Lords Sitting of 30 June 1891

COMMITTEE OF SELECTION FOR STANDING COMMITTEES.
Report from, that the Committee have added the Lord Abinger to the Standing Committee for the consideration of the Roads and Streets in Police Burghs (Scotland) Bill. Read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
FISHERIES BILL [H.L.]—(No. 17.)
Reported from the Standing Committee with an amendment: The Report thereof to be received on Thursday next.
ROADS AND STREETS IN POLICE BURGHS (SCOTLAND) BILL—(No. 161.)
Reported from the Standing Committee with amendments: The Report thereof to be received on Thursday next.
CORK (COUNTY AND CITY) COURT HOUSES BILL.—(No. 194.)
House in Committee (according to order); Bill reported without amendment; Standing Committee negatived; Then Standing Order No. XXXIX. considered (according to order), and dispensed with: Bill read 3a: Amendments made: Bill passed, and returned to the Commons.
MARKETS AND FAIRS (WEIGHING OF CATTLE) BILL—(No. 185.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
  THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (Earl CADOGAN): I have to ask your Lordships to give a Second Reading to this Bill to amend the Markets and Fairs (Weighing of Cattle) Act, 1887. The main objects of this Bill are to transfer the authority as stated in Clause 1:—
  "As from the passing of this Act the powers under section 9 of the principal Act of the Local Government Board, as to England and Wales, and of the Secretary for Scotland, as to Scotland, shall be transferred to, and vested
  1826
  in, the Board of Agriculture, and the powers under the same section of the Local Government Board for Ireland shall be transferred to, and vested in, the Irish Land Commission."
  The other objects of the Bill are to provide adequate accommodation to the satisfaction of the Board of Agriculture for the weighing of cattle. By the Act of 1887, it was provided that weighing machines were to be provided in all markets and other places for the sale of cattle; but it has been found that those machines have been placed in inconvenient positions, and that there has not been adequate accommodation provided in the shape of pens and otherwise. Generally it will be found that there are amendments in the Act of 1887, and there is a provision that returns are to be provided compulsorily, but only in the places which will be found mentioned in the Schedule. A Royal Commission on Market Rights and Tolls sat in 1888–9; and this Bill has been drawn with the view of carrying out the main provisions recommended in the Report of that Commission. I beg to move the Second Reading of the Bill.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Earl Cadogan.)
  THE DUKE OF THE RICHMOND AND GORDON: My Lords, I am not going to raise any objection to the Second Reading of this Bill; but I could have wished that the noble Lord had given us some more cogent reasons for this Bill being introduced. He says it was to amend the Act passed in 1887, and I dare say that, in so far as it amends it, in the first place there is no great objection to it, because it transfers the powers of the Local Government Board, and vests them in the Board of Agriculture. The noble Lord has not alluded to various clauses in the Bill.
  EARL CADOGAN: If the noble Duke will forgive me, I mentioned Clauses 2 and 3.
  THE DUKE OF THE RICHMOND AND GORDON: I believe my noble Friend did allude to Clause 2, but I think he left out a part of Clause 3, which, to my mind, is one of very serious importance, I mean that part of Clause 3 that the prices at which cattle are sold in the market shall be given to the Board of Agriculture. I want to know whether the noble Lord by that clause intends

  1827
  that if I go to a market and sell my stock to anybody I choose, without having them weighed, the price of the cattle is to be given to the authority, and by the authority forwarded on to the Board of Agriculture. I am quite aware that the measure applies only to a certain number of places which are named in the Schedule; but I am very much afraid that, if the measure is passed with those places named in it, it will not be long before we are told that there is an excellent precedent in this measure for the proposal that it should be made to apply to all markets throughout the country. I quite understand that if the cattle are weighed in the market, the weight of the animals and the price at which they are sold should be stated, because that may be for the benefit of the public, and it may be quite right that information should be given to the authority to be sent up to the Board of Agriculture; but I think it would be excessively despotic to step in and say that the price of all the animals I sell at that market is to be made public, and that I must give it to the authority for that purpose. The title of the Bill refers to the weighing of cattle, but it goes further than that in its provisions, because it directs that the price of the cattle shall be sent up to the authority in London. I daresay my noble Friend will say that this applies only to a certain number of places, namely, those mentioned in the Schedule, but perhaps he will forgive me if I call his attention to Clause 4, which says:—
  "Every auctioneer who sells cattle at any such mart as aforesaid shall, unless exempted as aforesaid, make the like Returns to the Board of Agriculture with respect to cattle entering, weighed, and sold at that mart as are required by this Act to be made by a market authority, and shall be subject to the like penalty for making any false or fraudulent statement in any such Return."
  Therefore, although in certain points it is confined to the towns named in the Schedule, every auctioneer throughout the country—not confined to the towns mentioned in the Schedule—is bound, when he sells these animals, to make a Return to the Board of Agriculture.
  EARL CADOGAN: I beg the noble Duke's pardon; it is unless he obtains an exemption from the Board of Agriculture.
  THE DUKE OF THE RICHMOND AND GORDON: Yes, but I know perfectly well what that means. I should like my noble Friend, if he is agriculturally inclined, when he objects to having his stock included in these provisions, to go up to the Board of Agriculture and make out his case. I think I can be pretty near certain what the answer would be. He would be told that it is for the general interests of the country and that, surely, he would not stand in the way of so great a public benefit. The noble Lord may certainly go and remonstrate to the Board of Agriculture if he pleases, but I do not think his remonstrance will have much effect. If he desires to have the weighing done in the market, that is all very well; but what I complain of here is that by this section you are compelled to give the prices of the animals you sell, whether they are weighed or not. I will not trouble your Lordships any longer, nor, as I before said, should I oppose the Second Reading, but I think the noble Lord will agree with me, and see that in Clause 3 it is necessary to put in words to meet the objections I have indicated. If he really means that this is a Bill to deal with the weighing of cattle, I think the noble Lord will see-that it is necessary at the end of Clause 3 to add the words, after "cattle," "and the price of cattle so weighed sold thereat."
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN: My. Lords, I am very glad Her Majesty's Government have seen their way to introduce this Bill, which appears to me a very useful measure. The practice of weighing cattle has, under the operation of the Act of 1887, been largely extended throughout the country, and especially in Scotland and Ireland, and I know as a fact that many persons who have taken to weighing their cattle have found that they have derived great advantage from the practice. I do not share the apprehensions of the noble Duke that we shall be brought under a despotism in consequence of the Clauses introduced into this Bill. No doubt the Bill does go a little further in regard to the practice of weighing cattle than the Act of 1887 did, but it is in consequence of inquiry made into the subject, and the Report of the Royal Commission on Market Rights and Tolls, and their re-

  1829
  commendations that the new provisions have been embodied. I admit that under Clause 3, for the first time, the practice of giving Returns is made compulsorily. I submit it is very desirable, and for the advantage of all farmers and of agriculturists of all kinds, that we should have as complete Returns as we can, and I do not think there is any reason for any person who has sold cattle, whether they have been weighed or not, to object that any great secret is disclosed, or, that they are injured in any way by the fact that the price given for the animals is to be returned for the advantage of the public. I think noble Lords connected with Scotland especially will constantly have seen in all the principal papers, price-lists, giving the weight, price, and quality of cattle.
  *THE MARQUESS of WATERFORD: And in Ireland also.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN: Those Returns are given most fully in the newspapers every day. And I would make this remark, that the advantage of weighing cattle is greatest for the purpose of buying store cattle. People find out by comparing the price of store cattle with the price of fat cattle what they may have to give, and by going very much on the arithmetical figures they can often buy fat and store cattle in the market. In that way the agricultural interest has derived very great advantages from the operation of the Act of 1887, and I am glad to see that those advantages are considerably extended by this Bill. I think if the noble Lord will look at Clause 3 he will see that in the last words of it there is some ambiguity. There are Returns to be given.
  "With respect to the number of cattle, entering, and the number and weight of cattle weighed at the marketer fair, and the price of the cattle sold thereat."
  I admit that if a man sells beef apparently to a butcher it would be a very great hardship if he were compelled to pay a fee for having it weighed; but I do not myself see why if the market authority were called upon to weigh the animal it can do the animal any harm to be weighed, provided the market authority pay the fee, so as to be able to send the necessary information to the Board of Agriculture. Clause 4 no doubt
  1830
  does impose an obligation, I believe for the first time, upon auctioneers; but I happen to know that the large auctioneers in Scotland now send this information of their own free will, and I believe that considerable advantage is derived from the practice. I hope this Bill will be passed into law, and I believe it will be an improvement in its operation and effect even upon the present practice, which undoubtedly has been of great advantage.
  A noble LORD: Perhaps the noble Earl who has charge of this Bill will allow me to ask why in Ireland the weighing authority has been transferred to the Land Commission?
  EARL CADOGAN: I really cannot say. It was considered the proper authority to transfer it to. Has the noble Lord any objection to raise?
  A noble LORD: No. I would only remark that there does not seem to me to be any connection between the Land Commission and market affairs.
  *THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORD: Perhaps I may be allowed to give the noble Lord an answer with regard to the Land Commission. The Land Commission were employed to collect statistics throughout Ireland, and they have done so, in order to be able to fix what are called fair rents, and they have, in fact, inaugurated an Agricultural Department. The original market authority in Ireland was the Local Government Board, and they have consented to hand their duties over to the Land Commission, who, as I have said, have established an Agricultural Department. The Land Commission have done very useful work throughout Ireland by the publication of the prices to-be obtained in the different markets. I think great credit is due to them for what they have done in this respect, and I think this Bill will be of the greatest advantage to Ireland, as it will enable the farmers in the different districts to ascertain the prices of store cattle, and also of fat cattle. The noble Duke objected to a Return being required, without the consent of the owner of the cattle, but I would point out that it could not hurt the noble Duke or any other person, if the Returns were given without his name being attached to them. The Returns would merely state that a certain num-

  1831
  ber of cattle were sold at a certain price, and nobody could possibly ascertain that they were the noble Duke's or anybody else's cattle. I hope the noble Earl who has charge of the Bill will ask the House to pass it in very much the form it is at present.
  On Question, agreed to.
  Bill read 2a (according to order), and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next.

BRINE PUMPING (COMPENSATION FOR SUBSIDENCE) BILL.—(No. 131.)

  COMMITTEE.
  House again in Committee (according to order).
  Clause 50.
  Amendment again proposed, To leave out sub-section (1.)—(The Lord Stalbridge.)
  *LORD STALBRIDGE: My Lords, I beg to remind your Lordships that the object of this Amendment is to leave out the sub-section which excepts Railway and Canal Companies, Gas and Water Companies, County Councils and Municipal Corporations, Local Authorities and Brine-pumpers, from the right to receive compensation under the Bill.
  *LORD BRAMWELL: My Lords, it does seem to me that this Clause 50 is very unreasonable and unjust, and I ask your Lordships to let me make my protest against it. I shall not be long about it. Your Lordships had the other day a denunciation from my noble and learned Friend, Lord Grimthorpe, of the common-law of the land for this: that a man may find his wells dried up by his neighbour digging to a greater depth than he has sunk. Now that decision was come to by your Lordships' House a good many years ago, and, perhaps, something might be said in favour of it upon principle, and one might put this simply; it is very hard that I may not dig 100 feet deep because my neighbours have only dug 50. That indicates what is the principle of that decision. But whether the law is right or wrong in that matter has no bearing upon the case before your Lordships, because by the law of the land everyone is entitled to the support of what I may call neighbouring or adjacent land, whether it is underneath
  1832
  or alongside; and if anybody by any contrivance excavates what is underneath my land, and lets me down, or cuts away that land which is by the side of mine and deprives it of the lateral support to which by law it is entitled, that makes a wrong against me, and it is an actionable wrong for which I may sue him. But the difficulty in the case of the brine-pumpers is, that you cannot trace who it is that has taken away the support to which your land is entitled. It may be the pumper to the north or the south of you, to the east or to the west; and what in reality this Bill' is, is this: it is not a Bill to alter the law, but it is a Bill of procedure, a Bill to enable those who are wronged to get at those who have done them that wrong. Well, that is true, and if it is true it is a right thing to provide a remedy for one man who is so injured and so wronged; it is a right thing to provide it for everybody so injured and wronged. But this first sub-section of Clause 50 provides that there are certain persons and bodies who shall not be entitled to this, which I say is simply a measure of procedure—to participate in the benefit it gives against those who have wrongfully abstracted the support to which their land is entitled. Your Lordships know that Clause 50 says that—
  "Nothing in this Act shall entitle the following persons or bodies of persons to compensation from any compensation board, namely, (1) Any Railway or Canal Company."
  I need not read the rest of that subsection.
  "(2) Any Gas or Water Company. (3) Any County Council."
  I would not stand up for them.
  "Or Municipal Corporation. (4) Any sanitary highway or other Local authority. (5) Any brine-pumper."
  Now, why are they not included? If instead of the support being taken away by brine-pumping, any man had managed to get at the support to which a railway is entitled, and had excavated the salt from underneath and let the railway down, the Railway Company would have had an action against the wrongdoer. But what happens in these brine-pumping cases, as I understand, is that the abstraction takes place, but you cannot say who has abstracted, because, as I

  1833
  said before, it may be one set of brine-pumpers or another. That, I believe, is the case. This is the case which I present to your Lordships on behalf of these people. I may say, as a matter of right and justice, they are entitled to compensation from those who wrong them; and when a procedure such as is in this Bill, which seems to me, I must say, to be admirably drawn, is brought forward for the purpose of getting at the wrongdoers. I cannot tell why one set of sufferers, in particular, should be left out of it. I understand there are two reasons assigned. One is that, if these Railway and Gas Companies and others are to participate in the fund that is raised, there will not be enough for an adequate compensation of the other people who would be entitled, not merely the poor people, but, if a man's land, worth many thousands, is let down the owner of it will be entitled to compensation. Well, I daresay, that 3d. is not enough to provide for everybody. What is the remedy? Why, not to take away from the people entitled—some of the people—but to raise the 3d. If the 3d. will not do, make it 6d. Why not? If your principle is right, it should be carried out to its legitimate consequences; and a sufficient sum of money ought to be raised to compensate the sufferers. Then the other reason is, to my mind, a very curious one. It is this: that the Railway Companies have made a great deal of money out of carrying the salt which the brine-pumpers have taken from under their railways, and from under other people in the neighbourhood, and, therefore, that they ought not to receive any compensation. How far that is true of a Gas Company or a Canal Company, I am sure I do not know, or of some others who are mentioned here. What is the answer to it? The Railway Companies have made no more then they have a right to make by the Statutes which called them into existence; and, I suppose, the same thing might be said of a great many other people in the neighbourhood. The small shop-keeper who has sold goods to the "poor people," of whom my noble Friend spoke so pathetically the other day, has got on tolerably well by the help this brine pumping has brought him, but he will be at liberty to come in and make his claim
  1834
  upon the fund. I am pretty sure it is hopeless, but I felt bound to make this protest against what seems to me, for the reason I have mentioned to your Lordships, a great injustice to those whose land has been let down by what may be called the excavation of the brine-pumpers.
  *LORD HENNIKER: My Lords, this Bill is not a Government measure, but perhaps your Lordships will expect me, as representing the Local Government Board, to say one or two-words upon it. There is no doubt whatever that there is something to be said from the point of view of the noble Lord (Lord Stalbridge), as expressed in his Amendment; but on the other hand the Local Government Board think that, as the question has been brought before a Select Committee of the other House, by whom it was considered with the greatest possible care, and as the decision of the Select Committee was accepted by the House of Commons, it would be wrong not to adhere to the clause. I must remind your Lordships of this: that in a matter of this kind the result arrived at is generally somewhat in the nature of a compromise. The President of the Local Government Board is of opinion that the omission of these various properties, or classes of property, that are mentioned in the 50th clause as excepted from the operation of the Bill, is, to a certain extent, a compromise, and that it would be much better not to disturb what has been agreed to in the other House. Therefore, I hope, speaking' for the Local Government Board, that your Lordships will accept the clause as it stands in the Bill.
  *LORD STALBRIDGE: My Lords, I will not put the House to the trouble of dividing, as I am sorry to see that Her Majesty's Government oppose the amendment. With regard to what has just fallen from the noble Lord who represents the Government I would simply say that in the Select Committee of the House of Commons, before which this Bill came, the members on this point were even and the question was only decided by the casting vote of the Chairman. There can, therefore, be no doubt that in the Committee of the House of Commons by whom the matter was very carefully considered their opinion was equally divided upon this

  1835
  question. Their decision was no doubt freely accepted by the House of Commons, because naturally that House, having sent a matter for the consideration of a Committee, would not trouble itself afterwards with the Committee's decisions, and they accepted them en bloc. But I think this Government and succeeding; Governments will find this an exceedingly awkward precedent. I may truly say that I have all the legal opinion in your Lordships' House in my favour; but the weight of opinion of other noble Lords—those who are not lawyers—will no doubt carry the day. All Governments seem to govern more by expediency than upon principles of political economy, and I suppose we may assume that is the case now.
  *THE DUKE OF WESTMINSTER: I am exceedingly glad that the opposition to this clause has been practically withdrawn, for I am sure if this Amendment had been carried the whole operation of the Bill would have been greatly affected, and practically the Bill would have been of no effect whatever. If the Railway Companies had come in there is no doubt that all the other Companies and classes enumerated in the clause would have had to come in against the wishes even of the bodies interested themselves. For instance, the Local Boards of Northwich and Winsford have petitioned against their admission, but they would have had to be let in if this amendment had been carried. I will say no more, for anything I might say would only be a repetition of the argument I used the other day. I have only to again express my satisfaction that this Amendment has not been carried.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Preamble.
  LORD HERSCHELL: My. Lords, I suggest that it would be better to take out the preamble of the Bill. I think preambles never do any good, and this one is not an exception. It recites that the remedy given under this Bill is applicable in all cases of injury to property; but it appears from the discussion on clauses which has taken place that that is not the case, and, therefore, the recital in the preamble goes somewhat beyond the provisions of the Bill; and the more so, as I understand
  1836
  the Bill, as it stands, leaves open to any Railway Company, or anybody else such rights of action as they have at present. That really is the answer, to my mind, to a great deal that has been urged by way of objection to the exclusion of these public bodies and others. They are only excluded from the new remedy. The Bill does not prevent them having any right of action which they have at the present time.
  Preamble omitted.
  LORD THURLOW: Your Lordships will recollect that the consideration of Clause 38 was postponed.
  THE CHAIRMAN (the Earl of MORLEY): The preamble has been passed; the noble Lord should have called attention to it before.
  THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (Viscount CRANBROOK): It will probably be remembered that I objected to the postponement, and suggested that the noble Lord might take his objection in the Standing Committee. I did not understand that there was anything postponed for your Lordships.
  *THE DUKE OF WESTMINSTER: That is quite right. It was to be taken in Standing Committee.
  Bill re-committed to the Standing Committee; and to be printed as amended. (No. 203.)

SCHOOLS FOR SCIENCE AND ART BILL. — [H.L.] (No. 193.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
  VISCOUNT CRANBROOK: I have to ask your Lordships to give a Second Reading to a Bill for enabling the managers of schools of science and art to transfer them to the Local Authorities when it is desired to do so. There have been several occasions on which Local Authorities could have come to an arrangement with managers of schools of science and art, but the difficulties and impediments thrown in the way of the transfer were found to be very great. There would have been necessary a refunding of the money given in the original grant, and as regards the Charity Commissioners, the process is long and tedious. The mode in which I propose to deal with the question in

  1837
  this Bill is to allow these schools to be transferred in the same way as ordinary schools can be transferred to the School Board. I need not go further into the matter, and I ask your Lordships to read the Bill a second time.
  LORD HERSCHELL: A point has been called to my attention in regard to this Bill which, perhaps, the noble Viscount may think ought to be considered. It is this: under the second Sub-section of Section 2, the provisions of Section 23 of the Elementary Education Act are made applicable. That clause says that where there are trusts concerned the arrangements shall be made in the manner and with the consent there provided. In the case of a particular art school which might be transferred under this Bill there is a trust for alienation; but it is obviously only a trust for alienation by way of sale; and a fear has been expressed where the transfer would be otherwise than by way of sale, whether this would be sufficient to enable the school to be transferred in the manner proposed by this Act, which, of course, is not a transfer by way of sale. Perhaps, the noble Viscount would consider that.
  VISCOUNT CRANBROOK: I will look into it.
  Bill read 2a (according to order), and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Friday next.

TRAMWAYS (IRELAND) ACT (1860) AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 162.)

  COMMITTEE.
  Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.
  THE EARL OF BELMORE: My Lords, before this Bill goes into Committee perhaps I might make one or two observations upon it. I regret that, owing to my absence from town during the whole of last week, this Bill escaped my attention until to-day. I was not, therefore, able to give notice of an amendment, as I would otherwise have done, and which I now hope to move in the Standing Committee when it goes there next week. I have nothing whatever to object to in this Bill, but there is one matter which I should have been very glad to have seen included in
  1838
  it, and to which I should be glad to call the attention of my noble Friend who represents the Irish Office in this House. Rather more than a year ago an extension of the South Clare Light Railway came before the Committee of the Privy Council in Dublin on one occasion when I was present, and the opposition to it was solely on the ground of the incidence of the baronial guarantee. The Committee of the Privy Council advised the Lord Lieutenant not to let the Bill proceed; and, although, of course, I had no right to say anything about what might have influenced the Committee if they had had the power themselves in the matter, yet, I think it is a fair inference from what took place, and from the course of evidence that as nobody objected but everybody wished this Light Railway to go on (and that certainly would have been my view) if there had been power with regard to the guarantee it would have been done, and all the expense of sending the Bill back to the Grand Jury, with all the attendant expenses of retaining legal gentlemen to argue it, would have been avoided. I hope to have an opportunity of moving an amendment in that direction, and I should be glad if the noble Lord representing the Irish Office in this House will consider the point.
  EARL CADOGAN: I will undertake that the point suggested by the noble Lord shall be considered.
  House in Committee (according to order): Bill reported without amendment; and re-committed to the Standing Committee.

FORGED TRANSFERS (No. 2) BILL.— (No. 147.)

  COMMITTEE.
  House in Committee (according to order).
  Clause 1.
  LORD HOBHOUSE: In Sub-section (2) of Clause 1, I have an amendment to move of a very simple character. The object of the Clause is to enable the directors of companies or the other authorities mentioned, to provide funds to meet the losses upon transfers. The object of the Bill is to facilitate transfers, and it seems a fair thing that the

  1839
  fund for compensation should be provided by a charge upon transfers. As the law at present stands, by the Companies Clauses Act, the charges which they can make upon transfers are limited to 2s. 6d. per transfer, and the charges which the other authorities can make under the Commissioners Act are limited to 5s. per transfer. What is now proposed is that the companies or authorities, as the case may be, should be empowered, among other modes of raising the compensation fund, to charge an additional fee upon transfers, being an ad valorem amount not exceeding 1s. in £100—that is 1s. in 2,000 shillings. It is obvious that is a very trifling fee and it seems to fall upon the right shoulders. It falls upon persons who can never feel it because it is so small.
  Amendment moved.
  In Clause 1 (2), line 13, after ("income") insert ("or by fees not exceeding the rate of one shilling on every one hundred pounds transferred, to be paid by the transferee upon the entry of the transfer in the books of the company or authority.")—(The Lord Hobhouse.)
  LORD HERSCHELL: The second Subsection of the 1st Section enables the company to provide the fund either by insurance, reservation of capital, accumulation of income, or in any other manner they may resolve upon; but a doubt has been expressed that this Bill might be so restrictive as to exclude this particular charge, which is certainly regarded by some of the leading railways, who are probably the best judges, as the most suitable way of raising this fund. I have only heard, I may say, from one or two of them,—but I see no objection to this amendment. Of course the matter will become public, and I shall have no objection to accept the amendment.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Bill re-committed to the Standing Committee, and to be printed as amended. (No. 204.)

COMMISSIONERS FOR OATHS ACT (1889) AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 123.)
House in Committee (according to order): Bill reported without amendment, and re-committed to the Standing Committee.
SLANDER OF WOMEN BILL.—(No. 111.)

  COMMITTEE.
  House in Committee (according to order).
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR: I do not propose to move any amendments at this stage of the Bill, but I propose, when it goes before the Grand Committee, to move some amendments. As I do not propose, at present, to do so, I shall not make any further opposition to the Bill at this stage of it. Probably, the Standing Committee will not avoid the labour of making the alterations which I foresee will be necessary in the direction I have indicated, but, if it is not satisfactorily amended, I shall certainly reserve to myself the right of moving that the Bill be read a third time six months hence.
  Bill reported without amendment; and re-committed to the Standing Committee.

LAW AGENTS (SCOTLAND) BILL, non LAW AGENTS AND NOTARIES PUBLIC (SCOTLAND) BILL.—(No. 198.)
Read 3a (according to order) with the amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
PENAL SERVITUDE BILL.
Brought from the Commons. Read 1a; and to be printed. (No. 205.)

LAND REGISTRY (MIDDLESEX DEEDS) BILL.
A Bill to transfer the Middlesex Registry off Deeds to the Land Registry, and provide for the conduct of the business thereof—Was presented by the Lord Chancellor; read 1a; and to be printed. (No. 206.)
House adjourned at twenty five minutes past Six o'clock, to Thursday next, a quarter past Ten o'clock.