Lords Sitting of 4 March 1889

Preamble
The Earl of Gainsborough took the Oath.
SMOKE NUISANCE ABATEMENT (METROPOLIS) BILL.
A Bill to amend the Acts for abating the nuisance arising from the smoke of furnaces and fireplaces within the Metropolis. Presented (The Lord Stratheden and Campbell). Read 1a (No. 13.)
POOR LAW RELIEF.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  THE EARL OF STRAFFORD, in rising to ask whether it is intended to move for the reappointment of the Select Committee which sat during last Session on Poor Law Relief, said: My Lords, Probably it will be in the recollection of your Lordships that a Committee was appointed early in last Session on the Motion of the noble Earl the late Viceroy of Ireland, and the terms of the Reference to the Committee were rather wide. The Committee was appointed—
  "To inquire as to the various powers now in possession of Poor Law Guardians, and their adequacy to cope with distress that may from time to time exist in the Metropolis and other populous places; and also as to the expediency of concerted action between the Poor Law Authorities and voluntary agencies for the relief of distress."
  The Committee was presided over by the noble Earl the late Secretary of State for India, and that noble Lord drew up a most interesting and elaborate Report. The Committee sat for 18 days and examined 45 witnesses, but in the time
  818
  at their disposal they were only able to deal with that part of the reference which related to the Metropolis, and could not go into the wide subjects covered by the reference as to "other populous places." In their Report the Committee express the advisability of their being re-appointed in order that in a subsequent Session of Parliament they might continue their inquiries still further. My Lords, it is something like twenty-one years since any Committee of your Lordships' House inquired into the working of the Poor Laws. I think it was in the Session of 1867, what was called a Poor Law Relief Bill was referred to a Committee, and they reported upon it; but since that time no stock has been taken of the way in which the Poor Law has been worked. Considering that it is on the efficiency with which the Poor Law is administered in England and Wales that the well-being and comfort of the poorer classes very much depend, I think that every now and then we should have an inquiry into its working, and as the Committee last year only dealt with London and not with "other populous places," I trust the Government will either consent to the re-appointment of the old Committee or the appointment of a new one. If the Government do not see their way to do this, I would ask my noble Friend whether, if the Committee is moved for by the noble Earl who moved for it last year, the Government will give its assent?
  LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: In addition to the Question appearing on the paper, the noble Earl asks me whether if any noble Lord moves for this Committee the Government will assent to the Motion. First of all dealing with the Question on the paper, I may say at once that it is not the in

  819
  tention of the Government to move the reappointment of the Committee. The Committee of last year was not appointed on the initiation of the Government, it was assented to by the Government upon the Motion of the noble Earl sitting on the front Bench opposite (the Earl of Aberdeen). With regard to the further Questions put by the noble Earl, if there seems to be any general disposition either on the part of the Members of the Committee who served last year or the House generally to renew the inquiry, the Government will not oppose it, any more than they did last year; that is, they will take up the same attitude in regard to the matter as was taken last year. The reason, I think, why the inquiry was mainly confined to the Metropolis by the Committee last year was that the Question was more particularly dealt with by the noble Earl (the Earl of Aberdeen) in moving for the Committee. There was, as some of your Lordships will remember, a considerable amount of agitation going on during the winter of last year with regard to the distress among the unemployed, and no doubt as regards the Metropolis some pressure was put upon the Government to consent to the inquiry. The order of Reference did include "other populous places," but, when the Committee appointed had gone through a considerable part of its work, it became evident that if the inquiry were to be extended to populous districts outside the Metropolis it would be impossible to report during the last Session. It was thought to be of some importance to get the Report so far as it concerned the Metropolis, in order that matters agitating the public mind might be set at rest. As far as the Government is concerned, it is entirely for the House to say whether the Committee should be re-appointed; but if it is it will be well for the Metropolis to be excluded from the scope of inquiry, so that the same ground may not be gone over again. If the inquiry is moved for, I think it will not be unfair to ask that some specific grievance, or some special subject of inquiry, should be indicated, because the House at large will probably not regard the fact that no similar inquiry had been instituted for 20 years as sufficient ground for a fresh inquiry. I can only say with regard to the inquiry
  820
  of last year, which was a most exhaustive one so far as it went, that it is a matter for congratulation that no serious-maladministration was brought to light.
  THE EARL OF ABERDEEN: My Lords, it is the fact that the Government did assent to the appointment of the Committee last year, although it was with some reluctance. Before moving for the re-appointment of the Committee. I should like to consult with the noble Lord who presided over the Committee, and other noble Lords; but my impression is that their opinion will be, if not altogether unanimously in favour of the re-appointment of the Committee, at any rate sufficient to justify me, or some other noble Lord, in moving its re-appointment. It occurs to me, my Lords, that among the advantages which will be gained by that inquiry and by the able Report which the Chairman of the Committee drew up in this; that it was made clear that certain powers which were vested in the Board of Guardians had become inoperative, or at any rate they were not resorted to, and in fact the Boards of Guardians in many cases seemed unaware of what their powers were. I think that shows that the continuation of the Inquiry as regards other districts than those dealt with last Session would be highly desirable.

GIBRALTAR-PROPOSED DOCK ACCOMMODATION.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  VISCOUNT SIDMOUTH, in rising to ask Her Majesty's Government whether it had been decided to proceed with the construction of a dock at Gibraltar, and, if it had been, how soon the work would be commenced, said: My Lords, this question was put by me some two or three months ago, during last Session, and on that occasion received the satisfactory answer from the Admiralty that the matter was under consideration. I hope that the answer of my noble Friend to-day will be to the same effect.
  LORD ELPHINSTONE: My Lords, having regard to the interest that my noble Friend takes in this question, I am not at all surprised that he returns again to the Question he put to me in August last, and repeated in December. In my reply on August 3rd, I stated there were five schemes before the

  821
  Admiralty. Two of them only were accompanied by any details, and pending the receipt of details of the other three schemes, the matter remained in abeyance. In December I was unable to be present; but my noble Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies (Lord Knutsford) answered for me in effect that the matter was still under the consideration of the Admiralty. Since that, we have had a scheme submitted, by which it was proposed that about 40 acres of water should be enclosed, that coal wharves should be built, and that two docks should be constructed—one for the Imperial Navy, and the other for the mercantile marine. There are objections, and serious objections, to that scheme, which I do not think it is necessary for me to enter into at present. The Director of Works has lately been at Gibraltar, and has gone over the whole of the schemes that have been submitted. The Admiralty have had under consideration the whole of the various schemes, and have given a general approval to one, which is for the construction of a dock on the site of the new mole, and the reservation of this site has been asked for on behalf of the Navy. The Admiralty are fully aware of the desirability of having a dock at Gibraltar, and are sensible of the inconveniences which have been felt for the want of dock accommodation there; but in face of what are considered more pressing Imperial necessities it is not proposed that any immediate steps be taken for the construction of docks.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVON: My Lords, I hope the Admiralty will consider a little longer before they come to a decision on this important subject I always regret very much when I find myself at variance with the noble Lord (Lord Elphinstone), especially on questions where professional knowledge enters so very largely; but I must say from all that I have ever heard, and from all the study that I have been able to give to the subject, it does seem to me that the construction of a Naval dock at Gibraltar would be a matter the desirability of which is certainly more than questionable. It would mean an expense which is to be deprecated at a moment when so much money is needed for similar purposes, and from the military
  822
  point of view, in time of war, at all events, the construction of a dock at Gibraltar is absolutely useless. I say useless for two reasons. In the first place, a complete change has come over the whole system of artillery. The cannon now used are of enormous range, twice, at least, as powerful as those of former years; and from the heights of the Spanish hills heavy guns could render a dock at Gibraltar absolutely untenable. The question has been gone into over and over again; and it is incontrovertible that if Spain were Great Britain's enemy it would be impossible to hold the docks at Gibraltar. In the second place, it is to be remembered that there exist a very good dock with arsenal and workshops at Plymouth, and another very good dock with arsenal, workshop, and accessories at Malta, both of which places are practically only three days' sail from Gibraltar. My Lords, what is really needed at Gibraltar and, indeed, at all our coaling stations (and about this there is no controversy) is a greater number of modern guns. At present there are at Gibraltar some 400 or 500 absolutely obsolete guns. I believe the Admiralty are taking steps to send out to Gibraltar some new guns, and in a few months there will be a considerable accession of strength to the place. The whole question, as my noble Friend knows, is a very large one; involving many others. There is the question of armaments, and the scarcely less difficult question of garrison, and all sorts of questions which have been created or largely altered by steam communication, which renders a place like Gibraltar quite different to what it used to be. There is the question of communication with India through the Mediterranean and by the Suez Canal, or by the alternative route of the Cape of Good Hope. For all these reasons, and a variety of others which I need not go into, I trust that the Admirality will think twice and thrice before they commit themselves upon a question so large as that which is involved in the construction of a dock at Gibraltar, which it is probable would after all be of very little practical utility.
  House adjourned at a quarter before Five o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Ten o'clock.