Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

must elapse, he pointed to the words in at once from the uncertainty in which the first line of Clause 5 as soon as they were at present placed with regard conveniently may be after the passing of to the course they had to pursue during this Act." With regard to the continued the next few days, he strongly urged Her validity of the orders of the old local au- Majesty's Government to take the subject thority, the 32nd clause of the Act pro- of his remarks into their early and serious vides that they consideration.

'Shall, so far as consistent with this Act, remain in full force until they are revoked or have expired by lapse of time."

The 11 & 12 Vict. certainly was not repealed by the late Act, and only three days ago an Order in Council had been issued under its provision with regard to the outbreak of smallpox among sheep. In one respect, however, there would be a serious interregnum under the recent Act if measures were not taken by the Government before the 1st of March. The Act passed the other day gave full powers as to slaughtering and disinfection, but contained no provisions in reference to matters such as excluding town manure from districts previously healthy. The Bill as originally drawn by the Government contained provisions on all those points; but it was cut in two in the other House, and the first half had been passed by their Lordships without alteration. If the second portion should be sent up to that House in time to be passed before the 1st of March, no difficulty need arise, as the Government, of course, could introduce clauses upon the point. If not, it would be necessary to renew the Order in Council; and he believed public opinion was fast tending towards the conclusion that it was by these after all that the difficulty could best be met.

THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM said, only a week now intervened before the 1st of March, the period to which reference had been made by the noble Duke. He thought it most important that some intimation should be given at once by the Government to traders and farmers, as to whether the markets would probably be open at the time named in the first instance, or whether they were to look forward to the renewal of restrictions for a limited time. He hoped the measure which it was stated was about to be submitted to them would be in a shape intelligible to all, and not form such a specimen of crude legislation as that which they had recently been led to adopt, and which must give rise to extreme difficulties all over the country. Thinking, then, that those interested in the disposition of cattle should be relieved

THE DUKE OF MONTROSE concurred with the noble Duke as to the importance of the subject he had introduced to their Lordships' notice, and hoped the Government would consider whether the Orders in Council should not be renewed.

THE MARQUESS OF BATH remarked that it would not do to continue the Orders in Council for too long a period, or the new Acts of Parliament would only be in force for a few days. Even if the Cattle Plague Bill passed the House of Commons tonight, and their Lordships sat on Saturday, it would be inexpedient, in his opinion, with so little notice, to consider so important a measure until Monday. Then, as Amendments would doubtless be made by their Lordships, it would have to be sent back to the Commons, and thus it could not receive the Royal Assent before Wednesday. But the sittings of the quarter sessions were fixed for Monday, and many of their Lordships would think it their duty to attend them. In that case it would be inconvenient for them to attend to consider the Bill on Monday; and he therefore thought they would come better prepared if the Government were to fix Tuesday for the Cattle Plague Bill, and continue the Orders in Council in operation for four or five days.

LORD REDESDALE also counselled delay. It was impossible fairly to consider the Bill in so short a time as he feared the Government would propose. It was imperatively necessary that the whole subject should be dealt with calmly and deliberately, even if it lessened the period of its duration by some days. It certainly should not be introduced before Tuesday, as their Lordships would not otherwise have time to go over it in as careful a manner as it deserved.

THE EARL OF CARNARVON thought the Bill demanded their best attention, so that when it became law it should not be found to contain the inconsistencies which he was sure the Cattle Diseases Bill would. At the same time, he was sorry to see the matter postponed.

THE DUKE OF MARLBOROUGH said, it was of the utmost importance that the provisions of the next Bill should be dis

op

Committee-Cattle Plague (re-comm.) [24].
Report-Cattle Plague [32].

cussed quietly and calmly, and he trusted | Second Reading-Jamaica Government [17]. that the House would be afforded the portunity of fully considering them. LORD POLWARTH hoped it would be distinctly stated whether the Orders in Council would be renewed.

THE DUKE OF ARGYLL said, that the most serious attention of the Government was being given to the whole subject, and every care would be taken against any difficulty arising between the period for the expiration of the old Orders in Council and that for the new ones coming into operation.

THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH remarked that if the Bill were delayed beyond the 1st of March it would be necessary that some measure should be adopted by the Government to bridge over the intervening period.

[blocks in formation]

Considered as amended-Savings Banks and Post
Office Savings Banks* [5]; Telegraph Act
Amendment [13] [Lords.]

*

LONDON (CITY) TRAFFIC REGULATION
BILL (by Order)-SECOND READING.
Order for Second Reading read.

MR. AYRTON said, he wished to make a few remarks with respect to this measure, which, though it had been proceeded with in the ordinary course as a Private Bill, was essentially of a public character. He thought, therefore, that the House ought not to treat it as a mere private measure. According to the Standing Orders it was requisite that a person should have a definite and special interest before he could be heard in opposition to a Private Bill. The consequence of this rule was, that while a measure might affect everybody, nobody was in a position to resist it. This Bill, therefore, would, he believed, pass as an unopposed Bill, for as far as he was aware no person would have the requisite locus standi to oppose it. Besides, this Bill was a very extraordinary one. It contained no less than seven heads, and it proposed that the corporation of the City of London should make regulations for the street traffic of London. There was, besides, a general provision that the corporation might make regulations about anything else which was not included in the seven

heads.

It further provided that these regulations should have effect within a month after they were made, unless the Secretary of State should disapprove them; but if the Secretary of State once signified his approval, neither he nor any one on the part of the general public would have any power whatever to procure the alteration of the regulations, however much inconvenience they might cause. In addition to all this, there were no fewer than twenty clauses imposing penalties on persons who went into the City and did not conform to those clauses. One offence was driving into the City with a carriage constructed in the manner in which, he believed, nearly all carriages were usually built. Then, again, it was an offence, and would cause the infliction of a penalty, to stand in the street and not cross over with sufficient rapidity, to walk negligently, or to walk or drive in a way which did not meet the approval of a City functionary. The measure, in fact, was a monstrous in

[ocr errors]

terference with the liberty of the public. intention to do so. He hoped, however, Now, the question naturally arose, "If that if the Bill were now read a second this be necessary in the City, why is it time, those who represented the interests not equally necessary in other parts of of the City would be allowed a few days London?" He hoped the House would to determine whether the course proposed not allow the Bill to pass without some was the proper one. Having said thus examination and consideration. He would much on the Bill, he wished to offer a few not, however, ask the House to reject it, remarks on the subject of omnibuses. The because some regulations for the traffic of fact was, that the Bill was opposed by the metropolis, or at least of certain por- the omnibus proprietors, whose servants tions of it, were undoubtedly necessary. set the public at defiance more than any The course, therefore, which he should other class of men. He was driving the propose was the same as was taken last other day through the Poultry when a Session when the question was under con- three-horse omnibus drew up across the sideration. The Bill on that subject, it road in the narrowest part, suspending would be remembered, proposed to throw the traffic in either direction until it upon the ratepayers the responsibility of suited the driver of the omnibus to move indemnifying the promoters of the under- on. Now at present there existed no effitaking, but as the City objected to the cient means of preventing this. The omniproposal, the House referred the Bill to a bus proprietors also claimed a right to have Committee partly nominated by the House the trace bar to protrude any distance they itself, and partly by the Committee of pleased beyond the wheel, even over the Selection. Furthermore, an Instruction curbstones of the pavement. was given to the Committee to examine into that project, with a general regard to the public interests of the metropolis. The proceedings of that Committee were, in the end, extremely satisfactory. He should move, therefore, that after the Bill had been read a second time it should be referred to a Committee of twelve Members, five to be nominated by the Committee of Selection, and the remainder by the House, and that there be an Instruction to such Committee to inquire as to the best means of regulating the traffic of the metropolis.

MR. LOCKE KING said, he thought the proposal of the hon. and learned Member for the Tower Hamlets was a reasonable one. This was not purely a City question, but one affecting the whole of the metropolis. Nor was it simply a measure relating to omnibuses, as under its provisions no person who drove a two-horse carriage would be allowed, unless the carriage were altered, to take it into the City.

out being liable to be taken into custody by a policeman and carried off to the greenyard, or some place of that sort. He hoped that the House would accede to the proposal of his hon. and learned Friend the Member for the Tower Hamlets, and allow a Committee, composed of persons who were interested in the question, to take into consideration the traffic, not only of the City, but of the whole metropolis.

MR. LOCKE said, that some of his constituents had represented to him that if a particular clause in this Bill passed, their trade would be entirely put an end to. He MR. CRAWFORD said, he thought that believed that under the clause relating to any opposition to the principle of this Bill splinter bars no private carriage could go would be very unreasonable, for on-no sub-into the City and pull up at a shop withject had there been so many complaints of late as the difficulty of moving in vehicles or on foot through the City. He would not refer to the circumstances out of which that inconvenience had arisen, but he might mention that one cause was the Railway Stations by which the City was surrounded. The City was now actually impassible at some hours of the day. It was true that an Act had been passed for the regulation of the traffic, but some of its provisions had proved to be impracticable, and now, when the City asked Parliament to place further power in their hands, the first thing they met with was opposition. The hon. and learned Member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ayrton) had proposed that the Bill should be referred to a Select Committee of a peculiar character, but he had given no previous notice of his

MR. ALDERMAN LAWRENCE said, that this Bill was brought in in the interest, not of the City alone, but of the metropolis generally, and therefore the City thought it would receive great consideration from the House. The hon. and learned Member for the Tower Hamlets had asked what diffierence there was between the City and the surrounding districts. The answer was obvious. In the City the streets were narrower

[blocks in formation]

MR. STANSFELD replied that he could only say that the very difficult and complicated matter to which the Question of the noble Lord referred, had met with the earliest and most earnest attention of the Secretary of State; but it was, of course, impossible to state the conclusions at which he had not yet arrived, nor was it even possible to name a day on which such a statement could be made, but he might assure the House that his noble Friend (Earl de Grey) would give his earnest and continuous attention to the subject. The House would not begrudge the time necessary to arrive at a conclusion, considering the importance of coming to one which should, if possible, be final, and put a stop to discussion on a vexed question.

[blocks in formation]

EPPING FOREST.-QUESTION. MR. DOULTON said, he would beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works, Whether he is aware of inclosures now proceeding in Epping Forest to the extent of many hundred acres, especially near Loughton, Woodford, and Epping; whether he is aware that Lord Cowley has already inclosed nearly 300 acres since the announcement was made of the intentions of Her Majesty's Government in reference to open spaces; whether the Crown has any rights over the land so inclosed, or, if not, the rate per acre at which the Crown's forestal rights have been purchased; and whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to take any steps to prevent any further inclosures, pending the introduction and passing of the Bill promised to be introduced early this Session?

MR. CHILDERS: Sir, the reply of the Government to the first Question of the hon. Member is that the Department of Woods is not aware of any inclosures now going on at Epping, except within those portions of the forest the forestal rights of the Crown over which have been purchased by individuals. The Government have no information of what is being done on private property, with which they have no concern. The answer to the second Question is, that it is very probable Lord Cowley may have inclosed a certain number of acres-assuming that his is the property-certain rights in respect to which were purchased by Lord Mornington some years ago. As to the remainder of the Question and the rent per acre, all the particulars.were laid before Parliament, I think, in 1864. I believe the forestal rights over particular land in question, if it be the land which I suppose it to be, were purchased at between £4 and £5 per acre. In answer to the last Question, I have to state that, with respect to land, the forestal rights over which have been purchased by private individuals, Government has no intention and no power to interfere. With respect to land, the forestal rights over which have not been purchased, the Government is in this position. Two Committees have inquired into the subject, one in 1863 and the other in 1865. recommendation of the first Committee was as follows:

The

Committee as applicable to the remaining portion "Two courses presented themselves to the of Waltham Forest; one is, to discontinue the sale of the forestal rights of the Crown, vigilantly

pur

partment did not, early in the Session of 1864, promise the House that stringent Clauses for the protection of life and pro

to maintain those rights without regard to the question of cost for the purpose of preventing all future inclosures, and to preserve the forest in its present extent and wild uninclosed condition. The other course is to obtain the sanction of Par-perty should be immediately drawn up liament for the inclosure of the remaining portion and inserted in all future Waterworks of the forest, to ascertain the rights of the several Bills; and whether such Clauses have parties interested, and to make provision, partly been drawn up and inserted in Waterby those means and partly by purchase, for securworks Acts since passed; if not, the ing an adequate portion of the forest for those poses of health and recreation for which it has reason why? been proved to your Committee this forest has from time immemorial been enjoyed by the inhabitants of the neighbourhood and the metropolis. Your Committee are of opinion that to employ the forestal rights of the Crown for the purpose of obstructing the process of inclosure to which the lords, commons, and copyholders of the manors comprised within the forest are entitled in common with all other persons similarly situated would not only be a course of doubtful jus-mittee, whose inquiry closed so late in tice, but might, in accordance with the experience of the past, fail in securing the desired object."

[blocks in formation]

Having these two conflicting recommendations, the Government have felt much difficulty in arriving at a decision. The question of the best arrangements for securing the recreation of the people of the metropolis does not primarily concern the Treasury, but I have been in communication with the Home Office and the Metropolitan Board of Works, and I have every hope that something may be done which, without entailing legal expenses on the Department of Woods which is a Revenue Department, may meet the wishes of this House. Meantime, no fresh instructions have been given to that department.

In reply to Mr. SANDFORD,

MR. CHILDERS said, the correspondence was not concluded, and it was unusual to lay incomplete correspondence on the table. When the proposal of the Government is before the House, if the hon. Member repeats his Question as to the correspondence, no doubt a satisfactory answer will be given.

WATERWORKS BILLS.-QUESTION. MR. FERRAND said, he rose to ask the President of the Board of Trade, If the Secretary of State for the Home De

VOL. CLXXXI. [THIRD SERIES.]

MR. MILNER GIBSON, in reply, said, he was not aware of any such promise having been made, but early last Session his right hon. Friend (Sir George Grey) stated that a draught of a Waterworks Bill was prepared. He introduced the Bill, and it was referred to a Select Com

the Session that no satisfactory legislation could take place. In accordance, however, with the recommendation then made, another Bill had been prepared, and he hoped shortly to introduce it.

AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS.

QUESTION.

SIR WILLIAM HUTT said, he wished to ask, Whether the Government propose to introduce any measure to authorize the collection of Agricultural Statistics in Great Britain?

MR. MILNER GIBSON: It is the intention of the Government to ask for the same Vote as last year for the collection of those statistics.

CATTLE PLAGUE STATISTICS.
QUESTION.

MR. OWEN STANLEY said, he would beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, If the Reports of the Veterinary Department relating to the Cattle Plague can specify in more detail the Returns of the cattle attacked, killed, or died; whether cows, oxen, or calves?

MR. H. A. BRUCE said, in reply, that up to the present time the Reports had not distinguished between oxen, cows, and calves. But for the future the duty of sending in those Returns would be intrusted to the local authorities, who would be required to make them to the Privy Council in such form and at such time as they might think fit. He could see no objection, but, on the contrary, great advantage, in adopting the suggestion of the hon. Gentleman.

2 G

« AnteriorContinuar »