Lords Sitting of 14 July 1896

PUBLIC HEALTH (PORTS) BILL.
Brought from the Commons; Read 1a and to be printed.—[No. 197.]
DISEASES OF ANIMALS BILL.
Returned from the Commons with the Amendment agreed to.
LORD'S DAY ACT.
Second Report from the Select Committee (with the proceedings of the Committee during the present Session) made, and to be printed.—[No. 196.]
FISHERIES ACT AMENDMENT BILL [H.L.]
Reported from the Standing Committee with a further Amendment; the Report of the Amendment made in Committee; of the whole House and of the Amendment made by the Standing Committee to be received on Thursday next.
TRUSTS (SCOTLAND) BILL [H.L.]
Reported from the Standing Committee without Amendment, and to be read 3a on Thursday next.
MILITARY LANDS PROVISIONAL ORDERS BILL.
Considered in Committee (according to Order); Bill reported without Amendment; Standing Committee negatived; and Bill to be read 3a on Thursday next.

VEXATIOUS ACTIONS BILL [H.L.]
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY), in asking their Lordships to read the Vexatious Actions Bill a Second time, said the practice of bringing absolutely wanton and vexatious actions by persons of no responsibility whatever on every conceivable subject, had now become such a scandal that the time had arrived when some sort of stop should be put to such proceedings. The misfortune was that these actions were apt to create an example and to multiply themselves, and, although a particular plaintiff might be estopped, he would have many successors, and the practice would go on undiminished. The difficulty was to have some process by which they could stop useless, wanton, and mischievous actions and, at the same time, not place unnecessary obstruction in their Courts against the bringing of causes by those of Her Majesty's subjects who really had a grievance. The object sought to be secured by the Bill was that there should be some protection to the persons sued. It was quite true that in such cases as those to which he was directing attention, verdicts followed for the defendants, but it appeared to be forgotten that they had to appear to defend themselves, and to instruct counsel, and the result was that though they succeeded, they succeeded at a loss to themselves. It was to put an end to that wanton and vexatious course of procedure that this Bill had been devised. The list he had did not go further back than 1891, but that was quite sufficient for his purpose. It opened on the 1st of January, when Lord Esher was summoned in the Queen's Bench for damages for slander. The action was dismissed as frivolous and vexatious. The other actions were as follow:—19th January, Mr. S. L. Simeon, Clerk in the House of Commons, damages for neglect of duty, proceedings stayed until costs paid; May, 1892, the Speaker, damages for refusing to present petition, dismissed with costs on appeal from Master's order; 13th July, 1892, the Speaker, at Westminster County Court, £1 13s. 8d., cost of copy affidavit made for defendant at his request, judgment for defendant with costs; 27th July, 1892, Mr. Simeon, Brompton County Court, damages for trespass under fi fa, non-suit with costs;

1411
25th January, 1893, Mr. A. K. Stephenson, Westminster County Court, £1 1s. for work and labour done for defendant, judgment for defendant with costs; 28th July, 1893, the Speaker, Clerkenwell County Court, work and labour done, judgment for defendant with costs; 12th December, 1893, Mr. A. T. Hare, City of London Court, work and materials, paid into court; 9th January, 1894, Mr. A. T. Hare, City of London Court, work and materials, case struck out, plaintiff not appearing; 14th February, 1894, Speaker's butler, Clerkenwell County Court, damages for assault, judgment for defendant with costs; 8th March, 1894, the Speaker, Westminster County Court, damages for assault committed by defendant's servant with defendant's approval—first the servant and then the servant's master—judgment for defendant with costs; 25th April, 1894, the Speaker, Sir A. K. Stephenson and Mr. Hare, damages for corruptly and maliciously conspiring and combining amongst themselves to obstruct and defeat the course of justice, judgment for defendant with costs; 24th May, 1894, the Serjeant-at-Arms, Westminster County Court, damages for assault, judgment for defendant with costs; 14th June, 1894, Mr. Hare, Mr. Gardner and Sir A. K. Stephenson, Clerkenwell County Court, £1 damages for corruptly and maliciously conspiring, judgment for defendant with costs; 28th June, 1894, the Speaker, damages for refusing to present petition, judgment for defendant with costs; 12th July, 1894, Chief Inspector Horsley, £1 1s. damages for assault, judgment for defendant with costs; 25th July, 1894, the Lord Chancellor, Westminster County Court, damages for refusing to present petition, judgment for defendant with costs; 8th December, 1894, the Lord Chancellor, £1 1s. for neglecting to attend the Court pursuant to summons on the 25th July, 1894, struck out, petitioner not appearing; November, 1894, Lord Halsbury, Mr. Mackenzie and Mr. Graham, High Court of Justice, £1,000 damages for not appointing trial of petitions, dismissed as frivolous and vexatious; 19th February, 1895, the same defendants, damages for refusing to present petition, judgment
1412
for defendants with costs; 4th March, 1895, the same defendants, an appeal from Order of 19th February, 1895, and for new trial, appeal dismissed; 25th March, 1895, Lord Herschell and Lord Esher, damages £1 for refusing to attend on subpœna on 19th February, 1895, and obstructing the course of justice, judgment for defendants with costs; 10th April, 1895 (hearing 9th May, 1895), Lords Herschell and Esher and Judge Lumley Smith, Clerkenwell County Court, damages £1 for conspiring to obstruct justice by depriving plaintiff on 19th February, 1895, of his right to examine Lords Herschell and Eslieron subpœna, dismissed with costs; 22nd May, 1895, Judges Lumley Smith and Meadows White, motion for rehearing of last mentioned action, dismissed with costs; 4th July, 1895, the Prince of Wales, Sir E. Maunde Thompson and Mr. R. Garnett, Clerkenwell County Court, damages for maliciously refusing to renew plaintiff's ticket to British Museum Reading Room, judgment for defendants with costs. The list of actions he had read as having been brought by one person against a number of other persons—cases of a vexatious and frivolous kind—made out a case, he believed, for the interference of their Lordships' House. The object of the Bill was to prevent wanton and vexatious proceedings of this kind. It was proposed by the Bill that the conduct of a person engaging in wanton and vexatious litigation and not paying the necessary costs should be brought to the attention of the Attorney-General, and that the Attorney-General might, in his discretion, apply to the High Court of Justice, who might then make an Order that no process should in future be issued in the person's behalf without leave obtained in the High Court for that purpose. While the interests of the public and of citizens who had good cause of complaint were sufficiently protected by the provisions of the Bill, he thought the time had arrived when persons should be protected from groundless and vexatious proceedings and the infliction of the costs attending them. He therefore moved that the Bill be read a Second time.
LORD HERSCHELLagreed with his noble and learned Friend that some Measure of this kind was necessary, and

1413
he was satisfied that, while the Bill gave protection against wanton and vexatious action, it placed no obstruction in the way of persons who had real cause of action.
Read 2a (according to Order) and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

CHAIRMEN OF DISTRICT COUNCILS BILL.
Read 2a (according to Order), and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Thursday next.
LAND CHARGES BILL.
Read 3a (according to Order) Amendments made; Bill passed and sent to the Commons.

AGRICULTURAL LAND RATING BILL.
On the Order of the Day for Committee on this Bill being read,
LORD HARRISsaid that the Bill being a Money Bill it was not competent to their Lordships to amend it, and he understood that the procedure was to negative the Committee stage. He, therefore, moved that the Committee be negatived.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (LORD HALSBURY)put the Question that the House resolve itself into Committee, and declared that the "Non-Contents" had it.
A brief consultation took place on the Treasury Bench, and
LORD HARRISrose and moved, "That the House resolve itself into Committee."
THE LORD CHANCELLORreminded his noble Friend that that Question had already been decided in the negative, and said the Motion should be to rescind the Order that had been made.
LORD HARRISaccording moved, "That the Order of the House be rescinded."
Motion agreed to.
Bill considered in Committee (according to Order); reported without Amendment; Standing Committee negatived; and Bill to be read 3a on Friday next.

LIVERPOOL COURT OF PASSAGE BILL.
Amendments reported (according to Order), and Bill to be read 3a on Monday next.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS ASSOCIATION.
*LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYsaid that some noble Lords had said that agricultural rates should not be relieved because urban rates were high. Urban rates were high because of School Boards' imitation of the London County Council, and because of misspending ratepayers' money, and he asked Her Majesty's Government if the attention of the Local Government Board had been called to the fact that municipal corporations subscribed moneys at the ratepayers' expense to an association describing itself as the Association of Municipal Corporations, and that the expenses of deputations of mayors, town councillors, and town clerks who attended the meetings of the association were charged to the borough fund, and if these payments were illegal; and whether, in the interests of ratepayers, the Local Government Board would give instructions to the borough auditors to disallow all such payments.
LORD HARRIS: The Local Government Board have no reason to doubt that municipal corporations subscribe at the cost of the ratepayers to the Municipal Corporations' Association, and it is not improbable that the expenses of representatives of corporations in attending meetings of the association are charged to the borough fund; but the Board have no definite information on the subject. The Board in the case of a municipal borough have no jurisdiction with regard to such matters, and they are not empowered to give any directions to the borough auditors with respect to charges of the character referred to. The question as to the legality of the charges can only be determined by the High Court.

IRISH MAIL CONTRACTS.
VISCOUNT DE VESCIasked the Postmaster General what arrangements were contemplated from the commencement of the new Irish mail contract in April 1897, for expediting the night mail and passenger trains between London (Euston Station) and Kingstown and from Kingstown to London (Euston Station), and also the up and down day mail and passenger trains over the various railways in Ireland which were run in connection with the night mails to and from Kingstown; also what arrangements were contemplated for the dispatch of day mail and passenger trains from London to Kingstown and from Kingstown to London. His Lordship said that the question he had to ask was not of a kind which as a rule was brought before their Lordships' House, but it was of such importance to the travelling public and to the relations between the two kingdoms, and to men of business that that must be his apology for troubling their Lordships. As the House was aware, the present arrangements under which the mails were conveyed between Ireland and England, had been determined, and a new contract would commence in April 1897. He would explain as some justification for including in his Question an inquiry as to the arrangements for conveying passengers as well as mails, that by the Treasury Minutes which had been issued on various occasions when mail contracts were under consideration, it had been always contemplated by the Treasury and the Post Office that one of the chief objects in improving the communications in respect of the trains was to afford facilities for passenger traffic as well as for mails. In the Treasury Minutes of 1883, and again in 1895, it was stated that accommodation for mails and passengers provided under the new contract was to be in no way inferior to that provided in the Ireland, which was then the largest existing vessel, and since then even larger vessels had been constructed and used. Most of their Lordships might be aware that under the new arrangements half an hour extra was to be gained at sea, and under that arrangement the City of Dublin Company, which had the contract for conveying the mails, was now building a fleet of new boats, which were expected to attain
1416
a high rate of speed, and to be fully capable of running 21 knots. Under the same arrangements, half an hour was also to be gained by the London and North-Western Railway Company. He considered that a very small and exiguous advantage. Anyhow, there was this, one hour was gained by the night mails from London to Kingstown, and viceversâ from Kingstown to London. He was not sure whether at present a similar arrangement had been entered into with regard to the day mails, and the question he desired to put was this, what arrangements were contemplated by the Post Office when the new contract came into operation, which he believed would be in April next, for expediting the mail trains in Ireland. He had been assured from all sources that it was expected in Ireland that the whole or the greater part of this gain of time would be given in Ireland itself, and that none of it would be taken practically on this side of the water. He had a list showing what the present arrangements of trains were. At present the night mail train, the principal matter concerning people in Ireland, left Euston at twenty minutes past eight, arrived at Kingstown at 5.55 by booked time. The mails and the passengers were at once dispatched from Kingstown Pier, and arrived at Belfast 9.30, at Londonderry at 11.10 and at Cork at 11. 15, all in the morning. The return trains left Cork at 2.40, and the night mails left Kingstown at 7.25, arriving in London at 6.15 in the morning. What was asked for was that the whole gain of time should be given in Ireland.
THE POSTMASTER GENERAL (THE DUKE OF NORFOLK): I was not until now aware of the object of the noble Lord in asking me the question, and I am afraid my answer will hardly be satisfactory to him as regards the giving to Ireland the whole benefit of the curtailment of time, because the ramifications of the railways in Ireland make it impossible to do more than to give the answer I have to read to the House. It is contemplated that the down night mail shall leave Euston at 8.45 p.m. instead of at 8.20 p.m., and arrive at Kingstown at 6.7 a.m. instead of 6.42 a.m., and that the up night mail shall leave Kingstown at 8.20 p.m. instead of 7.50 p.m., and reach Euston at 5.50. a.m.

1417
instead of 6.15 a.m. It cannot at present be stated what arrangements will be practicable for carrying on the improvement into the provinces of Ireland. The case of each district must be considered on its merits, and the arrangements will depend largely upon the companies being able to effect the alterations required without increase of the existing payments. As regards the day mail, it is intended that the dispatch from Euston shall continuo to be made at 7.15 a.m., the arrival at Kingstown taking place at 5.5 p.m. instead of at 5.35 p.m. In the other direction the dispatch from Kingstown will continue to be made at 7.20 a.m., the arrival at Euston taking place at 5.15 p.m. instead of at 5.45 p m. All the hours mentioned are in English time.
LORD SUDELEYinquired whether the noble Duke would consider the possibility of making a through communication from Kingstown to Broadstone. The railway had been passed by the Board of Trade, and there seemed to be no reason why the mails should be carted from Westland Row to Broadstone.
THE DUKE OF NORFOLKpromised to give close attention to the matter, but he had a misgiving that the noble Lord was imposing a duty upon him that he could hardly claim to be able to discharge.
VISCOUNT DE VESCIhoped the noble Duke would reconsider the matter, as it was most important additional time should be given in Ireland.
THE DUKE OF NORFOLKsaid that half-an-hour's gain was given, and it was hoped the Irish companies would take advantage of that half-hour, and expedite their trains accordingly.
VISCOUNT DE VESCIimagined it was for the Post Office to dictate to the companies on this and the other side of the Channel how they should run their trains.
THE DUKE OF NORFOLKsaid that he quite understood the noble Lord's points. The alterations did not come into force until April 1897, and those points had not yet been sanctioned by the Post Office.
House adjourned at Ten minutes past Six o'clock to Thursday next, a Quarter past Ten o'clock.