ROADS IMPROVEMENT BILL.

HL Deb 22 July 1925 vol 62 cc267-91

Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.

Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House in Committee accordingly:

[The EARL of DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]

Clause 1:

Planting of trees and laying out of grass margins in highways.

1.—(1) The Minister of Transport (hereinafter referred to as the Minister) and any county council or other highway authority shall have power to cause trees or shrubs to be planted and grass margins to be laid out in any highway maintainable by him or them respectively; and to erect and maintain guards or fences and otherwise to do anything expedient for the maintenance or protection of such trees, shrubs and grass margins.

(2) No such tree, shrub, grass margin, guard or fence shall be placed, laid out or allowed to remain in such a situation as to hinder the reasonable use of the highway by any person entitled to the use thereof, or so as to be a nuisance or injurious to the owner or occupier of any land or premises adjacent to the highway.

(3) The powers conferred by this section shall not be exercised by the Minister, or any county council or other highway authority except in a highway vested in him or them respectively, or upon land so vested which forms part of a highway.

(4) Where an urban authority incurs expenses under this section in connection with a main road which is maintained and repaired by that authority pursuant to subsection (2) of Section eleven of the Local Government Act, 1888, the expenses shall not be treated as part of the costs towards which the county council are required to make an annual payment under that subsection except where and so far as the county council consent to their being so treated.

VISCOUNT PEEL moved to add to the clause the following new subsections:— (5) If damage is caused to the property of any person by anything done in exercise of the powers conferred by this section, that person shall, unless the damage was caused or contributed to by his negligence, be entitled to recover compensation there-for from the Minister, county council or other highway authority by whom the powers were exercised. (6) Section seven of the Telegraph Act, 1878, shall apply to any work done in exercise of the powers conferred by this section as if the work were done in the execution of an undertaking authorised by a special Act of Parliament, and as if any county council or highway authority carrying out the work were the undertakers.

The noble Viscount said: The first subsection which I now move gives protection to the gas, water and electricity undertakings, and it also gives protection to other authorities and bodies and individuals also. The second subsection, (6), refers to Section 7 of the Telegraph Act, 1878, and was inserted to protect the Postmaster-General. The effect of it is that if the exercise of the powers of the clause involves the moving of telegraph lines, the expense of the moving is to be borne by the authority exercising the power. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 2, line 11, at end, insert the sail new subsections.—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM moved to leave out Clause 1. The noble Lord said: I desire to move the omission of this clause for the following reason. It empowers the Minister of Transport to plant trees and lay out margins of grass on various highways. No doubt in ordinary times that is quite a good idea. It would take a good many years before the trees grow, and if by any chance a branch falls upon any person walking along the road the Government, I presume, or the local authority, will be responsible for any damage that may be done to that person. Only a short time ago a person was awarded £1,200 damages because a tree, or part of a tree, fell upon him, breaking his leg. Therefore we should be committing ourselves to a certain amount of unknown damages. My chief objection to this clause is that at the present moment we are so poor that we are unable to obtain four or five cruisers, which are absolutely necessary for the preservation of this country and for the preservation of its trade and commerce. While we are in such a position that it is doubtful whether we can obtain three, four, or five new cruisers. you are actually proposing to spend money upon planting trees on the roads and laying out grass margins, and tomorrow we are proposing to spend money upon theatrical entertainments.

I think if this country is in such a poor position pecuniarily as to make it doubtful whether it is possible to raise the money for procuring necessary pro- tection for our lives and property, we might really postpone the planting of trees along the road. After all, we have now been in existence for some hundreds of years without planting trees along the roads, and at the present moment, with such shortness of money, not only in the pockets of the Government but in the pockets of everybody else—except, perhaps, the trade unions—I think we might postpone the planting of trees along the highways until a better time. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Leave out Clause 1.—(Lord Banbury of Southam.)

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

May I point out that the money proposed to be spent is entirely raised from motor taxation.

LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM

That does not make it any better. We might use the money for providing new cruisers.

LORD LAMINGTON

May I ask the noble Viscount a question with regard to subsection (3), which says: (3) The powers conferred by this section shall not be exercised by the Minister, or any county council or other highway authority except in a highway vested in him or them respectively, or upon land so vested which forms part of a highway. I understand that the Common Law of the country is that the road authority only own the actual surface of the road, and nothing else. What are the cases in which the roadways are vested in the authority? What is the differentiation?

THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (VISCOUNT PEEL)

My Lords, I am rather surprised that my noble friend moved an Amendment to leave out Clause 1 of this Bill, because Clause 1 is the Bill. When I moved the Second Reading I do not think the indignation of my noble friend was sufficiently aroused against this expenditure to induce him to put down an Amendment to reject the Bill altogether. One point be raised was that at some future time these trees night grow to such magnificent and umbrageous proportions that some of their branches might fall and injure the passers by. I submit that this century will be rather more advanced than it is at present by the time the trees have grown to such a size that any danger need be apprehended by the passers by, and I think most of your Lordships, for the rest of your lives, will be able to pass under them without much danger. But the real object of my noble friend was, I think, a more subtle one. He was evidently exercised not about the trees but about cruisers, and I think he wanted to induce me to make a premature statement about the number of cruisers the Government are going to build. As the Prime Minister is going to make a statement very shortly, possibly my noble friend will excuse me now.

As to the amount of money to be spent on these trees, of course it comes out of the Road Fund, being collected from the owners of motor vehicles, and I think that the sum to be expended on planting trees is very small. My noble friend knows how very little trees cost per thousand, and how inexpensive it is to plant them. In view of the enormous advantage of turning these bare roads into shady highways, this very small expenditure, discreetly made by the transport authorities, need not be grudged. It is not comparable to the expenditure on a cruiser or a submarine or even a sloop, and therefore I think we need not make any comparison of that kind. A point was made about the margins of the road. Those margins, I think, are in the highway or part of the highway, and therefore naturally will be within the authority of the Ministry of Transport or the County Council to deal with them.

EARL RUSSELL

I am not sure whether the noble Viscount has quite apprehended Lord Lamington's question. Subsection (3) says that these powers are limited to a highway vested in these authorities. I understand that to mean that they are the owners of the soil of the highway, and that, as was truly pointed out, is not the usual thing in this country. That would limit the application to new highways to ground bought by one of these local authorities, or by the Ministry of Transport. A highway cannot be said in ordinary cases to be vested in the local authority. Does the noble Viscount really think that he did deal with thatpoint?

VISCOUNT PEEL

I understand that what is included is such interest in land as the local authorities have got.

LORD LAMINGTON

I am quite sure the noble Viscount is wrong. The turf on the side of the road does not really belong to the road authority.

VISCOUNT PEEL

But this applies mainly to those roads which have been acquired by the Ministry of Transport. No question arises of the road surface; the whole land belongs to the Ministry of Transport.

LORD HARRIS

There are many counties where there is a very wide margin to roads. They are occupied by the local occupier. Whoever occupies the land has the grazing rights up to the end of the margin, and the road authority has no authority over the margin. On the contrary, the local landowner is very often compelled to do work on this margin which he thinks might very well be done by the local authorities.

LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM

Clause 1 says that the Minister of Transport and any county council or other highway authority shall have power to cause trees or shrubs to be planted and grass margins to be laid out "in any highway maintainable by him or them respectively." There is nothing whatever to limit it to these new roads, the soil of which has been bought by the Minister of Transport. It applies to all highways maintained by any county council or other highway authorities. I am not a lawyer, but I do happen to know as a magistrate as a fact that the soil of all the highways which are maintained by county councils or other local authorities does not belong to them but belongs to the owner of the land adjoining that highway. If the owner owns both sides of the roadway he owns the whole of the soil. There was a very well-known case when the Duke of Rutland's keepers held down a man who was endeavouring to prevent a grouse or partridge flying across the road, and it was held that the sole right of this man, as one of the public, was to pass along the highway. He had no further right at all, and the soil of the highway in that case belonged to the Duke of Rutland, who owned both sides of the road. Now my noble friend is going to come down and plant trees on somebody else's land. My noble friend says that the planting of trees costs very little. I beg to differ from him. I, unfortunately, have planted trees, and I find it very expensive. Trees very often do not grow. They die, and you have to replant them. I do not exactly know what the cost of a fair-sized tree is, but the Duke of Buccleuch says it is £2.

THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH

No, that is with the guard.

LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM

Very well, with the guard, but there will have to be a guard. My noble friend says it does not come to very much, but what I want to inculcate in this House and the people generally is that we must begin economising in little ways. It is like a spendthrift who went to a club and bought a bottle of champagne for which he paid 7s. 6d., and said he was saving 10s., because the price in the market was 17s. 6d. We must impress on the country that in every matter, however small, we must begin by denying ourselves some such luxury as is proposed in this Bill. And this is not the whole Bill by any manner of means. There are other important sections of the Bill affecting, for instance, the cutting-down of hedges or walls which interfere with the proper vision along the highway.

EARL RUSSELL

The greater part of what the noble Lord has said is founded on a misapprehension. He says this clause gives power to plant trees on other people's property, but the whole clause is governed by subsection (3) and it is that to which I called the noble Viscount's attention. Subsection (3) limits it to highways which are vested in the Minister of Transport or the local authority. If the noble Viscount is not prepared to deal fully with that matter now perhaps he will deal with it at another stage, but I suggest that "vested" undoubtedly means that they have full ownership, and that therefore these powers are limited to a very small number of highways in this country. Under this Bill you could not, for instance, plant trees on the grass margins of the Bath Road, to take a concrete example.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

This power was especially put into the Bill in regard to the new arterial roads which are banked on each side. It is intended mainly for that purpose.

VISCOUNT PEEL

I think the point is a simple one and that the noble Earl has stated it generally correctly. The powers are given under subsection (2) and the limitation is contained in subsection (3). It is clear there that it can only be done on "a highway vested in him or them respectively." It is clear, therefore, that if the highways are not vested in him, but are vested in adjacent landowners, it could not be done.

LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM

I think the noble Earl is right and that I have made a mistake, for which I apologise. But why put into subsection (1) of Clause 1 powers which are taken away by subsection (3)? What would he the position of any magistrate who reads Clause 1 and, thinking, as magistrates always do, that Parliament knew what it was doing, sees that he has to do certain things and finds a little lower, down that he may not do them? Why not amend subsection (1) on the Report Stage and cut out subsection (3) altogether?

VISCOUNT PEEL

I think it may fairly be assumed that the magistrates would read all the subsections of the clause.

LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM

But it seems to me that they are contradictory.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 2:

Amendment of s. 8 of 9 Edw. 7. c. 47.

2. For the purposes of Part II of the Development and Road Improvement Funds Act, 1909, the expression "improvement of roads" shall, in addition to the matters specified in subsection (5) of Section eight of that Act, include the planting, laying out, maintenance and protection of trees, shrubs and grass margins in and beside roads, the placing on or near roads of notices, milestones and sign posts, and the freeing of roads from tolls.

LORD STRACHIE moved to add to the clause "and the prescription of building lines along roads in anticipation of the widening thereof." The noble Lord said: This Amendment and an Amendment which appears later in the Paper and is consequential upon this, were put down at the request of the County Councils Association. For some considerable time county councils have endeavoured to secure the right to prescribe the building line and twenty-six county councils have now passed strong resolutions asking the Government to deal with this matter. Governments of the day have never objected to granting this power on its merits, but have always said that the matter was under consideration and would be dealt with on some future occasion. Possibly that is the reply that I shall receive to-day. As I understand it, His Majesty's Government are not going to say that there are no merits in this request, or that the county councils have no grievance in being unable to prescribe building lines with reference to the future widening of roads, but that it is not. necessary at the moment and that really the matter is not one for the Ministry of Transport at all.

Much the same attitude was taken in the House of Commons where the Government was able, by a technicality, to say that the Amendment, moved by one of their own supporters on behalf of the county councils, was out of order and was not within the ambit of the Bill. It is doubtful whether that ruling was correct as it was given by the Chairman of the Standing Committee on, I understand, the advice of the Government draftsman. Such a ruling would not apply to your Lordships' House because your Lordships have power always to alter or amend the title of a Bill if it be necessary.

The county councils are asking that this power should be conferred upon them as they are likely to be put to very heavy expenditure in regard to the future widening of roads, on account of the fast-moving and heavy traffic which passes over them. The same may be said in reference to the cutting off of corners. We all know that if a corner has to be cut off so that vehicles coming in different directions shall have a proper view of each other, the amenities of a house are sometimes affected and the whole house has to be removed. That is a very expensive matter. It is possible that my noble friend in charge of the Bill will remind your Lordships that a. Ministry of Health Bill is coming forward tomorrow which deals with the widening of streets. That Bill has nothing to do with the widening of roads and the county councils are asking for power to prescribe the building line even when there is no idea of widening particular roads, in order to safeguard themselves when a road has to be widened twenty or thirty years hence. As your Lordships are aware, it is no uncommon thing for buildings to be built by the side of the great main roads leading out of our great towns and cities. Unless there is power to prescribe the building line, when those roads have to be widened some time in the future some of those buildings have to be pulled down and heavy compensation has to be paid.

I should like to remind your Lordships that in 1921 this House agreed to the Middlesex County Council (General Powers) Bill which gave a power similar to that for which the county councils are asking to-day. In the present Session your Lordships agreed that similar power should be given to the Surrey County Council, whose Bill is awaiting a Third Reading in another place. That shows that, so far as the principle is concerned, the Government can have no objection whatever; otherwise they would have objected to the Private Bills promoted by those great county councils. The object of the County Council of Surrey was to prevent speculative builders from putting in foundations at the sides of roads which they thought would be widened in the future and in regard to which compensation could be claimed from the county council. If there is much delay in dealing with this question it seems possible that builders in other parts of the country will do the same thing. I cannot see why your Lordships should not safeguard the county councils against expenditure in connection with such matters.

If my Amendment is agreed to, there is, in the subsequent clause which I have placed on the Paper, admirable protection for landowners, tenants and lessees, and everyone interested in land, that they shall receive adequate and proper compensation for land taken when the building line is prescribed. I hope, therefore, that your Lordships will accept my Amendment, which is really necessary if the local rates are to be kept down. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 2, line 20, at end insert ("and the prescription of building lines along roads in anticipation of the widening thereof").—(Lord Strachie.)

LORD RITCHIE OF DUNDEE

I do not know whether it would be in order for me to address your Lordships at the present moment upon the Amendment which stands in my name. It is an Amendment to the Amendment to be proposed by Lord Strachie. We have not yet come to the particular clause to which that Amendment is to be moved, and I should like to be guided by the Lord Chairman.

LORD STRACHIE

I am quite ready when my Amendment comes before the House to accept the Amendments to it that the noble Lord proposes to move.

VISCOUNT PEEL

These words moved by the noble Lord really involve the whole of his Amendment. Your Lordships must look at pages 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the Marshalled List of Amendments in order to judge of the effect of this rather voluminous Amendment. I congratulate the noble Lord on moving so vast an Amendment in comparatively few words. The general effect of the Amendment is, as he says, to enable county councils to lay down building lines so that in the future there is no danger of strips of land along the sides of roads having their price unduly enhanced when it is necessary to purchase them for road widening. I admit that there is a great deal to be said on the merits of this suggestion and the only objection that I have to put forward may be considered by your Lordships as rather of a technical nature. This is not a Bill to deal with building lines, and I understand that the Minister of Health intends to bring forward a Bill which deals generally with the question of building lines and not merely with the comparatively small points covered by this Amendment.

I do not intend, as the noble Lord seems to think, to argue this upon the basis of a Bill in charge of his colleague Lord Emmott, which is before your Lordships' House. The point here is rather a different one referring to the limitation of roads than to houses. I leave that part of his argument out of account because I do not think it is strictly relevant. The other point I wish to make is this. The Minister of Transport is very anxious that this Bill should pass before our sittings are adjourned to the autumn. One of the objects of this Bill is the planting of trees, and your Lordships know how important it is that the Department should have the benefit of the planting season and should begin their operations as soon as possible. That argument will not appeal to my noble friend behind me (Lord Banbury of Southam) but will appeal to most of your Lordships who are anxious that this Bill should pass. If an Amendment of this kind, dealing with a matter that possibly is not strictly within the scope of the Bill, or not strictly one of the purposes for which the Bill was framed, is introduced now, it might have the effect of delaying the passage of the Bill in another House where, as your Lordships know, they are even more pressed for time than we are in this Assembly.

Those objections your Lordships may possibly consider to be rather of a technical nature. I understand that this Amendment commends itself to a considerable number of your Lordships' House and to the County Councils Association, and if the noble Lord really presses it, and thinks it not unwise in view of the considerations that I have mentioned, and that it will not endanger the life of the Bill, I would not myself, on behalf of the Government, offer any objection to the Amendment at this stage. I will only guard myself by saying that if your Lordships think fit to introduce the Amendment there are certain modifications which I think it may be necessary to insert at some stage or other of the Bill.

EARL RUSSELL

It may be necessary to modify the Amendment later, but I hope your Lordships will insert it now. It is idle to promise us a Bill which is to deal at some future time particularly with roads. We have heard a good deal about Bills coming forward at future times and they do not always come. Taking the objections which the noble Viscount has raised—

VISCOUNT PEEL

I wished to shorten the time, and I suggested that if your Lordships were anxious to put in this Amendment I would not offer any objection.

EARL RUSSELL

Very well, I will not say another word.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM had an Amendment on the Paper to leave out Clause 2. The noble Lord said: I merely put down this Amendment in order to ask for an explanation of this clause. I do not thoroughly understand it. I do not know whether it is limited to finance, whether the only effect of it is to give power to local authorities to take money out of the Roads Improvement Fund for the purpose of laying and planting trees, or Whether it is limited to land vested in a highway.

LORD HARRIS

Before the noble Viscount replies I should like to say a word upon this clause. If the noble Viscount fails to meet me, I shall be almost inclined to support my noble friend if he moves that the clause be omitted. I should not support him on the ground of his objections, although I have every respect for them, but because I think this clause is the most striking example I have come across of the pernicious system of legislation by reference. This clause does not refer to this Bill at all, but refers to another Act altogether. It refers to the Roads Improvement Fund Act, 1909, and what is there in that Act to show that in some subsequent Act an Amendment has been introduced into the first Act? How is it to be done? Why should not the Bond Improvement Act, have been brought up and this Amendment put into it, instead of having legislation in this Bill upon a matter which has nothing to do with the subject of the Bill?

VISCOUNT PEEL

In answer to my noble friend Lord Banbury of Southam, all I have to say is that this clause does what it proposed to do—namely, enlarge the purposes for which grants may be made under the Act of 1909 from the Road Improvement Fund. I do not know whether I ought to reply at length to the objection of my noble friend Lord Harris, regarding legislation by reference. To tell the truth I thought that was such a long established evil that even the most powerful critics were hardly able to move it from the Statute Book, but on another occasion I shall be able to discuss it with my noble friend.

Clause 2, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 3 agreed to.

Clause 4:

Restrictions as to fences at dangerous corners.

4.—(1) Where the Minister or ally county council or other highway authority is of opinion that it is necessary for the pre- vention of danger arising from obstruction to the view of persons using the highway to impose restrictions with respect to any land at or near any corner or bend in a highway maintainable by him or them, respectively, the Minister, county council, or other highway authority may serve upon the owner and upon the occupier of the land a notice— (a) directing the owner or occupier of the land to alter the height or character of any wall (not being part of a permanent building), fence, or hedge thereon so as to cause it to conform with any requirements specified in the notice; or

(3) If any person upon whom a notice has been served under this section objects to comply with any requirement of the notice, or objects to restriction imposed thereby, he may, within seven days after receipt or the notice, send his objection in writing, stating the grounds thereof, to the authority by whom the notice was served and thereupon the matter shall be determined by arbitration, and upon any such arbitration the award may direct that the notice shall have effect with or without any modifications, or that it shall be withdrawn.

(7) Any person upon whom a notice is served under this section shall be entitled to recover from the Minister, county council, or other highway authority by whom the notice was served any expenses reasonably incurred by him in carrying out any directions contained in the notice; and any person sustaining loss in direct consequence of any requirement of a notice served under this section, or any person who proves that the value of his interest in any land has been reduced by restrictions relating to the land imposed by any such notice shall, if he makes a claim within six months after the service of the notice be entitled to recover from the Minister, county council, or other highway authority by whom the notice was served compensation for the injury sustained, and the amount of such compensation shall, in default of agreement, be determined by arbitration.

(10) Subject as hereinafter provided, every notice which may be served under this section may be served either by delivering it or leaving it at the usual or last-known place of abode of the person on whom it is to be served, or by sending it by post as a registered letter addressed to him at his usual or last-known place of abode, or if that cannot be found, by fixing it on some conspicuous part of the land; and any such notice or document may be addressed to the "owner" and the "occupier" of the land (describing it) without further name or description:

Provided that a notice requiring the owner and occupier of land to alter the height or character of any wall, fence, or hedge thereon shall be served upon him personally, and where any such notice is served upon the occupier a copy thereof shall be served upon the owner of the land.

(11) In section the expression "wall" includes any partition of whatsoever material constructed, and any bank, the expression "fence" includes hoarding or paling, and the expression "hedge" includes any tree or shrub.

(12) Any matter which is under this section to be determined by arbitration shall be determined by a single arbitrator agreed on by the parties or, in default of such agreement, by the judge of the county court of the district in which the land in question is situated according to the procedure prescribed by rules of court.

(13) Nothing in this section shall apply with respect to any wall belonging to a railway company or to the owners, trustees, or conservators acting under powers conferred by Parliament of any canal, inland navigation, dock, or harbour where the wall forms part of or is necessary for the maintenance of their railway, canal, inland navigation, dock, or harbour.

(14) Nothing in this section shall apply to any wall belonging to a railway company and forming part of or necessary for the maintenance of their railway.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU moved, in subsection (1) (a), after "fence," to insert "tree." The noble Lord said: I merely rise to ask the noble Viscount in charge of the Bill if he does not think it would be wise to insert the word "tree" in addition to the words already in the Bill. Every one knows that corners are often made much more dangerous by the growing of an evergreen tree, such as a holly, and as the Bill stands it reads "fence, or hedge thereon so as to cause it to conform with any requirements specified in the notice." Would it not be wise to put in the word "tree"

Amendment moved— Page 3, line 5, after ("fence") insert ("tree").—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)

VISCOUNT PEEL

I am much obliged to my noble friend for calling my attention to this point. I thought it was pretty clear from the definition that "hedge" included "tree," but my suspicions were aroused that a tree which grew apart from the hedge, and yet caused some obstruction of the roadway, might not be included. I went into that, and I would suggest to my noble friend that it would be simpler to introduce an Amendment into the definition subsection, to add after the words "tree" or "shrub," "whether forming part of a hedge or not."

I think that would make it perfectly clear that the obstructive tree might be removed.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

I accept the suggestion. I only moved this Amendment for reasons of public safety.

EARL RUSSELL

The noble Viscount will recollect that I called his attention to this point on the Second Reading. I like the form of his Amendment in the definition clause and I shall be glad to accept it.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

VISCOUNT PEEL moved to leave out subsection (3) and insert as a new subsection:— (3) If any person upon whom a notice has been served under this section objects to comply with any requirement of the notice, or objects to any restriction imposed thereby, he may, within fourteen days after receipt of the notice, send his objection in writing, stating the grounds thereof, to the authority by whom the notice was served, and thereupon the question whether the notice shall be withdrawn as respects any requirement or restriction objected to shall be determined in the manner provided by this Act.

The noble Viscount said: This is really a drafting Amendment in order to group together at a later stage the arrangements about serving notices and so on.

Amendment moved— Page 4, lines 3 to 12, leave out subsection (3) and insert the said new subsection.—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

VISCOUNT PEEL

The Amendment to leave out the last fifteen words of subsection (7) is purely drafting.

Amendment moved— Page 5, leave out lines 10 and 11—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

VISCOUNT PEEL moved to leave out all words of subsection (10) after "addressed," where that word secondly occurs and to insert as the case may require, to the 'owner' or 'occupier' of the land (describing it) without further name or description: Provided that a notice requiring the owner or occupier of land to alter the height or character of any wall, fence or hedge thereon shall be served personally upon him or his agent, or upon some person having charge of his affairs, and if the notice is served upon the occupier a copy thereof shall be served upon the owner, or if it is served upon the owner a copy thereof shall be served upon the occupier of the land.

The noble Viscount said: This is also a drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 5, line 36, leave out from ("addressed") to the end of the subsection and insert the said words.—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

VISCOUNT PEEL moved, at the end of subsection (11), to insert the words "whether forming part of a hedge or not." The noble Viscount said: This will meet the point that has been raised by the noble Lord.

Amendment moved— Page 6, line 5, insert ("whether forming part of a hedge or not").—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

VISCOUNT PEEL

My Amendment to leave out subsection (12) is The same point that we have been dealing with.

Amendment moved— Page 6, lines 6 to 11, leave out subsection (12).—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU moved, in subsection (13), after "Nothing in this section shall," to insert (a) authorise the service of a notice under this section with respect to any wall forming part of an ancient monument or other object of archæological interest, except with the consent in writing of the Commissioners of Works; or (b)

The noble Lord said: In the original Bill no provision was made for a wall which may be dangerous, but which is a wall of great antiquarian value. In my own county there are walls which obstruct the highway, but which are of very ancient origin. It is for this reason that I asked the noble Viscount to give some consideration to the Amendment. I understand he will accept it.

Amendment moved— Page line 12, after ("shall") insert the said words.'—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)

VISCOUNT PEEL

I accept the Amendment.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

VISCOUNT PEEL

My Amendment to leave out subsection (14) is consequential.

Amendment moved— Page 6, lines 19 to 21, leave out subsection (14).—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 4, as amended, agreed to.

LORD STRACHIE moved, after Clause 4, to insert the following new clause:—

Power to prescribe building line.

" —(1) A county council or other highway authority (hereinafter in this section referred to, where the context so admits, as 'the authority') may by order prescribe, in respect of any road (being a public highway) which is for the time being maintainable by them, a building line along each or either side of the whole or any part of such road, and, subject to the provisions of paragraph (a) of subsection (10) of this section, it shall not thenceforth be lawful, without the written consent of the authority (which consent, if given, may be subject to such conditions as the authority shall think fit), to erect, or permit to be erected, any structure whatsoever in front of such building line, or to alter, or permit to be altered, any structure existing at the date of the order in such manner that any part thereof projects in front of such building line, or to make, or permit to be made, any permanent excavation in front of such building line:

Provided that the consent of the Minister shall be obtained before any such building line is prescribed as aforesaid in respect of any road, or part thereof, for the time being classified by the Minister for the purpose of advances from the Road Fund.

(2) One month at least before the date of the order the authority shall—

1. (a) cause to be prepared, signed by their surveyor, and deposited with their clerk, a plan of the proposed building line, which shall be open at all reasonable times to the inspection of the public without charge;
2. (b)give notice in writing of the deposit of the said plan to every owner or lessee interested whose name and address they can ascertain; and
3. (c) give public notice by advertisement in two newspapers circulating in the district in which the road affected is situate, that the said plan has been so deposited.

(3) Within one month after the date of the order the authority shall—

1. (a) cause to be prepared, signed by their surveyor and deposited with their clerk, a plan of the said building line, which shall be open at all reasonable times for the inspection of the public without charge; and
2. (b) give notice in writing to every owner or lessee interested whose name and address they can ascertain that a building line has been so prescribed and a plan thereof so deposited.

(4) If the road, in respect of which a building line is proposed to be prescribed in accordance with the provisions of this section, is either a main road maintained and repaired pursuant to subsection (2) of Section eleven of the Local Government Act, 1888, or a road, other than a main road, classified by the Minister as aforesaid, the authority shall, before prescribing a building line as aforesaid, send a notification of their proposals to the council of the county in which the road is situate, who shall submit their observations thereon, if any, to the authority within three months from the date of such notification, and the authority shall consider such observations, if any, before making any order under this section.

(5) If the road in respect of which a building line is proposed to be prescribed in accordance with the provisions of this section is a main road maintained and repaired by a county council, the authority shall, before prescribing a building line as aforesaid, send a notification of their proposals to the local authority of the district in which such road is situate, who shall submit their observations thereon, if any, to the authority within one month from the date of such notification, and the authority shall consider such observations, if any, before making any order under this section.

(6) The authority may, subject to the provisions of paragraph (b) of subsection (10) of this section, at any time after the date of the order and on giving three months' notice in writing to the owner or lessee of any structure which, or any part of which, was in front of the said building line at the date of the order, require that such structure shall be demolished or set back or altered in such manner that no part thereof shall project in front of the said building line.

(7) Any person upon whom a notice is served under subsection (3) of this section who proves that the value of his interest in any land has been reduced by the prescription of a building line, and any person upon whom a notice is served under subsection (6) of this section who proves that he has sustained loss or damage by the demolition, setting back or alteration of any structure, shall be entitled to recover from the authority compensation for such reduction in value or for such demolition, setting back or alteration, as the case may be, and the amount of such compensation shall, in default of agreement, be determined by arbitration under the provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1889:

Provided that—

1. (i)in estimating the amount of such compensation, there shall be taken into account as a set off the benefits accruing by reason of any road widening or improvement made or about to be made by the authority to the person to whom such compensation is payable;
2. (ii) no compensation whatsoever shall be payable in respect of any structure the erection or alteration of which in advance of the proposed building line was first commenced after the service at the notice specified in paragraph (b) of subsection (2) of this section; and
3. (iii) no compensation whatsoever shall be payable to any person in respect of a reduction in the value of his interest in any land as aforesaid, except in pursuance of a claim made to the authority within six months after the date of the order.

(8) Where by any scheme confirmed under the Town Planning Acts, 1909 to 1923, any building line is proscribed by the local authority making such scheme and such building line is nearer to the centre line of the road than a building line prescribed in accordance with the provisions of this section, the local authority shall pay to the authority (if not the local authority) such proportion of any compensation paid by the authority under subsection (7) of this section as may be agreed upon between the authority and the local authority or, in default of agreement, as shall be determined by arbitration under the Arbitration Act, 1889.

(9) Copies of any plan prepared, signed and deposited in accordance with the provisions of subsection (3) of this section shall, when certified by the clerk of the authority to be true, be received in all courts of justice and elsewhere as prima facie evidence of the contents of such plan so far as it relates to a building line prescribed in accordance with this section, and a copy (certified as aforesaid) of so much of any such plan as relates to the district of any local authority shall, on the application of that local authority or of the council of the county in which the road affected is situate, as the case may be, be delivered to such local authority or county council, and copies of or extracts from such plan shall also be delivered to the owner, lessee or occupier of any property in the district applying for the same, on payment of a reasonable fee to be determined by the authority, and all fees so received shall be carried to the credit of the fund out of which the highway expenditure of the authority is payable.

(10) Nothing in this section shall be deemed—

1. (a) to prevent the erection in front of a building line prescribed in accordance with this section of any boundary wall or fence or the alteration of any existing boundary wall or fence; or
2. (b) to require the demolition, setting back, or alteration of any boundary wall or fence existing in front of such building line at the date of the order.

(11) The provisions of this section shall not apply to any building (not being a dwelling-house) or lands now belonging to a railway company and held by them foe the purposes of any railway authorised by Act of Parliament or by an order having the force of an Act.

(12) Every notice for the purpose of this section may be served either by delivering it or leaving it at the usual or last known place of abode of the person on whom it is to be served, or by sending it by post as a registered letter addressed to that person at his usual or last known place of abode, or by delivering it to some person on the premises, or, if there is no person on the premises, by affixing it on some conspicuous part of the premises, and any such notice or document may be addressed by the description of the 'owner' or the 'occupier' of the premises (naming them) without further name or description.

(13) Any person offending against any of the provisions of this section shall be liable on summary conviction to a penalty not exceeding ten pounds, and a further penalty not exceeding five pounds for every day during which the offence continues.

(14) Nothing in this section shall derogate from the powers of the London County Council under the London Building Acts, 1894 to 1923, and in the administrative county of London the London County Council shall be the authority for the purposes of this section."

The noble Lord said: I beg to more this Amendment formally. It is really consequential, but if the noble Viscount desires to raise any point of detail I shall be very glad to meet him. I accept the Amendments of which Lord Ritchie of Dundee has given Notice.

Amendment moved— After Clause 4, insert the said new clause.—(Lord Strachie.)

LORD JESSEL

May I draw the noble Lord's attention to subsection (14) of the proposed new clause? It says that nothing in this section shall derogate from the powers of the London County Council under the London Building Acts, and in the administrative County of London the London County Council shall be the authority for the purposes of this section. The London County Council is not the highway authority in London. It is the borough councils, and I do not know how the noble Lord proposes to meet that point.

LORD STRACHIE

I shall be perfectly ready to meet that point on Report stage if the noble Lord puts down an Amendment.

THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH

I hope we shall have some assurance from the Government that they have looked through the wording of this clause. I agree with it in principle, but I think we should have some assurance that a huge Amendment like this has been thoroughly considered.

VISCOUNT PEEL

I am much obliged to the noble Duke, but earlier in the discussion I stated that, of course, I reserve the right of looking thoroughly at the wording of this new clause and probably moving Amendments on Report stage.

LORD DYNEVOR

May I draw the noble Lord's attention to the words "to make or permit to be made any permanent excavation in front of such building line"? A main road might go through a cutting, or the side of a hill with a steep bank, and that hill or bank might be of stone or marble, or some other mineral. I understand that the owner would not be allowed to cut through the embankment in order to get at the mineral because it would be an excavation. Therefore he would be permanently cut off from his minerals in the side of the hill. I do not think the noble Lord meant that, but if that is the meaning of the word "excavation" then the owner of the property would be debarred from cutting through the embankment.

LORD STRACHIE

I am quite ready to meet any objection of that sort. There may be some difficulty on that point, and I would suggest that the noble Lord should put down an Amendment for the Report stage. The reason why the clause is so long is that it was necessary to protect all owners, lessees and tenants. I have already said that I am prepared to move the Amendment with the alterations suggested by the noble Lord, Lord Ritchie of Dundee—namely, to omit the word "now" from subsection (11) and to add to that subsection the words: or belonging to the owners, trustees or conservators acting under powers conferred upon them by Parliament of any canal, inland navigation, dock or harbour, and held by them for the purposes of the canal, inland navigation, dock or harbour.

On Question, Amendment, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 5:

Power to conduct experiments.

5.—(1) The Minister may, either by himself or through any authority or other organisation approved by him, conduct experiments or trials for the improvement of the construction of roads, or for testing the effect of various classes of vehicles on various types of roads, and may construct such roads and works, erect such plant, provide such accommodation, and, subject to the approval of the Treasury, incur such expenditure as may be necessary for the purpose.

(2) An experiment or trial under this section shall not be conducted on any highway except with the consent of the authority or person responsible for the maintenance of the highway, and, where the highway is a main road maintained by an urban authority pursuant to subsection (2) of Section eleven of the Local Government Act, 1888, the consent of the county council also.

VISCOUNT PEEL moved to add the following new subsection: (3) If damage is caused to the property of any person by anything done in exercise of the powers conferred by this section, that person shall, unless the damage was caused or contributed to by his negligence, be entitled to recover compensation therefor from the Minister.

The noble Viscount said: This strengthens the provision for compensation, where it is shown to be due to the action of the Minister.

Amendment moved— Page 6, line 38, at end insert the said new subsection.—(Viscount Peel.)

LORD DANESFORT

How does the noble Viscount suggest that compensation is to be recovered from the Minister? Is it by arbitration or otherwise?

VISCOUNT PEEL

That point is met in an Amendment I am to move later.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 5, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 6 agreed to.

VISCOUNT PEEL moved, after Clause 6, to insert the following new clause:

Determination of questions.

" .—(1) If any question arises under this Act—

1. (a) whether compensation is payable under the provisions of this Act or as to the amount of any compensation so payable; or
2. (b) whether a notice served under this Act shall be withdrawn as respects any requirement or restriction objected to in manner provided by this Act; or
3. (c) whether any expenses were reasonably incurred by any person in carrying out directions contained in a notice served under this Act;

the question shall be decided, if the parties so agree, by a single arbitrator appointed by them, or in default of such agreement SLS aforesaid, by the county court.

(2) A county court shall have jurisdiction to deal with any such question as afore-said, notwithstanding that, by reason, of the amount of claim or otherwise, the case would not, but for this provision, be within the jurisdiction of a county court.

(3) In determining any question whether a notice served under this Act shall be withdrawn as respects a requirement or restriction objected to, the arbitrator or court shall have power to order that the requirement or restriction shall have effect subject to such modifications, if any, as the arbitrator or court may direct.

(4) Except in so far as they may be applied by county court rules, the provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1889, shall not apply to any proceedings in a county court under this Act."

The noble Viscount said: This rather long Amendment is really consequential upon the introduction of the new subsections regarding compensation, and, as the result of provisions as to arbitration being taken out of Clause 4 and being inserted here, it will apply to disputes arising under any of the three sections. There, I think, my noble friend Lord Danesfort will see an answer to his question.

Amendment moved— Page 7, line 5, at end insert the said new clause.—(Viscount Peel.)

EARL RUSSELL

I am not sure that it is an answer to the question, because a Minister of the Crown is to be one of the parties to the proceedings. Are you to be able to proceed against him in the ordinary way, or will he set up the privilege of the Crown? That makes a very considerable difference to the rights of the subject.

VISCOUNT PEEL

I think the noble Earl is referring to some rather ancient procedure. Under this procedure the county court deals with the matter.

LORD DANESFORT

But there is some difficulty in suing a Minister of the Crown, either in the county court or in any other court. As a rule you have to proceed against him in the form of a Petition of Right, which is an extremely cumbrous and expensive matter. Perhaps the noble Viscount will consider the matter between now and Report.

EARL RUSSELL

I am bound to say that I, too, should be glad if the noble Viscount would consider the matter. The mere fact that you give the county court jurisdiction to decide does not mean that you can proceed by the ordinary procedure of issuing a county court summons and serving it upon the Minister. Perhaps the noble Viscount will consider that point.

VISCOUNT PEEL

I will consider it before the Report stage.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 7:

Interpretation, short title and extent.

7.—(1) In this Act the expression "roads" includes bridges, viaducts, subways, road-ferries and footways, and the expressions "common," "open space," and "allotment" have the meanings respectively assigned to them by the Development and Road Improvement Funds Act, 1909

(2) In the application of this Act to Scotland— (b) the expression "judge of the county court" shall mean sheriff;

VISCOUNT PEEL moved to leave out paragraph (b) of subsection (2), and to insert: "(b) the expression county court' shall mean 'sheriff's court.'" The noble Viscount said: This is a formal, drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved—

Page 7, lines 18 and 19, leave out paragraph (b), and insert: ("(b) the expression 'county court' shall mean sheriff's court'").—(Viscount Peel.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 7, as amended, agreed to.

Title:

An Act to make further provision for the improvement of roads and for purposes connected therewith.

THE LORD CHAIRMAN

Does the noble Lord, Lord Strachie, move his Amendment to the Title?

LORD STRACHIE

Yes.

Amendment moved— After ("roads") insert ("including the prescription of building lines").—(Lord Strachie.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Title, as amended, agreed to.