§ Order of the Day for the Third Reading read.
§ LORD MUIR MACKENZIEMy Lords, in moving the Third Reading of this Bill I think I ought to say a word or two on the subject. It seems to me that, although no opposition has suggested itself, some explanation is due to the House for taking the Bill so rapidly. The circumstances, of course, are peculiar. The Bill was brought in very late in the last session, and although I do not think that your Lordships had any objection to passing it rapidly through on that occasion, it did no good, because when it went down to the House of Commons the Government did not see their way to give it any facilities. But on this occasion, as it appears that the Bill is exactly the same as the one which passed on the former occasion, I thought it was justifiable that it should pass through rapidly and I trust that your Lordships will see no objection to its doing so. I note that there is to be a proposal to add an Amendment to the Bill, and I receive it with considerable pleasure. When it is actually moved I shall, perhaps, have a word to say upon the exact effect of the words proposed to be inserted. I beg to 217 move that the Bill be now read a third time.
§ Moved, That the Bill be now read 3a.—(Lord Muir Mackenzie.)
§ On Question, Bill read 3a.
§ Clause 1:
§ Repeal of 5&6 Wm. 4, c. 41, s. 2.
§ 1. Section two of the Gaming Act. 1835 (which makes money paid to the indorsee, holder, or assignee of securities given for consideration arising out of certain gaming transactions recoverable from the person to whom the securities were originally given), is hereby repealed. No trustee, executor, or other person acting in a representative or fiduciary capacity shall be under any obligation to make or enforce any claim under the said section in respect of any transaction completed before the passing of this Act, or be liable for any breach of duty by reason of any failure to do so.
§ LORD ASKWITH moved, at the end of the clause, to insert: "No action for the recovery of money under the said section shall be entertained in any court." The noble Lord said: Lord Muir Mackenzie, on a previous occasion, explained to your Lordships the circumstances in which this Bill, as originally introduced, was altered. It was really because a noble and learned Lord wished to consider the question of vested interests, and indicated that he thought the Act might be retrospective in its character. With regard to vested interests, or vested rights, in this case they were more likely to be vested wrongs. At any rate, this action to which the noble and learned Lord has alluded came as a great surprise to the whole community, who had thought that if they paid a bet by cheque it was as valid a transaction as if they paid it in gold, silver, or pence. They found that according to the law they were wrong, and actions have since been heard for the recovery of bets that were paid, possibly in good faith, by cheques. That seems to me to be a very unsatisfactory state of affairs, and in order that the law may be perfectly clear and that no action shall be brought upon these cheques I placed on the paper the Amendment that stands in my name.
§ The law as it stands at present is in favour of sharps; it also leads to Judges, counsel, solicitors and the public trying to evade it; it puts trustees and executors in a most invidious position; and it is apt to open up, after a man's death, transactions which he himself, had he been alive, might, perhaps, have been the last to desire to open up. I think, too, that the manner in which the law now works 218 is very unfair to one section of the community—the bookmakers. They way be trying to conduct their business honestly and yet find those whom they have trusted turning against them. That means that their business has to be conducted under the anxiety that any cheque they receive in payment of a bet may have to be repaid. There has been a considerable number of actions in the Courts; more, I think, than were anticipated. The noble and learned Lord alluded yesterday to several cases in which very stringent remarks had been made by Judges as to the effect of the law. I think, therefore, it is in the interest of the public that the law should be made clear and that these transactions in the Courts should not be allowed. With that object in view, I beg to move the Amendment which stands in my name.
§
Amendment moved—
Clause 1, line 16, at end insert ("No action for the recovery of money under the said section shall be entertained in any court).—(Lord Askwith.)
§ LORD MUIR MACKENZIEMy Lords, I am very glad that the noble Lord has thought fit to move this Amendment. I told the House on the Second Reading that I should be glad if something of the sort were done, because it agreed entirely with the opinions I ventured to express to your Lordships on bringing forward the Bill in that form last session. It is just possible, I think, that the words which the noble Lord proposes to put in make unnecessary certain other words with regard to trustees which are already in the Bill. I do not think, however, that it matters, and on the whole the proposed words make the Bill read more clearly than it would otherwise have done. I very gladly accept the Amendment.
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ LORD MUIR MACKENZIEMy Lords, I beg to move that this Bill do now pass.
§ Moved, That this Bill do now pass.—(Lord Muir Mackenzie.)
§ On Question, Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.
§ House adjourned during pleasure.
§ House resumed.