Lords Sitting of 21 July 1887

MINUTES
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Licensed Premises (Earlier Closing) (Scotland)* (183).
Second Reading—Margarine (Fraudulent Sale) (169); Coroners (177).
Committee—First Offenders (140–182).
Committee—Report—Valuation of Lands (Scotland) Amendment* (176).
Report—Copyhold Enfranchisement (180).
PROVISIONAL ORDER BILLS—First Reading—Tramways* (181).
Third Reading— Public Health (Scotland) (Cowdenbeath Water) * (154); Public Health (Scotland) (Duntocher and Dalmuir Water) * (167); Pier and Harbour (No. 2)* (137); Gas and Water* (131), and passed.

THE MAR PEERAGE.

  POSTPONEMENT OF MOTION.
  THE EARL OF GALLOWAY, who had the following Motion on the Paper:—
  "That the prayer of the Earl of Mar in his petition presented on the 27th ultimo, for an investigation into the connection between the Mar estates and the ancient Mar dignity, with the view to obtain an unprejudiced re-hearing in a court of law, of his right to the estates of Mar, be granted."
  said that, not having been able to bring his Motion on in the House at the conclusion of Tuesday's Sitting he put it down for to-night, and he could not now proceed with it, owing to the number of Bills which had since been placed on the Notice Paper which took precedence of it. He begged to give Notice that he would postpone the Motion till Tuesday, the 2nd August. He could not put it down for an earlier date, as until then he should have to be in Scotland in consequence of official duties. He wished to make an appeal to the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack, in the absence of the Prime Minister, to prevent any Government Bills being put down for that date which would necessarily have precedence of it. He thought he had some claim to this indulgence, as he could have brought on the Motion on Monday, but he gave way in order that the Government might bring on the Criminal Law Amendment (Ireland) Bill.
  THE EARL OF SELBORNEsaid, he thought it his duty to inform the noble Lord, that if the Motion was ever made he should be obliged to submit to the House that it ought not to be entertained. Not only was it a private matter
  1572
  which could only be dealt with judicially by the House, but it was in regard to property which had been the subject of solemn litigation, and of a decision by the Court of Session, affirmed by their Lordships 10 years ago, as the Court of Final Appeal. There was a Standing Order of the House, that matters pending, or which at any former time had been pending before the House in its judicial capacity, should be referred to the Committee of Appeals. This Notice was in direct contravention of that Standing Order. When he saw the Notice on the Paper it occurred to him that it was not one that should be permitted to be debated, as it might lead to serious results. He was not in favour of one person more than another in the matter. With him it was merely a matter of principle. It seemed to him that no more illegal or unconstitutional Notice was ever put upon the Table of this House. If the Motion came before their Lordships, he should move that the Question be not put, as the most respectful way of dealing with it.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY)said, that he must refer the noble Earl (the Earl of Galloway) to the Prime Minister for an answer to his question.
  THE EARL OF GALLOWAYsaid, that he had put the Motion on the Table of the House several times, and his only motive for postponing it was to suit the convenience of the House. Of course, after the statement which had been made by the noble and learned Lord (the Earl of Selborne), he would consider whether it would be right on his part to proceed with his Motion. But it would have been much better if the noble and learned Lord had heard the grounds on which he made the request. He was sure that his noble and learned Friend would not take exception to anything which he would have to say. He was simply going to urge that the prayer of the Petition which had been presented should be answered. He had nothing whatever to do with the Petition itself, and he did not attempt to approve of all its terms. The noble Duke, who had first placed the Motion on the Paper, was not able to be present, and had asked him to undertake it. He did not feel inclined to say "No." If he did not bring it on, it would appear as if he were running away from what he had undertaken.

  1573
  He hoped the noble and learned Lord would not think it was out of any disrespect to him if he ventured to put the Motion down in order that he might have an opportunity of explaining the special grounds why, without going into the judicial or legislative questions, it would not be out of reason to entertain the Motion. He would, therefore, ask their Lordships' attention to the subject, and hoped the Prime Minister would prevent Government Bills interfering with its consideration on the 2nd August.
  THE PEIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY)said, he did not think his noble Friend was aware of the state of the Orders of the House. On Tuesdays or Thursdays any Bill, Government or not, that was put down took precedence of all Notices of Motion, and if the Government was to abstain from putting down Bills they could have no security that the noble Lord's Motion would be considered. Why should not the noble Lord put down his Motion for Monday 1st instead of Tuesday 2nd August?
  THE EARL OF GALLOWAY: It will be Bank holiday.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: There is nothing to prevent us sitting on that day. It would be an admirable day for such a discussion.
  THE EARL OF GALLOWAY: Then I will put the Motion down for Monday the 1st August.
  Motion postponed.

FIRST OFFENDERS BILL.—(No. 140.)
(The Earl of Belmore.)
FIRST OFFENDERS BILL.—(No. 140.)

  COMMITTEE.
  Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.
  Moved, "That the House do now resolve itself into Committee upon the said Bill."—(The Earl of Belmore.)
  Amendment moved, to leave out all the words after the word ("That") and insert ("the Bill be referred to a Select Committee)."—(The Earl of Milltown.)
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY)said, that the Lord Chief Justice had expressed his desire for some such measure as this, and opposed the reference to a Select Committe.
  THE EARL OF SELBORNEsaid, he agreed with the Lord Chief Justice, and
  1574
  earnestly hoped the Bill would be proceeded with, and not referred to a Select Committee.
  LORD BRAMWELLsaid, he should be very sorry if their Lordships objected to the Bill. He considered its objects excellent.
  THE EARL OF BELMOREsaid, that the Amendments of the Lord Chancellor, which he accepted, would alter the scope of the Bill to a considerable extent in the way of limitation; they would make the Bill shorter and clearer; and, therefore, he thought it would be better that the Bill should be reprinted with those Amendments. He hoped, however, that their Lordships would go into Committee pro formâ.
  Amendment (by leave of the House) withdrawn.
  Motion agreed to; House in Committee accordingly.
  Amendments made: The Report thereof to be received To-morrow; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 182.)

SMOKE NUISANCE ABATEMENT (METROPOLIS) BILL,—(No. 43.)
(The Lord Stratheden and Campbell.)
SMOKE NUISANCE ABATEMENT (METROPOLIS) BILL,—(No. 43.)

  COMMITTEE.
  Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.
  Moved, "That the House do now resolve itself into Committee upon the said Bill."—(The Lord Stratheden and Campbell.)
  THE EARL OF WEMYSSsaid, he hoped that their Lordships would not consent to go into Committee until the evidence taken before the Select Committee which had considered this question was before the House. This was a most important measure, seeing that it was not confined to manufactories, but extended to every private dwelling in the Metropolis; and the effect of the Bill would be that it would be open to an inspector to enter any room in any house, and see what sort of fires they were burning. That would be, he submitted, an intolerably inquisitorial power. The Bill also gave to the vestries the power of drawing a line between houses of particular valuations, with a view to exempting some. He had received a letter from the Vestry of St. James's, in which they objected strongly to the principle of the Bill, and espe-

  1575
  cially to the exemption of property above or below a certain valuation. He was most anxious that their Lordships should have before them the evidence to which he had referred; and he, therefore, would ask his noble Friend, to kindly postpone this stage of the Bill.
  LORD STRATHEDEN AND CAMPBELLsaid, that the Government had an Amendment down dealing with the point to which the noble Earl took exception, and when that was reached the noble Earl could support it.
  EARL BROWNLOWsaid, that the evidence taken before the Committee was of very great importance, and it was most desirable that it should be before the House before the Bill was considered. He, therefore, felt bound to appeal to the noble Lord in charge of the Bill to postpone this stage.
  LORD STRATHEDEN AND CAMPBELLsaid, he was not aware that the evidence had not come before their Lordships. Under the circumstances, lie should ask leave to postpone the order till Monday.
  Committee of the Whole House put off to Monday next.

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

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
  VISCOUNT POWERSCOURT, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, that its object was to prevent the sale of a certain compound, not butter, under that name. A letter had appeared in The Times, which their Lordships no doubt had seen, from Sir Lyon Playfair, suggesting that, instead of margarine, this substance should be called "butter substitute." Others suggested that it should be known, by the name of "butterine." The object of a Bill of this kind was to make the law as difficult of evasion as possible. After many consultations on the subject, in some of which he had taken part, the agriculturists of England and Ireland had decided that the name "margarine" was most likely to carry out the desired object. Therefore, he hoped their Lord ships would retain that name in the Bill. There were one or two matters with regard to the clauses of the Bill which
  1576
  he should like to notice. In the second clause it was proposed to be enacted that the word "margarine" should mean the various substances mentioned in the clause, and that they should not be sold except under the name of "margarine." That was the view of people who were engaged in the butter trade. To the third clause an Amendment was suggested, but these were matters to be dealt with in Committee. Clause 5 was also proposed to be amended; but it should, not be done unless a proviso was inserted that a person giving a warranty should not be a man of straw, but a man of substance. Since coming to the House he had received a Report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons, to whom the Bill had been referred, and the evidence taken by that Committee could be sent for. The noble Viscount concluded by moving the second Reading of the Bill.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(Viscount Powerscourt.)
  LORD HOUGHTONsaid, that this was by no means the first time this question had come before Parliament. Last Session a Bill was introduced into the other House, backed by the names of Members from Ireland, and a Bill was also introduced last year into their Lordships' House by Lord Vernon, which he professed his willingness to modify in accordance with suggestions made by the then Government. The present Bill was referred to a Select Committee in the other House, and that Select Committee had made certain recommendations with reference to the sale of margarine, of which the noble Lord had spoken. One of the recommendations of the Select Committee relating to the name under which the commodity should be sold was opposed in the other House, and rejected by a majority. The hon. Members who carried that vote had not had an opportunity of Reading the evidence upon which the Committee founded its Report; and it was most desirable that their Lordships should not be in the same position in deciding the question. Therefore, it would be better to wait until the House had the evidence taken by the Select Committee before it. He understood the noble Viscount was willing to postpone the Committee stage of the Bill till the end of next week.
  LORD BASINGsaid, that as he was Chairman of the Select Committee of the other House with reference to this Bill, he should like to make one or two observations. The provisions of the Bill, with one exception, were practically agreed to by all Parties on the Committee. The persons representing the trade in this butter substitute were very honourably distinguished by the readiness with which they agreed to accept any restrictions or regulations which Parliament might think fit to impose with a view of carrying out the objects of the Bill. Unfortunately, there was great difference of opinion as to whether the butter substitute should be called "butterine" or "margarine." Upon that question he would only make this observation—that by the use of the term "butterine" this substance had become so well known as to obtain a great market. That, on the one hand, was in favour of butterine; but, on the other, it could not be doubted that the word "butterine" had greatly increased the fraudulent sale of the article. The appearance of the material produced, which was manufactured with care and as a proper and wholesome article of food—its appearance as well as its name had greatly increased its sale. The practical importance of the Bill being agreed upon, he ventured to hope that their Lordships would pass the second Reading, although he agreed that some time ought to elapse before coming to a decision upon the only important question that arose with regard to the Bill. The noble Lord opposite had referred to Clause 5 as needing some Amendment; but he would point out that it was practically only a reprint of a clause in the Food and Drugs Act, and had never done any mischief. It did not follow that because the allegation was made that an article had been sold is the same state as it was received with a warranty from the wholesale dealer the Court would accept that statement without evidence. He ventured to hope that the clause might be retained in the Bill. He should like also to suggest that the commencement of the Act should be postponed till the 1st of January next year, as it would be hard on many persons that it should be brought into immediate operation.
  LORD EGERTON OF TATTONsaid, whatever might have been the evidence offered to the Committee, there was a
  1578
  strong feeling amongst agriculturists, which had reached him from various quarters against the use of the term "butterine," which, obviously, was a word open to misrepresentation. It was clear that a tradesman in exposing the title "butterine" to his customers could so manipulate the ticket that the customer should only see the word "butter," and not the final "ine." The result of the use of the word had been that the substance was mistaken for butter and its price had been raised. While butterine was only worth from 4½d. to 6d. per pound, through being mistaken for butter, its price had risen to 10½d. to 1s.. per pound. Practical agriculturists and farmers were unanimous in wishing that the sale of pure butter should be insured by a substitute not being permitted to be sold under a name which caused it to be mistaken for butter. Unless some strong reason were shown, he trusted their Lordships would retain the name adopted by the other House.
  THE EARL OF WEMYSSsaid, that in Committee he intended to move that the word "butterine" should be substituted wherever "margarine" occurred in the Bill. The Committee of the House of Commons, having heard the evidence, adopted the word butterine on Division by 2 to 1. It was not margarine, and it was not desirable to give it a false name. Margarine was the substance from which butterine was made. Margarine was pressed fat, and was manufactured into butterine by a wholesome process in which milk was used. The substance so manufactured had been known in the trade for the last 12 years as butterine, and during that period it had been sold to the extent of £4,000,000 in value. It would be most unfair now to throw suspicion upon the article by changing its name from butterine to margarine. If any thing were to be done to prevent fraud and adulteration as regards articles of this character it should be effected by means of a general Act, and not by a Bill of this character. He should endeavour to draw up a general Bill of the nature he had indicated. Of the 87 who voted in the House of Commons in favour of margarine 46 were Irish Members, who were interested in suppressing butterine as a rival of butter; but it should be remembered

  1579
  that farmers were interested in the sale of suet, from which butterine was largely made. He was glad to hear that the Committee stage of the Bill was to be postponed for a week in order that their Lordships might have an opportunity of reading the evidence given before the Committee which had been appointed to consider this subject.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he thought all were agreed that it was desirable to give a second Reading to the Bill, and that there should be an interval of some days before the Committee. In his opinion it would be equally absurd to object to the term "velveteen" instead of worsted, because of its similarity to "velvet," as to object to the term butterine. There are two textures, one is called velvet, the other velveteen, the former of a much finer material, the second, probably as worn for clothing. What would be thought of a Bill rejecting the name of velveteen which has been known for years, in order to give the substance the name of worsted, which does not describe it, but which describes one element of it, upon the excuse of its being necessary to protect the velvet makers?
  THE EARL OF GALLOWAYsaid, that the object of those who objected to the word butterine was to prevent the public from being imposed upon. He thought that the question might be settled by the introduction of both words, "margarine and butterine" being given to the title of the Bill, as both these substances, which were quite different from one another, were strictly defined in the Bill.
  THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THR COUNCIL (Viscount CRANBROOK)said, that he had seen the substance called butterine, which resembled butter, but which contained no trace of butter. The term butterine was calculated to mislead people into believing that the substance was of the nature of butter. It was therefore necessary to discriminate between those who made a well-manufactured article and those who made a bad and unwholesome mixture; otherwise the Bill would be an idle one.
  LORD BRAMWELLsaid, he objected to the substance being called by the name of margarine, which it certainly was not.
  EARL FORTESCUEthought that it would be better to discuss all these points
  1580
  in Committee after the evidence which had been taken on the subject was in. their hands.
  LORD FITZGERALDsaid, what was wanted was an honest name. "Butterine" was a false name adopted to deceive the public.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday the 1st of August next.

CORONERS BILL.—(No. 176.)
(The Lord Chanellor.)
CORONERS BILL.—(No. 176.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day far the Second Reading, read.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY), in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, it was simply a measure for consolidating existing Statutes.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a —(The Lord Chancellor.)
  LORD HERSCHELLsaid, he hoped that with this Consolidation Bill the subject of the amendment of the law would not be lost sight of. He could not help feeling impressed by the slow way in which we moved in matters of this sort. Some years ago he recommended an amendment of the law, and pointed out the direction which it should take. The consequence of the observations which he made was that an Act was passed by the State of Massachusetts, and he believed at least one other State followed the example. He had since heard that the Act was working extremely well. In this country where his observations had been made the law stood just as it was when he spoke 10 years ago.
  LORD BRAMWELLsaid, that one of the most successful pieces of our legislation had its origin with his noble and learned Friend, he meant the consolidation of the law with respect to bills of exchange. One argument in support of the course proposed by the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack he derived from his noble and learned Friend—namely, that the best way to see what Amendments were required in any body of law, was to consolidate the existing laws.
  LORD THRING, as Chairman of the Committee for the Revision of the Statute Law, said, he hoped the Bill

  1581
  would be passed without any amendment altering the law. Any material improvement in the form of the Statute Law must be made by the aid of numerous Acts consolidating the scattered provisions of the law; and experience showed that such Acts could not be passed unless an assurance was given that they did not materially alter the law.
  LORD HERSCHELLsaid, he did not mean that their Lordships should not pass this Consolidation Bill; but he hoped that that would not interfere with the amendment of the law relating to Coroners.
  THE EARL OF SELBORNEsaid, that when any change was made in the law, it would be very necessary to deal with the question of the election of Coroners. As the freeholders of a county elected a Coroner, there was a long and expensive canvass, whenever there was a contest, as in most oases happened; and he know for certain that the usefulness of some coroners had been permanently injured by the embarrassments into which they had fallen in consequence.
  VISCOUNT CROSSsaid, that when he had the honour of being at the Home Office he brought in a Bill dealing with Coroners' elections. He knew the enormous expense of such contests in Lancashire, and he believed that it had seriously affected the usefulness of those officers. He, for one, would wish to see some other mode of election, but the first step to reform would be the consolidation of the law.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly.

COPYHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT BILL.
(The Lord Hobhouse.)
COPYHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT BILL.

  (NO. 180.) REPORT OF AMENDMENTS.
  Amendments reported (according to Order).
  LORD HERSCHELLsaid, that all their Lordships were agreed that where, in fact, the right of forfeiture was not of any pecuniary value at all, which was the case in the vast majority of instances, it ought to be excluded from consideration. He proposed, on the third Reading, to move an Amendment to that effect.
  Bill to be read 3a on Tuesday next.

NEW ZEALAND.

  MOTION FOR PAPERS.
  LORD SANDHURSTsaid, he had ventured to put on the Paper a Notice referring to the subject of the emigration of pensioners to New Zealand for two reasons. First, he hoped to induce their Lordships to agree with him that the idea he was about to ventilate was one which would be beneficial to the pensioner and to the Colony, and also to the advantage of the Mother Country; and, secondly, he proposed to call their Lordships' attention to the circumstances of the pensioner who, although in receipt of a pension, was not, owing to regulations, in a position to avail himself of the advantages which the receipt of such a pension should suggest. His object was to improve the position of the pensioner, direct his attention to the advantages of emigration, and facilitate that emigration which should not interfere with the labour market in the Colony. If, by a process of this kind, we could induce a stream of those men to go out, we should be forming a fresh link and direct association with the Colony, which, in itself, was sufficient to recommend the general idea to their Lordships. Again, the majority of those pensioners lived near and in the towns. The labour market was, as they were all painfully aware, greatly congested even in the agricultural districts, and if they could provide a system of this kind of emigration they might, though perhaps, imperceptably at first lessen the pressure. Successful men in the Colonies attracted others, and that pensioners had been successful as Colonists there was little difficulty in showing. There had been lately great interest taken in the subject of Colonial defence. He could not, of course, say what determination Her Majesty's Government had come to at the Colonial Conference; but whatever that determination might be, a body of pensioners could not fail to be of use in assisting any scheme. If only a small body went out they would form a valuable disciplined nucleus for a defence force, for he should suggest, if his plan came to anything, the pensioners being made liable to serve in New Zealand for Colonial defence, as they were liable to be called on by the War Office up to a certain age. If, on the other hand, a large number emigrated, he

  1583
  thought that the Imperial and Colonial Governments would find them of the greatest use. There was this difference between Australia and New Zealand in regard to defence. He believed that between Sydney and Victoria, there was no point at which a large force could be landed with a prospect of doing great harm if one of the great cities were attacked, the railway system was such that forces could be brought from Brisbane to Adelaide. New Zealand was different, it was a difficult country to defend on account of its innumerable harbours, and the formation of the country did not admit of sufficiently rapid communication between all parts. If they had stations of pensioners—disciplined veterans—who could be available, he thought that the men would materially aid in naval defencs. No one travelling in Now Zealand could fail to be struck by the advantages which that Colony offered for emigration, whether from England, India, or elsewhere. The Colony had truly been described as a paradise for working men. A comparatively short time ago the Government of New Zealand, with the dual purpose of opening up the country and attracting populations to settle on the land instead of staying in the towns, passed a Bill leasing on very advantageous terms to the occupier holdings from one to 50 acres. Success attended the effort, and Captain Daveney, the Imperial pensions officer, a gentleman of great experience and knowledge, bearing in mind the successful attempt of Sir George Grey to establish pensioners' settlements, perceived that great opportunities were offered for pensioners. He obtained from the Minister of Lands leave to send information on the subject to India in case there might be time-expired men who might be desirous of settling in New Zealand instead of returning to England, for their Lordships would remember that a time-expired man in India was given his choice of a passage home or to a colony; and, moreover, the Minister remarked that if anything came of the plan he would direct the Surveyor General to set aside good land for pensioners' settlements. These leases were on very favourable terms, and, moreover, there were great advantages for poor men in the Colony. Elementary education was free, and food was generally cheaper than in England. There was far more chance for a man
  1584
  raising himself and gaining a competency there than here, and his children would, no doubt prosper more than himself, as there would be plenty of employment for them as they grew up. The idea was really a development under more favourable conditions of what was done in this way by Sir George Grey, and now there was no chance of disturbances with the Maoris which the early pioneers had to fear. He was informed that all who stayed on their land did well. He had received the following from the Imperial pensions officer:—
  "Sir George Grey founded five settlements. The pensioners lived on their lands until death. They managed not only to live well and bring up their families respectably, but numbers of their descendants still cling to their allotments and would not part with them. About 150 of these men still remain. I go out quarterly to pay their pensions, and it is a pleasure to look at their neat cottages and gardens. Most of them have been 40 years in their present abode."
  Sir George Grey also testified to the success of the scheme. He had received a letter from the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Sir M. O'Rorke, who said—
  "I am very glad you are endeavouring to promote the introduction of additional pensioners into this Colony, and I hasten to offer you my testimony in favour of the scheme. I settled in the pensioners' settlements 31 years ago, and have represented it for 27 years uninterruptedly in the New Zealand Parliament. These settlements are unlike anything I have seen in Australia; the pensioners and their families having evidently taken root in the soil, and not indulging in the rambling propensities of other classes of Colonists. I can hardly decide in looking back over the last 30 years whether the Colony or the pensioners profited most by Sir George Grey's scheme. I consider it absolutely necessary that the pensioners should be accompanied by their wives."
  That, he considered, was very valuable testimony. The pensioner was himself a capitalist with this advantage, that he could not spend his money in gin shops immediately on arrival at the port of debarkation. The men who go out must be pensioners and not those who had commuted the whole of their pension. Therefore, he did not wish to ask the Government for capital to carry out this idea. But there was a difficulty confronting them which might easily be got over—namely, the payment of passages out to New Zealand of a pensioner and his family. With regard to Army pensioners, there were some 85,000. The

  1585
  average age at which a soldier after 21 years' service went on the non-effective list was 39 to 40, and the average rate of pension of a sound, healthy man was 15 d. to 16 d., the average number discharged per annum being 2,000. The pensioner might have his pension paid him in any part of Her Majesty's Dominions without having to obtain leave to go; therefore he might go to any Colony. If, however, he went to any foreign country before the age of 50 his pension was stopped. After 50 he might draw his pension in any part of the world. He could not commute his pension until after 50, and he must commute the whole or none. If he did commute his pension, he only capitalized it at four years' purchase instead of at the actuarial rate allowed to officers, which would be 11 years' purchase. The principle of allowing a man to commute the whole of his pension was, in his opinion, a bad one, because after a time, having had every temptation to throw his money away, and never having been in possession of such a sum before, he was very likely to return starving. But although he was opposed to commutation, he did think that if it was allowed at all it ought to be allowed at such an estimate of years' purchase as would be obtainable from an annuity company. An officer could commute a portion of his pension so long as he did not leave less than a third of it, or less than £80, and the computation of the number of years' purchase was based upon actuarial calculation. He thought it hard that a private soldier should have to take four years' purchase at 50 years of age when the proper rate would be 11. If at 39 he were allowed to commute a small proportion, he might then have sufficient to pay his passage, or, at any rate, to pay all but a very small margin of his passage out. Then he should like to remind their Lordships that this system of four years' purchase was started under very different circumstances than the present. In 1830 it was thought desirable to emigrate 1,500. When they were sent out their pension was commuted at only four years' purchase, as the land given them then was supposed to represent the remaining value. Now the four years' system obtains, although the land representing the remaining value was not given. As he had said, he was strongly opposed to pensions
  1586
  being entirely commuted, as were also the Commissioners of Chelsea Hospital. But, at the same time, if the principle were allowed it ought to be done at a fair rate, and, as was the case with officers, a portion might with advantage be commuted if the family were desirous to emigrate, so as to give a pensioner enough to pay his passage and leaving him the remainder of the pension to be received on landing. An advance of nine months was already given; but that was of use only to single men, for the sum realized would not be sufficient to pay for a family, and as the voyage only takes six or seven weeks, the emigrant would find himself without means on arrival. Possibly if the noble Lord did not approve this plan, perhaps he would consider the desirability of a loan, with repayment spread over a term of years, which would be deducted from the pension. He hoped the question would be carefully considered, both by the War Office and the Colonial Office. He had treated the pension as a reward for past services, and not entirely as a retainer for the future. But he had been told that his proposal would denude the country of some of its Reserve Forces. But the pensioners were only a substratum of reserve, were never called out, and were paid by Post Office order where they liked. The enrolled pensioners, who, no doubt, were a valuable force, served under an agreement at £1 per quarter. Pensioners did not belong to it merely from the fact of their being pensioners; it was an enlistment on their part, though he did not underrate pensioners, and he thought the pensioner would be more useful as a defender in New Zealand than he would be England. The idea had been approved by many in New Zealand, and the Auckland Chamber of Commerce passed a Resolution in its favour. Some time ago the Prime Minister received a deputation, headed by Lord Meath, and the difficulty he pointed out was that for such an undertaking as that alluded to in the speeches of the members of the deputation a gigantic loan would be required, therefore a complete scheme must be submitted to Government before such a proposal could be submitted to Parliament. But he asked for no large loan, the only difficulty was that of passage money, and he had indicated a

  1587
  method of overcoming that difficulty. He had had the advantage of conversation with many well-informed gentlemen who had watched the rapid growth of the Colonies, and in many oases assisted in the building of them up, and they greatly encouraged him in the idea that emigrant colonization would be attended with good results. He hoped, therefore, that his recommendation as to pensioners would meet with favourable consideration from the Under Secretary for War, who had shown an interest in the Army which would be praiseworthy in a soldier but was remarkable in a civilian. If he and the noble Earl the Under Secretary for the Colonies would allow him to assist them they would set in motion a plan of which the results might at first be small, but might lay a groundwork for a far larger scheme with far more remarkable results in the future. He begged to move for Papers on the subject.
  Moved, "That there be laid before this House Papers relating to the emigration of pensioners to New Zealand."— (The Lord Sandhurst.)
  LORD NAPIER OF MAGDALAsaid, he thought the House was indebted to the noble and gallant Lord for having brought the subject forward. It was matter of great regret that men who had served their country well should be reduced to a condition of want, and if means could be devised of assisting them and their families to a Colony in which they would have better prospects than lay before them at home, a great blessing would have been conferred on them and the country.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR, WAR (Lord HARRIS)said, he was extremely grateful to the noble and gallant Lord for bringing before the House a question which was not only a question of considerable interest to every noble Lord who had at heart the welfare of these men who had fought for their Queen and country, but a large and important question. The noble and gallant Lord suggested that pensioners should be assisted by the State in the way of an advance of money or more favourable terms of commutation in order to enable them to emigrate to the Colonies. Up to 50 years of age a pensioner was liable to serve in this country, or if he is in a Colony might
  1588
  be called up by the Governor of that Colony, or by the lawful authority in this country. But the pension was not altogether a pension, it was also in the nature of a retaining fee for future services. After 50 the pensioner was absolutely free, and his pension must be paid without any liability as to service on his part. With respect to the propriety of making advances to pensioners the Board of Commissioner at Chelsea had more than once endeavoured to induce the Treasury to allow advances in a lump sum for two years to enable the pensioner to emigrate, with the understanding that if he was not able to find employment in the Colony and returned his pension would go on as before. But the Treasury had not acceded to the suggestion, and the utmost advance they would make was from six to nine months' pension. The question of commutation was an intricate though interesting question. It had been recognized so far back as Queen Anne's reign, but it was not carried into effect until 1830, when British soldiers were allowed to commute their pension for four years in order to emigrate to Canada where tracts of land were granted them. A large number of men availed themselves of the privilege; but, being unable to get on in their new home were compelled to return to this country. Considerable complaints were made of the War Office authorities for having induced the men to accept these terms. In 1831 the Secretary of State wrote to the Commissioners of Chelsea Hospital, and pointed out to them what those terms were. The Commissioners expostulated that the terms were not good enough, and that a man's pension was worth more than four years' purchase; but the Secretary of State replied that he was bound by the Act of 1830. The difference between the terms which officers were allowed to obtain and what the pensioners could obtain had only existed within the last 20 years. 1869 was the first time that statutory authority was given to an officer to commute his half-pay on an actuarial value, whereas a pensioner remained under the old Act of 1830, and could only obtain four years' purchase for his pension. He was exceedingly obliged to his noble and gallant Friend for having brought forward this subject. He thought it was one which

  1589
  ought to be carefully considered by the country. This was, however, hardly a matter with which their Lordships could deal, for if a change were made in the amount which a pensioner could obtain as commutation the subject would have to be dealt with in a Money Bill in the other House of Parliament. But it was a matter which he thought was worthy the consideration of Parliament. He was exceedingly obliged to the noble and gallant Lord for having drawn attention to it, and he could assure him that it had not escaped the notice of the Secretary of State for War. His right hon. Friend (Mr. Stanhope) was quite prepared to take it into consideration; but it was impossible for their Lordships to go any further at this moment under the circumstances he had stated. It was a very large question, and it was hardly one with regard to which he could pledge himself at this moment. He had not found in the War Office any Papers which bore on this subject. The most interesting details were to be found in the reports of of the Parliamentary debates about 1831 and 1832; but if the noble Lord would call at the War Office he should be afforded an opportunity of seeing the Papers there that related to the subject j of his Motion.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERYsaid, he wished that the Colonial Conference, of the existence of which they had heard so much and seen so little, had been now sitting, because this was a question which might well come before them. He confessed he thought the Treasury was taking what they sometimes thought it did—a somewhat pettifogging view with reference to this matter. This question of State aided emigration was very important, especially in connection with the proposal now brought forward. Here it was not merely a question of relieving over-population, but of reviving the old Roman form of colonization in this country by providing for the defence of our Colonies and settling great numbers of deserving men who could not find employment. This question of State-aided emigration would, in its full scope, soon have to be faced by the Government, and he regretted that the Government did not see their way to face it even in this small connection on the present occasion. There were very few
  1590
  questions on which the country felt so great an interest at this moment as the question of emigration. In the present case the colony was willing to receive the emigrants if the Imperial Government would facilitate the sending of them out. In conclusion, he hoped that the Colonial Office and the War Office would endeavour to force a more statesman-like view of this question on the Treasury.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (The EARL of ONSLOW)said, this question of emigration was not among the subjects to be brought before the Colonial Conference, and therefore the Conference was not invited to pronounce an opinion upon it. There were a number of noble Lords and of hon. Members who had taken up the question of emigration with great zeal and energy, and who at the time the Conference was sitting had lengthened interviews with distinguished delegates who attended its meetings and who expressed to them their views on the subject. In regard to the particular question brought forward by the noble Lord, he could only say that the colony of New Zealand and the Colonial Office were always glad that there should be such an addition to our colonists as was likely to be of service to the colony. One of the great difficulties which they had to contend with in any scheme of emigration was as to the class of men who proposed to go out. These men who had served their Queen and country with distinction were men whom any colony ought to be proud to receive. The noble and gallant Lord had asked that some papers on the subject might be laid upon the Table of the House. His noble Friend had stated that there were none in the War Office, and he might add that there were none in the Colonial Department. He believed the only Papers consisted of a collection of letters printed and circulated by the noble and gallant Lord who had brought forward this Motion. These showed that the noble and gallant Lord had been in communication with representatives of the Colony of New Zealand, and he might, perhaps, express a hope that the noble and gallant Lord would exercise his influence with the representatives of the Colonies in order to induce them to do something to get over what

  1591
  appeared to be the main difficuty— namely, the payment of the passages of the emigrants.
  LORD HARRISsaid, it was no doubt a question whether it was wise that the country should lose these men who, in the event of an invasion, might be exceedingly useful; but as a matter of fact the State had actually assisted them to emigrate.
  LORD SANDHURST, in thanking the Under Secretary of State for War for his sympathetic reply, said, he fully admitted that they could not go further at this moment. He regretted that the noble Lord (Lord Harris) and himself approached the question of pensions from two different standpoints, the noble Lord saying it was a retainer for the future, and he (Lord Sandhurst) regarding it as a reward for past services. The noble Lord also seemed to lay much stress upon the value of pensioners' services at home; and regarding the payment of passages, suggested by the noble Earl (the Earl of Onslow), he would venture to remind him that New Zealand had already paid upwards of £2,000,000 in assisting emigration.
  Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE—THE CHANCERY DIVISION.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  THE EARL OF SELBORNEasked the Lord Chancellor, Whether any steps are likely soon to be taken to carry into effect the recommendations of the Committee, lately presided over by the Master of the Rolls, as to the business of the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice? The noble and learned Lord said that the Committee, which consisted of the Master of the Rolls, Mr. Justice Kay, the late Mr. Justice Pearson—whose name he could not mention without expressing his sense of the eminent judicial services of that learned and excellent Judge, and of the great loss which the country had sustained by his death—Mr. Justice Stirling, Sir Horace Davey, and four other gentlemen, made their Report on August 7, 1885; and though there were some differences of opinion, the conclusion they carne to was that it was clear that the actual number
  1592
  of Judges attached to the Chancery Division was unequal to cope with the business, and therefore they thought it necessary that the Chancery Division should be reinforced by an additional Judge. That might be done in either of two ways—either by transferring a Judge from the Queen's Bench to the Chancery Division, or by increasing the whole number of Judges. He found that the number of causes standing for hearing on the 16th of October, 1884, was 842; on the 23rd of May, 1885, 667; at the beginning of the present Trinity sittings 786, above 100 more than in May, 1885; and on the 20th of July, 1887, the number was 826. He thought their Lordships would be of opinion that under the circumstances it was desirable that steps should at once be taken to do whatever could be done to accelerate the despatch of business in that important Division of the Court.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY)said, that the Report was brought under his notice some time ago, and he had considered it. It was impossible not to feel that much depended on the appointment of an additional Judge; and he quite agreed that it was absolutely essential, in order to clear off the arrears, that additional assistance should be given. Much injury and additional cost was caused to suitors by the present state of things. They had to come up from the country once, twice, and perhaps oftener, to have their cases disposed of. The difficulty of dealing with this matter was the state of business in the other House. There was a power to appoint an additional Judge under the 18th section of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, by an Address of both Houses; and he was prepared to move their Lordships' House in the matter. After communication with the First Lord of the Treasury, it was impossible to say whether time could be found in the other House for a Motion upon the subject. Although it was a very urgent matter, there were other even more urgent questions; and, in the present state of business, his right hon. Friend informed him that it was impossible to name a day for making such a Motion, though the opportunity might occur before the Session came to an end.
  LORD HERSCHELLsaid, be thought that those who were averse to making

  1593
  this change were not sufficiently alive to the frightful injury which the present state of affairs was inflicting on suitors.

CELEBRATION OF THE JUBILEE YEAR OF HER MAJESTY'S REIGN—THE NAVAL REVIEW OFF SPITHEAD.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD LAMINGTONsaid, he rose to call the attention of the House to the very inconvenient arrangements made by the Admiralty to enable the Members of both Houses of Parliament to see the Naval Review. The arrangements for the Members of both Houses and their ladies were most unsatisfactory. They would be taken down to Portsmouth by special train, but left to get back to London as best they could. It was stated that they must return in any class of carriage they might be able to get into. The arrangements made by the Admiralty were not intelligible; and he would ask why, if they could have special trains down from London, they could not have special trains back to town, as he thought might be arranged with the most perfect case? The arrangements made for the Naval Review of 1856 were also very bad. Many Peers and Peeresses on that occasion did not get back to London until 3 o'clock in the morning. The whole affair wag a disgrace to the Admiralty, as the noble Earl opposite (Earl Granville) well knew; and he trusted that the mistakes made then were not going to be repeated on Saturday.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that, as his noble Friend had appealed to him, he would say that, partly from his recollection of the eventful day to which reference was made, and partly from his own want of confidence in Her Majesty's present Government, he intended to entrust himself entirely to the hospitality of the Mercantile Marine, and not to that of the Royal Navy.
  LORD ELPHINSTONE (A LORD in WAITING)regretted exceedingly that his noble Friend was not satisfied with the arrangements made by the Admiralty for the convenience of both Houses of Parliament. The Board had made the best arrangements in their power, and they hoped they would be successful in every respect and that every person would be satisfied. He had taken the trouble to go to the Waterloo Railway
  1594
  Station, and he learned from the manager that there was only room in the dockyard for one train at a time. The difficulty was to get a train into the dockyard and out of it: under ordinary circumstances, and if the way was clear it occupied 20 minutes, not allowing five minutes for filling up. The Admiralty guests, who numbered 2,900, would fill seven trains, and they would occupy about three hours in getting away. If a special train were in waiting when the guests were landed, no doubt his noble Friend, with his stalwart frame, would be able to get a seat, but smaller and weaker men like himself would be left behind. It was only six and a-half minutes' walk from the landing stage to the Harbour Station, where the trains would be continuous. It was thought very much better that the Admiralty guests should go from the Harbour Station, carriages being reserved for them in each special train despatched. It would be much more for the convenience of Members of Parliament that this course should be adopted, as otherwise they might be kept waiting a long time for special trains. Moreover, noble Lords and Members of Parliament, with the other Admiralty guests, would be landed at different times from Her Majesty's Ships, and would leave for town as they came ashore without waiting for a special train at a stated hour. He thought that the Railway Company had done the best they could, having regard to the fact that the company was answerable for the lives of all the passengers they carried. The Admiralty had, he thought, made the best arrangements possible under the circumstances with the Railway Company in arranging that two carriages should be reserved for noble Lords and Members of Parliament in each special train despatched for London.
  THE EARL OF WEMYSSasked whether arrangements could not be made for more than two carriages for ours to be attached to special trains for the Admiralty guests to start from Portsmouth Harbour Station at stated hours?
  THE EARL OF FEVERSHAMsaid, he thought it would cause a great deal of inconvenience unless more than two carriages were reserved by each train for the Admiralty guests.
  LORD ELPHINSTONEsaid, he wished to remind noble Lords that all the trains despatched from Portsmouth Harbour would be special trains. As all the Admiralty guests would not be landed at the same moment, it would be inconvenient to run special trains at stated hours for the Members of Parliament. If two carriages were not enough by each train, all the rest of the train was open to their Lordships and Members of Parliament.

  CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT (IRELAND) BILL.
  Leave given to the following Lords to sign the Protest against the Third Reading, although their Lordships were not present when the question was put; viz.,

  M. Ripon.

  L. Wolverton.

  E. Chesterfield.

  L. Greville.

  E. Granville.

  L. Sandhurst.

  E. Kimberley.

  L. Hothfield.

  E. Sydney.

  L. Northbourne.

  V. Hampden.

  L. Monskwell.

  V. Oxenbridge.

  L. Hobhouse.

  L. Camoys.

  L. Herschell.

  L. Braye.

  L. Kensington.

  L. Rosebery.

  L. Burton.

  L. Leigh.

  L. Hamilton of Dalzell.

  L. Houghton.

  L. Thring.

  L. Acton.

  House adjourned at a quarter past Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Ten o'clock