GREAT SOUTHERN AND WESTERN AND WATERFORD, LIMERICK, AND WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANIES AMALGAMATION BILL [H.L.] (Hansard, 27 July 1900)

§ * LORD GREVILLE
I beg to move the Amendment standing in my name to Clause 25. If sub-sections such as are included in my Amendment are not inserted the Waterford Corporation will be deprived of the benefits which they have enjoyed for years past. The Amendment will not in any way injure the Bill, and I trust your Lordships will agree to it.

§ EARL SPENCER
I am afraid it is rather difficult to explain the position of the mover of the Amendment as well as that of the Joint Committee who considered the Bill, but I think I must venture to do so. The Bill is a very important one, and I will admit that Limerick, Waterford, and other places are deeply interested in it. The Committee, therefore, went carefully into all these matters; they sat for a great many days, and this matter was discussed at great length before them. I do not know whether my noble friend is going to press this Amendment, but I think it right that I should state exactly what it is. Two years ago a very important Act was passed in respect of the Rosslare and Fishguard line, which immensely affected the whole traffic of the railways in the south of Ireland. That Act established a line of steamboats from Rosslare to Fishguard, and a good many conditions were imposed on the promoters, one being that the Great Southern and Western should give the line all the traffic they could. That Act will affect in an enormous degree the whole trade and commerce of the south and west of Ireland, and since it has been passed it has very much affected the position of the different railway companies in Ireland, almost necessitating the bringing forward of the Bill now before your Lordships. One of the clauses of the Bill is intended to protect all through traffic as 1452 before, wherever it goes. That clause remains. There was another clause affecting the future, but after a good deal of consultation and discussion the Committee decided against it. One of the clauses to protect the Harbour Commissioners of Waterford was that the Great Western of England, which is in close alliance with the Great Southern and Western, were to run a daily service of steamboats to Waterford as well as to Fishguard, and in that clause the through traffic obtained was to be carried by their lines to their own stations, or wherever their lines came in England. That was as the Bill came before us, but the Great Western of England opposed that clause, considering it hard and onerous upon them. The Committee considered the grievance, and came to the conclusion that the Great Western had something to say on the matter. Therefore they inserted a clause saying that, until the Great Western were relieved of their obligation to run a daily service of steam-boats to Waterford, the same conditions should be imposed upon the Great Southern over the new amalgamated line as were placed on them in respect of their own lines in the Rosslare and Fishguard Bill. With every desire to give full protection to the different places, we came to the conclusion that that clause would be more just. My noble friend wishes to alter that. He seeks for a through traffic clause to all places in England, quite independently of the clause which was inserted in the Rosslare and Fishguard Bill, and then promises that if that is granted the Harbour Commissioners of Waterford will engage not to oppose any Bill brought forward by the Great Western The Committee have fully considered this, and are not in a position to give way on that point. I confess that I do not think any great hardship will be imposed upon Waterford if the Bill stands as it is. I therefore oppose the Amendment.

THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (The Earl of MORLEY)
My Lords, I think it is hardly worth while to say anything in support of the view taken by the noble Earl who has just spoken, except to remind the House that this Bill was referred to a specially strong Joint Committee of both Houses, who sat for twenty-nine days, and that this particular question occupied a considerable time. I cannot believe that your Lordships will 1453 be likely to reverse the decision arrived at after so much deliberation.

§ * LORD GREVILLE
The object of the new clause which I now beg to move is to put a check on the working of the company, and to give to the Treasury powers which will secure the proper working of the line.

§ EARL SPENCER
I am afraid I must also oppose this Amendment. It involves a new principle in railroad legislation, and I do not myself believe that it is at all necessary. Under clauses in both Bills there is ample power to refer to arbitration any disputes as to the facilities—the wide facilities —which have been granted. The proposed clause would effect a sweeping change, and has never been before the Committee. The matter is of vast importance, and would make a revolution in railway legislation, at all events, in Ireland. I do not express an opinion as to whether it is right or wrong—it has not been discussed before the Committee— but I think the existing protection clauses sufficient.

THE EARL OF MORLEY
This clause appears on the Paper now for the first time, and the first I saw of it was a typewritten copy which was handed to me just before the House met. It is entirely out of the question to move it without giving notice.