Lords Sitting of 8 June 1905

BARON GRAVES.
Petition of Henry Cyril Percy, Baron Graves of Gravesend in the Peerage of Ireland, claiming a right to vote at the election of Representative Peers for Ireland (presented on the 9th day of May last); referred to the Committee for privileges.
INTRODUCED.
Ernest William Baron Grimthorpe having succeeded to the title on the death of his uncle, Edmund Baron Grimthorpe, by virtue of a special remainder in a Patent, dated 17th February, 1886, was (in the usual manner) introduced.

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
Liverpool Corporation Bill. Read 2a, and committed.
Shepton Mallet Gas Company (Electric Lighting) Bill [H.L.]; Sandgate Urban District Council Bill [H.L.]. Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
Tramways Orders Confirmation (No. 1) Bill [H.L.]—(Pudsey Corporation Tramways Order). Standing Order No. 92 considered (according to order), and dispensed with, with respect to a Petition of the Yorkshire Electric Power Company. Leave given to present the said Petition.
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 10) Bill; Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 13) Bill. Brought from the Commons.
Aberdare Urban District Council Bill; Colne Corporation Bill; North Sussex Gas Bill; South Wales Electrical Power Distribution Company Bill. Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.
Municipal Corporations (Merthyr Tydfil Scheme Confirmation) Bill [H.L.]. Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments. The said Amendments to be considered on Monday the 26th instant.
Gamble's Divorce Bill [H.L.]. Minutes of Evidence and Proceedings before this House on the Second Reading, together with the documents deposited in the Case, returned from the Commons.
Rotherham, Maltby, and Laughton Railway Bill; Baker Street and Waterloo Railway Bill, Edgware and Hampstead Railway Bill; Charing Cross, Euston, and Hampstead Railway Bill; Heckmondwicke Improvement Bill; Andover Lighting and Power Bill; Tramways Orders Confirmation (No. 1) Bill [H.L.]; Tramways Orders Confirmation (No. 2) Bill [H.L.]; Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 9) Bill [H.L.]; London and North western Railway Bill. Report from the Committee of Selection, That the following Lords be proposed to the House to form the Select Committee for the consideration of the said Bills; viz.—

E. Lauderdale (chairman),

E. Temple,

L. Crofton,

L. Congleton,

L. Rosmead;

agreed to; and the said Lords appointed accordingly. The Committee to meet on Thursday the 29th instant, at Eleven o'clock; and all petitions referred to the Committee, with leave to the petitioners praying to be heard by counsel against the Bills to be heard as desired, as also counsel for the Bills.
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 10) Bill (No. 105); Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 13) Bill (No. 106). Read 1a; to be printed; and referred to the Examiners.
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 11) Bill; Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 15) Bill. To be read 2a on Monday the 26th instant.—(The Lord Kenyon.)

PRIVATE AND PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMATION BILLS.
Ordered, That Standing Orders Nos. 92 and 93 be suspended; and that the time for depositing petitions praying to be heard against Private and Provisional Order Confirmation Bills, also the time for depositing Documents relating to any Order under The Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, which would otherwise expire during the adjournment of the House at Whitsuntide, be extended to Monday the 26th instant.
Education Board Provisional Order Confirmation (London No. 1) Bill [H.L.]. Amendment reported (according to order); and Bill to be read 3a on Monday the 26th instant.
Gas and Water Orders Confirmation (No. 1) Bill [H.L.]. Amendment reported (according to order), and Bill to be read 3a on Monday the 26th instant.
Gas and Water Orders Confirmation (No. 2) Bill [H.L.]. Amendments reported (according to order), and Bill to be read 3a on Monday the 26th instant.
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 8) Bill [H.L.]. House in Committee (according to order). Amendments made. Standing Committee negatived. The Report of Amendments to be received on Monday the 26th instant.
Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (No. 3) Bill; Local Government Provisional Order (Gas) Bill; Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 6) Bill; Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 7) Bill. House in Committee (according to order). Bills reported without Amendment. Standing Committee negatived; and Bills to be read 3a on Monday the 26th instant.
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 7) Bill; Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 9) Bill. Read 2a (according to order), and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday the 26th instant.

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  SEA FISHERIES (SCOTLAND).
  Report to the Secretary for Scotland of a Departmental Committee on the Sea Fisheries of Sunderland and Caithness.

  TRADE REPORTS: ANNUAL SERIES.
  No. 3395. Bulgaria.
  No. 3396. Italy (Sicily).
  No. 3397. Egypt (Alexandria).

  Annual statement of navigation and shipping of the United Kingdom, for the year 1904.

  ARMY (SOUTH AFRICA).
  1. Report of the Committee appointed by the Army Council to consider the question of Sales and refunds to contractors in South Africa, together with appendices.
  2. Evidence taken before the Committee.

  SIGHT TESTS.
  Report on the sight tests used in the mercantile marine for the year ended 31st December, 1904 (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper [Cd. 2111]).

  METEOROLOGICAL COMMITTEE.
  Treasury Minute, dated 20th May, 1905, dealing with the constitution of the Meteorological Office.
  Presented (by Command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  POLLING DISTRICTS (COUNTY OF SURREY).
  Order made by the county council of the county of Surrey altering certain odlling districts in the county.
  Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  CRIMINAL CASES (RESERVATION OF POINTS OF LAW) BILL [H.L.]
  House in Committee (according to Order).
  [The Earl of ONSLOW in the Chair.]
  Clause 1.
  LORD ALVERSTONEsaid the Amendments standing in his name, to which he understood the Lord Chancellor agreed, were for the purpose of rendering the Bill more workable.
  Amendments moved—
  "In Clause 1, page 1, line 8, after the word 'apply ' to insert the words 'within such time as may be fixed by rules of Court'; and in line 22, after the word 'section' to insert the words 'and the Court may make such order as to the custody or admission to bail of the prisoner as they think necessary.'"—(Lord Alverstone.)
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR (The Earl of HALSBURY): I accept the Amendments.
  On Question, Amendments agreed to.
  Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.
  Clause 2.
  LORD ALVERSTONE LORD ALVERSTONE moved to add, at the end of Clause 2 (Extension of Powers of Court of Crown Cases Reserved), the words in his Amendment.
  Amendment moved—
  "In Clause 2, page 2, line 7, after the word 'convicted' to insert the words 'and if the Court order a retrial of the case, they may make such order as to the custody or admission to bail of the prisoner and the renewal of the recognisances of the witnesses pending the retrial as they think necessary to meet the circumstances of the case.'"—(Lord Alverstone.)
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR: I accept the Amendment.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 2, as amended, agreed to.
  LORD ALVERSTONE LORD ALVERSTONE moved to insert a new clause after Clause 2. He explained that it enabled the Court, where they thought it desirable, to certify, in any case stated under the Crown Cases
  1058
  Act, 1848, that the prisoner might have legal aid. This power existed in other cases, and it was thought advisable by Judges and members of the Bar that the provision should also be made in cases under the Crown Cases Act.
  Amendment moved—
  "After Clause 2, to insert as a new clause the words, 'Where it appears to the Court on the hearing of any case stated under the Crown Cases Act, 1848, whether in pursuance of this Act or otherwise, that it is desirable that a prisoner should be represented by counsel, the Court may, if they think fit, certify that the prisoner may have legal aid, and the expenses of such legal aid may be allowed and paid in the same manner as the costs for the prosecution are paid, subject to any rules which may be made for the purpose under the Prosecution of Offences Act, 1879, and to any regulations as to the rates or scales of payment which may he made by a Secretary of State.'"—(Lord Alverstone.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 3 agreed to.
  LORD ALVERSTONE LORD ALVERSTONE moved to insert a new clause to enable Rules of Court to be made under the Act.
  Amendment moved—
  "After Clause 3, to insert as a new clause, the words, 'Rules of Court made under Section 17 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1875, may regulate generally the practice and procedure under this Act.'"—(Lord Alverstone.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 4 agreed to.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR,in moving the insertion of two new clauses at the end of the Bill, explained that there were certain things which must be done during quarter sessions, and that if they were not so done power to do them was gone. It had been foreseen that if this Bill came into operation without some such provision as that contained in his proposed new clauses there might be a difficulty in allowing persons out on bail.
  Amendment moved, to insert the following new clauses—
  (A.) "Where a Court of quarter sessions reserve a question of law under the Crown Cases Act, 1848, any recognisances may, subject to any rules made under Section 29 of

  1059
  the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879, be taken out of Court before any justice of the peace, or where any of the parties is in prison before the governor or other keeper of the prison, and the same consequences of law shall ensue as if the recognisances had been entered into before the Court of quarter sessions by which the question of law was reserved."
  (B.) "Where on the hearing and determining of a question of law with respect to which a case is stated under the Crown Cases Act, 1848, whether in pursuance of this Act or otherwise, the judgment of the Court stating the case is affirmed, any sentence of penal servitude or imprisonment on the person convicted shall begin to run, in the case of a person admitted to bail from the date of his subsequent reception into prison, and in the case of a person committed to prison under sentence and not admitted to bail from the date on which he is so committed."—(The Lord Chancellor.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to. Bill re-committed to the Standing Committee; and to be printed as amended. (No. 107.)

  BILLS OF EXCHANGE ACT, 1882, AMENDMENT BILL [H.L.]
  Read 3a (according to order), and passed, and sent to the Commons.
  ADVERTISEMENTS REGULATION BILL [H.L.]
  Amendments reported (according to order), and Bill to be read 3a on Tuesday the 27th instant.
  SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE (IRELAND) (No. 1) BILL [H.L.]
  Read 3a (according to order), and passed, and sent to the Commons.
  CLOSING OF LICENSED PREMISES (CHRISTMAS DAY) (IRELAND) BILL
  Third Reading (which stands appointed for this day put off to Thursday the 29th instant.
  SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE (IRELAND) (No. 2) BILL [H.L.]
  Amendments reported (according to order), and Bill to be read 3a on Tuesday the 27th instant.
  COMMITTEE OF PRIVILEGES.
  A question having arisen as to a right to be heard at the Bar, moved that the Question be referred to the Committee of Privileges for consideration and report—(The Lord Chancellor), agreed to; and ordered accordingly.
  SUNDAY CLOSING (SHOPS) BILL [H.L.]
  Minutes of Evidence, together with an Appendix, laid upon the Table, and to be delivered out.

  THE LOSS OF THE STEAMER "WORK- FIELD."
  LORD MUSKERRY LORD MUSKERRY rose to call attention to the recent Board of Trade inquiry held at Cardiff for the purpose of investigating the circumstances attending the loss of the steamer "Workfield;" to ask whether it is a fact that ten firemen and two sailors who alleged insobriety against the captain were retained by the Board of Trade for some length of time antecedent to the inquiry, whilst the chief engineer, who stated before the Receiver of Wrecks that the master was perfectly sober, was allowed to proceed to sea; for what reasons did the Board of Trade not place all the evidence before the Court which they had the opportunity of doing; why was it that the chief engineer and second officer wore not retained by the Board of Trade, similarly to the seamen and firemen, to give evidence; and whether, in view of the defective nature of this inquiry, the Board of Trade will quash the judgment arrived at by the Court.
  The noble Lord said: My Lords, as Board of Trade inquiries into shipping casualties have earned amongst nautical men a most unenviable reputation for injustices caused by improper procedure and preconceived bias on the part of those sitting on these inquiries, I have felt it necessary to bring forward this case of the "Workfield" inquiry. And I do so principally because, if the facts are as I understand them, the Marine Department of the Board of Trade have conducted their part of the business in a fashion which in the interests of justice cannot be too strongly condemned. Whilst the Department very zealously retained a number of seamen and firemen—amongst whom was the usual admixture of aliens—to support a charge of drunkenness against the captain, they did not exercise a similar power in detaining responsible men whose evidence would have been an emphatic denial of these charges.
  I have information to the effect that the chief engineer of the ship stated in his depositions before the Receiver of Wrecks at Cardiff that the master was perfectly sober. I therefore want to know why both he and the second officer of the steamer were not required by the Board of Trade to give the Court of Inquiry the benefit of their evidence. At the Board of Trade inquiry the master strenuously denied the charge of drunkenness, and in his denial he was supported, by his chief and third officers. Add to the evidence of the two latter, the evidence—which was not given—of the chief engineer and second officer, and we have all the really responsible men in the ship supporting their commander againgst the charges levelled at him by a number of irresponsible seamen and firemen. I am not going to criticise, either one way or the other, the decision of the Court that there had been careless navigation, for which the certificate of the captain was suspended for nine months; but I do think it a most scandalous thing that a Court, supposedly judicial in its dealings, should say it was satisfied that the master was drunk and then recommend that he should be tried again—and punished again, I suppose—by a local marine board.
  Again, the first inquiry had been in progress for several days when one of the assessors—too old for the work—became indisposed. He then resigned his nautical assessorship and a new inquiry had to be got through before another assessor. The prosecution, therefore, had the opportunity provided them of doctoring the discrepancies in their evidence to the further detriment of the master. The protracted nature of the inquiry has entailed not only great loss of time but considerable expenditure of money to the captain. However, I understand that, fortunately for himself, he was a member of the Merchant Service Guild, which has defrayed his legal expenses. But the principle remains the same, and the Board of Trade should ensure that these inquiries are carried on as expeditiously and inexpensively as possible. The position as it stands now—especially after this "Workfield" case—is that captains and
  1062
  officers are subjected to a prosecution in respect of which, win or lose, they must pay their own costs. If they are successful in appealing against a decision of a Court of Inquiry they are not allowed their costs, because the Board of Trade are presumed to be absolutely impartial. What a hollow presumption this is, is shown by the way material evidence in favour of the captain of the "Workfield" was withheld from the knowledge of the Court. In view of the most unsatisfactory nature of the whole inquiry, and of the anxiety and loss of time and money to which the captain has been subjected, I hope that the Board of Trade will set aside the judgment of the Court and let the whole thing fall into oblivion—for it certainly reflects no credit on our reputation for strict impartiality and justice.
  I would like to draw your Lordships' attention to these punishments that are inflicted on captains and officers of the mercantile marine. Assuming a case where a captain or officer has been found in default, either through neglect of precautions or error in judgment, it is usual to suspend his certificate for a certain period, and in any case he has to pay the costs of the inquiry. Now, the suspension of his certificate for three months, or for nine months, may on the face of it seem a rather simple thing, as the idea would be that at the termination of the period for which the certificate was suspended the punishment would there and then cease; but, unfortunately, that is not the case, and the suspension of the certificate means a punishment during the whole time he remains at sea. It is a serious bar to his getting further employment and is a most serious detriment to him professionally.
  If your Lordships would contrast this with the punishment and results of the punishment that would be meted out to an officer in the Royal Navy for a similar neglect of precautions, or error of judgment, you will see what a vast difference there is. The officer in the Royal Navy has not to pay any costs of proceedings; his being reprimanded does not necessarily imply a loss of all future professional advancement; his case will be tried before a Court comprised of his own

  1063
  fellow officers, and he knows that the trial will be an absolutely fair one, and that he will be afforded every possible chance of vindicating himself. Contrast that with the unfortunate merchant officer who is often tried by those who have no practical experience of the extreme difficulties and disabilities under which he has to carry on his professional duties, and who, as I have said before, has often to contend with a preconceived bias against him on the part of those who are trying his case. My Lords, in the interest of fair play and impartial justice, the Legislature should inquire closely into the proceedings of these Courts with a view to instituting some reform. I beg to put the Questions standing in my name.
  THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (The Duke of MARLBOROUGH): My Lords, I will not follow the noble Lord into the various points which he has raised in the course of his speech. No doubt, on some future occasion, the noble Marquess the President of the Board of Trade will deal with these matters, if the noble Lord refers to them again. I will confine myself to-day to replying to the Questions which stand in the noble Lord's name on the Paper. The noble Lord asks whether it is a fact that ten firemen and two sailors who alleged insobriety against the captain of the "Workfield," were retained by the Board of Trade for some length of time antecedent to the inquiry. The reply is that the master, and the chief and third officer, and ten seamen were detained for the purpose of the inquiry.
  The noble Lord referred to the fact that the chief engineer, who stated before the Receiver of Wrecks that the master was perfectly sober, was allowed to proceed to sea, and asked for what reasons the Board of Trade did not place all the evidence before the Court which they had the opportunity of doing. The reply is that the chief engineer did receive notice that he was detained for the inquiry; but he wrote to say that he had lost all his effects in consequence of the wreck of the ship, and had been out of employment for four months, and that he had then got a very good berth offered him, which in all probability
  1064
  meant that he would be employed for several years to come. He, therefore, desired not to appear at the Court and was given permission to sail. His statement was submitted to the Court, but I understand that the solicitor employed for the defence of the captain did not think fit to use that evidence. Inquiries were made with a view of detaining the second officer, but it was found that he was bound on a ship for Baltimore, and no statement could be got from him.
  I must remind the noble Lord that all the evidence available was placed before the Court of Inquiry, and that out of the crew of twenty-nine men, sixteen were called as witnesses. The chief officer and the third officer were detained, and they were the two men who gave evidence to the effect that the captain was sober; but the noble Lord will notice in the report of the inquiry that the Court thought their evidence—
  "generated the belief in their loyalty to their master rather than in their veracity."
  In reply to the third Question—namely, whether, in view of the defective nature of this inquiry, the Board of Trade will quash the judgment arrived at by the Court—I have to say, on behalf of the Board of Trade, that they do not propose to take any further steps in the case, except to direct a local marine board inquiry to be held by the Court into the master's misconduct in drinking to excess.
  House adjourned at five minutes past Five o'clock, to Tuesday the 20th instant, a quarter before Two o'clock.