Lords Sitting of 14 March 1902

OFFICE OF LORD GREAT CHAMBERLAIN.
Committee for Privileges met. Counsel further heard on behalf of the Marquess of Cholmondeley and the Earl Carrington. The Attorney General heard to open the case on behalf of the Crown. Committee adjourned to Monday next.
PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
  CATERHAM AND DISTRICT GAS BILL [H.L.]
  Reported with Amendments.
  WREXHAM WATER BILL [H.L.]
  Reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments.
BIRMINGHAM ASSAY OFFICE BILL [H.L.]
  SWANSEA CORPORATION WATER BILL [H.L.]

    DARLEY DALE WATER BILL [H.L.]
    ISLE OF WIGHT CENTRAL RAILWAY BILL [H.L.]
    ASHTON UNDER-LYNE AND DUKINFIELD CORPORATIONS (ALMA BRIDGE, &c.) BILL [H.L.].

    LINCOLN AND EAST COAST RAILWAY AND DOCK (ABANDONMENT) BILL.
    Committee to meet on Tuesday next.
    DEVONPORT WATER BILL [H.L.]
    Report from the Select Committee, That it is not expedient to proceed further with the Bill; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
    DONEGAL RAILWAY BILL [H.L.]
    Read 2a (according to order).
  LIVERPOOL GRAIN STORAGE AND TRANSIT COMPANY BILL [H.L.]
    BIRMINGHAM CORPORATION WATER BILL [H.L.]
    Read 3a and passed, and sent to the Commons.
  METROPOLITAN POLICE PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL,
    MILITARY LANDS PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 1) BILL.
    Brought from the Commons. Read 1a; to be printed, and referred to the Examiners.
    HAMILTON GAS PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL [H.L.]
    Amendments reported (according to order), and Bill to be read 3a on Monday next.

    PRIVATE AND PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMATION BILLS.
    Ordered, That no Private Bill brought from the House of Commons shall be read a Second Time after Thursday the 19th day of June next.
    That no Provisional Order Confirmation Bill originating in this House shall be read a First Time after Tuesday the 6th day of May next.
    That no Provisional Order Confirmation Bill brought from the House of Commons shall be read a Second Time after Thursday the 19th day of June next.
    That when a Bill shall have passed this House with Amendments these orders shall not apply to any new Bill sent up from the House of Commons which the Chairman of Committees shall report to the House is substantially the same as the Bill so amended.
    That this House will not receive any petition for a Private Bill later than Tuesday the 6th day of May next, unless such Private Bill shall have been approved by the High Court of Justice; nor any petition for a Private Bill approved by the High Court of Justice after Friday the 9th day of May next.
    That this House will not receive any report from the Judges upon petitions presented to this House for Private Bills after Friday the 9th day of May next.
    Ordered, That the said Orders be printed and published, and affixed on the doors of this House and Westminster Hall. (No. 31.)

  RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
    COLONIES (ANNUAL).
    No. 349. British Guiana: Report for 1900–1901.

    PATENTS ACTS.
    Note by the Solicitor-General on the Report of the Committee appointed by the Board of Trade to inquire into the working of the Patents Acts on certain specified questions.
    Presented (by Command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

    CHURCH TEMPORALITIES (IRELAND).
    Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General upon the account of the Irish Land Commission in respect of Church Temporalities in Ireland, for the year ended 31st March, 1901; together with the account for the above period, and that from 26th July, 1869 (the date of the Irish Church Act) to 31st March, 1901.

    SUPERANNUATION.
    Treasury minute, dated 11th March, 1902, declaring that John Roper Norrish, chief clerk and cashier, His Majesty's Consulate, Alexandria, was appointed without a civil service certificate through inadvertence on the part of the head of his Department.
    Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.

    ILLEGAL SALE OF COPYRIGHT MUSIC.
    LORD WINDSOR: My Lords, I rise to call attention to the serious loss inflicted upon copyright holders of music by the illegal sale in the streets and elsewhere of copyright music by hawkers, and to the impracticability of their obtaining redress under the existing law, and to ask His Majesty's Government whether they see their way to passing some temporary measure to protect those who suffer by reason of these illegal practices. I am well aware that this question is familiar to most of your Lordships, especially to those noble Lords who were members of the Select Committee which was appointed to inquire into the subject of copyright. The outcome of that Committee was, I believe, the Bill which passed this House in 1900 in the name of Lord Monkswell, but which did not get through the other House of Parliament.
    My Lords, the extent of this grievance and the gigantic scale upon which the fraudulent sale of copyright music is carried on is not generally known. It is to this one particular point of the copyright law that I wish to draw attention. Men hawk about, and offer for sale at 2d. per song, music that is sold in a legitimate way by music sellers for 2s., and such is their impudence that I am told they actually stand on the doorsteps of the shops when the legitimate music sellers

    5
    are having the songs played over as an inducement to the public to purchase them, and hawk a song for 2d., crying "If you step inside, you can hear it for nothing." I think few people who have not specially inquired into the subject know the scale upon which the illegal sale of music is conducted. I have in my hand a short list from one printer of these pirated songs, which shows that within two months—between December 12th of last year and February 13th of this year—no fewer than 85,000 copies of eight different songs were sold, and as the price charged is about 2d per copy as compared with 2s. charged in a legitimate way, it will at once be seen that this matter involves large sums of money. The only remedy which now exists is to obtain an injunction to restrain the sale of the music, and this is insufficient, because the popular demand for a song is frequently transient and because the printing block can easily be transferred to another printer and the sale continued as merrily as before round the corner. It seems to me that this is an intolerable hardship, and I venture to ask his Majesty's Government whether they cannot do something to protect the rights of copyright holders. I do not ask them to deal at once with the complicated copyright law in a comprehensive Bill, though I think it would be advisable if that were done. But I do think some prompt and simple means should be adopted of protecting copyright holders from these illegal practices. These persons have a right to look to Parliament for protection, and Parliament ought not to say it cannot deal with the subject.
    I feel quite certain that, with the store of legal knowledge which is at the command of both Houses of Parliament, this grievance could very easily be remedied. It may be said that it is inconvenient to deal with one portion of the copyright law in the way that I suggest, but there is a precedent for that in the Act which was passed in 1862 for amending the law relating to copyright in works of fine art. This Act was passed for the protection of copyright holders of pictures, drawings, and so forth, and, besides imposing a penalty of £10 for every offence, it provided that all such imitations made without consent, and all
    6
    negatives used for the purpose of taking; such copies, should be forfeited to the proprietor of the copyright. I suggest that the Government should bring for-ward a measure on the lines of the three clauses in Lord Monkswell's Bill. The case of musical composers is very much harder than that of painters of pictures whose copyright is infringed. Both struggle very hard to do the best artistic work they possibly can to obtain popularity. They sometimes fail, but the painter of a picture, if he has a few clients who appreciate his work, although he may not get as much as he would if his pictures were in popular demand, I obtains a considerable sum, while the composer of music for which a copyright is obtained probably sells it to a publisher for a very small sum, depending for his remuneration on the royalties obtained by the sale of the music. The case of these composers is much harder, therefore, than that of painters, to protect whom the Act of 1862 was passed. If the Government cannot see their way to bring forward a measure on the lines of the three clauses in Lord Monkswell's Bill, I should like to know whether they would view with favour, or give any facility to the passing of, a measure drafted on these lines if it were introduced by a private Member.
    VISCOUNT KNUTSFORD: My Lords, I am one of those referred to as having largely studied the question of copyright. I served on the Royal Commission of 1878 and on four or five Committees of this House, and am largely responsible for the Bill which passed this House in Lord Monkswell's name. The subject which came before us as long ago as 1878, and on subsequent occasions, was the great injury done to music composers by the way in which songs were sold in the street for 1d. and 2d. immediately after their publication, and before the owners of the copyright had really gained any advantage from them. In 1899 we were told that the piracies in the music trade were carried on to an alarming extent, and that most well-known songs were thus treated. Names of publishers were falsely printed on these piracies, and also false places of publication. It was proposed by one of the Committees upon Copyright Bills

    7
    that clauses should be introduced enabling police constables to seize the copies of music sold in the illegal manner which my noble friend has described. Piracies in the music trade are carried on to an alarming extent, and I earnestly hope that something may be done to protect those who suffer. As Lord Windsor said, injunctions are practically useless as a means of meeting the evil. One case was brought to our notice where an injunction cost £153, and another £200, but none of this expense, of course could be recovered from the persons against whom the injunctions were issued. I would not go so far as my noble friend and ask the Government to immediately introduce a Bill embodying the three clauses which deal with the question in the Copyright Bill, but I would ask whether, if my noble friend brought in a Bill himself, the Government would give it their support.
    THE LORD CHANCELLOR (The Earl of HALSBURY): My Lords, I am afraid I cannot encourage my noble friends to hope that the Government will do as they suggest in this matter, but, at the same, time I do not at all deny that they have made out a case to show that an evil does exist. I think that one of the reasons why the evil is so great has not been sufficiently pointed out. The law is strong enough at present against persons who have a local habitation and name and who are of sufficient substance to be proceeded against, but in this case we are dealing with travelling hawkers who have no local habitation. I admit that the evil is very great, but on the other hand we must remember that it is a serious thing to attempt to make an invasion of a civil right the subject of criminal proceedings. It requires some consideration before a general authority of this sort can be given to police constables to arrest hawkers and seize their copies of songs. Before I could advise my colleagues as to giving support to any Bill on the subject which Lord Windsor might introduce, I should like to see what its provisions exactly were.
    VISCOTJNT KNUTSFORD: They would be the three clauses taken out of the Copyright Bill which passed this House last session.
    THE EARL OF HALSBURY: I am aware of those clauses, but I suspect that unless they are fortified by something else you will not cure the evil.
    LORD WINDSOR: Those who desire that this evil should be remedied do not ask for powers of arrest, but only for powers to visit premises and seize the printing blocks and copies of songs. I shall take the opportunity of presenting to the noble and learned Lord a Bill on this subject for his consideration.

    REMOUNTS—PURCHASES IN WESTERN NORTH AMERICA.
    LORD RIBBLESDALE: My Lords, I rise to move for a Return of the number of horses purchased for His Majesty's Government in the Western States of North America up to the 31st of January, 1902, and to ask what has been the average price paid for such horses. I must apologise to the noble Lord the Under Secretary of State for War for asking in a rather different form almost the same Question which he was either unwilling or unable to answer the other night. † In that Question I asked the noble and gallant Lord whether he knew the number of horses delivered at Kansas City, and the answer was that he had no information on that point. I understood the noble Lord, however, to say that all the horses which had been bought in the Western States of North America had been shipped at New Orleans, and therefore in putting my Question tonight I have acted on that hint. As the greater includes the less, and as the Western States, of North America include New Orleans. I have asked him for the number of horses purchased in the Western States of North America, and the average price paid for such horses. What interests me most is the average price paid. The answer the noble Lord gave me the other night was quite beside the point. With all that chivalrous tenderness towards contractors and contracts which has distinguished His Majesty's Government when Questions of this sort have been asked, the noble Lord replied that it was a contract price, and therefore a matter of secrecy—a sort of sensitive plant which would wither at once if exposed to the fierce light of your Lord
    † See page 567.

    9
    ships' House. I submit that in givin me that answer the noble Lord was replying to a question which I had never asked. I did not mention the word "contractor" or "contracts." I asked for the average price. All that the noble Lord had to do was to add the number of dollars paid up to date for horses purchased in the States, and divide that by the number of horses shipped from New Orleans. He would then arrive at the average price. That would give no sort of revelation as to contract price, and I do not think it would involve any of those economic risks which the noble Lord has from time to time indicated as inevitably incident to the disclosure of the contract price. I have had information which makes me very uncomfortable about what is going on, but from the answer of the noble Lord to my Question the other day I imagine he does not know what is taking place. That seems to me hardly conceivable. I cannot suppose that His Majesty's Government are getting no returns as to the horses which they are buying out there at a very much higher price than they ought to pay. If the noble Lord cannot give me the particulars, the disclosure of the happy-go-lucky way of trading will not restore the already shaken confidence of practical people in the business capacity of the War Office.
    Moved, "That an humble Address be presented to His Majesty for a Return of the number of horses purchased for His Majesty's Government in the Western States of North America up to the 31st of January, 1902."—(The Lord Ribblesdale.)
    THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Lord RAGLAN): My Lords, the noble Lord has slightly altered the form of his Question. I said in my answer the other day that we would send for the information for which he asked, but it has not arrived at the War Office yet. As soon as we have it I shall be happy to lay it on the Table. As to the answer which I gave to the noble Lord, I do not recollect confining myself to the question of contract. What I said was that most of the horses were being bought at these particular places, not by contract, but by private
    10
    purchase, All the horses that are being bought in the Western States of North America are being purchased by five officers of the Remount Department who are over there, and the greater part of the horses are bought from small dealers. Horses are bought individually as well as in large numbers. We have at the War Office, of course, information as to the total number of horses bought in the United States, and the total price paid for them, but we have no information as to the price paid for particular horses in particular places in the States. I can not agree with the noble Lord that it would be well to publish the prices.
    LORD TWEEDMOUTH: My Lords, I do not rise to enter at length into the discussion, but to say that the statement of the noble Lord that he cannot give the price paid for particular horses in a particular place is extraordinary. He ought to have been able to give the average price of each lot of horses wherever they came from. If the War Office have not got these prices it shows bad book-keeping. Of course, I quite understand it is possible that it might not be desirable to give these prices. Say nothing as to that; but it does seem extraordinary that the Under Secretary for War should state that it is impossible for him to give the information.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of LANSDOWNE): My Lords, I did not I understand my noble friend the Under Secretary to base his case entirely on the difficulty of obtaining the prices of particular bunches of horses bought in particular localities. What my noble friend most objects to, is to making any statement with regard to the average price at which these horses have been bought, and I must say it seems to me that the case against making such a statement is overwhelming. The charge which has been made against the agents of the Government is that they have made bad bargains for the country, and I dare say that in the early days of the campaign hurried bargains were made and high prices paid, as is always the case when one buys in a hurry. But our object surely ought to be to make better bargains in the

    11
    future. Now, what would be the effect of the proposal of the noble Lord to advertise to the whole world the price at which horses were bought up to the beginning of this year in these particular States? These prices would become generally known, and the result would be that our buyers, wherever they went, would not be able to get a single horse below the price which, as a matter of notoriety, was formerly paid by the Government. I understand that my noble friend is quite ready to give the information which the noble Lord asks for in the first part of his Motion, but his refusal to give the other information is perfectly reasonable.
    LORD RIBBLESDALE: I will not press my Motion, although I believe that the publication of these prices would have the contrary effect to that suggested by the noble Marquess. The sellers out there would know that the prices published were considered in this country as very excessive, and that they could not again sell horses at that figure. The prices would, therefore, comedown instead of going up. That is my feeling on the matter, and I have had a great deal of experience in the purchase of horses.
    Motion, by leave of the House, withdrawn.
    House adjourned at ten minutes past Five o'clock, to Monday next a quarter before Eleven o'clock.