SECOND READING. (Hansard, 25 August 1887)

§ LORD MOUNT-TEMPLE
, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, the measure had come up from the House of Commons, and its object was to confer the same powers on the Corporation of Dublin in regard to useless and unnecessary roads as were exercised by the Grand Juries outside the city. It would enable the Corporation to narrow such roads as were unnecessarily wide, in order to save unnecessary expenditure. In the House of Commons it was proposed to insert these powers in the General Open Spaces Bill, which he (Lord Mount-Temple) had charge of in their Lordships' House; but the con- 1789 struction of that measure rendered it impossible to insert these provisions, seeing that the Bill dealt only with amendments of the existing law.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY)
said, he hoped that their Lordships would not read this most extraordinary Bill a second time. The Bill provided that— It shall and may be lawful for the Corporation to narrow such roads as the borough surveyor may report to be unnecessarily wide, and to stop up any roads which may appear to them to be useless. No provision was made in the Bill as to what was to happen to anyone's property affected by such a proceeding. No machinery was provided for awarding compensation, or for dealing with frontages. For the Corporation of Dublin and its borough surveyor to be absolute masters of other people's property, and to have power to stop up any roads which they might choose to consider unnecessary, would be an extraordinary state of things. And that was the whole Bill. If any of their Lordships had had questions affecting the closing up or the narrowing of roads before them at Quarter Sessions they would know what a large amount of consideration they involved—how many witnesses it was necessary to call on the one side and on the other, and how difficult it was to arrive at a decision. Everyone received a hearing. But here, forsooth, it was proposed to settle such matters on the mere ipse dixit of the borough surveyor. It seemed to him, moreover, a strange thing that in a Bill called an Open Spaces Bill, power should be sought for closing up roads. The whole Bill was so crude and devoid of machinery and lacked all protection to the public or to the owners of property that he hoped their Lordships would not read the Bill a second time.

§ LORD MOUNT-TEMPLE
said, he quite admitted that the clause to which the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack took exception was not a proper one. But the Bill had come up with the unanimous assent of the House of Commons, and he recommended their Lordships to consider whether they might not be able to suggest a better clause than the present one in Com- 1790 mittee, especially as the principle of the Bill was not objected to. If their Lordships read the Bill a second time, he promised that the promoters would modify the clause and remove the objections to which it was at present exposed. It was a measure which was eagerly desired by Irish Members connected with Dublin, and he could see no harm in giving to the City of Dublin the same powers as were exercised outside of it under similar precautions. He trusted their Lordships would not reject the Bill.

§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Viscount CROSS)
said, the Bill only contained one operative clause, and that was stated to be one which they ought not to pass, and so stated by the noble Lord who moved the second reading. If that clause was expunged, nothing would remain of the measure for their Lordships to consider. It contained a principle which everyone objected to, and, instead of reading the Bill a second time, he suggested that it should be dropped, and that the noble Lord should introduce another Bill of a less objectionable kind, allow it to be properly discussed by their Lordships, and send it down to the other House.

§ LORD MOUNT-TEMPLE
said, he had not stated that the principle of the clause was objectionable, but that its method was faulty in having no proper securities against abuse or carelessness. He thought that Dublin should have the same advantages in regard to narrowing and closing unnecessary roads as the rest of Ireland possessed.