Lords Sitting of 1 August 1887

MINUTES.
-PVBLIC BILLS—Second Reading—Statute Law Revision * (192); Escheat (Procedure)* (193); British Settlements* (189); Secretary for Scotland Act (1885) Amendment (104).
Committee—Smoke Nuisance Abatement (Metropolis) (175), negatived.
Report—Merchandise Harks Law Consolidation and Amendment* (201–203).
Third Reading—Legitimacy Declaration Act (1858) Amendment* (202), and passed.
PROVISIONAL ORDER BILLS—Third Reading—Local Government (Ireland) (Ballyshannon, &c.)* (103), and passed.
Withdrawn—Elementary Education Confirmation (Middleton St. George)* (93).

NEW PEER.
The Right Honourable Henry George Percy (commonly called Earl Percy) having been summoned by writ to the House of Lords in his father's Barony

675
of Lovaine—Was (in the usual manner), introduced.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND CHINA—REPORTED ESTABLISHMENT OF A BANK.

  QUESTION.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERY: I wish to ask the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he is able to confirm or contradict a telegram which has appeared in The
  Standard of to-day, stating that an American and Chinese bank has been established, with a capital of £200,000,000 sterling?
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY): No; I have received no information on the subject; but it is fair to say that, this being a matter not directly concerned with the Foreign Office, our representative may not have thought it worth the expense of telegraphing.

ISLANDS OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC— THE NEW HEBRIDES—ACTION OF FRANCE.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERY: I also desire to put a Question to the noble Marquess on a point upon which I need not dwell, because it has been so constantly before your Lordships. I cannot disguise from, the noble Marquess that there exists a feeling of great apprehension with regard to the continued presence of the French in the New Hebrides. A statement from the noble Marquess might greatly alleviate that feeling; and, perhaps, he could also give a date for the production of Papers on the subject.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY): I will see if the Papers can be produced before your Lordships separate; but I am not quite certain whether they will be ready. I entirely share the feelings of the noble Earl. I look upon this continued occupation of the New Hebrides with deep regret, though I am not able to say—it would be unjust to say—that the French Government hold any language on the subject to which we can take exception. Our difficulty has been to obtain an answer to the
  676
  representations we have made. Those representations have fully called the attention of the French Government to the gravity with which this matter is regarded both in this country and also in the Colonies. I can only repeat the hope that before long the expressed opinions of the French Government, which are entirely correct, may be translated into practice. It is fair to the French Government that I should say that they have wished to conduct side by side with this matter the negotiations in regard to the Suez Canal which, I think, were in progress when the noble Earl was in Office. We have no objection to this; but we must demur to these latter negotiations being the cause of any delay in regard to the former.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERY: Did any communication from the French Government, which was expected by the noble Marquess in February, again in March, and the beginning of May, arrive?
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I think we had one communication; but it was of a very inconclusive character.

SMOKE NUISANCE ABATEMENT (METROPOLIS) BILL.—(No. 175.)
(The Lord Stratheden and Campbell.)

COMMITTEE.
Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.
LORD STRATHEDEN AND CAMPBELL, in moving that the House be put into Committee, said: My Lords, it is hard on me, and hard upon the House, that I should be compelled to add a few words on the Motion with a view to shorten our proceedings, and to avert a general debate upon the Bill before us. The noble Earl (the Earl of Wemyss), by his Amendment, would raise a general debate, since he proposes to throw out the Bill at a time and in a manner perfectly unprecedented. When was there ever an example of the House refusing to go on to the next stage and to discuss the clauses of a Bill, after a Select Committee of the House had just examined and revised them? It is a form and species of obstruction which even in "another place" has not been yet arrived at. The noble Earl is well entitled to a patent, not for averting smoke, but for retarding legislation. But the Resolution in itself is as unten-

677
able as the time for making it is inappropriate and startling. It maintains that the Bill ought not to go on until the Acts of Lord Palmerston have been amended. But the Bill proposes to amend them. The last two clauses have no other object. They enlarge the area in which those Acts are valid; they add to the constructions over which they will be operative. "But," says the noble Earl, "until you have amended the Acts of Lord Palmerston, you must reject provisions for amending thorn." The Resolution maintains also that the Bill ought not to go on until the Acts of Lord Palmerston are better administered. But it has been repeatedly explained, while now the evidence confirms it, that they can never be enforced until the smoke of private houses is in some degree abated. If the noble Earl has not acquired that lesson, he is wholly unfit to guide the House upon the subject. But for another reason he is unfit to guide the House upon the subject, he asserted here that the Bill gave the police a right to visit the interior of domiciles, and to the Vestry of St. James that no class of houses could be possibly exempted. Both statements are unfounded, and it can only be supposed that he has never read the Bill he so traduces and calumniates. The noble Earl is also quite alone in the position which he occupies. His own League has not condemned the Bill which he, at last, proposes to annihilate. His own Party, consisting of another noble Lord and of himself, are not united in resisting it. His near Relative (Lord De Vesci) has laboured to correct and to enlarge it. If the noble Duke (the Duke of Westminster) was able to be hero to-night, which he is not, he would oppose the noble Earl to the utmost of his power. Last of all, Her Majesty's Government having given Notice of Amendments to be moved in Committee, cannot, at least, without a flagrant inconsistency, support the noble Karl in refusing to go into it. My Lords, I do not deprecate, however, the hostility of the noble Earl to the Bill if he sincerely disapproves it—although, in that case, he ought to have opposed it long ago on many previous stages. All Bills afford a scope for opposite opinions. I venture only to point out the proper mode of acting on his judgment with regard to it. It is to move against it in the ordinary way on the third reading.
678
Before now, Bills have been rejected on that stage, after going through every other one. At no period, unless I am entirely deceived, have Bills been quashed in transit from a Select Committee to the general Committee. I engage the noble Earl to give up that which ought to be hopeless, for that which may be possibly attained; and at the same time—as regards this measure—to exchange the character of a persecuting friend for that of a legitimate and straightforward opponent. It is not at all too late for him to withdraw the Notice he has given, and to offer that which I suggest to him. The noble Lord concluded by moving that the House go into Committee.
Moved, "That the House do now resolve itself into Committee upon the said Bill."—[The Lord Stratheden and Campbell.)
THE EARL OF WEMYSS, in rising to move—
"That before the law for the prohibition of smoke is extended to private dwellings, it is desirable that the purpose and intention of the existing Acts be more carefully carried into effect, either by their amendment or by their better administration,"
said that, notwithstanding the outrages of which the noble Lord complained, he had not the slightest intention of withdrawing his Amendment. If his action was unexampled, the Bill of the noble Lord was no less unexampled. He was in sympathy with the general object of the Bill, though not with its provisions. He remembered some years ago a gentleman, supposed to be a speculative builder from Croydon, announced a great discovery and made an alarming prophecy about the doomed city, London, which was to be suffocated in a dense fog, and that those who lived in the pure atmosphere of Croydon were to come in and bury the ill-fated inhabitants of the Metropolis; but London had got on in spite of the fogs. And on the other hand, as regards the question of health, a gentleman of recognized authority in sanitary matters had expressed the opinion that what Tendered the air of London, with its 4,000 miles of sewage, less deleterious than it might be expected to be was the great quantity of carbon with which it was impregnated. His objection to the Bill was that it was to be applied to private houses. His

679
contention was that the present law, with some extension of its application and of the area over which it extended, was sufficient for ail purposes. The Acts at present in force were those of 1853, 1856, and 1866. The Act of 1853 applied to every furnace employed in working engines, to dye-houses, distilleries, sugar refineries, and other similar places. The Act of 1856 extended the Act of 1853 to steamers west of the Nore and to public baths and wash-houses. Then there was the Sanitary Act of 1866, which was repealed as regards the rest of the country by the Public Health Act, 1875, but was still in force in the Metropolis. The objection might reasonably be made that the present law did not apply to steamers with, donkey engines or to clubs or hotels, and that the area over which it extended was too restricted. Before a Bill enforcible against private houses was passed it would be much better to extend the existing law to semi-public buildings, like hotels and clubs. To put private houses under like provisions would be to establish a hateful system of espionage. The present system was for policemen to go about with smoke shades, by which they tested the density of the smoke issuing from any manufactory. If the smoke was denser than the permitted standard the owner was warned, and three warnings were given in consequence of what was observed by the policeman outside before an Inspector was sent to examine what was going on inside. He supposed his noble Friend's Bill would be worked in much the same way. Now, about 50 policemen were at present employed on this special duty. It might then be imagined what an army of policemen and what an enormous expenditure would be required to administer such a Bill with respect to the 700,000 houses in the Metropolis. Further, the cost of the measure to owners and occupiers of the necessary changes in their grates was calculated at between £2,000,000 and £3,000,000 sterling. Public opinion was not ripe for so stringent a measure.
LORD STRATHEDEN AND CAMPBELLdissented.
THE EARL OF WEMYSS: Did his noble Friend mean to assort that public opinion in the country generally or in the Metropolis was ripe for such a measure?
LORD STRATHEDEN AND CAMPBELL: Certainly.
THE EARL OF WEMYSS: Well, he had read the evidence of Mr. Ernest Hart, and other witnesses, on this point, and he said distinctly that public opinion was not ripe for it. His noble Friend's utmost hope was not that his Bill would be universally applied, but that some of the Local Bodies would be inclined to adopt the proposed system. If such a measure as this were passed it would, in his judgment, remain a dead letter. He heartily sympathized with his noble Friend in his object; but he thought it would be better to proceed slowly on the old lines, and to ascertain whether the present Acts were efficiently administered, and whether their operation might not be reasonably extended. By bringing forward this Bill his noble Friend had shown what good intentions he had; and by passing the second reading their Lordships' House had affirmed the principle that this smoke nuisance ought to be further abated. Having said this much, he ventured now to move the Resolution which stood in his name.
Amendment moved,
To leave out from ("That") to the end of the motion for the purpose of inserting the following words: ("before the law for the prohibition of smoke is extended to private dwellings, it is desirable that the purpose and intention of the existing Acts be more fully carried into effect, either by their amendment or by their better administration").—(The Earl of Wemyss.)
THE EARL OF HARROWBYsaid, that all the objections adduced by the noble Earl were raised many years ago when Lord Palmerston initiated his great smoke reform movement. The wonderful success of Lord Palmerston's legislation must be admitted by everybody who remembered the state of things that previously existed. One hardly knew the City again after the Act had been in operation a few years. What was the real evil which we had to deal with now? Lord Palmerston intended to deal with all the factories of his time, and consequently he fixed a certain limit But since that time the spread of manufactures had gone on steadily. Clearly, therefore, if we wished to carry out Lord Palmerston's intentions we must attack the factories which were outside his limit was the evil a great one or was it a small one that they

681
had to contend with? He thought the London fogs need only be thought of a; few minutes to convince their Lordships that the evil was a very great one and that it was growing every year. The addition of the 40,000 houses per annum was of itself a source of great alarm. They had beard in medical evidence, that a dense fog in London had raised the mortality to that of the great cholera year. Every year the bulk and the frequency of the fogs increased, and it was becoming a perfect scandal and discredit to us that we were taking no steps whatever to deal with this tremendous evil, which was causing an increased rate of mortality. The trees and plants were telling the same story. The last conifer in Kensington Gardens had given up the struggle, and the roses were stunted and dwarfed. His noble Friend had talked of this Bill as if it were a measure of the most tyrannous and sweeping character. Its first object was to extend the area of Lord Palmerston's Act. It was next proposed to bring clubs, hotels, and refreshment houses under the operation of the Bill. Let any noble Lord walk down Northumberland Avenue and watch the chimneys of the great hotels pouring forth great volumes of smoke which floated across to the National Gallery and evidently produced most serious evils. Again, their Lordships had only to watch their clubs in order to see the damage done by the smoke which issued from them. Their Lordships would observe that it was not a question of prohibiting smoke—for that, of course, would be absurd—but of abating smoke. The best witnesses agreed that if we could cope with the smoke of the kitchen chimneys we should enormously diminish the magnitude of the smoke nuisance in London. A grate in a kitchen could be dealt with at a very small cost—from 10 s. to 30 s. for a very large kitchen range. Was there the slightest danger of this Bill being put in force tyrannically? The power of enforcing the Bill was placed in the hands of the Local Authorities, who were elected by the inhabitants, and the measure was much more likely to be inoperative than too operative or too drastic. Moreover, any regulation relating to the abatement of smoke must be sanctioned by the Home Secretary. there was no real danger in making the experiment. The
682
smoke from steamers could easily he dealt with. One large Company was already, with great advantage, consuming its own smoke. The smoke from locomotives was another question which would have to be considered. He ventured to suggest that they should try the experiment of this simple Bill. It was a step, at any rate, in the direction of amendment, which could not lead to any grave or tyrannical results, because the powers under the Bill were placed in the hands of people who lived in the houses affected by it. He implored their Lordships to take a step forward in this great question, and he hoped that if the experiment could not be made this your Her Majesty's Government would hold out some distinct hope of dealing with the question completely and thoroughly in the next Session of Parliament.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY)said, he was willing to admit the necessity of some measure for the abatement of this nuisance; but he could not resist saying that he thought the Bill before the House was rather an obstruction than an aid to doing good. If the object, which he thought all would agree was a good one, were attained by this Bill, he could quite understand the argument of his noble Friend who had just sat down; but he found that every tiling was to be left to the Local Authorities, who were to make any regulations they thought fit for the abatement of smoke in any private dwelling. The Local Authority might impose on offenders such reasonable penalty as they thought fit; in fact, the Bill provided no limit at all. This was the first time that legislation proceeded on such lines. He could not help thinking that although its object was a very good one this Bill was ill-devised, clumsy, and inconvenient, and would be totally inoperative for the purposes for which it was intended. He hoped their, Lordships would not proceed further with it.
LORD MONKSWELLmaintained that public opinion in many parts of the Metropolis was in favour of the Bill. The expense of putting the Act in force would be reimbursed over and over again in the course of a few years. He hoped, therefore, seeing that the Government had not adopted the course taken by the noble Earl on the Cross Benches, but had put forward such Amendments

683
as would make the measure workable, then Lordships would proceed with the Bill.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORDsaid, he would remind their Lordships of the system of police supervision in domestic matters which this Bill would inaugurate. It seemed to him that the Bill was drawn in the interests of the producers of gas and coke, and for the benefit of the Welsh coalfields. In his opinion, the small amount of damage from the ordinary domestic fireplace did not call for the interference which would be absolutely necessary under such a measure as this. Reference had been made to the dense fogs of a few years ago as having caused a large death rate. It was the custom to attribute the severe fogs and dark days that occurred in London to the smoke, and he was of that opinion until a short time ago. During the last Whitsun Recess an excessively black fog hang over London for 21 hours; that fog he traced back to Holland, whence it got to Dover, and the next day, eight hours later, it reached London. That fog could not. therefore, be duo to London smoke. He believed that if the existing law was more frequently enforced the smoke nuisance would be much lessened. The prime cost of the apparatus prevented many persons from burning the smoke of their furnaces, and unless they were fined they would continue to evade the law. He heartily supported the Amendment of the noble Earl (the Earl of Wemyss).
LORD HOBHOUSEobserved that he thought it probable different methods of dealing with smoke would be found suitable in the various parts of London; but, whether that was so or not, he was sure that no one knew the best method, and that by the Local Authorities trying different plans the best method would gradually be discovered. It had been said that the control of the Home Secretary in this matter would be illusory. It was not his experience that in local matters the control of the Central Authority was illusory. On the contrary, there wag a disposition on the part of the Central Authority to make all the Local Authorities act in a single groove, and to adopt methods which were sometimes unworkable. He thought that the Local Authorities, under the supervision of the Home Secretary, might be trusted to carry out the provisions of this Bill, which he should support.
EARL BROWNLOWsaid, that on behalf of the Government he should support the Amendment of the noble Earl (the Earl of Wemyss), having always held the view that private dwellings should he excluded from the operation of the Acts. There was extreme difficulty in legislating on a subject such as this Bill attempted to deal with. Inquiries had been instituted by Parliament on the subject. There had been a long correspondence on the subject, and all that he could say was that Her Majesty's Government were carefully considering it with a view of ascertaining whether any amendment could be made in the present law, or whether the difficulty could be met by a better administration of the present law.
THE EARL OF ROSEBERYsaid, he should support the Motion to go into Committee on the Bill. He had not much confidence in the argument that it would be better to await the time when London should have a local government, and to leave this question to be dealt with by that Body. Nor had he much confidence in waiting till the Home Office had made up its mind on the subject. He had no great affection for the Bill; but on one broad ground he did entirely sympathize with his noble Friend behind him (Lord Stratheden and Campbell). His noble Friend had two or three times been permitted by the House to read the Bill a second time, and on the third occasion the House deliberately referred the Bill to a Select Committee. The Committee having sat upon the Bill, and the measure having returned from that body, it was now proposed to reject it without allowing it to go through the ordinary stage of Committee. To burke the Bill in this way seemed to him to imply a disregard for the Select Committee that had sat upon it. Out of respect for their own proceedings, and their own Committee, it appeared to him absolutely necessary that their Lordships should go into Committee on the Bill, in spite of the Amendment of the noble Earl (the Earl of Wemyss). If the noble Earl had any wish to put an end to the measure at a later stage, the proper course would be to do it on the third reading.
LORD DENMANsaid, that it being the usual custom of the noble Earl on the Cross Benches to propose Resolutions and then to withdraw them, he

685
scarcely knew how to act in this matter‥ If the noble Earl pressed his Amendment to a Division he should support it, as he thought that the present law should be enforced before fresh legislation was entered upon, especially as a Member of the Government had opposed the second reading. It seemed to be forgotten that in 1820 Mr. Parkes, a worsted manufacturer at Warwick, got a patent for consuming the smoke at his works; and the first Lord Penman saw the air as pure as Mont Blanc, and linen bleaching below the tall chimney. Mr. Michael Angelo Taylor brought in a Bill to indict defendants for a nuisance if they did not consume their own smoke; and a power was given to the Court to order the building of furnaces, at the expense of defendants, suited to consume the smoke; but it seemed to have not been workable. When the Prince of Wales was in Sheffield all the fires were put out. He (Lord Denman) thought the House ought to be obliged to the noble Lord for causing the Bill to be studied; but he believed that more inquiry should be made before a compulsory measure was passed.
LORD STRATHEDEN AND CAMPBELLsaid, he had no desire to add anything to the speeches of his noble Friends in favour of the measure. He would point out, however, that whether their Lordships desired to carry it or not, they were bound to consider the Amendments offered by himself and by the Government. They could not judge the Bill until its final shape was given to it. Even if the smoke of London was to be prolonged the decorum and the dignity of that House ought not to be impaired, which they would clearly be if the Amendment triumphed.
On Question, Whether the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Motion?
Their Lordships divided:—Contents 12; Not-Contents 30: Majority 18.
Resolved in the negative.
Then Motion, as amended, agreed to.

METROPOLITAN IMPROVEMENTS— THE BURLINGTON HOUSE COLONNADES. —QUESTION.
THE EARL OF MILLTOWNasked Her Majesty's Government, Whether the
686
First Commissioner of Works would take steps to have the colonnades of Burlington House, now lying derelict on the banks of the river, in Battersea Park, protected from injury, either by a fence or some other adequate provision? These colonnades were beautiful works of art, and he had been surprised to find the Representative of the Office of Works in that House inclined to pooh-pooh suggestions with regard to them.
THE EARL OF WEMYSSsaid, there was no greater scandal to the Office of Works than that those colonnades should have been allowed to lie from year to year on the banks of the river. All the children of the Metropolis were playing hide-and-seek amongst them. He was afraid they were so much injured now by the exposure and the treatment to be which they had been subjected as to be of little value.
LORD HENNIKER, in reply, said, he would not enter into the architectural merits of the colonnades; but he must deny that he had pooh-poohed their artistic value. In what he had said in the House on a former occasion he had stated that a great many schemes had been laid before the First Commissioner of Works with regard to them, which had all been pronounced impracticable, not merely on the ground of expense, but in regard to finding an adequate situation for them. The noble Earl had himself been invited to make any suggestion for their being placed in a proper position; but he had so far made none. With regard to the proposal that they should be fenced round, it was necessary to explain that a Bill was now before Parliament handing over Battersea Park, amongst other places, to the Metropolitan Board of Works. Under these circumstances, the First Commissioner of Works did not think he ought to give any pledge as to what he would do to protect these remains; but he was instructed to say that when the question for handing over the Park was settled, if it remained in his hands to deal with the matter, he would give the proposal of the noble Earl his most careful consideration.
THE EARL OF MILLTOWNasked whether he was to understand that the colonnades were to be handed over to the Board of Works with the Park?
LORD HENNIKER: I am unable to say, as there is no provision in the Bill

687
with respect to them; but this point will be decided by my right hon. Friend (Mr. Plunket) when the Bill is passed.

SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND ACT (1885) AMENDMENT BILL—(No. 194.)
(The Marquess of Lothian.)

SECOND READING.
Order for the Day for the Second Reading, read.
THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (The Marquess of Lothian), in rising to move that the Bill be now read a second time, said: My Lords, in asking your Lordships to read this Bill a second time I feel that I labour under a disadvantage, inasmuch as the measure refers entirely to the strengthening of the Office I have the honour to hold and the fact that that Office is to be strengthened means, to a certain extent, a cutting and carving of powers from another Office. On that ground I should have been glad if one of Her Majesty's Secretaries of State had undertaken the duty of moving the second reading of this Bill. This question will be in the recollection of your Lordships. It has been before your Lordships for several years. I do not propose to go back to the history of it; but perhaps I may be allowed to remind your Lordships that in 1883 a Bill called the Local Government Bill was introduced, but it was late in the Session when it came up to your Lordships, and it was felt that a measure of that importance should not be passed without sufficient discussion and consideration. The consequence was that your Lordships' House did not pass that Bill in 1883. Public feeling in Scotland was very; much roused on the subject, and the result was that in January of the following year a meeting was held in Edinburgh—perhaps the most representative meeting that ever was held in Scotland, embracing, as it did, not only every political section—I see the noble Earl (the Earl of Wemyss) smile—but it embraced, not only every political section, but every branch of society, and every portion of the Kingdom of Scotland. I see the noble Earl smiles dissent, but I think the only dissentient voice on that occasion came from the noble Earl himself. The result of that meeting was a deputation which shortly
688
afterwards waited upon the Prime Minister, Mr. Gladstone, and which I had the honour to introduce. Mr. Gladstone then undertook that measures should be introduced to give effect to the wishes of the people of Scotland; and in 1884 my noble Friend opposite (the Earl of Rosebery), to whose courage, ability, and cordiality the measure owed so much, brought in a Bill for the creation of the Office of Secretary for Scotland. I wish to refer to that Bill, because some words were used on the second reading, both by the present Prime Minister and by the noble Earl (the Earl of Rosebery), that strengthen my hands in asking your Lordships to give a second reading to the Bill now before you. When that measure was before this House the present Prime Minister said the consideration that it was desirable to confer as much power upon the now Office as possible induced him to vote for the Amendment—that was, that the administration of law and justice should be placed in the hands of the Secretary for Scotland; and the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Rosebery) said it was quite certain that if this new Minister was to start his Office under discouraging conditions the Office would be a failure. The point to which the noble Earl was then referring was then very question of the administration of law and justice. In "another place," however, that Amendment was rejected. I am quite certain that my Predecessors in Office will bear out completely the contention of the noble Earl that it was almost impossible that the Office then constituted should not be a failure unless some additional powers were attached to it. I do not say it has been a failure, but that it may become so unless these additional powers are granted. There are two considerations that I will lay before your Lordships in asking you to give the Bill a second reading. The first is what I may call a sentimental consideration, and the other is a practical one. The sentimental consideration has a very direct bearing on the practical one. After the long period of most intimate union between England and Scotland, which has lasted now nearly 200 years, people are apt to forget how entirely distinctive and different the administration of Scotland is from that of England. There is almost no point of

689
resemblance. There are different forms of religion and different social forms affecting every portion of Scotland. There is a different node of education—an entirely different code of education—and different systems of agriculture. There are also different systems affecting the laws of lunacy and parochial laws, the fishing laws, and almost every other department. In fact, I think the few Acts which are mentioned in the last clause of this Bill as exceptions to the operation of the Bill practically touch the whole of the laws which are similar with regard to both Scotland and England. To these differences between Scotland and England the people of Scotland are intensely and passionately attached—not, I rejoice to believe, because there is any feeling of not continuing cordially the union; but for that very reason the people of Scotland wish to continue the life-interests and sentiments that have made them what they are. I think it is most desirable, in the interests of the Empire, that everything should be done to keep up and foster this national spirit, which is the parent of that healthy rivalry and emulation which is the life-blood of a people. So much for the sentimental reason. I now come to the practical reason. The fact of the administration of law and justice not being in the hands of the Secretary for Scotland has put the Head of that Department in a very awkward position. I will not go into details; it would not be proper if I were to do so; but I think it is an open secret that last year, during the difficulty which arose in the Western Highlands, it would have been almost impossible even for my Predecessor, with his great ability, to satisfactorily settle the question of law and order in that part of the country if he had not been a Member of the Cabinet. That difficulty may arise again in the Western Highlands or elsewhere at any moment, although I hope it may not; and your Lordships will see how desirable and necessary it is that that control of law and order which was given to the Secretary for Scotland last year by an exceptional method should be permanently vested in him by Act of Parliament and by Statute. For that reason, if for no other, I should ask your Lordships to pass this Bill. There are other questions, and almost every day that I have passed at the Scottish
690
Office has given me an experience showing that it is absolutely necessary for the proper administration of that Office that the powers referred to in this Bill should be transferred from the Home Office to that of the Secretary for Scotland. The provisions of the Bill are very simple and very drastic. They transfer these powers from the Home Office, and make the Secretary for Scotland, in fact, the Home Secretary for Scotland. Certain Acts have been excepted, because they refer generally to the United Kingdom. I will refer briefly to these exceptions. The first is the duty of advising Her Majesty upon the exercise of the prerogative of mercy, and I feel sure your Lordships will agree with the Government in considering it desirable that this duty should be exercised by one Officer of State only. The next exceptions are the Factory and Workshops Act, 1878, the Coal Mines Regulation Act, 1872, and the Explosives Act, 1875. These are all applicable to the United Kingdom; and having regard to the due regulation of trade and uniformity of practice, Her Majesty's Government thought it desirable that these Acts should continue, as at present, to be administered by the Home Office. In connection with the Cruelty to Animals Act, there are questions relating to vivisection, with respect to which the law should be as uniform as possible in all parts of the United Kingdom; and with regard to the Reformatory and Industrial Schools Acts the Government at present has in contemplation a Bill dealing with these subjects. If that Bill were passed it could then be considered whether it was desirable that the subject should remain under the Home Secretary or should be transferred to the Secretary for Scotland, or whether, as regards Scotland, they should be transferred to the Secretary for Scotland. I have now gone through the principal points of the Bill for which I ask a second reading. I think I ought to refer for one moment to the position of the Lord Advocate. The position of the Lord Advocate will not be changed at all by this Bill. The position of the Lord Advocate was guaranteed under the Act of 1885, and any changes that may take place in consequence of the passing of this Act will amount to this—that the Lord Advocate will simply act in relation to the Secretary

691
for Scotland as he did with reference to the Secretary of State for the Home Department under the Bill of 1885. I may add that the Lord Advocate has highly approved of this measure. One more: point I should like very briefly to refer to, and I do so with some diffidence, because, I think some difficulty might arise in reference to it. I should have liked, if; it were possible, to have added to this Bill a clause which should have provided that the Secretary for Scotland should be one of Her Majesty's Secretaries of State. I think that would have given satisfaction to the people of Scotland, who earnestly desire it, and it would also necessitate the Minister for Scotland being a Member of the Cabinet. By the passing of the Act in 1885, the position of Scottish legislation has been entirely altered. Before that time, when the Home Secretary was responsible for legislation regarding Scotland, he had the opportunity, as it was his duty, to bring before the Cabinet any legislation affecting Scotland. Now, if by any chance the Secretary for Scotland is not a Member of the Cabinet, there is no opportunity for him to bring directly before the Cabinet measures which he may think are for the advantage of Scotland: and in the immense pressure of other Business it is quite possible, and more than possible, that measures deeply affecting Scotland may be pressed out. But, on the other hand, I quite see that a clause of that sort, which would have necessitated the appointment of a Minister who should be a Member of the Cabinet, was not a clause which ought to be introduced into a Bill of this kind. It would have affected other Departments of the State besides Scotland. Therefore, whatever may be done in the future, I hope your Lordships and the people of Scotland will be satisfied with the Bill which I now ask to be read a second time. I feel that this measure will be satisfactory to the people of Scotland; and I cannot conclude without appealing to the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Rosebery), who has had so much to do with the legislation connected with this Department, and I feel sure I may rely upon his cordial support in bringing forward this measure, which, I venture to think, will be for the benefit of the people of Scotland and of the United Kingdom.
Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a—(The Marquess of Lothian.)
THE EARL OF ROSEBERY: Before the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack puts the Motion, I should like to say I confess I read this Bill with Tory great approval, because it only carries out the Amendment which I had the I honour of bringing before your Lordships, and which met with your Lordships' approval, but did not find the same approval in "another place," and, therefore, was left out of the Bill when it passed through the House, But I never had any doubt—and I have frequently expressed that feeling—about this, that if the Secretary for Scotland once was brought into existence, he would, by the very force of circumstances, attract to himself all those other attributes which we wished to have been given to him by the Bill of that time, and which it is now found necessary to give to him. I do not enter upon that by way of vindicating my own foresight in the matter, because it was perfectly obvious that either the Secretary for Scotland should cease to exist altogether, or else by the very nature of things we should find the Government very soon bringing in the Bill which the noble Marquess has now laid on the Table. The Noble Marquess thinks that the Secretary for Scotland has suffered by not having these powers. I do not doubt that the Secretary for Scotland has so suffered; but if I might venture to say so, in my humble opinion, that Office has suffered much more by I another circumstance. It has suffered by the fact that in the 16 months that have followed the passing of the Act which created the Office there were no less than five incumbents of that Office. Five Secretaries for Scotland in less than 16 months would be enough to ruin any Office imbued with less vitality than the "Office which the noble Marquess now so efficiently fills. My only doubt as to this Bill is whether in the other House it may find that easy passage or those I facilities from the Government which I hope it may; but if the Government have it really at heart to force this Bill through, I do not doubt the people of Scotland will derive at the end of this Session a substantial benefit in the measure now before your Lordships.
THE EAEL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid, he must congratulate the noble Marquess the Secretary for Scotland on the pro-

693
duction of this Bill, and he hoped their Lordships would give it a second reading.
Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE—THE MARGARINE BILL.—QUESTION.
THE EARL OF WEMYSSasked, Whether the President of the Board of Trade, or someone in charge of the Margarine Bill, would, in accordance with the understanding arrived at the other evening, give their Lordships an assurance that the Bill should not proceed further in their Lordships' House until the evidence taken before the Select Committee of the other House had been laid before their Lordships?
THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Lord STANLEY of PRESTON)said, he was not responsible for the Bill, and it was not his power to give his noble Friend any positive assurance in the matter. The evidence had not yet been circulated; but he was sure his noble Friend's appeal would not be without effect on those who were responsible for the conduct of the measure.
THE EARL OF WEMYSSsaid, he only made the appeal for the convenience of those interested in the subject.
House adjourned at half past Six o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Ten o'clock.