Lords Sitting of 28 June 1910

Preamble
Several Lords Several Lords—Took the Oath.
The LORD CHANCELLOR The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House, That the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table the Certificate from the Examiners that no Standing Orders are applicable to the following Bill:
Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Order (No. 6). [H.L.]
Also the Certificate that the further Standing Orders applicable to the following Bill have been complied with:
Shirebrook and District Gas.
The same were ordered to lie on the Table.

BRIGHTON AND HOVE GAS BILL.
The King's consent signified, and Bill reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments.
LONDON UNITED TRAMWAYS BILL. [H.L.]
Reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments.
GAS ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No.2) BILL. [H.L.]
Reported, with Amendments, and recommitted to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

LITTLE HULTON URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL.
EGREMONT URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL (GAS) BILL.
BRISTOL GAS BILL.
EXMOUTH URBAN DISTRICT WATER BILL.
Reported, with Amendments.

EXMOUTH GAS BILL.
Reported, with an Amendment.
SOUTH HANTS WATER BILL.
Report from the Committee of Selection, That the Earl of Londesborough be proposed to the House as a Member of the Select Committee on the said Bill in the place of the Earl Fortescue; read, and agreed to.
NORTH EAST LONDON RAILWAY BILL. [H.L.]
Read 2a (according to order), and committed: The Committee to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 4) BILL.
Brought from the Commons.
LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL (MONEY) BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners.
YORKSHIRE ELECTRIC POWER BILL. [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons, agreed to, with Amendments: The said Amendments considered, and agreed to.
WATER SUPPLIES (PROTECTION) BILL. [H.L.]
The evidence taken before the Joint Committee from time to time to be printed, but no copies to be delivered out, except to Members of the Committee, and such other persons as the Committee shall think fit, until further order. (No.72.)
CALEDONIAN RAILWAY ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL. [H.L.]
A Bill to confirm a Provisional Order relating to the Caledonian Railway—Was presented by the Lord Pentland (pursuant to the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act,1899, sections 8 and 9); read la, and to be printed.(No.73.)
PIER AND HARBOUR PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No.2) BILL. [H.L.]
Read 2a (according to order).

POLICE (WEEKLY REST-DAY) BILL.
Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.
Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Viscount Ridley.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
House in Committee accordingly.
[The Earl of ONSLOW in the Chair.]
Clause 1:
No constable to be on duty more than six days in any week.
1.—(1) The police authority of any county or borough in England or Wales as respects which this Act is for the time being in force shall make such arrangements as to the hours of duty of constables that every constable (not being above the rank of inspector) shall be allowed at least fifty-two days in a year on which he is not required to perform police duty, save on occasions of public emergency, and for such days being distributed throughout the year with the object of securing, so far as practicable, to every such constable one day's rest in every seven.
(2) This Act shall not come into force as respects any police authority until such date as may be fixed by the authority, but if this Act has not come into force as respects the police authority of any county borough maintaining a separate police force before the expiration of four years from the passing of this Act, it shall come into force as respects that authority at the expiration of that period. And if this Act has not come into operation as respects any other police authority before the expiration of such period as may hereafter be fixed by Order in Council, it shall come into operation at the expiration of that period, and the Order may apply cither to all such other police authorities generally or to any authority specified in the Order.
THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (EARL BEAUCHAMP)THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (EARL BEAUCHAMP) moved to omit from subsection (1) the word "public" ["save on occasion of 'public' emergency"]. The noble Earl said: My Lords, this is not a very important Amendment, but your Lordships will see that some inconvenience might be caused if it is not adopted. The emergency might not be of a public character. For instance, supposing there was a whole lot of illness in the Police Force. That would not be an emergency of a public character, yet it might obstruct the whole working of the Force. Therefore I hope your Lordships will agree to leave out the word.
Amendment moved—
Clause 1, page 1, line 11, leave out ("public").—(Earl Beauchamp.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
LORD BELPER LORD BELPER moved to amend subsection (2) so that it would read—
(2) This Act shall not come into force as respects any police authority until such date as may be fixed by the authority, but if this Act has not come into force as respects any police authority on the expiration of four years from the passing of this Act, His Majesty may direct by Order in Council that it shall come into force at the expiration of such period as may be fixed by the Order, and this Act shall come into force
1026
accordingly: Provided that before any Order in Council is made under this Act the draft thereof shall be laid before each House of Parliament and if an Address is presented to His Majesty against the draft or any part thereof by either House of Parliament within the next subsequent thirty days on which that House has sat next after any such draft is laid before it no further proceedings shall be taken thereon without prejudice to the making of any new draft order.
He also proposed to add the following new subsection—
(3) An Order in Council under this Act may apply either to all police authorities generally in respect of which this Act has not come into force or to any authority specified in the Order.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I think I had better say a few words to explain the scope and the exact intention of my Amendment. It probably might be, for the purposes of an Amendment, divided into two. The first part deals with the question of the four years. As the Bill stands, the Act will come into compulsory operation in every county borough maintaining a separate police force at the expiration of four years after the passing of the Act, while with regard to other authorities, including all the large counties, the time for it to come into operation is to be fixed by an Order in Council. There is no limit put on the time when that Order in Council may be first enforced, and therefore the object of my first Amendment is to say that the Order in Council shall not be issued until the same period—namely, after the expiration of four years. The provision as to the expiration of four years will apply to every Police Force, and if, as I believe, the intention was to give a certain latitude with regard to counties, whose case has not been properly considered before the Committee, I think it would be obvious that it would be a hardship upon them if an Order in Council were issued the moment the Bill passed, without the same limit of time as is given to county boroughs. That is the intention of the first part of my Amendment.
With regard to the second part of the Amendment I must say a few words, because it seems to me that the discussion, which was not a long one, on the Second Reading did not sufficiently point out that the case of the counties and also of some of the smaller boroughs had not at all been considered by the Committee which sat upon the Bill in the House of Lords. But as far as it was considered, they made a very great distinction between the two

1027
cases. In their report the Committee stated that—
"It will be admitted that little or no comparison is possible between the daily life of a police constable on duty in the heart of the metropolis and that of a constable stationed in a sparsely inhabited rural district, more or less free from crime or any approach to disorder."
That was exactly our case on the Second Reading—that they were not on all fours at all, and that the life of a policeman who is posted in a rural district is not at all to be compared with that of a man who is amongst a very large population and exposed to very disagreeable and dangerous work. The Committee went on to say—
"As a matter of fact, the figures given in evidence as to health in the Police Force show a marked improvement. Your Committee are not able to find that the question of one day's rest in seven has been at all widely or generally raised or discussed by those affected by, or responsible for, the cost—namely, the ratepayers and their elected representatives.
The Committee continued—
"Having regard to these and other facts and circumstances which might be mentioned, your Committee do not recommend at present the enactment of the Bill which has been referred to them, applying as it does to the whole of England and Wales."
Considering that that comes from the Committee who recommend the Bill as far as London goes, I think one would not have been altogether unreasonable if one had taken exception to the Bill referring to the counties, and also, possibly, to some of the other boroughs. But the Bill having passed the other House, and having met with unanimous support there, it is very difficult at this stage to limit its scope; but I do think that it is only a very moderate and reasonable proposal which I make with regard to this Amendment—namely, that in each case where an Order in Council is issued it should be submitted to the House for consideration before it actually takes effect.
The wording of this Amendment has been carefully considered. The difficulty as to Parliament over-riding an Order made by the King in Council can only be got over in the way suggested—that is, that before the Order is made a draft of it should be laid on the Table of the House. That is what my Amendment proposes. In the latter part of my Amendment I suggest that if an Address is presented to His
1028
Majesty against the draft or any part thereof by either House of Parliament within the next subsequent thirty days on which that House has sat next after any such draft is laid before it, no further proceedings should be taken thereon, without prejudice to the making of any new draft Order. I should like to point out that, although I have addressed my remarks principally with regard to the counties, whose case I am more conversant with and whose case I represent, as far as my Amendment goes this provision that the Order in Council shall lie on the Table for thirty days applies not only to counties but also to boroughs. There are a great many boroughs, I do not say in the same position as counties, but at all events in a different position from London, and I have thought it desirable in the first instance to make it applicable to the whole of these, and it is in that form that I move my Amendment. I think I ought to point out that the words I have quoted from the Report do not refer merely to the counties, although I think the case is stronger in the counties, but to all the other boroughs outside London, and that the recommendation of the Committee was with regard to London only.
Amendment moved—
Clause 1, page 1, line 17, leave out from ("respects") to the end of the clause and insert ("any police authority on the expiration of four "years from the passing of this Act, His Majesty "may direct by Order in Council that it shall "come into force at the expiration of such period "as may be fixed by the Order, and this Act "shall come into force accordingly: Provided "that before any Order in Council is made under this Act the draft thereof shall be laid before each House of Parliament and if an Address is presented to His Majesty against the draft or any part thereof by either House of Parliament within the next subsequent thirty days on which that House has sat next after any such draft is laid before it no further proceedings shall be taken thereon without prejudice to the making of any new draft order.
"(3) An Order in Council under this Act may apply either to all police authorities generally in respect of which this Act has not come into force or to any authority specified in the Order").—(Lord Belper.)
EARL BEAUCHAMP: My Lords, His Majesty's Government having given this Bill their support, I rise to offer to your Lordships their advice with regard to the Amendment which the noble Lord has just moved. He divides his Amendment into two parts. I hope he will allow me to deal first with the second part—that

1029
part which deals with the Order in Council being laid before each House of Parliament. To that His Majesty's Government offer no objection, and they would be glad if the noble Viscount who is in charge of the Bill sees his way to adopt it. But with regard to the other part, to which I think the noble Lord did not devote quite so much attention, I hope I may be allowed to say a few words in explaining why it is that we see some objection to the adoption of the first part of the Amendment. Your Lordships will see that the noble Viscount deals differently in the Bill with county boroughs from other police authorities. In the first part of the second subsection county boroughs are dealt with first of all, and then, in line 22, "any other police authority." That is to say, the promoters of the Bill have recognised that a different set of circumstances exists in the large county boroughs from that which exists in county areas and also in smaller boroughs. Whenever we have a Bill dealing with local government in this House it is almost without exception that we hear from some noble Lord that we should recognise the difference between the different sets of circumstances, and that we should not try to make one rigid law applicable to both. That was the intention of the noble Viscount and the promoters of the Bill—namely, to make some distinction between the large boroughs and other police authorities, and that is the distinction with which the noble Lord who moves the Amendment really does away. He proposes that they should be dealt with in exactly the same manner. The reason why the promoters introduced this difference in regard to the police force in the large boroughs and the police force in other areas was that their experience in London led them to believe that it takes some time to get the increased number of police necessary in order to give effect to this Bill. It is very undesirable suddenly to have a large number of recruits in any police force, and from experience in London the promoters are inclined to think four years the proper period to give the large county boroughs in order that they may get the necessary number of recruits to be able to carry the Bill into effect. The result of the noble Lord's Amendment is, in the first place, to sweep away the difference between the county boroughs and the other areas, and, in the second place, he does not make it compulsory, as the Bill does, upon the county boroughs.
LORD BELPER: I beg the noble Earl's pardon. The Amendment does not interfere with the compulsion on county boroughs in four years.
EARL BEAUCHAMP: In the third line of his Amendment the noble Lord says, "His Majesty may direct by Order in Council that it shall come into force."
LORD BELPER: That is after the expiration of four years.
EARL BEAUCHAMP: The noble Lord will see that his Amendment would read—
"This Act shall not come into force as respects any police authority until such date as may be fixed by the authority, but if this Act has not come into force as respects any police authority on the expiration of four years from the passing of this Act, His Majesty may direct by Order in Council that it shall come into force at the expiration of such period as may be fixed by the Order, and this Act shall come into force accordingly."
I think your Lordships will see, under the general interpretation, that the word "may" is permissive, and makes some difference in the phraseology of the Bill as it stands at this moment. I think, if the noble Lord will look at the Bill and consider the effect of his Amendment, he will see that it takes away, so far as county boroughs are concerned, the compulsion provided for. That really is one of the reasons why His Majesty's Government would be unwilling to see this part of the noble Lord's Amendment adopted. In their opinion this different treatment of county boroughs is really necessary. I do not know that in the debate which took place on the Second Reading any very strong objection was taken to this point in the House; and, in view of the larger opportunities for objection which will be allowed by accepting the second part of the noble Lord's Amendment and making it necessary that the draft Order should be laid before your Lordships' House, I venture to hope that we may be able to come to a general agreement on the subject. There will be certain verbal Amendments necessary, but with those I shall not venture to trouble your Lordships until I know whether the suggestions which I venture to make are generally acceptable.
VISCOUNT RIDLEY: My Lords, I hope, on behalf of the promoters of this Bill, that the noble Lord who has moved this Amendment will be content with the

1031
second portion of it. As regards that portion, I may say that it was distinctly understood by the framers of the Bill that there were different circumstances in county boroughs and in counties, and for that reason there appeared in the Bill a different practice as regards those different areas. When the noble Lord asks that as regards the counties, which may be dealt with by an Order in Council, there should be the fullest opportunity for Parliament to revise and discuss that Order in Council, I venture to say I consider that a great improvement on the Bill and a proper provision to be inserted in it. In fact, I think I committed an error towards this House in not explaining more fully on Second Reading the difference in practice which it was proposed to adopt in the Bill. But as regards the other portion of the Amendment, it seems to me that it is nugatory of the intention of the Bill, which is that within four years this provision should come into force in county boroughs. After what has fallen from the noble Earl who represents the Home Office, I trust that the noble Lord who has moved the Amendment will content himself with that important part of it which provides that Parliament should have the revision of the Order in Council, and that he will not, by insisting on the first portion of his Amendment, render the Bill practically nugatory in a large number of important boroughs in this kingdom.
LORD WENLOCK: My Lords, on the Second Reading I ventured to enter a protest against the manner in which the payment was going to be taken from local authorities to meet the expenses of this Bill. I did so on behalf of a very important borough, and I appeal to my noble friend who has moved this Amendment to insist upon boroughs being included within the procedure he proposes to adopt. It would give county boroughs an opportunity of stating their case the same as counties, and if they fail to make out their case it will be open to the Government of the day to place compulsion upon them. I earnestly hope that the Government will see their way to give boroughs the same opportunity that they are going to give to counties. In the first place, the great boroughs are not being consulted, and if they were canvassed I am confident that it would be found that there is considerable opposition to this Bill. Very few of those authorities know what the effect of the Bill
1032
will be. It was only yesterday that this matter was mentioned before the Standing Joint Committee of my own county, and I was surprised to find how very few people had ascertained what the effect of it would be. In view of the fact that the result of this Bill has not been thoroughly grasped by those who represent the ratepayers up and down the country, I hope Government will be good enough to allow county boroughs the same opportunity as counties, which would be the result of carrying the other part of my noble friend's Amendment. I hope my noble friend will stick to his Amendment as it stands. Every local authority will then have the opportunity of having their case properly stated in Parliament before compulsion is put upon them.
THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND: My Lords, I am afraid I am very obtuse, but I listened with great attention to the speeches of the noble Earl opposite and of my noble friend on my right (Viscount Ridley) and I fail to understand why they desire a different treatment for boroughs from that to be meted out to counties. The noble Earl opposite told us that it is necessary in a borough—apparently he is advised that it is not necessary in a county—that four years should elapse before a sufficient number of new police could be obtained in order to allow the remaining members of the force to have one day's rest in seven. That I can quite understand, and there is nothing as far as I see in the noble Lord's Amendment which deprives them of that four years. The noble Earl went on to say that the Amendment did away with compulsion, but neither Lord Ridley nor the noble Earl opposite told us why compulsion is necessary in the case of boroughs when it is not necessary in the case of counties. Again I should like to emphasise what fell from my noble friend Lord Belper, that the Committee which had the whole of this subject under consideration drew a clear distinction between the metropolis and other places, including large boroughs, and by doing so they distinctly left the inference upon their Report that they did not think that it was necessary, or that the time had come, for other authorities than the metropolis to be forced to carry this provision into effect. The counties are to have four years warning that they are liable to an Order in Council forcing them to come under the provisions of this Bill,

1033
and then, after those four years have expired, the Order in Council is to be laid before the House. Why are the boroughs not to have the protection which is demanded, and which I am glad the noble Earl is willing to give, in the case of the counties—namely, that each particular case should have the opportunity of being considered by this House before this compulsion, which the Committee who have inquired into the question have not recommended and which is simply the invention of a certain number of private Members of the House of Commons, is forced upon them. I do hope we shall insist on this Amendment. It is quite a reasonable one, and I fail at the present moment to see why the noble Viscount thinks it makes the provisions of the Bill so far as boroughs are concerned nugatory.
LORD BELPER: My Lords, I think some answer is necessary with regard to the remarks of the noble Earl opposite upon my Amendment. In the first place, let me say that in using the expression "His Majesty may direct by Order in Council" I have followed the universal form in Acts relating to Orders in Council. It would not be correct to say that His Majesty shall make an Order. This practically leaves it to the Government to make the Order in Council on the very day they desire to make it. As soon as the four years have elapsed they can make the Order in Council at once. Therefore as far as the question of the use of the word "may" is concerned there is nothing in it, because that is the usual form in Acts of Parliament. As regards the distinction between the large boroughs and the counties, I cannot see that the noble Earl made out his case. What are the facts? He says that the big boroughs, being large police authorities, would require more time to arrange for the extra police that might be required. But what are the figures that are given in this return? It appears that the distribution of the police is as follows—in the metropolis, 17,258; in boroughs having their own police force, 18,713; and in counties, 17,038. No doubt some of these counties are very much smaller than others, but some are very much larger than the boroughs, and have very large police forces. And if it is necessary to give this period of four years latitude to a county borough, surely it is just as necessary in many counties to give ample time for the
1034
consideration of the matter. The fact is, distinction is being made without any case for it having been made out in the Report of this Committee. The Committee themselves say that the only distinction they can draw is between the police force in London and that in other parts of the country. I venture to say that it would be a rather strong action where no particular case had been made out to apply compulsory powers by the issue of an Order in Council at any moment directly the Act is passed, not giving even four years grace. I should strongly object to give way with regard to that, and so far as the distinction between counties and boroughs is concerned I cannot see that the noble Earl has made out a case which would justify their being treated in a totally different manner.
EARL BEAUCHAMP: My Lords, I am glad to find myself in agreement with Lord Belper on one point. I quite agree that I did not make out my case as to the distinction between county boroughs and smaller areas with regard to the Order in Council, a matter to which Lord Wenlock also referred. It had not been my intention to make any distinction in areas, because if the noble Lord will look at his own Amendment he will see that that part of it which we should be glad to accept says that "Provided that before any Order in Council is made under this Act the draft thereof shall be laid before each House of Parliament." That covers all areas, county boroughs, county areas, and the smaller boroughs. There would not be any difference between them. With regard to the other part of the Amendment, may I venture to put forward another difficulty which might arise if we accept it. Supposing four years passed, and at the end of that time the county borough had made no preparation for adding to its number of police, and the draft Order directed a weekly rest-day to be given, there would have to be a further delay before there would be a sufficient number of police to allow the rest-day to be given. So that what would happen under the first part of the Amendment of the noble Lord would be that there would be, first, a delay of four years, and then there would be another delay of four years possibly before they would be able to get a sufficient number of police in order to give a weekly rest-day. That is a practical difficulty, and might inflict some hardship in

1035
the case of the big county boroughs. I am glad to find that the noble Lord is anxious that this Order in Council should be made applicable to all these authorities, and being so far heartily in agreement with him I hope he will withdraw the other part of his Amendment.
LORD WENLOCK: The same difficulty would arise in the case of big counties as in the case of big boroughs.
EARL BEAUCHAMP: I agree; but would it not be different in degree? With counties you have scattered areas, and it is possible to arrange the matter more easily in counties than in towns. The circumstances are rather different, and we ought to make some distinction in the regulations affecting them.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: My Lords, I intervene with great reluctance, because I have not studied the question with the close attention that has been given to it by my noble friends. It seems to me that a very important concession has been offered to Lord Belper by the acceptance of the latter part of his Amendment—that which requires these Orders in Council to lie on the Table of the House for a certain number of days. It is the case, no doubt, that that applies to all Orders in Council.
EARL BEAUCHAMP: Hear, hear.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: That disposes satisfactorily of a part, at any rate, of the proposal of my noble friend Lord Belper. With regard to the other part of his Amendment, I would venture to suggest that, in deference to the strong pressure which has been put upon him on the part of the Home Office, he should not press it at this moment, but should reserve to himself the right of bringing up words at a future stage if on further consideration he thinks that necessary.
THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND: I confess I did not quite understand, what I now gather from the remarks of the noble Earl opposite, that the Order in Council refers to boroughs as well as to counties. Will the noble Earl tell us how the clause would read as he now proposes it?
EARL BEAUCHAMP: What I suggest is that the noble Lord should leave out the first part of his Amendment down to the word "accordingly," and should insert the remainder of it, commencing at the word "Provided," at the end of the subsection. I do not think there would be any doubt that that would refer to both kinds of authorities as it would be in the same section. If your Lordships agree to that I am informed that the proposed subsection (3) in the noble Lord's Amendment would not be necessary. That subsection really deals with the last two lines of the Bill on page 1. The words in the Bill are "The Order may apply either to all such other police authorities generally or to any authority specified in the Order." The words in the noble Lord's proposed subsection (3) are almost similar, and I think he only proposed to put them in because his Amendment as it stands on the Paper would have struck them out. If the noble Lord will be good enough to accept this at the present stage, he will have an opportunity before Report of looking into it and seeing whether he and his advisers are satisfied with the form which we propose. If not, we might discuss it on the Report stage.
THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND: It does not seem to me that that would meet the case. I understand that the noble Earl wishes to leave out the words of my noble friend's Amendment down to the word "accordingly," and that the rest of the Amendment should come in at the end of the clause. The clause reads—
"This Act shall not come into force as respects any police authority until such date as may be fixed by the authority, but if this Act has not come into force as respects the police authority of any county borough maintaining a separate police force before the expiration of four years from the passing of this Act, it shall come into force as respects that authority at the expiration of that period."
What is the good, after saying that, of adding at the end a proviso that the Order in Council should lie on the Table of Parliament for thirty days? No order would be necessary.
EARL BEAUCHAMP: If the noble Duke will be content to wait until he sees in print the clause as amended, I think it will be satisfactory to him.
LORD BELPER: I am willing to adopt the suggestion of the noble Earl on the

1037
clear understanding that I shall be at liberty, when I see the words in print and on further consideration, to move an Amendment on Report if I think it desirable or necessary. The only point that I should still press is that I believe there are counties which have just as largo police forces as in boroughs, and I think they require time just as much as do the boroughs in which to make the arrangements before the Order in Council is issued. I do not see at present the distinction between a very large borough and a very large county with an equally large police force, and it may be necessary for me to meet that case at a later stage of the Bill.
THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES: It will be necessary for the noble Lord to withdraw the Amendment in the form in which it is now moved, and then to move the addition of the proviso at the end of the clause.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment moved—
To add at the end of Clause I, the words "Provided that before any Order in Council is "made under this Act the draft thereof shall "be laid before each House of Parliament and "if an Address is presented to His Majesty "against the draft or any part thereof by either "House of Parliament within the next subse"quent thirty days on which that House hag sat "next after any such draft is laid before it no "further proceedings shall be taken thereon "without prejudice to the making of any new "draft Order."—(Lord Belper.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.
Remaining clause agreed to; the Report of Amendments to be received on Tuesday next; and Bill to be printed at amended. (No.74.)

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 4) BILL.
Read 1a; to be printed; and referred to the Examiners. (No.75.)
House adjourned at ten minutes past Five o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Four o'clock.