LORDS AMENDMENT. (Hansard, 23 December 1920)

§ LORD STANMORE
The Commons have agreed to your Lordships' Amendment in which you substituted a panel of arbitrators in Scotland, corresponding to the 946 English panel, for the Land Court. The Commons have added a further Amendment to your Lordships' Amendment in which the Land Court appears, but in a very different position from that in which it was before. It is no longer a compulsory tribunal but merely one to which parties can go when both perfer that course. If the Land Court is as objectionable as some noble Lords believe it to be no two parties will ever consent to refer differences to such a body, and this provision will in that case remain inoperative. The panel of arbitrators will remain the only tribunal before which any person may be taken save at his own free choice. If it were possible that two parties could agree to the Land Court as the tribunal it would be very unfair that they should not be allowed to have their case adjudicated upon by that tribunal.

THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH
I hope that your Lordships will not agree to my noble friend's suggestion. At this hour of the night noble Lords will not wish me to say anything upon the matter, as you are all familiar with this question and I understand in another place they are very anxious to have this Bill back as soon as possible. My noble friend talked about the Land Court being objectionable. I do not know whether he meant the Court itself, or the members composing it. I submit to your Lordships that it is not constituted for the purpose, and is not, suitable for the purpose. With regard to other questions connected with Scotland, my noble friend opposite appealed to some of your Lordships who proposed Amendments that there should be uniformity, and in some cases your Lordships agreed with his appeal. I only ask for uniformity in this case. I appeal that the Bill should leave your Lordships' House giving the same conditions to Scotland as to England, and in doing that I am only carrying out the advice which the noble Lord offered with regard to uniformity on other questions.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR
As this matter touches upon a legal and technical it question it encourages me to make a very brief observation upon the point. I do not agree with the advice which the noble Duke has addressed to the House, and I 947 observe that Scottish Members in another place who are very much in touch with Scottish opinion equally dissent from the course which the noble Duke recommends. At twenty minutes past ten at night the noble Duke adds another very considerable point of difference to those which have already emerged. We are to proceed to put down an Amendment to the House of Commons Amendment—why? Because any Scottish liege is forced to go to the Land Court? Because any injustice is being done by forcing a person to submit his quarrel to an unwelcome and unacceptable tribunal? No. But because the noble Duke says they should be deprived of that third alternative. It seems to me to be quite unreasonable.

LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH
I differ from the noble and learned Lord with great reluctance, but I distrust any extension of the jurisdiction of the Laud Court. I do not think the dilemma which the noble and learned Lord put is accurate, because if we have in Scotland, as in England, the alternative method of having arbiters, and you agree that the members of the Land Court shall be the arbiters, they can be so selected, but here is a pro

THE EARL OF CRAWFORD
May I suggest, now that the Amendment have been considered, that your Lordships 948 posal to extend the jurisdiction of the Land Court as a court, and to that I demur. Look at the drafting of this Amendment. They are to have jurisdiction on all questions which under the Act of 1908 or the Act of 1907 may be determined by a single arbiter. I do not know what all those questions are and I have not had time, in the half hour or hour which has elapsed since we received these Amendments, to discover what those questions are. They are also to have the like powers and jurisdiction as they have for the purposes of the Small Landholders (Scotland) Acts, 1886 to 1919. That is a varity of Acts extending over a period of thirty-three years. Now this Land Court was originally the Crofters Commission. It was established to deal with matters entirely confined to the Crofters Counties and Crofters, and I think it is a complete mistake to give them any jurisdiction over the larger landed estates in Scotland, and I shall support the noble Duke.
On Question, That this House doth disagree with the Commons in the said Amendment?—
should suspend the sitting during pleasure pending a Message from the House of Commons.

CONTENTS.
Richmond and Gordon, D.	Morton, E.	Dynevor, L.
Sutherland, D.	Powis, E.	Douglas, L. (E. Home.)
	Selborne, E.	Ebury, L.
Ailsa, M.	Stanhope, E.	Elphinstone, L.
Bath, M.		Erskine, L.
Camden, M.	Chaplin, V.	Faringdon, L.
Exeter, M.	Falmouth, V.	Hamilton of Dalzell, L.
Linlithgow, M.	Hampden, V.	Kenyon, L.
Salisbury, M.	Hood, V.	Lamington, L.
Albemarle, E.		Lovat, L.
Ancaster, E.	Askwith, L.	O'Hagan, L.
Doncaster, E. (D. Buccleuch and Queens-berry.)[Teller]	Avebury, L.	Oranmore and Browne, L.
	Balfour, L. [Teller]	Oxenfoord, L. (E. Stair.)
	Blythswood, L.	Saltoun, L.
Grey, E.	Cheylesmore, L.	Sandys, L.
Jersey, E.	Clinton, L.	Stewart of Garlies, L. (E. Galloway)
Kilmorey, E.	Cottesloe, L.
Malmesbury, E.	Decies, L.	Stuart of Wortley, L.
Mar and Kellie, E.	Deramore, L.	Sumner, L.

NOT-CONTENTS
Birkenhead, L. (L. Chancellor.)	Sandhurst, V. (L. Chamberlain.)	Hylton, L.
	Milner, V.	Lee of Fareham, L.
Lucan, E.	Peel, V.	Ormonde, L. (M. Ormonde.)
Lytton, E.	Colebrooke, L.	Somerleyton, L. [Teller]
Onslow, E.	Crawshaw, L.	Stanmore, L. [Teller]
Strafford, E	Donington, L.	Wigan, L. (E. Crawford.)