SECOND READING. (Hansard, 24 July 1883)

LORD THURLOW
said, he would remind their Lordships that the object of the Bill was to provide an important 264 code of guidance for the fishing trade and for the settlement of disputes. The Bill, as their Lordships were aware, was the result of au inquiry by a Committee appointed by the Board of Trade, in consequence of the numerous cases of cruelty to boys and apprentices on beard those beats. The Committee was composed of Members of Parliament and others specially selected on account of their acquaintance with the circumstances. They were instructed to visit the fishing stations, and they collected a vast amount of information which was given in the 273 pages of the Blue Book. They had examined over 200 witnesses whose evidence could be found in reply to some 6,500 Questions. He mentioned that to show that this was not an attempt at ill-considered and hasty legislation. The persons best informed on the subject considered the Bill necessary in the interests of humanity and for the benefit of the trade. he hoped, therefore, the Bill would be read a second time.

§ VISCOUNT CRANBROOK
said, that when it was proposed before to read the Bill a second time his noble Friend (the Marquess of Salisbury) took exception to the Motion on the ground that its provisions were not known in the localities interested. He had himself received that day both a telegram and a letter from the Hull Smack Owners Association begging that the Bill might not be forced on, as they were unacquainted with its provisions altogether. It was not his intention to ask their Lordships not to read the Bill a second time; but he trusted that before Committee a sufficient time would be allowed to enable those smack owners to consider its provisions.

§ THE EARL OF WEMYSS
asked whether, if the Bill were passed in its present form, every man in charge of a fishing beat, no matter of what size, would be obliged to have a certificate from the Board of Trade?

§ LORD WAVENEY
said, he had received a telegram to the same effect as the noble Viscount opposite.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
said, he also had received a telegram to the same effect. It was to be very much regretted that the Government should proceed with a Bill which was not understood by those affected by it. Seeing the difficulty of introducing Bills into the House of Commons, he knew no reason 265 why they should not be first introduced in the House of Lords; but they ought to be brought forward at an earlier date than was customary in the case of the few Bills primarily submitted to their Lordships.

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY
said, in answer to the noble Earl on the Cross Benches (the Earl of Wemyss), that the Bill would apply to beats of 20 tons and upwards.