Lords Sitting of 7 May 1888

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Customs and Inland Revenue* (95).
Second Reading—Timber Acts (Ireland) Amendment (69).
Committee—Merchant Shipping (Life Saving Appliances) (43–96).
Withdrawn—Public Libraries Act, 1885, Amendment* (82).
PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL—First Reading—Local Government (Ireland) (Ballymoney, &c.)* (97).

MERCHANT SHIPPING (LIFE SAVING APPLIANCES) BILL.—(No. 43.)
(The Earl of Onslow.)
COMMITTEE.
House in Committee (according to Order).
Clause 1 (Duty to carry boats and other appliances for saving life).
On the Motion of the Earl of ONSLOW,
Amendment made, in page 1, line 10, by leaving out from ("all persons") to to the end of the clause and inserting ("her crew and passengers").
Moved, at end of clause add ("ships surveyed by the Board of Trade as passenger steamers, or passenger ships in the foreign trade, being always considered a distinct class requiring special provision of boats, rafts, or other ap-
1428
pliances for saving life in case of danger, in accordance with rules from time to time, without which no certificate shall be granted them.")—(Lord Norton.)
THE SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF TRADE (the Earl of ONSLOW)said, he sympathized with the desire of the noble Lord that ships carrying passengers should be better provided with boats than those engaged in the ordinary carrying trade. The whole object of the Bill was to see that means were provided for saving life at sea according to the nature of the service in which the ship was employed. He could not consent to an Amendment making but two classes of ships. The noble Lord might safely leave it to the Board of Trade and the Committee to see that the different classes of ships were properly provided with life-saving apparatus, and carried in accordance with the nature of the service to be performed.
Amendment negatived.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 2 (Appointment of consultative committee for framing rules) agreed to.
Clause 3 (Power to make rules as to life-saving appliances).
THE EARL OF RAVENSWORTHin proposing an Amendment providing that the Board of Trade, "on the advice of the Committee aforesaid," might from time to time make, rescind, and vary rules with respect to all or any of the matters mentioned in the second schedule of the Act, said it appeared to him to be a most extraordinary thing that the Board of Trade should take the trouble to form a Consultative Committee to advise it in the framing of rules having the force of "law," and at the same time take the power of making, rescinding, and varying rules, without giving any reason whatever. It might be urged that his Amendment ought to be rejected because it interfered with the responsibility of the Department. In this connexion he drew attention to what he described as a curious circular recently issued by the Board of Trade referring to his Amendment. He thought the circular was illustrative of the system which was carried on at the Board of Trade. He did not wish to make any attack on the Department, but merely to show what the system was and to what extent

1429
the responsibility was borne. The circular was dated May 2, and was signed by Mr. Gray. It asked the various shipping bodies throughout the country whether they had any observations to offer upon the Amendment which he had just moved, and that, if so, the Department would be glad to receive them. When he read that circular, it occurred to him to ask the question, "Where is the responsibility of the Board of Trade?" Did it rest with the distinguished statesman in "another place," or did it rest with the permanent public servants who sat in Whitehall? He thought it was clear on the face of the Bill that the Board of Trade felt the weight of the responsibility which rested upon it. Let their Lordships consider what the Board of Trade was called upon to do. It now regulated the mightiest interests in this country, and necessarily from day to day it found itself in the discharge of its duty face to face with the ablest men in the country—the managers of great industries. Those men, knowing their own business infinitely better than any President of the Board of Trade and all his staff put together, might naturally feel that friction was being created when they were interfered with by frivolous regulations. The noble Lord concluded by moving the Amendment of which he had given Notice.
Moved, in page 1, line 23, after ("Trade") insert ("on the advice of the committee aforesaid.")—(The Earl of Ravensworth.)
THE EARL OF ONSLOWsaid, he regretted very much that it was quite out of his power to accept the Amendment of the noble Earl, which was not merely a small Amendment in a small Bill, but involved a departure from established Constitutional practice and proposed alterations in Parliamentary procedure which the Government could not agree to. The effect of the Amendment would be to shield the President of the Board of Trade from all responsibility to Parliament and the country for these rules. The noble Lord had thought fit to make a rather severe onslaught upon the officials of the Board of Trade in respect of a circular which had been issued on behalf of the Board. In issuing that circular the officials of the Board of Trade were anxious that those who
1430
were interested in this question should give an opinion upon the Amendment of the noble Earl. As far as responsibility was concerned, that circular had been sent out on his own suggestion, and with the full approbation of the President of the Board of Trade. If the Amendment of the noble Earl were adopted, the power of the President of the Board of Trade to rescind or to vary the rules would be taken away, and it would, therefore, be impossible to make any alterations in them. He therefore hoped that the House would not adopt the Amendment of the noble Earl.
THE EARL OF RAVENSWORTHsaid, he hoped that it would be thoroughly understood that he had no desire whatever to make an attack upon the Board of Trade officials.
Amendment negatived.
THE EARL OF HARROWBYsaid, he wished to enter his protest against the rules, which would have to lie upon the Table for a certain time, being laid upon the Table in a dummy form.
THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY)said, that, as no time would be gained by laying the rules upon the Table in such a form, it was not likely that such a course would be taken.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY)said, that the laying of dummy rules upon the Table was clearly not a compliance with the requirements of the Act.
LORD COLERIDGEsaid, he coincided with the view taken by the Lord Chancellor on the matter.
Clause agreed to.
Clause 4 (Penalty for breach of rules).
On the Motion of The Earl of ONSLOW, Amendment made, in page 2, line 7, by leaving out ("to sea") and inserting ("on any voyage or excursion").
Clause (as amended) agreed to.
Clause 5 (Provisions for enforcing rules) agreed to.
On the Motion of The Earl of ONSLOW, the following new Clause was inserted, after Clause 5:—
(Saving as to sea-fishing boats.)
"The rules made under this Act shall not apply to any sea-fishing boat which is for the time being registered in pursuance of the Sea Fisheries Act, 1868."
Clauses 6, 7, and 8 agreed to.

FIRST SCHEDULE.
Constitution of the Committee.
THE EARL OF RAVENSWORTHsaid, he moved to amend the constitution of the Committee. According to the Bill, it was provided that the Committee should be composed of:—
"(1) Three shipowners selected by the President of the Board of Trade out of a list of nine names submitted by the Council of the Chamber of Shipping of the United Kingdom; (2) three shipbuilders selected by the President of the Board of Trade out of a list of nine names submitted by the shipbuilders of the United Kingdom; (3) three persons practically acquainted with the navigation of vessels selected by the President of the Board of Trade out of a list of nine names submitted by the Local Marine Boards of the United Kingdom; (4) three persons being or having been able-bodied seamen selected by the President of the Board of Trade out of a list of nine names submitted by seamen's societies recognized by the President of the Board of Trade for this purpose; (5) three persons selected by the President of the Board of Trade out of a list of nine names to be submitted conjointly by the committee of Lloyd's and the committee of Lloyd's Register Society."
He objected to the list of names of shipowners having to be submitted to the Board of Trade by the Chamber of Shipping of the United Kingdom. Although a very influential and valuable body, the Chamber of Shipping was by no means representative of all the ship-owning interests in the country. The chief objection he took to the present form of the Schedule was that the shipowners were to be selected by the Board of Trade out of a list submitted. Surely they were competent to elect their own representatives. He did not pretend that there was any novelty about the Schedule he proposed, but he claimed that it possessed the high authority of the Board itself, its leading features having already been submitted to the country in the form of a Circular issued by the Board in January, 1882.
Moved, That the constitution of the Committee be as follows:—

1. "Ten shipowners to be nominated as follows: one by the Council of the 'Chamber of Shipping,' two by the Steam and Sailing Shipowners' Associations of Liverpool, and one each by the Shipowners' Associations of London, Glasgow, Leith, North-East Coast of England, Hull, Bristol, Channel Ports, and Ireland.

2. Three members to be nominated by the Councils of the 'Institute of Naval Architects,' the 'Institution of Shipbuilders and Engineers,' Glasgow, and the Institution of Shipbuilders and Engineers,' Newcastle-on-Tyne, respectively.

1432

3. Three persons to be nominated by the 'Local Marine Boards' of the United Kingdom practically acquainted with the navigation of merchant vessels.

4. Three persons to be nominated by 'Seamen's Societies' recognized by the President of the Board of Trade for this purpose, being or having been able-bodied seamen.

5. Two persons to be nominated by the 'Committee of Lloyd's Register' and the Committee of the Institute of London Underwriters.'"—(The Earl of Ravensworth.)

THE EARL OF ONSLOWsaid, that neither the Schedule in the Bill nor that which the noble Earl proposed to substitute for it would fully meet the views of all the shipowners in the Three Kingdoms. For instance, he had received adverse remarks on the noble Earl's Amendment from Belfast, which port claimed to have representation, inasmuch as it contributed 50 per cent more than Glasgow or Bristol. Of the 27 members of the Consultative Council formed under the proposal of the noble Earl, 19 would be representative of shipowners only, and he asked their Lordships to consider how the master mariners, under writers, seamen, and other important interests were likely to fare with such a majority against them. This Bill was really a very small one, and the objects at which it aimed were not very large. In fact, it would only seriously affect 1,165 out of the 37,552 vessels on the British register. He was afraid, therefore, that the noble Earl was forging a Nasmyth hammer to crack a nut. The Government honestly desired to meet the views of the shipowners, and as far as they could to accept the principle that those who understood the subject should advise the Board of Trade in reference to the saving of life at sea. He would ask their Lordships to adhere to the Schedule in the Bill, though he was willing to accept any six names to represent the shipowners and builders, upon which all the interests affected could agree.
LORD NORTONthought that if neither the system of election proposed in the Bill nor that in the Amendment would give satisfaction to the shipowners, it would be better to have no advising council at all, but to leave the Board of Trade free to obtain the best opinions it could in each case. Nothing justified the establishment of a Consultative Committee, at all but the hope of making it a representative body, which shipowners generally would recognize; otherwise it

1433
was only mischievous, as dividing responsibility.
THE EARL OF RAVENSWORTHsaid, the ships chiefly affected by the Bill included the magnificent vessels belonging to the great lines of passenger steamers. The noble Earl had met him to a certain extent, and, indeed, to such an extent that he should hardly be justified in putting their Lordships to the trouble of a Division. At the same time he could not help thinking that the plan for appointing the Council laid down in the Bill was a very halting and unsatisfactory one.
Amendment negatived; First Schedule agreed to.
SECOND SCHEDULE.
Matters for which the Rules are to provide.
THE EARL OF ONSLOWin moving an Amendment in the 2nd clause of the Second Schedule, said, the Schedule dealt with "matters for which the rules are to provide," and the 2nd clause was—
"The number and description of the boats, life-boats, life-rafts, life-jackets, and life buoys to be carried by British ships, according to the class in which they are arranged, and the methods to be provided to get the boats and other life-saving appliances into the water."
The Amendment was to insert, after the word "arranged," the words—
"And the mode of their construction, also the equipments to be carried by the boats and rafts."
The best method of saving lives was to prevent ships from sinking, and when shipowners made proper provision in the way of construction, water-tight compartments and bulkheads, he proposed that the Consultative Committee should have power to take this into consideration in mitigation of the obligations which they would otherwise apply. The second part of the Amendment was intended to meet the views of the noble Lord who had an Amendment to allow regulations to be made as to what should be carried in boats in the way of life-saving apparatus.
Amendment moved,
In Second Schedule, page 5, line 1, after ("arranged") insert ("and the mode of their construction, also the equipments to be carried by the boats and rafts.")—(The Earl of Onslow.)
THE EARL OF RAVENSWORTHsaid, this was a good Amendment, because it
1434
did justice to the immense improvements which were constantly being made in shipbuilding. The Amendment would only affect a certain class, but that the very best class of ships.
Amendment agreed to.
LORD COTTESLOEin moving to add at the end after the word "buoys" the words—
"And also a sufficient quantity of oil for use in stormy weather, according to the size and tonnage of ships or boats,"
said, that he felt deeply interested in the welfare of the British seaman, although he was not personally connected with either the Navy or the Mercantile Service. With the Mercantile Service he had never in any way been connected, but he had always had personal interests in the Royal Navy, and for three generations members of his family had flown their flags as Admirals in that Service. Their Lordships would remember that in 1882 this subject was brought before the House. A Return had, at his instance, been kindly produced by his noble Friend the Vice President of the Board of Trade, of the experiments which had been made and which appeared to have met with a considerable measure of success. The use of oil had in many instances been instrumental in saving life in tempestuous weather, and he thought that no ship should go to sea without carrying a certain quantity as part of her equipment. The subject had been taken up by the National Lifeboat Institution, and the result of their inquiries had recently been published in their journal. Reports were given in that journal by captains of ships who had succeeded in many instances in saving their vessels from shipwreck by the use of oil. Mr. T. A. Cregan wrote to The Glasgow Herald an account of a most effectual experiment during a heavy gale in the Bay of Biscay. A quart of oil in two canvas bags punctured with small holes proved so efficacious that scarcely a sea came on board, each wave as it reached the oil ceasing to lash and undulating past the ship without a break. Captain James Forman, of the ship Airlie, of Dundee, described the effect of the oil as "magical," and stated that but for its application he should certainly have lost all his boats. Captain Lashbrooke, master of the ketch Elizabeth, of Bade, gave similar testimony of his

1435
experience of this remedy during a storm on December 13, 1882, and the captain of the steamship Stanmore, which arrived at New York on September 21, 1882, ascribed his safety during terrible weather to his having towed a bag of oil, which slightly escaped, when the ship was running before the wind. Having shown the advantage of the use of oil as a life-saving appliance in stormy weather, he urged that no ship should put to sea without a supply of that article, and that oil should be included in the Schedule to that Bill. He ought to refer to an interesting Report on that subject made by Captain Chetwynd, R.N., who was specially engaged by the Life Boat Society to investigate and report on the use of oil in stormy weather, in which he said that the result of the experiments made had been to show that there was little difference in the effect produced by the various oils of ordinary everyday use, such as colza, linseed, fish or seal oil. In some cases paraffin was used with the same effect. Very small quantities of oil had been found sufficient to cover a considerable space with the smooth, glassy surface characteristic of oil on water. He therefore asked that it should be made compulsory on all shipowners to supply their vessels with oil as with other life-saving appliances. He hoped that none of their Lordships would ever experience the hazards and terrors of shipwreck; but were such a misfortune to happen to any of them, and they should be exposed to a tempest threatening the existence of the ship, he thought they would then be happy to avail themselves of the use of oil if any could be found on board. And if the master of the ship were in the emergency to offer them a boat which could not live in the sea while the passengers were getting on board of it, or a life-raft which would expose the occupants to the danger of being washed overboard, or a life-jacket to put on, or a life-buoy to cling to, he thought that a passenger would much prefer that the master should provide an oil bag or two to calm the surface of the water so as to enable boats to be safely launched and used for saving the passengers. Yet he regretted to say his noble Friend who had charge of that Bill hesitated to require that oil should be enumerated among the necessary life-saving appliances in the Schedule to the
1436
measure. The noble Lord moved the Amendment standing in his name.
Moved, in Schedule 2, page 5, line 6, after ("boats, life-boats, life-rafts, life-jackets, and life-buoys") add ("and also a sufficient quantity of oil for use in stormy weather, according to the size and tonnage of ships or boats.")—(The Lord Cottesloe.)
LORD ELPHINSTONEsaid, with regard to an experiment at Folkestone, by which oil was forced through a pipe from below to the surface of the water, it was found that the experiment was not so successful as some persons had been at first inclined to imagine. Oil forced up from below was not so efficacious as when poured on the surface of the water. An interesting experiment was tried in 1886 on the Royal Yacht Osborne, anchored at Carrickfergus. The Prince and Princess of Wales were on board and were anxious to land. A heavy sea was rolling at the time, and great anxiety was felt as to how the Princess could be conveyed ashore, because there was not enough water for the yacht to cross the Bar. The chief engineer then suggested that oil should be made use of for the purpose of smoothing the water alongside the yacht. A preliminary experiment was made, and the effect of the oil in breaking the waves was found to be so great that it was decided to carry the experiment further. When the Princess of Wales left the yacht a steam cutter was sent ahead to distribute the contents of bags of oil from the small holes in each bag. The desired effect was attained. No broken water and no sea came into the boat. It was announced as the conviction at that time that the development of oil pouring on water could not fail to be of immense advantage, especially in the case of lifeboats. So satisfied were the Admiralty of the importance of using oil in certain circumstances that they had issued a Memorandum for the information of officers in general on the use of oil at sea, and for modifying and breaking the effect of the waves. The manner in which the oil could be used was pointed out, and the cases in which it could be employed with advantage were also referred to. There could be no doubt that under certain conditions the use of oil at sea was of the greatest possible advantage. He did not know what the decision of the Board of Trade might be, but the Admiralty did not

1437
propose to issue any instructions to commanders on the subject. They felt satisfied, after calling the attention of officers to the use of oil by the Memorandum previously referred to, that it would be better to leave officers to exercise their own judgment according to the circumstances.
THE EARL OF ONSLOWsaid, he thought their Lordships must be indebted to the noble Lord for having brought this interesting subject before the House. He should have been glad to meet the views of the noble Lord and to advise their Lordships to accept the Amendment in its entirety were it not for the difficulty of mentioning one article alone and excluding others. Since this Bill had been brought forward he had received models and inventions of a great many useful appliances; in fact, his room was more like a section of the Inventions Exhibition than a gentleman's study. Those persons would feel aggrieved if any particular article was mentioned specifically in the Schedule. He was quite prepared to bring up words on Report and to leave it to the Committee which would have to decide as to the equipments to be carried by boats, and also the appliances to be carried by ships, to say whether they would include oil. He hoped that when the noble Lord saw the words on Report they would meet his views.
Amendment negatived; Schedule agreed to.
The Report of Amendments to be received on Friday next; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 96.)

TIMBER ACTS (IRELAND) AMEND MENT BILL.—(No. 69.)
(The Lord Privy Seal.)
SECOND READING.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (Earl CADOGAN)in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, that he had caused to be circulated a Memorandum explanatory of the provisions of the Bill amongst their Lordships. The Bill was an amendment of the Irish Timber Act of 1783. The Act of 1783 encouraged the planting of trees by two classes of persons. The first class was that of tenants for lives renew-
1438
able for ever; and it was provided that when they planted trees they should be the absolute owners of the property as tenants in fee. The second class was that of tenants for life, or lives, or any term of years, of which 12 years were still unexpired. It was proposed to extend these provisions to a new class—namely, the tenants for statutory terms, which, as their Lordships knew, were for 15 years' renewal. There was one other class to which it was proposed to extend the Bill, subject to registration—namely, the class of tenants holding under a lease of not less than 31 years. He would like to say, in reply to several communications which he had received, that the Bill was not to be of a retrospective character, and that it would be obligatory that registration should take place within 12 months after the planting of the trees. It would be evident that it would not be possible for any tenant to claim compensation for trees that had been planted more than 12 months before the registration; and he further had to say that under the Bill there was no change made as to the right of tenants to plant trees. The only change which the Bill made was as to those who were to be permitted to cut them down, or to claim the property in them as their own. He begged to move the second reading.
Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Lord Privy Seal.)
THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORDsaid, he was not quite clear that the description given of the Bill by the noble Earl (Earl Cadogan) was quite accurate. This Bill embodied in itself a great number of Acts of Parliament which were passed in the last century, and he believed it was most difficult to read those Acts of Parliament together. He ventured to suggest to their Lordships that they might be passing a Bill which contained a great deal more drastic concessions than they would wish to give. They were aware that under the Act of 1870 there had been a great number of concessions given, which they were told afterwards necessitated the Act of 1881, and they were told that the Act of 1881 necessitated the Act of 1887. Therefore, they were accustomed to what were called "germs" in these Bills. He wanted to suggest to the noble Earl that instead of em-

1439
bodying these numerous Acts of Parliament, they should embody the one Act of 1783 which he named. He (the Marquess of Waterford) had read that Act, and could say—speaking only as a layman—that that Act gave the whole of the powers which the noble Earl had mentioned. It was not an amending Act, so far as he could understand it; and it referred to no other Acts. He was afraid if they passed the Bill in its present shape their Lordships would be embodying a number of Acts of Parliament of which they knew nothing. He did not wish to prevent judicial tenants obtaining all the rights which the Memorandum stated the Bill would give them; but why embody a number of Acts when one Act which clearly expressed what was meant would suffice?
LORD INCHIQUINsaid, he thought it was singularly inconvenient to anybody who was interested in Irish legislation to have a Bill of this nature brought before their Lordships. It was quite impossible by looking into the Bill to make out what it meant. He went to several people for an explanation of its provisions, but without avail. What ho was afraid of was, that this Memorandum might not be quite so accurate as the noble Earl (Earl Cadogan) hoped it was. If it was perfectly accurate, then he had no objection to the Bill. But what he should have thought would have been much simpler than that, was to have repealed all those numerous Acts which, he might tell their Lordships, were so bulky that they would stand three or four feet from the ground if piled on top of each other, and which would take a lawyer a very considerable time to examine; as for a layman, it was absolutely impossible. The simplest way would have been to have repealed all those old Acts, and to have brought in one sole Act which would explain exactly what was meant, so that they might understand exactly what they were doing; because such an Act as this might be used in a way in which it was not intended that it should be used in Ireland, especially now, as their Lordships knew, that there was another Bill called a Timber Bill in the other House, which would come up to their Lordships in a later period of the Session, and which might undo what they were trying to do by this Bill. That Bill might never come up; but if it did come up, it
1440
would be a second amending Bill in the same Session of Parliament. The noble Earl, he thought, would do well to have the Bill recast.
LORD FITZGERALDin a minute criticism of the Bill, said, it was wholly unnecessary to incorporate all those Acts which had been mentioned relating to the planting of trees in Ireland. They are very difficult to interpret, and he was afraid that if they incorporated them all in the present Bill it would only Tead to confusion and embarrassment. He was entirely favourable to promoting the cultivation of trees in Ireland. What he intended to propose was that the Committee stage of the Bill should be postponed until after the Whitsuntide Recess, so as to give them full time for its consideration. He was afraid he could not accept all the statements of the noble Earl (Earl Cadogan) with regard to the rights of planting trees and their ownership in Ireland. The noble Earl had told them that it was perfectly settled law that the right of planting trees, quite irrespective of registration, had been established under the Land Acts. He could not accept that statement, and should like the noble Earl to mention the cases in which it had become settled law. He (Lord Fitzgerald) would point out that the statutory terms of 15 years, though of a shorter may be of a more continuous character than the terms contemplated by the ancient Acts, as at the end of every 15 years the rights of the landlord and tenant were liable to re-adjustment. At the same time, he should be glad that the statutory tenants in Ireland should have the benefit of some such enactment as was proposed by the present Bill, if it could be done with proper safeguards. But they knew from experience that legislation of the kind if unguarded was very apt to end in paring off or tearing up some rights of the landlords.
THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY)said, it was very gratifying to observe the horror with which the noble and learned Lord (Lord Fitzgerald) regarded the tearing up of the rights of the landlords. He could only regret that it had come rather late. The noble and learned Lord had not been quite so sensitive in the matter when measures of a very

1441
different character from the Bill for liberty to plant trees in Ireland were under discussion.
LORD FITZGERALDsaid, he was not a Member of the House while those measures were under discussion.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, he believed that was so; and he supposed that if the noble and learned Lord had been here during all the time the legislation would have been very different from what it was. It seemed to him that the real scope and object of the Bill was not thoroughly understood. It was a perfectly reasonable proposal that the Committee stage should be postponed till after Whitsuntide, which, he hoped, would afford their Lordships ample time for sufficient examination of this perfectly innocent and harmless piece of legislation.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY)in explanation, said, for the information of the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Waterford and others, that the present Bill did not propose to repeal any of the provisions of the ancient Acts. It was merely intended to give a most distinct intimation of what the Irish Timber Acts were, and it left them at large just as they were; but those Acts had been enumerated in the Bill in order that what they meant might not be left out of mind. There were no new rights created by the Bill.
EARL CADOGANsaid, he would remind their Lordships that a Bill precisely similar to this one had been amended in their Lordships' House in 1886; but, as differences of opinion had been found to exist upon its discussion, it had been dropped in the House of Commons. It provided, like this Bill, that tenants of statutory terms should have the same privileges as tenants for life, or lives renewable for ever.
Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDERS (BALLYMONEY, &C.) BILL [H.L.]
A Bill to confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board for Ireland relating to Ballymoney, Clones, and Tuam; was presented by The Lord Privy Seal; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners. (N° 97.)
House adjourned at Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Ten o'clock.