Page images
PDF
EPUB

purpose. I do not see how we are to support the argument that the civil bill processes are to be made to apply outside the Act. The question is a very important one; and I am not sure that this Bill is the right place to deal with it. I think that better regulations might be made than under the present law; but I do not think that in a matter which would affect such a thing as the recovery of rent in Ireland, that we ought to change it in a clause apparently for another purpose, and simply by being inserted amongst several other clauses, so that it would hardly be suspected by anybody that it meant to apply to anything outside. If the thing is to be done, it should be done in a separate clause. I shall certainly bring the case before the Prime Minister. I have not had any conversation with him about it. The right hon. and learned Gentleman thought that I had alluded to it in the debate; but I do not remember having done so. I think that the matter is well worth examining; but I am certainly still of opinion that if it should be done that it should not be done in this clause.

SIR R. ASSHETON CROSS: I gather from the speech of the right hon. Gentleman who has just sat down that, at all events, he agrees with us as to the merits of the case. He cannot defend the law as it as present stands, as he suggests that it should be amended, and he is with us entirely on the merits. [Mr. W. E. FORSTER dissented.] The right hon. Gentleman says that he does not quite admit that. But he says that the law is in an unsatisfactory state. Well, it is in an unsatisfactory state, and it would be in a still more unsatisfactory state if the Amendment is allowed to be carried; and the only ground for not retaining the section in the clause is that it does not belong to this clause. All that we ask leave to say is that the draftsman intends that this clause shall meet this case. Of course, any Court would naturally say that these words have not been left out of this particular clause for this special purpose. But if the right hon. Gentleman will go one step further, and say that the Government will consider this matter, and that he will bring in a separate clause, because he does not admit that this is a proper clause for it to be inserted in, we shall be content. The whole scope of the Act is

relative to the operation of land in Ireland and other purposes. It is absolutely within the scope of this Act, and no one can possibly think otherwise. What I am saying is that the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ireland has put my argument before the Committee. The Government have admitted the whole strength of our case; but they are resting their defence on this-that this clause is not the place for it. If the Government will say that they will consider this matter, and bring up a separate clause, then we shall be content. If they will not, then I think that it is necessary for us to report Progress, in order to give them an opportunity to re-consider the matter.

MR. W. E. FORSTER: I cannot say more than this, that I shall bring the matter before the Prime Minister; but I cannot say that I shall bring in a separate clause. If we put in the words "judicial rent," I do think, with the right hon. Gentleman, that it will leave things worse than they are at the present moment. I do admit, on the other hand, that there is an objection to there being two forms of collection. But the real question to be considered is this-is this a matter of sufficient importance that we should introduce it as a separate clause in this Bill, independently of the general Act? That is not so perfectly easy a matter to decide, and it is a matter which me and my right hon. Friend will have to consider, and it is not a matter upon which the Committee will expect me to pledge myself at present. I do not suppose the right hon. Gentleman objects to the passing of the clause with

judicial rent.". Sir R. ASSHETON CROSS objected.] Well, if the right hon. Gentleman objects, we must take a division.

*་་

[ocr errors]

MR. W. H. SMITH: Under these circumstances, I have no alternative but to move to report Progress, and with every desire to promote the Bill. The right hon. Gentleman talks of introducing the words "judicial rent;" but that deserves very serious consideration, and, under these circumstances, it seems to me necessary that Progress should be reported.

[ocr errors][merged small]

MR. W. E. FORSTER: I should like | Prime Minister was not now present; to understand what the right hon. Gen- and he considered that when they had tleman asks us to report Progress for got through 15 clauses with rapidity it now? Is it that he objects to these was a tolerably reasonable request, words "judicial rent" being in? [Mr. after having given their reasons on the W. H. SMITH: Yes.] Well, then, there subject, that Progress should be reis another mode-namely, to strike out ported. the words, on the understanding that they will be brought in again, but, probably, not in that clause. It appears to me there is plenty of time for the right hon. Gentleman to raise the question hereafter. I think we must take a division.

MR. PARNELL said, he hoped that when the Chief Secretary brought the question before the Prime Minister he would also bear in mind the admission made by the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for the University of Dublin (Mr. Gibson) that he considered this matter of so much importance that he would be willing to allow the Limitation of Costs Bill to pass if he could retain this reform in the law; and the right hon. Gentleman also would recollect that if he opened this gate and permitted a form of procedure under the Civil Bill Court in one direction, the Irish Members would be entitled to suggest procedure being made in other directions, and also of reforms in the Superior Courts.

MR. GIBSON said, he did not introduce the Limitation of Costs Bill at all. He was dealing with an interruption, and he had a very short explanation of the matter. He would say one word on the present proceedings. How and why did the Government accept the measure, when the right hon. Gentleman had said two or three times over that he would like to consult the Prime Minister on the subject? They had fully a right now to have Progress reported.

MR. W. E. FORSTER: What I did say was that I should like to consult the Prime Minister on the question of whether I would answer the appeal of the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir R. Assheton Cross) that we would bring up a clause. That was the point.

MR. GIBSON said, unquestionably, the right hon. Gentleman referred to a desire to consult the Prime Minister who was in charge of the Bill, and who had taken a most active interest in every single one of these clauses. For his own part, he expressed regret that the

MR. CHAPLIN said, he hoped it would not be necessary to take a division on the Motion to report Progress. He did not think the right hon. Gentlemen apprehended the position which had been placed before him by the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for the University of Dublin (Mr. Gibson). The position was this. His right hon. and learned Friend objected to the insertion of the word "judicial" in the clause now before the Committee, unless it were qualified by the admission on the part of the Government that they would bring up a clause in some other part of the Bill more appropriate in their view. In answer to that the right hon. Gentleman said "I am not very clear in my own opinion; it is impossible to decide without consulting the Prime Minister." Well, that being so, could there be anything more reasonable than that Progress should be reported in order to enable the Goverment to consult their Leader and Chief on this point of considerable importance. It was the more necessary to do this, because, as everybody knew, no important point was ever raised in the Bill that any Member of the Government would venture to decide without a direct appeal to the Prime Minister. Under the circumstances, he hoped Progress would be now reported.

MR. MULHOLLAND said, he would just add to what had been said that they were not suggesting any change whatever; they were resisting change, and supporting a proposal that had received the support of the Prime Minister and the Government against a change that, as he thought, had been too hastily admitted by the Attorney General for Ireland.

MR. W. E. FORSTER said, he would not dispute the Motion to report Progress, for what he saw induced him to think that they would not be allowed to decide the question raised.

Motion agreed to.

Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Monday next.

MOTION.

1091

LAND LAW (IRELAND) [CONSOLIDATED

FUND].

Committee to consider of authorising the payment out of the Consolidated Fund of the Salary and Retiring Pension of the Judicial Commissioner of the Land Commission, to be appointed in pursuance of any Act of the present Session relating to the Land Law of Ireland (Queen's Recommendation signified), upon Monday next.

House adjourned at a quarter
after One o'clock till
Monday next.

HOUSE OF LORDS,

Monday, 18th July, 1881.

*

MINUTES.]-PUBLIC BILLS-Committee-Wild
Birds Protection Act, 1880, Amendment
(118-166); Burial Grounds (Scotland) Act
(1855) Amendment (131); Sale and Use of
Poisons (159), discharged.
Committee-Report-Tramways Orders Con-
firmation (No. 2) * (126).

and to ask, Whether Her Majesty's Government propose to take any steps to enforce the regulations of the Board of Trade? said, the subject was one that had lately attracted much attention, and he should not have brought it forward again but for the unsatisfactory nature of the Returns just issued. It would be remembered that in 1878 an Act was passed that made it compulsory for Railway Companies to send in Returns every six months specifying the kind of brakes used by them, and the number of carriages and engines fitted with brakes, with other particulars on the subject. Previously to this the Board of Trade had made a very careful investigation into the question of railway brakes, acting in accordance with the recommendation of the Railway Accidents Commission; and in 1877 a Circular was issued by the Board, which referred to the little progress which had been made by the Companies even

in

[ocr errors]

"The first step of agreeing upon what are the requirements which in their opinion are essential to a good continuous brake.' The Circular then proceeded to specify certain conditions or requirements for an efficient brake, which were these

"The brakes to be efficient in stopping trains, instantaneous in their action, and capable of being applied without difficulty by enginedrivers or guards.

"In case of accidents to be instantaneously self-acting.

train.

"The brakes to be regularly used in daily working.

"The materials employed to be of a durable character, so as to be easily maintained and kept in order."

Third Reading Commons Regulation (Shenfield) Provisional Order (132); Alsager Chapel (Marriages) * (153), and passed. Royal Assent-Newspapers [44 & 45 Vict. c. 19]; Married Women's Property (Scotland) [44 & 45 Vict. c. 21]; Post Office (Land) [44 & "The brakes to be put on and taken off with 45 Vict. c. 20]; Bankruptcy and Cessio Scot-facility on the engine, and every vehicle in the land) [44 & 45 Vict. c. 22]; Court of Bankruptcy (Ireland) (Officers and Clerks) [44 & 45 Vict. c. 23]; Summary Jurisdiction (Process) [44 & 45 Vict. c. 24]; Local Government Provisional Orders (Askern, &c.) [44 & 45 Vict. c. xcviii]; Local Government Provisional Orders (Horfield, &c.) [44 & 45 Vict. c. xcix]; Inclosure Provisional Orders (Thurstaston Common) [44 & 45 Vict. c. c]; Land Drainage Provisional Orders [44 & 45 Vict. c. ci]; Local Government Provisional Orders (Birmingham, Tame, and Rea, &c.) [44 & 45 Vict. c. ciij; Gas Provisional Order 44 & 45 Viet. c. ciii]; Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation [44 & 45 Vict. c. civ]; Tramways Orders Confirmation (No. 1) [44 & 45 Vict. c. cv].

RAILWAYS-CONTINUOUS BRAKES.

OBSERVATIONS. QUESTION.

EARL DE LA WARR, in rising to call attention to the Parliamentary Return ending 31st December 1880, relative to railway continuous brakes;

Such were the conditions laid down by the Board of Trade as indispensable for an efficient brake. This took place in 1877. It was then added in this Circular

"There can be no reason for further delay, and the Board of Trade feel it their duty again to urge upon the Railway Companies the necessity for arriving at an immediate decision and united action in the matter."

But what had been done? These Re-
turns of the Railway Companies had
been carefully and periodically made;
but he regretted to say that they showed
comparatively but little progress.
was true there were some of the

It

large Companies which were conspi- | passenger carriages in the United Kingcuous for the good example they had dom. He thought, therefore, there was set. The Brighton. and South Coast but one conclusion at which they could Railway, among these, were successfully arrive, which was that the repeated employing efficient continuous brakes- warnings and recommendations of the the Westinghouse-throughout their sys- Board of Trade had hitherto failed to tem. He might also mention the North- produce any real effect upon the great Eastern, the Great Western, and the Mid- bulk of Railway Companies in the land Companies, as taking active steps to United Kingdom with reference to the comply with the requirements of the use of continuous brakes. These facts Board of Trade; also the Glasgow and would bear him out in the appeal which South Western and North British, in he wished to make to Her Majesty's Scotland. But if they looked to the gene- Government as to the course which they ral result, as shown by the last Return intended to pursue. There were differto the 31st of December, 1880, they would ences of opinion as to what was the best arrive at a very unsatisfactory conclusion, kind of brake, and this was not a matwhich was this-that of the 61 English ter which could be discussed with adCompanies, there were only 10 which vantage in their Lordships' House. It had in use any brakes that fully com- was a matter which Railway Companies plied with the requirements of the Board ought themselves to decide as they had of Trade; of the eight Scotch Companies the means and opportunities of doing five so complied, but of the 21 Irish so; but he would urge that the time Companies, not one complied. Thus, of was come when some decision ought to the 90 Companies of the United King- be arrived at, either individually or coldom, there were only 15 who had com- lectively, by Railway Companies, that plied to some extent with the require- an efficient brake in accordance with adments of the Board of Trade. But from mitted principles of construction should these 15 must be deducted those whose be adopted. The question had been compliance was little more than a mat- much considered, and many eminent ter of form, running only a few trains engineers and others had expressed with continuous brakes, as if only to their opinions with regard to it. He show by the Returns that they were believed there was not one of them who giving them a trial. Among these would not say that efficient railway were the Great Northern, the Lancashire brakes were essential, not only on the and Yorkshire, the Manchester, Shef- ground of utility, but also for the actual field, and Lincolnshire, the London and safety of the public. Railway ComSouth-Western, the London, Chatham, panies deserved praise for the manner and Dover-all of them important lines. in which their lines were conducted geThus, as appeared by the Return, the nerally; but with regard to the meGreat Northern had only four engines chanical appliances to which he had and 35 carriages fitted with brakes as drawn attention, they ought, he held, required by the Board of Trade; the to bestir themselves. Voluntary action London, Chatham, and Dover had only on their part would be preferable to six engines and 31 carriages so fitted; Parliamentary interference. The noble the South-Western had only two en- Earl concluded by asking, Whether the gines and 10 carriages so fitted. It Government proposed to take any steps furthur appeared that the London and to enforce the regulations of the Board North-Western, one of the most import- of Trade, and whether they would lay ant lines, had from the first made no on the Table of the House a Copy of attempt to adopt a brake as recom- any Correspondence between that Demended by the Board of Trade, and partment and the Railway Companies? were now compelled to admit that the brake which they had been using was a failure. Upon the whole it would appear that there were only about seven Companies out of 90 who were actively carrying out the recommendations of the Board of Trade, and the number of passenger carriages so fitted with continuous brakes amounted to 11 per cent of the

Earl De La Warr

LORD SUDELEY said, he would not attempt to follow the noble Earl through his detailed analysis of the Return; but he thought it would, perhaps, have been fairer not merely to have stated that only seven out of 90 Companies were carrying out the recommendations of the Board of Trade, but to have shown the number of carriages and engines

not in a position to give any pledge ou the subject, yet the negotiations were being actively pressed forward, and there was reason to hope that before many months should have passed a great stride would have taken place with regard to the use of continuous brakes all over the United Kingdom. In these circumstances, and while fully recognizing the necessity for continuous brakes for providing for the safety of the travelling public, the Board of Trade did not think it desirable at the present moment to take any further steps in the matter. The inquiries into the accidents of the last few months had again shown that many of them might have been mitigated, if not altogether prevented, had continuous brakes been adopted; and that fact, combined with the pressure of public opinion, and with the fact that the Board of Trade were urging on the Companies to allow no delay in the matter, would, it was hoped, bring about the end which the noble Lord had in view, and would prevent the necessity of any further legislation in the matter.

fitted with continuous brakes. An examination of the Returns relating to continuous brakes on railway trains showed that 1,615 engines and 17,654 carriages used in passenger trains were so fitted on the 31st of December, 1880; or, in other words, that of the entire stock used in passenger traffic 33 per cent of the engines and 41 per cent of the carriages were fitted with continuous brakes, and that 10 per cent of such fittings were effected during the year 1880. Although some of the Companies had wholly and others partially adopted a brake which fully complied with the conditions specified in the Schedule to the Railway Returns (Continuous Brakes) Act, 1878, yet others, and notably one of the largest Companies, used brakes which did not fulfil the suggestions contained in the Board of Trade Circular of 1877 with regard to continuous brakes. The Board of Trade had been in communication with the London and North-Western Railway Company, who up to the present time had not adopted a continuous brake, but used a sectional brake. They were informed by that Company that the chairman (Mr. Moon) had a meeting with several of the chairmen of the largest Railway Companies, and the result of that interview was that directions were given to the loco-way Company, as instead of that Commotive superintendent of the London and North-Western Railway to consult with the locomotive superintendents of some of the other Lines in the matter. The first question to which that committee devoted itself, as shown in a letter from Mr. Webb, the locomotive superintendent of the London and NorthWestern Railway, of the 10th of March last, was to obtain a standard coupling which would make it possible for the carriages of one Company to interchange with the carriages of another Company, whatever continuous air brake they might have adopted. In the opinion of the London and North-Western Railway Company, an universal coupling was the principal thing to be brought about to insure the interchangeability of stock. The Board of Trade were informed that when the question of this coupling should have been arranged, there was every reason to believe that the London and North-Western Railway Company would see their way to adopting a continuous air-brake of some description. Although the Company were

[ocr errors]

LORD COLVILLE OF CULROSS said, he thought that the noble Earl (Earl De La Warr) had gone out of his way in complaining of the Great Northern Rail

pany having done less than any other in England, it had, in his opinion, done more to fulfil the wishes of the noble Earl than any other Company. Ninety per cent of their carriages were fitted with continuous brakes. A few weeks ago 12 railway engineers, representing the London and North-Western Railway, the Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire Railway, the Great Northern Railway, the South-Eastern Railway, the Great Southern and Western Railway (Ireland), the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway, the London and SouthWestern Railway, the Midland Railway, the Great Western Railway, the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway, and the Metropolitan Railway, had met to consider the question of continuous brakes, and their expressed impression was that the simple vacuum brake became spoilt when converted into an automatic brake. Vacuum brakes, however, could be made automatic at an expense of £10 in the case of an engine and of £5 in the case of a carriage. The London and NorthWestern Railway Company had given

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »