Lords Sitting of 28 July 1891

COMMISSION.
The following Bills received the Royal Assent:—

1. Brine Pumping (Compensation for Subsidence).

2. Crofters' Common Grazings (Scotland).

3. Tramways (Ireland) Act (1860) Amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE PEERS FOR IRELAND.
Lord Mulgrave—Report made from the Lord Chancellor, that the right of Constantine Charles Henry Phipps, Baron Mulgrave, to vote at the elections of Representative Peers for Ireland has been established to the satisfaction of the Lord Chancellor; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
FORGED TRANSFERS (No. 2) BILL. (No. 214.)
Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to, with an Amendment.
TRUSTS AMENDMENT (SCOTLAND) BILL.—(No. 245.)
Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.
TRUSTS AMENDMENT (SCOTLAND) BILL.—(No. 245.)
  REDEMPTION OF RENT (IRELAND) BILL.
  Brought from the Commons; read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a on Friday next: (The Lord Privy Seal [E. Cadogan]).—(No. 280.)
PRIVATE BILLS
Standing Orders and Table of Fees considered and amended, and to be printed as amended. (No. 281.)

PRIVATE BILLS-SESSIONAL ORDERS.
*THE SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF TRADE (Lord BALFOUR of BURLEIGH): My Lords, I have to ask the House to suspend the Sessional Order of the day in favour of the Provisional Orders Bills in reference to the Railway Rates and Charges mentioned in the Motion which
526
stands in my name on the Paper. The general objects of these Bills and known to your Lordships, and the procedure with regard to them was explained to this House when the Joint Committee was appointed for the consideration of these matters. That procedure has been in accordance with the Act of Parliament passed in 1888, and a prolonged inquiry has, as your Lordships know, been made by the Joint Committee. It has extended over 48 days, and far beyond the time named in this Sessional Order the 26th June. I think I may say that everybody connected with the matter is anxious that these Bills should now become law, and I hope your Lordships will not stand in the way of attaining that result, but will allow the Sessional Order to be suspended for the day, and I beg to move accordingly.
Moved, "That the Sessional Order of the 5th of March last, That no Bill brought from the House of Commons confirming any Provisional Order or Provisional Certificate shall be read a second time after Friday, the 26th day of June next,' be dispensed with."—Agreed to.
A number of Private Bills read 2a accordingly.

HIGHWAYS AND BRIDGES BILL. (No. 234.)
Amendment reported (according to order): A further Amendment made; and Bill to be read 3a on Thursday next.

PURCHASE OF LAND AND CONGESTED DISTRICTS (IRELAND) BILL.—(No. 260.)
Commons Amendments to Lords Amendments and Commons Consequential Amendments, and Commons reasons for disagreeing to certain of the Lords Amendments, considered (according to order).
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (Earl CADOGAN): My Lords, perhaps it might be for the convenience of the House that I should, in a few words, state the course which I propose to take this evening upon these Amendments, and that I should also state the advice which I would venture to give to the House with regard to the Amendments which the other House have inserted in this Bill. I need hardly remind your Lordships that during the passage of this Bill through both Houses of Parliament it has received the most full and anxious

527
consideration of both Assemblies, and I think I may be permitted to say that while, on the one hand, noble Lords sitting on both sides of this House have taken the greatest pains and the greatest care with regard to all Amendments upon this Bill, it may also be said that the Members of the other House received the Amendments which we made in the spirit of a sincere desire to amend, without in any way infringing upon the principles of the Amendments we inserted, and, generally speaking, I would venture to advise your Lordships to assent to the Amendments the House of Commons have introduced. Of course, on a subject like the present, which involves conflicting interests, and upon which opposite views would naturally be taken, it is absolutely necessary to say that on the ultimate stage of the Bill we should go on the principle of give and take, and therefore I shall not be wrong in asking your Lordships to agree to the Amendments sent up from the House of Commons. There are one or two points upon which I shall venture to move Amendments which I understand will be accepted in the other House. They are the result of careful consideration and of compromise. I will take the Amendments seriatim, and I shall be happy to give any explanation that may be required, or to answer any questions which may be put to me at a later stage when the Amendments come to be moved. Upon one point perhaps I might be allowed to say a word. The noble Lord (the Marquess of Waterford) who has throughout the progress of this Bill evinced so able and intelligent an interest in all that concerns it, has placed an Amendment upon the Notice Paper. I do not like to pass it over in silence, but I will only say now that I trust your Lordships will agree to the Amendments made by the House of Commons. The first Amendment on the Paper has reference to Clause 7, page 7, of the Bill in its present state. It provides for the case of a purchaser who himself pays one-fourth of the money, and proposes that the interest to be paid on the three-fourths advanced shall be £3 17s. 6d. instead of £3 15s., as agreed to in your Lordships' House. I move that the House do agree to this Amendment of the Commons. I believe
528
the noble Marquess has an Amendment upon this point.
Moved, That this House doth agree to the Commons' Amendment, to leave out in Clause A, after Clause 6, "fifteen shillings," and to insert "seventeen shillings and sixpence," and at the end of the clause to add—
"And an annual sum at the rate of two shillings and sixpence for every £100 of the advance shall be paid and applied in the same manner as the county percentage mentioned in Section 4 of this Act."—(The Earl Cadogan.)
*THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORD: My Lords, I put down an Amendment to the Commons' Amendment in the hope that Her Majesty's Government might accept it. The fact of the matter is that the clause which was introduced in this House, and which would induce the tenants in Ireland to produce a certain amount of money themselves, that is to say, one-fourth, has been emasculated in the other House. Your Lordships agreed when it was put into the Bill that it would be a very great advantage to induce the tenants of Ireland to produce a certain portion of the purchase money themselves, because it would increase the amount of money to be distributed, it would add to the protection which is given in this Bill to the British taxpayer, and I think it is only right that people should be induced if possible to pay, at any rate, something towards the purchase of their holdings. This clause is drawn upon the lines of the provisions introduced into the Act of 1870, and the Act of 1881, following what are called the "Bright" clauses. There was an inducement held out under this clause which was introduced in your Lordships' House for the tenants to produce this one-fourth of the purchase money, and the 5s. per cent., which is called the county percentage, is the inducement to make them do so. In another place, that 5s. has been reduced to 2s. 6d., and I do not think 2s. 6d. per cent. is at all adequate to induce a tenant to produce any portion of his purchase money. He would much rather borrow the whole amount from the Government. Therefore, I put down this Amendment to the Bill as it left the Commons. I ask that if the tenant should provide one-third of the purchase-money he shall be forgiven the 5s. percentage. I hope Her Majesty's Government

529
may still see their way to accept this Amendment, and I believe it will be accepted in another place, because really as your Lordships will see it is a very reasonable Amendment. I might say that my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary in another place pointed out the great advantage which would result from the Lords' Amendment of the Bill as it stands, and I cannot understand how, after the very strong reasons he gave for maintaining that Amendment, the 5s. was cut down to the 2s. 6d.
Moved as an addition to Clause A, as amended by the Commons—
"And any advance made after the passing of this Act which shall not exceed two-thirds of the price paid for a holding, shall he repaid by an annuity of three pounds fifteen shillings per cent. on the amount of such advance for forty-nine years, and no payment shall be made to the guarantee fund by way of county percentage in respect of any such advance."—(The Lord Tyrone [M. of Waterford].)
EARL CADOGAN: I hope the noble Marquess will not persevere with his Amendment. I confess I agree with a great deal which has fallen from him. It is perfectly true that under our former proposal the county percentage was done away with altogether for those who were themselves prepared to pay one-fourth of the purchase-money; but I hope the noble Marquess will not think I am taking refuge under a technicality if I say that his Amendment can hardly be accepted in point of order. The fact is it is not really an Amendment upon the Amendment we are now considering. By the Amendment carried in this House it is provided that any tenant purchasing who paid one-fourth should be excused the county percentage, and should stand at an interest of £2 15s. In the other House of Parliament when that Amendment was discussed a proviso was agreed to, to the effect that he should pay £2 17s. 6d. Now, the Amendment of the noble Marquess is that we should accept that which has been decided in the other House, that is to say, the compromise of £2 17s. 6d., and that in addition we should create another class of purchasers, namely, those prepared to pay one-third, and to them give the privilege of paying only £2 15s. interest. I think my noble Friend will see that is hardly an Amendment upon the former clause of the Bill. It is really the creation of an additional class,
530
and I am informed it is absolutely impossible to assent to that as an Amendment of the Commons' Amendment. I hope that my noble Friend, therefore, will not think that I am taking refuge under any technicality, but will see that it is absolutely impossible to accept this Amendment.
*THE EARL OF ARRAN: I should like to say, if the noble Earl does not see his way to accept the Amendment proposed by the noble Marquess, that it would be better to return to the Amendment as originally proposed in this House. It is surely a most useful thing to induce the Irish tenants to put some of their own money into the land instead of leaving it in the bank.
EARL CADOGAN: Does the noble Earl moan to suggest that we are to disagree with the Amendment now before the House? Of course, my duty in the matter is simply to advise the House as to the course which I think it is best to pursue. The noble Lord is asking us to decline a compromise which has been accepted by the Chief Secretary in the other House. That is hardly a course that I ought to recommend to your Lordships, and I hope, therefore, my noble Friend will not persevere in the course he has proposed.
*THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORD: After the observations which have been made by the noble Earl I will withdraw the Amendment.
Amendment (by leave of the House) withdrawn.
Commons' Amendment to Lords' Amendment on page 7, agreed to.
Further Commons' Amendments agreed to.
EARL CADOGAN: The nest Amendment on the Paper is one which I confess I abandon with some reluctance. It is an Amendment which was proposed by my noble Friend the Marquess of Waterford on Clause 8, page 7, which affected the liability of the tenant after agreement for sale—that is, between the agreement and the completion of the purchase. My noble Friend behind me proposed that during that period the payment of interest should be left to the Land Commission, and that it should not be necessary for the landlord to see to it himself. I can only say that I believe

531
in this respect the effect of the clause as it left your Lordships' House would hare been better than it will be at the present; but at the same time, for the reasons I have before stated, I have to earnestly entreat your Lordships not to insist upon this clause, which has not been agreed to in the other House.
Commons' Amendment, disagreeing to Clause B, agreed to.
EARL CADOGAN: The next Amendment is in Clause 12 of the Bill, on page 12. These are practically verbal Amendments, which constitute a re-casting of that clause, about which there has been so much discussion upon the subject of proportional allocation of the advances. Noble Lords opposite will remember that when this Bill was in Committee my noble Friend the Marquess of Londonderry proposed an additional clause or sub-section qualifying the Apportionment Clause as it came up to us from the other House; but after consideration before the Report stage I ventured to present to your Lordships, in consequence of the remark made as to the bearing of that clause, one instead of it, which I think noble Lords opposite and others thought an Amendment upon that which was proposed by my noble Friend. Since that time the clause has been again discussed in the other House of Parliament, and that discussion has resulted in a third edition, which I hope will, on the whole, make the meaning more plain to those who read it, perhaps, somewhat superficially. There are a large number of Amendments as your Lordships will see, but I think I should meet the convenience of the House if I might be permitted to read the clause as it would stand if the Commons' Amendments were agreed to. It is Subsection 3 of Clause 10 (b)—
"If the advances applied for (and which appear to the Land Commission likely to he sanctioned) for the purchase of holdings exceeding £50 rental fall short in any year of the proportion of the annual share of the County in the Guarantee Fund ascertained in accordance with Sub-sections 1 and 2 of this section with reference to the class of holdings exceeding £50 valuation, the difference shall be carried to a common fund to be available for the purchase of any holding within the county for the purchase of which advances may be made under this Act."
I do not know whether any noble Lord desires to make a remark upon it, but if
532
it be agreeable to the House I will proceed to put all the Amendments. Most of them are drafting, but the general sense of the Amendment is to be found in the clause as I have just read it.
Moved in Clause 10, page 11, Sub-section 3, Sub-clause (b.), lines 3 and 4, to leave out ("amount so deemed to be allocated ") and insert—
("Proportion of the annual share of the county in the guarantee fund ascertained in accordance with sub-sections one and two of this section with reference"); sub-clause (c.), line 4, leave out ("amount so deemed to be allocated") and insert ("proportion of annual share of the county in the guarantee fund ascertained in accordance with sub-sections one and two of this section with reference.")—(The Earl Codogan.)
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: I have only this remark to make upon these Amendments so far as I understand them. I believe I raised a good deal of objection to the form of the clause, but they seem to me now to make it perfectly clear.
Commons' Amendment agreed to.
Further Amendments agreed to.
EARL CADOGAN: The next Amendment is in what is now Clause 13, page 13, line 42. The Commons disagree to the Amendment made by the Lords in page 11, line 37, for the following Reason:—
Because, it is not thought necessary that the Crown should appear in every case by counsel, and alternative amendment approved of, namely, to substitute for ("counsel appearing") the words ("what is offered.")
I move that the Commons' Amendment be agreed to.
LORD HERSCHELL: My Lords, I think it is rather a curious reason this for disagreeing with the Amendment. As the Bill came to us from the other House it provided that the Privy Council, after hearing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Crown, should advise the Lord Lieutenant. This House inserted the words "if any." and that is disagreed to, because it is not thought necessary that the Crown should appear in every case, which is giving the very reason why it was agreed to. We must not look at it too critically; but there would be this objection to it: if the Crown did not wish to appear by Counsel, but desired in some other way to argue the matter, they would be precluded

533
from doing so; they could only appear by Counsel, and that is probably why the alternative Amendment is put in. I do not understand the statement that one may get something else to be an argument why one should get nothing.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELAND: Is it worth while making the point, because after all they have to submit the value, and the Attorney General has to secure the assistance of a private advocate. It is not, I think, worth while making a distinction between the cases, and, on that account, the point is not worth disputing.
LORD HERSCHELL: It would not be worth disputing if some Amendments had not been made already, and the Bill therefore has to go to the other House, otherwise I would not suggest it. But I do not press it if your Lordships are satisfied with the English.
THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY): My impression is it is Irish, and, therefore, it is quite in keeping.
EARL CADOGAN: I move that the Lords do not insist upon their Amendment.
LORD HERSCHELL: First we do not insist upon our own, and then we agree to the Commons.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: I suppose they have amended it. It is put in the strangest way here. It does not say the Amendment is approved of, but that the alternative Amendment is approved. The usual course is to tell us they have made an Amendment. I hope they have, otherwise embarrassment will arise: that is all.
EARL CADOGAN: I am informed that the alternative Amendment was made.
Moved, That the Lords do not insist upon their Amendment.—Agreed to.
Moved, That this House doth agree to the Commons' Amendments.—Agreed to.
Further Amendments agreed to.
EARL CADOGAN: The next Amendment is in Clause 25, to insert new Clauses F and G. The Commons have disagreed to the clause which is marked
534
F, giving power to the Land Commission be let or manage their holdings. They disagreed with this because the clause Joes not make provision for the application of any profit realised in the management of holdings, and because the second part of the clause would place the Land Commission in the position of Judges in their own case, and enable them to vest in themselves the holdings of tenant purchasers. I am bound to say that this is one Amendment with which I sympathise. There was considerable reason in the objections entertained by the other House with reference to this clause. A discussion took place upon it in the other House, and I believe it was then agreed that the clause as passed by your Lordships should be dissented from, and that we should bring in a new clause in substitution for it. Perhaps your Lordships will allow me to read the Amendment I now propose. I move, first, that the House do not insist upon its Amendment.
LORD HERSCHELL: I should have thought if you were going to substitute a new clause you would not say you were going to insist upon it, but suggest the new clause in substitution.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: If you send down a new clause you certainly need to insist, otherwise your Amendment is gone.
EARL CADOGAN: I have placed upon the Paper notice of an Amendment of a new clause to be substituted for that proposed by the Commons' Amendment. I propose to substitute the following: it will stand as a new Clause 26, page 20, of the Bill as last printed.
Moved, in lieu of Clause F. to which the Commons have disagreed, to insert the following new Clause:—
"Whenever the Land Commission are entitled to cause any holding to be sold under any power of sale, they may, if they think fit, apply to the High Court or (if the rateable value of the holding does not exceed fifty pounds) to the county court of the county in which such holding is situate, for an order to the sheriff to put them in possession of such holding, and it shall be lawful for such court, upon being satisfied that the Land Commission are so entitled, to issue an order accordingly, and such order shall be executed by the sheriff in like manner as a writ for the delivery of possession."—(The Earl Cadogan.)
Amendment agreed to.
EARL CADOGAN: The next Amendment is marked G, on page 7. It was an Amendment moved by the noble Lord opposite, with reference to the provision that holdings while subject to purchase money should be under conditions especially relating to questions of waste. It dealt with drains and watercourses, and it dealt also with that very important subject which your Lordships discussed, namely, the question of timber, and what has been held to be the practical disafforesting of Ireland. I am afraid it would be impossible for me to advise your Lordships to insist upon the retention of this clause. The House of Commons have given as their reasons that the provisions in that behalf of the Drainage Acts and the rights enforceable under the Common Law are sufficient to secure the proper maintenance of drains and watercourses. I am not quite sure, if my information is correct, that the provisions are sufficient to secure that which was secured by the clause of my noble Friend. I am rather inclined to think not; but, at the same time, I cannot advise your Lordships on that account to retain the clause. I believe that the provisions of the Common Law do not go quite so far as the proposed clause, but that they are practically sufficient to attain the larger part of the objects of my noble Friend. The Commons Reason also states that the proposed sub-head (a) would only have the effect of preventing a purchaser from cutting down timber growing on his holding, and would not operate to protect plantations, which are not included, as a rule, in the land purchased. With regard to the question I have just now alluded to, I may repeat what I have said on a former occasion, that my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary has turned his attention to it, with an earnest wish to arrive at a solution of it; but at present he does not see his way to any legislation on the subject. I much regret it, because I deeply sympathise with all that has been said by noble Lords on both sides of the House as to the danger of disafforesting Ireland, and as to the unsatisfactory arrangements with regard to timber.
Moved, "That the Lords do not insist upon their Amendment."—(The Earl Cadogan.)
*THE EARL OF ARRAN: I should like to say, with regard to the drainage part of the Amendment, that, of course, if the Common Law is sufficient to ensure drains being kept open, there is no necessity for the clause; but all I can say is, it has not hitherto been sufficient. The drains have not been kept open by the tenants, as far as my knowledge goes. With regard to rejecting the sub-clause A, because it provides only against part of the danger and not the whole, that does not seem a very good reason.
EARL CADOGAN: As I said before, it is with considerable regret that I ask my noble Friend not to persevere with his clause; but, on the whole, I am afraid I must ask the House not to insist upon this Amendment.
Motion agreed to.
Further Amendments agreed to.
EARL CADOGAN: The next is in Clause 23. The other House has left the appointment of Assistant Commissioners in the hands of the Lord Lieutenant and the Treasury, and all they have asked is that before the appointments are made the Land Commissioners shall be consulted upon them. I think this is a compromise which I can safely recommend to your Lordships, and I hope you will adopt it.
Commons' Amendments agreed to.
EARL CADOGAN: Then there is an Amendment of your Lordships in Clause 31 of the present Bill, page 24. Tour Lordships may remember there was a provision for an appeal from the decision of a Commissioner, and when the Bill was before this House it was thought provision should also be made for an appeal against the decision of two Commissioners, in case two Commissioners sat on one of those cases. The Commons disagree to the Amendment, and they move a proviso which practically provides that a decision shall always be given by one, and it is, therefore, unnecessary to provide for an appeal from the decision of two Commissioners. They disagree to the Amendments because the object of the proposed Amendments would be better carried out by the insertion at the end of the sub-section of the following:—
"Provided also, that every order made by the Land Commission in carrying the said Acts into effect shall, in the first instance, be made by a Commissioner sitting alone."

537
I beg to move that the House does not insist upon its Amendment.
Agreed to.
Moved, That this House doth agree to the Commons' Amendment.
Agreed to.
Bill returned to the Commons.

PUBLIC HEALTH (SCOTLAND) ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 269.)
Read 3a (according to order), with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
TURBARY (IRELAND) BILL.—(No. 265.)
  METALLIFEROUS MINES (ISLE OF MAN) BILL.—(No. 225.)
    POST OFFICE ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 254.)
    House in Committee (according to order); Bills reported without Amendment; Standing Committee negatived; and Bills to be read 3a on Thursday next.

HOUSE OF LORDS OFFICES.
First Report from the Select Committee considered (according to order.)
*THE EARL OF MORLEY: My Lords, I beg leave to move the Motion which stands in my name. I do not think there is anything special in the Report which renders it necessary for me to say anything, except that it contains the Report of the Sub-Committee appointed to consider questions relating to the general index.
Report agreed to.

PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION —PEERS IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
LORD DE MAULEY, in rising to move—
"That a Peer giving notice of his intention to offer his services to a constituency to represent them in the House of Commons, shall be excused attendance in the House of Lords during the existence of that Parliament,"
said: My Lords, the object of this Motion is to facilitate the transfer of superabundant talent from the one House to the other—
THE EARL OF FEVERSHAM: I rise to order. I beg to submit that the Motion of which the noble Lord has given notice is out of order. It involves
538
a large and important constitutional change, which can only be carried out by an Act of Parliament. At present it is entirely incompetent for any Peer, as I conceive, to give notice of his intention to offer his services for the purpose of representing a constituency in the House of Commons; and therefore I think it is contrary to the honour and dignity of this House that we should discuss a Motion which is contrary to the order of the House and to the Rules of Parliament.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, I do not wish to express any opinion either for or against the Motion of the noble Lord until I have heard what he has to say. I confess I do not see in what way the Motion can be considered to be out of order. It is a Motion, as the noble Lord (the Earl of Feversham) says, of a character which, in its ultimate results, would involve a large constitutional change; but I never heard that it was unusual, either in the other House or in this House, to preface Bills for large constitutional changes by Resolutions. It seems to me, therefore, that the noble Lord is only following the ordinary course in respect of the very considerable change which he desires to introduce.
LORD DE MAULEY: My Lords, no one venerates this ancient House more than I do, but we all know that ancient buildings carry within themselves the elements of destruction. I am aware how delicate a subject that is which deals with the customs and privileges of your Lordships' House. Measures have been submitted to us which have been rejected because they were too drastic. The suggestion on the Notice Paper is more modest. It is to transfer superabundant talent from one House to the other. It is not reform which is wanted, but a redistribution of the powers of Parliament. The danger which threatens us is that the constant increase of our numbers will weigh us down, and sooner or later will affect the stability of the House. Every successive Government is bound to accede to claims, irresistible upon a Minister, either as rewards for political services or the recognition of social distinction. The result is that our increasing numbers will soon rival those of the Representatives of the people. The great advance of science, the spread of

539
political knowledge, has driven men to the front who deserve a large amount of respect and every mark of political recognition. No doubt every appointment to this House is excellent, but the result is the same—an increase of numbers which soon will rival as I have said those of the Representatives of the people. With every fresh addition another man of note is removed from direct contact with the constituencies of the country. It cannot be sound policy that, in a nation of representative institutions, its executive should attract to itself the essence of political talent, and remove it so far from the influence of popular control and popular opinion. But if the policy in a constitutional point of view is doubtful, it falls with severity upon the individual. He may be in the full enjoyment of mental and physical vigour, yet an once, by no voluntary act of his own, but by the accident of birth, he is removed from the scene of his labours to be locked up in this House for life, without the possibility of egress. He may have taken the initiative in measures of great political importance, his name may be associated with the moral and social problems of the day. There is an end to that. At once his active career is closed, and the tenour of his political life is altogether changed. He may act on the lines which gave him celebrity, but the spur to exertion is blunted. He is no longer the representative of the opinions of a section of his fellow countrymen, but a general overlooker of the politics of the kingdom, and the earnestness of zeal is changed for the lukewarmness of duty. Besides, there must exist in every man's heart a feeling of gratitude towards that body of electors who first gave him a start in political life. He may wish to renew that connection, and the link between him and his former constituency ought not to be severed by an impolitic and inexorable law. But if the custom falls with severity upon the older Members of the House, it also affects its younger ones, and indirectly the country. Many a man enters your Lordships' House full of the aspirations which new duties evoke, and determined to take an active part in the business of his country, only to find his enthusiasm damped by the sedative decorum of the House, and his political activity checked by the monopoly
540
of its Select Committees. I know I may be met with the argument—if so, I admit its validity—that there are some who have never occupied a seat in the House of Commons who yet illumine your Lordships' debates by their eloquence, and display the practical qualities of statecraft. But those are the very qualities that would have recommended them to the electors of the country for a representative position which would have been an honour to the recipient, an honour to the constituency which conferred it. All men have not the good fortune to blaze into notoriety. There is a vast amount of practical talent submerged in your Lordships' House which might be drawn out by the greater activity of the other House—activity which is subdued here by a dead-weight, but which would find its vent in the more heated atmosphere of the House of Commons. Few measures originate in your Lordships' House to call out the latent powers of debate. Measures are sent here after having been threshed out by interminable discussion in the other House, the skeletons picked dry by the criticism of one Assembly served up for the hyper-criticism of the other. The constituencies expect that their Parliament, individually and collectively, shall be occupied with the affairs of the nation; and as long as talent lies undeveloped, or in abeyance, it cannot be said to fructify for the benefit of the public. But, after all, it is not on the floor of this House that the business of the country is conducted; it is in the Committee Rooms upstairs; and that Court of Appeal from the decisions of the other House should be comprised of Members skilled in the science of legislation, men of practical experience and adepts in political science; and nowhere can that education be learnt better than in the rough-and-ready training which the House of Commons affords. Everybody with experience of Committees knows how crude are the Bills often sent up to your Lordships' House to be moulded into shape by the refined experience of the Chairmen of Committees; but those Members are learning their business, and even they have their limits. Every one who has served on Committees must have perceived how often the labours of a Chairman have been thwarted by the inexperience of a

541
political novice, which would not have occurred had his political training begun before he became a Member of this House. I hope I may be excused if in illustration of my argument I cite a personal allusion, one case out of many that might be cited. The Chairmen of Committees in this House, or, at all events, the majority of them, learnt their business in the House of Commons. No business Assembly in the world could have displayed more talent in unravelling the tangled skein of Parliamentary business than has been exhibited by those experienced Chairmen. There is a noble Lord in this House who is simply excellent as a Chairman of Committees. I remember the noble Lord's predecessor—admirable, too, in that position; and, if report can be credited, there is a son of the noble Lord who is now endeavouring conscientiously to obtain an insight into the business of the country. Lord Redesdale told me that at one period of the Session it was utterly impossible to pass the Bills which were showered into this House from the House of Commons; and, at his request, Committee after Committee was appointed and the business was cleared. If it had not been for the practical experience and talents of the Chairmen of those Committees the work of the country would have been at a standstill. There is a noble Lord who has never enjoyed the benefit of a seat in the House of Commons, who has never made Parliamentary duties his study, though his natural abilities are unquestioned, but that noble Lord's name is absent from the Committees; why, I cannot imagine, unless it be referred to that clique in this House who arrogate to themselves the power of selection, and leave in the shade the invaluable knowledge of other Members. But I pass from the question of the legislative knowledge of your Lordships. It is a trite observation that in a country of representative institutions legislation which has not been stamped with the verdict of popular approval is an anomaly, and I cannot understand how it can be derogatory to any man's dignity to seek the highest honour which a constitutional country can offer, namely, the honour of being entrusted with the interests and opinions of his fellow-countrymen. He might enter or
542
re-enter this House with the satisfaction of feeling that to his merits, and not to an accident, he owed his position in the Legislature of his country. The standard of education rising in the electoral body has created a spirit of criticism which tests the soundness of legislation and the forces which move it. It will become more and more difficult to prove that a custom, however successful in practice, which is not based upon popular support is not an anomaly, and is not consonant to the dictates of reason or the principles of common-sense. Tour Lordships' wise prudence has always listened to the voice of public opinion. In deference to that voice, you abolished voting by proxy, and have recognised the advantages of measures for the public benefit. You have one more anomaly to discourage. The legislation of individuals does not receive the stamp of public approval. The most effective method of stifling objections, and of lending a popular character to the discussions in this House, would be to open your doors to the ebb and flow of political services from one House to the other. If this House relies upon its antiquity, it is based upon sand. The passage of political services from one House to the other should be permitted, and when the constituencies perceive the public spirit of its Members in seeking a wider range for the exercise of their duties, this House will grow in the affections, the esteem, and the respect of the country.
Moved to resolve,
"That a Peer giving notice of his intention to offer his services to a constituency to represent them in the House of Commons, shall be excused attendance in the House of Lords during the existence of that Parliament."—(The Lord de Mauley.)
THE EARL OF FEVERSHAM: My Lords, I do not know whether I am in order, but I wish to make an Amendment that the Motion be not put, because I cannot conceive that it can be according to the practice of Parliament that any Motion should be put to the House that is ineffective or contrary to law; and surely it cannot be in accordance with the dignity of this House.
Moved, "That the Question be not now put."—(The Earl of Feversham.)
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, I have tried to find out from the declared Legal Authorities in this House to what extent it is competent for us to debate this Motion. I had hoped that the noble Lord opposite would have given us some light upon this subject; but I am told that if "shall" were read "should," the Motion would be perfectly legitimate, and that if the word "excused" does not mean "prohibited" then that the Motion would also be legitimate. I think in the present case the wisest course for this House to adopt will be to accede to the Motion of my noble Friend behind me (the Earl of Feversham), and move the Previous Question; for though the Motion relates to a constitutional matter of very considerable importance, and if your Lordships think so, worthy, no doubt, of very grave deliberation, I do not think it would be suitable that we should approach it in this very indirect manner. I believe myself that, in fact, the Motion is wholly unnecessary. I imagine that if the noble Lord is himself inclined to offer his services to any constituency, there is no danger of this House inflicting upon him any penalty for absenting himself from the deliberations of this House during the period that he is doing so; and, therefore, a Motion of this kind is unnecessary to enable any noble Lord, who is inclined to do so, to offer his services to a constituency. I do not venture to express any opinion as to what the result of such an offer might be; but, under these circumstances, I think we had better assent to the Motion of my noble Friend who has moved "the Previous Question."
Previous Question put, whether the said Question shall be now put? Resolved in the negative.

FORGED TRANSFERS (No. 2) BILL. (No. 214.)
Commons Amendments considered (on Motion), and agreed to.
House adjourned at a quarter before Six o'clock, to Thursday next, a quarter past Ten o'clock.