Lords Sitting of 5 May 1902

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House, That the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table the certificates from the examiners, that the further Standing Orders, applicable to the following Bill, have been complied with—
Leyland and Farington Gas.
Also that the certificate that no further Standing Orders are applicable to the following Bill—
Imperial Institute [H.L.].
The same were ordered to lie on the Table.

SOUTH SHIELDS, SUNDERLAND, AND DISTRICT TRAMWAYS BILL [H.L.]
Witnesses ordered to attend the Select Committee.
CORNWALL ELECTRIC POWER BILL.
The consent of the Prince of Wales signified; and Bill reported, with Amendments.
LEICESTER CORPORATION BILL [H.L.]
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 13th of February and 25th of April last, discharged; and Bill committed.
IMPERIAL INSTITUTE BILL [H.L.]
Read 2a.
LONDON SCHOOL BOARD (SUPERANNUATION) BILL.
Read 2a, and committed.
HIGHAM FERRERS AND RUSHDEN WATER BOARD BILL,
  BRIGHTON AND ROTTINGDEAN SEASHORE ELECTRIC THAMROAD BILL,

    READING GAS BILL,
    GRAND JUNCTION WATER BILL,
    BROMLEY GAS BILL.
    Read 3a, and passed.

BRADFORD-ON-AVON GAS BILL [H.L.],
  GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY (No. 2) BILL [H.L.]
  Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
  NORTH WARWICKSHIRE WATER BILL.
  Read 3a with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
BIRKENHEAD CORPORATION BILL,
  BOURNEMOUTH GAS AND WATER BILL,

    BRYNMAWR AND WESTERN VALLEY'S RAILWAY (VESTING) BILL,
    CALEDONIAN RAILWAY BILL,
    CAVEHILL AND WHITEWELL TRAMWAYS BILL,
    DARTFORD IMPROVEMENT BILL,
    NORTH BRITISH RAILWAY (GENERAL POWERS) BILL,
    NORTH BRITISH RAILWAY (STEAM VESSELS) BILL,
    SALFORD CORPORATION BILL.
    Brought from the Commons; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners.

    DERBYSHIRE AND NOTTINGHAMSHIRE ELECTRIC POWER BILL.
    Returned from the Commons with the Amendment agreed to.
    PAISLEY GAS PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL [H.L.]
    A Bill to confirm a Provisional Order under the Burgh Police (Scotland) Act, 1892, relating to Paisley—Was presented by the Lord Balfour; read 1a; to be printed; and referred to the Examiners. (No. 61.)
    TRAMWAYS ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No. 1) BILL [H.L.] (No. 62).
    A Bill to confirm certain Provisional Orders made by the Board of Trade under the Tramways Act, 1870, relating to Brighton Corporation Tramways, Cheadle and Gatley Urban District Council Tramway, Lees Urban District Council Tramways, Southport Corporation Tramways, Stockport Corporation Tramways, and Sunderland Corporation Tramways.
    TRAMWAYS ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No. 2) Bill [H.L.] (No. 63).
    A Bill to confirm certain Provisional Orders made by the Board of Trade under the Tramways Act, 1870, relating to Heywood Corporation Tramways, Leeds Corporation Tramways, Pontypridd Urban District Council Tramways, Southampton Corporation Tramways, West Riding Tramways (Knottingley Extension), and Wolverhampton Corporation Tramways.
    GAS ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No. 2) BILL [H.L.] (No. 64).
    A Bill to confirm certain Provisional Orders made by the Board of Trade under the Gas and Water Works Facilities Act, 1870, relating to Bridge of Earn Gas, Clay Cross Gas, Harwich Gas, and Hornsby Gas were presented by the Earl of Dudley; read 1a; to be printed; and referred to the Examiners.
ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 2) BILL,
  ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 3) BILL.
  Read 2a (according to order), and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Friday next.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT IRELAND PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 1) BILL.
  Brought from the Commons; read 1a; to be printed; and referred to the Examiners. (No. 65.)
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  ROYAL OBSERVATORY, EDINBURGH.
  Twelfth Annual Report of the Astronomer-Royal for Scotland.
  SOUTH AFRICA.
  Correspondence relating to proposed additions of territory to Natal.

  TRADE REPORTS: ANNUAL SERIES.
  No. 2783. Germany (Bavaria).
  No. 2784. France (Corsica).
  No. 2785. Turkey (Aleppo and Adana).
  Presented (by command); and ordered to lie on the Table.

  PENAL SERVITUDE ACTS, 1853–1891 (CONDITIONAL LICENCE).
  Licence granted by His Majesty to Mary Ann Curtis Lucas, a convict under detention in Aylesbury Prison, permitting the said Mary Ann Curtis Lucas to be at large, on condition that she enter the Reading Refuge and Laundry Home, and there remain for a period not less than one year. Laid before the House (pursuant to Act); and ordered to lie on the Table.
AGRICULTURE AND TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION (IRELAND) BILL.
House in Committee (according to order); Bill reported without Amendment; and re-committed to the Standing Committee.

THE MARRIAGE LAW.
THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF YORK: My Lords, I rise to call attention to the valuable Report of a Royal Commission on the Laws of Marriage presented to Parliament in 1868, and to ask His Majesty's Government whether they will consider the advisability of giving effect to its recommendations by legislation. No one can, I think, doubt the profound importance of this subject. It deals with the earliest and closest of all the social relations which exist among, mankind and which constitute the very basis of society itself; and it affects, directly or indirectly, the happiness of the whole human race. Now, this Commission was, in itself, somewhat remarkable. It was presided over by the Lord Chancellor of the day, and of the four distinguished lawyers who were among its Members, three of them successively-occupied the position of Lord Chancellor. The Commission was not only remarkable for its composition and the dignity and importance of its members, but also for the Report that was issued. This was not a case in which there was divergence of opinion. There was no minority Report. Everyone of the members of the Commission signed the Report with the exception of one noble Lord who was unfortunately unable to be present on more than a few occasions and did not feel himself justified in appending his signature. The state of the marriage laws of

601
England at that time is stated in one of the earlier sentences of the Report, as follows—
"The marriage laws of England and Ireland differ most materially from that of Scotland; and the laws of England and Ireland, while they agree in their leading principles, differ in many important particulars, and do not apply those principles in a uniform or always in a consistent manner."
The Commissioners recognised that there were great difficulties in dealing with a matter of so much intricacy and complexity, but they did not despair of success. These are their own words—
"After the most careful and deliberate consideration of this subject, we have come to the conclusion that the difficulties in the way of the attainment of our object are not insuperable, and that it is the duty of the State to make an earnest endeavour to overcome them."
These words were appropriate and weighty thirty-five years ago, but they have even more force at the present time, for they are as true to-day as they were in 1868. The Commissioners criticised freely, and not unjustly, the complexity of the law, and the elements of uncertainty that existed in it, on which the validity or nullity of so many marriages depended. The object the Commissioners had in view was, in their own words—
"To consider what are the principles on which a marriage law, applicable to all parts of the kingdom ought to be founded, and to bring existing laws where they differ from each other to the test of those principles."
Further, they made up their minds that in any measure which they might suggest to remedy these evils, they would keep this principle in view—that the marriage law ought to embrace the maximum of simplicity and certainty. Now, my Lords, it seems to me that the time has surely come when something might be done to deal with this most valuable and interesting Report. Since 1868 up to the present day all the complexities, and uncertainties, and inequalities in the law have remained in their full activity. Surely the time has come when this valuable Report might be removed from its obscure resting-place on the shelves of your Lordships' House and some endeavour made to translate its recommendations into legislation. This matter concerns, in some degree, not only the happiness
602
of the people, but the credit and the honour of one of the greatest nations of the world. We as a nation are proud of our high civilisation, of our earnest endeavour to do justice to everybody in all things, whether rich or poor, learned or ignorant—not only to do justice in all things to all men, but to all women, and even to their children. It is from a desire to promote, as far as a humble individual may, this object that I venture to ask the Prime Minister the Question on the Paper.
THE PRIME MINISTER AND LORD PRIVY SEAL (The MARQUESS of SALISBURY): I confess to have been very much affected by the observations of the most rev. prelate. He never mentioned the words "Prime Minister" before, and to be asked to express an opinion suddenly on the Report of a Commission which sat thirty-five years ago is, I confess, a trial for which I had not entirely prepared myself. The only thing I can promise is to do what I have not yet done—to read the Report. Until I am able to read the Report the most rev. prelate will not think I am wanting in respect if I decline to express any opinion. I know the subject which he has brought forward in this somewhat unexpected manner is one of the most thorny and difficult which can be submitted to any legislative assembly in the world; and, with the deepest respect for his abilities and his un-doubted sincerity, I extremely doubt if any exhortations which come from him will have for their result that either House of Parliament will furnish a satisfactory clue to the labyrinth of matrimonial legislation. The difficulties are extreme. What they are I think I should rather hear from the most rev. prelate than profess to give them on my own account; but the very fact that we have now gone on for more than 300 years without effecting any satisfactory solution of the various difficulties which the marriage law presents to us is not, I am afraid, encouraging to the prospect of any successful results to our efforts in the future; and all that we can do is to hope that the most rev. and right rev. bench and the most rev. prelate himself, now that they have devoted themselves to this very difficult

603
and almost unparalleled task, will be able to arrive more nearly to a result than we have ever had a chance of arriving at before. As far as our experience goes, discussions upon the marriage law have been fruitful in conflict and fruitful in the display of difference of opinion, but have not yet produced any satisfactory indication of a common agreement.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (The Earl of HALSBURY): I only intervene to correct a misapprehension, due, perhaps, to an imperfect reading of the Report. The most rev. prelate is mistaken in saying that the Commissioners were unanimous. There were two very important dissentients—namely, Lord O'Hagan and the Lord Justice General of Scotland.
THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF YORK: I am quite aware of the opinions expressed by those two dissentients on certain points; but I think I am right in saying that all the members signed the Report.

SOUTH AFRICAN COASTING TRADE.
LORD MUSKERRY: My Lords, I rise to call attention to the fact that the coastal trade of our South African colonies is almost wholly monopolised by a "ring" of foreign ship-owners, comprising Germans running their steamers under the German flag, and Norwegians running steamers under the British flag, but without complying with any of the restrictions regarding certificated officers, etc., the prevailing language used on board of these vessels being German and Norwegian respectively; and in view of the fact that foreign countries debar British ships from trading under similar conditions, to move to resolve that His Majesty's Government take steps to afford due protection to British trade in the colonies in question, and thus give proper encouragement to the employment of British ships manned by British officers. I will read to your Lordships a letter which I have received on the subject, and which speaks for itself. It is
604
dated from Cape Town, on March 24th of this year, and is as follows—
"You are aware, no doubt, that there are a great many small ports on this coast at which the large liners do not touch, and whatever cargo there may be for such places is transshipped either here or at some other port of call. This causes a pretty considerable coasting trade for small steamers, and such craft are kept very busy indeed, unless they have the misfortune to belong to a British owner and carry a British master and crew. This may seem, at a glance, to be a rather tough statement, but nevertheless it is a perfectly true one. The coast trade is controlled by a 'ring' of German and Norwegian owners, and no one outside of them has a look in. The Germans run their boats under their own flag, and of course do not employ anyone but natives of 'der Vaterland.' On the other hand, the Norwegian owners run their boats under the English ensign, but there their claim upon British recognition ceases, as their masters, officers, and crews are, without exception, Norwegians, and the work of these vessels is carried on in the Norwegian tongue. To show you how completely they hold the trade in their hands, I will just state one case in point. Some few weeks ago there came out from England a small steamer named the 'Dee,' hailing from Hull, I think. She was manned by English officers and crew, and the master, a man who knows this coast thoroughly, is also an Englishman. This vessel was intended for the coast trade, but up to the present has done little or nothing, for the simple reason that the 'ring' will not let her get a cargo; while at the same time the German and Norwegian boats are running full cargoes. Now, Sir, do you not think that this is a shameful state of affairs? While so many British vessels are laid up for want of cargoes here, a pack of foreigners, who hate the very sight of us, wax rich on the coasts of the very Colony that we are struggling even now to save from the hands of the Boers."
We do seem to offer every facility to foreign vessels to compete against our own ships both at home and abroad, and, when the attention of the Government is called to this, their answer is that they have no power to interfere. If the state of the law is such that they cannot interfere to protect our commerce and our shipping, I submit that the sooner legislation is introduced which will give them these powers, the better.
THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (The Earl of ONSLOW): I think the noble Lord is somewhat misinformed, because there is no "ring" of foreign shipowners. No doubt there are a certain number of foreign ships plying along the coast of South Africa, but a very large proportion of the coasting trade of South Africa is

605
in the hands of British shipowners. There may be some Norwegians who own shares in some of the ships that ply along the coast; but it would be impossible, without very great trouble and delay, to ascertain what proportion of such ships are owned, or partially owned, by Norwegians; and when the noble Lord asks that His Majesty's Government should take steps to afford due protection to British trade in the colonies in consequence, I presume he means that some sort of preference should be given to British over foreign vessels in the ports of these colonies. That is a matter which, in the first place, concerns not his Majesty's Government at home, but the Governments of the colonies themselves; and the noble Lord knows that opens up a very large question indeed. This country has, for many years past, adopted a policy of Free Trade with regard to shipping entering its ports; and if anything of the kind suggested were done, it would be a very serious departure from that policy, which I hardly think your Lordship would be prepared to make in the circumstances, and in consequence of the grievance which the noble Lord has brought before the House.

THE LOSS OF THE "TANTALLON CASTLE."
LORD MUSKERRY: My Lords, I beg to ask His Majesty's Government whether the Court of Inquiry which, eleven months ago, investigated the circumstances of the loss of the Cape liner "Tantallon Castle" on Robben Island, South Africa, desired to draw the attention of the Government to the urgent necessity of placing fog signals on Robben Island and other dangerous points along the coast; whether such fog signals have now been placed on Robben Island and the other dangerous points referred to; and, if not, whether His Majesty's Government are now prepared to take steps in providing these most necessary safeguards for the protection of British ships and the lives on board of them.
THE EARL OF ONSLOW: The Court of Inquiry into the loss of the "Tantallon Castle "drew attention to the fact that the lighting of Robben Island
606
was not all that could be wished. The attention of the Colonial Government, not of His Majesty's Government, was drawn to the circumstances, and I believe that the Colonial Government are considering the question. At any rate, they have communicated with the Board of Trade and the Trinity House, and both those authorities have given such answers to the Questions as were necessary. I can promise the noble Lord that the attention of Sir W. Hely-Hutchinson, Governor of Cape Colony, shall be called to the matter, and we will ascertain what further steps, if any, are being taken by the Government of that colony, which alone is concerned in the matter.
House adjourned at five minutes before Five o'clock, till Tomorrow Two o'clock.