PART II. GUARDIANSHIP OF ANCIENT MONUMENTS. (Hansard, 28 May 1913)

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
I move to delete the proviso to subsection (1)—namely, "Provided that the Commissioners shall not consent to become guardians of any structure which is occupied as a dwelling-house by any person other than a person employed as the caretaker thereof or Ins family." I have put down this Amendment as a preliminary step towards leaving out of the Bill altogether dwelling-houses that are actually inhabited, and there are on your Lordships' Paper consequential Amendments to carry that out. I understand, from the Amendments which appear on the Paper in the name of His Majesty's Government, that they do not assent to that proceeding, but I do not know that I need press the point at this moment, because so far as the actual Amendment which is now under consideration is concerned the Government and myself are in agreement. But the Government propose to reinsert the words later on, and no doubt they will explain their reasons when we come to that Amendment.

§ EARL BEAUCHAMP
I think it would be convenient to your Lordships if at this stage I explained the difference between the Amendments standing in the noble Marquess's name and those standing in my name. What the noble Marquess does by his Amendments is to exclude entirely ecclesiastical buildings and dwelling-houses from the scope of the Bill. We are entirely at one with regard to ecclesiastical buildings, though I know that that feeling is not shared by some of the noble Marquess's colleagues. He and I, however, are agreed that we must exclude ecclesiastical buildings. What on consideration seems best to us to do is to put into the definition clause such form of words as will entirely exclude ecclesiastical buildings from the scope of the Bill, and then no difficulties can arise in the future.
Then we come to dwelling-houses, and this is where the noble Marquess and I are at issue. The noble Marquess's Amendment goes further than I think your Lordships would generally wish that it should go. His Amendment would make it impossible for the local authority to purchase a dwelling-house even by agreement with the owner; it would make it impossible for the owner of such a house to give his interest in it of his own accord; and it would also make it impossible for the owner of such a house to hand it over to the local authority so as to make them guardians of it. The form of words which I have put on the Paper and to which we shall come in due time, makes this distinction—that without the consent of the owner it cannot be done. The owner of the dwelling-house which is occupied can, by the mere exercise of his will, prevent anything being done. The noble Marquess would prevent the owner from handing it over by consent, but I do not put that disability upon him. I would allow him to do it if he were willing to do so himself. That is the point at issue between us.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
I may say at once that I do not propose to discuss the question of ecclesiastical buildings, which it is quite clear does not arise on this Amendment. I am entirely in agreement with His Majesty's Government on that point. But as regards dwelling-houses, I understand that the point between, us is a very small one. The Government wish to retain power for the local authority, and, as the Bill now stands, for the Government 430 themselves, to buy a dwelling-house in which the owner is living. I think that will be a very unusual proceeding and not likely often to be availed of. At any rate, I am not concerned to resist it if the Government desire to have that power. There will, however, be rather a difference of opinion between us when we reach Clause 13. I do not think that Clause 13 ought to be applied to dwelling-houses which are actually occupied. As I mentioned in the observations which I made on the Second Reading of this Bill, there are many houses, with one of which I am very closely acquainted, which might easily become ancient monuments under this Bill, and by the Bill as it stands the owner would not be allowed to throw two servants' rooms into one without giving a month's notice to the Commissioners. That really is absurd, and Clause 13 ought not to apply to dwelling-houses at all. But it will be much more regular, of course, to raise that point when we come to Clause 13.

§ EARL BEAUCHAMP
Your Lordships will see that the next Amendment is part of the scheme, the object of the Amendment being to allow the local authorities as well as the Commissioners of Works to become guardians by consent.

§ EARL BEAUCHAMP
I move to insert, in subsection (1), the words "the monument" after the word "maintain." This is a purely drafting Amendment for which I am indebted to the noble Marquess opposite.