COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 2 August 1887)

§ THE EARL OF WEMYSS
asked 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 POWERSCOURT
said, 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 EGERTON
said, 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 GRANVILLE
said, 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 WANTAGE
said, he hoped that the consideration of the Bill would be deferred.

§ LORD BASING
said, 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 BRAMWELL
said, 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 ROSEBERY
said, 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 FORTESCUE
thought 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 CARNARVON
remarked 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 THRING
thought 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 FITZGERALD
said, 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 FITZGERALD
said, 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 ROSEBERY
explained, 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."

§ THE EARL OF WEMYSS
said, 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 BRAMWELL
said, 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 POWERSCOURT
rose to Order. He wished to know how many speeches a noble Lord might make?

§ EARL GRANVILLE
said, the noble and learned Lord was perfectly in Order. There appeared to be a strong wish in some quarters that nobody should speak.

§ LORD BRAMWELL
said, 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 WEMYSS
said, he had cried out "Not-Content."

§ LORD HALSBURY
said, he understood that no one had challenged his decision. However, he would put the Question again.

§ EARL GRANVILLE
explained 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.