Lords Sitting of 23 April 1888

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—Referred to a Select Committee—Land Transfer (21).
Committee—Electric Lighting Act (1882) Amendment (38–75).
Committee—Report—Metropolitan Board of Works Commission* (62).

STATE OF IRELAND—BOYCOTTING— THE WIDOW AND DAUGHTER OF THE LATE JAMES FITZMAURICE, LIXNAW, CO. KERRY.
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNin whose name the following Notice stood upon the Paper—
"To ask whether it is true that the widow and daughter of James Fitzmaurice, who was murdered at Lixnaw, county Kerry, and whose murderers await execution in Tralee Gaol, are being severely boycotted and are obliged to have police protection; whether it is true that upon Norah Fitzmaurice, on whose evidence the murderers were found guilty, entering chapel on Sunday, 15th April, a person named Dorling, who was secretary to the local branch of the National League, signalled to the congregation to leave, upon which a considerable number of the congregation left"—
said that it had been his intention to bring certain facts under the notice of the House; but he saw by the morning papers that the local secretary of the National League, a person of the name of Dorling, to whose action he had intended to draw their Lordships' attention, had been prosecuted by the Government for using intimidating language towards Norah Fitzmaurice, the daughter of the murdered man, and had been sentenced to six months' imprisonment with hard labour, against which sentence he had appealed. Although his Question related to matters of fact and was not directed to the point whether those matters were legal or not, yet if a discussion were to arise in the House at the present moment, it might be said that such discussion had prejudiced the defence of a man who was upon his trial. Therefore, with their Lordships' permission, he would postpone the Question of which he had given Notice. Of course, on a future occasion, as soon as the appeal had been disposed of, he should exercise his right of bringing before the House all the facts of the case, which appeared to him to reach

135
issues extending far beyond this murder, terrible though the murder was.

NAVY—DOCK ACCOMMODATION IN THE COLONIES AND NAVAL STA TIONS.
MOTION FOR RETURNS.
VISCOUNT SIDMOUTHin rising to move for Returns of dock accommodation in the Colonies and naval stations immediately available for the use of Her Majesty's ironclad ships and other vessels of war; and inquiring whether it was the intention of the Government to acquire any naval stations in lieu of and with the same object as Port Hamilton, which was recently occupied and had since been abandoned, said, he need hardly explain to the House the importance of this question. In the Mediterranean the only dock accommodation possessed by us was at Malta, and there was nothing between that and the Channel ports. The four docks at Malta were the sole resource for the repair of our ships in the Mediterranean. Malta had always been considered impregnable, but he was present last year, when there was a sham attack upon Malta, and he thought that the result was to shake that feeling of security in the place which had previously been felt. The first act of an enemy seizing Malta by a coup de main would be to disable the works. In the Mediterranean they had Cyprus, where there was an excellent harbour, which might be useful in time of war, but there was no dockyard establishment. It was the same at Gibraltar. There was no dock at that place, and the establishment there seemed in other respects inadequate to meet the demands of a large fleet engaged in warlike operations. The value to the country of Gibraltar without the means of docking and repairing our first-class men-of-war there was, from a naval point of view, comparatively small, the harbour itself being incommodious and unsafe. Provided with a largo and well-defended dock, it would be all important. Proceeding eastward at Suez there was no establishment—nothing to speak of—between Malta and Bombay, a distance of 4,500 miles. At Bombay there were five extensive docks, but not exclusively in the hands of the Government. He trusted that the docks there would be adapted to the use of large vessels without delay. Trincoma-
136
lee was practically abandoned and the Mauritius docks were in private hands, but Lord Brassey stated that one of them might be made available for first-class ironclads at an expenditure of £50,000. At the Cape the Table Bay docks, which were private, were extensive and adequate but unprotected, and the railway connecting Cape Town with Simon's Town, where the Government works were situate, was still incomplete. Going eastward the next docks were to be found at Singapore; these were private and not adapted for the larger ships, but might be made so by means of a Government loan. At Hong Kong there was a large private dock, but also inadequate for the reception of first-class ironclads; but he had heard that a new one was opened in January last, and if that was so they would be in a better position. There were deficiencies in the West Indies which should be considered by the Government. Attention was drawn some time ago to the construction of a railway between Simon's and Table Bays; but he was not aware that it had been made, and it would be very useful in the event of a war. The docks in China and Japan hitherto made use of would, of course, be closed to us in case of war. He sincerely hoped that our dockyard accommodation in various parts of the world was in a more forward state than he thought, but it was a subject of such importance that he was justified in calling attention to it.
Moved, That there be laid before the House—
"Returns of dock accommodation in the Colonies and naval stations immediately available for the use of Her Majesty's ironclad ships and other vessels of war; and to inquire whether it is the intention of the Government to acquire any naval station in lieu of and with the same object as Port Hamilton, which was recently occupied and has since been abandoned."—(The Viscount Sidmouth.)
LORD ELPHINSTONE: I hope my noble Friend will not think it necessary to press for this Return, for full information with regard to dock accommodation in all parts of the globe is already given in a work published with the authority of the Admiralty called The Dock Book. It gives information as to every dock in the world, whether belonging to this country or to any Foreign Power, with the required details as to their capacity. He is perfectly correct in the description

137
he has given of the dock accommodation' in the different parts of the world, and; I thank him for the private information he has given me as to the object of his Question. As he told me, he wished to know what dock accommodation was available for first-class ironclads in ports east of the Mediterranean. If I include Australia there are 11 docks, nine of which are open at present, and the remaining two wilt be completed this year. Of these one is at Saigon, belonging to the French Government; one at Nagasaki and one at Tokosuka, belonging to the Japanese Government; one at San Francisco, belonging to the United States Government; one at Hong Kong, which is in private hands; and six belong to various Colonial Governments—namely, the Cape of Good Hope, Adelaide, Melbourne, Sydney, Auckland, and Esquimault. The noble Viscount asked whether access to private docks can be assured at all times in case of emergency. If by "emergency" he means in time of war, I apprehend the captain of a man-of-war would in any British port insist upon priority; but, at other times, special arrangements for priority exist only at Hong Kong, Halifax, and Esquimault. In times of peace, the whole of these docks, whether British or foreign, are available. The noble Viscount then asks for particulars of the dock at the Cape of Good Hope. It is a Colonial Government dock, 500ft. long, open and available at all times. At Hong Kong there is a private dock 500ft. long, open and available at all times. At Bombay a clock is in course of construction, and arrangements between the Imperial and Indian Governments are in progress for increasing the size of this dock, so that it will be sufficient to accommodate a first-class ironclad. In Japan the two docks are 420ft. and 513ft. in length. They are available in time of peace. In Mauritius there are three docks—two of 318ft. and one of 378ft. These belong to private firms. They are open and available at all times. At Esquimault the dock is 445ft. in length, but an additional 30ft. may be obtained by shifting the caisson. With regard to the dock at Vladivostock it is a floating dock, and is formed in sections which can be joined together as needed, according to the size of the vessel to be docked. The main piece or section,
138
called the "first part," can lift 1,850 tons, and it is complete and in working order. The dock when complete will be capable of docking vessels of 8,000 tons, and the actual lifting power of the whole dock is 20,000 tons. The Dock Book published by order of the Admiralty is complete to December, 1887. With regard to the second part of the Question, I do not know whether the noble Viscount has read the correspondence that passed relative to the retention or otherwise of Port Hamilton. Three Naval Commanders-in-Chief on the China Station strongly advised its being given up. They felt that in the event of war a portion of their squadron would have to be detached for the protection of that island, and that those vessels would be better employed elsewhere. The island was, therefore, restored to the Corean Government under certain conditions, and it is not the intention of Her Majesty's Government to acquire any other place in lieu of it.
Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

ARMY AND NAVY (COMMUTATION OF PENSIONS).

  MOTION FOR RETURNS.
  VISCOUNT SIDMOUTH,in moving for a Return showing the numbers of officers of the Army and Navy respectively who during the last 15 years had commuted their pensions; the Return to show the numbers for each year separately, and the partial and whole commutations to be shown in separate columns, said, his object in asking for the information was to ascertain the extent to which the practice of commutation had been carried in view of the large number of officers who, having commuted their pensions and received a lump sum of money, had afterwards fallen into the hands of speculators and others, and been completely ruined.
  Moved, That there be laid before the House—
  "Returns showing the number of officers of the Army and Navy respectively, who during the last fifteen years have commuted their pensions; the Return to show the numbers for each year separately, and the partial and whole commutations to be shown in separate columns."—(The Viscount Sidmouth.)
  LORD ELPHINSTONEsaid, there was no objection on the part of the Admiralty to grant the Return.
  LORD HARRISsaid, he would be happy to give the information from the War Office if the noble Viscount would be satisfied with a Return of commuted pensions from the year 1880 inclusive. They could not go beyond 1880 without complicating the Return with the operations consequent on the abolition of purchase in the Army.
  VISCOUNT SIDMOUTHsaid, he should be happy to change the terms of his Motion in the way suggested by his noble Friend.
  Motion amended, and agreed to.

  LAND TRANSFER BILL.—(No. 21.)
  (The Lord Chancellor.)

  MOTION FOR A SELECT COMMITTEE.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY),in rising to move that this Bill should be referred to a Select Committee, said, he had some difficulty in introducing the Motion to their Lordships, as he was not certain in what way it was going to be met by his noble and learned Friend (Lord Herschell). As far as his researches extended, he believed it was absolutely without precedent that a Minister of the Crown in charge of a Bill should be refused the opportunity of sending that Bill to a Select Committee. If, however, he had understood him correctly, the noble and learned Lord on the Front Opposition Bench rather intimated on a former occasion that he intended to resist the Motion for the reference to a Select Committee. What had happened had a little surprised him, and he thought that a Motion should have been made on the second reading to reject the Bill; but instead of that being done, criticisms had been made on clauses of the Bill. The Bill passed through that House last Session without any serious objection to any principle in it. It was said, that the drafting of the Bill was defective; if that were so it should be sent to a Select Committee, where all points could be discussed across the Table, and he hoped that his noble and learned Friend would assent to that course. He believed it would be possible in a Select Committee to mould the Bill, if objectionable, into such a form as would produce a great improvement with respect to the expense, facility, and speed of land transfer. There were some who took the view that registration should
  140
  be confined to sales; but if it were so confined the result would be simply to add one process to the mode in which land is transferred. Last year in "another place" Mr. Fowler thought it necessary that the Bill should be referred to a Select Committee of their Lordships; and he had received representations to the same effect from almost all the law societies in the country. He hardly thought that the noble and learned Lord appreciated the difference between the Act of 1875 and the state of things now existing in consequence of the Settled Land Act and the Conveyancing Act. He believed that if the principle of compulsory registration both on sale and succession were agreed to, a Select Committee would be the best body to carry that principle into effect. Some noble Lords had been prejudiced by previous attempts at legislation in this direction. He believed one cause which had prevented the success of those efforts had been undue timidity in shortening the period for showing a good title. He was extremely anxious that the Act when passed should not be a mere barren addition to the Statute Book.
  Moved, "That the Bill be referred to a Select Committee."—(The Lord Chancellor.)
  LORD HERSCHELLsaid, that he had not the slightest intention of dividing the House on the question, as he knew it would be absolutely useless to do so; but in spite of his noble and learned Friend's lecture he must renew his protest against referring the Bill to a Select Committee on the ground that it would not be for the public advantage. The Bill was one of great importance, and did much more than embody any single principle. The House might be agreed on the general question of registration of title. But it was another matter to insist on registration both in transactions inter vivos and on successions. The House had expressed no view on that extension. Their Lordships would be as well able to deal with the important questions raised by the Bill as a Select Committee. The Committee was to include four lawyers, the rest being laymen. No doubt the House would not be bound by the determination of the Select Committee; but there was a natural impatience in the House

  141
  to discuss a matter which had been referred to a Select Committee. There were several important questions which would have to be considered; whether the owner would have to register before transfer to a purchaser; whether registration was to be compulsory on every succession or only when transfer took place; and whether a distinction should be drawn between a possessory or qualified and an absolute title. There was, further, the important question of succession on intestacy, which certainly ought not to be decided by a Select Committee. Then, if the Select Committee were intended to revise the drafting of the Bill, he should certainly decline to take part in so dangerous an operation. He believed that after a Select Committee had tinkered with the Bill, it would be found when it came into operation that they had created confusion instead of avoiding it. Besides, the legal Members of the House had not time to spare from their judicial duties to deal with a Bill of this character in a satisfactory manner. It was perfectly true, as his noble and learned Friend had said, that the law societies were in favour of referring the Bill to a Select Committee; but it was with the proviso, which had been rejected by his noble and learned Friend, that evidence should be taken by the Committee.
  THE EARL OF SELBORNEsaid, he was very far from differing from all that his noble and learned Friend who had just sat down had said, and he quite agreed that there were several important questions to be considered, which it was not to be assumed that the House had decided, if the Bill went to a Select Committee. On some of those questions he had last year expressed his opinion, and, if he had not then pressed his views on all those points to a division, he had not changed them, and should feel quite at liberty to urge them now. But he did not think that his noble and learned Friend had done justice to the arguments in favour of the course recommended by the Lord Chancellor. He certainly should not join the Committee for the purpose of any mere criticisms upon the drafting of the Bill. But there were questions of machinery, on which the success of the Bill would largely depend, and of the relation of the Bill to the previous Acts dealing with the question, with which
  142
  a Select Committee would be eminently qualified to deal. Last year he had urged the consolidation of those Acts with the Bill, which was now done, with such changes in and Amendments of them as the Settled Lands Act, and other intermediate legislation, had rendered necessary. This alone, in his judgment, was a sufficient reason for the course which the Lord Chancellor now proposed. The Bill ought to receive, in all its details, careful consideration; could that be done in that House? There was no doubt that a Select Committee, including much of the legal strength of the House, besides lay members, was exactly the body to deal with such work, which the House could not possibly do. He quite agreed that there were several important questions which could eventually only be determined by that House, and that those questions must be considered in the House; but surely it would be more convenient to consider those questions without feeling that it was necessary for the House to go into every other question as well. Even with regard to those questions which the House itself must consider, he had no hesitation in saying that he thought that the House would be assisted in that consideration when the Bill had come back, and was re-committed, by knowing what had been the opinions expressed after full deliberation and consultation by the noble Lords, both legal and others, who might compose that Committee. The great argument in favour of a Select Committee was that in it a discussion of this character could be carried on under conditions under which it was impossible for a legal argument to be carried on in that House. He did not mean that they could not speak as often as they chose in Committee; but in a Select Committee there was an interchange of ideas which could hardly take place in the House. If the majority of the Select Committee, after full consideration, returned the Bill to that House, recommending changes which perhaps the Government might not have been disposed to accept, he felt sure that those changes would stand a better chance of being adopted than they might otherwise have.
  LORD THRINGsaid, he was opposed to the Motion to refer the Bill to a select

  143
  Committee. The important points of the Bill could only be decided by the Whole House; and, in his opinion, a Select Committee was the worst tribunal that could be imagined for the consideration of a Bill of this kind, which hung together like the links of a chain.
  LORD ESHERsaid, it seemed to him that this was a Bill which more, perhaps, than any other required that it should be sent to a Select Committee. It bristled with technicalities; and, speaking for himself, having read it very carefully, there were some pages of questions which he would like to have solved before he could understand the wording of the Bill. How those questions were to be asked across the Table of the House passed his comprehension to know. The real working point, the backbone of the Bill, was the compulsory registration of possessory titles. If that registration could be made at little or no expense, and with little or no delay, it seemed to him that the objections which had been stated to compulsory registration would almost fall to the ground. The answer to that question depended on the amount of evidence which they should require in order to put on the register the possessory title. If the Bill went to a Select Committee it would. be possible to put into the Bill the amount of evidence which should be deemed necessary. The question whether noble Lords would agree to compulsory registration or not would depend greatly upon the matter of evidence. Another point requiring to be carefully looked into was a so-called "Interpretation Clause," which was really a misinterpretation clause, because it put an almost impossible meaning upon words which were used in the body of the Bill. That circumstance afforded another reason why the Bill should go to a Select Committee.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, he would point out that last year their Lordships had a Bill of the same kind before them, and it never seemed to occur to anybody then that the Bill should go to a Select Committee. Moreover, some of the questions raised in this Bill had on a former occasion been debated in the House and divided upon. He rather supported the suggestion of his noble Friend behind him that the Bill should be partially dealt with in
  144
  Committee of the Whole House, and afterwards, if necessary, referred to a Select Committee, because ho did not see how the Bill could be sent, in the first instance, to a Select Committee until the wide and important questions involved in certain portions of the Bill had been determined upon. As had been pointed out, the Bill did not contain the materials on which the House could form a judgment—namely, as to whether the scheme of the Bill would involve serious expense and delay, which depended not upon any provisions in the Bill, but upon provisions which were to be made on Orders under the Bill; and he submitted it was the duty of the framers to put those provisions into the Bill, and not to leave the House in the dark as to material points.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE von FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY)said, it was necessary that the Bill should not only be intelligible and clear to those who made it, but also that its clauses should not be ambiguous, either in the minds of those who interpreted it in the Court of Law or of the landowners, whom it would affect so largely; and it, therefore, became a matter of careful discussion to know whether the clauses as they stood had a thorough application to all the detailed objects the Bill had in view. There seemed nothing more unsatisfactory, as a general rule, than the manufacture of the clauses of an Act of Parliament across the Table of the House, and there was no subject on which that was less satisfactory than where it affected the pecuniary rights and. the very existence of a very large and important interest in the country. In his opinion, some other machinery must be found for framing the Bill than that which consisted in a debate between the two sides of the House. Select Committees did not appear to enjoy the admiration of the noble Lords opposite, who seemed to regard with scorn anything that was done in the way of framing a Bill by anyone except what they termed a competent draftsman. In his own opinion, the best course would be to refer the Bill to a Select Committee.
  Motion agreed to; Bill referred to a Select Committee accordingly.

  ELECTRIC LIGHTING ACT (1882) AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 1.)
  (The Lord Thurlow.)

  COMMITTEE.
  House in Committee (according to Order).
  Clause 2 (Repeal of s. 27 of 45 & 46 Vict. c. 56. Purchase of undertaking by local authority).
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNmoved to omit the words "the goodwill of the business and of," on the ground that they rendered uncertain the elements of value in the property of the Companies to be taken over. He desired, at the same time, that at the expiration of the period during which the Companies' privileges were to endure, their plant and material should be valued as being in situ, and as suitable for the purposes for which they were intended, instead of being taken over at the "old iron" value.
  Amendment moved, in page 2, line 3, to leave out ("market"), and leave out ("the goodwill of the business and of").—(The Earl of Camperdown.)
  THE EARL OF CRAWFORDsaid, that inasmuch as it was understood that the noble and learned Lord opposite intended to propose an Amendment upon this clause, it would be convenient if he would now state the effect of that Amendment.
  LORD HERSCHELLsaid, that the effect of his proposed Amendment would be to insure that at the expiration of the Companies' term their plant and material should be taken over at the price it would fetch as being ready for immediate working.
  VISCOUNT BURYsaid, he hoped that the word "goodwill" would not be omitted from the Bill. When the measure was before the Select Committee the Committee appeared to be divided into two parties—one in favour of giving the Companies a right to the value of their goodwill, and the other in favour of treating their businesses as those of breaking up concerns.
  THE EARL OF CRAWFORDsaid, that in justice to the public they should make it clear a time would come when the Companies would no longer be justified in putting fresh capital into their works for the purpose of keeping them in going order, and, in fact, to save themselves would have to starve the business.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY)said, he confessed that his first view with respect to a matter of this kind was that if compulsory powers for purchase of a going concern were enacted, the full value of the going concern at the time of purchase ought to be given. He did not see that there was any reason why, in the nature of things, the Electric Lighting Companies should be burdened with burdens different from those placed upon other industries. He understood, however, that the Companies themselves on the whole preferred that this word should be left out, and as their Lordships ought not to affect to be wiser than the Companies themselves as to their own interests, ho was content on their representation to vote for its omission. But in doing so he did not wish to bind himself at any future time not to vote for its inclusion, for he could not in the least assent to the view, either, on the one hand, that this industry should be subjected to greater burdens than were imposed upon others, or, on the other, that they were entitled to any special preference.
  LORD HERSCHELLsaid, that he agreed with very much that the noble Marquess had said. He had always thought it desirable to provide against unreasonable terms being required if the Local Authorities wished to purchase these undertakings; but he had never seen any reason why special burdens should be imposed upon the undertakers. If the condition were imposed upon them that at the and of any given term they should not receive the full value of their property, they would recoup themselves in some other way, as by making higher charges. The present generation would thus pay more for the electric light in order that some 30 or 40 years hence the next generation should have it for less than they ought to pay. At the same time, he recognized the difficulties of the situation, and if the Bill could not be got through without, he agreed that the word "goodwill" should be struck out of this clause. He would prefer that instead of the term "goodwill" the words "market value" should be substituted. This was all that any reasonable person could expect to obtain.
  THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (Viscount CRANBROOK)said,

  147
  that it was only on the same ground England to the Commission about to be
  taken by his noble Friend (the Marquess of Salisbury) that he consented to this Amendment.
  LORD THURLOWsaid, he was quite willing to assent to the Motion. It was essential for the passage of the Bill through "another place" that the word "goodwill" should not be in it. What he dreaded was that unless the purchase of these undertakings was made a fair one—and more than fair, liberal—during the last few years of the term the undertakers would be tempted to do what was called scamp the undertaking. He had consulted the representatives of most of the London and Provincial Electric Lighting Companies, and he had come to the conclusion that the prolongation of the term from 21 years to 42 years, as now proposed, would be sufficient to insure the public against overcharge. On behalf of the Companies he was authorized to accept this Amendment, as they were satisfied that the prolongation of the term would bring capital into the business.
  Amendment agreed to.
  VISCOUNT BURYsaid, he wished to draw the attention of the noble Lord opposite to the provision that on the purchase of an undertaking the purchaser should get a clear title without the seller having to make one. This would absolve the Local Authority from the necessity of investigating the title to see whether it was free from mortgages. He should like to ask what would become of mortgagees and other creditors?
  LORD THURLOWsaid, he did not think that any difficulty such as that suggested by the noble Viscount would arise. At the same time he might say that he was not responsible for these words in the clause.
  Clause, as amended, agreed to.
  Remaining Clauses agreed to, with Amendments; the Report thereof to be received To-morrow; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 75.)

THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS.

  QUESTION.
  LORD SUDELEYasked the Lord President of the Council, Whether Her Majesty's Government propose to refer the question of granting a new Charter to the Royal College of Surgeons of
  148
  England to the Commission about to be appointed (or already appointed) to consider the question of the formation of a new University?
  THE LORD PRESIDENT (Viscount CRINBROOK): The Petition of the Royal College of Surgeons is not for a new Charter, but for a supplementary Charter to that already existing. I do not think that the points raised in it, though of some importance, can properly be referred to the Commission which is about to be appointed to consider the question of a new University.
  House adjourned at half past Six o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter
  past Ten o'locck.