictions, indeed, were so numerous as to leave him (the Lord Chancellor) to doubt whether any persons would be willing to lend either a great or a small sum on such terms. He did not say that there were not proper and useful provisions in the Bill; but he thought, without expressing a final opinion on the subject, that the clauses he had mentioned might profitably be examined by a Select Committee.
LORD COLERIDGEsaid, he was quite willing, if it was the general wish of their Lordships, that the course recommended by the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack should be adopted.
Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and referred to a Select Committee.

EGYPT—THE SUEZ CANAL.

  OBSERVATIONS. QUESTION.
  LORD LAMINGTON,in rising to call the attention of the House to the balance sheet of the Suez Canal, said, that he was anxious not to say one word that might embarrass the Government in the present serious state of Egyptian affairs; but the shareholders of the Suez Canal had recently held a meeting in Paris, and the Report submitted to them was so remarkable that it seemed to him desirable to bring it under the notice of their Lordships and the country, in order that the Government should state what amount of control they exercised over the Canal. As the House knew, the Canal was opened in 1869. In the following year 490 ships passed through it, with a gross tonnage of 486,000 tons. In l879, 1,477 ships passed through, of a tonnage of 3,236,000 tons; in 18a0, 2,026, of a tonnage of 4,344,000; in 1881, 2,727, with a tonnage of 5,794,000. The result of all this was that the net profit, after deducting 5 per cent for the reserve

  1551
  fund, amounted to about 14 or 15 per cent. The Report went on to say that last year's figures showed an increase on those of 1880 of 34 per cent in the number of vessels and the tonnage, and of 28¾ per cent. in the amount of the receipts, and he (Lord Lamington) supposed that altogether such a balance-sheet of such an undertaking was never presented before. Seven new permanent services for the Canal were inaugurated last year—the British India, the German, the Thames and Mersey, a French one to Mauritius and Reunion, a Dutch one to Java, an English one for the same destination, and a Chinese line, the China Merchants' Steam Navigation Company. The vessels bound direct for Australia numbered 98, as against 51 in the year 1880. This steady increase had been maintained in spite of the fact that freights to India and the East had been so low as hardly to yield the barest profit to the shippers. The Canal, in fact, tended more and more, year by year, to become the sole International highway between the East and the West, as well as between Europe and Australasia. Now, as 78 or 79 per cent of the total number of ships passing through the Canal in 1881 carried the British flag, that fact was sufficient to show the enormous importance of the Canal to the trade of Great Britain. There was, however, another reason which made it specially necessary at the present moment to draw the attention of the Government to this part of the Egyptian question, and it was this—half the Canal, the part connecting I smailia with Port Said, depended for its water supply on the freshwater canal which passed Ismailia, turned southward, and ended at Suez. This supply was both precarious and insufficient, and if it were interrupted would render Port Said uninhabitable, and would necessitate the abandonment of many stations on the Canal. That was exceedingly important, especially as he found that the officials of the water company that supplied Alexandria had given notice of the suspension of their works in consequence of the state of the country. It thus appeared that the water supply of Alexandria might be cut off at any moment, from which the most serious consequences must follow, to say nothing of the fact that the proposed new fresh-water canal, which, according to the Report, had become very desir-
  1552
  able, and as to which measures had been taken for its construction, had now been suspended owing to the troubled state of the country. He had taken upon himself to point out, 15 years ago, that the Suez Canal would eventually become the high road between England and India, where we had 250,000,000 subjects, and the prediction had been fulfilled. Therefore, it was impossible to exaggerate the importance of this question, as regarded our interests in it; and in order to show what others thought of it, he would ask their Lordships' attention to a despatch of M. Barthelemy St. Hilaire, who said that England furnished nearly all the custom, and that the Canal was the indispensable route which placed her in communication with that incomparable Colony which she possessed in India. It was said that there was to be a European Conference, and he (Lord Lamington) believed that the assembling hereafter of all the Powers at a Conference, with Turkey sending her Representative, would be attended with beneficial results; but to hold one at the present moment would be like building a lifeboat whilst the vessel was hurrying to destruction, or constructing a fire-escape when the building was in flames. With or without allies we were bound to protect our interests, independent of any other country. The result, so far, of our interference seemed to be that all the Powers were afraid of each other. Prance was afraid of the Sultan, England would not act without France, Italy would not act without the other Powers—and, in fact, the only person who was not afraid was Arabi Pasha, who set everybody at defiance. There was no time for a Conference, because in one week the Suez Canal might be in jeopardy. He did not say there should be any interference in the internal affairs of Egypt, because he was not sure that it was within our right to do so; but trying to protect the Canal could in no way be said to be interfering with the general policy of the country at all; and when our own interests were at stake, together with the lives and property of Her Majesty's subjects, they were bound to interfere when necessary. If France had gone before us, so much the better; but, come what would, we were bound to protect the rights of our countrymen and the trade of our country. We ought to act in independence of other countries, stating

  1553
  that we did not wish to interfere with any internal arrangement. What had been done by the Government in sending ships to Alexandria without troops on board was of as much utility as—
  "A painted ship
  Upon a painted ocean,"
  and like sending a body without a soul. What the Government ought to do was to take such measures as would prove effectual in the protection of the Canal, and not in this matter to rely on France or any other Power, but to see that the interests of England, which were paramount above all others, would be duly considered and conserved. In conclusion, he would ask Her Majesty's Government whether they possessed any control over the management and maintenance of the Canal?
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, I should be the very last person to charge the noble Lord opposite (Lord Laming-ton) with introducing Questions merely with a view of embarrassing Mer Majesty's Government. The noble Lord puts Questions and discusses subjects in which he takes an interest always in the most courteous manner. I must say I can conceive no subject of greater interest than the one the noble Lord's Question is upon, none your Lordships take a deeper interest in, or to which Her Majesty's Government attach greater importance. At the same time, I must point out to my noble Friend that his Question hardly led me to anticipate the exact line he was going to take. The Notice on the Paper is—
  "To call attention to the balance sheet of the Suez Canal, and to ask Her Majesty's Government whether they possess any control over the management and maintenance of the Canal."
  The noble Lord himself gave some figures—some very striking figures, and I believe he gave them quite accurately—as to the balance-sheet of the Canal. As to the control Her Majesty's Government have over the management and maintenance of the Canal, no doubt the noble Lord knows exactly how the matter stands. We receive no share of the earnings of the Canal until 1894; but we receive from the Khedive 5 per cent upon the purchase money of our shares. We have nominated three competent men as members of the Board of Directors, who represent the British Govern-
  1554
  ment on the Board—Colonel Stokes, Sir Rivers Wilson, and Mr. Stanley. The two former gentlemen watch all financial matters, and attend every monthly meeting of the Board, and the latter is the resident director in Paris, a member of the managing committee, and sends the Government information of everything that occurs 'there. In fact, they all three report constantly to Her Majesty's Government upon all matters affecting either the financial or the general interests of this country, and I am informed that they have great influence upon the Board, and are treated with great consideration by the French directors. The noble Lord went into a much larger question, one which very properly occupies the public mind to a great extent at the present moment. I can only say as to that question that it does not escape the attention of Her Majesty's Government, and we attach absolutely the same importance that the noble Lord does to the enormous interest England possesses in the Suez Canal.

INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION (IRELAND) BILL.—(No 138.)
(The Lord O'Hagan.)

SECOND READING.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
LORD O'HAGAN,in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, its object was to alter to a large extent an existing Act of Parliament. Their Lordships would remember that in 1878 the noble and learned Earl, the then Lord Chancellor (Earl Cairns), introduced into their Lordships' House a Bill for the improvement of intermediate education in Ireland. That was a very wise, just, and impartial measure. Their Lordships accepted it unanimously, and it went through the House of Commons also with unanimity. The Act then passed was received in Ireland with uniform favour on all sides. It created great emulation, and, at the same time, it created new schools, improved the old schools, and gave a wonderful stimulus to the education of the country. The funds for carrying out the new system, which were taken from the Church Surplus Fund, proved, however, to be inadequate for the purpose, and when the Bill passed the House £1,000,000 was allocated by Vote to purposes of in-

1555
termediate education in Ireland. But that arrangement regarded only the boys of Ireland, and it was not contemplated that the girls should come within the operations of the measure at all. The change, however, was proposed in the House of Commons, and it was unanimously agreed that the Bill should apply to girls as well as boys. As was pointed out at the time, the result of the change was likely to be that the £1,000,000, although it was believed that it would be adequate for the young males, would not be adequate when the addition of the girls was made. It was stated that a difficulty would arise, and the noble and learned Earl (Earl Cairns) pledged the Government that if there should be, as anticipated, a want of additional means for this great national purpose, the question of supplying these means would be considered by the Government. The figures showing the progress of the system were remarkable, and might be of interest to their Lordships. In the year 1879—the Bill having passed in 1878—there were 3,671 boys and 979 girls under the scheme—a total of 4,630. In 1880, there were 4,693 boys and 1,477 girls—a total of 6,170; in 1881, the boys were 5,714, and the girls, 2,033—a total of 7,747. That showed a marvellous progress and a very satisfactory state of things indeed. But the result was that the Commissioners of Intermediate Education, applying themselves to the changed circumstances which were created by the addition of the girls, found that their means were not sufficient to meet the demands for result fees, exhibitions, and prizes which it was necessary to give for the purpose of carrying on the system, and in the year 1881 there came a deficit. There was consequently at that moment, he (Lord O'Hagan) was sorry to say, a considerable deficit with reference to the existing operations of the system, and it would be necessary for the Government to look carefully into the matter, and to fulfil, in the case of this system of intermediate education, the promise made by their Predecessors. But in the meantime, in the year 1879–80, there was a considerable surplus—a surplus of some £8,000 or £10,000; in 1881 that surplus became a deficit. The Act of Parliament provided that the Commissioners could accumulate the surplus from year to year and capitalize it; but it deprived
1556
them of the power of applying the surplus that might be accumulated one year to supplying a deficit of another year. The object of the present Bill was to give the Commissioners power to apply the surplus of 1879–80 to the deficit of 1881, and would give them continuous powers hereafter to apply surpluses in the same way. Ho would ask them to give the Bill a second reading.
Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Lord O'Hagan.)
On Question? Resolved in the affirmative.
Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House Tomorrow.
In reply to a Question upon the subject,
Loan O'HAGANsaid, that the Treasury had not been yet applied to, as it was only a power to use money already in hand; but if there were still a deficit, the small amount necessary to defray it would come out of the Disestablished Church Surplus.

COUNTY COURTS (IRELAND) BILL.
(The Lord O'Hagan.)

(NO. 105.) SECOND READING.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
LORD O'HAGAN,in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, that it would, if passed, facilitate and improve the means of obtaining appeals from the County Courts in Ireland. There were certain difficulties existing under the present law. Certain cases disposed of by the County Courts were not appealable; and the object of the Bill was to give an appeal in every case, except those which came within the late Acts of Parliament dealing with the equitable jurisdiction of the County Courts. The second object of this legislation was to give an opportunity of appealing, which at present could only be done whilst the County Court was sitting, after the sittings of the Court had terminated. If that were not done, there would be in many cases a defeat of justice. The Bill also provided that certain jurisdiction should be given to i County Courts in Ireland which they

1557
did not at present possess—one of which was to allow executors to administer, within certain limits, the assets in the County Courts; and also to give County Courts jurisdiction in cases where there had been mistake or fraud, and where the County Courts had not, up to the present, been able to take action under the existing law. He believed, in both these cases, it was considered a matter of great hardship that people having to deal only with small cases should be compelled to go to the Courts of Chancery, and incur enormous expense, where the matter at issue was often of a trifling amount. He would conclude by moving the second reading.
Moved, "That the Bill be now read2a."—(The Lord O'Hagan.)
THE EARL OF MILLTOWNsaid, he did not wish to oppose the Bill. It, however, gave an absolutely unlimited right of appeal; and it was not, in his opinion, always of advantage to a poor person that there should be a right of appeal in his case. Such a power might often have the effect of defeating the ends of justice, and he thought a person making an appeal should have to show good grounds for doing so. There should, moreover, be no right of appeal in actions of debt under a certain amount, otherwise it might be possible for a rich man to crush a poor man by insisting on his right of appeal. Then the appeal was to a Judge of Assize; and, unfortunately—or fortunately as some think—in Ireland the Assizes only took place twice a-year, and a considerable amount of time might thus elapse before an appeal could possibly be heard. There was a Winter Assize, and he would suggest that appeals should be heard before the Judges who went on those Assizes. He saw that the Bill made it unnecessary that an affidavit should be made by the appellant that the appeal was not made for the purpose of delay. That would be a bad provision, and he trusted the noble and learned Lord (Lord O'Hagan) would see the desirability of taking it out of the Bill.
On Question? Resolved in the affirmative
Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

SOMERSHAM RECTORY BILL.
(The Earl of Powis.)
SOMERSHAM RECTORY BILL.

  (NO. 116.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Beading read.
  THE EARL OF POWIS,in moving that the Bill be now read 2a said, its object was to provide that four-sevenths of the income of the rectory should be enjoyed by the Regius Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, while three-sevenths should be allotted to the clergyman who was in charge of the parish, subject to the obligation to maintain two curates.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Earl of Powis.)
  On Question? Resolved in the affirmative.
  Bill read 2a accordingly.
  House adjourned at Six o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Ten o'clock.