Lords Sitting of 26 March 1886

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Consolidated Fund (No. 2)*; Electric Lighting Act (1882) Amendment (No. 3)* (48).
Second Reading—Drainage and Improvement of Lands (Ireland) Provisional Order* (38); Electric Lighting Act (1882) Amendment (No. 1)* (25); Electric Lighting Act (1882) Amendment (No. 2)* (40).
Second Reading—Committee negatived—Third Reading—Consolidated Fund (No. 1),* and paused.

REPRESENTATIVE PEERS FOR SCOTLAND.
The Clerk of the Crown in Chancery delivered his certificate that the Earl of Mar and the Earl of Morton had been elected Representative Peers for Scotland in the room of the Viscount Strathallan and the Lord Saltoun deceased.

IRELAND-POLICY OF THE GOVERNMENT.—QUESTION.
VISCOUNT CRANBROOK: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether it is his intention, or the intention of any other Member of the Government, to make a statement in this House on the 8th April as to the Irish policy of the Government, similar to the statement which we understand will be made in the House of Commons on that day?
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Earl GRANVILLE): It is not my intention to do so on that day.
LORD ASHBOURNE: Does the noble Earl intend to do so on an early date?
[No reply.]
LORD ASHBOURNE: If not on that date, will the noble Earl do so on another date?
EARL GRANVILLE: I have no doubt that it will be my duty to do so on some day or other—at least, I hope so.

ELECTRIC LIGHTING ACT (1882) AMENDMENT (No. 1) BILL.
(The Lord Rayleigh.)
ELECTRIC LIGHTING ACT (1882) AMENDMENT (No. 1) BILL.

  (No. 25.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  LORD RAYLEIGH, in moving that the Bill be read the second time, said, that it was commonly but erroneously supposed that electric lighting was a recent invention. The are light was, in fact, discovered at the beginning of the century by Davy, and might be recognized by its powerful character, which by contrast seemed to be intensely blue, but was really less blue than the daylight. Subsequently, the present Mr. Justice Grove, then an ardent experimentalist, showed how a reading-lamp could be constructed by passing electricity through a spiral wire at a red heat. The difficulty in the practical development of the art lay almost solely in the production of the electricity, which at that time could only be produced by batteries. But by the introduction of the dynamo machine the art of electric lighting attained a greater and greater development; and at the present time the dynamo had so nearly attained perfection that 93 per cent of the whole mechanical power was converted into the electrical form. The next difficulty was in employing electricity on a small scale; but the discoveries, almost simultaneous, of Edison and Swan, went far towards overcoming these difficulties. A period of speculation ensued. Electricity was supposed to be rapidly superseding gas, and gas shares accordingly became much depreciated in value. Then various schemes came before Parliament for the supply of the electric light, and the Act of 1882 was passed, which was termed "An Act for facilitating and regulating" the use of electricity for lighting and other purposes. But it was proposed to effect this object by more oppressive regulations than were ever before applied to an industrial undertaking. The burden of complaint lay in the 27th clause, by which Local Authorities should have the option of compulsorily purchasing undertakings for electric lighting after 21 years. In
  4
  the event of disagreement as to the price, the question was to be submitted to arbitration; and it was provided that the price to be paid for the undertaking, plant, &c, should be its value at the time of purchase—that was, when the machinery might be much worn or even obsolete—but without any addition in respect of compulsory purchase, or of goodwill, or of any profits. What was still more surprising was that when the Bill was first introduced into the House of Commons the period was seven years. It was, however, extended by the Select Committee of that House to which the Bill was referred to 14 years, and their Lordships further enlarged the time to 21 years. If the terms of purchase had been reasonable the mere shortness of time might not have constituted an obstacle to the working of the clause. But no capitalist would care to invest his money in electrical enterprises on such terms as the Act imposed. Those terms, in effect, were that if the enterprize failed the loss should fall exclusively on the capitalist; but if it should be successful the Local Authorities should have power to step in and buy the concern on utterly inadequate terms. How could such a clause permit the proper development of any scheme of electric lighting? The question arose, With what motive was the Act made so stringent? It had been suggested that the object really was to put a stop to electric lighting; and it was, perhaps, true that the powerful interest of the Gas Companies arrayed against electric lighting enterprizes had influenced the result too much. But he was unwilling to believe that Mr. Chamberlain, who was then President of the Board of Trade, was actuated by anything else than a desire for the public interest. It was a difficult and wide question how far Local Authorities could usefully enter into industrial enterprizes of this kind. He would not enter into that question, though he would remark that the electric light did not stand in the same position as water supply, which was an absolute necessity, or even as the manufacture of gas, of which almost as much was known as could be known. At the time the Act was passed it was generally supposed that the electric light would be a great success, and the Board of Trade desired that the benefit of that success should be shared by the public, and

  5
  that it should not go entirely to private Companies. It seemed to him that there was too much jealousy at the present day of a private Company making large profits. Most undertakings were more or less of a speculative character; and if some were great successes others were miserable failures, so that one ought to be balanced against the other. The promoters of the Act, in endeavouring to advance the public interest, really inflicted great injury on the public by preventing them from having any chance of getting the electric light for many years. Although he believed a great mistake was made at the time of the passing of the Act in 1882, he was willing to admit that the subject was one of considerable difficulty. The Bill was not seriously debated in either House of Parliament; but it had the advantage of consideration by a Select Committee of the House of Commons, under the Presidency of Mr. E. Stanhope. That Committee took the evidence of experts, and heard counsel who represented the various interests involved. He must go further and admit that some of the witnesses on behalf of electric lighting examined before that Committee seemed to think that 21 years might possibly suffice as a minimum period, not, however, in conjunction with such terms of purchase at the end of the period as those embodied in the Act. From another point of view he thought they need not altogether regret that something in the nature of a wet blanket was thrown by the Act over the feverish speculation at that time. But during the last two years he thought the Act had done a great public injury. Experience had been gained in many mills and large ships which had been lighted by electricity; and the last two years would have been a very favourable time in other respects. Labour had been cheap, and capital could easily have been obtained on reasonable terms. As soon as it became clear that matters were at a deadlock, endeavours were naturally made to obtain some relaxation of the very stringent provisions of the law. At the suggestion of Mr. Joseph Chamberlain, who was then at the Board of Trade, a Committee was appointed, of which a noble Lord opposite (Lord Thurlow) was Chairman, and among its Members were Sir Frederick Bramwell and others, who were well qualified to advise in matters of that kind.
  6
  The present Bill was, in fact, the outcome of the deliberations of that Committee. When they considered in what direction it would be possible to obtain a relaxation of the present law, the most obvious one that suggested itself was a prolongation of the period of 21 years, more particularly if that prolongation could be accompanied by some less unfavourable terms of purchase. This was the view of the matter which had commended itself to his noble Friend (Viscount Bury), who had contributed the second Bill to the trio now before the House. If the question were merely one of raising a large amount of capital in order to start an enterprize of this kind once for all, it was likely enough that such a relaxation as he had spoken of would meet the circumstances of the case. But they could not shut their eyes to the fact that, in so experimental an enterprize as electric lighting must be for many years, it would be impossible for a Company to lay out a large sum in the first instance, in the full confidence that they would obtain a fair remuneration for their outlay. They would establish the system on a comparatively small scale at first, and then would gradually extend it. In that case it was obvious that a comparatively small capital would be required in the first instance; but from time to time they would have to go into the market in order to raise fresh capital. In what position would the Company be to effect that object? After a considerable fraction of their term had elapsed they would be in such a position that it would be impossible for them to attract fresh capital to the enterprize. Moreover, the interests of the public would be by no means well served during the latter part of such a term. During the later years the Company would hesitate greatly about embarking on any improvements or extending the area of their operations. After considering the objections which he had endeavoured to place before their Lordships, the Committee came to the conclusion that a solution of the question could not be found in that direction; and they proposed that the two competitors, lighting by gas and lighting by electricity, should be put on the same footing in respect not only of privileges, but also of obligations. The obligations imposed by the Bill were more severe than anything in the existing law. One of

  7
  the clauses relating to the compulsory supply of electric light provided that the Company should be required to supply electric light at any point within 25 yards of their mains. The important question of the raising of additional capital was provided for by the adoption of the corresponding provision from the Gas Acts known as the Auction Clauses. The object of securing to the public part of the benefits of the undertaking was, to a great extent, obtained under the provisions of the Bill by the adoption of what was known as the sliding scale of the Gas Acts. If a Company were able to supply light at a lower rate, then in accordance with that they would be at liberty to increase the dividends paid to their shareholders. By this arrangement a Company would have every inducement to consider efficiency and economy; and, at the same time, if circumstances were favourable, both the public and the Company would be benefited. At the present stage of the question he did not wish to commit their Lordships further than to the opinion that the obstacles should now be removed which practically forbade the attempt to supply electricity publicly on a large scale uncle the Act of 1882. If the suggestion of the noble Viscount who had another Bill on the same subject were adopted, the exact form of that remedy might be well left to a Select Committee of that House, or of both Houses of Parliament. What he particularly wished to emphasize was that too much time had been lost already; and it would be a matter of great regret if further delay was allowed to intervene, so as to prevent a fair chance being given to this most interesting application of modern discovery and invention, which promised to do much to relieve the gloom and un healthiness of life in our great cities The noble Lord concluded by moving that the Bill be now read the second time.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a—(The Lord Rayleigh.)
  LORD HOUGHTONsaid, that Her Majesty's Government had no objection to the second reading of this Bill, provided that if the Motion of the noble Viscount (Viscount Bury) to refer the two Bills to a Select Committee should not be carried the noble Lord would defer the Committee stage of the present
  8
  Bill till the Government Bill on the same subject had passed through Committee.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly.

ELECTRIC LIGHTING ACT (1882) AMENDMENT (No. 2) BILL.
(The Viscount Bury.)
ELECTRIC LIGHTING ACT (1882) AMENDMENT (No. 2) BILL.

  (No. 40.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  VISCOUNT BURY, in moving that the Bill be read the second time, said, that although it went in the same direction, it did not go so far as that of his noble Friend (Lord Rayleigh). The Bill to which the House had just given a second reading was a Companies Bill, as it put the undertakings of the Electric Lighting Companies on equal terms with those of the Gas Companies. But he believed that the interests of the public would be best served if a term were given at the end of which the electric lighting undertakings should belong to, or should be capable of acquisition by, the Local Authorities. His noble Friend, on the other hand, gave the Electric Lighting Companies a perpetuity like the Gas Companies. The term fixed by the Bill which he was now moving was 42 years. He had no objection to the greater part of his noble Friend's Bill; but it would be in the interests of the public that both should be referred to a Select Committee. If the Government had prepared a Bill on this subject why had they not brought it on before, instead of wishing to delay these Bills? Legislation was urgently required on this subject, as the Act of 1882 had made electric lighting altogether an impossibility. He did not know of a single place which had been lighted under it. It had entirely frightened capitalists away, as no one would invest money in a concern which could be sold for the price of old iron at the end of 21 years. He proposed to give a term of 42 or 63 years, at the end of which period the Local Authority would have to pay the price of a going concern.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Viscount Bury.)
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly.

ELECTRIC LIGHTING ACT (1882) AMENDMENT (No. 1) BILL.—(No. 25.)
(The Lord Rayleigh.)

ELECTRIC LIGHTING ACT (1882) AMENDMENT (No. 2) BILL.—(No. 40.)
(The Viscount Bury.)
VISCOUNT BURY, in moving that these two Bills should be referred to a Select Committee, said, that the matter must be dealt with, to a great extent, on expert evidence. The principle to which he attached importance was that the term for the purchase of the undertakings should be extended from 21 years to a much longer period, and the object of the Committee would be to inquire from experts what was the shortest term that could be given for working which would permit of capital being raised for electric light undertakings.
Moved, "That the Bills be referred to a Select Committee."—(The Viscount Bury.)
LORD HOUGHTON, in reply, said, that Her Majesty's Government had no complaint to make against either of the noble Lords; on the contrary, they quite admitted that the present position of electric enterprize fully warranted them in bringing in these Bills. Although the Electric Lighting Act of 1882 contained some valuable provisions, nevertheless he did not doubt that the time had arrived for relaxing some of its most stringent clauses. The Board of Trade had, in relation to this matter, to consider three separate interests—those of the inventors, those of the Local Authorities, and those of the public. Her Majesty's Government believed that electric lighting had a very brilliant future before it, provided sufficient security was taken that new and perpetual monopolies were not created. He objected to the Bill of the noble Lord (Lord Rayleigh) on the ground that although it was politely called an Amendment Bill it was really intended to entirely destroy the Act of 1882, and to establish a new series of vested interests. The Government, having taken the best opinions, found it was not necessary to alter the law regarding the right of consumers to choose their own burners. The noble Lord's argument seemed to be that because a bad bargain had been made with the Gas Companies they were bound to go
10
on making such bargains. He appealed with great confidence to their Lordships not to aid the noble Lord in establishing a new monopoly. As to the Bill of the noble Viscount (Viscount Bury), he (Lord Houghton) was bound to say that the Government thought the present Purchase Clause was a fair one, and did not work badly; but the Bill of the noble Viscount would create a more dangerous, because a more insidious, form of monopoly. What Her Majesty's Government were prepared to do in their Bill was to extend the maximum term during which a Provisional Order should remain in force from 21 years to 30 years, and, with the consent of the Local Authority, to 42 years from the date of the concession, the Companies to have three months' notice in order to enable them to arrive at some new arrangement. Her Majesty's Government, however, could not consent to their Bill being referred, with those now under discussion, to a Select Committee. He, therefore, appealed to the noble Viscount to withdraw his Motion for referring these Bills to a Select Committee; or, at all event, to postpone it until he had seen the Government measure, which would be laid before the House in a day or two. In his opinion, this subject could be better discussed in Committee of the Whole House than by a Select Committee.
VISCOUNT CRANBROOKasked whether it was intended that the three Bills should be referred to a Select Committee?
LORD HOUGHTONreplied in the negative.
VISCOUXT BURYsaid, that an extended term of 30 years would not be sufficient. If the noble Lord did not intend that the Government Bill should be referred to a Select Committee, and refused to agree to a further extension of the term beyond 30 years, he should go to a division upon his present Motion. If the noble Lord, however, would agree to refer the Government Bill to the same Select Committee to which these Bills were to be sent he would gladly withdraw his Motion.
THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONsaid, that when the House had seen the Government Bill it would then be for their Lordships to decide whether the three Bills should be sent to the same Select Committee.
EARL GRANVILLEwas understood to assent to that proposition.
Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

ISLANDS OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC— THE NEW HEBRIDES—ALLEGED OCCUPATION BY FRANCE.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  THE EARL OF HARROWBY, in rising to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether he has received any communications from the Australian Colonies on the subject of the apprehended occupation by France of the New Hebrides; and whether he could state what course Her Majesty's Government propose to take respecting this important matter? said, he hoped that the Secretary of State for the Colonies (Earl Granville) would be able to allay some of the anxiety that was felt on that important question. The future of the New Hebrides was a matter of no small concern to our Australian Colonies and New Zealand, and the subject required to be treated with very great delicacy and care. What he wished to impress on the noble Earl was that many of their Lordships felt an intense desire that the question as to the New Hebrides should be looked at principally from an Australian point of view. These Island were not of the small importance to the Colonies of Australia and New Zealand anyone would think, viewing them from a map. Of course, as it was mixed up with the subject of the possible increase of French convicts in those seas, it assumed an aspect of very great and peculiar gravity. He therefore hoped that Her Majesty's Government would approach that matter with an earnest desire to look at it not only from a British point of view, but, if possible, primarily from the point of view of their Australian fellow-subjects.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Earl GRANVILLE)said, he would endeavour to answer the Question in the same spirit in which the noble Earl (the Earl of Harrowby) had asked it. He (Earl Granville) fully recognized the appreciation shown by the noble Earl of the delicacy of some of the matters connected with that question. Their Lordships were aware that an agreement had been come to with regard to the Hebrides, and the Govern-
  12
  ment most fully adhered to that agreement. A pledge had been given on the part of Her Majesty's Government to the Australian Colonies that no agreement should be entered into or considered with reference to those Islands without consultation with the Colonies interested in the matter; and at this moment they were in communication with all the Colonies on a suggestion that had been thrown out by the French Government which they thought might possibly be agreeable to the Colonies. Under those circumstances, he did not consider that it would be convenient in the interests of the Public Service that he should make any further statement at present on the matter.

  ELECTRIC LIGHTING ACT (1882) AMENDMENT (NO. 3) BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill to amend the Electric Lighting Act, 1882—Was presented by The Lord Houghton; read 1a. (No. 48.)

  CONSOLIDATED FUND (NO. 1) BILL.
  Read 2a (according to order): Committee negatived: Then Standing Order No. XXXV. considered (according to order), and dispensed with: Bill read 3a, and passed.
  House adjourned at half past Five o'clock, to Monday next, a quarter before Eleven o'clock.