HL Deb 25 July 1898 vol 62 cc983-5

Amendment proposed— Page 3, line 19, after 'Act' insert 'and of those enactments, sections one hundred and thirty-five, and the following sections of the Grand Juries Act, 1836, so far as unrepealed, shall extend to the case of maliciously setting fire to, destroying, or injuring property of any description, whether real, or personal, in like manner as they apply to the setting fire to, injuring, or destroying the particular descriptions of property specified in the first-mentioned section.'"—(The Earl of Mayo.)

*THE EARL OF MAYO

My Lords, I have put this Amendment down because the sections of the Grand Juries Act, 1836, are not quite wide enough or broad enough with regard to certain cases of malicious injury. My Amendment covers all kinds of malicious injury, such as maliciously setting fire to, destroying or injuring property of any description, whether real or personal. I instanced one case during the Second Reading Debate, in which, if a boat without cargo was drawn up on the shore and burned, it could not be considered a malicious injury; but if it had a sack of potatoes in it, it would be a malicious injury. I will give another instance to show the incompleteness of the present law. A cart standing in a yard may be burned, and it would not be a malicious injury, but if, the cart were in a shed and it were burned it would be a malicious injury. Your Lordships will, therefore, I think, see the necessity of this Amendment, which I hope that Her Majesty's Government will accept.

THE DUKE OF ABEECORN

My Lords, this is a very necessary Amendment, and I hope Her Majesty's Government will be willing to accept it.

LORD HARLECH

My Lords, I have much pleasure in supporting the Amendment, the adoption of which will, in my judgment, make the Bill more valuable.

*LORD CLONBROCK

My Lords, I have the following Amendment on the Paper, which is to the same effect as the Amendment of my noble Friend (the Earl of Mayo), namely— Page 3, line 19, after 'Act,' insert 'provided, however, that compensation may be given for criminal injury to any kind of property, or to the person, or for loss of life.' I propose not to move my Amendment, but to support the Amendment of the noble Earl. It is of the greatest importance that all classes of property should be protected. This is one of the instances in which the old Grand Juries Act requires amendment. But for this, the Grand Juries Act is one of the best Statutes we have; and I am exceedingly glad the Government have adopted so much of it in this Bill.

*THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELAND

My Lords, there is no doubt whatever that the clause of the Grand Juries Act, to which attention has been drawn, is anomalous. It includes a good many classes of property, and leaves out a good many classes of property which one would imagine would be included. I think there is a good deal of sense in this Amendment, and I shall offer no opposition, to its being included in the Bill.

Question put.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment proposed— Page 3, line 22, after 'council,' insert 'and if the decree is made, shall have the power of a judge of assize under section one hundred and forty of the Grand Juries Act, 1836, with respect to the apportionment of the compensation.' "—(Lord Ashhourne.)

Question put.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment proposed— Page 3, line 41, after 'masters,' add 'provided, however, that no appeal shall lie in any case in which the amount of compensation awarded by the county court shall not exceed ten pounds.'"—(Lord Clonbrock.)

*LORD CLONBROCK

I think, in any case, where so small an amount of compensation is awarded, it is important that no appeal shall lie, owing to the great expense it would involve on both parties.

*THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELAND

If there was only one side to the question I would agree with, my noble Friend; but it might be that the person who is awarded the compensation may be seriously aggrieved at getting so little, and might think that if his case were heard on a wider area and with better evidence he would get a larger sum. I therefore think it would be better to leave the matter as it is.

Question put.

Amendment negatived.

Question put— That clause 5, as amended, stand part of the Bill.

Motion agreed to.