Lords Sitting of 18 July 1884

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Reformatory and Industrial Schools (Manx Children)* (200); Poor Law Guardians (Ireland)* (201).
Second Reading—Revision of Jurors and Voters Lists (Dublin County) (178).
Committee — Summary jurisdiction (Repeal, &c.) (155–202).
Committee—Report—Naval Enlistment* (175).
Third Reading—Local Government Provisional Order (Salt Works)* (182); Supreme Court of Judicature Amendment* (191); Building Societies Acts Amendment* (188), and passed.

SOUTHWARK AND VAUXHALL WATER BILL.

  THIRD READING.
  Bill read 3a, with the Amendments.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid, he desired to propose some Amendments to the Bill. It was a Bill promoted by one of the Metropolitan Water Companies, asking Parliament to give it additional powers in respect of the extension of their boundaries and certain other matters, and especially to give them additional powers of entry for the purpose of cutting off the water supply. It appeared to him that, in the present state of the water question, and under existing circumstances, they ought to be very careful how they bestowed additional powers on Water Companies, without having any guarantees that these powers should be used in a reasonable way, and also to see that the public were reasonably protected. For this purpose he proposed to add two clauses to the Bill; but he would take one at a time. The first which he would move was to the effect that the Company should send quarterly or half-yearly to every person liable to the payment of water rates a note containing the figures of which the sum total was made up, including the annual value taken by the Company. Not till this note was delivered should payment by the consumer become due. One of the chief grounds of misunderstanding between the consumers and the Company would thus be removed.
  Moved, after Clause 11, to insert the following Clause:—

  1581
  "From and after the passing of this Act the Company shall send in, either quarterly or half-yearly to every person liable or about to become liable to the payment of water-rate a claim or demand note containing or accompanied by the particulars by which the sum total claimed is made out, including the annual value on which the percentage charge is levied as well as any additional items or particulars of charge, and upon, but not until, the delivery of such claim or demand note the payment by the consumer shall become due and the rights of the Company shall become enforceable." — (The Earl of Camperdown.)
  LORD ROMILLYsaid, that the suggestion of the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Camperdown) had been subitted to the Committee to which this Bill was referred, and of which he (Lord Romilly) was the Chairman; but, after fully considering it, they had come to the conclusion that it ought not to be inserted, on the grounds that this was the first time such a clause had been proposed to be inserted in a Water Bill, and that there ought to be a Bill containing the clause applying generally to all Water Companies.
  THE EARL OF CLARENDONsaid, that, as being also a Member of the Committee referred to, he objected to the insertion of a clause of this nature on the third reading of a Bill, which was supposed to be rather a formal proceeding.
  LORD BRAMWELLsaid, he would point out that the Company to whom the Bill referred had not the slightest objection to give particulars of their demands—in point of fact, they had been carrying out the practice for the last six months; but they objected to the difficulty they would experience if this clause was inserted, and they said it would throw upon the Company the burden of proving the delivery of the notice, which might not be a very easy matter in cases where the customers desired to evade payment. To his mind, it would give encouragement to fraudulent proceedings; and, besides, it would not affect all Water Companies alike; and, therefore, their Lordships ought not to impose this obligation on this Company alone, the matter being at this time a subject of much controversy. Besides that consideration, he might explain, with regard to the extension of the supply, that the Company had had a district assigned to it and statutory powers, but had gone beyond that district at the request of those who wished to be supplied by it
  1582
  with water. That might be ultra vires on their part; but, as far as the public were concerned, there was nothing illegal in it. He trusted that their Lordships would not impose this liability upon the Company.
  LORD CARRINGTONsaid, that the Local Government Board were quite prepared to give their support to the clause.
  THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES)said, that, in his opinion, it would not be right to insert such a clause in the Bill, especially upon the third reading; but that the question should be dealt with in a general measure.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that while he quite agreed with the object aimed at by the insertion of the clause, he doubted the expediency of dealing with a particular Company in an exceptional manner. He would recommend that the subject should be dealt with by a separate Bill.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid, that it had been asked why he had introduced legislation affecting one single Water Company only. The reason was, that this Company was now coming to Parliament for additional powers; and, if any others had been doing the same, he would have made the same proposition with regard to them. They had been told that this should be done by general legislation. He had proposed to do so, but had been told that it was a private matter; and that, unless Notice was given in October or November, and all the expense undertaken of a Private Bill, he could not make a proposal at all with regard to the Metropolitan water supply. The machinery of the House seemed made for the protection of the Water Companies. All that he proposed was, that consumers should know what they were paying for; and he was quite willing that the clause should be modified, so that the service of the notice would not have to be proved. They were told that the Company had been doing this for the last six months; if that were the case, he could not see what objection there could be to their being bound to do it by Statute.
  On Question? Their Lordships divided:—Contents 44; Not-Contents 48: Majority 4.
  Amendment disagreed to.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid, that he would not trouble their Lordships by moving any other Amendment in the Bill.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR, in reference to an observation which had fallen from, the noble Earl (the Earl of Camperdown) as to the difficulty which stood in his way when he proposed to deal with that subject by the general law, said, he wished to say that he more than doubted whether, according to the true and rational construction of the Standing Orders, there was any such difficulty. If, indeed, the Standing Orders had any such effect as the noble Earl supposed, they ought to be amended and revised; and he hoped that the noble Earl would give his attention to that matter.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid, he should certainly take the advice of the noble and learned Earl.
  Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.

EDUCATION DEPARTMENT — SCHOOL HOURS—COMPULSORY ATTENDANCE.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYasked the Lord President of the Council, Whether, if he is correct in saying that the Education Act of 1870 puts no limit to the number of hours that children may be kept in school, he will assign some maximum limit of hours for compulsory attendance at school? Last year he had complained of cases in which children were kept in school for eight hours; and if the noble Lord opposite the Lord President were justified in saying that no limit was assigned under the Act, the children would be at the mercy of any school board and Inspector who might be willing to sign a time-table which might require more hours in school than were allowed by the Factory Acts. In Alsace and Lorraine, a German Commission had lately recommended that young girls should not have more than 18 hours a-week schooling, and it would permit 6½ hours' home lessons. It also recommended 11 weeks' holidays in the year.
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL), in reply, said, that it was not for him to fix any limit, neither were the hours of attendance limited by any hard-and-fast lines; but the authorities of each school framed a
  1584
  time-table, which had to be approved or disapproved by the Education Department. The Education Department, in the case of each school, judged whether the hours proposed by the managers were reasonable; and, if so, they were sanctioned accordingly. In the great majority of instances the hours sanctioned were practically those provided by the Code—namely, two hours in the early part of the day, and two hours in the afternoon.

MALTA—USE AS AN EXAMINATION CENTRE—ADMINISTRATION OF CIVIL AFFAIRS.

  MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS.
  EARL DE LA WARR, in rising to move—
  "That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for Papers and Correspondence which has taken place during the last few years with reference to the question of making Malta a centre for civil service, naval, and military examinations; also to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the proposed changes have been made in the administration of civil affairs of Malta and its dependencies, in connection with the position and duties of the Chief Secretary, who is now acting also in the capacity of Lieutenant Governor,"
  said, he hoped to be able to explain, in a few words, his reasons for moving an Address for Papers and Correspondence relative to a question which was one of great concern to the Maltese people. Some time ago, he believed when the noble Earl opposite the Secretary of State for India (the Earl of Kimberley) was Colonial Secretary, and he thought also while the noble Earl below him (the Earl of Carnarvon) filled that Office, a Correspondence took place between the Imperial Government and the Maltese Government, relative to making Malta a centre for Civil Service and Naval and Military examinations. Now, until the Papers to which he referred were before their Lordships, it was not possible to enter fully into the question; but there could be no difficulty in seeing that it was a matter of the greatest importance to the Maltese, that there should be placed within their reach, advantages from which they were now practically excluded, but which, as British subjects, they naturally felt they had some right to claim. The relations of Malta to this country were very peculiar. It was a Dependency of the British Crown; but it was not, strictly speaking,

  1585
  in the position of a Colony. The Maltese were British subjects; but, not being of British origin, it would be a mistake to regard them as a Colony like many other Dependencies of the Crown. They placed themselves voluntarily under the protection of the Crown of this country; and it was naturally stipulated that, as far as possible, the privileges of the Maltese should be preserved and their ancient laws continued. He did not, however, think that it could be said that these privileges had been so fully accorded to them as might have been expected since Malta became a Dependency of the British Crown; and it was not, he believed, till the year 1849, when Mr. More O'Ferrall was Governor, that the right of representation in the Council of Government was granted to them. He should perhaps be travelling somewhat beyond the subject which he wished now to bring specially under their Lordships' notice, if he were to go further into this; but, in considering any question relating to Malta, he thought it should be borne in mind that its position was not that of a fortress only. He wished to speak as in no way undervaluing its importance as such to this country; but it must be remembered that there was a civil population, a considerable population, and an increasing one, whose welfare, whose industries, whose trade and commerce, whose resources and their capabilities of development were matters which demanded the most careful and attentive consideration. He might add, not the least among these was the promoting facilities for education, not only elementary, but also the higher branches. These, it was true, in a great measure existed or were in progress; but there was one thing wanting, and one which greatly hindered the advance of education in the upper classes—it was the want of the opportunity of making use of the education which had been acquired. In Malta alone there was little scope for this, and a young man who had qualified himself to pass, it might be into the Civil Service, or into the Army or the Navy, was unable to offer himself for examination without coming to England. This amounted almost to exclusion; among other reasons, the expense was an almost insurmountable barrier. Knowing, as he thought he might say, something about the affairs of Malta—he might also add of the
  1586
  loyalty of the people and their desire to strengthen the ties which connected them with this country—he did not believe that there was anything at this moment which would more tend to encourage this than to give them the advantage of making Malta a centre for Civil Service, Naval, and Military examinations. It would stimulate education; it would encourage, in the most popular and legitimate manner, the study of the English language; and it would open the door of honourable competition to young men of ability and talent, to take their places in the service of their country, in Malta, or in England. He trusted the noble Earl the Secretary of State for the Colonies (the Earl of Derby) would not object to laying the Papers and Correspondence relating to this subject, some of which must be of a rather distant date, upon the Table of the House. He (Earl De La Warr) was sure that, from the Papers which must be in the possession of the noble Earl in the Colonial Office, he would see the importance of what he had now ventured to bring more immediately under his notice, and he hoped their Lordships might be put in possession of fuller information than he was himself able to give. It remained only for him to ask the noble Earl, whether, the Chief Secretary at Malta, having been gazetted as Lieutenant Governor, with an increased salary as such, would have the administration of the civil affairs of the Island more immediately under his direction; and, whether the noble Earl could explain what his actual position was? He concluded by moving the Address of which he had given Notice.
  Moved, "That an humble Address he presented to Her Majesty for Papers and for Correspondence which has taken place during the last few years with reference to the question of making Malta a centre for civil service, naval, and military examinations."—(The Earl De La Warr.)
  THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, he thought it would be, perhaps, more convenient to their Lordships, as well as to his noble Friend (Earl De La Warr), if he answered first the criticism which he had made. He promised, some time ago, to lay Papers on the Table of the House which would, he thought, show the position and functions of the Chief Secretary in his new situation as Lieutenant Governor. Those Papers, he be-

  1587
  lieved, were already in a form for presentation; but, at any rate, he could say they would be in their Lordships' hands before the close of the Session. He might mention, upon that matter, that he thought the noble Earl had exaggerated in his own mind the magnitude of the change made. It was not intended to take away any of the administrative power in civil affairs at present possessed by the Governor; it was only intended to give the Chief Secretary a higher status. Nothing had been done in the recent change which would deprive the Governor of any power which he at present possessed. With regard to the Correspondence which had taken place during the last few years with reference to making Malta a centre for Civil Service, Naval and Military examinations, there would be no objection to laying it on the Table, as it was not very voluminous. It commenced in 1878 and ended in 1882, and the most material part was already in print. It would be well for the noble Earl to withdraw his Motion, and the Papers would be laid on the Table in the ordinary manner. The question of making Malta a centre for these examinations had not been raised since he had been at the Colonial Office. He thought the whole difficulty lay in this—that Malta could not very well be dealt with exceptionally. It might be a fair subject of discussion whether there should be Colonial centres of examination for the Public Service; but if that question was to be raised, it would have to be raised on a much larger scale. An exception could not be made in favour of Malta while other British Colonies and Dependencies not much more distant from England, and with as good claims, were excluded.
  Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

SUMMARY JURISDICTION (REPEAL, &c.) BILL.—(No. 155.)
(The Lord Chancellor.)
SUMMARY JURISDICTION (REPEAL, &c.) BILL.—(No. 155.)

  COMMITTEE.
  Order of the Day for the House to be put in Committee read.
  Moved, "That this House do now resolve itself into a Committee on the said Bill."—(The Lord Chancellor.)
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, this was not a mere Consolidation Bill.
  1588
  It effected some very extensive alterations of the law; but it was of a very peculiar character, for it was so framed as to be perfectly unintelligible to the ordinary mind, because almost all its enactments were done by repealing sections picked out of a variety of Statutes. He supposed the noble and learned Earl upon the Woolsack would not admit that Acts of Parliament were given to them to conceal their thoughts; but that was the way the subject was treated in this Bill. Where such extensive alterations were made in the Statute Book, he thought it would have been a matter of great convenience to affix, as was sometimes done, statements showing what were the points on which it was proposed to change the law. He remembered one case in which the House were legislating in such a manner as to sweep away the whole military law of the Indian Army, and he trusted that nothing so calamitous would occur in the present case. If they were to exercise any supervision over legislation of this kind, such a Memorandum as he had suggested was absolutely indispensable.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, there were a large number of Acts which were open to the same kind of objection, and the various Consolidation Acts that had in recent years been passed would all have been open to this criticism of the noble Marquess. Parliament, in this matter, was obliged to place considerable confidence in the learned and careful persons who drafted Bills of this description, and in those who examined them after their preparation; and although this kind of legislation had been carried on for a long time, and upon a large scale, he did not know of any case where there had been an oversight on the part of the competent and careful draftsmen, or that any inconvenience to the public had arisen. Parliament, therefore, had been right in bestowing that confidence. The present Bill, with some trifling alterations, and those of a formal character, was the same as passed through this House last Session, when the noble and learned Earl (the Earl of Milltown) watched its progress; and he thought he might venture to say that it might be safely passed by their Lordships.
  Motion agreed to; House in Committee accordingly.
  Amendments made:—The Report thereof to be received on Monday next; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 202.)

REVISION OF JURORS AND VOTERS LISTS (DUBLIN COUNTY) BILL.
(The Lord President.)
REVISION OF JURORS AND VOTERS LISTS (DUBLIN COUNTY) BILL.

  (NO. 178.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL), in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, that its object was to amend the existing arrangements for the revision of jurors and voters lists in the County of Dublin, which was found to be most distinctly inconvenient and unreasonably burdensome on the official who now discharged the duty. The fact was, that in the City and County of Dublin the same official discharged the duties of Recorder and Chairman of the County. His duties in that double capacity were very onerous indeed—so onerous and so continuous throughout the year, that the holder of the office was the hardest worked judicial officer in the country. Both the present and the late Government felt that there was a strong case for relieving this officer from the particular portion of his duties dealt with in this Bill. The best way in which he could explain the matter was by referring to an application from the holder of the office which was the groundwork of this Bill. In January, 1880, the then Chairman of the County, resigned; and, in virtue of an Act passed two years before, the Chairmanship of the County devolved upon the Recorder of the City, carrying with it among other duties, and they were many, this duty of the revision of the jurors and voters list. When this event happened, the Recorder addressed a letter to the Irish Government, in which he said that he had always been of opinion that it was a mistake to unite these two important offices, that the united duties were too much for the same individual, and so on. At the same time, he said that he would be prepared to do his best to perform the duties of both offices. He said—
  "I believe that this accession to my present work will necessitate nearly continuous sittings, and will entail a much larger amount of work
  1590
  and more continuous sittings than are imposed on the holder of any other judicial office."
  And then he went on to say that, while willing, as far as possible, to discharge the duties of the two offices, there was one portion of them—namely, that of the revision of the lists for the county, which it was practically impossible for him to undertake. He added that, even if it were practicable, he did not think it would be fair to his office, or to himself—neither did he believe that the Government or Parliament would compel him—obliged as he was to hold sittings for other purposes for 11 months in the year, also to hold the sittings necessary, which would be almost continuous, for this revision. Therefore, he respectfully asked the Government to relieve him of these particular duties; and that was what the present Bill proposed to do by appointing a Revising Barrister for the County. That application of the Recorder had been referred to the Lord Chancellor of the day. He gave his opinion that the application was a reasonable one, provided that the Recorder could prove his statements to be accurate—that was to say, that the amount of time consumed by the revision of the lists proved to be what he expected. The Lord Chancellor said if the revision occupied as much time as was anticipated, he thought the duty too much for the Recorder; and he further pointed out that it was an inconvenient time of the year at which the revision must be made, inasmuch as it was just when the Licensing Sessions were held. He added, however, that it would be as well not to deal with the matter then, but to wait until the Recorder had had some experience of the actual working of the arrangement.
  THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORD: Who said that?
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL): The then Lord Chancellor, Dr. Ball. It had turned out that the Recorder was perfectly right in his anticipation as to the amount of labour and time required for the revision of these lists. His sittings had been fully as numerous, and had taken up quite as much time as he had estimated. The Bill was introduced in accordance with the Memorandum of the Lord Chancellor in 1881; but, under the pressure of other Business, it was allowed

  1591
  to drop. Now, the same Bill had been brought in and carried through the House of Commons. It appeared, as he had said, that this unfortunate official was compelled to have almost continuous sittings, for one purpose or another, all the year round, and so was in the position of having no vacation whatever. That was a state of things which it appeared to the Government it could not be to the public interest to continue, inasmuch as it was impossible that these important duties could be satisfactorily discharged. At the same time, it appeared unreasonable and unfair to require such a multiplication of business to be performed by the same officer. To put an end to that state of things, this Bill enabled the Lord Lieutenant to appoint a Revising Barrister for the County of Dublin, and so put it in the same position as other Irish counties. He begged to move the second reading of the Bill.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Lord President.)
  THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORD, in rising to move that the Bill be read a second time that day three months, said, that the Recorder of Dublin was in a better position than any similar officer in Ireland. The Recorder of Belfast, for instance, who got a less salary, had to revise the voters' lists for the County of Antrim, and the noble Lord opposite (the Lord President) must be aware that the County Court Judges of Ireland, who had an immense amount of judicial work to do, also revised the voters' lists in their districts. It seemed to him most extraordinary that this Bill should have been brought in at this time, when it was proposed to carry into law a scheme to provide new electoral machinery for the Three Kingdoms, in the shape of a Redistribution Bill, a Franchise Bill, and a Bill for the Registration of Voters. Why on earth, when they hoped soon to have these Bills before them, and to pass them into law, should the Government bring forward this measure, which he could only characterize as a job? He could not understand how the Government could lend themselves to such a thing. The Bill proposed to create a new office; and, to his mind, it was most ridiculous to do such a thing in only one county. Why should they not treat all the counties alike? He was prepared to show
  1592
  their Lordships, on the authority of the Chief Secretary for Ireland himself, that the Recorder of Dublin did not do as much work as many other officials, although he received a great deal more pay. Personally, he had nothing to say against the Recorder; indeed, he believed an official who discharged his duties more to the satisfaction of the public than Mr. Falkner did not exist. It was not to the character of the gentleman he objected, but to the creation by the Government of new offices. They were told the present Government was a Government of Retrenchment. [Opposition laughter.] Well, so it was said; but, for his part, he had seen very little of retrenchment about their policy. The salary of the Recorder of Dublin was £2,500 a-year, and Mr. Gibson had informed him that he had heard Mr. Trevelyan say, in the House of Commons, that last year this official only sat for 160 days. Was that at all in agreement with what had been said by the noble Lord opposite (the Lord President)? The noble Lord had given them to understand that the Recorder had no holidays, but was obliged to sit continuously. Such was evidently not the case. Then, with regard to the duties performed by this gentleman, he had only 5,000 voters to deal with; whilst the Recorder of Belfast had infinitely more. The County Court Judges also, although paid much smaller salaries than the Recorder of Dublin, had those lists to revise in two, and even three counties, in addition to their ordinary judicial work. The County Court Judge of Roscommon and Sligo, who had a list of 7,000 voters to revise, sat last year 300 days. His salary was only £1,500 a-year, whilst that of the Recorder of Dublin, who only sat 100 days, was £2,500. As a justification for the course he (the Marquess of Waterford) had taken in connection with the matter, he would point out to their Lordships that Notice of Motion to reject the Bill had been put on the Paper in the House of Commons by Mr. Biggar, Mr. O'Brien, Mr. Sexton, and Mr. Healy. Nearly the whole of the Irish Conservative Members, he believed, had been opposed to the Bill; and he was satisfied that almost every noble Lord who came from Ireland was opposed to it. Therefore, he sincerely hoped that it would not be read a second time. If a Conservative Government had

  1593
  brought forward such a Bill, they would have been hooted at right and left for such a piece of jobbery in trying to create places for their political supporters. The noble Marquess concluded by moving the rejection of the Bill.
  Amendment moved, to leave out ("now") and add at the end of the Motion ("this day three months.")—(The Marquess of Waterford.)
  THE EARL OF HOWTHsaid, that as one who was closely connected with the county of Dublin, and anxious to support its interests, he warmly supported the Bill. He would point out that it was impossible to conceive a more important jury panel than that of Dublin. Noble Lords must remember the unparalleled duties which were cast upon them during the past few years in connection with the terrible crimes and terrorism which had occurred in the country. He could not understand how the proposal in the Bill could be considered a job. Probably the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Waterford) was not aware of the difficulties connected with the registration of jurors in the country; but he could assure him they were enormous. People were anxious to avoid being placed on the list.
  THE EARL OF MILLTOWNsaid, he had listened with attention to the arguments which had fallen from noble Lords. It was said that the Recorder of Dublin was overworked; but last year he only sat 160 days, and that did not appear excessive work. He (the Earl of Milltown) did not want to say that this was a job, although he thought it might easily be made one, neither did he object to favour being bestowed on briefless barristers, the Government being at liberty to select one for this appointment; but he protested against the country being taxed for the support of such people.
  LORD FITZGERALD, in rising to support the Motion for the second reading of the Bill, said, that he had no interest in the question, save that of friendship for the Recorder. That officer was appointed by the late Government, and had proved himself a most excellent one. It was perfectly evident, from the statements made by the Recorder, that the duties he had to discharge, in addition to his legal functions, were very inconvenient and oppressive.
  1594
  He (Lord Fitzgerald) denied that there was any political advantage to be gained by the Government through the carrying of the Bill; for their Lordships must be well aware that the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, or the Irish Executive, would have to appoint the Revising Barrister, who would be a barrister of 10 years' standing. There was no ground for the charge that this was a job; and, in proof of that, he would call attention to the fact that the Revising Barrister would, he presumed, be paid a fee of 100 guineas only for each revision. The noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Milltown) had spoken of briefless barristers. Did the noble Earl intend this as a reproach? Very probably a briefless barrister might be appointed to this office; but, for his own part, he (Lord Fitzgerald) had not the same objection to those gentlemen as some noble Lords seemed to have. In Ireland there was no difficulty in obtaining, even among briefless barristers, high-minded gentlemen capable of performing judicial duties with fairness and efficiency. As to whether the Recorder of Dublin was, or was not, an over-worked official, who ought to be relieved of a portion of his present functions, all he could say was, that if he did not believe that to be the case, he Would not support the Bill. He would also refuse his assent to it, if he thought there was anything political in it; but he knew that that was not the case. The object was merely to relieve an overworked Judge. He could not say how many days the Recorder sat, because his sittings varied; but as to the statement alleged to have come from Mr. Trevelyan through Mr. Gibson, he thought Mr. Trevelyan had probably been referring to his sittings as Recorder, and did not take into account his other legal work, and his sittings for the purpose of revising these lists. At one time, the Recorder did not revise the jury lists; but, in 1877, a Bill was passed providing that as soon as there should be a vacancy in the Chairmanship of the County Dublin, all the duties of the office should be cast on the Recorder of the City of Dublin. The whole of the duties of the Chairman of the County, civil and criminal, were to be cast on him. Two or three years afterwards Mr. Trench resigned the Chairmanship of the County; and, as he (Lord Fitzgerald) understood it, this Bill was brought in a year after-

  1595
  wards to relieve the Recorder of part of his duties. The fact was, the Recorder of Dublin, though everything he did he did well, was an over-worked official. He had an extensive criminal jurisdiction, with jurisdiction to try all except capital offences, and sat repeatedly during the year for the consideration of criminal business. He had a much larger jurisdiction than any Chairman of Quarter Sessions in England. Dublin was a community of 250,000 persons, so that, obviously, the criminal duties were no light matter; but, in addition to that, he had also important civil duties, including the whole supervision of the licensing authorities in the City of Dublin, and also an extensive equitable jurisdiction. In addition to all these, after the resignation of the late Mr. Trench, he had all the work of the Chairman of the County of Dublin, civil, criminal, and equitable, cast upon him in addition to his other work. Under these circumstances, the request for some assistance was not unreasonable. Mr. Falkner, the present Recorder, did not object to his civil, criminal, or equitable duties; but he asked to be relieved of the duty of revising the lists, which took place at the only period of the year in which he could have a short vacation. To his (Lord Fitzgerald's) mind, the revision of the jury lists was infinitely more important than the revision of the electoral lists. In conclusion, he would say that the Bill was a very proper one to relieve an overworked official from a very troublesome duty, which occupied a great deal of time; and, therefore, he supported it.
  THE EARL OF LONGFORDsaid, that, in his opinion, a fair case had been made out for the application for relief that had been put forward by the Recorder of Dublin. He, therefore, hoped that the opposition to the Bill would not be pressed.
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL)said, he most decidedly denied that there was the shadow of a ground for describing this Bill as a job. The present proposal was not made originally to the present Government, but to the late Government; and the late Lord Chancellor had written the Memorandum which he had just communicated to the House assenting to the measure.
  THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORD: Provisionally.
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL): Not at all; only delaying the final decision until there should be some experience of the work of the united offices. He could not help thinking it was strange, to say the least, that the noble Marquess should have spoken of this Bill as a job, considering that if the late Government had continued in Office they would certainly have introduced it in 1881.
  On Question, "That ('now') stand part of the Motion?"
  Resolved in the affirmative.
  Bill read 2a accordingly; and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next.
  House adjourned at half past Six o'clock, to Monday next, a quarter before Eleven o'clock.