Lords Sitting of 22 July 1897

VISCOUNT DILLON.— LORD KENSINGTON.
Reports made from the Lord Chancellor, that the right of Harold Arthur, Viscount Dillon, and William, Baron Kensington, to vote at the elections of Representative Peers for Ireland has been established to the satisfaction of the Lord Chancellor; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.

PROVISIONAL ORDER (SCOTLAND) BILL [H.L.]
On the Order to go into Committee on this Bill,
*THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Lord BALFOUR)said he understood it was necessary that the Committee stage of the Bill should be taken so that Amendments agreed to by the Select Committee to whom the Bill was referred might be inserted in their proper places. But he thought it right to say that he did not intend to ask the House to proceed further with the Bill this Session. It was no doubt introduced late in the Session, but when it was referred to the Select Committee he hoped the Bill would be placed on the Statute Book this year. But the proceedings in the Select Committee occupied longer than he anticipated, and after one of the Amendments made in the Select Committee, he felt it would be hopeless for him to ask Parliament to proceed further with the Bill this Session. The majority of the Amendments made by the Committee dealt with points on which he was willing to accept the decision arrived and the structure and framework of the Bill had not been greatly interfered with by the Amendments, which, on the whole, were in the direction of preserving more strict control over legislative proposals, which would come before Parliament by Provisional Order, than was at first proposed. The
686
threatened attack on the position of the Secretary for Scotland in the Bill was not carried to extremities, and, indeed, in one rather important particular. An important function was laid on the Secretary for Scotland, which he himself would not have asked Parliament to intrust to any executive officer—power in connection with the Chairmen of Committees to prevent opponents front being heard before Parliament unless they could show good cause. One Amendment made by the Select Committee he regarded as of great importance. It related to the method of forming the tribunal to sit in judgment on proposals placed in the hands of the Secretary for Scotland. As introduced, the Bill proposed that there should be a tribunal of three persons —one of whom was a Judge of the Court of Session or a Sheriff, aril to be Chairman; and the other two gentlemen chosen for their fitness and skill in affairs of this kind. In this way a panel was to be formed from whom Commissions were to be chosen for each inquiry. The selecting body was to consist of two persons selected by the conveners of counties in Scotland, and two persons selected by the convention of Royal Burghs, and they were to sit with the Secretary for Scotland and consider the claims and qualifications of possible Commissioners to be placed on the panel, front whom the Commission for each inquiry would be selected by the Secretary for Scotland. That proposition did not meet with general acceptance. A legal chairman was objected to in many quarters, and the proposal that the select body should be appointed by the convention of Royal Burghs was also a good deal criticised. After considerable discussion another clause was proposed by him, which would have had the effect, while still maintaining the selecting body on the lines originally suggested; it would have had it composed as before of two members elected by the conveners of counties in Scotland, and two sent in by town councils of cities and burghs above 15,000 in population at the last Census. As the proposal for a legal chairman was to be abandoned, he suggested that the selecting body should have the duty laid upon it of providing not only for the panel of ordinary Commissioners, but the panel from whom the

687
chairman should be chosen. He attached great importance to the selection of both these panels by a small and quasi-judicial body, which would feel the responsibility of acting judicially. It was also proposed that the selection of the panel should be made in this way—that all the counties and burghs in Scotland with a population above 15,000 should each nominate one. There were thirty counties having separate county councils, and 27 or 28 burghs, which would have been qualified under that provision. That would have resulted in a panel of 60 persons being selected. But the method proposed was not so satisfactory as the one he suggested, because there would have been no possibility of conference between the respective selecting authorities. They would each probably have selected a respectable gentleman known to themselves, who might or might not have special qualifications. They would feel no special responsibility in selecting a fit person, and he did not think a tribunal selected from a body so chosen would have commanded general confidence. However, that proposal was carried against his by five to four. He could not make himself responsible for it, and he was, therefore, obliged to face these two alternatives—either to abandon the Bill or ask the House to reverse the decision of the Select Committee. Earlier in the Session he should have had no hesitation in selecting the latter of these two alternatives. But if he did that now, and the Bill had to pass through the other House, it could hardly be expected to become law this Session. So he had decided to ask the House not to proceed further with the Bill. On one other point an Amendment was made and was carried against him. Probably it was only a fair corollary of the decision to which he had referred, that the persons composing the tribunal for each inquiry should not be remunerated for their services beyond payment of out-of-pocket expenses. If it was difficult in Parliament to obtain Members of that House and the House of Commons to serve on Committees when resident in London, it would be found doubly difficult to induce gentlemen qualified for the work to go to parts of Scotland in which they were strangers, and away from home, at a time when it might be inconvenient, and do irksome work
688
and drudgery without receiving remuneration. He did not regret the introduction of the Bill in its original form. He believed it had been recognised by most of those interested in solving the question in Scotland as an honest attempt to deal with a somewhat difficult and intricate subject, the difficulty and intricacy of which, he thought, was not always fully recognised by all those who set themselves up as authorities in regard to it. In regard to the future, he thought this question could not be allowed to rest where it was. He believed the demand for a certain amount of devolution of private Bill legislation to tribunals sitting locally would increase rather than diminish, and that Parliament would have to deal with it. He hoped and believed the introduction of this Bill would lead to a discussion of the whole question in Scotland during the autumn, the result of which would be to ripen opinion on the subject and place the Government in a more favourable position for dealing with it on a future occasion. He might, perhaps, be allowed to express his own personal hope that it would be found possible to re-introduce a Bill on the subject at an earlier period next Session, and, in the light of the experience they had gained, that they might be able to carry it to a successful conclusion. ["Hear, hear!"] He begged to move in the meantime that the House resolve itself into Committee.
LORD TWEEDMOUTHthought that, as the Secretary for Scotland had announced the withdrawal of the Bill, it would be mere beating of the air if he were to attempt to debate the subjects he had raised. He would only say he thought what had been desired had been gained—namely, that a definite proposal should be placed upon the Paper, should have been before their Lordships' House, and should go before the people of Scotland interested in the matter, in the Recess, so that they might form their opinion upon it, and aid the Secretary for Scotland in producing another Measure in a subsequent Session of Parliament. He was sure the noble Lord would find there was a general desire on the part of Scotsmen of all parties to further a satisfactory change in this important question, and that they would welcome his efforts in this direction. As to the noble Lord's remarks on the question of the panel, he would remind him

689
that this had been the crux of the difficulty in all proposals to change the present system of dealing with private Bills. He thought the fault of his noble Friend's proposal was that be designed a much too elaborate system of indirect election. A system of as simple a. direct election as could he arrived at, which would give a sufficiently large body of sufficiently practical persons to form a panel from which individual commissioners should he chosen, was what they should aim at. He did not think his noble Friend's proposal with regard to the panel was one which commanded the assent of Scotsmen, and he did not think it was one which would have produced satisfactory results in the future. He believed the proposal in the Bill as it stood was after all the better proposal. It. was not novel, for it had been proposed before, that these subjects should be dealt with by men chosen by the Town and County Councils, and he trusted that in another Session of Parliament they would be able to deal with it in a satisfactory manner.
THE EARL OF MORLEY (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES)thought the Secretary for Scotland had obtained the object in view in introducing this Measure. He agreed with the noble Lord who had just spoken that it was extremely desirable a definite project should be brought. before those interested in Scotland, and the matter thoroughly discussed during the autumn. He thought the noble Lord might be congratulated on having attained that object. Of course it. was impossible to carry such a Measure this Session. He hoped when the Bill was introduced again the provisions would be a little fuller than they were. It seemed to him there were several omissions in the Bill that would require a. fuller statement in any new project that was, brought before Parliament. He could but say he should only be too happy to give any assistance in his power, and he should like also to say he must not be. understood to be bound absolutely by the decision which the Committee had arrived at, or to the exact forms of the Bill, anxious as he was to simplify and render cheaper the process
690
by which private Bill legislation could be accomplished.
Motion agreed to; House in Committee accordingly. Amendments proposed by the Select Committee made; Standing Committee negatived.

PARISH COUNCILS (SCOTLAND) (CASUAL VACANCIES) BILL.
Considered in Committee.
[The CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES, the Earl of MORLEY, in the Chair.]
Clause 1,—

SHORT TITLE AND CONSTRUCTION OF ACT.
This Act may be cited as the Parish Councils Casual Vacancies (Scotland) Act 1897, and shall be construed as one with the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1894.
Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 2,—
PROVISIONS FOR FILLING UP CASUAL VACANCIES IN PARISH COUNCILS IN PARISHES PARTLY LANDWARD AND PARTLY BURGH-AL, ETC.
"In the event of a casual vacancy in the parish council of a parish which is partly landward and partly burghal, or comprises a police burgh or part of a police burgh, the following provisions shall have effect with respect to she filling up of such vacancy (that is to say):—

(1) The parish councillors, who are members of the Landward Committee of such parish council, shall not be entitled to vote in filling up any casual vacancy therein, except a vacancy caused by the death, resignation, or disqualification of a parish councillor who was a member of such Landward Committee.

(2.) The parish councillors who are not members of such Landward Committee shall not be entitled to vote in filling up any casual vacancy in such parish council, except a vacancy caused by the death, resignation, or disqualification of a parish councillor who was not a member of such Landward Committee."

*LORD BALFOURmoved as an Amendment to leave out Sub-section (1), upon the ground that. it really was not required. There was no grievance and no difficulty to be remedied by means of it. Not only was that the case, but if it was

691
passed as it stood it would lead to many difficulties and complications which did not now exist. The reason for allowing the landward members of the Council to elect to casual vacancies in the Landward Committee was that the Landward Committee had distinct and separate functions from the Parish Council as a whole. The burgh members had no functions apart from their membership of the Parish Council, because all the functions which were discharged by the Landward Committee for the landward part of the parish were discharged for the burgh through the proper burgh authority. There had been a few difficulties in cases where burgh members had insisted on putting men with burgh interests into the Landward Committee. In the other case there had been no difficulty at all, and, as he had said, serious complications would be caused if this sub-section was allowed to stand part of the Bill. He would give one instance which he thought would convince the Committee that the proposal was not a wise one—namely, the case of the Parish Council in which Dundee and Broughty Ferry were situated. There were there two burghs, one of which had only one representative upon the Parish Council, and if the Bill were to pass with this sub-section in it the result would be, in the event of a vacancy occurring in the representation of Broughty Ferry, while the landward representatives of the Council would be prevented from voting, the vacancy would be filled up by the representatives of Dundee, because there were no others to do it. That would be an anomalous and absurd result, and he hoped their Lordships would not allow this sub-section to stand part of the Bill.
THE EARL OF LAUDERDALEexplained that the object of the promoters of the Bill was to protect the interests of the landward members. The Secretary for Scotland had stated that those interests would be duly preserved by leaving out the sub-section, and therefore he had no objection to its omission.
LORD TWEEDMOUTHobjected to the Amendment. He should like to explain to English Lords what the proposal of the Bill was and what the effect of the Amendment would be. In Scotland, parishes which were subject to Parish Councils were divided into three categories—namely, landward, which were
692
entirely parishes that were outside the limits of a burgh; burghal parishes, which were parishes within the limits of a burgh; and mixed parishes, consisting of landward and burghal parishes. In the Local Government Act for Scotland great care was taken to save the interests of the landward and burghal portions of such a parish. Great care was taken to insure, according to the interests of the two portions of the parish, an exact proportion in the numbers of the members of a County Council. In only one respect was not provision made, and that was in the case of a casual vacancy. When a. vacancy occurred from the death of one of the Councillors, then the landward representatives and the burghal representatives alike met and chose another Member in the place of the deceased. At times the interest of the landward and burghal parts of the parish were very different, and friction arose, and there had been difficulties, which, however, had been assuaged by the intervention of the Local Government Board for Scotland, who had induced the representatives of both portions of the parish to join in selecting the proper man to represent the particular interest which was represented by the deceased person. So that really this Bill was introduced to meet one particular case which had arisen, although other means had been found of meeting such cases. But if they were going to allow the landward representatives of a parish to select their own man by themselves, aside from the burghal representatives, to a vacancy that occurred amongst them, surely they ought not then to allow the landward men to have anything to say in the choice of a representative to a vacancy that occurred among the burghal representatives. Not only did they save the landward people from any violation of their interests by allowing them to elect a man to fill a vacancy that occurred among their own number, but if they adopted Lord Balfour's Amendment, they would allow the same landward men to have a large voice in filling the vacancy caused by a death amongst the burghal representatives also. Surely that would be giving an altogether unfair predominance to the landward members of mixed parishes. He would ask their Lordships either to leave matters as they were by not passing this Bill at all—which would not give rise to

693
any great grievance—or, if they did, while it was perfectly fair to give to the landward representatives of the Parish Council the right to elect their own representative, then he should say they ought also to allow the burghal portion of the parish to elect their own representative from among their own number. It seemed to him that to take that course would be absolutely inconsistent with the provisions of the Act of 1894. The step proposed by the noble Lord would be a departure from the intention of the Act, which evidently was to preserve the rights and interests of the burghal representatives and landward representatives in their separate capacities. He should certainly oppose the Amendment.
*LORD BALFOURsaid there was One point omitted by the noble Lord—that there could really be no question of Lurgh representatives being properly appointed, for where there was a mixed parish the population of the burgh would always be in the majority, they would get in their man if they were unanimous, and would always have their own way in regard to filling up vacancies on the landward committee. It was impossible in the event of a question arising as to the burgh representation, and opinion being divided, the landward party by siding with one of the parties might determine the question as between the burgh representatives; but even in that case the man elected would be a representative of the burgh, not of the landward interest, whereas in the case for the Bill if the burgh representatives chose they could by united action put a man into the landward committee in their own interest, and hostile to the general body of ratepayers.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY, after the appeal of his noble Friend to English Lords, ventured to express his opinion on this Scotch subject, though he did so with great diffidence. He really could not understand the argument of Lord Balfour. He could quite understand. that it might be the case, as the noble Lord said, that there being such a large number people in the town portion of the parish, as compared with what in England would be called the rural portion of the parish, the land portion would always have a majority. But that was not exactly the point. As he understood,
694
all voted together; but surely, if it was desirable to make admission and to let the landward portion of the district vote for vacancies in their own body, it seemed to follow almost as a matter of course that you should do the same with the other portion.
*LORD BALFOURsaid the noble Earl had missed the point; the landward committee sat apart from the burgh portion as to certain duties, as to the discharge of which the burgh representatives had no interest whatever.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid he had no doubt he had missed a point, but he could not see the evil result that would follow from placing them both on a footing of equality as regards casual vacancies. It seemed to him an equitable arrangement, and he did not see why all invidious privilege should be accorded to landward members and not given to town members. He could not see what possible injury would be done to anybody by making the matter equal to both sides. That was the view he took, but he repeated he had a feeling of diffidence in intervening at all.
THE EARL OF LAUDERDALEsaid there was a distinct difference of position, the landward members acted separately, but the burgh members conjointly with the landward members, so that the same question did not arise with burgh vacancies.
LORD TWEEDMOUTHsaid this was no reason for not meting out equal justice in respect to electing their own representatives.
THE EARL OF LAUDERDALEsaid there was no case in regard to the burgh portion, because there it was election to the whole council.
Question put: "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
The Committee divided.

CONTENTS

10

NOT-CONTENTS

29

Bill reported as amended, and re-committed to the Standing Committee; to be printed as amended.—(No. 175.)

STATUTE LAW REVISION BILL [H.L.]
Read 2a (according to Order), and referred to the Joint Committee on Statute Law Revision and Consolidation Bills; and a message ordered to be sent to the Commons to acquaint them therewith.

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES (METRIC SYSTEM) BILL.
Considered in Committee.
Clause 1,—

USE OF METRIC WEIGHTS AND MEASURES IN TRADE.
Notwithstanding anything in the Weights and Measures Act 1878, the use of a weight or measure of the metric system in trade shall be lawful, and nothing in Section nineteen of that Act shall make void any contract, bargain, sale, or dealing by reason only of its being made or had according to weights or measures of the metric system, and a person using or having in his possession a weight or measure of the metric system shall not by reason thereof be liable to any fine.
Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 2,—
METRIC STANDARDS AND EQUIVALENTS.

(1.) The Board of Trade standards which may be made under Section eight of the Weights and Measures Act 1878, shall include metric standards derived from the standard metre and standard kilogram deposited with the Board of Trade.

(2.) It shall be lawful for the Queen by Order in Council to make a table of metric equivalents in substitution for the table in Part I. of the Third Schedule to the Weights and Measures Act 1878, and as from the date at which the Order in Council comes into operation, Part I of the said schedule and Sections eighteen and thirty-eight of the said Act shall be repealed.

*LORD BALFOURsaid the object of the Amendments he had to move was to put beyond all doubt the identification of the special standards referred to, and made no change in the substance of the Bill.
Amendments made: —In Sub-section (1) before the words "standard metre," insert the words "iridio-platinum linear." Before the words "standard kilogram," insert "iridio-platinum," and
696
after "Trade" insert "and numbered 16 and 18 respectively."
Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 3,—

SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the Weights and Measures (Metric System) Act 1897, and may be cited with the Weights and Measures Acts 1878 to 1893.
Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Bill re-committed to the Standing Committee; and to be printed as amended.—(No. 176.)

LUNACY BILL [H.L.]
Amendments reported (according to Order), and Bills to be Read 3a Tomorrow.
CHAFF-CUTTING MACHINES (ACCIDENTS) BILL.
Amendments reported (according to Order), and Bills to be Read 3a To-morrow.

VERMINOUS PERSONS BILL (NOW CLEANSING OF PERSONS BILL).
Amendments reported (according to Order).
Clause 1,—
POWER TO LOCAL AUTHORITIES TO PROVIDE CLEANSING, ETC. FOR PERSONS INFESTED WITH VERMIN.
On and after the passing of this Act any local authority shall have the power, when and in their discretion they shall see fit, to permit any person who shall apply to the said authority, on the ground that he is infested with vermin, to have the use, free of charge, of the apparatus (if any) which the authority possess for cleansing the person and his clothing from vermin. The use of such apparatus shall not be considered to be parochial relief or charitable allowance to the person using the same, or to the parent of such person, and no such person or parent shall by reason thereof be deprived of any right or privilege or be subject to any disqualification or disability.
Local authorities may expend any reasonable sum on buildings, appliances, and attendants that may be required for the carrying out of this Act.
THE EARL OF STAMFORDsaid he had spared no pains to meet the point taken by the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack and by Lord Kimberley, and to identify the fund out of which the expenses of this Bill should be met. He proposed with this object to insert the following words in Clause 1,—
"And the objects of this Act may be met out of any rate or fund applicable by the authority for general sanitary purposes or for the relief of the poor."
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY)said he was not prepared to say that the noble Lord would succeed in the ingenious device he had adopted, but a difficulty arose in a way the noble Lord did not seem to contemplate. A rate was only imposed by statute for some specific purpose. If there was any general rate by which such purposes as these could be satisfied it could be charged on it. Otherwise, if they made a rate for a purpose not authorised by statute the rate was simply bad. The result would be that if there was no rate to meet the duties placed on local bodies by this Act, there would be no machinery to put the Act into force unless some one was to pay the expenses out of his own pocket. If there was a rate already chargeable for these purposes, the Amendment was not necessary. If there was not, then he ventured to suggest that they were creating a new rate and placing a new charge on the community which exposed them to another objection. On the other hand, he could not help feeling that if no Amendment was put in the other House they would have no opportunity of dealing with the Bill at all. It would be taken as it was, and in that condition of difficulty the noble· Lord had apparently adopted the only possible device.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid he could not help feeling that there was a good deal of difficulty in the matter, and he should like to know what was the view of the Local Government Board on the subject. The Amendment said that the expenses might be met out of any fund for general sanitary purposes, but he knew that in regard to some sanitary measures, certainly, there was a different proportion to be paid by house property
698
and by lands. Of course, it would not be right that there should be cleansing of verminous persons from a rate which was proportioned, for very different reasons, indeed, in a peculiar manner. On the other hand, it was rather anomalous to enact that it should be from any fund which was raised for poor relief, because it was especially stated in the Bill that it was not to make a man a pauper in any way.
THE PRIME MINISTER (The Marquess of SALISBURY)said the noble Earl opposite seemed to feel that there was a difficulty, where the rate was paid in the proportions of one by the country and three by the town, in applying such a rate as that to the discharge of the purposes of this Bill. But people who lived in houses had much more interest in getting rid of vermin than the person who merely walked in the fields—[laughter]—and therefore it was quite proper that the houses should be specially charged in order to get rid of this nuisance. [Laughter.]
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: I must be allowed to say that that is a most ingenious argument, and I am quite prepared to accept it. [Laughter.]
LORD HARRISsaid it seemed somewhat audacious on his part to advance an opinion in opposition to the Lord Chancellor, but it was the Local Government Board's opinion, and not his personal opinion. Their opinion was that the Bill as originally drafted was sufficient, and that it would have been legal to supply those appliances out of the rates. But to meet the noble mid learned Lord's suggestion that it would be necessary to specify the rate, these words had been inserted.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: Then the Local Government Board do not object to the words moved?
LORD HARRIS: No; they have suggested them themselves. [Laughter.]
Clause 2,—

DEFINITION.
In this Act "local authority" means the council of any county borough, the district council of any district, any board of guardians, and in the county of London any sanitary authority as defined in the Public Health (London) Act 1891.
THE EARL OF STAMFORDmoved to leave out the word "means," and to insert the words, "shall mean in England."
Amendments agreed to; and Bill to be Read 3a To-morrow.

COPYRIGHT (AMENDMENT) BILL [H.L.]
On the Order for the Third Reading of this Bill,
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid he ought to call the attention of Lord Monkswell to the fact that he was told that if the last clause of the Bill was retained, it would cause considerable difficulty with regard to negotiations that had been pending for some time. He would suggest that he should therefore omit that clause, but, as he did not think it would be quite regular to do it at this moment, the better course would be for him to move the adjournment of the Debate until to-morrow. In the meantime, he could give notice of his intention to omit the clause.
LORD MONKSWELLsaid he had already been made acquainted by the Colonial Office with the difficulty in regard to that clause, which he proposed to leave out. If the noble and learned Lord thought it had better be done to-morrow, he would take that course. He would, however, move the other Amendments of which he had given notice. They did not deal with the substance of the Measure at all.
Amendments made:—
Clause 1,—

TRANSLATIONS AND INFRINGEMENT OF COPYRIGHT.
(1.) In the case of a book, it shall be an infringement of the copyright therein if any person shall, without the consent of the owner of the copyright, translate the book.

COPYRIGHT IN TRANSLATIONS.
(2.) The author of an authorised translation of a book shall be entitled to copyright therein in the same manner as if it was an original work.
Leave out "an authorised," and insert "a lawfully made."
After "copyright made therein," insert, "in the particular translation so made."
Clause 7,—

ABRIDGMENTS WITHOUT CONSENT PROHIBITED.
(i.) It shall be an infringement of the copyright in a book if any person shall, without the consent of the owner of the copyright, print or otherwise multiply, or cause to be printed or otherwise multiplied, any abridgment of such book, or shall export or import any abridgment so unlawfully produced, or shall sell, publish, or expose for sale or hire, or cause to be sold, published, or exposed for sale or hire, any abridgment, knowing or having reasonable grounds to suspect that the same has been so unlawfully produced or imported.
COPYRIGHT OWNER NOT TO ABRIDGE WITHOUT AUTHOR'S CONSENT IN CERTAIN CASES.
(ii.) Where the author of a book has sold the copyright thereof in consideration (whether wholly or in part) of a royalty or a share of the profits to be derived from the publication thereof, or is otherwise notwithstandig such sale possessed of a pecuniary interest therein, such book shall not, during the continuance of the copyright therein, and so long as the author shall be entitled to such royalty, share of profits, or shall be so interested as aforesaid, be abridged by the purchaser of such copyright without the consent in writing of the author or his assigns.
(iii.) Where the author has sold the exclusive right of publication of a book, without assigning the copyright, he shall not be at liberty to publish an abridgment of the work without the consent of the owner of the exclusive right of publication.

NOTICE ON TITLE PAGE THAT ABRIDGMENT IS NOT BY AUTHOR.
(iv.) If the owner of the copyright in a book to the abridgment whereof the author's consent is not required under the preceding proviso intends to publish an abridgment thereof made by some person other than the author of the original book, he shall give notice of such intention to the author, if living, by registered letter, directed to his last known address, and shall, if so required by such author, either state or cause to be stated on the title page of each part or volume of the abridgment that the abridgment is not by the author of the original book, or shall in like manner state or cause to be stated the mine of the maker of the abridgment.
(v.) The author of a book shall be entitled to restrain and obtain damages for any abridgment published in contravention of the above provisions of the section.
In Sub-section (iv.), leave out from "copyright" to "preceding proviso," both inclusive, and insert "exclusive right of publication of a book."
Clause 8,—
DRAMATISATION OF NOVELS PROHIBITED.
In the case of a hook which is a work of fiction in prose or in verse, it shall he an infringement of the copyright therein if any person shall, without the consent of the owner of the copyright, take or colourably imitate the title of such book, or take from such book any material or substantial part thereof and use or convert it into or adapt it for a dramatic work, or knowing or having reasonable grounds to suspect such dramatic work to have been so made shall perform or permit or cause the same to be performed.
In both places where "book" occurs, leave out "book," and insert "work."
LORD MONKSWELLmoved "That the Debate be adjourned until To-morrow."
Motion agreed to.

FINANCIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION (GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND).
THE EARL OF MAYOasked Her Majesty's Government when the proposed new Commission on the Financial Relations between Great Britain and Ireland was to be appointed?
THE PRIME MINISTER: My Lords, it will be appointed as soon as we have a sufficient number of persons to constitute a Commission, but there is not that passionate desire to take part in the deliberations of the Commission that we could wish. And, as I have already had the pleasure of pointing out to my noble Friend, I think, on another occasion, there is always the difficulty, when you are dealing with Irish subjects, that impartiality is a rarer and more precious gift than it is when you are dealing with English subjects. Selection, therefore, is a matter of considerable difficulty, and, as often happens in these cases, the people who could serve the best are the least willing, and the people who are the most trilling are the least able to render adequate assistance. Under this difficulty we are doing our best, and I have no doubt we shall in a very short time have an adequate Commission to produce. I am merely representing to my
702
noble Friend that it is no laches or fault on the part of the Government, but merely the inherent difficulties of the question, that have caused the matter to be delayed for so long.

COTTON CLOTH FACTORIES BILL.
Brought from the Commons; Read 1a; to be printed; and to be Read 2a To-morrow—(Lord Belper.) [No. 177.]
POOR LAW BILL.
Brought from the Commons; Read 1a; to be printed; and to be Read 2a on Monday next—(Lord Harris).—[No. 178.]

SCHOOL BOARDS EXPENSES BILL.
Brought from the Commons; Read 1a; to be printed; and to be Read 2a To-morrow—(The Lord President of the Council).—[No. 179.]
House Adjourned at half-past Five o'Clock, till To-morrow, a Quarter past Ten o'Clock.