COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 16 March 1893)

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
My Lords, on the last occasion on which this Bill was in Committee I stated that in consequence of the representations I had received on the one side and the other, leading to the conclusion that there was a great difference of opinion with reference to the expediency of bringing within the scope of this Act sale and hire agreements of a character well-known to your Lordships, I had determined to withdraw that provision from the Bill. 185 Owing, I imagine, to some little noise, I made the statement at a time noble Lords were leaving the House at the close of a previous discussion, this announcement did not find it way into the public Press. I am vividly aware of the fact because the communications I had previously received I continue to receive attacking the provision in the Bill, based upon the supposition that the clause still remains in it. I, therefore, repeat the announcement, that the provision relating to the hire and sale agreements is no longer in the Bill. The Bill is now almost entirely of the character of a consolidation Bill with a few amendments of the law, to which I do not think there is likely to be any opposition.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
This proposed Amendment deals with a matter to which my attention has been called. I think there can be little doubt when the Bill of Sale Act was passed in 1878, the intention was that trade fixtures should not be dealt with by an unregistered instrument any more than other trade effects, and accordingly there was a provision in the Bill that fixtures as defined in the Bill which wore trade fixtures, except fixed machinery, motive power, and so on, should be regarded as goods within the meaning of the Bills of Sale Act, and that those goods should not be assigned by a bill of sale except subject to the provisions contained as to registration. It has been held that where there is a mortgage of premises, for example, containing such trade fixtures as are defined in the Act, that inasmuch as they pass as incident to the freehold they are not properly to be described as assigned by the conveyance, and that it is the land which vests the machinery in the person to whom it is conveyed by mortgage. I am satisfied that was not the intention of the Legislature in passing the Act of 1878, and that the decision, the propriety of which I do not comment upon, defeats the intention which the Legislature had. My attention has been called to this matter by those interested, and I propose to put in words now to make that clear, and to carry out what I am satisfied was the intention of the Act of 1878—namely, that the Act should apply to this trade machinery as defined by this Act whether charged separately 186 or in connection with any land or buildings.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
My attention has been called to the fact that where the registration of a bill of sale is renewed, between the original granting of the bill of sale and the renewal, or between one renewal and another, there may be changes in residence, occupation, or place of abode as stated at the time of the original registration. Of course the re-registration, supposing those changes have taken place, becomes much less efficient in regard to notice, because they may appear to relate to a bill of sale of a party who is residing at a different place altogether when the bill comes to be registered. Therefore, I propose that there shall be a statement of the change.

§ LORD ASHBOURNE
I think my noble and learned Friend has done very wisely to insert those words. I think it is a very useful change.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
My Lords, as this Bill has already been through Standing Committee last Session, and no change has been made in it except those I have called attention to, it seems hardly necessary it should go through the Committee again. I therefore move that the Standing Committee be negatived.