Lords Sitting of 4 August 1890

COMMISSION.
The following Bills received the Royal Assent:—
Poor Law (Ireland) Rating.
Pauper Lunatic Asylums (Ireland) (Officers' Superannuation).
Boiler Explosions Act, 1882, Amendment.
Infectious Disease (Prevention).
Anglo-German Agreement.
Foreign Jurisdiction (Consolidation).
Statute Law Revision. Removal Terms (Scotland) Act (1886) Amendment.
Birstall Wesleyan Chapel Trust Scheme Confirmation.
Shrewsbury and Holyhead Road (Anglesey and Carnarvon).
And a number of Private Bills.

METROPOLIS MANAGEMENT AND BUILDING ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. (No. 168.)
Report from the Select Committee, That the Committee adjourned on Friday last over this day; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.

DUBLIN CORPORATION BILL.
THE EARL OF MORLEY: My Lords, the Motion that stands in my name requires a few words of explanation. The Motion is that the Bill relating to the Dublin Corporation be re-committed so far as relates to Part IV. The facts of the case are these: When the Bill came up from the House of Commons these clauses relating to the collection of rates were in such a condition that the Committee to which the Bill was referred did not consider, under the circumstances, they were able to pass the clauses. Perhaps I had better read the Chairman of the Committee's statement on the subject. He states—
"I have to remark in the first instance, that the Bill, as it left the other House, did not
1710
attempt to deal with the great difficulty in the case, that of the altered position of the Collector General and his staff, his duties being the same, or nearly the same under the Bill, with only one-third of the sum available for the payment of himself and his staff."
Then he recommends that the rating clauses of the Bill ought to be struck out, and that the preamble be amended accordingly. Since that decision was arrived at clauses have been prepared which have been agreed to by certain parties to the Bill. It was thought extremely desirable by them that the matter should be again brought before the same Committee, when, of course, any opponents of the new clauses, whoever they might be, would have an opportunity of being heard. It was a point of some difficulty, and it was thought by myself far better that the matter should be settled in a satisfactory manner here, and sent down in a satisfactory form to the Commons. That is all I have to say now about the matter. It is not, of course, for me to express any opinion, or to make any statements as to the merits of the case, in regard to which I am afraid I am not competent to speak,
Moved—
"That the Bill be re-committed so far as relates to Part IV. (Rates), and the corresponding recitals in the preamble."—(The Chairman of Committees.)
THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORD(who spoke by leave of the House sitting): My Lords, I must really make the strongest protest I am able against the Motion of the noble Earl. I do not think the Motion comes exactly from himself. I think it is a change of front on the part of Her Majesty's Government, and a very extraordinary change of front it is. I will put before your Lordships very shortly what happened with regard to his Bill. Originally, when the Bill came into another place, it proposed to transfer the appointment of the Collector General to the Corporation. Well, that was opposed by Her Majesty's Government, and amended, and it was then arranged that the Corporation should collect its own rates, and that the other rates should still be collected by the Collector General. The Bill was then placed before a Committee of your Lordships' House. It was again opposed by Her Ma-

1711
jesty's Government, these clauses were opposed by the Government in the person of Sir Richard Wyatt acting for the Government, it was opposed by the Chambers of Commerce in Dublin, who represent the largest ratepayers in that town. It was also opposed by the Port and Docks Board. Now, let me point out what happened then. All these different bodies have been heard by counsel upstairs, at great expense to them; and now, by the re-committal of this Bill, they must go through all that expense again. It is a most unsatisfactory arrangement; and I am sure your Lordships will agree with me that if the Government opposed this Bill up stairs they should not have changed front now, and come forward with a large sheaf of other clauses which the Government made no mention of before that Committee. I may mention that the clauses in Part IV. of this Bill were unanimously rejected by the Committee upstairs. These new clauses which the noble Chairman has suggested will improve the Bill are perfectly unworkable. They are most complicated; and to prove to your Lordships that even the framers of these clauses do not think much of them, they have inserted a proviso at the end that if either of the parties object to them they are at the end of six months to become a dead letter and to no longer have effect. I think on the part of the framers them selves that is not saying very much in favour of these clauses. I say these clauses simply do not carry out the original decision of the House of Commons. That decision was that the Corporation should collect its own rates. This does not even arrange for that; but it arranges that the Corporation is to interfere with the collection of all rates. I must protest very strongly against this change of front- The expense of this re-committal will to everybody be very great. The opponents received no notice, and at the last moment these clauses are brought for ward, clauses which are very crude, and, as I venture to think, though I cannot claim great skill draughtsman, extremely badly drawn. From my own knowledge of the country also I believe them to be absolutely unworkable. They arrange that the Corporation shall
1712
have the appointment of two-thirds of the staff by which they provide really for the collection of the whole of the rates in Dublin. I hope sincerely that if your Lordships agree to refer this Bill to the Committee again the Committee will not follow the example of Her Majesty's Government, but will adhere to their former decision.
THE DUKE OF ABERCORN: I beg to support every word which has been said by the noble Lord who has just sat down, and to protest most strongly against the action taken in re-committing this Bill. The clauses relating to rating have been unanimously rejected by the Committee upstairs. At the same time, other similar clauses have been inserted at the action of certain persons, and I shall be very much obliged if the noble Lord will inform the House why the wishes of those certain persons who have met these clauses with approbation have been consulted in the matter, and why this Bill is to be laid before the Committee upstairs again without any notice. It has caused, I am bound to say, great consternation among a large number of Her Majesty's citizens in Dublin, who had no notice that this action was to be taken, and who thought that when the Bill came down from the other House all further legislation on that head was at an end. I must say that I think the various opponents of this Bill have great cause of complaint, for not only have they been taken completely by surprise, but they will be put to great expense in having to employ counsel at great expense to re-argue the case.
THE EARL OF MORLEY: I think I ought to explain, in answer to what has fallen from the noble Duke, that the opponents of the Bill have had ample warning or notice in this matter. The Motion which I have made has been on the Paper for a week, and ample opportunity has therefore been given to any persons desirous of opposing the Bill, and discussing the matter before the Committee.
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (Earl CADOGAN): I rise not at all for the purpose of entering into the matters which have been referred to by the noble Lords, or with any desire of prolonging this discussion, but merely to point out that the question before the House is whether this Bill should be re-

1713
committed or not. I am bound to say that in my opinion the noble Lord, the Chairman of Committees, has shown good ground for such re-committal, and I hope your Lordships will agree to it. On Question agreed to.

SWAZILAND.

  QUESTION—OBSERVATIONS.
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, I rise to put a question to the noble Lord the Secretary of State for the Colonies. The Session is more or less approaching an end, and it would be, I think, very desirable if he could inform the House what is the state of the negotiations with regard to Swaziland, whether any arrangement has been come to with the South African Republic, and whether, before we adjourn, Her Majesty's Government will be prepared to place before the House any Papers on the matter?
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Lord KNUTSFORD): My Lords, I am glad the noble Earl has been good enough to put this question to me, because the matter is one which is of great importance and which has naturally excited much interest in this country as well as in South Africa. I am happy, therefore, to be able to state that we learned yesterday that the result of the negotiations, conducted in a most friendly spirit between Her Majesty's Government and the Government of the South African Republic, has been the making of a Convention which secures the independence of Swaziland, and a joint Government over the white settlers for a term of years, and provides other terms, to which, with your Lordships' permission, I will shortly refer. This Convention has been signed by the President, and is to be submitted this day to the Volksraad for ratification. Papers will be presented to Parliament on the subject as soon as possible, but, looking at the importance of the subject, I trust your Lordships will allow me to make a short statement in explanation of the course of events which led up to these negotiations, and also of the action of Her Majesty's Government. Swaziland has an area of about 8,000 square miles, and is surrounded on three sides by the South African Republic. It has a native population of about 63,000, about 9,000
  1714
  of this number being fighting men. In the Report of Sir Francis de Winton, to which I shall have occasion later on to refer, he well describes the Swazis as "a happy, contented, work-hating, wild people." As regards the number of white residents it is very difficult to make any accurate calculations; but referring to Sir Francis de Winton's Report, I may observe that he says that—
  "As regards the White residents, it is difficult to arrive at their correct numbers, so many persons being non-resident, though possessed of interests in Swaziland, and a proper register of those entitled to vote for the White Committee never having been kept. The mineral holders, miners, canteen and store keepers, missionaries, and a few permanent farmers are the only residents in the country. These consist chiefly of subjects of Great Britain. The non-residents consist of grazing holders and concessionaires. These are chiefly subjects of the Transvaal, or persons who have interests in the South African Republic. Roughly speaking, the subjects and sympathisers of the South African Republic represent 3 to 1 as to other nationalities, but they do not represent much capital."
  As regards the trade of the country, it may be shortly stated that the main trade is through Delagoa Bay and Natal. The trade between Natal and Swaziland is about £70,000 a year, and it may be said that the trade and commerce of Swaziland generally have been chiefly created by the wants of the white residents, and are almost entirely in the hands of Englishmen, with the exception of one or two Germans. Little is produced in the country out of which revenue can be collected. The present revenue of the country mainly consists of rents, obligations and transfer fees due under concessions; licences, taxes, and Customs dues. The former are paid to the King or Representative of the Swazi nation, and are computed to amount to about £20,000 a year, while the other portion of the revenue, that is, the portion derived from licences, taxes, and Customs dues, may be stated at about £8,000 a year. I need not weary your Lordships by going into the early history of Swaziland, a full account of which is contained in Sir Francis de Winton's Report; but I may mention that the independence of the Swazis and the continuance of that independence were fully recognised by Article 12 of the Convention of 1884, known as the Convention of London, and made between

  1715
  this Government and the South African Republic. I may add that Her Majesty's Government have throughout desired to proceed on the lines of that Convention, to maintain Article 12 in its integrity, and to secure the independence of the Swazis. It will be convenient that I should state shortly the position of the two countries under the Convention of 1884 as regards Swaziland, as it had, of course, an important bearing upon the conduct of the negotiations. Under Article 12, by which the independence of Swaziland was recognised, it would not be competent for Her Majesty, without breach of that Article, to take Swaziland under her protection in the recognised meaning of that expression. But Her Majesty's Government can, under Article 2 of that Convention, if they think fit, appoint Commissioners and a body of police in Swaziland to maintain order and prevent encroachments in Swaziland. Upon the appeal of the Swazi King Her Majesty might afford him help required to protect the independence of his territory, but again, without breach of Article 12 of the Convention, Her Majesty could not accept a surrender of his dominions and declare them to be British territory. On the other hand, the Government of the South African Republic cannot take any steps to annex Swaziland, without breach of the Convention, nor can they conclude any Treaty of protection over Swaziland, until Her Majesty has approved, nor can they appoint Commissioners under Article 2. In 1886 Mr. Theophilus Shepstone was appointed adviser to the King, and to secure good government over the white settlers a representative white Committee was appointed in July, 1887. The members of that Committee, however, signally failed to perform their duties, and the reasons are very graphically given by Sir Francis de Winton in his Report. He states that—
  "The minutes of the proceedings of this Committee, with the exception of those of September, 1889 (not entered), show that some attempt was made, at the commencement, to administer the affairs of the white residents in Swaziland by the members composing it; but the Committee having no experience in administration, and nearly all having private interests in the country, the record of these minutes are a painful evidence of internal dissensions, continued differences, and an absence of any desire to contribute to the real
  1716
  welfare of the country. Latterly, the country was left to govern itself, as the members-were engaged in getting concessions for themselves and their friends."
  The Committee was dissolved in 1889, and in October of that year King Um-bandine died and a regency was started. And now I will refer very briefly to the course of events which has led to the appointment of the Commission of Inquiry, and to the present negotiations. In January, 1889, matters had got into a very serious and dangerous state. The King had granted concessions to everybody, right and left, and the history of these concessions, as has been observed by Sir Francis de Winton, is probably without parallel, for the King and his Council in Swaziland had not only granted away all their actual property and territory, but also all those rights which should only belong to the Government of a country. On January 30, 1889, Sir Hercules Robinson reported to me that the time had arrived for Her Majesty's Government to decide whether the British Government or the Transvaal Government should now take over Swaziland. In March we received proposals from the South African Republic; they proposed that the territory of Swaziland should be added to the Republic, and said that they considered this "the only practical solution of the danger of disturbances." At that time our information was very insufficient as to the real state of things, and very contradictory as to the wishes of the King of the Swazis and his people. Her Majesty's Government, therefore, proposed a Joint Committee of Inquiry, and ultimately Sir Francis de Winton was appointed to act in conjunction with the Transvaal Commissioners. I would observe, in passing, that it will be seen from the Papers that Her Majesty's Government have always been fully alive to the necessity of preventing a separate interference in Swazi matters by the South African Republic; and in June, 1889, for example, when we learned that an officer was going to be sent by the President into Swaziland, on the ground that it was alleged that disturbances would take place in the following July, Her Majesty's Government immediately telegraphed out that they would not sanction separate action, and that they would send up, as,

  1717
  in fact, we did send up, Colonel Martin with, police to act with the Transvaal officers. On September 36 of last year Sir Francis de Winton was appointed. I will not trouble your Lordships with the instructions which were issued to Sir Francis de Winton. They will appear with the Report which will be presented to Parliament. I will only read one paragraph of the instructions given to him, as showing the line we desired to take in reference to this matter.
  "In your discussions with the Commissioner of the South African Republic and in any recommendation you may make, you are at liberty to take into consideration the relations of the affairs of Swaziland to the interests of South Africa generally; bearing in mind that Her Majesty's Government desire to arrive at a satisfactory and enduring understanding with the South African Republic in regard to all the tribes and countries bordering thereon, and that it is an essential feature of our policy that there shall be no undue restrictions on the developmemt and advancement of British trade and enterpaise in any part of South Africa."
  But pending those proceedings and the settlement of the question it was necessary to appoint a temporary Commission to keep peace and order in Swaziland, in place of the White Committee, to which I have before referred, and Colonel Martin was appointed the British Commissioner. I desire now publicly to express our sense of the good service rendered by Colonel Martin, for it is largely owing to his tact and judgment that peace and order have been hitherto preserved under very trying circumstances in Swaziland. Turning again to the Report of Sir Francis de Winton, it is manifest from what I have said of the legal position of the Governments of the two countries with regard to Swaziland that there were three alternative courses which might be taken consistently with the preservation of the independence of the Swazis—either the government of the whites might be handed over to the Transvaal Government, or we might take it in hand ourselves, or there might be a Joint Government. Sir Francis de Winton's recommendations were opposed to a Joint Government. He thought that complications would probably arise from that form of government. He pointed out in his Report the conditions under which alone Her Majesty' Govern-
  1718
  ment could administer the government of the whites; that it would cost about £22,000 a year, and that we should not have any full command of the Revenues; and there were other reasons which he urged for consideration if that course was to be adopted. He also laid down nine conditions which would have more or less to be observed and enforced if the government of the white settlers was to be handed over to the South African Republic. On the whole, looking to his Report and remembering the conversations which I have had with him, I think I am not doing him an injustice in saying that he was in favour of our allowing the South African Republic to take over the administration of the government of the white settlers. But, after very fall and careful consideration, and looking to the strong feeling in this country, and also to what we believed to be the strong feeling of the, Swazis, Her Majesty's Government decided in favour of a Joint Government over the white settlers. I need not now trouble your Lordships with the details of the various points which have been discussed before the terms of the Convention were settled; but merely say that, subject to the main principles of preserving the independence of the Swazis and securing the Joint Government over the white settlers, we have been most anxious to meet the wishes of the South African Republic. The exact terms of the Convention, as finally settled and as signed yesterday, and which the President is going to lay before the Volksraad today, have not yet arrived, but we know sufficient of the substance of them, from the draft agreements and correspondence which has passed, and I am able to point out the main features of the Convention to your Lordships:—1. The independence of the Swazis, as recognised by the Convention of 1884, is re-affirmed and secured; the control and management by the Swazi Government of all affairs in which natives are concerned remain unaffected. 2. It is provided that there shall be a joint administration over the white settlers, under a proclamation to be issued by the Swazi Regent and Council. 3. A Court of Justice will be established to administer Roman Dutch law; to decide all cases, criminal or civil, between white settlers; and to inquire into the validity of disputed con-

  1719
  cessions. 4. All lawfully acquired rights are to be recognised by the Joint Government Committee, and by all Judicial Tribunals. 5. The Government of the South African Republic undertakes not to interfere to the north or north-west of the Republic, and to support by its influence the establishment of order and government by the British South Africa Company within the jurisdiction and under the powers granted to that company by their charter. 6. Her Majesty's Government recognise the right granted to the South African Republic by concession from the Swazi King to construct a railway through Swaziland towards the sea. They also approve of the South African Republic making Treaties to secure a right to continue that railway to the sea at, or near, Kosi Bay, and to obtain a concession of an area of ten miles in radius from a point at, or near, that Bay. 7. Provision is made to prevent the sovereignty, control, or management of Kosi Bay, or of the area above mentioned, falling into the hands of a foreign Power. 8. Provision is also made for the entering of the South African Republic into the existing Customs Union Convention with the Cape, the Orange Free State, and Bechuanaland, upon terms to be agreed upon. 9. Failing such agreement within six months, the arrangement as to Kosi Bay is to lapse, but the Joint Government of Swaziland will continue for three years certain, and will not be terminated after the expiration of the three years unless six months' previous notice be given by either Party. If the South African Republic enters into the Customs Union, no limit of lime is named for the ending of the Convention. I fear that I have troubled your Lordships at some length, but some such short sketch of the position of affairs was necessary to enable your Lordships to appreciate the effect of the Agreement that has been made with the South African Republic, and I trust that when that Agreement is looked at, and when the position of the two countries with respect to Swaziland is understood, the country will approve of it, and will regard it as a satisfactory arrangement. The independence of Swaziland is secured, a Joint Government is provided for the white settlers, and we have been able to satisfy
  1720
  the natural, and very legitimate, desire of the South African Republic to have some port on the sea coast, while at the same time provision has been made to prevent that harbour, or port, from falling into the hands of a foreign Power. Although all the terms of the Convention may not approve themselves to every body, yet I feel confident that the Convention, on the whole, will be approved in this country as a satisfactory settlement of questions which were in a very unsettled condition, and which would, undoubtedly, if left unsettled, have led to grave complications and very serious trouble. I desire, in conclusion!, to recognise the friendly attitude of the South African Republic throughout this matter, and the good services rendered by Mr. Hofmeyr, who, at great personal inconvenience, went up himself to advise the President as regards the Convention. Nor can I conclude without bearing testimony to the great services, ability, and judgment shown by Sir Francis de Winton and Sir Henry Loch. It is largely owing to the tact and judgment of Sir Henry Loch that this troublesome question has been, as I trust, settled in a friendly spirit, and that our good relations with the South African Republic-have been maintained unimpaired.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: My Lords, I am sure every one must have listened with the greatest interest to the statement of the noble Lord opposite. The matter is so complicated and important that I think it would be unwise to enter into any discussion, or to express any opinion on it now, and until we see the Papers. I can only say that I earnestly trust that the hope which the noble Lord has expressed, that this will be a satisfactory settlement of very difficult questions, may be fulfilled. I only rise for the purpose of asking the noble Lord to say, if he can, within what territory Kosi Bay is situated, and with whom the negotiations for the construction of the railway to Kosi Bay are to be conducted. I should also like to ask whether there are any provisions in the Convention in regard to the transit of goods over that line, and as to the duties to be levied at the port.
  LORD KNUTSFORD: I have been obliged necessarily to cut my statement rather short. The territory at Kosi Bay

  1721
  belongs to the Queen Zambili, and is in Amatongaland. The South African Republic could not, according to the terms of the Convention of 1884, enter into any Treaty on the South-east of the Transvaal, but Her Majesty's Government will now support the Transvaal Government in making Treaties with the Chiefs and with Queen Zambili for constructing and maintaining the railway and the harbour at Kosi Bay. Attention will be paid to securing free rights over the railway which is to be constructed from the Eastern border of the Transvaal, through Swaziland, and on through the Queen Zambili's territory to Kosi Bay. I should not like to give an absolute answer on the other point until we have the Convention before us, but I have every reason to believe that the subject was discussed.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: I would ask one other question if the noble Lord will pardon me, and that is whether the position of Amatongaland will be in any way altered, except as regards the particular strip of land required for the railway?
  LORD KNUTSFORD: No, except that a certain portion of land on each side of the railway will be reserved to the South African Republic, and an area of land at or near Kosi Bay.

  SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE BILL.—(No. 231.)
  Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.

  ALDERSHOT ROADS BILL.—(No. 219.)
  House in Committee (according to Order).
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Earl BROWNLOW): I have no Amendment in the Bill itself, but I propose to add a few words at the end of it in fulfilment of a promise given in the other House by the First Lord of the Treasury. It will come after Clause 8 at the end.
  Moved to insert—
  "The Secretary of State for War shall, one month before selling any part of the lands shown on the plan referred to in this Act, give notice of his intention to the vestry of the parish in which such lands are situated, and to the county council of Surrey, and shall consider any objections which they may make to such intended sale."
  Amendment agreed to: the Report thereof to be received to-morrow, and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 247.)

  BANKRUPTCY BILL—(No. 237.)
  House in Committee (on re-commitment) (according to order.)
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR: I had proposed to move some Amendments, but I believe my noble and learned Friend will try, if I state what they are, to meet them in the further stages of the Bill. One has reference to the absolute bar upon the discretion of the Court in granting discharges in the event of a person being in the opinion of the Court guilty of any of the misdemeanours mentioned in the Act. I object to the form in which that absolute bar is placed. The second point has reference to the question which was raised by my noble and learned Friend opposite with reference to the obligation to disclaim onerous leases and so forth. As both of those Amendments will, I understand, be made by my noble and learned Friend at a further stage of the Bill I do not propose to move them now.
  Bill reported without further Amendment, and to be read 3ª on Thursday next.

  PHARMACY ACT (IRELAND) (1875) AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 172.)
  Amendments reported (according to order); and Bill to be read 3a to-morrow.
CENSUS (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL—(No. 226.)

  COMMITTEE.
  House in Committee (according to order.)
  Clause 5.
  THE PAYMASTER GENERAL (The Earl of JERSEY): I have one Amendment in this clause. I beg to move that the words in page 2, line 14, after the word "and" be inserted, "In the case of a dwelling-house in Wales or the County of Monmouth." This is to make it perfectly clear that the persons referred to as speaking Welsh are only those living in Wales and Monmouthshire.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 14.
  THE EARL OF POWIS: My Lords, we have been told that this Bill goes exactly on the lines of the Bill of 1880, but in this clause there is an important difference. In the Census Bill of 1880 the phrase used is "constable or other police officer for every parish," which, of course, restricts the use of rural constables to the local constables, and does not make the County Constabulary liable to be called in in addition to their present duties, which are extensive enough, to assist as enumerators. Now, I think it is very desirable that this phrase should be maintained, because the County Constabulary are much fewer in point of numbers than they are in Ireland, for instance, where they do this and every other sort of work; and it will be especially burdensome in the smaller Welsh counties where the number of county constables is very small in comparison with the area. It would be very undesirable that they should be taken away to act as enumerators, which would, of course, employ them, not only during the two days when the Returns are given out and taken back, but would give them a good deal of other employment. This makes but a very small apparent change, but its consequences would be considerable. In accordance, therefore, with the Act of 1880, the word "for" is used, and in page 14, line 24, I move, therefore, that the word "in" be struck out, and the word "for" substituted. We shall, probably, be told that this is a power which is only intended to be used in special circumstances, but the convenience of using drilled men for this work would be so great to the Department that, no donbt, the cases of pressure and necessity will be found to be very numerous, and it will aid greatly in establishing a practice which is not now the law of employing the constabulary for the purpose of doing census work.
  Moved, in line 24, to leave out the word ("in,") and insert the word ("for.") —(The Earl of Powis.)
  THE EARL OF JERSEY: There is no intention on the part of the Loeal Government Board to employ the County Constabulary as regular enumerators, but those words were put in in order to provide for emergencies or pressure, and to
  1724
  meet difficulties in certain cases in which the overseers or relieving officers could not be got to act as enumerators. I wish to assure the noble Lord that the Local Government Board intend to employ the latter in the first instance, and it would only be in very exceptional cases that they would be called upon to employ the parish constables. I believe there are some parishes in which parish constables are not now chosen. I hope the noble Lord will not press his Amendment.
  Amendment put, and negatived.
  Report of the Amendment to be received to-morrow.

  CENSUS (SCOTLAND) BILL.—(No. 227.)
  House in Committee (according to order); Bill reported without amendment; to be read 3a to-morrow.
  CUSTOMS CONSOLIDATION ACT, 1876, AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 152.)
  Read 3a (according to order) with the Amendment, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
  LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL (MONEY) BILL.
  Brought from the Commons; read 1ª, and to be printed. (No. 248.)
  PARLIAMENTARY REGISTRATION EX-PENSES (IRELAND) BILL.
  Brought from the Commons; read 1ª; to be printed; and to be read 2a on Monday next: (The Lord Privy Seal [E. Cadogan.]) (No. 249.)
  RESERVE FORCES BILL.
  Brought from the Commons; read 1a, and to be printed. (No. 250.)
  TRAMWAYS ORDER IN COUNCIL (IRELAND) (SOUTH CLARE RAILWAYS) BILL.
  Brought from the Commons; read 1a; to be printed; and referred to the Examiners. (No. 251.)
PROCEDURE IN LUNACY.

  QUESTION—OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD HERSCHELL,in rising to ask the Lord Chancellor "whether his attention has been called to the letter of Dr. Percy Smith in the British Medical

  1725
  Journal of 19th July, exemplifying the difficulty now frequently experienced in finding Magistrates to undertake the required duties of certifying lunatics, and the hardship thus inflicted on lunatics and their relatives; and whether he will consider what measures can be taken to lessen as far as possible the inconveniences thus arising, "said: My Lords, I have to call the attention of my noble and learned Friend to a somewhat important matter connected with the working of the Lunacy Act. Complaints are made that there is a difficulty experienced in finding a Justice of the Peace, whose act is necessary for the purpose of completing the requirements of the Act in reference to the detention of lunatics. My attention has been called to a particular case where, a lunatic having been admitted into Bethlehem Hospital under an urgency order, it became necessary, in order to comply with the requirements of the Act, and to justify the continued detention of the lunatic, to obtain the necessary documents from a Justice of the Peace. The relations of the lunatic endeavoured to comply with the Act. There were four Justices, I believe, in the district, who were qualified in the manner provided by the Act to act in lunacy matters. Three of them were absent; and the fourth declined to act, and, I believe, suggested a visit to the stipendiary. A visit was made to the stipendiary, and in this particular instance correctly enough he stated he was unable to do what was required of him in the absence of the petitioner. Bat in many cases I am informed the stipendiaries decline to exercise this jurisdiction under the provisions of the Act, which enables them to do so, if, as I understand, it is inconsistent with their ordinary duties. The result is that in cases of unquestioned lunacy the unfortunate relations of the lunatics are driven from one place to another endeavouring to find a Justice of the Peace who can perform the functions required of a Justice under the Act, and a very considerable amount of trouble, annoyance, inconvenience, and difficulty is entailed, which I am quite sure my noble and learned Friend will feel it is desirable to avoid as far as possible in the case of persons who are often sufficiently distressed at being compelled
  1726
  to part with those who are dear to them. I, therefore, desire to ask my noble and learned Friend whether he will inquire into the matter, in order to see what steps can be taken by which those inconveniences can be mitigated as far as possible.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR: I have had information from various quarters that some difficulty has been experienced in obtaining judicial authority for reception orders in cases of lunacy. The Act, which made a very considerable change in the law, has only been in operation for three months, and some difficulty was reasonably to be expected at first. So far as it has arisen from insufficiency in the number of justices oppointed. I have no doubt that at the meetings of justices at Michaelmas the appointments for next year will be made in the light of the experience which has been obtained. The allegation that Stipendiary Magistrates have manifested a disinclination to carry out the duties entrusted to them by the Statute is a serious one, which must necessarily engage the attention of the Home Office. It would be the Home Office which would, in the first instance, make inquiry in that direction, but I think there must be some misunderstanding in the matter. The terms of the Act of Parliament are quite clear. I do not understand my noble and learned Friend to suggest any alteration of the law. The principle of having a Judicial Authority met with such general assent in both Houses of Parliament, and the details were so carefully considered, that it would be unjustifiable to raise any of the questions over again for some time to come. I think your Lordships may rely upon those who have the working out of the Act cast upon them to get over such difficulties as present themselves in the practical and cordial spirit to which we are accustomed in this country. I have no doubt that at the approaching Michaelmas Sessions the Magistrates will take care, as far as in them lies, that if any inconveniences are found, the deficiency will be supplied. My noble and learned Friend has called my attention to the letter which has given occasion for his observations. I cannot part with that letter without saying that the spirit in which it is written is not one which gives it much

  1727
  credit with me. My noble Friend, as well as myself, may perhaps be aimed at, as he and my noble and learned Friend Lord Selborne both had to do with the measure until I took charge of it, and finally passed it through the House. I can only say, as far as I am concerned, the suggestions made by Medical Authorities received the most careful attention. I received a deputation, including Sir Andrew Clark and other eminent persons, particularly in that line of medical? tudy, and their suggestions were not only listened to but many of them adopted at my instance. After the Bill had passed in this House, the Home Secretary also received more than one deputation on the subject. I cannot say, therefore, that this letter comes credited with a spirit of great candour on the part of the writer. But the subject certainly requires attention, and if the facts should turn out as they are represented, undoubtedly they are facts which ought to be dealt with, and I can only say they shall receive any attention I can give to them.

  TRAMWAYS ORDER IN COUNCIL (IRE-LAND) (SOUTH CLARE RAILWAYS) BILL—(No. 251.)
  To be read 2a on Monday next.—(The Lord Privy Seal [E. Cadogan.])
  House adjourned at a quarter past Five o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Ten o'clock,