THIRD READING. (Hansard, 18 July 1889)

§ * THE EARL OF WEMYSS

Before your Lordships read this Bill a third time, I should like, with your Lordships' permission, to call attention to the fifth clause. Your Lordships have heard a good deal of Sunday closing on land. This is practically a Sunday Closing Bill as regards the waters on the West Coast of Scotland. Now, legislation of this kind is in itself objectionable, and certain to lead to evasion of the law. My noble Friend the Marquess of Lothian the other day gave reasons in support of this clause, but I think they were wholly insufficient. The first reason which my noble Friend gave was that there was a similar law in the time of George III. In the few remarks I have to make, I wish to carefully guard myself against the supposition that I yield to any Member of your Lordships' House, or to any member of the Presbyterian body in Scotland, in respect for the Sabbath, and in the desire that it should be decently observed. So much so that I have never yet voted for the opening of Museums on Sundays simply for fear that it would be the thin end of the wedge, and that in course of time the working man would lose his day of rest. But, my Lords, that is no reason why we should have legislation of this kind, which would tell so cruelly upon the fishing population. Fishermen lead a very hard life, and gain a very hard and uncertain living. Their calling is doubly precarious. It is precarious as regards the weather. You may have Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, days on which, owing to boisterous weather, it is impossible for them to set or shoot their nets. And then there is the uncertainty of the run of the fish. Again, you may have no fish on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday, and on Saturday the whole sea may be teeming and 659 glistening with silvery life, with human food, and wealth for the fishermen, and yet, if this clause passes, they cannot stretch out their hands and take it, they will not be allowed to set or shoot their nets between Saturday and Monday, and will thus be barred from gathering what kind Providence has sent them. I think that is a mistake. If fish came like manna, if they came every day in the week regularly, with a double portion on Saturday, then I could understand it; but unfortunately they do not, and I think this legislation is wrong in principle, it is unjust to the fishermen, and must lead to evasion of the law. So much, my Lords, for the principle of this legislation. Now, my noble Friend, as I have said, gave two reasons for this clause. One was that this was a provision existing already, or one which had existed in the time of George III. I am bound to say that in these days it is extremely refreshing to hear such a Conservative doctrine from a Conservative Treasury Bench; but I think my noble Friend goes a little too far in citing as a precedent the restrictive Sabbatarian legislation of the date of George III. In this he greatly out-Herod's my Conservatism. If my noble Friend is going on this tack I should like to know if he is prepared to revive all the arbitrary Acts of Parliament with reference to Sunday, some of which are dead letters. In the old days a person was liable to be sent to prison if he did not attend the service of the Church on Sunday mornings. I have seen in the town of Peebles the steeple in which those were confined who failed to attend the services in the church itself. But these Acts are obsolete, and I maintain it is unwise to endeavour to revive them, because, my Lords, there is plenty of Sabbatarian feeling still left to push these principles to the lengths of persecution. Witness the Sabbatarian outcry with which the recent opening of the Botanical Gardens at Edinburgh has been met. I would then appeal from my noble Friend, the Sabbatarian Secretary of State for Scotland, to my noble Friend on his right, Lord Balfour, who is a distinguished lay representative member of the General Assembly and a shining light in that Assembly. I would ask him to say whether he approves of the proposals of his fellow-countryman, the 660 Sabbatarian Secretary of State for Scotland, or whether he does not think that catching fish under the circumstances; to which I have referred on Sunday is neither a sin nor a crime. I feel confident he would give them, in such case, absolution and plenary indulgence. The* other argument of my noble Friend was that the fishermen themselves wished for this legislation. I would call my noble Friend's attention to the bearing of that argument. If a Minister is to grant a thing which possibly may be wrong merely because the people wish it—that goes very far. There is no limit to the carrying out of this argument. It was equally applicable to the demand of the trades unions for eight hours; of the Protectionists for Protection; of the Irish for Home Rule. I would ask my noble Friend, How will he do with the crofters? Is he prepared to give the land of the owner to the crofters because they wish it? I am sure that my noble Friend, when he sees the bearing of this argument, will be sorry that he put it forward. I object, then, in the interest of the fishermen, and on public grounds, to this anachronous penal Sabbatarian legislation, that is certain to lead to evasion of the law? It is retrograde legislation altogether, and would tend to bring the law into contempt. For these reasons, my Lords, I venture to ask your Lordships to strike out of the Bill those provisions which prevent fishing on the Sabbath.

THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN

My Lords, I cannot regret that the noble Lord has taken the course he has, because he has upon a very small matter taken occasion to give your Lordships a discourse upon the subject of the breaking of the Sabbath. He has stated what his own views are upon the question—namely, that he is very anxious that the-Sabbath should be kept; and he has also given me a name which I do not know that I deserve—namely, that of the Sabbatarian Secretary for Scotland. He has also appealed to my noble Friend on my right for support in the views which he has advanced. But, my Lords, although I have no objection to the epithet which the noble Lord has 661 applied to me, I am perfectly satisfied that before I have finished I can prove to the noble Lord that Sabbatarianism has absolutely nothing whatever to do with the question. The noble Lord has referred to the reasons which I gave upon the occasion of the Second Reading. I must just remind the noble Earl that I had no notice then of his objections, and when the noble Lord got up and stated his intention of moving the omission of Clause 5 I expressed my regret that the noble Earl intended to take that course, and gave two reasons which occurred to me at the moment. Those are the two reasons which I would now, with your Lordships' permission, like to say a few words upon. The effect of the noble Lord's Amendment, if your Lordships were to give effect to it, would simply be that on Saturday evening for two or three hours, and on Monday morning for two or three hours, there would be additional power to fish. The Act to which I referred on the previous occasion was an Act which was passed in 1815, in the reign of George III., and that Act is still in force. If the noble Earl wishes to make an alteration in the law, let him bring in a Bill to alter the law; but that certainly is the law actually in force all over Scotland at this moment. It is unlawful in any part of Scotland to cast herring nets between the hours of midnight on Saturday and midnight on Sunday. The consequence is that the only effect of this clause (which applies to a very small part of Scotland) would be to say that from Saturday night to Monday morning there shall be no fishing for herring. The reason for this enactment is this—that any fish caught on Saturday night it is impossible to sell on the Sunday, unless the noble Lord would also like to give permission to sell as well as catch fish on the Sunday, and the fish would be absolutely worthless, because they could not fee sold till Monday morning. On Monday morning, of course, for two or three hours after midnight on Sunday fish might be caught; but the reason why this clause was introduced into the Bill is because it was found that this longer close time has a very beneficial effect on that part of the coast of Scotland, and is desirable in the interests of the fishermen themselves, as the herring are very easily frightened fish. That, I think, is a 662 quite sufficient reason for the enactment by itself. With regard to the second reason which I gave to the noble Lord, that the fishermen themselves wished for this legislation, the noble Lord has gone into heroics upon that, but I simply meant to say that the fishermen themselves are so well aware of the advantages of having an enactment to prevent fishing during two or three hours on Saturday night, and two or three hours on Monday morning, that they themselves greatly desire it, and are perfectly willing to accept the clause in their own interests. My Lords, I think I need say no more. I have tried to point out to the noble Earl that this is not a Sunday question at all. It is simply a provision in the interests of the fishermen themselves in that part of Scotland. I would like to say one word more, and that is, that if this had been a Sabbatarian question the noble Earl might have given me credit for thinking that if I did accept the principle I would accept it for the whole of Scotland, and not apply the Sabbatarian principle merely to one small part of Scotland that I did not think it necessary to apply to the whole. Under these circumstances, I hope your Lordships will not consent to the Amendment of the noble Lord.