Lords Sitting of 16 July 1885

MINUTES.
PUBLIC Bras—First Reading— Post Office Sites*(181): Cholera Hospitals (Ireland)*(182); Polehampton Estates*(183).
Second Reading—Housing of the Working Classes (England) (177).
Committee—Tramways (Ireland) Provisional Order (No. 2) (65); Archdeaconries*(160–180); Tithe Rent Charge Redemption*(165).
Select Committee—Report—Waterworks Clauses Act (1847) Amendment [No. 179].
Report— Waterworks Clauses Act (1847) Amendment*(127); Secretary for Scotland (178).
Third Reading—Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 4)*(147); Tramways Provisional Orders (No. 2)*(156); Tramways Provisional Orders (No. 3)*(157); Public Health (Scotland) Provisional Order*(148); Pier and Harbour Provisional Orders*(114); East India Loan (£10,000,000)*(164), and passed.
Royal Assent—East India Unclaimed Stocks [48 £ 49 Vict. c. 25]; Yorkshire Registries [48 £ 49 Vict. c. 26]; Friendly Societies Act (1875) Amendment [48 £ 49 Vict. c. 27]; Gas Provisional Orders (No. 1) [48 £ 49 Vict. c. lv]; Commons Regulation (Ashdown Forest) Provisional Order [48 £ 49 Vict. c. lvi]; Commons Regulation (Drumburgh) Provisional Order [48 £ 49 Vict. c. lvii]; Commons Inclosure (Llanybyther) Provisional Order [48 £ 49 Vict. c. lviii]; Local Government (Gas) Provisional Orders [48 £ 49 Vict. c. lix]; Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (Labourers Act) (No. 4) [48 £ 49 Vict. c. lx]; Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (No. 2) [48 £ 49 Viet. c. lxi]; Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 5) [48 £ 49 Vict. c. lxii]; Drainage and Improvement of Lands (Ireland) Provisional Order (No. 2) [48 £ 49 Vict. c. lxiii]; Gas and Water Provisional Orders (No. 2) [48 £ 49 Viet.c. lxiv]; Water Provisional Orders [48 £ 49 Vict. c. lxv]; Tramways Provisional Orders (No. 1) [48 £ 49 Vict. c. Levi].

TRAMWAYS (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 2) BILL.
(The Earl Spencer.)
TRAMWAYS (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 2) BILL.

  (NO. 65.) 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 Spencer.)
  THE EARL OF LIMERICK,in rising to move, as an Amendment, "That the Order of Monday last for committing the Bill to a Committee of the Whole House be discharged," said, that, in adopting that course, he was actuated by no other than feelings of high respect for the noble Earl opposite (Earl Spencer), who had made the Motion which was carried on Monday, and that he had no knowledge of any of the parties interested in this particular project, either of those who were promoting or those who were opposed to it. He took the course he had taken solely because of the interest which now for 20 years he had taken in the Private Bill legislation of the House. The House, he
  884
  thought, was rather taken by surprise by what took place on Monday. He was sure that the majority of their Lordships could not have been aware what a very large question affecting the whole procedure of the House was raised by the Motion of the noble Earl. When the Notice appeared on the Paper he (the Earl of Limerick) thought, and he also was of opinion that many of their Lordships looked upon it as being simply a Motion to commit the Bill to a Committee of the Whole House, because the noble Earl was dissatisfied with the reception of the Bill before the Select Committee of their Lordships' House. Their Lordships had no idea of the raising of the larger question whatever. The noble Earl's argument was that the reference to a Select Committee had been made under a misconception of the Act of 1860, which regulated the procedure on this Bill, and that the Bill was really a Public Bill. But an examination of the various Acts passed between 1860 and the present time, establishing the procedure on Bills confirming Orders of the Lord Lieutenant in Council, showed that the noble Earl was mistaken, and that the procedure of the House, as related to Irish Tramway Bills, had not been founded on an entire misconception, as contended. The noble and learned Lord (Lord Fitzgerald) did not challenge the fact that, if the Bill had, upon the face of it, been a measure to confirm a Provisional Order, it would have necessarily come under the Standing Orders of their Lordships' House, and brought before a Select Committee without any opposition being made. The ground taken was that the Act was not an Act confirming a Provisional Order at all, but was one of an entirely different character, though he could not quite gather from the noble Lords who had spoken what the exact nature of the Act was supposed to be. He thought the matter was one of very great importance; and if this was an Act confirming a Provisional Order, it should follow the Rule of the House applicable to such measures. It was contended that the Bill had been introduced as a Public Act; but that would not exempt it from the ordinary Rule affecting those Public Acts which were of a local, limited application affecting private rights, which had always been referred to Private Bill Committees when they were opposed.

  885
  The noble Earl attributed some importance to the wording of the Act of 1860. It was—
  "The Lord Lieutenant, in Council, shall, as conveniently as may be, cause steps to he taken for the confirmation of such Order in Council by Act of Parliament, and until such confirmation the Order shall have no effect whatever."
  At that time, even when it was not opposed, a Provisional Order was to have no effect until it was confirmed by Act of Parliament. In 1861 the Act was changed; but, surely, if the rights of private persons to appear before a Private Bill Committee were intended to be taken away by either of those Acts, that would have been done in specific words, and not by a general statement that the Act was to be taken as a Public Act. He could not find anything since 1861 to show that these Orders were treated in an exceptional way. The Act of 1881 went further, and provided that no Act to confirm the Lord Lieutenant's Order should be required, unless the parties not only appealed, but also appeared to prosecute the appeal. When the Bill of 1883 was introduced, there was nothing to show that these Bills were not to take the usual course of Bills confirming Provisional Orders. Mr. Trevelyan, in introducing that Act, said that the Order of the Lord Lieutenant in Council in such cases as the present being only provisional, and requiring to be confirmed by Parliament, it would be open to anyone to oppose it. But opposition would be impossible unless the Bill were referred to a Select Committee as a matter of right. It would come to this—that if any person had sufficient influence he could get a Bill referred to a Select Committee; but that the general public who had private rights which were injured by such Bill, but who were not influential in Parliament, could not get them so referred. He could not believe that that was the intention of Parliament. Under the Act of 1883 very large rating powers were given, and also the power to take land compulsorily and to a considerable extent; but he did not know that Parliament had ever delegated to any other body the right to take land compulsorily. Those were the general grounds upon which he based his Motion. The question was whether they should continue the procedure they had followed for 25
  886
  years, or whether they should adopt the decision of Monday. If the Bill were not a Bill for confirming a Provisional Order, but was to be treated in every respect as a Public Bill, he (the Earl of Limerick) submitted that it ought not to have been introduced into that House at all, for it was one of those Bills which by the custom of Parliament could only have been introduced in the House of Commons according to Standing Order 226 of that House. Besides these reasons of a general character, he would urge that their Lordships should be very careful before they went into Committee on the Bill. Rightly or wrongly, this Bill went before a Select Committee of their Lordships' House, and that Committee decided that it was not advisable that it should become law. He submitted that the decision of the Committee ought to be received with great consideration. He wished he were better able to meet the arguments of noble Lords opposite. He had not raised this question out of any disrespect to the noble and learned Lords who took part in the discussion on Monday; but those Noblemen knew the exact question that was to be raised when they came down, and the rest of the House did not, and he thought a subject so important should not be decided hastily and without due investigation. In conclusion, he trusted the House would exonerate him from blame for occupying so much time in proposing the Resolution that stood in his name.
  THE EARL OF LONGFORD,in seconding the Amendment, said, this could not be both a Private and a Public Bill. If it was a Private Bill, it had been killed in Committee. If it was a Public Bill, it could not now commence at the Committee stage—in fact, it had never been introduced in that character. Some consideration ought to be paid to those who had been, by the Order of the House, at the trouble and expense of coming over to oppose the Bill, and who had proved their case before a Select Committee. It was not desirable to proceed with the Bill.
  Amendment moved,
  To leave out all the words after ("That") and insert ("the Order of Monday last for committing the Bill to a Committee of the Whole House be discharged.")—(The Earl of Limerick.)
  THE EARL OF SELBORNEsaid, he was not going to repeat the speech he had made the other evening; bat the proceedings were quite regular, and he hoped their Lordships would proceed with the Bill. The noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Limerick) gave due Notice of his intention to bring the subject forward the other evening; but no new argument had been adduced on the present occasion. He (the Earl of Selborne), therefore, trusted that their Lordships would adhere to the decision at which they arrived the other night. He maintained that the Bill was a public one, and that it had gone through all the usual stages.
  THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (The Earl of REDESDALE)said, that he did not think the matter was thoroughly understood.
  THE EARL OF LIMERICK: Hear, hear!
  THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES: Whether it was right or wrong, the Bill was read a second time, and referred to a Select Committee under the Standing Orders of their Lordships' House. It was called a Provisional Order, and every Bill which was called a Provisional Order there was no doubt might be dealt with in the way that this Bill had been. He held in his hand a letter from his noble Friend (the Earl of Belmore), the Chairman of the Select Committee, who was absent in Ireland, in which he said the Committee unanimously felt that the Bill ought not to proceed. He (the Earl of Redesdale) thought the decision of that Committee was a far more important guide to their Lordships' House than either the advice of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland or the Privy Council of Ireland. He believed that matters were inquired into before those Committees, and that their investigations were conducted in a way to bring out all the points of the case that were important in regard to legislation.
  THE EARL OF ROSSEsaid, that, as one of the Members of the Select Committee who considered the Bill, he desired to say a few words as to the general feeling of the Committee, and as to why it was their general feeling that the Bill should not proceed. So far as he knew, their action proceeded entirely on the ground that there seemed extremely little likelihood that the line would ever pay. The guarantee amounted to 1s. in
  888
  the pound, which would be levied on the district; and the Committee were of opinion that they should not allow an Act to go on, which would so heavily tax the occupiers and landowners of the district. The prospects of traffic appeared much over-rated, as the residences were situated principally near Ballincollig, which was already served by the Cork and Macroom line. It did not seem likely that lime would be sent partly by rail so short a distance; and as, under the scheme, no provision was made for its direct transfer from the ships to the trucks, it did not seem probable that the traffic in coal would be large.
  On Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Motion?"
  Resolved in the affirmative.
  House in Committee accordingly.
  Title.
  EARL SPENCER,in moving an Amendment to alter the title of the Bill by striking out the words "Provisional Order," in order to put in the words "Order in Council (Ireland) Bill," said, he did so on the ground that the measure was intended to affirm not a Provisional Order, but an Order in Council.
  Amendment moved, "That the title of the Bill be changed to' Order in Council (Ireland) Bill."—(The Earl Spencer.)
  THE EARL OF LIMERICKsaid, he questioned whether the former stages of the Bill, if a Public Bill, were not irregular.
  THE EARL OF SELBORNEsaid, the Amendment was only to insure that the Bill should be called by the name by which it was called in the Act of Parliament under which it was presented; and that no such mistake as had occurred in this instance should occur again, by the use of a form of title which failed to make a distinction between an Order in Council under the Act of 1860, and a common Provisional Order under Acts of a very different kind.
  THE EARL OF LONGFORDsaid, it would appear that the Bill had been introduced and read a second time, as a Public Bill, under false pretences. It was read a second time as a Private Bill, and rejected by a Select Committee.

  889
  The House, by main force, might be determined to pass it; but the noble Earl (the Earl of Limerick) was entirely in the right that the measure ought not to proceed on its present lines.
  Amendment agreed to; words changed accordingly.
  Title, as amended, agreed to.
  On the Motion of The Earl SPENCER, consequential Amendment made in page 1, by leaving out the word "Provisional," and after the word "Order" inserting the words "in Council."
  Clauses agreed to.
  The Report of the Amendments to be received To-morrow.
  House resumed.
  THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEESsaid, that ho must say that the Amendments proved most clearly that the House was right. The Bill had been read a second time, and confirmed by the House as a Provisional Order. Under the Orders of the House it was referred to a Select Committee, who had reported against it, and he thought their Lordships had committed an act of great irregularity.

HOUSING OF THE WORKING CLASSES (ENGLAND) BILL.
(The Marquess of Salisbury.)
HOUSING OF THE WORKING CLASSES (ENGLAND) BILL.

  (NO. 177.) SECOND BEADING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY,in rising to move that the Bill be now read a second time, said: The Bill, of which I have now the honour of moving the second reading, I do not present to your Lordships as a Member of the Royal Commission, although it is a Bill which has been drawn up with the unanimous consent of the Members of that Commission, and in concert with its Chairman (Sir Charles W. Dilke). The composition of that Commission was one ranging over a large field of political opinion; and it is, no doubt, a surprise to those parties who look at the names and the Report that the Commission came to any conclusion at all. I think, however, the Commission have made a very considerable number of very important recommendations, and the result is very largely due to the tact and conciliation with
  890
  which the deliberations of the Commission were conducted by the Chairman. Of course, anybody reading this Bill must read it with the knowledge that it is, to a certain extent, a compromise. Various Members of the Commission, no doubt, would have liked to go further, each in his own direction; but perhaps they occupied ground that was all the safer and sounder, because they had had to agree with one another in regard to the provisions of this measure. No one need expect to find that it contains any magic formula which will cure all the evils of which this House and the public have heard a great deal, and there is nothing startling, sensational, or extreme in its provisions. We are hoping to cure those evils by slow and gradual steps, by the application of remedies apparently not far-reaching in their character, but still judiciously directed to the precise difficulties which arose in each department of our inquiry. There is, as I have said, therefore, nothing sensational or extreme in the measure which we recommend your Lordships to accept. I will just go through the various portions of the Bill, only saying that it must not be considered to be the whole outcome of the deliberations of the Commission, for there are some very much larger and more difficult questions behind, which the circumstances of the Session do not permit of our dealing with now, but which I hope will be dealt with at some future time. The evils which this Commission was appointed to remedy consisted of two very distinct branches, which must not be confused, but must be kept apart by anybody who will apply the remedies rightly, but which there is a great tendency in the public mind to confuse. There are evils of a strictly sanitary character—namely, those evils which arise out of material causes, the bad structure of the houses, bad drainage, insufficiency of water, and so forth; and the evils which arise from overcrowding, due to the excess of population in one particular place. These evils are different in their nature, different in the remedies which it is requisite should be applied to them, and different, above all, in respect to the hope with which we can look for their speedy cure with the prospects of remedy which we have before as. The sanitary evils—and this is the result of our investigation—although they exist,

  891
  are in process of fairly rapid cure. In truth, if the law, as it exists, was fully carried out, these evils would hardly remain. Our task has principally been to suggest alterations that would secure a more ample and rapid execution of the law; and we believe if that can be done the sanitary evils will altogether disappear. But the most cheering point with respect to them is this—that with the increase of civilization and with the progress of the community these sanitary evils tend to vanish altogether, and they essentially differ in this respect from the evils of overcrowding. The more our prosperity increases the more sanitary evils will vanish; but the more our prosperity increases, the more there is the danger that unless remedial measures are taken the evils of overcrowding will also increase. The sanitary part of the measure consists of a number of details which we cannot well discuss without the Public Health Act in our hands; but, in the first place, it may be said that we give the Sanitary Authorities power to put into effect bye-laws all over the country, giving them the right of supervision as to tenement houses. At present, I think, there is only power in the Metropolis, and there only power where the Local Government Board give their previous authority. The Sanitary Authorities, by this Bill, receive power to bring these bye-laws into effect at once. They are bye-laws which permit the proper inspection and supervision over tenement houses— that is, over houses in which numbers of rooms or floors are inhabited by several distinct families, and where, therefore, there is great danger of sanitary evil arising. The next point that we deal with in respect to that subject is an alteration of the Artizans' Dwellings Act. Under that Act, the Local Authority has power to clear these places, popularly called "slums," and substitute better buildings. But the Local Authority is not always inclined to do its duty in that respect, the expense being very considerable, and local interests of a formidable character having often to be met. This Bill gives power to the Local Government Board, where the officer reports that the premises are unfit for human habitation, to authorize the Local Authority to put in force the provisions of the Act, and then it becomes the duty of the Local Authority to comply
  892
  with the order for the removal of the premises. Then there is another provision which will tend largely to increase the health of the Metropolis, and, in fact, of all houses in large towns. Anyone who has had a house built is acquainted with the speculative builders or the builders who are not speculative. They have a habit—I do not know under what part of their business it comes, perhaps from some uninstructed workmen —but they have a habit of conducting all the drains into the centre of the kitchen and leaving them there. If anything occurs in the house it is said—"It cannot be the drains, because it is a new house." The children die; typhoid fever has done its work, and then it is found that all the mischief has sprung from preventible disease. At present, under the law, a man who lets a furnished house is compelled to enter into a contract that the house is healthy; but, by a curious peculiarity of the law, that does not extend to an unfurnished house. By the provisions of this Bill that anomaly will be removed and the evil will be met. Any person building a house and letting it, and not taking proper and reasonable precautions that it shall be healthy, will be held to have broken the contract, and will be held liable, just as the Railway Company is, for the illness or death of any person living in it, so far as it is due to his own negligence. I believe that will be a provision of considerable value, which will put a stop to the somewhat reckless disposal of unfurnished houses, from which so many lamentable evils have arisen. I need not tell your Lordships of the evil in this end of the town; but it is ten-fold worse in the small houses, which are run up in the suburbs at a cheap rate, and the building of which has often been exceedingly disgraceful. No one who has examined into the matter can doubt that there is a great deal of scamped work, which has greatly increased the death-rate. I look to this clause more than to any other to diminish the death-rate that is caused by insanitary dwellings. But we must not imagine that it is anything we can do in this House, or in the House of Commons, that will remove all these evils. It must be done by that stirring up of public opinion which these investigations cause; it is to this that we must look for any real reform; it must be

  893
  from the people themselves, from the owners, builders, and occupiers, when their attention is drawn to the enormous evils which past negligence has caused— it is from them that the cure of the sanitary evils which have so largely increased the death rate must come. I think we should be deceiving ourselves if we imagined that any impulse would be sufficient to cure an evil so widely spread. But with regard to overcrowding there is something more we can do. In the main, the worst features of overcrowding are to be found in the Metropolis, where the chief difficulty lies in the enormous distance which the circumference lies from the centre. In other places it is possible to meet it by building cottages on the outskirts of the town; but that cannot be done in London, because of the distance being so great. We must, therefore, find some mode of stimulating the provision of houses in places where the workpeople have their work to do, or in the immediate neighbourhood thereof. We propose to give facilities in the Bill for using certain open spaces, which have been cleared in the Metropolis and elsewhere — for instance, the sites of prisons in the Metropolis — which, in consequence of recent legislation, have ceased to be necessary. The recent alteration of our prison-house legislation has made it expedient that many of the old buildings shall cease to be used for the purpose for which they were intended and to which they are now applied. It is proposed with reference to Millbank Penitentiary, Coldbath Fields, and Pentonville Prisons, that the sites shall be sold to the Metropolitan Board of Works at prices which will enable the Board to let them out, either to Trusts like the Peabody, or other similar Companies, under, of course, proper restrictions that they shall be applied, and solely, to the purpose of erecting dwellings for the working classes. I cannot help hoping that in connection with that provision some effort may be made to obtain working-class dwellings that shall be, while still healthy and useful, somewhat cheaper in their construction than those which the Peabody Trustees have erected. I believe that the Peabody buildings have done an enormous amount of good; but they have not struck at the lowest and most necessitous class. They are built on a
  894
  scale that renders necessary a rent higher than that class can pay. The people must be housed; and we must make an effort to see if we cannot, without disregarding the laws of health, produce buildings sufficient to house them, without asking a rent which is beyond their means to pay. As far as we have gone at present I do not think that the problem has been sufficiently approached. I believe it is possible to grapple with it, and do more in the way of cheap buildings than we have done. I hope that the Metropolitan Board of Works in dealing with these sites, if it shall please Parliament to place them in a position to do so, will make a serious and earnest effort to see that that great difficulty is more completely removed than it is now. Another change which we propose with respect to London is a change dealing with private and corporate property. Your Lordships are aware that very commonly in settlements it is provided that land shall only be leased at the best price that can be had. The result of that is that though the tenant for life may be perfectly willing to let the land for building working - class dwellings upon, and though it is for the public interest that he should do so, and every man living may desire that he should do so, yet he is forbidden by this provision to let the land for such purpose. Of course, it is more profitable to let the land for the purpose of large and rich buildings, shops, or private houses, than it is for poorer class houses. At all events, that is the case in many parts of the town. There are large properties in this part of the town which are bound up in that way; and I believe that if some legislation of this kind were introduced we should find a great deal more land set free. We do not, of course, wish to do anything contrary to the wishes of the owners; but we want to give liberty to use land for working-class dwellings in towns just as a man is at liberty now to use his land in the country for farmhouses and cottages, without considering whether it is the most profitable purpose for which the land could be used. I think your Lordships will feel that no injury is done to any interest by conferring powers upon town owners of providing for the wants of the population similar to those which already exist in the country. There is

  895
  a curious peculiarity in the Settled Land Act, which enables trust money, or the money belonging to Corporations, to be expended in erecting buildings for the country population. It enables farmhouses and cottages to be built out of the money belonging to the trust or Corporation; but the Settled Land Act stops short, and gives no such facility for building these working-class dwellings in towns. I do not understand on what basis this exception is made. I was anxious that some such clause should be introduced into the Settled Land Act while it was passing through this House; but it was thought better that the Act should pass without the introduction of matter which would lead to unnecessary conflict. I hope, now that it is recommended by the Royal Commission, it will commend itself to your Lordships. There is only one other provision of importance to which 'it is necessary I should draw your Lordships' attention. It may be that, after all these facilities are given, cases will occur in which room cannot be provided for the population. These cases occur principally in places where industries have suddenly sprung up, and where a large population has suddenly gathered together, and where there is no local capital to come forward in order to supply the necessary accommodation. I may illustrate what I mean by the case of the town of Camborne, in Cornwall, which occupies a considerable place in the evidence taken by the Commission. In that case, there were local difficulties which prevented the proprietors from selling the land, and there was no one who was willing to build. The consequence was there was most frightful overcrowding, accompanied by great misery, for which no possible remedy could be found. I do not think that in these cases there should be an exceptional remedy; but it so happens that we have, on the Statute Book, a law designed to meet cases of this kind, which is, perhaps, not so wholly applicable as it might be. The noble Duke opposite (the Duke of Argyll) made use of a striking observation the other night, that the history of social movements in this country was very nearly the history of the life of my noble Friend (Lord Shaftesbury). I believe that is a very true representation of the facts. Among-the measures which my noble Friend, in
  896
  his long and active life, was the means of passing, was one for increasing the number of lodging-houses in places where congestion of the population had taken place. He passed it in 1851, first through the House of Commons, and afterwards, owing to the death of his father, it was his singular fortune to pass it through the House of Lords. But it does not fulfil the expectations which he entertained of it, owing to certain technical difficulties that have arisen. We propose to use that Act with a little more freedom, for the purpose of meeting such exceptional cases as I have referred to. The Act of my noble Friend enables a parish or Local Authority to build lodging-houses in cases where the necessity has arisen. The Act is safeguarded by a number of provisions, requiring certain majorities to be obtained. The result of these precautions is, that the Act does not work at all. We prefer to apply it in another way in requiring no special majority of the population, but providing that an examination shall take place by the Local Government Board; and if the Inspector reports these two things—first, that the accommodation is wanted, and is not likely to be obtained in any other way; and, secondly, that the parish may provide it without any risk to the ratepayers—without imprudence as regards the ratepayers—then the Local Government Board may issue the necessary authority to enable the work to be carried out. At the same time, to clear up certain legal doubts as to whether my noble Friend's Act, and the Acts founded upon it, apply to separate tenements as well as to lodging-houses, the Bill provides that it shall be applicable to cottages as well as lodging-houses. My impression is that it is applicable to the building of cottages at the present time; but we have introduced a Proviso to clear up any doubt on that point, and also to give power, in suitable localities, for the provision of not more than half-an-acre of garden ground for each cottage, the annual value of such garden not to exceed £1. Where such provision is made by the Local Authority it is, of course, desirable that it should not take the form of long rows of buildings; but, as far as possible, they should erect cottages separated by gardens. It may not be possible to apply this provision in many cases; but I think the

  897
  carrying of it out will have a double effect; it may relieve cases of great congestion such as those to which I have referred, and it may, by its very existence, operate as an incentive to those who have the power to build cottages, to do so without bringing the Act into operation. I have now gone through all the principal provisions of this Bill, and your Lordships will perceive that there is nothing in it of a very large or sweeping character, yet I am not without hope that, if adopted by Parliament, it will exercise considerable influence over the happiness of those whose lot in life is difficult and who have many sorrows and troubles in store for them. I feel that the condition of the lowest and poorest of the working classes in the most crowded parts of the community is one which, more than any other, deserves attention both outside and in both Houses of Parliament; because it is by the character of the English race, and the nature of those produced from generation to generation that you carry on the traditions of the country, fill its armies, perform its public services, and maintain its prosperity, and uphold its ancient reputation; and their fitness for this electing must depend upon the physical causes which attend their birth and nurture. Among those physical causes none is more powerful, or more prominent, than the condition of the houses in which they and their parents dwell, and therefore there is none that deserves more earnest, careful, unflagging, and yet circumspect, attention both of the philanthropist and the statesman.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2ª "—(The Marquess of Salisbury.)
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2ª accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next.

SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND BILL.
(The Earl of Rosebery.)
SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND BILL.

  (NO. 178.) REPORT.
  Order of the Day for the Report of Amendments to be received, read.
  THE MARQUESS OF HUNTLYsaid, he thought their Lordships should have a clearer and more distinct understanding than they had at present as to the course the Government proposed to take
  898
  with regard to the Bill in the other House.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, he had already stated that although the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Rose-bery) had continued in charge of the Bill in their Lordships' House, they proposed that, in the other House, it should be taken up by them, and become a Government Bill.
  THE MARQUESS OF HUNTLYsaid, he was quite aware of that; but he was anxious to know what the intentions of the Government were with regard to the Scottish Education Department? There was some uncertainty on that point, because of the remarks of the noble Viscount the Lord President of the Council (Viscount Cranbrook) on Tuesday night.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, he very much regretted the absence of his noble Friend (Viscount Cranbrook) on the present occasion, and that he was not there to explain the matter. However, he understood from the speech of his noble Friend on Tuesday, that the Government entirely accepted the Amendments introduced at the instance of the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Rose-bery).
  THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANsaid, a considerable change had been introduced into the Bill with regard to the title of the Secretary, and he thought it was very desirable that there should be no doubt whatever as to what the position of the Secretary for Scotland, as Vice President of the Council who was to preside over the Scottish Education Department, was to be. He understood from his noble Friend the Lord President (Viscount Cranbrook) the other day that that position was to be absolutely clear and distinct; and he should like to know now if the Government could, in a more distinct manner, give a confirmation of what the Lord President was understood to say on Tuesday. He wished, in the first place, to know whether he was correct in understanding the Lord President to say that the Scotch Education Department would be wholly distinct and separate alike in form, in substance, and in organization from the English Department; and, secondly, whether, in spite of the alteration of title from President to Vice President, it was still intended that the Depart-

  899
  ment should be under the control of the Scotch Secretary? The Scotch people had made up their minds that they wished to have the control of their own education, and their Lordships having conceded so much to their wishes—he might say their unanimous wish—he thought it should be made perfectly clear and distinct what the scope of the Bill was before it left that House.
  THE EARL OF MINTOsaid, the title of the Secretary for Scotland, as regarded education, had been changed in a very remarkable way. The Amendment, as it stood on the Paper on Tuesday morning, was to the effect that the Secretary for Scotland should be the President of the Scottish Education Department; but when he looked at the Bill now before him, he found that the word "President" had been changed to "Vice President." He did not know that that change had been made. Ho would like to ask the noble Earl what the position of the Scotch Secretary was to be in regard to education; and, also, that they should know something more about the position of the Committee of Council. Was that Committee to be composed simply of official Members of the Council, or was it to be specially constituted so as to meet Scotch requirements? It was very desirable that they should know what was to be the constitution and the real functions of the Scottish Department. Was it to remain merely a titular body? In short, was it to be a sham or a reality? Was the Lord President of the Council to be a Member of the Scottish Committee of Council, and was he to be of superior rank to the Secretary for Scotland? He regretted that he could not join in the general approval given by their Lordships; for, in his own opinion, the change made in the title of the Secretary was a change for the worse, and he regretted that it should have been made.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERY,in reply, said, he could not give any pledges or extended explanations in regard to the constitution of the Committee; but it was due to the noble Earl behind him (the Earl of Minto) to say something to clear up the point that had been raised as to the change in the title. It was perfectly true that, in the Amendment as it appeared on the Paper, the word
  900
  "President" was there; but in the Amendment, as he (the Earl of Rosebery) read it to the House, he used the term "Vice President." The explanation of the matter was this. In drawing up the Amendment, he had taken the analogy of the Board of Trade, which was a Committee of the Privy Council, constituted with a President by an Order in Council. He did not not see why the same form should not be used in this case; but, on coming down to the House, the noble Viscount the Lord President (Viscount Cranbrook) pointed out to him that, though he quite understood the intention to be as it was stated, yet it would not be possible to have another President of the Council, one permanent, and the other shifting. The Chairman of the English Committee of Education was called Vice President, and therefore, as a matter of form, it was better that the Scottish Secretary should also be a Vice President. He (the Earl of Rosebery) did not see any great difference in substance in the change. He was asked by the noble Earl whether the Committee was to be a sham or not. He had no power to decide that point; but, in moving the Amendment, he had laid great stress on the intention of the promoters of the Bill that the Committee of Council should be a living reality, and not be, as at present, a collection of phantoms; but that, of course, rested more with noble Lords opposite than with himself. The noble Earl who had just spoken (the Earl of Minto) had said that he thought the original better than the amended Bill. In some respects, he agreed with him. He (the Earl of Rosebery) himself would have preferred if it had been possible to transfer education to the Scottish Secretary in a more distinct way by scheduling the Education Act; but it appeared that that was not possible. However, they were doing all they could in that direction, and he thought it infinitely better to do it in the way he had, than to risk the passing of the Bill by introducing changes in the interpretation of a Statute. For the rest, he trusted to the public declarations of the Lord President, who said that if education in Scotland was to be transferred to the new Minister—and it was to be transferred—it must be transferred as thoroughly and completely as possible. He (the Earl of Rosebery)

  901
  put the largest interpretation upon these words. They could not, in a Bill of that sort, deal with the question of patronage. That was outside the scope of the Bill. If it was intended at the last moment to withhold any part of that complete transference, all he could say was that an incomplete transference would be wholly unsatisfactory to the people of Scotland. The people of Scotland had made up their minds that their Minister was to have the control, absolute and complete, of their education, and anything that fell short of that in reality would be unsatisfactory to them. He believed also the Government were determined that this should be a large and a graceful concession, and not a niggardly and grudging one. In one case, it would be complete and satisfactory; in the other, it would be a phantom.
  THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (The Earl of IDDESLEIGH)said, he thought the explanation which the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Rosebery) had given of what took place the other night was a perfectly accurate one. Ho understood that the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Salisbury) was anxious for some fuller and more precise information on certain points which he thought could be best supplied by the Lord President. What he (the Earl of Iddesleigh) would venture to suggest, therefore, to his noble Friend (the Marquess of Lothian) would be that, instead of attempting to deal with the matter now, he should renew his Questions to the Lord President on the third reading of the Bill. If that course was taken, he had no doubt they would have a satisfactory statement from the Lord President with regard to the matter.
  THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANsaid, he would act upon the suggestion, and repeat his Questions when the Lord President was present on the third reading of the Bill.
  Amendments reported accordingly; and Bill to be read 3ª To-morrow.
  House adjourned at a quarter past Six o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Ten o'clock.