HL Deb 30 July 1906 vol 162 cc330-41

Order or the day read for the House going into Committee.

Moved, "That the House do now resolve itself into Committee."—(Earl Carrington.)

*LORD CLIFFORD OF CHUDLEIGH

My Lords, before the Motion is put I wish to make a protest against the rapidity with which this Bill is being proceeded with. It was read a second time on Friday, and to-day we are taking the Committee Stage, with two pages of Amendments to be introduced by the noble Earl in charge of the Bill. I cannot myself see why, with an Autumn session before us, there should be any need for this very great celerity.

EARL CARRINGTON

I can assure the noble Lord and the House that there really has been no undue haste in this matter. It is most desirable that the Bill should become law before the recess; otherwise there will be considerable delay. The Bill cannot take effect before January 1st next year, but there are a great many technical matters which have to be dealt with by the Board before the Bill can take effect. There is no wish in any way to rush the Bill, but it is in the public-interest that your Lordships should permit it to go through as speedily as possible.

LORD BURGHCLERE

My Lords, I wish to emphasise what my noble friend has said as to the desirability of this Bill being passed before the adjournment, but I cannot help at the same time reverting for a moment to what was said in the discussion on the business of the House which was initiated by the noble Marquess the Leader of the Opposition some time ago. Lord Lansdowne on that occasion pointed out that it would be much more convenient for this House if some Bills were first introduced here, and I ventured on that occasion to point out that it would be exceedingly advantageous if some of the Departmental Bills were introduced into your Lordships' House during the early part of the session, when we are by no means over-burdened with business. If this Bill had been introduced in your Lordships' House in the early part of the session it could have been fully discussed and referred to the Standing Committee, one of the most important bodies to which such Bills could be referred. This is a matter of procedure, and I hope that steps will be taken to introduce some Bills of this description in your Lordships' House in the first instance.

THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (The Marquess of RIPON)

My Lords, I do not think the complaint of my noble friend is quite justified in respect to the period at which this Bill was introduced in the House of Commons. I am informed that it was introduced in that House on March 6th. My noble friend has been in the House of Commons much more recently than I have, and knows quite well the difficulty of proceeding with smaller measures. That, no doubt, is the reason why the Bill has come up to us so late.

LORD BURGHCLERE

As a matter of personal explanation I wish to say that I did not bring any charge against the Government as to the period at which the Bill was brought up from the House of Commons. I merely said it would have been better if it had been introduced first into this House.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House in Committee (according to Order).

Clause 1:—

EARL CARRINGTON

moved to delete the words "That is to say, the actual percentage of tribasic phosphate of lime which has been dissolved or rendered soluble." He explained that it was proposed at a subsequent stage to insert a definition of the percentage of soluble and insoluble phosphates.

Amendment moved—

In page 1, to leave out from the word 'phosphates' in line 10, to the word ' insoluble' inline 12."—(Earl Carrington.)

On question, Amendment agreed to.

Drafting Amendment agreed to.

Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 2:—

Drafting Amendments agreed to.

Clause 2, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 3: —

EARL CARRINGTON

moved to amend Sub-section 2 (which provides that "an official sampler shall, at the request of the purchaser and on payment by him of the required fee, and may, without any such request, take samples for analysis ") by substituting the words "a sample" for the word "samples."

Amendment moved—

In page 3, line 16, to leave out the word 'samples' and to insert the words 'a sample.' "—(Earl Carrington.)

LORD BURGHCLERE

said a great many of the Amendments which came after turned on the word sample and the way in which the sample was to be sent to the analyst. He thought it would simplify matters if the noble Earl would explain the process to the House.

EARL CARRINGTON

said that the series of Amendments on the Paper were designed to carry out an undertaking given in the Standing Committee, that they would provide in the Act itself for a tripartite division of sample instead of leaving the matter to be dealt with by regulation.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

EARL CARRINGTON

moved the insertion of a new sub-section to provide that where a sample had been taken with a view to the institution of any civil or criminal proceedings, the person taking the sample should divide it into three parts and cause each part to be marked, sealed, and fastened up, and should deliver or send by post two parts to the agricultural analyst and one part to the seller.

Amendment moved—

In page 3, line 21, after the word 'later to insert as a new sub-section:—(3) Where a sample has been taken with a view to the institution of any civil or criminal proceeding, the person taking the sample shall divide the sample into three parts, and shall cause each part to be marked, sealed, and fastened up, and shall deliver or send by post two parts to the agricultural analyst and one part to the seller."—(Earl Carrington.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

EARL CARRINGTON

moved to delete the words "shall divide the sample into two and;" and to insert two new subsections.

Amendment moved—

In page 3, lines 23 and 24, to leave out the words 'shall divide the sample into two and,' and to insert ' (a) if the sample has not been divided into parts and the parts marked, sealed, and fastened up as hereinbefore mentioned, shall send a copy of the certificate of his analysis to the person who submitted the sample for analysis; and (b) if the sample has been so divided into parts.' "—(Earl Carrington.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Drafting Amendment agreed to.

EARL CARRINGTON

moved an Amendment to provide that the agricultural analyst to whom a sample was submitted should send a certificate of his analysis in all cases to the seller. He said this Amendment was proposed in order to give effect to the promise made in the Standing Committee that in every case a copy of the analyst's certificate should be transmitted to the vendor of the article analysed.

Amendment moved—

In page 3, line 28, after 'and ' to insert 'in every case to the seller and.'"—(Earl Carrington.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

EARL CARRINGTON

moved a proviso to the effect that if the agricultural analyst did not know the name and address of the seller he should send the certificate intended for the seller to the purchaser to be by him forwarded to the seller.

Amendment moved—

In page 3, line 30, after the word 'analysis, to insert the words 'provided that if the agricultural analyst does not know the name and address of the seller, he shall send the certificate intended for the seller to the purchaser, to be by him forwarded to the seller.' "— (Earl Carrington.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to

Drafting Amendment agreed to.

Amendment moved—

In page 3, line 39, after the word ' witness, to insert the words 'provided that this sub-section shall not apply (a) where the sample has been taken otherwise than in the prescribed manner; or (b) where the sample has not been divided into parts, and the parts marked, sealed, and fastened up as hereinbefore mentioned.'"—(Earl Carrington.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

EARL CARRINGTON

explained, with regard to his next Amendment, that it was agreed on the Second Reading in the House of Commons that the Board should not authorise the institution of criminal proceedings except after a second analysis had been made by the chief analyst. An Amendment was to be, inserted subsequently to this effect, and the present Amendment was consequential thereon.

Amendment moved—

In page 3, line 40, after the word 'proceeding,' to insert the words ' other than a proceeding which cannot be instituted until an analysis has been made and a certificate given; by the chief analyst.' "—(Earl Carrington.)

*LORD CLIFFORD OF CHUDLEIGH

I take it that this will refer to every prosecution.

EARL CARRINGTON

No criminal prosecution can be undertaken except after a second analysis made by the chief analyst. That is a protection which is thought desirable.

*LORD CLIFFORD OF CHUDLEIGH

said this would add considerably to the delay and expense. The county councils had experienced difficulty in getting agriculturists to avail themselves of the Act, and if before a county council could enter into a prosecution it was necessary, not only to have an analysis made by the official appointed by themselves with the sanction of the Board of Agriculture, but, in addition, to have a second analysis from the chief analyst, the Act would, he was afraid, become a dead letter.

EARL CARRINGTON

said that this provision was agreed to on the Second Reading of the Bill in the House of Commons, and he hoped the noble Lord would not persist in his opposition.

*LORD CLIFFORD OF CHUDLEIGH

said he made the more point of his objection in view of an Amendment which he intended moving to Clause 6, deleting the provision that a prosecution for an offence under the section should not be instituted except with the consent of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries. He did not think this should be a necessary condition precedent to a prosecution.

EARL CARRINGTON

admitted that there was a great deal in what his noble friend had said, but as this course had been agreed to in the House of Commons he hoped the Amendment would be allowed.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Consequential Amendments agreed to.

Clause 3, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 4.

Amendment moved—

In page 4, line 26, after ' him ' to insert the words 'or at his request.' "—(Earl Carrington.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 4, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 5 agreed to.

Clause 6

*LORD CLIFFORD OF CHUDLEIGH,

in moving to omit subsection (3), said that this Amendment was strongly supported by the county councils of England, who not unnaturally felt as they had been selected for a great many purposes—for many more than they thought they ought to have been—as the vehicles by which various legislation should be carried out, and as they were the authority to institute prosecutions in the case of the adulteration of food and in regard to false weights and measures, that in this particular instance, where it was only a question of whether or no they should prosecute a person who was selling manure and foodstuffs in a fraudulent manner, it was rather hard that they should be obliged to get the consent of the Board of Agriculture in a proceeding to which there was no analogy. The only case which was at nil analogous was in regard to the Rivers Pollution Act, where, in dealing with manufacturers, they were obliged to get the consent of the Local Government Board before instituting any prosecution. But in that case there was a very marked difference. There was, or might be, not only an enormous interference with trade, but, what was still more objectionable, a partial interference with the trade in one part of the country and not with a similar trade in another part. Under these circumstances it was particularly necessary that the Local Government Board should have some control over the prosecutions, but he was unable to see that there was any analogous necessity in the present case. In addition to that, the county councils felt that this provision would cause an enormous amount of delay and difficulty and that anything which would put difficulties in the way of the carrying out of the Act would practically defeat, to a very large extent, the good which they hoped would accrue from the Measure.

Amendment moved—

To leave out subsection (3)."—(Lord Clifford of Chudleigh.).

LORD BURGHCLERE

hoped his noble friend the President of the Board of Agriculture would not accede to the Amendment just moved. This clause had been inserted in consequence of many discussions in the Departmental Committee on whose Report the present Bill was founded. It was inserted at the wish of the traders themselves, and as a guarantee to them to a certain extent that the prosecutions under the Act would not be taken frivolously. It was a matter of the highest importance to the trade of the country that this section should be retained, and he sincerely trusted that the Amendment would not be accepted.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

said he would not have taken part in the discussion except for a communication which he had received from the county council of Durham, of which for several years he was a Member, asking him to put forward their opinion that this clause should be eliminated for the reasons which had already been given by the mover of the Amendment. The county council of Durham had carefully considered this matter, and had come to the conclusion that as a similar provision was not required in regard to prosecutions for the sale of adulterated human food, they were at a loss to understand why it should be necessary in regard to cattle food. He had no doubt that the President of the Board of Agriculture would explain this point, which at present they could not understand. They suggested that the noble Earl should insert in the place of the present clause a section which they had drafted.

He could not expect the noble Earl to accept the proposed clause straight away, or to do more than to promise to consider it, but he would read the proposed clause and ask his noble friend to postpone his final decision concerning it until the Report stage. The clause proposed by the county council of Durham was as follows— Prosecutions for an offence under this section may be instituted as well before a Court having jurisdiction in the place where the fertiliser of the soil or food for cattle or poultry was sampled as before a Court having jurisdiction in the place where the offence is alleged to have been committed. Their object was to be able to prosecute in two places—first, in the place where the article was originally sold, and secondly, in the place where it was retailed. At the present moment it was possible to prosecute only in the place where it was originally sold.

THE EARL OF MAYO

hoped the noble Earl in charge of the Bill would not accept the Amendment, because there was great danger of frivolous prosecutions being instituted, especially in the country from which he came. There was no doubt that manufacturers must be protected, and it was much better that the central body who really had the care of agriculture and of farmers in their hands, should decide whether prosecutions should be undertaken. Therefore, to avoid frivolous prosecutions, he hoped the noble Earl would be firm, and refuse to accept the Amendment.

THE EARL OF ONSLOW

said that this matter came before him when he was at the Board of Agriculture, and it was then made very clear that there would be grave risk of frivolous prosecutions unless some central authority were empowered to intervene. Having had some experience of the officials of the Board of Agriculture, he did not think that the power of refusing or of consenting to prosecutions could be in better hands than theirs. Therefore, he would vote with the noble Earl against the Amendment.

EARL CARRINGTON

At first sight there seems to be a great deal in what the noble Marquess and the noble Lord below the gangway have said, but I think a little consideration will show that the arguments the other way are so overwhelming that the House will be disposed to leave the clause as it stands. When a similar Amendment was proposed in the House of Commons, the matter was well threshed out, and the Amendment withdrawn without any division being taken. Under the law as it stands, criminal proceedings may be instituted by a person aggrieved, or by any body or association authorised by the Board, and by the Council of a County or borough. Several agricultural witnesses and the trade witnesses without exception made representations to Lord Burghclere's Committee as to the damaging effect which criminal proceedings would have on a trader's credit. Some of these fertiliser merchants are very big men, and have a great reputation in the country, and it would be a dreadful thing if some of them were, by means of a frivolous or malicious prosecution, put into the dock, because it must be remembered that these are criminal proceedings. It would be an uncommonly hard thing to put these men into the dock, possibly as the result of a frivolous prosecution. The traders urged that even if acquitted, great injury would be done to their business, and that therefore it was very necessary that the consent of the Board should be required in all cases. Leading members of the trade—and one must consider them a little—are quite content with the Bill as it stands, and regard it as a fair compromise between the conflicting interests, and their co-operation, I need hardly say, is most important for the efficient working of the Bill. Therefore I most respectfully hope the House will be willing to leave the matter as it stands.

*LORD CLIFFORD OF CHUDLEIGH

said that as the sense of the House appeared to be against the Amendment, he would ask leave to withdraw it.

Amendment, by leave, withdraw).

EARL CARRINGTON

moved to insert after "Fisheries "In line 3, the words, "And the Board shall not give such consent until the part of the sample re- tained by the agricultural analyst has been analysed and a certificate of analysis given by the chief analyst." He stated that the Amendment was proposed in. pursuance of an undertaking which had been given.

Amendment moved—

In page 6, line 3, after the word ' Fisheries,"To insert the words ' and the Board shall not give such consent until the part of the sample retained by the agricultural analyst has been analysed and a certificate of analysis given by the chief analyst.'"—(Earl Carrington.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 6, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 7:—

Amendment moved—

In page 6, line 14, to leave out from the word ' Act' to the word ' he ' in line 19. "— (Earl Carrington.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 7, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 8 agreed to.

Clause 9:—

EARL CARRINGTON

moved to add the following: "But the proceedings may be taken as well before a Court having jurisdiction in the place where the purchaser of the article to which the invoice or description relates, resides or carries on business as before a Court having jurisdiction in the place where the invoice or description was given." He said that the Amendment was moved in order to obviate any difficulty that might arise owing to a conflict between the English and the Irish jurisdiction.

Amendment moved—

In page 7, line 9, at the end, to add the words, ' But the proceedings may be taken as well before a Court having jurisdiction in the place where the purchaser of the article to which the invoice or description relates resides or carries on business as before a Court having jurisdiction in the place where the invoice or description was given.'"—(Earl Carrington.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 9, as Amended, agreed to.

Clause 10:—

Amendment moved—

In page 7, line 16, to leave out from the word ' citric' to the end of line 17, and to insert the words 'acid or other solvent of the prescribed strength.' "—(Earl Carrington.)

LORD CLIFFORD OF CHUDLEIGH

asked why the words, "of the prescribed strength" were to be substituted for the words, "of the strength to be prescribed."the Bill itself did not prescribe any strength; he took it that the strength was to be prescribed in the regulations.

EARL CARRINGTON

I am afraid I can hardly see the difference between "the strength to be prescribed," and the "prescribed strength."

*LORD CLIFFORD OF CHUDLEIGH

thought the expression already in the Bill was better than that now proposed to be inserted.

EARL CARRINGTON

It is more or less a verbal Amendment, and I hope the noble Lord will not object to it. I understand that "prescribed" also means prescribed by the Board of Agriculture. That is always the case.

On Question, Amendment agreed to,

Amendment moved—

In line 17, after the word 'prescribed' to insert the words ' and the percentage of soluble phosphates and percentage of insoluble phosphates mean respectively the percentage of tribasic phosphate of lime which has been, and that which has not been rendered soluble.' "—(Earl Carrington.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 10, as amended, agreed to.

Remaining Clauses agreed to.

Standing Committee negatived. The Report of Amendments to he received to-morrow, and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 189.)