« PreviousContinue »
Ultramontane demonstration. By the PARLIAMENT-RIGHTS OF PRIVATE
course Her Majesty's Ministers had now MEMBERS.-QUESTION.
pursued, they had become promoters of OBSERVATIONS.
the O'Connell demonstration. After MR. NEWDEGATE moved that the what had occurred, it was difficult to House do now adjourn. He said that imagine what further interference with he did so on account of what had just the due order and regular procedure of occurred, and of the division which had the House might not be proposed ; and just taken place. He was not about his chief object in having moved the further to allude to the subject of that adjournment was to ask the First Lord division than by saying that the Mem- of the Treasury, Whether it was the inbers present in the House had, by anti- tention of the Government, by proposing cipating the decision of a question at the Resolutions of 1869 with respect to that Morning Sitting, which stood for Amendments on the Motion for going the evening on the Notice Paper, the into Committee of Supply or Committee Notice having been given by the Govern- of Ways and Means, or by any other ment, established a precedent of action Resolutions, to preclude the Members not only totally at variance with the of this House from submitting such subpractice of the House, but which, if jects as may appear to them important further acted upon, must prove destruc- for the consideration of the House tive of the House itself, as a delibera- during the remainder of the Session ? tive and legislative Assembly. It was MR. GREENE seconded the Motion. manifest that if the Business ap- Motion made, and Question proposed, pointed at one Sitting was to be taken " That this House do now adjourn.”. by anticipation at a previous Sitting, (Mr. Newdegate.) no Members, except those who might happen accidentally to be present, could
MR. DISRAELI said, there was no have any effective voice in the decision such intention, nor had any proposal been of that Business, however important.
submitted which trenched on the priviIt was manifest that any faction might leges of private Members, unless there usurp the authority of the House, in the in its favour. There was, however, one
was a general concurrence of the House absence of the great body of the Members of the House, by very easily pre-Session that the privilege of bringing
remarkable characteristic of the present concerted action. He should not waste forward Motions on going into Commitmore words in remonstrance upon what had been done ; but with reference to and Means, which was to a certain
tee of Supply and Committee of Ways the decision of the Members then sent in the House in respect of the degree regulated and restricted by pretaking the Tuesdays and Wednesdays vious Administrations, was not so curfrom the unofficial Members of the
tailed by the present Government, who House and their Business, and appro- throughout the Session had proposed no
such priating those days to the Business of
arrangement. He was rather surthe Government, he wished to observe prised, therefore, that his hon. Friend that the Monastic and Conventual Insti
should impute to the Government a tutions Bill , of which he had charge, that now, when time was so valuable
design of such a character. He hoped stood for Wednesday the 4th of August; and when every minute might be said to that appointment was now, of course, be golden, his hon. Friend would not superseded by the action of the Government in the House. He (Mr. Newde- persist in the Motion.
MR. NEWDEGATE, having obtained gate) might now mention that it had not been his intention to press the second
the answer he required, said, he would reading of that Bill; but on being asked withdraw the Motion. by the hon. and gallant Member for
Motion, by leave, withdrawn. Galway (Captain Nolan) to withdraw that Bill, in order to facilitate the at
AGRICULTURAL HOLDINGS (ENGLAND) tendance of the Irish Members at the
(re-committed) BILL.-[Lords. ]—[BILL 222.] O'Connell Centenary, in Dublin, he de
(Mr. Disraeli.) clined to give an answer, because he did COMMITTEE. [Progress 26th July.] not choose to be counted as a supporter
Clause 16 (Compensation agreed or of what he understood was to be an settled by reference).
MR. OSBORNE MORGAN (for Mr. | point, and that there was no necessity JACKSON) moved, in page 5, line 10, to for appointing a new Court of Arbitraleave out “if in any case,” to end of tion, as was suggested by the Bill. He clause. The object of the clause, he believed that all the machinery of arbicontended, was to oust and repudiate tration was already provided by the altogether the action of the ordinary Lands Clauses Act, and for that reason Courts of Common Law by making he should move to strike out the whole arbitration in every case compulsory of the sub-sections, leaving the clause to If the Government would substitute read, “Where there is a reference under “may” for “shall” he should be con- this Act, a referee, or two referees and tent, otherwise he should persist in his an umpire, shall be appointed." Amendment.
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT also THE ATTORNEY GENERAL be- thought it would be better to leave the lieved his hon. and learned Friend's parties to settle disputes among themobject was to get rid of arbitration alto- selves, rather than to provide such an gether, which was one of the main prin- elaborate machinery of appeal as was ciples of the Bill. The Committee had proposed by the Bill. already decided that compensation should THE ATTORNEY GENERAL said, be given, and if they did away with it was all very well to talk of leaving arbitration it would be only putting the parties to agree among themselves. He parties to great expense and delay. himself knew of instances in which both
SIR HENRY JAMES believed that parties to a dispute agreed to refer all the reference to arbitration provided by matters in difference to arbitration, but the clause would be more expensive than could not agree as to how the umpire an appeal to the ordinary tribunals. was to be appointed. The sub-sections As, however, the Committee had already of the clause would entirely remove that substantially adopted the clause he difficulty. hoped his hon. and learned Friend MR. CAWLEY said, some provision would not press his Amendment to a must be made for the appointment of an division. They had better apply them- umpire where the referees did not agree, selves rather to improving the clauses otherwise arbitrations would constantly than make futile attempts to get rid of break down. them altogether.
MR. GREGORY advised the GovernMR. MELDON said, that they had ment to agree to strike out all those subhad some experience of Ireland under sections, and to introduce a reference to the Land Act of these references, and Common Law procedure, so as to make landlords and tenants were unanimously the clause run thus:-“Where there is in favour of Courts of Arbitration, and a reference under this Act referees and getting rid altogether of the County an umpire shall be appointed under the Courts.
Common Law Procedure Act.” That, he Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. thought, would meet the whole difficulty Clause agreed to.
of the case, as the machinery of the
latter Act was sufficient to meet all disClause 17 (Appointment of referee or putes without creating an entirely new referees and umpire).
legal tribunal. COLONEL DYOTT moved, in page 5, SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT said, line 13, to leave out from“ as follows,' " that if this latter suggestion was agreed to end of sub-sections. His object, he to a great many Amendments would be said, was not to interfere in any way got rid of, and the progress of the Bill with arbitration; but if the parties con- immensely facilitated. curred, the question in dispute might be MR. HUNT opposed the suggestion, disposed of by one referee, and so get on the ground that if it were adopted rid of the County Courts altogether. farmers would have to deal with two
MR. GOLDSMID said, before that Acts of Parliament instead of one. Question was put he should like to move That would simply lead to trouble and an Amendment which, properly speak- mystification. What the farmers wanted ing, came before that of the hon. and gal- was to have the whole law on the sublant Member for Lichfield. His opinion ject embraced within the four corners of was that landlords and tenants ought to a single Bill, and not to be puzzled and be left to agree among themselves on this distracted by having to turn from one
Act to another. Should the parties wish THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON to adopt the Common Law Procedure said, they had been told in the early Act they would be able to do so by part of the Sitting that the Government agreement.
hoped to get through the Bill to-night; MR. RODWELL admitted that the but whenever objection was taken to Common Law Procedure Act contained any of the clauses the Committee was very much the same terms as those of referred to Amendments which the Gothe specific clauses to which the Amend- vernment intended to introduce, but ment applied; but thought it better that which somehow or other never got on people should have the provisions before the Paper. He did not think that was them in an easily comprehended form a fair way to treat the Committee. He than that they should have to be referred thought that the state of the Business to the complicated sections of the Act in was not such as to warrant the Governquestion.
ment in encumbering the Bill with proAmendment (Colonel Dyott), by leave, cedure, when there was already a well
visions setting up a new system of prowithdrawn.
considered system under the Common
Law Procedure Act. MR. OSBORNE MORGAN thought that the arbitration provisions in the
Amendment (Mr. Goldsmid) negatived. Bill ought to be made as simple and MR. KNIGHT moved, in page 5, line perfect as possible, and he supported 21, after “referee," to addthe adoption of the procedure under the
“ And either party on so appointing a referee Common Law Procedure Act.
may stipulate that should an umpire be required MR. MELDON observed, that a great he shall be named by the county court judge, objection to the provisions of the Com- but should a demand made by one party that mon Law Procedure Act being adopted judge be objected to, the objecting party may
the umpire shall be named by the county court was that in nearly every case they require that he shall be named by the Inclosure would necessitate the removal of the Commissioners, and such nomination by the Inclaim to the Superior Courts at West-closure Commissioners shall be final.” minster, and thus entail great expense. MR. KNATCHBULL-HUGESSEN
MR. HERSCHELL suggested that moved that the Amendment should be the best course would be to adopt, as amended by striking out “ County Court the system of arbitration, and the mode Judge,” leaving the appointment of umof checking it, the system already pro- pire to the Inclosure Commissioners. vided by law, which had worked well in The latter alternative, however, would every case in which it had been in not necessarily be involved even if the operation.
words "County Court Judge ” were MR. E. STANHOPE thought the plan struck out. In his opinion, where quesproposed by the Government was the tions of mere law were concerned, such best, especially in cases of small claims as the determining whether an award for compensation, as it was far the was valid under the provisions of the cheapest and simplest.
Act—what costs should be given, and MR. CAWLEY was of opinion that other points of law, the County Court it would be absurd to allow the ap- might be employed as the cheapest Law pointment of the umpire to rest with Court accessible to the farmers. But he the Judges of the Superior Courts. objected to giving to the County Court
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT pointed Judge the appointment of referees and out that in the Bill as it stood there was umpires, or of deciding upon points which no power to obtain compensation under could only be properly decided by pracany other reference than that contained tical agriculturists. The County Courts in this clause.
were mainly known to the agricultural THE ATTORNEY GENERAL said, community as Courts for the recovery of it had been stated over and over again debt, and their unnecessary introduction that it was the intention of the Govern- into the Bill would not tend to make ment, in order to put the matter beyond it popular. The County Court Judge all question, to provide in a future part would probably know little of the farof the Bill that it should be in the mers, though he might be a friend of power of the parties to make such many of the landlords, which, however agreements.
unjustly, might expose his appointments to suspicion. Besides, an appeal wasCommittee and bullied them, as he (Mr. to be given to the County Court Judge, Knight) thought, without any reason and if the clause stood as it was, this whatever. The hon. and learned Genwould be an appeal against the decision tleman told the Committee that he was of his own nominee. In 99 cases out of fond of galloping over commons, and he 100 the umpire would be appointed by objected to their being inclosed, as that the referees, and where another autho- prevented his galloping. He (Mr. rity was necessary, the Inclosure Com- Knight) felt that no public officers had missioners would be the best, for, having more fully earned the confidence of the continual land transactions in every public than the Inclosure Commissioners. county, they could at once lay their MR. KNATCHBULL - HUGESSEN hands
upon the best practical valuers to said, he intended to take the sense of appoint as referees or umpires.
the Committee on the question of the MR. HUNT agreed in the opinion County Court Judge, and it would save that appeals from the appointment of some trouble if the matter were settled umpire by the referees would be rare; at once. but the Government were prepared to
SIR THOMAS ACLAND thought that accept the principle of the Amendment if the right hon. Gentleman intended to of his hon. Friend (Mr. Knight), that if divide the Committee on the County one of the parties had an objection to Court Judge he had better do so on a the appointment made by the County direct Motion, and not an Amendment Court Judge a reference might be made upon an Amendment. to the Inclosure Commissioners. He hoped his hon. Friend would withdraw
Amendments, by leave, withdrawn. the Amendment he had proposed in MR. KNATCHBULL - HUGESSEN order that the Government might pre- moved, in page 5, line 28, to leave out pare a form of words which could be
“seven,” and insert “ fourteen." more conveniently inserted. He did
Amendment agreed to. not approve of the proposal to leave out the County Court Judge, because very MR. KNATCHBULL-HUGESSEN few farmers would know where to find moved, in line 31, to leave out “the the Inclosure Commissioners.
County Court," and insert “ the InSiR WILLIAM HARCOURT re- closure Commissioners.' gretted to hear that the Government
Amendment proposed, were willing to allow the ultimate nomi
In page 5, line 31, to leave out the words nation of the umpire to rest with the
“ County Court,” in order to insert the words Inclosure Commissioners. They knew “Inclosure Commissioners.”—(Mr. Knatchbullsomething of the Commissioners in that Hugessen.) House, and had practically suspended
Question put, " That the words their action for six years in reference to inclosures because it was not such as
County Court stand part of the
Clause." Parliament could approve. The whole pith of the Bill was the umpire, and he
The Committee divided :-Ayes 229; protested against this serious change, Noes 81 : Majority 148. which would shake the confidence of
Clause, as amended, agreed to. tenant farmers in the measure. MR. KNIGHT said, the arrangements
Clause 18 (Mode of submission to made by the Inclosure Commissioners as
reference) agreed to. regarded the improvement of the tracts Clauses 19 to 22, inclusive, agreed to. of open country surrounding Exmoor
Clause 23 (Reference to any award by had given perfect satisfaction to the
umpire). proprietors and farmers. Their work
SIR HENRY JAMES moved, in had been well done, and most beneficially
apto the working classes. Large tracts of page 6, line 40, leave out from •
points to end of clause. common land, where no one was employed formerly, now employed many Amendment agreed to. labourers at much increased wages. On
Clause, as amended, agreed to. one occasion the hon. and learned Gentleman (Sir William Harcourt) got the Clause 24 (Award to give particuInclosure Commissioners before a Select lars).
MR. HUNT moved that for the MR. DISRAELI said, if not one words
owner in five were an absolute owner, “The mode and extent in and to which each the hon. and learned Member must know improvement of the first or of the second class what constituted an absolute owner. adds to the letting value of the holding The Committee had accepted the words. (that being one of the points required to
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON be specified), the following should be remarked that the words were accepted substituted :
on the understanding that the Govern-'
ment would introduce Amendments in “In the case of an improvement of the first class, where the landlord was not at the time the Interpretation Clause.
It was very of giving consent to the execution thereof abso- extraordinary that a Bill of that kind lute owner for his own benefit, the extent to should be hurried on upon the assurance which the improvement adds to the letting value that Amendments would be inserted of the holding."
which the Committee had not yet even The right hon. Gentleman explained seen. that this Amendment was a consequen
MR. HUNT said, the words “ absotial one, rendered necessary by that of lute owner” were objected to before, the hon. and learned Member for Cam- and the Committee decided not to enterbridgeshire (Mr. Rodwell), relating to tain the objection. the same subject, which had already MR. DODSON appealed to the Gobeen adopted.
vernment to postpone the words “abso
lute owner " until after their meaning Amendment proposed,
had been defined.
MR. GOLDSMID said, that when he In page 7, to leave out from the word “permitted,” in line 6, to the word "holding," in proposed an Amendment which did not line 9, inclusive, in order to insert the words appear on the Paper, the Government " In the case of an improvement of the first stated that they could not form an class, where the landlord was not at the time of opinion as to its character merely by lute owner of the holding for his own benefit, having it read offhand; but the Comthe extent to which the improvement adds to mittee was called on by the Government the letting value of the holding."-(Mr. Hunt.) to do so now, as this Amendment had
not appeared on the Paper. SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT ob
MR. HUNT observed, that the differjected to the use of the words "absolute ence was, that the Government were owner" in the Amendment. The words responsible for the Bill, while the hon. had no meaning, inasmuch as a land- Gentleman was not. owner who had a mortgage on his estate SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT said, or a settlement of any kind could not be that was unconstitutional doctrine. described as an absolute owner, and MR. GOLDSMID remarked, that he there was not a gentleman in England would not like to be responsible for possessed of property for four or five much that was contained in the Bill; years who had not some such settlement but, at the same time, when it had
passed through Committee, every MemTHE ATTORNEY GENERAL ob- ber of the Committee would be responserved, that the term “absolute owner sible if no objection were raised. had already been considered in the course MR. HUNT observed that, at all of the discussions on the Bill; and the events, the Government would be reInterpretation Clause had been post- sponsible for what they recommended. poned for the express purpose of having a proper form of words prepared, by Question, " That the words proposed which it should be accurately defined. to be left out stand part of the Ques
MR. DODSON suggested that the tion,” put, and negatived. insertion of these words should be post- Question put, “That those words poned till the Report.
be there inserted." MR. HUNT said, that they were
The Committee divided :-Ayes 188; proposed in consequence of an Amend
Noes 124: Majority 64. ment already inserted in the clause.
MR. OSBORNE MORGAN observed, MR. WHITWELL then proposed to that not one owner of an estate in five amend the clause so as to secure that was an absolute owner.
the award should be general in its