COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 4 April 1892)

§ LORD MACNAGHTEN
My Lords, before the question is put that the House resolve itself into Committee, I wish to say that I am, of course, most anxious to meet the criticisms and suggestions of noble Lords opposite; but it seems to me to be a matter requiring some consideration, and would, I think, be much better dealt with before the Standing Committee; therefore, if it meets your approval I should ask your Lordships to let the Bill pass through this stage, and I will take care to put down Amendments to meet the views of my noble Friends before it comes on in the Standing Committee.

§ * LORD NORTON
My Lords, I understand from what has just fallen from the noble Lord introducing this Bill that he wishes all discussion, or Amend- 528 ments, to be postponed till the Bill comes before the Standing Committee. At the same time, by way of preparing to call the attention of the Standing Committee to this Bill, I beg to say one word about this second clause, which enumerates the kinds of schools for which the land is proposed to be sold or given, either by compulsion, or by agreement,—and land in settlement without, apparently, even the consent of the remainderman. The noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Kimberley) pointed out that defect in the Bill, and I believe the noble Lord who introduces the Bill has promised to meet that objection in Committee; but I venture to ask generally, why is this Bill to deal differently with this class of schools from the law relating in the same way to ordinary elementary schools—why should not elementary schools be in the same category as the schools enumerated in this second clause, for which this Bill proposes to give such facilities for getting land? If there is anything in this Bill which is intended to give this class of polytechnic schools greater advantages than the School Sites Act gives to elementary schools, then I think elementary schools have a fair claim to have those additional privileges themselves. Schools for the poor have the first claim upon the public, and upon legislation of this Government. If, therefore, this gives a preference to technical schools over elementary schools, I think that is wrong, and that the additional advantages should be given to the elementary schools above that which they have under the School Sites Act, 1849. If, on the other hand, there is nothing more proposed to be given for this class of schools than is now given to elementary schools, what is the use of this long Bill? A Bill of one clause would be sufficient to say that the provisions of the School Sites Act of 1849 should apply to this class of technical schools. There is no reason why the two should be different; on the contrary, I think nothing can be more mischievous than a number of Bills for the same provisions for different kind of schools. I think the noble Lord who introduced the Bill stated in his introduction that he had in his mind one particular case. 529 It seems to me that there is nothing more dangerous than making a general Bill to meet a particular case, which might have been met by a Private Bill. Merely to save the promoters the expense of a Private Bill a Bill is introduced with the possibility of extension and application generally to all schools of that kind throughout the Kingdom. I think that is a thing in itself extremely objectionable; therefore as it is proposed to postpone discussion, or Amendments to the Standing Committee, I give this notice, that I shall call the attention of the Standing Committee to the question which I have now raised relating to this second clause.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY)
My Lords, I confess I think there is a good deal of principle involved in this Bill; but I think the more convenient stage to discuss it would be when it has passed through the Standing Committee and your Lordships see what changes have been made in its form. I entertain the strongest possible objection to any power for one man to give away what does not belong to him; and I think the proper course that ought to be pursued would be that if the tenant for life chooses to give away what is his, that is his own life estate, he should be permitted to do so provided it can be done without injury to the remainderman. If it was thought that there was some difficulty about it, I should think the difficulty might be met in cases where the Lands Clauses Act might be applied, where the tenant for life might waive any claim for his life interest, and then the remainderman, if he desired it, would have his interest valued and sold, and the entire fee-simple obtained for the property in question. But I confess I should look, and do look, with very great jealousy upon any system by which it was possible for one man to do what may be to the injury of another, and which he has by law and in justice no right to do. And I protest against the notion that my noble and learned Friend suggested about the impropriety of the Reverter Clause. I think it is a most proper clause, and for this reason: a man may be disposed to give land because he has an interest in 530 a particular institution,—it may be charitable, or religious, or what not. If it is to be turned afterwards into something entirely different, not only are the terms of the gift abandoned, but, besides that, it may be turned into something which may be very injurious to the property; and it appears to me that the Reverter Clause was devised for the express object of preventing that perversion of what you have intended. I have only said this for the purpose of giving my noble and learned Friend notice that, although I said nothing upon the Second Reading, and although here I abstain from doing anything in the nature of attempting amendment, I shall wait to see how this Bill comes out of the Standing Committee, and I reserve to myself the right to form a judgment then whether it ought to pass into law or not.

§ LORD MACNAGHTEN
I am much obliged to my noble Friends for their warning, and I hope when the discussion comes on I shall be able to satisfy them that there is nothing either dangerous, or wrong in the Bill.