Lords Sitting of 20 June 1902

VISCOUNT MOUNTMORRES.
Report made from the Lord Chancellor, that the right of William Geoffrey Buchard do Montmorency Viscount Mountmorres, in the Peerage of Ireland, 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.
Ordered, That the report of the Lord Chancellor of the United Kingdom, made to the House of Lords this day, that the right of the Viscount Mountmorres to vote at the elections of Representative Peers for Ireland has been established to his satisfaction, he sent to the Clerk of the Crown in Ireland, together with a certificate stating that such report has been made, and that the House has ordered it to be sent to the said Clerk of the Crown in Ireland.

EARL FITZWILLIAM.
Ordered, That the report of the Lord Chancellor of the United Kingdom, made to the House of Lords yesterday, that the right of the Earl Fitzwilliam to vote at the elections of Representative Peers for Ire-land has been established to his satisfaction, be sent to the Clerk of the Crown in Ireland, together with a certificate stating that such report has been made, and that the House has ordered it to be sent to the said Clerk of the Crown in Ireland.
The Lord Gormanston (V. Gormanston) took the Oath.

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House, That the Clerk of the Parliaments bad laid upon the Table the certificate from the Examiners that the Standing Orders applicable to the following Bill have not been compiled with:—
Fleetwood Urban District Council.
The same was ordered to lie on the Table.

CAVEHILL AND WHILTEWELL TRAMWAYS BILL.
Reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments.
HALIFAX CORPORATION BILL,
  EAST WORCESTERSHIRE WATER BILL.
  Reported with Amendments.
KINGSCOURT, KEADY, AND ARMAGH RAILWAY BILL.
Reported without Amendment.

YSTRADFELLTE WATER BILL [H.L.]
(Petition for additional Provision.)
The CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES informed the House that the opposition to the Bill was withdrawn.

FINCHLEY URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL.
Committed; the Committee to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
TRAMWAYS ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No. 2) BILL [H.L.]
Report from the Committee of Selection, That the Lord Shute (V. Barrington) be proposed to the House as a Member of the Select Committee on the said Bill, in the place of the Lord Crawshaw; read and agreed to.
RATHMINES AND RATHGAR URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL.
  BOURNEMOUTH GAS AND WATER BILL.
  Road 3a, and passed.
BARROW HÆMATITE STEELCOMPANY, LIMITED, BILL [H.L.]
Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY (No. 1) BILL.
Read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
PRESTON CORPORATION BILL,
  SCARBOROUGH TRAMWAYS BILL,

    BIRKENHEAD CORPORATION BILL,
    ERDINGTON, TRAMWAYS BILL,
    Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.

GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY (No. 2) BILL [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments.
LONGWOOD GAS BILL [H.L.]
  RHYMNEY RAILWAY BILL [H.L.]
  Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments; the said Amendments considered, and agreed to.
ABERDEEN SUBURBAN TRAMWAYS ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL.
A Bill to confirm a Provisional Order under the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, relating to Aberdeen Suburban Tramways, was presented by the Lord Balfour (pursuant to the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, Sections 8 and 9); read 1a; and to be printed. (No. 126.)
LOCAL GOVERNMENT' PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 11) BILL,
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDER (HOUSING OF WORKING CLASSES) (No. 2) BILL.
  Committed to a Committee of the Whole House.
WATER ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No. 1) BILL [H.L.]
House in Committee (according to order); Amendments made; Standing Committee negatived; the. Report of Amendments to be received on Monday next.
LONDON GOVERNMENT SCHEME (SOUTHWARK) BILL.
House in Committee (according to order); Bill reported without Amendment; Standing Committee negatived; and Bill to be read 3a on Monday next.
GAS ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No. 2) BILL [H.L.],
  ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 6) BILL [H.L.]
  House in Committee (according to order); Amendments made; Standing Committee negatived; the Report of Amendments to be received on Monday next.

ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 5) BILL [H.L.]
House in Committee (according to order); Amendments made; Standing
1232
Committee negatived; the Report of Amendments to be received on Monday-next.

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  MERCHANT SEAMEN'S FUND.
  Account of the receipts and expenditure under the Seamen's Fund Winding-up Act, from 1st January to 31st December, 1901.
  POLLING DISTRICTS (COUNTY OF LANCASTER).
  Order made by the County Council of the County of Lancaster, re-dividing the Hey wood, Ince, Stretford, and West-haughton Parliamentary Divisions into convenient polling districts.
  ELECTRIC LIGHTING ACTS, 1882 TO 1890 (PROCEEDINGS).
  Report by the Board of Trade respecting the applications to and proceedings of the Board of Trade under the Electric Lighting Acts, 1882 to 1890, during the past year.
  LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL.
  Returns relating to the Council to 31st March, 1902; with estimate of expenditure for 1902.

  INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION (IRELAND).
  Rules made by the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland—
  I. Determining the number of centre superintendents to be appointed for the examinations, 1902.
  II. Appointing the places at which the examinations for 1902 shall be held.
  Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  MARINE INSURANCE BILL [H.L.]
  Amendments reported (according to order), and Bill to be read 3a on Monday next.
  BRITISH MUSEUM BILL [H.L.]
  Read 3a (according to order), and passed and sent to the Commons.
  ROYAL NAVAL RESERVE VOLUNTEERS BILL.
  House in Committee (according to order). Bill reported without Amendment; Standing Committee negatived; and Bill to be read 3a on Monday next.

  CORONATION—ACCOMMODATION FOR PEERS.
  THE EARL OF MAYO had the following Notice on the Paper—
  To ask the Earl Marshal whether there is any objection to Peers who have once entered the Abbey making use of the covered way between Poets' Corner and St. Stephen's Porch in the same manner as the Members of the House of Commons.
  He remarked, however, that as the noble Duke was not present, he would postpone his Question.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR (The Earl of HALSBURY): I have no commission to answer the noble Earl's Question, but I have had a conversation with the First Commissioner of Works, and he informed me that the erections in the neighbourhood of the Abbey referred to by the noble Earl are intended for the convenience of Members of both Houses of Parliament.
  THE EARL OF MAYO: May I supplement my Question by asking if Peers have to be in their places as early as the time mentioned in the notice? I am informed that Members of the House of Commons need not be in their places till much later.
  [No answer was given.]

MIDWIVES BILL.
[SECOND READING.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND: My Lords, I do not think I need detain your Lordships at any length in moving the Second Reading of this Bill, for I believe there is a general consensus of opinion in favour of something being done to remove the evils of the present state of things. This Bill, or rather a similar Bill, when before your Lordships on a former occasion, met with a very favourable reception. There are in this country some 10,000 or 15,000 women practising as midwives, and they are said to attend some 450,000 cases annually to which a doctor is not called in. Yet there is absolutely no qualification for these women, no guarantee that they are acquainted with their
1234
duties, and it is possible for any old drunken hag, with no idea of cleanliness or acquaintance with proper methods, to advertise herself as a midwife and carry on that business without let or hindrance. The consequences of this state of things are what we might very well anticipate. If your Lordships were to examine the reports of Coroners' Courts you would find that they give a very melancholy, but, at the same time, a very instructive, lesson as to the necessity of a Bill of this kind; and no less than 200 Coroners, out of about 250 in England and Wales have signified their approval of such a measure. Puerperal fever is said to be an absolutely preventable disease, and in the London hospitals it is practically unknown; yet throughout the country at large it is on the increase in consequence of the lack of fully-trained medical attention in cases of childbirth. Not only has there been an increase in cases of this kind, but a large amount of sickness and disease, incapacitating the mothers and inflicting great injury upon the children, has resulted from the ignorance of mid-wives. I need not remind your Lordships of the terrible suffering caused by permanent ill-health to mothers who are dependent for their daily bread on their own labour; and, with regard to the children, it is calculated that 40 per cent. of the cases of blindness are due to want of care at birth. That, I think, is a state of things which justifies an attempt at a remedy. There is no doubt that in matters of detail the question is fraught with great difficulty, and, while asking the House to assent to the principle of the Bill, I frankly admit that it requires very careful consideration in regard to details. I trust that the House will give it that consideration when we reach the Committee stage, but for the present I ask your Lordships to adopt the principle of the measure, which is simply to require the certification of a proper degree of knowledge and of good character on the part of midwives. The position of existing midwives who are really fit for their duties, and whose character is above reproach is specially safeguarded in the Bill, and they will not be injuriously affected by its provisions. When this Bill was previously introduced in your

1235
Lordships' House exception was taken to it on the ground that there was not sufficient local control. That has now been amended by giving the Comity Councils a large power of supervision in cases in the country. These, broadly speaking, are the provisions of the Bill. I have no reason to suppose that any opposition to the Bill at this stage is likely to be encountered, and I think I shall be consulting the convenience of your Lordships by moving, without further words, the Second Reading.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Duke of Northumberland.)
LORD WELBY: My Lords, it is my intention to support this Bill, but I desire to draw the attention of the noble Duke in charge of the measure to one or two points which, I hope, may receive his attention before the Committee stage. The Bill gives very considerable powers to an independent Board which is to be created, including the power to take any proceedings that may be necessary under the Act. The Board will also have power to take certain fees from candidates for certificates, and to meet the expenses incurred out of the fees, but any balance of expenditure is to be charged on the rates. It is unusual to allow one body to spend money and then to hand the bill on to another body without any check or control. The expenditure of the Board has, I know, to be approved by the Privy Council, but that is an approval after the expenditure has been legally incurred, and therefore the control in that case is very imperfect. I would ask the noble Duke to consider before the Committee stage whether the control which is wanting here, and which I think he will agree with me is desirable, for I am sure he is as anxious as I am to avoid any unnecessary charge on the rates.
THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND: Hear, hear!
LORD WELBY: I would ask the noble Duke to consider whether this control could not be supplied by inserting in Clause 3 (Constitution and Duties of the Central Midwives Board), after the words "and generally to do any other
1236
act or duty which may be necessary for the due and proper carrying out of the provisions of this Act" the words "all questions of expenditure being subject to the previous approval of the Privy Council." The Bill further provides that the Board shall appoint a Secretary, who is to be paid such salary as the Privy Council may approve. But that leaves the Board at liberty to appoint such other officers as it pleases, whose salaries may be a charge on the rates. I would suggest, in order that the local rate account may be safeguarded, that the salaries of the other officers to be appointed should also be subject to the approval of the Privy Council.
THE EARL OF HALSBURY: My Lords, I think there are much more serious objections to the Bill than the noble Lords seem to think. At the same time I do not undertake the responsibility of moving its rejection, because certain cases contemplated by the Bill may require regulation. But I cannot help thinking that those who have drawn up the Bill apparently had in mind large centres of population possessed of ample means for the purpose of obtaining medical assistance, and had not considered that in certain cases it may not be possible to get trained nurses. I am assured by the magistrates in five counties—Lancashire, Worcestershire, Warwickshire, Sussex, and Surrey—that in small villages the persons who perform what is necessary, and in nine cases out of ten without skilled assistance, also perform the functions of maid-of-all-work in the house during the few days in which the woman is unable to work for herself. If the Bill in its present form passes into law, it will, I am told by correspondents, inflict an inconceivable amount of suffering on the very poor. One or two of those who have written to me live in a place ten miles from any medical man. [The noble and learned Lord here read passages from the letter of a lady who had herself obtained a certificate and assisted in the nursing of the poor, and who protested against the Bill in its present form; and also from the letter of a Magistrate, who was in a position enabling him to form a good judgment, stating that there was very

1237
serious objection to the Bill on the part of the working population.] As I have said, I am not going to move the rejection of this Bill, but I thought your Lordships' attention ought to be called to the evils that may arise, so that when the Bill is considered in Committee you may look at it with care and see that no injury is done to the poorer classes.
THE LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER: My Lords, I think it would be a pity if on this question no voice was heard from the Episcopal Bench, firstly, because so large a portion of the time of most of us has been spent in direct contact with the working classes; and, secondly, because of the close connection which has historically existed between the class of persons specially referred to in this Bill and the members of the Episcopal Bench. I do not know whether your Lordships are aware of the fact that for many centuries no woman could practice as a midwife without the direct sanction of the Bishop of the Diocese. Even in the life-time of some Members of your Lordships' House it used to be part of the inquiry connected with the Bishop's visitation whether or not the midwives in the parish were duly authorised. The form of the question put some eighty years ago by a predecessor of my own to every parish clergyman was—
"Doth any woman in your parish take upon herself to execute the office of midwife? Are they all licensed? Who is not?"
I refer to this merely as a curious incident in the history of this matter, which is remarkable for the wide swing of the pendulum from one extreme view to the other. Not many hundred years ago no medical man was allowed, in many parts of Europe, to be present at a birth. I was reading the account, the other day, of times when a medical man who wished to investigate the subject clothed himself in woman's dress so as to be surreptitiously present for the purpose of scientific investigation. Even in the early part of the last century midwifery was treated in a much less respectful manner in the Royal College of Surgeons than other scientific matters that came before that body.
1238
Now we have gone to the very opposite extreme, and there are amongst the opponents of this Bill some who speak of the midwife as a person who practically should not exist at all. A medical man who gave evidence before the recent Committee of the House of Commons said a midwife was—
"An obsolete individual, an anachronism, a relic of the Dark Ages."
The promoters of this Bill, one need hardly say, do not take either of these extreme views. We recognise, of course, the paramount necessity that in all ordinary circumstances there should be a ready appeal, at all events, to a fully trained medical man; but, at the same time, we recognise the natural—may we not say the wholesome—instincts which lead so large a proportion of the mothers of England of the poorer classes to prefer the aid of one of their own sex whom they have reason to believe, rightly or wrongly, to be fairly well qualified to aid them in the time of their need. It is calculated that 60 per cent. of the births that occur annually in England take place without the presence of a medical man. Recognising that desire on the part of mothers, we wish to do something which shall secure that the women who attend at such hours shall have at least some degree of competence for the task, and shall be under some sort of supervision as to the way in which they carry it out.
In this connection we are not quite abreast of other countries. I believe I am right in saying that in France legislation was passed regulating this particular matter in 1803; in Belgium in 1818, and in Austria in 1810. We alone among the nations of Europe have trusted to the common sense of those concerned, without interfering by means of legislative enactments. The evidence given before the Select Committee on Infant Life Protection, of which I had the honour to be a member, as to the mischief which took place from the incompetence of those who were professedly giving such help at that hour has impressed itself on the minds of practically all the coroners of England, and upon no small number of the medical profession. And, though all the doctors are not by any means agreed as to the way in which the

1239
wrong should be set right, they are unanimous as to the existence of the very grave evils which proceed from the lack of training on the part of these women. It was stated in evidence that at one of the great hospitals for women fully 25 per cent. of the cases were due to evils resulting from badly-managed confinements. Though it is subsidiary to the general question, I do not wish to pass over the case of the very large number of girl mothers who are without homes, and who, through the fault of others far more than their own, are forced to seek help where they can find it in the hour of their direst need. What have these girls—and their number is enormous—to look to or to do? If you turn to a certain class of newspaper, you will find many advertisements of homes for this special purpose, each of which is said to be "under the management of" one who describes herself as a "midwife." That is not illegal; it is not undesirable; something of the kind there must be. But is there any class of human beings, if we consider the circumstances, who more need to be inspected and supervised than those who are taking part in the bringing into the world of unwelcome children? It needs no special knowledge to realise the possibility, nay the probability, of terrible evils of the vilest sort. There should be some kind of certification of such persons.
It is, however, on far larger and more general grounds than that, that I join the noble Duke in asking your Lordships to read the Bill a second time. I am not quite certain that I correctly caught the grounds on which the writers of the letters, which the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack quoted, based their objections to the Bill. What the Bill says is that from and after January 1st, 1910, no woman shall "habitually and for gain" attend women in"] childbirth, unless she be certified under the Act. That does not prevent a neighbouring mother of experience rendering all the assistance in her power in the cases referred to. As to the observations of the Lord Chancellor that the Bill apparently had been drawn up by those who were unfamiliar with the needs of rural districts, I would point out that the Member who was
1240
in charge of the Bill in the House of Commons represents a large rural constituency, and is, therefore, presumably in touch with the needs of such communities. The Bill will effect a reform, not noisy or conspicuous, but sorely needed; a reform very far-reaching in its results, and one which affects the lives of both mothers and children in very many homes in England. If there are points, such as those to which your Lordships' attention has been called by the Lord Chancellor, which can be met, the promoters of the Bill will, I am assured, be most glad to further their Amendment, so that the Bill may issue from the Committee in the best possible form. It is a matter which, in a very literal sense, concerns the life of thousands "from the cradle to the grave."
EARL RUSSELL: My Lords, this is a Bill which affects almost entirely the poorer classes of this country, and the object of the promoters is, I take it, to avoid the misfortunes which occur at childbirth owing to the operation being performed by unskilled and unsuitable persons. To that extent I imagine that the Bill commands general and universal support, and I did not gather from the observations of the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack that he dissented from the principle of registration suggested in the Bill. Of course, a great deal of the success of the measure will depend on the way in which its details are made to work, and on the manner in which the Central Mid-wives Board, intended to be set up, carries out the duties that are imposed upon it. I do not myself see that the price which these women charge for their services need be materially increased by the operation of this Bill. If the Central Board takes the view, as I suppose it will, that it should place on the register as qualified midwives, not women who possess the necessary knowledge to be medical practitioners or trained nurses, but women who are of cleanly habits, and have sufficient knowledge to attend cases of this description without causing danger to life, it does not appear to me that the charges for their services need be materially increased, or that the number of those who practice as midwives

1241
need be materially diminished. I am glad to see that the Bill, as amended in the other House, provides that at least two of the members of the Central Board must be women, for I regard it of great importance that women should be properly represented on a Board which is to control a matter of this kind. In addition, the local control of the midwives has now been placed under the County Councils. The Bill has met with opposition from some portions of the medical profession on the ground that it will give, as they think, a status to these women which will make them to some extent competitors. I understand that doctors with small practices attend confinements now for 10s. 6d., and I think it will be found that qualified midwives will still be able to charge small sums for their attendance. The noble Duke will perhaps explain in Committee the meaning of the two dates in Clause 1–1910 in the first Sub-section, and 1905 in the second Sub section—which I have not yet been able to make out to my satisfaction. I think the Bill is one which should command general support; but it is important to prevent the regulations under it taking such a form as to make it compulsory on the poorer classes to pay higher fees than they can afford.
LORD THRING: My Lords, I agree with what was said by the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack on this question, and I cannot help feeling that the promoters of the Bill have entirely left out of account the country villages and small hamlets where surgical assistance is very difficult to get and trained nurses are out of the question. With regard to the registration of these woman, no midwife can be admitted under this Bill unless she produces satisfactory evidence to the Central Board. How on earth is a poor woman in the extremity of Cornwall, for instance, to produce satisfactory evidence to a Board in London? Again, a guinea for registration is an exorbitant sum to charge, and a sum which many poor women would find it absolutely impossible to pay Then there is a Clause which provides that, when the Central Board has made Rules, those Rules are not to be passed
1242
unless approved by the General Medical Council. What possible reason is there for referring Rules framed by such a thoroughly competent body as this Central Midwives Board will be to the General Medical Council? No doubt the medical profession are anxious to have these cases within their cognisance, but there are thousands of mothers in this country who cannot afford to have a doctor on these occasions, and upon whom this Bill would inflict the greatest possible hardships. To show how stupid the Bill is I would call attention to the Clause which provides that a midwife is not to attend abnormal cases. How is an unfortunate woman to know whether a case is abnormal or not? Many of the details in the Bill require Amendment, and I hope these points will be considered in Committee.
THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Lord BALFOUR of BURLEIGH): My Lords, there seems to be a general consensus of opinion in favour of the Bill being read a second time. Therefore, I shall not trespass on the time of the House to say anything on the general question. The various Amendments which have been foreshadowed may very well be left to be discussed when we reach the Committee stage. I should not have risen now but for the speech of the noble Lord who has just sat down. The noble Lord seemed to indicate that it would be difficult for a woman in Cornwall to satisfy the Central Board in London of her fitness to exercise this important calling. If the noble Lord had paid the promoters the compliment of reading the Bill with care he would have found in the third Clause that part of the functions of the Central Board are to appoint examiners and to decide upon the places where, and the times when, examinations shall be held. There is nothing in the Bill to the effect that all the examinations are to be held in London.
LORD THRING: I was not referring to the question of examinations, but to the case of the existing midwives, who are to be required to provide evidence, satisfactory to the Board, that at the passing of the Act they had been for at least one year in bonâ fide practice as midwives, and that they bear good characters.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: No doubt it is right that those who are at present in practice, so to speak, should be tenderly dealt with, and that is the desire of the promoters of the Bill. There is no intention to interfere suddenly with those who are qualified to carry on their occupation, but I am sure the House will agree that if a woman is not qualified it is in the public interest that she should be interfered with. The noble Lord opposite asked—How is an unfortunate woman to know that danger is likely to occur? The answer to that seems to me to be very clear and simple. The purpose of the Bill is to ensure that women who act as midwives shall have sufficient knowledge and training to know when to call in medical assistance. It is seven years since I had the honour of moving the Second Reading of a similar Bill in your Lordships' House. Since I have been a Member of the Government I have not, of course, taken part in promoting the Bill or in agitating for it, but I think I may be allowed to express my satisfaction that, after all these years of agitation on the part of those who are interested in the subject, there is now so good a prospect of legislation. I hope the Second Reading of the Bill will be agreed to and that it will be fully and carefully considered in Committee, for no more important and far-reaching measure of social reform has been before the House for a long time.
THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND: I sympathise most strongly with what the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack and Lord Thring said as to the position of women in rural districts, and I should certainly decline to support any measure which I thought would place them in a worse position. I think the clause in the Bill has been overlooked which provides that any woman who, within two years from the date of the Act coming into operation, claims to be certified, shall be so certified provided she hold a certificate in mid wifery from several bodies named, or such other certificate as may be approved by the Central Midwives Board, or produces evidence, satisfactory to the Board, that at the passing of the Act, she had been for at least one year in bonâ fide practice as a midwife, and that she bears a good character. It is merely a question of whether she has been in practice as a
1244
midwife and bears a good character; and' a letter from the squire, the parson, or the doctor of the village, to that effect would be considered satisfactory evidence by the Central Board. The noble Lord opposite complained that it was proposed to charge a guinea for registration and that many women would be unable to afford this sum. The wording of the Bill is that the fee is not to exceed the sum of one guinea, and it will be within the power of the Board to reduce that fee in accordance with the circumstances of the case. I may say that the promoters will be quite willing to accept any Amendments that will carry out the intention that the Bill should not bear harshly on those who carry on their avocation satisfactorily.
On Question, agreed to; Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Friday, the 4th of July next.

SALE OF INTOXICATING LIQUORS (LICENCES) (IRELAND) BILL.
[SECOND READING.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE EARL OF MAYO: My Lords, in moving the Second Reading of this Bill, I desire to say a few words in explanation of its object. The wholesale granting of licences in Ireland has become a positive scandal. The Magistrates are canvassed, and when licences are to be granted they are brought from all parts of the county. The whole gist of the measure, which has passed the other House with the consent of all parties, is that no licences shall be granted for five years from the time of its passage, with the exception of certain cases in which exemption will be allowed. Under Clause 2 exemption will be allowed in the case of premises which are now licensed or which were licensed at any time since January 1st, 1902; in the case of an hotel containing at least ten apartments set apart and used exclusively for the sleeping accommodation of travellers, and having no public bar for the sale of intoxicating liquors; and in the case of a railway refreshment room. Again, the premises to be licensed in the future must be valued under the Irish Valuation Acts at not less than £30 for the

1245
city of Dublin and Dublin Metropolitan Police District and the city of Belfast; £'20 in the cities of Cork, Limerick, Waterford, and Londonderry: £15 in the cities of Galway and Kilkenny; £12 in any other city or town of over ten thousand inhabitants at the census ascertained next preceding the application; and £10 in all other places. Nothing in the Bill, however, will affect the law as to the transfer or assignment of licences from one person to another, or as to the renewal of licences. As I have said, all parties in the other House concurred in passing the measure. It is only a small Bill—a small step, but a step in the right direction. We seldom in Ireland agree upon any Irish Bill, and the fact that we have done so upon this matter will, I am sure, commend the Bill to your Lordships' favourable consideration.
Moved, that the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Earl of Mayo.)
LORD CLONBROCK: My Lords, I rise to support this Bill and to endorse the statement of my noble friend that it is a step in the right direction. I wish the measure had gone considerably further, and that means could have been found, not only to prevent an increase in the number of spirit licences in Ireland, but to materially decrease their number. The increase that has lately taken place constitutes a grave public scandal, and I trust that the matter will, before long, engage the attention of the Legislature. In the meantime, this Bill, to which I hope your Lordships will assent, will prevent a further extension of the evil.
THE EARL OF CORK: My Lords, this Bill, though a very small one, will, in my opinion, effect a very great reform. Everyone who is acquainted with the small towns of Ireland must be aware of the fact that the enormous number of these licensed houses is a curse to the country. Personally, I should like to sec passed a measure transferring the power of granting licences from the local magistrates to other hands, but I do not think there is any prospect of that at present. I am convinced that the Bill now before the House will prove a most beneficial Act of Parliament.
EARL GREY: My Lords, the noble Earl who is in charge of this Bill has informed your Lordships that the measure passed through the other House with absolute unanimity. I think the fact that a Bill containing matters so doubly contentious as that of Ireland and liquor should come to us in so peaceful a garb, is matter for congratulation. I do not wish to strike a note of discord in regard to a measure upon which all parties in Ireland appear to be agreed, but I hope your Lordships will bear with me a few moments in view of the fact that I have, during the past year, devoted a considerable amount of energy and time to the endeavour to erect a ring fence round existing licences in Great Britain by the establishment of powerful Trust Companies which shall be able to accept and manage, in the interest of the community, every new licence which the licensing authorities may think it desirable to create. The provisions which the noble Earl relics upon for securing that the new licences shall come into respectable hands do not, in my opinion, go far enough. I understand that the licensing authorities will have power under the Bill to grant new licences in districts where there has been an increase of not less than 25 per cent. of the population according to the last census. Let us assume that the increase has taken place. The only other provision is that the applicant shall put in one surrender. I call that a most insufficient precaution. It is well known that new licences in growing communities have a very large value; they are worth, in many cases, thousands of pounds, and there is no security that the applicant who gets the new licence shall be a respectable man by the fact that he is required to put in the surrender of a house which may be obtained in the market for a very few pounds. What is wanted is that the law should make it impossible for magistrates to grant a new licence to a private individual for his personal gain. I, therefore, give notice that, in Committee, I shall move an Amendment to Clause 4, which will add a proviso, under which it will be necessary that an applicant to obtain a licence should he nominated by a Trust Company, under whose Articles of Association the man in charge of the

1247
public-house shall have no interest in, and receive no profit from, the retail sale of intoxicating liquors.
THE EARL OF DENBIGH: I wish to say, on behalf of the Irish Government, that there is no objection whatever to the Bill. Indeed, as the noble Earl has truly stated, the condition of affairs in Ireland has become so serious that it is desirable the Bill should pass, and I hope your Lordships will give it a Second Reading. I trust that the noble Earl will be prepared to accept some Amendments which will be put forward on behalf of the Irish Government when the Committee stage is reached, and that he will defer that stage till after the Coronation recess.
On Question, agreed to; Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the whole House on Thursday the 3rd of July next.

HORSE-BREEDING FOR MILITARY PURPOSES.
LORD BARNARD: My Lords, I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the War Office receives reports from the officers engaged in purchasing remounts and other horses for military purposes at various places in this country, and, if so, whether in the interests of agriculturists and horse-breeders, those reports, or summaries of them, can be made public. This Question ought, perhaps, more properly to have been addressed to the representative of the Board of Agriculture, but I have not been able so far to find out who represents that Department in your Lordship's House. I was much struck by the statement in the official reports of Col. Birkbeck, Inspector of Remounts, that British horses had proved far superior in South Africa to those procured elsewhere, and I think it is to be regretted that nothing has been done to induce agriculturists in this country to breed horses for military purposes. A great many farmers are ignorant on this subject, and there is a disinclination to breed horses suitable for such purposes. It is with a view to ascertain whether they should be told that it is not worth their while to breed such horses, or whether they should be encouraged to do so, that I desire to obtain information.
THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Lord RAGLAN): The Question really refers more to the subject of breeding horses than to that of remounts, and perhaps the noble Lord would have got a more satisfactory answer if he had addressed his Question to the Board of Agriculture. The War Office, of course, receive, reports from the officers and those engaged in the purchase of remount but these reports are entirely drawn up from the point of view of the horse purchaser, and not of the horse breeder. We have supplied the Board of Agriculture with information as to the specification of the horses which are required for Army purposes in peace as well as in war, and we are, of course, naturally anxious to do anything we can to assist in improving the system of horse breeding in this country with any information in our power. It is impossible, however, for us to publish the reports as a whole, but if there is any particular point as to which the noble Lord can make any suggestion, I will see if the information can be supplied.

CREMATION BILL [H.L.]
Commons' Amendments considered (according to order).
LORD MONKSWELL,who was in charge of the Bill, said that, as the Bill left their Lordships' House, Clause 5 provided that no crematorium should be constructed nearer to a dwelling-house than 200 yards, but the Commons had altered this distance to 500 yards. He had received a communication from the Home Office that the Home Secretary preferred that the distance should stand at 200 yards. He moved to disagree with the Commons' Amendment.
LORD BELPERexplained that the Home Secretary regarded the Commons' Amendment as likely to cause a very serious difficulty in some cases in the way of securing a suitable site.
On question, Motion agreed to.
LORD MONKSWELLcalled attention to the fact that in Clause 7, after the word "Act" in line 33, the Commons had inserted an Amendment providing that all statutory provisions relating to the keeping and destruction and

1249
falsification of registers of burials should apply to a register under this Act as if it were a register of burials. It had been pointed out to him by the Home Office that the word "keeping" ought to be omitted from the Amendment, because the mode in which registers of burials were kept was not applicable to cremations. For instance, in the register of burials one of the matters that had to be entered was the place of burial, and it would be absurd to insist on that being inserted in a cremation register. He therefore moved to omit the words "keeping and" from the Commons' Amendment.
On Question, Motion agreed to.
A Committee appointed to prepare a reason to be offered to the Commons for the disagreement to the Commons' Amendment to Clause 5; the Committee to meet forthwith; Report from Committee of reason prepared by them; read, and agreed to; and a message sent to the Commons to return the said Bill with the Amendments and reason.

FRESHWATER FISH (SCOTLAND) BILL.
House in Committee (according to order).
Clause 1 agreed to.
Clause 2:—
THE EARL OF GALLOWAYagreed as to the necessity of the Bill, but said that when it was in the other House words were inserted which seriously affected the rights of private individuals. As the Clause at present stood the right to carry on what was known as double rod fishing, or cross line fishing, or set lines, or other fishing, was taken away from persons even in ponds or lochs exclusively belonging to such persons. He contended that this was a piece of Socialistic legislation. In several lochs which he owned it was impossible to catch a single fish without employing these instruments, in connection with the use of which there was no cruelty whatever. They might just as well pass an Act to prevent people shooting with two guns. He held that in a free country everyone should be allowed to do what he liked with his own, so long as he did not interfere with the comfort of others.
Amendment moved—
"To leave out the words from 'except,' in line 13, to 'persons' in line 14, and to insert after the words 'other fishing' in line 15, the word 'except in ponds or lochs exclusively belonging to such persons.'"—(The Earl of Galloway.)
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: I hope the House will not be led away by the noble Earl and accept this Amendment. The noble Earl is correct in saying that this provision was not in the Bill when it was first introduced. It is the result of an Amendment which was moved in the Standing Committee in the other House and carried against the representative of the Government by a considerable majority. The provision placed upon proprietors the same restrictions as to fishing by methods, which, by a previous Act, were declared illegal on the part of others than owners, and I ventured to say on the Second Reading of the Bill, that to this no great exception need be taken. The Government, however, thought it necessary to preserve to proprietors the limited power of netting, which I confess seems to me the only power which even they would really desire to maintain. The effect of the Amendment, if the House were to agree to it, would be to restore the right of double rod fishing, or cross line fishing, or set lines or other fishing in enclosed waters. I think myself that it is extremely desirable that these methods of fishing should die out altogether. They are not, in my opinion at any rate, of the nature of sport, and I think it will cause a great deal of jealousy and friction if these powers are preserved when a Bill of this kind is being passed. The object is to preserve trout for legitimate fly fishing, and if it is necessary to take them by other means, surely it is better to adopt the net than to perpetuate the other forms of fishing referred to. The Clause as it now stands is in the nature of a compromise and I think it would be wise of the House to allow it to pass in the form in which it is now presented.
On Question, Amendment negatived.
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid that so far as he could see the Bill referred solely to trout. That being so, why call it a Freshwater Fish Bill? If

1251
the measure referred to other fish than trout, he thought there was a good deal of force in what had been said by the noble Earl who moved the Amendment.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: If the noble Earl will propose in the Standing Committee a title which he thinks will be more appropriate, I shall be most happy to consider it.
THE EARL OF GALLOWAYsaid that in most lochs in Scotland there were innumerable quantities of trout and pike, and the only way in which the pike could be kept down was by setting lines. If this was made illegal the pike would get the upper hand, with the result that the trout would be considerably diminished.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: I do not think there is any provision in the Bill against setting lines for pike.
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsignified his intention of moving, in the Standing Committee, that the title of the measure should be altered to Trout (Scotland) Bill.
Clause 2 agreed to.
Clause 3:—
LORD NEWTONthought Clause 3, which provided that no person should use dynamite or other explosive to catch or destroy fish, was open to some objection. A person owning a pond which was infested with perch or pike, might be anxious to destroy them, but under the Bill he would be subject to penalties if he used explosives for that purpose.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: I think anyone who attempts to destroy one kind of fish by dynamite and wishes the dynamite to differentiate between the fish he desires to destroy and the fish he does not desire to destroy, will find himself very much mistaken. It is extremely likely that it would destroy all the fish in the pool. I am confident that the destruction of fish by dynamite is a proceeding which would be condemned by this House.
LORD NEWTONsaid there might be no trout in the pond at all, and the owner might wish to destroy the coarse fish in order to introduce trout.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: The risk of dynamite being used improperly and illegally, as it sometimes is, is so great that it ought to be prevented altogether. If coarse fish have to be taken out of a pond, surely that can be effectively done by means of netting.
Clause 3, agreed to.
Clause 4:—
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNasked for an explanation of this Clause, which appeared to apply to salmon fishing.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: The river Esk and some of its tributaries are partly in England and partly in Scotland, and the jurisdiction is therefore divided between the English and Scottish authorities. This Clause was put in to save the rights and priviliges of the Board of Trade, who regulate English fisheries, as distinct from the Scottish authorities who regulate Scottish fisheries. It is an agreed Clause, to which no objection has been taken.
Clause 4 and remaining Clauses agreed to.
Bill reported without Amendment, and recommitted to the Standing Committee.

STANDING COMMITTEE.
Report from the Committee of Selection for the Standing Committee that they have added the Lord Stewart of Garlies (E. Galloway) to the Standing Committee; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
House adjourned at a quarter past Six o'clock to Monday next, a quarter before Eleven o'clock.