Lords Sitting of 20 July 1899

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House that the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table the Certificate from the Examiners that the Standing Orders applicable to the following Bill have been Complied with:
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 15).
And the Certificate that no Standing Orders are applicable to the following Bill:
BURGH POLICE (SCOTLAND) PROVISIONAL ORDER.
The same were ordered to lie on the Table.
WEST METROPOLITAN RAILWAY BILL.
Report from the Select Committee, That the Committee had not proceeded with the consideration of the Bill, no parties having appeared in opposition thereto; read, and ordered to lie on the Table. The orders made on Tuesday last discharged; and Bill committed.
NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE TRAMWAYS AND IMPROVEMENT BILL.
Report from the Select Committee, That the Committee had not proceeded with the consideration of the Bill, the Committee having found that the petitioners had no locus standi before them; read, and ordered to lie on the Table. The orders made on the 11th July and Tuesday last discharged; and Bill committed.
ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 17) BILL.
Report from the Select Committee, That the Committee had not proceeded with the consideration of the Bill, no parties having appeared in opposition thereto; read, and ordered to lie on the Table; the orders made on the 11th of July and Tuesday last discharged; and Bill committed to a Committee of the Whole House for to-morrow.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 14) BILL.
Report from the Select Committee, That the Committee had not proceeded with the consideration of the Bill, no parties having appeared in opposition thereto; read, and ordered to lie on the Table; the Orders made on the 11th of July and Tuesday last discharged; and Bill committed to a Committee of the Whole House.
GODALMING CORPORATION WATER BILL.
Reported from the Select Committee with Amendments.
LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL (MONEY) BILL.
Reported with Amendments.
LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL (GENERAL POWERS) BILL.
Reported from the Select Committee with Amendments.
WORCESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL BILL.
Reported with Amendments.
CITY AND BRIXTON RAILWAY BILL.
  DARWEN CORPORATION BILL.
  Reported with Amendments.
BEXHILL AND ROTHERFIELD RAILWAY BILL.
Reported with an Amendment.
GREENOCK AND PORT GLASGOW TRAMWAYS BILL [H.L.]
Commons Amendment considered, and agreed to.
BAKER STREET AND WATERLOO RAILWAY BILL.
Read 3a, with the Amendments; further Amendments made; Bill passed, and returned to the Commons.
STOCKPORT CORPORATION BILL.
  DERBY CORPORATION TRAMWAYS, &c., BILL.
  Read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
BROOKE'S PARK (LONDONDERRY) BILL [H.L.]
  OWEN'S COLLEGE, MANCHESTER, BILL [H.L.]
  Returned from the Commons, agreed to.
LINCOLN AND EAST COAST RAILWAY AND DOCK BILL.
  LOWESTOFT PROMENADE PIER BILL.
    MIDLAND AND SOUTH-WESTERN JUNCTION RAILWAY BILL.
    Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.
BRISTOL GAS BILL [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons with the Amendment made by the Lords to the Amendments made by the Commons, agreed to.
SOUTH HANTS WATER BILL [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments; the said Amendments considered, and agreed to.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 4) BILL.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 12) BILL.
  Amendments reported (according to order), and Bills to be read 3a Tomorrow.
PIER AND HARBOUR PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 2) BILL.
Read 3a (according to order), with the Amendment, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
METROPOLIS MANAGEMENT ACTS AMENDMENT (BYELAWS) BILL [H.L.]
Commons Amendments considered (according to Order), and agreed to.
RETURNS, REPORTS, &c.
  EDUCATION DEPARTMENT.
  Report of the Committee of Council on Education on schools for the blind and deaf; with appendices, 1898–99.
INDIA (ACCOUNTS AND ESTIMATES, 1899–1900).
Explanatory memorandum by the Secretary of State for India.
SOUTH AFRICAN REPUBLIC.
Correspondence relating to the Bloemfontein Conference, 1899.
AGRARIAN OUTRAGES (IRELAND).
Returns for the quarter ended 30th June, 1899.

QUEEN'S COLLEGE, GALWAY.
Annual Report of the President, for the Session, 1898–99.
Presented (by Command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894.
Orders in Council of 14th July, 1899—

I. Sanctioning a reduction, made by the Trinity House in Kingston upon-Hull, of certain buoyacre and beaconage dues levied by that Corporation between Hull and the sea;

II. Approving certain pilotage bye-laws made by the Corporation of Bristol.

III. Authorising the increase, by the appointment of an additional lower grade clerk, of the establishment of the Trinity House.

IV. Sanctioning an increase in the salary paid to Mr. George Napier McMurdo, a clerk in the service of the Commissioners of Irish Lights.

V. Approving an amended bye-law made by the Newport (Mon.) Pilotage Board, in lieu of byelaw No. 11 of the bye-laws approved by Order in Council of 3rd October, 1895.

VI. Approving certain bye-laws, made by the Trinity House in Kingsston-upon-Hull, fixing the rates of pilotage between Hull and Goole.

FOREIGN JURISDICTION ACT, 1890.
Order in Council of 14th July 1899, entitled "The China, Japan, and Corea (Supreme Court) Order in Council, 1899."
Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.

HOUSES OF LORDS AND COMMONS PERMANENT STAFF.
Report from the Joint Committee (with the proceedings of the Committee) made, and to be printed. (No. 171.): Minutes of evidence, together with an appendix, laid upon the Table, and to be delivered out.

OYSTERS BILL [H.L.]
Report from the Select Committee (with the proceedings of the Committee)

1349
made, and to be printed. (No. 172.): Minutes of evidence laid upon the Table, and to be delivered out. Bill reported with Amendments; and committed to a Committee of the Whole House; and to be printed as amended. (No. 173.)

PUBLIC LIBRARIES BILL [H.L.]
To be read 2a on Tuesday next.
GORDON MEMORIAL COLLEGE AT KHARTOUM [H.L.]
Read 3a (according to Order); Amendments made; Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.
SEATS FOR SHOP ASSISTANTS BILL.
Amendments reported (according to Order), and Bill to be read 3a To-morrow.
COMPANIES BILL [H.L.]

  COMMITTEE.
  Order of the Day for the House being put into Committee on this Bill read.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR (The EARL OF HALSBURY): My Lords, it will be more in order to go into details with regard to the provisions of this Bill on the Third Reading. I will simply say now that the Select Committee to whom the matter has been referred thought it well to rely rather on provisions intended to prevent, if possible, the making of fraudulent companies than on the infliction of pains and penalties on persons who were engaged in the conduct of companies afterwards. They thought it more prudent to see that in the initiation of new companies certain precautions should be adopted to prevent their beginning business until they have sufficient capital, and that will be effected by a provision against allotment until a certain proportion of the capital has been subscribed. Furthermore, the Select Committee have thought it right that persons put forward as directors of a company should, by some act of their own, recognise the responsibility they have assumed, and be called upon to sign a decaration that they are, and intend to be, directors of the company of which they are advertised as directors. In the deliberations of the Committee, which have lasted three years, they have arrived at practical unanimity. There certainly has never been a better Committee constituted, in respect of its legal elements, its business elements, and its general knowledge of the world, and I think I may say the three years during
  1350
  which they have sat have not been thrown away when they have arrived at practical unanimity with regard to a subject so important to the mercantile community. I shall go more minutely into the provisions of the Bill at a later stage, but I thought it necessary to say these few words on the present occasion.
  House in Committee (according to Order); the Amendments proposed by the Select Committee made; Standing Committee negatived; the Report of Amendments to be received on Friday, the 28th inst.

QUESTIONS.

  TRANSVAAL AFFAIRS.
  THE EARL OF WEMYSS: Seeing my noble friend the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies in his place, I would like to ask whether he can give the House any news with reference to the Transvaal.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (the Earl of SELBORNE): My Lords, in answer to the question of the noble Earl, I have to say that the following telegram has been received from the High Commissioner, Sir Alfred Milner:
  "19th July, British Agent South African Republic reports Article IV. of Franchise Law passed by twenty-two votes to live, with following alterations in Clause 1—viz. the words 'at least seven' are substituted for 'nine,' and the words from 'or five years' to end of clause are deleted. This has effect of making residential qualification for franchise seven years retrospective."
  Her Majesty's Government have no official information as to redistribution, but it has been stated that the Government of the South African Republic proposes to give seven new seats to the districts chiefly inhabited by aliens. If this report is confirmed, this important change in the proposals of President Kruger, coupled with previous Amendments, leads the Government to hope that the new law may prove to be a basis of settlement on the lines laid down by Sir Alfred Milner at the Bloemfontein Conference. They observe, however, that the Volksraad have still retained a number of conditions which might be so interpreted as to preclude those otherwise qualified from acquiring the franchise, and might, therefore, be used to take

  1351
  away with one hand what has been given with the other. The provision that the alien desirous of burghership shall produce a certificate of continuous registration during the period required for naturalisation is an instance of this, for it has been stated that the law of registration has been allowed to fall into desuetude, and that but few aliens, however long resident in the country, have been continuously registered. It would also be easy by subsequent legislation to alter the whole character of the concessions now made, but Her Majesty's Government feel assured that the President, having accepted the principle for which they have contended, will be prepared to reconsider any detail of his schemes which can be shown to be a possible hindrance to the full accomplishment of the object in view, and that he will not allow them to be nullified or reduced in value by any subsequent alterations of the law or acts of administration. I may add that Her Majesty's Government received late last night the following telegram from the Governor of Natal:
  "19th July. Resolution proposed to-day in Assembly by Baynes, seconded by Escombe. Begins:—'Legislative Assembly, Natal, desires to express its sympathy with and approval of action of British Government in its endeavour to secure equal rights and privileges for all Europeans in Smith Africa, whereby peace, prosperity, and termination of racial animosity in this country can alone be assured.' Ends. Prime Minister, who had to be carried to Assembly from his bed, to which he has been confined by the result of an accident for a fortnight, strongly supported on behalf of Government. Resolution carried unanimously amidst cheers."

  KINGSTOWN HARBOUR.
  LORD CLONBROCK: My Lords, I rise to ask to what Government Department the Kingstown Harbour Commissioners and harbour master are responsible for the discharge of their duties, and to move—
  "That it is; desirable that a committee be appointed to inquire into the management of Kingstown harbour, and the adequacy of the staff of the harbour master, and whether the lay Board of Harbour Commissioners should have the power of reducing that staff on their sole authority."
  I ask this question, my Lords, because it appears impossible, from the ordinary sources of information, to ascertain to what Department the Harbour Commissioners belong. Every Department seems inclined to disavow any connection with
  1352
  the Kingstown Board of Harbour Commissioners, but as they are a Government department and entrusted with the expenditure of public money there must be some Department to whom they are responsible, and to whom the harbour master can appeal for redress when he has been treated, as I think I proved to the House on Thursday that he has been in this case, in a very unjustifiable manner by the Commissioners. The answer which was given to the question I asked on Thursday appeared to me so unsatisfactory that I gave notice that I would move for an inquiry into the whole matter. In saying that the answer was most unsatisfactory I must, of course, assure my noble friend, Lord Denbigh, who gave the answer, that no reflection is intended upon him, because he only read a paper which had been placed in his hands, and was in no way responsible for the contents or the tenor of the answer. The more I look at the answer the more unsatisfactory it appears to be. In the first place, it is not actually an answer to my question at all. It states that the Commissioners were satisfied that if the harbour-master carried out the instructions given to him there would be no danger to life or property in the harbour. I never doubted for one moment that the Harbour Commissioners were satisfied on this point, or that they considered themselves competent to discharge the duties of the harbour-master as well as their own. For aught I know they may consider themselves competent to command the Channel Fleet. But my question was whether Her Majesty's Government were satisfied, which I trust is a very different matter; whether they were of opinion that due security was afforded to vessels frequenting the harbour when the harbour master, an experienced naval officer, had reported that the staff which had been given to him was absolutely inadequate for the discharge of his duties. I hoped that the Government in view of the importance of the matter would not be content with the "ipse dixit" of a lay Board, but would consult some nautical authority. The Harbour Commissioners, as the answer stated, are undoubtedly responsible for the management and control of the harbour, and the harbour master is bound to carry out the regulations which have been made; but the Commissioners have interfered with the men under the harbour master, and given them separate instructions. As a matter of fact, they interfere

  1353
  with the harbour-master in all the details of his official business, and if they are to do this I should like to know what is the good of having an experienced naval officer holding this post. When Captain Crofton was appointed by the then Lord Lieutenant (the Duke of Marlborough), the noble Duke made it a sine quâ non that the harbour-master should be a Commander in the Royal Navy of not less than forty years of age, and before making the appointment he referred to the Admiralty for particulars as to the character of that officer, and the appointment was not given to him until the noble Duke received a reply from the Admiralty stating that he bore a very high character. When the appointment was made, the noble Duke did not evidently anticipate that the harbour master would be reduced to the subordinate position in which it is now sought to place him. Under former Commissioners he was treated as a nautical adviser, and frequently consulted, and no attempt was made to interfere with him in the discharge of his duties. Now I come to what I consider the worst part of the answer which was given on behalf of the Government to the question asked by me on Thursday, viz., the unworthy insinuation thrown out against the harbour-master, that if he took a more active part in the discharge of his duties the staff might be reduced from twelve to eleven. The question I was calling attention to was the inadequacy of the staff of boatmen. Is it intended that the harbour-master should pull an oar in his boat, or act as stoker to his steam launch? If the answer does not mean that, what does it mean? How can an officer, by any increased activity, supply a deficiency on his staff unless he himself performs the duties of the man who is wanting? It seems so impossible that the Commissioners could have thus confused the duties of an officer and a seaman, that it looks to me as if this remark was made in the answer in an outbreak of temper, and as if the Commissioners, feeling that they were in the wrong, were trying to divert attention by throwing blame on somebody else. Their action reminds me of the old story of the instructions given to counsel—"We have no case, abuse the plaintiff's solicitor." There is an apparent discrepancy between the numbers I stated to the House on Thursday and the numbers given by the Commissioners.
  1354
  I was speaking only of the staff of boat men, and I stated that they numbered four, of whom only two could be on duty at one time. In addition to the boatmen there are two engine-room hands, two harbour constables, a night watchman, a messenger, and another officer who acts in the double capacity of pier-master and assistant harbour-master, making in all some eleven or twelve men; but of these only four are boatmen, and only two are available at one time. The Commissioners further said that the harbour-master was instructed to report immediately any case in which the authorised staff was found insufficient, and that no case had been reported; but I must remind the House that the chief ground of complaint on the part of the harbour-master, which it seems impossible to get the Board to recognise, was that the staff would be insufficient to cope with any emergency caused by stress of weather. This emergency has not occurred yet, but it is obvious that two men will be quite incapable of meeting it when it does occur. I think a sufficient case has been made out, and I hope Her Majesty's Government will grant an inquiry in some shape or form, and invite the opinion of nautical experts, who will be able to pronounce definitely whether the staff at the disposal of the harbour master is sufficient or not.
  Moved—
  "That it is desirable that a committee be appointed to inquire into the management of Kingstown Barbour, and the adequacy of the staff of the harbour-master, and whether the lay Board of Harbour Commissioners should have the power of reducing that staff on their sole authority."—(The Lord Clonbrock.)
  THE EARL OF CLANWILLIAM: I should like to express the hope that Her Majesty's Government will grant the inquiry asked for, because I think it is evident that the present Harbour Commissioners, who are really the Board of Works, have been exercising a false economy. Moreover, the action of the Commissioners in approaching the men under the harbour-master in the way they have done is subversive of all discipline.
  THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (Viscount CROSS): My Lords, I will commence by answering the question which the noble Lord has asked. The Harbour Commissioners are directly under the control of the Treasury, and it is to that Depart-

  1355
  ment that complaints should be made if the Commissioners do anything wrong. I admit to the full the importance of Kingstown Harbour, and I am quite willing to grant that when the harbour-master was appointed he had done most valuable service. He was an officer in the Navy, and in that position acquitted himself with great distinction. I hope I shall be able to persuade the noble Lord not to press his motion. I am told by the Treasury that it is unusual to grant an inquiry by a Committee of the House of Commons in regard to a Departmental question of this kind. Of course, this House has the right to order any inquiry it likes, but when the question is one of staff, which involves a money transaction, I hope your Lordships will not take that course unless there are very strong reasons for it. I regret very much that this question was not raised on the Irish Estimates in the House of Commons, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have been present to answer it, and the matter could have been better argued than it can possibly be in your Lordships' House. The question is really whether the staff of the harbour-master is sufficient or not, and I quite agree that when you have a naval officer as harbourmaster—a man of considerable ability and capacity—his advice and opinion ought to have great weight with the Harbour Commissioners. I have a lot of correspondence in my hand which has taken place between the Harbour Commissioners and the authorities, but I am not going to trouble your Lordships by reading any portion of it. I observe, however, that my noble friend stated that the leave of absence of the harbour-master had been curtailed. I have a letter which states that the question of leave of absence had never been raised. Of course, in making this statement I am repeating information which has been given to me. There seems to be a feeling, whether right or wrong, that the harbour-master has not been fairly treated by the Harbour Commissioners, and there is also some doubt as to his position. The Lord Lieutenant has the appointment of the harbour-master, who cannot be dismissed without the sanction of the Lord Lieutenant, but, in the meantime, he performs his duty under the control of the Office of Works. If there is a feeling that an inquiry ought to be made, let it be made by the proper authorities, and I may
  1356
  inform the noble Lord that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has promised that he will undertake that an inquiry shall be held if it is the wish of your Lordships. I hope the noble Lord will be satisfied with that assurance, and not press his motion.
  LORD CLONBROCK: I should like to explain that in moving for a committee of inquiry I did not mean a committee of this House. I had hoped that the Government might see their way to appoint an impartial small Committee, comprising some nautical experts, to decide the question of the staff. The question of leave is not one of so great importance, but the harbour-master informed me that his leave had been reduced from five weeks to four, and it certainly seems curious that the Board should know nothing about it. He informed me that the reason given for the reduction was that the length of his leave had been made to correspond with that granted to other harbour-masters. I do not know how many harbour-masters have the misfortune to be under this board, but harbours certainly vary in size, and there cannot be another of such importance as Kingstown. Therefore the comparison between the leave given to the harbour-master at Kingstown and that given to the smaller harbour-masters is not a fair comparison. It also came to his knowledge that the leave of the harbour-master had been calculated on the scale of pay, and that he was held in the office to rank with a third-class clerk. This, however, was not stated directly to him. I am convinced that the owners of ships frequenting Kingstown harbour would be very apprehensive if they knew that the staff had been reduced to such an extent that the only experienced man concerned—the harbour-master—declared it to be insufficient, and especially so in times of emergency. I think a thorough inquiry should be held into the matter on public grounds, and if the noble Viscount will assure me that such an inquiry will be held I will not press my motion.
  VISCOUNT CROSS: My Lords, I can only repeat that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has stated that, if it is desired by the House, an inquiry shall be made. With regard to the question of leave, I have a letter here, signed by Mr. Stevenson,

  1357
  in which he says that the question of leave of absence is entirely a new one.
  Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

  CONGESTED DISTRICTS BOARD (IRELAND) BILL.
  Brought from the Commons; Read 1a; and to be printed. (No. 174.)
  ELECTRIC LIGHTING (CLAUSES) BILL.
  Brought from the Commons; Read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a on Friday the 28th instant (The Earl of Dudley). (No. 175.)

  UNIVERSITY OF LONDON ACT (1898) AMENDMENT BILL.
  Brought from the Commons; Read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a Tomorrow (The Lord President [D. Devonshire]). (No. 176.)
  House adjourned at live minutes past Five of the clock, till To-morrow half-past Ten of the clock.