Lords Sitting of 28 March 1887

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First, Second, and Third Reading—Consolidated Fund (No. 1) *, and passed.
Report—Electric Lighting Act (1882) Amendment* (10).

IRISH LAND LAW BILL.

  QUESTION.
  THE DUKE OF ABERCORN: Seeing the noble Earl the Lord Privy Seal in his place, I would ask him a Question of which I have given him private Notice—namely, When the Irish Land Bill will be printed and circulated among the Members of your Lordships' House? Also, I desire to ask him, if he is able to state the time when the Government will take the second reading?
  THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (Earl CADOGAN): In reply to my noble Friend I beg to say that, in pursuance of Notice already given, I propose to explain to your Lordships the Irish Land Bill of the Government on Thursday next. If it should be the pleasure of the House to read the Bill a first time, it will be printed and circulated immediately, and will, I think, be in the hands of your Lordships a day or two after that. In regard to the second reading, it is impossible for me to fix a day this evening; but I may say that it is the wish of the Government to proceed with the measure as soon as possible after the Easter Recess.

ALLOTMENTS BILL.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  THE EARL OF JERSEYasked Her Majesty's Government, Whether they would introduce the Allotments Bill in that House at an early date? The Bill had been promised in the Speech from the Throne, and if it was to be passed it would be well that it should be passed early in the summer, so as to enable necessary arrangements to be made before Michaelmas; but, from the flow of words in "another place," there did not scorn to be much prospect of the Bill being brought forward there. He felt sure that their Lordships would entertain in a kindly and practical spirit a measure of this nature for the advantage of the labouring classes. It was very likely

  1591
  there might not be so largo a demand for additional allotments as was sometimes supposed; but the introduction of a practical measure with fair and compulsory clauses, into their Lordships' House, would have a most beneficial effect in reducing the very high and, in some cases, extortionate rents which were exacted for allotments.
  THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (Viscount CRANBROOK): I am very sorry that the only answer I can give to my noble Friend's Question is that the Bill will certainly not be introduced before Easter. I cannot at present fix any particular day for its introduction.
  THE EARL OF JERSEY: Will it be introduced into this House?
  VISCOUNT CRANBROOK: I cannot answer that Question.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY)said, he could not foresee what the state of Business would be. It was necessary very much to arrange the introduction of Bills in this House in reference to the possibility of their being introduced into the other, and with reference to the possibility of their being passed in the other, and the time they would take in each House. The Government had not yet decided what course would be taken.
  THE EARL OF JERSEY: I only asked the Question in order to get from the Government an assurance that the Bill will be introduced this Session under ordinary circumstances, and that there is no intention at present of shelving the subject.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I can assure the noble Earl that there is no intention whatever on the part of the Government to shelve the question.

  RAILWAY AND CANAL TRAFFIC BILL—PETITION OF THE SOUTH EASTERN RALLWAY COMPANY.—MOTION.
  LORD BRAMWELLsaid, that last Friday he presented a Petition from the South Eastern Railway Company, praying that the Company might be heard by counsel at the bar against the Railway and Canal Traffic Bill. He might take the opportunity of saying that his clients, he was about to say—[Laughter]—ho would adopt the word—his clients the Railway Company, who were represented by him, and who desired to be
  1592
  represented by counsel, had not presented that Petition in a spirit of obstruction. The application he was now making had not been originally suggested by them, but by himself to them. He wanted to present, not an abstract, but a concrete case—the particular case of this particular Company—upon the subject upon which they were called upon to legislate. The Petition stated two facts, neither of which could be contradicted. One was that under an Act passed in 1836 they made their line, and were empowered to charge certain rates and tolls. The other fact, equally indisputable, was that the Bill proposed to take away the right to charge these rates. It seemed to him only necessary to state these facts in order to obtain a favourable answer to the Petition that his clients might be allowed to employ counsel before their Lordships against the Bill which proposed to interfere with their rights. The noble Lord in charge of the Bill had stated that there was a special reservation by Parliament of its right to revise these rates and tolls. But no lawyer would raise such a contention, as this reservation was only to be found in Acts of Parliament passed long subsequently to the Company's Act of 1836. As he had said, he had not been requested by the Company to bring this matter before their Lordships, but he had made the suggestion to the Company himself. As they would be affected by the principle of the Bill now before their Lordships, they ought, in all fairness and justice, to be heard against it. It was not to be supposed that the case of the South Eastern Railway Company was so bad that it was not worth while to hear them. That he denied, and no lawyer would contradict him. What would be thought of a tribunal or Judge that first decided a case was too plain to hear the party, and then without hearing, decided against him? The Company he represented would be seriously affected by the Bill; and in fairness, reason, and justice, they ought to be heard upon it. He therefore moved that the South Eastern Railway Company be hoard by counsel against the Bill.
  Moved, "That the prayer of the petition of the South Eastern Railway Company, presented on Friday last, praying to be heard by counsel against the Bill, be complied with."—(The Lord Bramwell.)
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Lord STANLEY of PRESTON)said, that when he came down to the House, he was prepared only to speak to the point to which the noble and learned Lord (Lord Bramwell) had begun by calling attention, and that was whether or not it was expedient that this Bill should be argued by counsel at the Bar. He (Lord Stanley of Preston) was prepared to show that it was not expedient for the House to acquiesce in the Motion which the noble and learned Lord had made. Having consulted the practice of the House on former occasions, in order to see what precedents there were for counsel being heard against Bills in their Lordships' House, he found that it was at least 40 years since any Motion similar to that which the noble and learned Lord had made had been proposed in that House. He would not weary the House by going through the authorities; but there were at least ten or a dozen measures with regard to which this proposal had been made, the latest occurring between the years 1835 and 1840. No doubt, in very exceptional cases, counsel had been heard at the Bar in opposition to measures. An important debate took place in the House on Juno 10, 1850, with regard to a Petition concerning the Australian Colonies Government Bill, when it was ultimately decided by a sufficient, though not a large, majority that it was not expedient for the Petitioners to be heard by counsel at the Bar in opposition to the Bill. Sir Erskine May, in his Parliamentary Practice, laid down the Rules which had always prevailed with regard to the discussion of Bills of national interest, and stated that it had not been unusual, when particular persons were affected, to allow them to be represented by counsel. In making that observation Sir Erskine May was doubtless referring to the practice of hearing counsel before Committees. With respect to this Petition, the Company in question had not communicated with anyone in charge of the Bill upon any of the grievances which they alleged. There was nothing, he maintained, complicated about the question to need their Lordships hearing counsel upon it. He would point out that the Bill did not touch the revenue of the Companies; and that it did not deal in anything like the sweeping manner
  1594
  stated with the traffic arrangements. For instance, as regarded the question of the reduction of faros, he had expressly stated, in introducing the measure, that it did not attempt to deal with them in any comprehensive manner. The noble and learned Lord would probably not contend that Parliament, in these latter matters, had reserved to itself the right of dealing with them on the grounds of general policy, bearing in mind, of course, the interests of the public on one hand, and those of the Companies on the other. As regarded this particular Petition, it was not presented till Friday evening before the debate. He had no doubt their Lordships would give it full consideration; but there was nothing about the case to induce them to reverse the uniform practice of the House for at least 40 years. Not only would the course proposed be exceedingly inconvenient; but it was difficult to see how the Petitioners would benefit by its adoption, inasmuch as there were very few counsel who would be so well able to lay their case before the House as the noble and learned Lord. The measure was, he thought, in the general feeling of the House, a useful and workable one; and the Company, as he had said, had not made any communication to those who were in charge of the Bill. He trusted the House would not accede to the Motion of the noble and learned Lord, for its effect would be only to lead to delay. It would not be productive of any advantage to the Companies, and it would be extremely inconvenient to the practice of their Lordships' House.
  LORD BRAMWELLsaid, he should like to point out that the South Eastern Railway Company could not petition against the second reading of the Bill. What they asked was to be heard on clauses which particularly affected them. The noble Lord the President of the Board of Trade based his argument on the assumption that the Bill would not affect the revenue of this Company. If the Company had a guarantee to that effect from the noble Lord, of course they would desire nothing more, and would be satisfied. They, however, believed that it would affect them; and, in the name of justice, those who were going to be injured by this legislation should be heard before the injury was done. He did not understand Sir

  1595
  Erskine May to say that such a Petition as that should not be heard. He asked, as a matter of right, that the Petitioners should be heard.
  Motion disagreed to.

COLONIES (NAVAL AND MILITARY SERVICES).

  MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS.
  Moved for, "Address for Report of the Committee appointed last year to consider the position of officers in receipt of pensions and desirous of entering upon military or naval service in the Colonies; also the Correspondence resulting from that Report between the Committee and the Lords of the Treasury."—(The Viscount Sidmouth.)
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (The Earl of ONSLOW)said, there would be no objection on the part of Her Majesty's Government to lay upon the Table of that House the Report of the Committee or the Correspondence which followed; but he would point out that, in the latter ease, the documents were not yet quite complete. The Government, however, would consider what Papers could be laid before the House. He would state the result of what had been agreed to. It was manifestly in the interests of the Empire that no obstacle should be thrown in the way of the Colonies organizing their own defences in such a way as to become a source of additional strength to the Empire, and the Government, therefore, had always been anxious to further the efforts of the Colonial Authorities in that respect. Many retired officers of the Army and Navy wore at present forced to live a life of idleness, and it would be a great advantage to the Colonies that they should have the advantage of the services of those experienced officers. In that way the forces of the Colonies might be rendered efficient and trustworthy in case of emergency. What had been arranged was this—that a naval officer on the Active List would not draw his half-pay from the Imperial Government, but would look wholly to the Colonies for his remuneration; but, on the other hand, his services would count for increased pay and retirement allowance, and also for promotion. An officer employed an an engineer or torpedoist would be deemed to be in naval or military employment. Present holders of appointments in the Colonies would be
  1596
  given a month to decide whether they would hold under the old or the now arrangements. Any Army officer might count his time in the Colonial Service for pay and half-pay. It was hoped the effect of these regulations would be to give the Colonies the advantage of the matured experience of the officers of the Imperial Service. The present more rapid system of promotion caused by retirement after a certain length of service would give the Colonies more opportunities of availing themselves of the services of retired officers than they formerly had. It was not always convenient to present Papers which were not complete, and in ordinary circumstances it would probably have been better to wait; but, in view of the mooting of the Colonial Conference, he thought it would be very desirable that such Papers as were ready should be presented as soon as possible.
  Motion agreed to.

LAND LAW (IRELAND) ACTS—REPORT OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  THE EARL OF MILLTOWN, in asking Her Majesty's Government, When it is proposed to issue an analytical index to the Evidence of the Royal Commission on the Irish Land Acts? said, there had recently been presented to their Lordships Rouse a very voluminous Blue Book, containing the evidence given before the Land Commission, of which he had had the honour of being a Member; but the importance of that volume as a book of reference was extremely diminished by the absence from it of an analytical Index, one of the consequences being that anyone who desired to find out what the general opinion was upon a particular point was involved in a difficulty similar to that of the individual who searched for the proverbial needle in a bundle of hay. That there was an Index he was aware, because the excellent and painstaking Secretary to the Commission had begun to prepare it some weeks ago; and he (the Earl of Milltown) was certain it was not the fault of this gentleman that the Index was not printed at the same time as the Report. He hoped the noble Earl the Paymaster General (Earl Beauchamp) would be able to state that the fault was not with the Government Depart-

  1597
  ments in having neglected to supply the Secretary to the Commission with the necessary assistance. Most mischievous results might follow from quoting isolated passages from the evidence of particular witnesses; and it was only by seeing how the general consensus of evidence wont that an opinion could be safely arrived at as to the point to which the evidence tended. As he was on the subject of the Commission, he might be allowed to say a word on a personal matter. He saw by the newspapers that the other day a gentleman, in making a very furious onslaught on the Commission in general, elsewhere described him (the Earl of Milltown) as one of the most malevolent and persistent rack-renters in Ireland. All he could say was that, if he was a type of the rack-renter at large, the Irish tenant had not very much to complain of, for he had never in his life raised a rent, nor had ever a dispute with a tenant; nor did he deserve much credit on that-ground, because the whole of his patrimonial estate—so far as the agricultural part of it was concerned—was let in leases for ever in the early part of last century. It would puzzle even the ingenious gentleman who had made the onslaught on him to demonstrate how he could possibly raise his rents, as these rents were at present less than a quarter of the prairie value. If this gentleman would make the discovery, he should be very much obliged to him if he would communicate it to him.
  THE PAYMASTER GENERAL (Earl BEAUCHAMP), in reply, said, that neither the Home Office nor the Treasury had any answer to give to the noble Earl in this matter. He (Earl Beauchamp) could only give an answer similar to that tendered under similar circumstances by the Secretary of State—namely, that Her Majesty's Government had no authority or control whatever over a Royal Commission when once appointed. The noble Earl who asked for an acceleration of the work of preparing the Index must apply to the Chairman of the Commission, or the Secretary who had the work under his control.
  House adjourned during pleasure.
  House resumed—The Lord Kintore chosen Speaker in the absence of the Lord Chancellor and the Lords Commissioners.

  CONSOLIDATED FUND (No. 1) BILL.
  Brought from the Commons and read 1a: Then Standing Order No. XXXV. having been dispensed with for the remainder of this day's sitting, moved that the Kill he now read 2a; agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly; Committee negatived: Bill read 3a and passed.
  House adjourned at One o'clock A.M., till a quarter past Ten o'clock.