Lords Sitting of 2 August 1887

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS Second Reading—Trinidad and Tobago (195).
Committee—Margarine (Fraudulent Sale) [169–205); Statute Law Revision* (192).
Committee—Report—Allotments and Cottage Gardens Compensation (155); Escheat (Procedure)* (193); British Settlements* (189); Secretary for Scotland Act (1885) Amendment * (194).
Third Reading—Merchandise Marks Law Consolidation and Amendment * (203–206), and passed.

TRADE AND COMMERCE—THE BOUNTY SYSTEM OF FOREIGN POWERS.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVON: I venture to ask a Question, of which I have given private Notice to my noble Friend the Prime Minister. It would he very satisfactory to learn whether any, and if so, what consents have been given on the part of the different Foreign Powers who have been invited by Her Majesty's Government to enter on a discussion of the bounty system? I see it is reported in one of this morning's papers that France has given its adhesion to that Conference. Of course, this is not the time for entering into a discussion of the question itself, nor will I make any comments upon it; but I think the House will learn with very great pleasure that there was a willingness on the part of so important a member of the Conference as France to enter on a discussion of the matter.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY): I cannot speak with absolute confidence with respect to France; but Germany, Spain, and Belgium, subject to certain conditions, have agreed to take part in the Conference. The noble Earl. I am sure, does not wish that I should do more than answer his Question. I may, however, add that the answers which we have received have been satisfactory.

DOMINION OF CANADA—SUBSIDY TO THE CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY.

  EXPLANATION.
  THE EARL OF HARROWBYsaid, that he wished to explain why he did not ask the Question which stood in his name yesterday with reference to the

  873
  subject of the subsidy to the Canadian Pacific Railway. He did not bring the matter forward, because he was informed that fresh negotiations were in progress between Her Majesty's Government and the Canadian Government, and that it was not desirable that there should be discussion upon the subject at that juncture.

  MARGARINE (FRAUDULENT SALE) BILL.—(No. 169.)
  (The Viscount Powerscourt.)

  COMMITTEE.
  Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.
  THE EARL OF WEMYSSasked that the consideration of the measure should be postponed until Friday next, on the ground that the evidence taken before the Select Committee of the other House had not been placed in their Lordships' hands. The evidence was very voluminous and important. It consisted of nearly 3,000 questions and answers.
  VISCOUNT POWERSCOURTsaid, that copies of the evidence had been laid upon the Table, and that to postpone the Committee stage of the Bill at this late period of the Session would be to place the measure in great jeopardy.
  LORD EGERTONsaid, he hoped that the request of the noble Earl would not be acceded to. The nature of the evidence taken before the Select Committee was generally known to those who had taken an interest in this subject, as the question had been discussed fully in the Agricultural Press. It would not be fair to noble Lords who had come from the country with the special purpose of discussing this measure to postpone the consideration of it.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, the arguments just delivered strengthened the desire for postponement, and, now that the evidence was upon the Table, it could soon be printed and circulated. The course suggested by the noble Earl was followed in connection with the Smoke Nuisance Abatement Bill ought to be followed now. The Smoke Bill was postponed no less than three times because the evidence relating to it had not been laid upon the Table. He had seen a copy of the Report containing the evidence bearing upon the Margarine Bill; but had not had time to read it. The appeal of the noble Earl seemed to him to be most reasonable.
  LORD WANTAGEsaid, he hoped that the consideration of the Bill would be deferred.
  LORD BASINGsaid, it would be a pity to lose the present opportunity of advancing the Bill a stage. He had procured several copies of the Report, and had caused them to be placed upon the Table for examination. He left himself, however, in their Lordships' bands in this matter. It should be understood that neither of the two Bills referred to the Select Committee of which he was Chairman contained the word "butterine," about which the controversy was raised; and in no way, therefore, had the decision of the House of Commons been reversed.
  LORD BRAMWELLsaid, he only had the evidence put into his hands as he entered the House that afternoon. Under these circumstances, it was neither reasonable nor just to ask the House to come to a decision upon the disputed points in the Bill.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Lord STANLEY of PRESTON)thought it would be a great injustice to parties interested in this question if their Lordships were to come to a decision without full knowledge on the subject. At the same time, there was a general desire on the part of the House that the Bill should be proceeded with that day; and as the point of difference was a comparatively narrow one, though of great importance—namely, whether the description of the article dealt with should be "margarine" or "butterine," he would suggest, in order to meet the objection that had been raised, that that question should be reserved for decision till the next stage of the Bill.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERYsaid, he could not quite concur with the remarks of the noble Lord (Lord Basing), that there was any general wish on the part of the House to proceed with the Bill at the present juncture. Nine copies only of the evidence had been circulated among their Lordships. The circulation of nine copies of the evidence did not offer that complete and satisfactory information to the House to which it was entitled before deciding a question. They were asked to decide not a mere matter of trade slang or a nickname, but the name by which a certain article should be described, and which might strike a blow at a great industry employing great

  875
  capital and making great purchases in the agricultural districts, and which made an article generally recognized and purchased by the working classes, and their Lordships were appealed to to do this blindly, and without even regarding for a moment the very evidence collected by the House of Commons for the purpose of guiding their judgment. He feared the Government was not so careful of the position and prestige of the House as it ought to be. If they thought the House could legislate as well without information as with information, the House was likely to be brought into a condition, he would not say of contempt, but of ridicule, which must profoundly affect its status, and there would be no use in their continuing to sit.
  EARL FORTESCUEthought it would be bettor to reserve the question of nomenclature and proceed with the Bill, which involved more questions than that of one word. On that he could pronounce no opinion till he had read the evidence. But he thought the course proposed by the President of the Board of Trade—and he spoke after over 40 years of experience in Parliament—neither unpredented nor unreasonable, but the reverse; and he felt sure it would be approved by the common sense of the country.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVONremarked that a great number of their Lordships had come there in the expectation that the Bill was to be fully discussed, and he himself saw no practical difficulty in the way of that discussion. The least they had a right to ask was that the suggestion of the President of the Board of Trade should be acceded to, though his own view was that they were in sufficient numbers and had sufficient knowledge to discuss the matter, which was really a very narrow one, resolving itself into whether the avowed and confessed counterfeits of butter should be called by the one name or the other. The agricultural newspapers had discussed the matter for months; and it was important to the consumer, who had been placed in an unfair position, that a decision should at once be arrived at.
  LORD THRINGthought that the Act of 1875 did all that this Bill would do, and did it better. The House ought not to go on with the Bill in the absence of the evidence.
  LORD FITZGERALDsaid, the simple question was whether the article should be called "butterine" or "margarine," and no perusal of the evidence would load to a settlement of that question. The noble and learned Lord's speech ought to have been made on the Second Reading. The sole question on the debate on the Second Reading was the title. He protested against the noble Earl's (the Earl of Rosebery's) remark that the House could not proceed with the Committee stage of the Bill without being made an object of contempt to the country.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERY: I never said so.
  LORD FITZGERALDsaid, that was his interpretation of the noble Earl's observations. Why not proceed with the Bill and leave open the question of margarine or butterine for Report? That would have the advantage of shortening discussion. He hoped the Committee stage of the Bill would not be postponed.
  THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (Viscount CRANBROOK)said, the noble Earl (the Earl of Rosebery) seemed to doubt the general opinion of the House, so he suggested that his noble Friend in charge of the Bill should move that the House at once resolve itself into Committee, in order that the sense of the House might be taken.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERYexplained, in answer to the noble and learned Lord (Lord Fitzgerald), that he had carefully avoided using the word "contempt" in connection with the discussions of the House, though he did use the word "ridicule."
  Moved, "That the House do now resolve itself into Committee upon the said Bill."—(The Lord Basing.)
  THE EARL OF WEMYSSsaid, he ventured to oppose that Motion. A certain number of noble Lords did not want to come on another occasion; but the fight would not take place that night.
  LORD BRAMWELLsaid, the Preamble of the Bill contained an allegation the truth or falsity of which their Lordships had not had an opportunity of testing by the evidence.
  VISCOUNT POWERSCOURTrose to Order. He wished to know how many speeches a noble Lord might make?
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, the noble and learned Lord was perfectly in Order. There appeared to be a strong wish in some quarters that nobody should speak.
  LORD BRAMWELLsaid, that when the noble Viscount interposed he was calling their Lordships' attention to the Preamble of the Bill. It was in those terms—
  "Whereas it is expedient that further provision should be made for protecting the public against the sale as butter of substances made in imitation of butter, as well as of butter mixed with those substances."
  He said that that allegation in the Preamble might be utterly untrue. Whether it was true or not depended upon the evidence, which they had not had an opportunity of seeing.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY)then put the Question, and declared that the "Contents" had it.
  THE EARL OP WEMYSSsaid, he had cried out "Not-Content."
  LORD HALSBURYsaid, he understood that no one had challenged his decision. However, he would put the Question again.
  On Question? Their Lordships divided:—Contents 50; Not-Contents 15: Majority 35.
  Resolved in the Affirmative.
  House in Committee accordingly.
  EARL GRANVILLEexplained that the reason for the Division was not opposition to the Motion to go into Committee, but a desire to secure a postponement of the Committee stage of the Bill until the Report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons was printed and circulated among their Lordships. As it was, he felt that those who voted with him had better, under the circumstances, follow the advice of the President of the Board of Trade, and postpone all argument until they got to another stage of the Bill.
  Amendment made: The Report thereof to be received on Friday next; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 205.)

  TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO BILL.—(No. 195.)
  (The Earl of Onslow.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (The Earl of ONSLOW),in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, it was introduced for the purpose of effecting the union between the Islands of Trinidad and Tobago. The Legislative Councils of both Islands had passed Resolutions in favour of their union, and this Bill was necessary to carry those Resolutions into effect.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a—(The Earl of Onslow.)
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Thursday next.

  ALLOTMENTS AND COTTAGE GARDENS COMPENSATION BILL.—(No. 155.)
  (The Earl of Winchilsea.)

  COMMITTEE.
  House in Committee (according to Order).
  Clauses 1 to 4, inclusive, agreed to.
  Clause 5 (Compensation).
  LORD BRAMWELL,in moving to omit the words "notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary," said, that these words would open the way to fraud, in that a man might enter into a bargain with the landowner, and, having had the benefit of that bargain, might afterwards, if he thought fit, get the additional benefit given by those words. The late Lord Chancellor had said a good deal on what he called "the loose talk" indulged in upon the subject of freedom of contract. If there had been any loose talk on the part of anyone he thought it had been on the part of the late Lord Chancellor himself. He agreed that the law had refused to enforce agreements which it deemed to be contrary to public policy; but the law had never been so silly as to hold that freedom of contract was an unlawful thing. The law had never said that when a man had entered into a bargain by which he undertook certain obligations and from which he derived certain benefits, that he should be at liberty to deny his obligations. No doubt, that had been done by the Statute Law, as in the case; of that splendid effort of legislation, the Hares and Rabbits Act, and the Agricultural Holdings Act; but the Com-

  879
  mon Law never did any such thing. It was contended that there was no difference between the case of a farm and that of an allotment; but the difference was great. The landowner must let his land to the farmer, as he could not cultivate it himself, and if a restriction were put upon him he must let it subject to that restriction; but the owner who granted allotments granted them, he apprehended; in the immense majority of eases, for the sake of the allottee. The effect of the clause as it stood would be to prevent the granting of allotments.
  Amendment moved, in lines 13 and 14, to leave out ("notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary").—(The Lord Bramwell.)
  THE EARL OF WINCHILSEAobserved, that the Amendment was another protest against the principle of the Bill, and as such it was impossible for him to ask their Lordships to accept it. Unless these words were retained it could not be said that provision was made for compensation in every case. If a man were permitted to contract himself out of the Bill, a loophole would be afforded which would prevent compensation being made in every case. The noble and learned Lord drew a distinction between land let to a farmer and to a cultivator of allotments, and said that in the one case the landlord let for his own benefit, and in the other for the benefit of the allotment holder. That was a mischievous distinction which did not exist in fact, as it was equally to the benefit of the landlord to let to the allotment holder as to the farmer.
  THE EARL OF SUFFOLKsaid, he wished to express his concurrence with the views of the last speaker. It was a grievance with cottagers that when they had to quit their holdings they had no right to compensation for the trees and plants they left behind them.
  Amendment negatived.
  LORD BRABOURNEsaid, he rose to move an Amendment providing that tenants should be entitled to claim compensation from their landlords for all fruit trees and bushes which they left growing on the land. Under the Bill the tenant could not obtain compensation unless he first obtained his landlord's written consent to plant the trees. The
  880
  value of the holding might be greatly improved by the trees, and it was certain that in most cases the trees would be planted without the written consent being obtained. Their Lordships should recollect that they were not dealing with large occupiers who might be trusted to secure themselves by obtaining the required consent in writing. The holders of small allotments would not do so. No doubt, the written consent should be obtained, for the erection of any buildings; but in such an ordinary matter as the planting of currant and gooseberry bushes, the labourer should surely not be deprived of compensation because he had not obtained his landlord's consent in writing to the transaction.
  Amendment moved.—(Lord Brabourne.)
  THE EARL OF WINCHILSEAsaid, that the planting of fruit trees was a matter on which it appeared right that the landlord should have a discretion, as fruit trees planted might be a disadvantage to neighbouring allotments. Moreover, trees which when planted might be of very little value, would, after some years, become of considerable value; and he did not see any reason why the unearned increment should belong to the tenant. This was a case in which it might fairly be left to the landlord to say whether or not the trees should be planted by the tenant.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (The Earl of ONSLOW)said, he thought it desirable that fruit trees should be exempted from the matters for which the tenant should be entitled to claim compensation. Otherwise, in Herefordshire and other fruit-growing counties, considerable inconvenience would accrue to tenants who had planted trees by special arrangement with their landlord.
  Amendment negatived.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clauses 6 and 7 severally agreed to.
  Clause 8 (Appointment of arbitrator).
  LORD BRAMWELLremarked that it was unfortunate that the conditions of legislation were such that their Lordships were obliged to agree to that to which their judgments were opposed, for fear that the Bill should not pass. The Amendment that he wished to propose on this clause was the most reason-

  881
  able one in the world. As the clause stood, it would be open to justices on an ex parte application, without even notice being given to the other party, to appoint an arbitrator to assess the amount of compensation to be paid to the outgoing tenant, and the object of his Amendment was to require that notice that such an application was about to be made should be given to the other party in the cheapest and most convenient form—say, by means of a letter to be sent through the post. He had appointed hundreds of arbitrators, but he had never appointed one without notice being given to both parties; and it was only common justice that both parties should know what was about to be done in their case, otherwise the greatest enemy of one of them might be appointed to adjudicate upon his case. If it were too late for their Lordships to do what was just and right, he was very sorry for it; but, at all events, he would give their Lordships an opportunity of doing what was just and right by moving his Amendment, which was to the effect that notice should be given to one party of the intention of the other to apply to the justices to appoint an arbitrator to assess the amount of compensation.
  Amendment moved, in page 3, line 3, after ("application") insert ("and proof of notice to the other party which may be, by letter, posted to his usual address.")—(The Lord Bramwell.)
  THE EARL OF WINCHILSEAsaid, he opposed the Amendment, on the ground that the arbitrator could not be appointed by the justices until the landlord and tenant had met and had disagreed, and were, therefore, aware that one of them would make the application. The tenant would probably have to consult a lawyer as to the form of the notice, and would have to pay him for his advice 6s. 8d., which would amount to a large percentage upon the sum in dispute.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY)said, he also opposed the Amendment, on the ground that when the arbitrator was appointed the other party would have notice of the fact.
  LORD BRABOURNEobserved, that the act of the justices would be merely a ministerial one. It would be done upon the application of either party
  882
  without prejudice to the other. It could not be opposed, even if the other party had full notice, since the provision in the Bill was that "the justices shall appoint an arbitrator" upon application; and the justices, restrained, moreover, as they were by the clause from appointing an interested party, might surely be trusted to select a proper person for the office.
  Amendment negatived.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clauses 9 to 16, inclusive, agreed to.
  Clause 17 (Recovery of compensation money).
  LORD BRAMWELLsaid, that it appeared to be almost idle for him to trouble their Lordships by moving Amendments upon this Bill; but here, again, it appeared to him to be a matter of common justice that he should move an Amendment upon this clause. Under the clause as it stood execution might issue directly the report of the arbitrator was made, without the party adversely affected by it being allowed to show cause why it should not be carried into effect. The party so affected might be able to show that he was not the landlord or that he was not the tenant, or that he had a sot off, or that he had any other substantial defence; yet, as the Bill stood, he would not be able to set it up against the arbitrator's award. He proposed to amend the clause by moving the insertion of words which would give the party adversely affected by the award an opportunity of setting up any substantial defence he might have to the proceedings before execution could issue.
  Amendment moved, in line 7, leave out ("upon order made by the judge,") and insert ("with costs by plaint in.")—(The Lord Bramwell.)
  LORD HALSBURYagreed that the words suggested by the noble and learned Lord would be clearer; but they were not really necessary.
  Amendment negatived.
  Clause agreed to.
  Remaining Clause agreed to.
  Bill reported without Amendment; and to be read 3a on Thursday next.

INDUSTRIAL AND REFORMATORY SCHOOLS—RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION.

  QUESTION.
  THE EARL OF MILLTOWN (for the Earl of HARROWBY)asked, Whether Her Majesty's Government would consider the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Industrial Schools with the view of proposing legislation upon the subject in the next Session?
  EARL BROWNLOW: Mr. Matthews, in reply to a Question in the House of Commons on Friday last, said that—
  "He had considered the recommendations of the Royal Commission, and that two measures dealing respectively with reformatory and industrial schools had already been prepared by the draftsmen, and he hoped that they might be introduced next Session."
  House adjourned at a quarter past Six o'clock, to Thursday next, Two o'clock.