Lords Sitting of 15 July 1897

COMMISSION.
The following Bills received the Royal Assent:—
Arundel Gas.
Barry Railway.
Berriew School.
Birkenhead Corporation.
Birkenhead Corporation (Ferries).
Bolton Tramways and Improvement.
Borrowstounness Town and Harbour.
Bournemouth Corporation.
Bristol Corporation (Docks).
Caledonian Railway.
Carnarvon Corporation.
City of London Sewers.
Cordoba Central Railway Company.
Crowborough District Water.
Crowhurst, Sidley, and Bexhill Railway.
Dublin Corporation.
Dublin, Wicklow, and Wexford Railway (Shillelagh Extension, etc.).
Eastbourne Water.
Easton and Church Hope Railway.
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 1).
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 2).
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 3).
Electric Lighting Provisional Order (No. 4).
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 5).
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 6).
Extraordinary Tithe.
Finance.
Great Eastern Railway (General Powers).
Great North of Scotland Railway.
Guild of Literature and Art (Dissolution).
Halifax Corporation Tramways.
Hastings Harbour.
Hunstanton Water and Gas.
Hoylake and West Kirby Improvement.
Juries Detention.
Lanarkshire and Ayrshire Railway.
Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway.
Liverpool City Churches.
Liverpool Corporation (Loans).
Liverpool Corporation Tramways.
Liverpool, St. Helen's, and South Lancashire Railway.
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 2).
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 4).
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 5).
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 6).
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 7).
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 8).
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 9).
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 10).
Local Government Provisional Order (Gas).
Local Government Provisional Orders (Poor Law).
Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (No. 2).
Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (No. 3).
Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Order (No. 4).
Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (No. 5).
Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Order (No. 6).
Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Order (No. 7).
Lowestoft Water and Gas.
Luton Water.
Malvern Link Urban District Gas. Manchester Ship Canal.
Market Gardeners' Compensation (Scotland).
Mersey Channels.
Midland and South Western Junction Railway.
National Provident Institution.
New Hunstanton Water and Gas.
North British Railway.
Peacocke's Divorce.
Pier and Harbour Provisional Orders (No. 1).
Pier and Harbour Provisional Order (No. 2).
Pier and Harbour Provisional Orders (No. 5).
Preferential Payments in Bankruptcy Act (1888) Amendment.
Quarter Sessions Jurors (Ireland). Railway Clearing House.
Railway Clearing System Superannuation Fund.
Rathmines and Rathgar Township Tramways and Improvement.
Rhondda and Swansea Bay Railway.
Sheffield Corporation.
Sheffield District Railway.
Southampton Corporation Tramways.
Stromness Harbour.
Suttie's Trust Estate.
Tower Subway.
Vale of Glamorgan Railway.
Victoria Eye and Ear Hospital, Dublin.
The Lords Commissioners were the LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY), the LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELAND (Lord ASHBOURNE), and the Earl of KINTORE (Lord in Waiting).

MERCHANT SHIPPING (UNDERMANNING) BILL.
THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Lord BALFOUR), in moving the Third Reading of this Bill, said he had given notice of the insertion of two or three Amendments to Clause 1, in order to make the language of the Bill more clear and precise. Those of their Lordships who were present in the Stand- in, Committee last week would remember that Lord Herschell made some remarks on the drafting of the Bill to the effect that the objects for which a ship could be detained under the Section 459 of the leading Act were not suitable to the special provisions of this Bill That criticism had been met by the Amendments which he had put upon the Paper. Under Section 459 of the Merchant Shipping Act 1894 a ship could only be detained for the purpose of being surveyed. The words which he proposed to insert in the Clause were to make it clear that in a case of undermanning, the ship could he detained for the purpose of ascertaining the sufficiency of her crew, and under the same section an order could be made for the detention of a ship for the purpose of survey, alterations, or repairs, and for the loading or unloading of cargo. The Amendments
132
purposed to add to the conditions which, were contained in the leading Act, other conditions applicable to the control of the sufficiency of the manning of a vessel. The Amendments made no real change in the substance of the Bill, and they were simply proposed for the purpose of meeting the criticism made by the noble Lord opposite (Lord Herschell) who, he understood, was satisfied with the amendments now proposed.
LORD HERSCHELLsaid the alterations would entirely meet the criticism he ventured to make before the Standing Committee. He thought that as the Bill now stood it would be a great improvement in point of drafting it; and, moreover, it would have the great advantage that when the time for consolidation came, and it must come before long, it would be perfectly simple as the Bill now stood. Some re-drafting would have been required if the Bill had passed as it stood in its original form.
Read 3a (according to Order); amendments made; Bill passed, and returned to the Commons.
Amendments made:—
Clause 1,—

EXTENSION OF POWERS OF DETENTION FOR UNSAFETY TO UNDERMANNING.
(1.) Section four hundred and fifty-nine of the Merchant Shipping Act 1894 (which gives power to detain unsafe ships) shall army in the case of undermanning, and accordingly that section shall be construed as if the words "or by reason of undermanning" were inserted therein after the word "machinery." and the powers exercisable under or for the purposes of that section shall include any power required for the purposes of this section, and the conditions of which the performance may be required under that section shall include conditions with respect to manning.

(2.) Section four hundred and sixty-two of the Merchant Shipping Act 1894 (which relates to foreign ships) shall also apply in the case of undermanning, and accordingly that section shall be construed as if the words "or by reason of undermanning" were inserted therein after the words "improper loading," and the powers exercisable under or for the purpose of that section shall include any power required for the purposes of this section and the conditions of which the performance may be required under that section shall in-chide conditions with respect to manning.

Sub-section (1), after "machinery insert—
"and as if the words 'or for ascertaining the sufficiency of her crew' were inserted after the word 'surveyed', and as if the words 'or the manning of the ship' were inserted therein after the words reloading of cargo.'"
Sub-section (2), have out the words—
"Any power required for the purposes of this section, and the conditions of which the performance may be required under that section shall include conditions w nth respect to manning,"
and insert "power to muster the crew."
Leave out all after "loading" to the end of the clause.

VERMINOUS PERSONS BILL.
*THE EARL OF STAMFORDin moving the Second Reading of this Bill, disclaimed any credit for its title. The Bill, he said, aimed at a small but very useful work among the poorest class. The persons to whom the Bill would be of the most use would be honest working men who, during their search for work, were driven by stress of circumstances to lodging-houses and shelters. Misery, they knew, made a man acquainted with strange Led-fellows, and there was a certain difficulty in the way of men in that position ridding themselves of these bed-fellows under the present circumstances. The Bill was intended to give them a short and easy way of extricating themselves from those difficulties and of going able to associate on more equal terms with their fellow-workmen. It was also designed to give the means of waging war upon filth and its evil accompaniments generally. It simplified the procedure in this way—that instead of a man in this condition having to go to the casual ward and be detained there he might go to any local authority and avail himself of the disinfecting appliances to thoroughly cleanse himself. The power was given of expending a reasonable sum on buildings, appliances, or attendants that might be required to carry out the objects of the Bill. The Measure had been pressed forward by those who were well qualified to speak from their efforts and work amongst the
134
very poor, and it was held by them that whereas the Bill, being permissive only, could do very little harm, if ally, it was extremely likely that it might do some good in dealing with a great evil. He, therefore, moved that the Bill be read a Second time.
LORD HARRISsaid the Local Government Board had no objection to the Bill.
Read 2a (according to Order), and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next.

LUNACY BILL. [H.L.]
Considered in Committee.
[The CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES (The Earl of MORLEY), in the Chair.]
Clause 15,—

POWER TO REQUIRE AMENDMENTS OF REGULATIONS OF HOSPITALS.
The Commissioners may by notice require the visiting committee of any asylum, or the committee of management of any hospital, to make such alterations in, and addition to, the rules and regulations of the asylum or hospital as the Commissioners may consider expedient, and if the committee do not within two months after the notice make such alterations and additions to the satisfaction of the commissioners, and send to the commissioners a printed copy of the amended rules and regulations, the Commissioners may make a report to a Secretary of State, and. the Secretary of State shall have power to determine whether the alterations or additions required by the Commissioners, or any of them, with or without modification, ought to be made or not, and any alterations or additions which the Secretary of State may approve shall be observed as part of the rules and regulations of the asylum or hospital.
EARL RUSSELLmoved that the clause be omitted. He said the noble Lord in charge of the Bill kindly consented to postpone the Committee stage till that day in order to give some opportunity for observations to be made upon it on behalf of the London County Council. He was sorry to say that time had not permitted of formal meetings, and their Lordships would understand that any observations he made must be taken to be the result of informal conferences and not the deliberate opinion—although he believed he was expressing the wishes of the statutory Asylums Committee of the

135
Council. If a clause, such as this could always be carried out with perfect reasonableness and a desire to avoid all friction between the Commissioners in Lunacy and the body in charge of an asylum, there would be no objection to it. But the Asylums Committee did not feel quite confident that that would always be the case, and circumstances might arise in which the operation of this clause might be very objectionable. The effect of the clause was that the Commissioners might require the Visiting Committee of an asylum to make alterations or additions in the rules or regulations such as to the Commissioners might be deemed expedient; and if the Committee did not within two months after the notice make such alterations and additions to the satisfaction of the Commissioners, the latter might apply to the Home Secretary, and he would determine whether the alterations were to be made or not. One could conceive many cases in which such power would be very desirable and in itself might not seem objectionable. I But in the case of asylums managed by publicly elected authorities, such as county asylums, when the people who managed them were re-elected and where their action was subject to criticism it did not seem necessary that such powers should be given. Indeed, if it were exercised by the Commissioners over the Managing Committee, who knew all the local circumstances, it might lead to friction and to the taking away from the latter that full sense of responsibility which made them careful mid conscientious in their management. If the clause could be eliminated he asked that at any rate it should not be made applicable to asylums under the management of popularly elected bodies.
THE LORD CHANCELLORwas afraid he could not accept the noble Lord's Amendment. He did not think the noble Lord would deny that in institutions which were the subject of the investigation, such as the Holloway Asylum, it was manifest that there was a necessity for some such clause as this. He did not believe there was any ground for suggesting there would be any friction. The Commissioners of Lunacy would only be anxious to do their duty, and if they exceeded it or behaved unreasonably there was still an appeal under
136
this clause. The Holloway investigation disclosed the necessity for an alteration in the law, and the Government considered the one which they proposed by this clause was as well devised as could be. If the noble Lord had suggested the alteration of the clause or the placing some restriction upon it that would be considered, but his present proposal was to leave it out altogether. The noble Lord would have an opportunity before the Standing Committee of formulating some amendment which he should consider with respect; but if it came to a question of refusing such power in some body or other he could hold out little hope that the Government would yield.
LORD MONKSWELLentirely agreed that the clause as it stood gave too much power to the Commissioners in the internal management of asylums.
*THE EARL OF NORTHBROOKsaid perhaps the noble and learned Lord who had charge of the Bill would take into consideration this suggestion, that county and borough councils where asylums were under county or borough councils, and maintained out of county or borough rates, might have an opportunity before the Secretary of State gave his decision to make any representation they wish to make contrary to the proposed rules. No doubt the Lunacy Commissioners occasionally made suggestions, that if carried out would increase expenses, and so long as asylums were maintained by the ratepayers, the representatives of the ratepayers should have the opportunity of expressing an opinion. ["Hear, hear!"]
THE LORD CHANCELLORthought that was very reasonable indeed, and he would gladly welcome an Amendment in that direction. The suggestion as he understood the noble Lord was, that before the Secretary of State decided finally upon the point as to which difference of opinion arose between the asylum authorities and the Commissioners, the borough or county council should be heard. That was a very reasonable suggestion, and it would not interfere in the least with the working of the Bill.
Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.

137
Clauses 16 (Branch establishments to be registered), 17 (Alterations and additions to hospitals, etc., to be approved), and 18 (Management of hospitals), ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 19,—

PLANS AND CONTRATS.
The following sub-section is hereby substituted for Sub-section two of Section two hundred and fifty-four of the principal Act.
"(2) Plans for building, restoring, or enlarging an asylum, and contracts for the purchase of lands and buildings, agreed upon by
a visiting committee shall not be carried into effect until approved by a Secretary of State, and the visiting committee shall forward to the Commissioners, free of expense, copies of all plans and contracts so approved, and the accommodation shown on any plans so approved shall not, without the approval of the Commissioners, be appropriated or used for other purposes than those shown on the plans."
EARL RUSSELLdid riot oppose this clause, but if it were enforced too rigidly at first it would press with some hardship upon London. Their Lordships were perhaps not aware of the extremely congested state of lunacy accommodation in London. The London County Council had 2,000 lunatics in charge for whom they had no asylum accommodation. He frankly admitted the asylums were somewhat overcrowded, not to an extent prejudicial to health, but in a way that would be affected by the clause. Although the clause was so reasonable in itself that it was impossible to oppose it, yet he trusted that in putting the clause in force some allowance would be made for the condition of things that had necessarily arisen in the case of lunacy in London.
Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 20 (Dissolution of agreement to unite), 21 (Transfer of property of subscribers on dissolution of union), and 22 (Regulations as to infectious maladies), ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 23,—

PENSIONS AND ALLOWANCES TO OFFICERS AND SERVANTS OF ASYLUMS.
(1.) The provisions of the Poor Law Officers' Superannuation Act 1896 shall apply to the visiting committee and to every officer of an asylum in like manner, as nearly as may be, as they apply to guardians and their officers and servants, with the following modifications:

(a) A Secretary of State shall be substituted for the Local Government Board wherever the Local Government Board is referred to in the Poor Law Officers' Superannuation Act 1896.

(b.) The period of three months from the commencement of this Act shall be the period within which any existing officer of an asylum may signify, in writing, to the visiting committee his intention not to avail himself of the provisions of this section. Any existing officer of an asylum who has given such notice as aforesaid shall remain subject to the provisions of Sections two hundred and eighty, two hundred and eighty-one, and two hundred and eighty-two of the principal Act, as if this Act had not been passed, and those provisions shall, for the purposes of this enactment, continue in force notwithstanding their repeal by this Act. Notwithstanding anything in this Act contained the provisions of the Poor Law Officers' Superannuation Act 1864, and the Acts amending the same, shall not apply to any existing officer of an asylum who has given such notice as aforesaid.

*THE EARL OF NORTHBROOKsaid he had been requested by the County Councils Association to suggest to the noble and learned Lord who had charge of the Bill whether this clause might not with advantage be omitted from the Bill. It did not appear to have essential connection with the remainder of the Bill, and the County Councils Association thought, and he confessed he thought with justice, that there were strong objections to the clause. This clause provided that the provisions of the Poor Law officers' Superannuation Act, 1896, should be applied to officers and employés in lunatic asylums, and the objection to this was that the nature of the employment of persons in lunatic asylums, in constant communication with lunatics, was such that the length of time required to entitle persons employed under Boards of Guardians to superannuation was not properly applicable to persons employed in lunatic asylums. Taus, he thought, was a very substantial objection. The present state of the law under the Act passed in 1890

139
was that the visiting committee of a lunatic asylum might, under the Lunacy Act, 1890, Section (280), grant to any officer or servant incapacitated by confirmed illness, age, or infirmity, whose service in the asylum had extended for 15 years, and who was not less than 50 years of age, such superannuation allowance, not exceeding two-thirds of his salary, as they think fit, subject, however, under Section (281), Sub-section (3), to the confirmation of the County Council. Therefore the discretion of the Lunatic Asylums Committee was controlled by the action of the County Council, and if they were to propose to, give an unnecessarily liberal superannuation allowance, the County Council would inquire into the circumstances, and, if not satisfied, refer the question back to the Lunatic Asylums Committee. At all events, they had the power to say "Yes" or "No" to the proposal. He did not believe the present law worked badly, and certainly it did not in the county with which he was connected, and he had not seen any reason alleged why it should be altered. No doubt, under the present law, officers in lunatic asylums had not an absolute right to pensions, but, as a matter of practice, he did not believe it was ever refused in a reasonable case by the committees of lunatic asylums. The objection of the County Councils Association was that persons in future employed in lunatic asylums would be put in a position of considerable disadvantage if the clause passed (the rights of present employés being saved), they would receive smaller superannuation allowances, and would be subjected to a two-per-cent reduction of their salaries. This objection supplied good reason why the proposal should be reconsidered. Another reason be might mention, and that was that the Poor Law Superannuation Act had not been received with unqualified approval throughout the country. It was said, and he believed with truth, that the calculation of the percentage to be paid by the officers was far from sufficient to protect the ratepayers from losses under the Act, and therefore, there would be objection to the extension of the Act to another body of officers employed under Borough and County Councils, the superannuation falling upon the rates. For these reasons
140
he trusted that the noble and learned Lord would not press the clause. If necessary, the matter could be reconsidered at a future time. These reasons he advanced not on his own authority, but on behalf of the County Councils Association, which body had carefully considered the clause, and came to the unanimous conclusion that it ought to be omitted from the Bill.
EARL RUSSELLhad little to add to the appeal to the noble and learned Lord to omit the clause. It was objected that the pensions under the clause would be less liberal and in London the permissive system had worked very well. The scale was settled by a select Committee of the House after careful consideration. Under the present system a man receiving £62. 8s. 0d. a year would as a maximum rate of pension receive £44. 12s. 0d., but under the scheme proposed in the Bill he would get only £35 7s. 2d., and in addition to that he would he required to contribute two per cent. of his wages to the Superannuation Fund. Further than that so far as he could discover, under the clause a person who had not served for ten years and became incapacitated from ill health would have difficulty in obtaining an adequate pension. Of course lunacy work was of an especially trying and dangerous character and quite apart from the danger of occasional attacks from lunatics, there was exposure to weather and night duty. He trusted the noble and learned Lord would see his way to the omission of this clause, for if it remained in the Bill it would be very strongly opposed in the House and elsewhere. The opposition was partly on the ground that the rate of pensions would be on too liberal a scale.
THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEESsaid that the noble Earl (Earl Beauchamp) had notice of an Amendment to the clause and this would come before a Motion for its omission.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, with reference to the Motion the noble Earl wished to make and the opinion expressed by the noble Earl who spoke first, that the details of the proposed scheme led hint to think very strongly that the pension scheme should be very carefully considered, but the time of the session would not allow of the preparation of an

141
amended scale that would satisfy everybody, he hoped therefore that the clause would not be pressed.
EARL BEAUCHAMPleft his Amendment entirely in the hands of the noble Earl. His only object in giving notice of the Amendment was to express the opinion which would be largely shared by noble Lords who were acquainted with the condition of affairs, that with the onerous and disagreeable duties they had to discharge these officers would not he fairly and adequately treated under the provisions in the Bill.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid the reference to the period of the Session was a cogent observation in relation to the threatened opposition to the clause, and when he introduced the Bill, he mentioned that if there were any great opposition to it, this clause would not be pressed. It was attacked from two conflicting points of view by those who thought the pensions would be of too liberal a scale, and on the other hand by those who thought it did not do sufficient justice to persons who worked in a very disagreeable and hard field of labour. Such being the condition of conflict, it was clear that the clauses dealing with superannuation came within the condition he had laid down. Of course an attempt to force them through might imperil clauses of the Bill to which there was no opposition and for which there was urgent necessity. Under the circumstances he yielded to the persuasions of noble Lords and especially after the intimation that the clause would be opposed in the House and elsewhere with great vigour. That was conclusive in the middle of July and so he proposed to drop these clauses. Indeed, he might say that although the clauses were put in because on both sides it was felt that something ought to be done, he was himself disposed to think that the subject would more naturally be dealt with in a separate Bill, and probably in the other House. He, therefore, the more willingly acceded to the suggestion, and all the clauses having reference to the pension fund would be dropped out of the Bill.
EARL BEAUCHAMPsaid he did not move Ins Amendment.
Clause 23 struck out.
142
Clauses 24 (Grant of allowance or gratuity in cases of injury) and 25 (Contribution to be paid into and allowances and gratuities to be paid out of county or borough fund) struck out.
Clause 26,—

ADJUSTMENT OF LIABILITIES BETWEEN LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND GUARDIANS.
(1.) Where any pauper lunatic is in an institution fur lunatics, other than the asylum of the local authority within whose area is situate wholly or partly the union to which he is chargeable or the place from which he is sent, and the expenses which the guardians of any union are required to pay in respect of the lunatic are thereby increased beyond those which would have been payable by them if he had been sent to that asylum, the guardians shall be entitled to recover the additional expenses as a debt from that local authoriy.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid he did not know on what ground the noble Earl opposite (Earl. Russell) wanted to postpone it for two years.
EARL RUSSELLsaid the reason was very simple. The clause would involve in many cases a fairly large fiscal change; and all asylum, costing, as many in London did, £500,000, could not be built in three years. Two asylums were now being built as rapidly as possible, and it would seem somewhat inequitable when they were trying as quickly as possible to overtake the arrears of the growth of lunacy, suddenly to put on the county a very much larger charge. Under the state of circumstances that obtained, he thought it would be more fair to the persons concerned to give more time for a financial re-adjustment by postponing the operation of the clause until the date he had named in his Amendment.
THE LORD CHANCELLORthought that was an unreasonably long time. The case the noble Lord had urged would be properly considered, but the operation of the section ought not to be postponed for two years.
EARL RUSSELL: Would the noble and learned Lord accept 1898?
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: I think you bad better leave it as it is.
EARL RUSSELLsaid he would not press his Amendment now.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid it seemed to him there was a matter of

143
justice. It was unfair that the guardians in a particular case should have to pay the additional amount, and he did not see why they should not have an opportunity of recovering it as soon as possible.
Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill; remaining clauses and the schedules ordered to stand part of the Bill; Bill re-committed to the Standing Committee; and to be printed as amended.—(No. 158.)

POOR LAW OFFICERS' SUPERANNUATION ACT (1896) AMENDMENT BILL.
Amendments reported (according to Order), and Bill to be Read 3a Tomorrow.
MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS (SCOTLAND) BILL. [H.L.]
Read 3a (according to Order); passed, and sent to the Commons.
METROPOLITAN AND OTHER POLICE COURTS BILL.
Read 3a (according to Order), and passed.

POLICE PROPERTY BILL.
THE EARL OF DENBIGHsaid he had an Amendment to move on behalf of the Irish Office, and he understood that the Home Office were agreeable to its insertion. It was in Clause 3.
Clause 3,—

EXTENT, REPEAL, AND SHORT TITLE.
(1.) This Act shall not extend to Scotland.

(2.) Sections twenty-nine and thirty of the Metropolitan Police Courts Act, 1839, are hereby repealed.

(3.) This Act may be cited as the Police (Property) Act, 1897.

The Amendment was to insert as Subsection (2)—
"In the application to Ireland of this Act the Chief Secretary shall be substituted for the Secretary of State."
Amendment agreed to; Bill to be Read 3a To-morrow.

CHAFF-CUTTING MACHINES (ACCIDENTS) BILL.
Considered in Committee (according to Order); Bill reported without Amendment; and re-committed to the Standing Committee.

VOLUNTEERS BILL.
On the Order for the Third Reading of this Bill,
THE EARL OF WEMYSSsaid he wanted to appeal to his noble Friend at the head of the War Office not to press this Measure in the present Session, but to let it stand over, so that the Volunteers of this country, who had not the slightest idea what the Measure meant, might consider it. The Bill was apparently a very small innocent. It was a Bill of only one clause, but it was revolutionary in its effect upon the civil status of the Volunteer. It practically took away from him his civil status. He was now in exactly the same position as any other civilian in the matter of debt, but if this Bill passed he would be put in the position of being capable of being imprisoned for debt, which no other civilian was subject to. He had drawn up a memorandum as to the position of a Volunteer which he had submitted to a great authority at the War Office, and to the secretary and adjutant of his old regiment, and they all admitted the truth of its contents. As this memorandum contained the gist of the whole matter, perhaps their Lordships would bear with him while he read it,—
"What is a Volunteer? He is a civilian, save when called out and doing duty. His service is voluntary. He cannot be forced to come on parade, to go into camp, or to nut on his uniform. He is not under the Mutiny Act, save when serving. He can resign by giving 14 days' notice, but the commanding officer can refuse to accept his resignation until he has paid any money he may owe to the regiment and returned his arms, accoutrements, or any other property belonging to the regiment. That is the hold which the commanding officer has over the Volunteer. A Volunteer is thus, except when he comes out to drill, manœuvres, or camp, essentially a civilian. He is a civilian soldier, and, save when serving, he is socially in the position of any other civilian. He has in no way lost his social status by becoming a Volunteer. If this Bill becomes an Act, what will be his position? If he has had his uniform given him

145
by his regiment or company on the understanding and agreement that he will make himself au efficient for three years and thus earn the capitation grant for his regiment, and fails to do this, he will be liable to imprisonment for non-payment of this money, in whole or in part, and he thus loses his civil status. This power of imprisonment for a regimental debt, now not possessed by a commanding officer, is given by the Bill, which extends rules for securing efficiency—rules which now do not involve imprisonment—to the earning of the capitation grant, and a fine for the breach of such rule for securing efficiency shall not be deemed a civil debt. Thus a Volunteer, a civilian when not on military duty, will, in the matter of regimental fines or money liabilities, lose his civil status, and will be liable to imprisonment for non-payment of a money debt."
The word imprisonment hail been struck out of the second clause of the Bill, but it was in the Bill in the first clause, by which the power of imprisonment was practically given. The Volunteer was thus, he ventured to say, deprived of his civil rights. This was a great, a revolutionary, change, which ought not to be made without some very grave reason and without full consideration. He knew that everything his noble Friend did was for the interest of the service, and, of course, he had done this in the supposed interest of the service. In his opinion, however, it was not in the interest of the service. The case was this, that officers were anxious to fill their regiments and gave these uniforms to the men on the understanding that they would work out the cost by earning the capitation for whatever number of years would cover the original cost of the uniform. They sometimes had difficulty in getting these men to pay, for they left their regiment and the money was lost. But, as an old Volunteer, he ventured to say it would be better that any amount of money should be lost, and even that whole regiments should disappear, than that they should change the civil status of the Volunteer. He ventured to think that a force of the kind of the Volunteer force should be treated in the most careful manner possible, and that nothing should be done to put it, in regard to civil matters, in a different position to any other civilian in the country. The force, as a whole, did not know what the Bill meant, and, therefore, it was not an unreasonable request that the Measure should be postponed till next Session.
*THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (The Marquess of LANSDOWNE)said he feared he should have some difficulty in converting the noble earl to his views in regard to this Bill, but he assured the noble earl and the House that the Bill did not make that serious invasion of what the noble earl termed the civil status of the Volunteer which he imputed to it. In a sense every Act of Parliament which rendered an individual liable to a penalty for the commission of an offence, to which penalty he was not liable before might be said to involve an alteration in the civil status of that individual; but he preferred to discuss the Bill on the practical grounds of its necessity in the interest of the force. The Volunteer corps formed a part of the defensive forces of the country; they had their place in all our schemes of defence and mobilization; they received assistance from the State—
THE EARL OF WEMYSS: The men do not.
*THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE, continuing, said the corps received assistance from the State upon condition that they held themselves ready to serve their country when required to do so. Each individual Volunteer received certain advantages, which he received, in the main at all events, at the expense of the public, and in consideration of receiving those advantages he entered into a contract that he would, by attending a limited number of drills, make himself efficient up to a certain point. The man might end that contract, if he pleased to do so, by giving a moderate notice, but he maintained that while that contract was in force it was a reasonable thing that the corps should have the means of enforcing it against the man by some process simpler and more expeditious than a civil suit. If the Volunteer received his equipment and uniform, and, having received it, deliberately failed to make himself efficient, surely it was true that he perpetrated a double fraud or wrong—he did a wrong to his corps, which was cheated out of the capitation grant which he was bound to help in earning for it; and, on the other hand, he deprived the country of the services of an efficient soldier. The noble Earl spoke of this being a revolution, a revolution which

147
was not understood by the Volunteer force; but the Bill left the Volunteer force precisely in the position which they themselves always believed they occupied. ["Hear, hear!"] A recent decision of the Courts had thrown a doubt upon the law, but unquestionably until that doubt was created every Volunteer believed that these fines could be recovered from him by proceedings before a Court of Summary Jurisdiction. As a matter of fact, there was no case on record of a Volunteer ever having gone to prison for the non-payment of these fines, for the simple reason that in such cases a Volunteer either paid the fine, or made himself efficient, or showed good reason why he was unable to do so. With regard to the attitude of the Volunteer force towards this Bill he had been in communication with the Institute of Commanding Officers of the Volunteer Corps, and he was in a position to say that the members of that institute had considered the Bill and were entirely favourable to it. He believed he was right in adding that if they had any criticism to make in regard to the Bill it was that it do not go quite far enough. The Bill had been for some time before the public; it had passed through the other House of Parliament not without some discussion; it had passed through the whole of the usual stages in their Lordships' House, and he really did not think that the noble Earl had any ground for asserting that it had been in any way sprung upon the force in which he took so great an interest. He was reluctant to refuse any request coming from one so long and so honourably connected with the Volunteer force as the noble Earl, but he thought the noble Earl's request was not an entirely reasonable one, and he must ask their Lordships to read the Bill a Third time.
LORD TURINGpointed out that the Summary Jurisdiction Act allowed these penalties to be recovered as civil debts. Under that Act they might imprison immediately if a man did not pay, but if they enacted that the debts were to be recovered as civil debts they might recover before magistrates by exactly the same process, only they could not imprison unless the man had money and would not pay. For the words "shall not be deemed to be a civil debt" there ought to inserted "shall be recovered summarily
148
as a civil debt." In that case a man could not be sent to prison unless he could pay and would not pay. He did not think such dreadful consequences would accrue as Lord Wemyss had detailed, but in a Bill of this sort, under which a man merely committed a breach of contract, they ought to take steps to recover a debt as a civil debt.
LORD HERSCHELLmaintained that the provision of the Bill ran counter to the policy of the Legislature. The sixth section of the Summary Jurisdiction Act provided that where under any Act, whether past or future, a sum of money claimed to be due was recoverable on complaint to a Court of summary jurisdiction, such sum should be deemed to be a civil debt, and if recoverable before a Court of summary jurisdiction should be recoverable in the manner declared by the Act as recoverable and not otherwise. An order for the payment of money could be obtained, and if the money were not paid the complainant could have distress, and if the person could pay and did not pay he could be sent to prison. Was more wanted than that? Surely it would be much better instead of saying "shall not be deemed to be a civil debt" to say "shall be recovered summarily on complaint before a Court of summary jurisdiction."
*THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid he could not pretend to be as conversant with points of law as the noble and learned Lord, and as he understood the words the noble Lord had suggested would achieve the purpose they had or ought to have in view, he thought the best course he could pursue would be to adjourn the Third Reading and ask the noble Lord to propose the Amendment. ["Hear, hear."]
Further Debate adjourned to Tuesday next.
House adjourned at Half-past Five o'Clock, till To-morrow a Quarter past Ten o'Clock.