Lords Sitting of 20 August 1883

MINUTES.
SELECT COMMITTEE—Second Report—Office of the Clerk of the Parliaments and Office of the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod. [No. 206.]
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Parliamentary Registration (Ireland)* (204); Local Government Board (Scotland)* (207); Medals* (208); Tramways and Public Companies (Ireland)* (205); Public Works Loans* (209).
Second Reading—Education (Scotland) (199); Expiring Laws Continuance* (197).
Committee—Parliamentary Elections (Corrupt and Illegal Practices) (189); Labourers (Ireland) (183), deferred; Bankruptcy (195–211); National Debt* (196–212).
Committee—Report—Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 9)* (125).
Report—Isle of Wight Highways* (191); Local Government Provisional Order (No. 2)* (203); Patents for Inventions* (201); Cholera Hospitals (Ireland).* (193).
Third Reading—Electric lighting Provisional Orders (No. 1)* (157); Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 6)* (159); Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 7)* (160); Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 5)* (173); Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 8)* (174), and passed.
Royal Assent—Companies Acts Amendment [46 & 47 Vict. c. 28]; Metropolitan Board of Works (Money) [46 & 47 Vict. c. 27]; Supreme Court of Judicature (Funds, &c.) [46 & 47 Vict. c. 29]; Payment of Wages in Public-houses Prohibition [46 &47 Vict. c. 31]; Greenwich Hospital [46 & 47 Vict. c. 32]; Companies (Colonial Registers) [46 & 47 Vict. c. 30]; Railway Passenger Duty, &c. [46 & 47 Vict. c. 34]; Irish Reproductive Loan Fund Act (1874) Amendment [46 & 47 Vict. c. 33]; Diseases Prevention (Metropolis) [46 & 47 Vict. c. 35]: Parochial Charities (London) [46 & 47 Vict. c. 36]; Mersey River (Gunpowder) [46 & 47 Vict. c. clxxxiv].

TREATY OF BERLIN—ARTICLE X.— THE VARNA RAILWAY.

  QUESTION.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I wish to ask, Whether the noble Earl the Foreign Secretary, to whom I have given Notice of the Question, can give any further information with respect to the fulfilment of the 10th Article of the Treaty of Berlin in relation to the claims of British subjects on the Bulgarian Government with regard to the Varna Railway? A Question was asked on the subject some months ago, and the matter was said to be then under the consideration of the Bulgarian Government. I should be glad if the noble Earl can give any information on a subject which interests the British people to a very great extent.
  EARL GRANVILLE: I have nothing to add to the answer which I gave to the noble Earl on the 24th of July, excepting that on the 27th of that month Mr. Lascelles reported that M. Zancoff had assured him that the question was occupying the serious attention of the Bulgarian Government, who were fully alive to the necessity of arriving at a satisfactory solution.

MADAGASCAR—ACTION OF THE FRENCH AT TAMATAVE—THE CASE OF THE REV. MR. SHAW.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYasked the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he could give any information with respect to the case of Mr. Shaw, a missionary, who had been mixed up in recent incidents in Madagascar, and appeared to have suffered a good deal, perhaps not altogether from his own fault?
EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, in answer to questions which I put to M. Waddington as to what were the charges against Mr. Shaw, whether that gentleman was informed of them, by what tribunal he would be tried, and whether he would have full facilities for his defence, he told me that he was informed by the French Government that when the French Consul left Tamatave, Mr. Shaw's case was still under consideration. The charges against him were complicity with the enemy and hostile action respecting the French colours. They did not yet know the result of the inquiry. He was not in prison, but on board one of the French ships, where the French Consul saw him walking up and down. The French Government said the prisoner must have been informed of the charges against him, the Code for the Navy making this necessary. He will be tried by a court martial formed according to the Rules laid down by the said Code, and he has the right of appeal before a Court of Revision. There is no reason whatever for supposing that he will not have every facility for preparing his defence. M. Waddington added that the letter addressed by the Governor of the Mauritius to Admiral Pierre received a courteous reply.

PRIVATE BILLS.
Standing Orders Nos. 1, 26, 33, 39, 61, 62, 64, 66, 99, 113, 114, 128, 150, 153, 154, and 155: Considered and amended; and to be printed as amended. (No. 210.)
EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
(The Lord President.)
EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.

  (NO. 199.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL), in moving that

  1311
  the Bill be now read the second time, said, that its main object was to remedy several defects in the Scotch Education Act, which had been pressed upon the notice of the Education Department by various School Boards in Scotland, and which he believed all the friends of education in that country admitted that it was desirable to cure. They related principally to the subject of school attendance, and the means of securing that attendance in a satisfactory way. At present those means were in some respects imperfect, and were not the same as in England. He would describe, in a very few words, the effect of the principal clauses. The 3rd clause was intended to increase the facilities for having school board cases tried. These cases, at present, could only be heard before the Sheriff Court, and that appeared very often to be a matter of great inconvenience and difficulty from the distance which the parties had to go. The clause, therefore, provided that such cases might be heard not only in the Sheriff Court, but by the Sheriff when he went on Circuit for the determination of small-debt cases, and also by the Police Courts of the burghs. By Clause 4 it was proposed to amend the corresponding clause of the Education Act of 1872, by requiring that a parent should not only provide an elementary education for his children—which, as the law now stood, might be satisfied by sending the child to a very inefficient or unrecognized school—but that the parent in future should provide efficient elementary education. It also extended the time of compulsory attendance from the age of 13 to the age of 14. As things now stood—very absurdly—although under the Factories Acts a child could not be employed until he was 14 years of age, the power of sending him to school compulsorily ceased at the age of 13. It was desirable that such an anomalous state of things should be put an end to. By Clause 5, enactments were made which would put an end to doubts in the law, the effect of which was, according to certain decisions, that the parents of a child were able without much difficulty to evade the compulsory provisions of the law by simply sending the child to school at the time when prosecution took place, although he had not been attending school for months beforehand. The rest of that clause extended the
  1312
  power of payment for poor children, as the former clause extended the compulsory attendance from 13 to 14. Clause 6 was of some importance, being intended to put labour in Scotland on the same footing as in England. At present, under the Factory Acts in Scotland, a child could work in a factory or workshop as a half-timer from 10 years old, provided that he then went to school. The child was not required, as in England, to have passed any examination under the Standards whatever; so that in many cases the parent did not begin to send his child to school until he was 10 years of age. That was quite contrary to the spirit of the Acts. Clause 9 greatly improved the means of enforcing school attendance precisely upon the lines of the English Act. At present, in Scotland, the parent could only be prosecuted for gross and habitual neglect in sending his children to school—which were very wide words indeed, and had given rise to great difficulty in the Scotch Sheriff Courts. There were no bye-laws, as in England, by which they could require the attendance of a child unless there was some reasonable excuse; but under this clause the Court might make an order which would have the same effect as the bye-laws of English School Boards. Clause 11 defined what reasonable excuse should be. Clause 12 allowed other persons, such as the School Inspectors, to put the school board in motion in these matters. Under Clause 13, provision was made for another matter which was very much desired in Scotland—namely, the power of requiring school boards in certain cases to combine for the formation of a joint board. There were cases in which parishes adjoined, and where there was a very small number of children in each—there might be a dozen—and yet for some reason or other, which could not be a good reason, they declined to join in a common school board, and in having a common school. He trusted their Lordships would accept the Bill, because these changes would effect a real improvement in the Scotch Education Act.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Lord President.)
  THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, he had not seen the Bill before coming down to that House; but he had very great confidence in the judgment

  1313
  of the Scotch Education Department, especially in the knowledge with regard to Scotch matters which was possessed by Sir Francis Sandford. Yet there were certain things in this Bill which struck him as being rather strong. According to the 6th clause, a child under 10 could not be employed unless he had passed the Third Standard. It was not a provision that such a child should not be taken on full time, but that he should not be employed at all. He ventured to say that that was really impracticable. Farmers would now and then employ children to dig potatoes and do light farm work; but what means had they of knowing whether the child had passed the Third Standard or not? That seemed to be over-legislation.
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL)said, that the law already prohibited the employment of such children, except in factories and workshops; and the Bill proposed to extend the prohibition to factory and workshop labour.
  THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, he could assure his noble Friend that if the law now was that a farmer could not employ a child under 10 years of age, it was a law which was not much observed. The only other part of the Bill which struck him as being rather strong was the 13th clause, where the Education Department had absolute power of their own discretion, and without remonstrance from anybody, to require that school boards should be what the Education Department required them to be. That clause had some bearing on another measure which was about to come before their Lordships—namely, the Local Government Board (Scotland) Bill. He was not, perhaps, so much in favour of that scheme as some of his noble Friends; still, there was much to be said in favour of the improved management of Scotch Business; but he might say he felt sure that, whatever improvement was made in the local government of Scotland, the people of that country were extremely desirous—desirous almost above all things—that the new powers which were about to be given to the new body should include education. As to what was now called the Scotch Education Department, he believed that he himself had long had the honour of being a Member of it; and he did not
  1314
  recollect having ever been summoned to attend on more than one occasion during a considerable number of years. The practical result was, that the Scotch Education Department were the officials of the Privy Council Office. It was true that good work had been done through the exertions of eminent educationists interested in Scotland; but it did not follow that the system would continue to work well under different circumstances. Therefore, the Department were to have absolute power, without consultation with any Scotch body, to require the junction of school boards with surrounding or contiguous districts. He thought there should be an appeal to somebody in Scotland in regard to that power, as it might operate inconveniently in some places. As at present advised, he thought that was a stronger power than should be conferred on the central authority in London.
  LORD BALFOUR, speaking from his own experience as Chairman of a school board, said, that the provisions of the Bill were really very much required in the interests of education in Scotland, more especially that provision which enabled school boards to keep back children at school until the age of 14. By a curious anomaly in the Factory Acts and the Education Act, when read together, they could prevent a child from working full time above the age of 13 and below the age of 14; but they could not keep that child at school. He believed that the school board of which he was Chairman was, if not the first, at least one of the first, to bring this anomaly to the knowledge of the Department. He was glad it was now in a fair way of being cured. He quite agreed with the noble Duke (the Duke of Argyll) that the law as to the employment of young children was not very rigidly enforced; but perhaps that was a part of the law which was best left to the discretion of the local authorities. But this he must say from experience, and from the evidence laid before the Factory Commission some years ago—that it was of the utmost importance, in the interests of the child, that he or she should be well grounded before going to work. If the child went to work half time without any education at all, the half time attendance at school was practically useless to the child. If he had been well grounded before going to

  1315
  work, half attendance was nearly as good as whole time. He should be very much pleased to see this Bill passed through Parliament, and he believed it would have the very best possible effects upon Scotch education.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS (CORRUPT AND ILLEGAL PRACTICES) BILL.—(No. 189.)
(The Earl of Northbrook.)
PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS (CORRUPT AND ILLEGAL PRACTICES) BILL.—(No. 189.)

  COMMITTEE.
  Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.
  Moved, "That the House do now resolve itself into Committee."—(The Earl of Northbrook.)
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, that his view of the particular provisions of this Bill was much modified by the fact that the measure would come to a termination in December of next year. There were many controverted points connected with it, and points as to which they might naturally feel doubtful; but on the whole he thought that, as the Bill was to come to an early termination, the wisest plan would be to allow it to go forward very much as it was, reserving to themselves entire freedom, when it came to be renewed, or to be made a permanent measure, to move any Amendments which experience might dictate.
  Motion agreed to; House in Committee accordingly.
  THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, he wished to invite the attention of the noble Earl who had charge of the Bill to a point of much importance to certain parts of Scotland. He believed that by this measure the conveyance of voters to the poll was made a corrupt practice, and that it put an absolute prohibition on candidates paying the expense of conveying voters to the poll. He now expressed no opinion as to the general expediency or wisdom of that provision; but he would mention that in the West of Scotland, and especially in some of the Islands, where the voters were of a comparatively poor class, it would amount to their practical disfranchisement not to allow them to be conveyed to the poll; and if such a prohibition
  1316
  were enforced the Government would be bound to establish a much larger number of polling places.
  THE EARL OF NORTHBROOKsaid, that Clause 47 provided for the conveyance of voters by sea, where they could not reach their polling places without crossing the sea, or an arm of the sea.
  THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCHsaid, he was aware of that clause; but the difficulty was, how voters were to be conveyed, perhaps, 18 or 20 miles to the polling places? In such cases there was scarcely the least chance of the voters going to the poll at all. He himself would have to go 23 or 24 miles to the poll. The result would be the disfranchisement of a great number of voters, and to give the towns a great advantage over the rural populations.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, the number of polling places was to be increased under Clause 46, by which, so far as practicable, every elector would have a polling place within a distance not exceeding three miles of his residence if there were 100 electors in the district. With regard to the point as to prohibiting the conveyance of voters to the poll, Clause 14 expressly provided that electors might combine together for the purpose of being conveyed to the poll.
  EARL FORTESCUEsaid, that, in order to get a real expression of the opinion of the constituency, it was necessary to secure the attendance of a great number of electors at the poll; but that was incompatible with very narrow restrictions as to expenditure. He thought the multiplication of polling places would entail great additional expense upon candidates. He could not help thinking that the prohibition of conveyance would be a virtual disfranchisement of the poorer classes of the rural population.
  THE EARL OF NORTHBROOKsaid, he hoped the Bill would not have the effect anticipated. The expenses of providing polling places would be reckoned outside the maximum.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, he believed the only real remedy for the difficulty which had been raised was one which had been always popular in that House, but unpopular in the other—namely, voting papers. He did not think there was any other way out of the difficulty without great expense. He imagined the result of the Bill would be very likely to show that there was very

  1317
  considerable disfranchisement in the less populous places, and that this would supply political force enough to bring about the introduction of a system of voting papers.
  Amendments made: The Report thereof to be received To-morrow.

PUBLIC OFFICES SITE BILL.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD STRATHEDEN AND CAMPBELL, in rising to ask Her Majesty's Government whether it is intended in the present year to proceed to operations under the Public Offices Site Act, said: My Lords, it is not in Order to accelerate the operations of the Government under the Public Offices Site Act that I have put this Notice on the Paper. My aim is wholly different. Let me remind your Lordships how the question stands at present. According to the declaration of the Government last Session, until plans have been delivered to the Houses, no new building will commence. No such plans are yet before us. But the Act empowers the Government to destroy Spring Gardens and the Admiralty. At the same time, they are not bound to take any course under the Ac; and until the Treasury permit they are not qualified to do so. My Lords, there are many reasons why the Treasury should be slow to grant the latitude in question. The arguments against the Bill were wholly unreplied to. It was opposed to the utmost by the Institute of Architects. It is not by trampling on architectural opinion that any capital has ever been embellished. Although upon the face of it adopted, the Bill has never had the virtual sanction of the House, as no Division was resorted to—erroneously perhaps—and it is far from certain that a Division would have led to the Bill being carried. Its only pretext was economy, which cannot shelter it, however, as there is not the slightest definition of the outlay it may possibly accumulate. But there is one circumstance which last Session quite escaped the House, and I reproached myself for not having adverted to it. It is the mode in which the Bill would operate if carried out on the quarter made up of Carlton Gardens and Carlton House Terrace. As I am not one of its inhabitants, or likely to become so, I refer to this part of the case with greater freedom
  1318
  and with more impartiality. During a long course of years their view of St. James's Park—the particular advantage they have bought and paid for dearly—will be—if the Bill goes on—a view of dust, of dirt, of beams, of ladders, of demolition and confusion. When the result is gained, a new, a vast, and possibly a hideous edifice will stand on what is now an area of verdure and tranquillity. There can be no doubt whatever that the value of these houses will be considerably lowered. No family of ordinary prudence would think of choosing that locality while such a course of building was going on, and such an end might be anticipated. The unfortunate proprietors will not be able to escape without heavy loss, and not be able to hold on with any decency or comfort. But there is something else to be remembered. As far as I am able to inform myself, these houses are held under leases from the Crown. It naturally is so, as they are well known to have been placed, some 50 years ago, on the site of a Royal Palace. The holders are entitled to look to the Crown for protection from disturbance, so far, at least, as the Crown is qualified to give it, having purchased from the Crown with a security that no disturbance would arise. The Crown, however, could do nothing to protect them by itself, unless in the form of legislative veto on the Bill, which does not fall within the practice of our age, however just it would have been upon its merits. But what the Crown cannot do by itself the Treasury, which represents the Crown in some of its financial attributes, which has gradually become the first Department of the State and central force of the Executive, may take upon itself with perfect regularity and perfect order to accomplish. The extraordinary outlay which the country has incurred in Egypt, and which could not be foreseen when the Bill was carried, would fully justify prohibitory conduct upon their part. It could not be resented even by the supporters of the Bill, and it would deserve the gratitude of all who value beauty in the capital. The Treasury would merely imitate a function of the Supreme Court in the United States—that of arresting Bills by which a fundamental principle is violated. My Lords, I put the Question which stands in my name on the Paper.
  LORD THURLOW: In reply to the Question of the noble Lord, I beg to say that the Chief Commissioner of Works proposes very shortly to invite the competition of architects for the new buildings for the War Office and Admiralty to be erected on the Spring Gardens site; but I am to add that no building will be erected or commenced until the next financial year, when a Vote for the purpose will be presented to Parliament, and opportunities will be given for a full discussion of the merits of the scheme. In regard to the Parliament Street site, I may also add that it is determined by the Office of Works to widen Parliament Street in the manner that has been proposed; and the site, when it is clear—and it will probably be some time before that happens—will be exclusively devoted to the erection of such buildings as banks and clubs and insurance companies' offices, and other noble buildings of that kind, with fitting architectural elevations, which will have to be approved by the Office of Works as suitable to the surroundings of the neighbourhood. Before that is done, ample warning would be given for a further discussion of the subject. That is all the information I am at present able to give. I may take this opportunity of stating, in reference to a Question asked the other night by the noble Earl on the Cross Benches (the Earl of Wemyss), that there could not be found in the Office of Works any trace of the model of the buildings proposed to be erected in Parliament Street when Mr. Layard was First Commissioner, and there is no knowledge at the Office as to what has become of it.
  THE EARL OF WEMYSSsaid, that the model cost £500, and was worth £1,500. He would suggest that a further search should be made for it.
  THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES)said, that in a short time proposals from architects would be received for the erection of a new War Office and Admiralty on the site already sanctioned, and money would be required for that purpose next Session. Before, however, money was asked, he hoped Parliament would have full opportunity of passing an opinion on the selected architect's designs. He confessed he was sorry to hear the conclusion at which the Government had arrived with regard to the widening of
  1320
  Parliament Street. He did not want clubs, banks, and hotels there. Such plans would be extremely injurious in a variety of ways. Now that Public Offices were in immediate contiguity to Parliament Street, he had hoped that other Public Offices would be erected, so as to be in the immediate neighbourhood of the Houses of Parliament. The proposal of the Government was an extremely injurious and unfortunate one.

LABOUREES (IRELAND) BILL.
(The Earl of Dunraven.)
LABOUREES (IRELAND) BILL.

  (NO. 183.) COMMITTEE.
  Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.
  THE EARL OF DUNRAVENasked that their Lordships should allow this Bill to pass through Committee to-day. He had several Amendments; but as they were of an unimportant character, and were not yet in print, they could be taken, he thought, on the Motion for the third reading to-morrow.
  Moved, "That the House do now resolve itself into Committee."—(The Earl of Dunraven.)
  EARL FORTESCUEsaid, he must enter his protest against what he though was an objectionable course in regard to a most questionable Bill. The more he looked at the measure the more he disapproved of it, and the more dangerous did it appear to him. He had very great objection to the power contained in it of erecting cottages being placed in the hands of the Boards of Guardians, who might erect cottages in districts already congested. There was a very great tendency on the part of Irish legislators to assent to any measure which involved an advance from the Treasury for expenditure in Ireland. He supposed there was a general idea that it was a good thing for money to be laid out like this, and that it was a good thing to allow interest to get into arrear, so that it might eventually be wholly or partly forgiven. He protested against Amendments being taken on third reading, contending that ample time should be given for the consideration of the new proposals. Amendments to Bills of this kind were discussed with much greater advantage when the noble and learned Earl the Lord Chancellor was not in the Chair.
  LORD VENTRYsaid, he had some small Amendments to propose; but he was prepared to postpone their consideration till the third reading of the Bill.
  THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES)said, he hoped that their Lordships would not allow Bills to be treated in the way proposed by the noble Earl (the Earl of Dunraven). He supposed the Amendments would be moved, and then the third reading. It was bad enough to have Bills coming to their Lordships' House so late in the Session; but they were asked practically to have no Committee on this Bill, but to reserve the Amendments to a later stage. He thought this was treating the legislation of that House with the greatest possible contempt. He should object to the Bill going through Committee on that occasion.
  THE EARL OF DUNRAVENsaid, there was no Amendment of any importance whatever of which Notice had yet been given. The Amendments of the noble Lord (Lord Ventry) were purely verbal, and those of which he himself had given Notice were not calculated to take up any time in their consideration; and he hoped their Lordships would allow the third reading to be taken to-morrow.
  On Question? Resolved in the negative: House to be in Committee Tomorrow.

BANKRUPTCY BILL.—(No. 195.)
(The Lord Chancellor.)
BANKRUPTCY BILL.—(No. 195.)

  COMMITTEE.
  Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.
  Moved, " That the House do now resolve itself into Committee."—(The Lord Chancellor.)
  LORD FITZGERALD, in presenting a Petition against the Bill being passed into law during the present Session, said, he did not concur in the prayer of the Petition, as it would not be desirable, or for the public benefit, that the Bill should be thrown over to another Session, although he could have desired more time to consider it. It was a Bill that appeared to have been prepared with great care, and made most efficient provision for the immediate protection and realization and distribution of the
  1322
  properties of bankrupts, from which he hoped for very great advantages. He would, therefore, although presenting the Petition, humbly recommend their Lordships to pass the Bill.
  LORD BRAMWELLsaid, he was not in the House when the Bill was read a second time, though he should have felt it his duty, if he could, to have rendered assistance to their Lordships; but he knew he could be of no use, because he could not say that the Bill was a good or a bad one, as he had not had an opportunity of reading it. He knew the second reading would pass, because the Bill was introduced by the Lord Chancellor, and because their Lordships knew that a Grand Committee had been for two months "cutting and carving it," which he believed was the right expression to use towards an honest attempt to improve a Bill. He could show their Lordships a string of Amendments that he had had sent to him, and he had himself made 67 notes and queries of things he would like to have had an explanation about; but he should not trouble the House with any one of them, as he knew it would be utterly hopeless. The clause relating to disclaimer he really could not understand, though, if he was sitting in their Lordships' House when the matter came there for decision, he should be under the necessity of coming to some conclusion upon it. He could not but think it was altogether wrong and unreasonable that the Bill had not been placed before their Lordships in such a way and at such a time that those of their Lordships who were competent to speak on the matter should have been heard. He was not opposed to the Bill; he believed it to be a good Bill, and it would be a great pity if it did not pass through Parliament this Session; but it was a most alarming and improper thing to pass a Bill in the hope that in some future time they might be able to amend it. Its severity was most wholesome, and he hoped it would have the effect contemplated, of deterring people from the fraudulent and reckless bankruptcies which were now only too common.
  LORD BALFOURsaid, he would remind the House of a proposal he made a few weeks ago, that Bills might, be postponed from one Session to another, with the possibility of taking them up again at the point where they

  1323
  were left. The position in which the House was placed was, that either they must reject the Bill, because they had not time to consider it, and so nullify a great deal of hard work in "another place," or they must accept the Bill on the responsibility of the Lord Chancellor. The latter was the course they were to adopt, and it was the right course under the circumstances; but surely it would be much more dignified if, when Bills of this magnitude and importance came up at so late a period of the Session, their Lordships had power to postpone the consideration of them until the commencement of the next Session. It was derogatory to the dignity of the House that it should be entirely cut out from the consideration of the Bill. It was not a Bill which excited much political feeling, while, at the same time, it was one which some of their Lordships were very well qualified to discuss. Their Lordships would be well occupied in the beginning of next Session in hearing the answers to the 67 notes and queries of the noble and learned Lord who had last spoken.
  THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, he was very much struck by a remark of the noble and learned Lord (Lord Brarnwell) when the Bill was read a second time in that House. He said he felt it a positive humiliation to do so. That was a very strong expression. They must remember, however, that some Acts, notably the Settled Land Acts, had been passed by that House with even less consideration, from the technical nature of the subject, than they were giving to this Bill; and they ought also to bear in mind the great length at which the whole Bill had been discussed by the Grand Committee, under the able Presidency of Mr. Goschen. Under these circumstances, they might fairly be satisfied with the competency of the hands it had passed through. Although some noble Lords had expressed irritation at the impossibility of considering the Bill, yet none of them had expressed serious objection to any of the principles of the Bill. There would be a serious responsibility on the part of the House, and one which he would not be willing to share, if they were to throw out the Bill, which had taken so much labour in "another place," without their Lordships having very good reasons for its rejection. There was only one provision which, he
  1324
  regarded with dislike, and that was of great political importance. He alluded to the immense patronage conferred upon the Board of Trade. He did not approve of placing such enormous patronage in the hands of the Executive for the time being. The Board of Trade would appoint the administrative staff—that was to say, the Official Receivers of debtors' estates all over the country; and they would not be attached to the Court of Bankruptcy, but would come under the superintendence of the Board of Trade. Thus the Board would have a larger amount of patronage than any other Department of the Government. He did not wish to move any Amendment in this matter; but was it absolutely necessary that the appointment of the Receivers, who held a most important office under the Bill, should be in every part of the country taken out of the hands of the local authorities and placed in those of the central authorities? He remembered, when he was at the Post Office, there was a large amount of patronage there; but the minor appointments were practically in the hands of the Treasury, and the more considerable ones were distributed strictly on the principle that they were rewards for good service. In this case, however, the appointments might be used to reward electoral services.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, he was sorry the noble Duke had not proceeded beyond a protest, and either moved, or given Notice of moving, an Amendment to the Bill in the very salutary direction in which his speech had pointed. Undoubtedly, one of the greatest dangers to the Constitution was that of permitting the American maxim, "that the spoils belonged to the victors," to become acclimatized here; and the enormous patronage which the Bill conferred upon the Board of Trade might, unless carefully watched, work in that direction. Thirty years ago, or more, statesmen of this country were very much alarmed at this danger, and they introduced a system of competitive examinations for the purpose of guarding against it. He had no doubt whatever, notwithstanding what had been said against that system, it had been very effective for that purpose, and had entirely divested those smaller appointments, in a great number of Departments of the State, of any political or electioneering character. But they were now about to create a very large series of

  1325
  valuable appointments which were above the level of competitive examinations. Therefore it was obvious it would have to be very carefully provided that they did not become rewards for merits of an electioneering character in the various parts of the country where they existed. The very fact that they were spread all over the country would make them all the more valuable for rewarding services of a Parliamentary and electioneering character. He confessed that he should very much prefer that the precedent set in respect of another kind of office—namely, that of a Revising Barrister, should be followed in this instance. His appointment was in the hands of a Judge of the Crown. There was no reason why these appointments should not be placed in the hands of either the Judges or County Court Judges, or some non-political or permanent officer whose judgment in such matters would not be affected by any political considerations. He could not now, without Notice, move in Committee the institution of any such change in the Bill as that; but, certainly, if he found the opinion of the House encouraged him in moving an Amendment in that direction he should be disposed to move it upon Report.
  EARL FORTESCUEsaid, he thought that the discussion which had just taken place quite justified the comments which he had made on the second reading of the Bill. There were some six pages of doubtless valuable Amendments about to be moved by the noble and learned Earl on the Woolsack. Now, during the present Session the House had enjoyed the advantage of the services of a body of Legal Authorities of, he believed, an eminence and judicial experience unequalled at any former period; and he could not help thinking that in all probability some one or other of those high Legal Authorities might also have suggested some Amendments of considerable value. He hoped that the public would consider that for any defects in the working of the Act, the management or mismanagement of the Government—they best knew which—in sending up that Bill for consideration in detail in the third week of August would be responsible.
  THE EARL OF MILLTOWNobserved, that that Bill bade fair to become law without having been examined in either House of Parliament. Discussion was deprecated in the other House on the
  1326
  ground that the Bill had been fully considered by a new Institution called a Grand Committee; and now in this House, because the Commons had accepted it, their Lordships were practically asked to give up all their rights and privileges to a Grand Committee of the other House, and to abdicate the function which the Constitution vested in them. It seemed to him doubtful whether they had any moral right thus to forsake their duty.
  THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES)said, that if they did not pass the Bill through Committee it would be equivalent to throwing it out for this Session; and, for his part, he thought the Bill ought to be thrown out, and allowed to come up at a reasonable period next Session.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that, complaints having been made as to the circumstances under which that Bill came before their Lordships, he wished to notice a few of the particular criticisms which had been offered in the course of that discussion. The noble Earl who spoke last but one had referred to the formidable array of Amendments on the Paper, consisting, as he said, of six pages. Those Amendments were only formidable in appearance. The draftsman of the Bill had performed the useful function of revising the form and expression of the measure in its last stage; and nearly the whole of the Amendments in those six pages were merely intended to give greater precision of expression, without altering the substance. There were, indeed, a few Amendments to which that remark did not strictly apply; but these were framed only to clear up some points of detail, without altering any principle of the Bill. With regard to the question of patronage, the noble Duke (the Duke of Argyll) was under a mistake in respect to the Official Receivers. If the Board of Trade were to appoint all over the country the persons who were from beginning to end to deal with the property of bankrupts and to administer it, it would, no doubt, be a serious matter; but the functions of the Official Receiver were of an entirely different character from that. The creditors were to have the right to appoint their own trustees, as they did under the present law; but during the short interval that might elapse between the initiation of proceed-

  1327
  ings and the choice of the trustee, in order that the estate might not suffer, those officers, the Official Receivers, were to be appointed to protect the interests of the general public in regard to fraudulent and reckless trading, and also to protect the interests of the creditors at an early stage of the proceedings, by providing them with the information without which they would be helpless, and which experience showed that they could not obtain for themselves. Those officers were to be ad interim receivers pending the appointment of the trustee and the manager by the creditors. The other officers were only that portion of the existing staff who discharged what were called administrative duties. With respect to the alleged severity of the Bill, he would point out that it did not make any new misdemeanours. Those acts of fraudulent bankruptcy which were punishable as misdemeanours remained, in substance, as they were. The Bill did, undoubtedly, enumerate various acts discreditable to a debtor, which might be—but not necessarily must be—a ground for refusing his discharge. He was very sorry indeed that there should be anything to prevent himself and their Lordships from having the assistance of those who were so well qualified to give it as his noble and learned Friends opposite, and other noble and learned Lords not present. He did not think it would be profitable to enter into any explanation now of the causes which, whether in that House or in "another place," had contributed to prevent the Bill from coming earlier before their Lordships. One of those causes was the great care and pains taken with it in the Grand Committee of the other House, and also, subsequently, in the other House itself. He could very much wish that this and other Bills also had reached their Lordships sooner. With all the important legislative Business which the Government had to transact, and with the encroachments on the time, limited as it was, which was at its command, he should be very glad if, by any greater economy or better distribution of time, it would be possible to bring important Bills at an earlier date before their Lordships. But he did not think it would be a wise course for their Lordships to throw out all Bills of importance which came up to them after
  1328
  they had been carefully considered elsewhere, and had been, on the whole, approved by the best authorities on the subjects with which they dealt. He did not think it would be wise to reject this Bill in the hope that it would be possible to legislate better on the subject in a future Session; and with regard to the suggestion of his noble Friend (Lord Balfour) that Bills might be taken up in a future Session at any stage which they might have reached before Prorogation, there were two considerations to be borne in mind if that question should ever come before their Lordships—first, the enormous accumulation of Bills in various stages, which might then be expected to arise from Session to Session; and, in the next place, the great temptation that would arise to introduce Bills of a character which their Lordships might not think deserving of encouragement, and to throw out other Bills by postponing their stages, in order that they might be taken up in another Session. However, those questions were not now under consideration. All he could say was that, as their Lordships were aware, the greater part of this measure was the re-enactment of former laws, without any alteration in those points which experience had shown did not require alteration; and, with regard to those points in which alterations had been made, those were matters which had not been done in a corner, for they had been for a long time subjects of consideration by the mercantile community, and by both Houses of Parliament. This Bill had been prepared after great deliberation and consultation between the Government and all those officers of the Bankruptcy Courts and County Courts on the one hand, and of the Board of Trade on the other, who were best able to bring valuable information to bear upon the subject; then it passed into the form in which it had been introduced in the other House, and it was then referred to the Grand Committee on Trade, by whom no Amendment of importance was introduced without full time being given for its consideration. Therefore, their Lordships had all the guarantees before them upon the subject which could be given. He would not presume to say there were no points in the Bill which experience of its operation might prove to require amendment; but he could say con-

  1329
  fidently that few measures had ever been presented to their Lordships upon which more care had been bestowed.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid, that, with regard to the point of patronage which had been raised, it was very natural that Parliament should be extremely jealous of vesting any large amount of patronage in any Department of the State. He had been expecting to hear from the noble and learned Earl on the Woolsack some very strong reasons for vesting patronage of this kind in a Department of the State, instead of Courts of Law or local authorities. These receivers would be a kind of interim officers of the Court; but the noble and learned Earl had not pointed out why they could not as well be appointed by a Court of Law. He thought the importance of their duties was a reason for giving this patronage to the Courts. The Board of Trade had power, not only to appoint these officers, but to remove them. He hoped that on a future stage of the Bill the House would have some further explanation on this point.
  Motion agreed to; House in Committee accordingly: Amendments made: The Report thereof to be received on Wednesday next; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 211.)
  House adjourned at a quarter past Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Four o'clock.