accounts of such joint board, and which such member authorised or joined in authorising." Amendment agreed to. Repeal of Acts. Clause 33 (Repeal of Local Acts). MR. STANSFELD moved in gaged in a very important inquiry in reference to obtaining for London a constant water supply. He quite approved of the transfer of the powers in question to the Local Government Board, and he might add that a process was going on page 18, line 13, after " Acts," to insert "other Boards should be placed upon a more by which the powers of the various than Acts for the conservancy of rivers." MR. DIMSDALE objected to the logical foundation than that which they Amendment. The Bill as originally his right hon. Friend (Mr. Stansfeld), had heretofore occupied. He warned framed would have qualified the stringency of the Lea Conservancy Acts-be expected of him than he would have however, that a great deal more would first, by fixing a standard of purity; and, secondly, by enabling the Local Government Board to alter or set aside those Acts. The former proposal, however, had been withdrawn, in deference, he presumed, to threatened opposition from residents in northern towns, and the Amendment would deprive the Lea district of the advantage they had anticipated from the latter. He preferred the Bill as it stood to the Amendment. MR. COWPER also regretted that the right hon. Gentleman had thought it necessary to propose this Amendment. MR. STANSFELD explained that the Amendment was introduced in order to remedy an inconvenience that would result from the clause as it stood at present. Amendment agreed to. Clause 35 (Transfer of powers and duties under Alkali Act, 1863, and Metropolis Water Acts, to Local Government Board). He MR. STANSFELD said, that the clause transferred from the Board of Trade to the Local Government Board the powers created by the Alkali Acts and by the Metropolis Water Acts of 1852 and 1871; but it would tend to, the mutual convenience of the Boards that the transfer should not at once take place. therefore proposed to amend the clause by saying that the transfer of these powers might be effected by Order in Council at any time prior to the 1st January, 1873; and in the event of there being no such transfer that the transfer of the powers should take place on that date. MR. SCLATER-BOOTH did not agree in the propriety of effecting the transfer by an Order in Council. MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE thought that this would be the most convenient way of doing it; and it was desirable that some delay should take place, because the Board of Trade was now en power to effect under the existing powers in reference to the water supply. He hoped that one day the supply of water the trading companies, whose principal would cease to be solely in the hands of object was to make a profit for their shareholders, and that it would be placed under some local authority. MR. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH thanked the right hon. Gentleman for Local Government Board would soon find his concluding remarks, and said that the that it was quite necessary that within a short time the existing Acts in reference to the supply of water to London should be replaced by new legislation, because the powers conferred by them were quite insufficient. He feared, however, lest the Amendment now proposed should practically tie up the hands of the Government, and prevent them from introducing any adequate measure during the whole of next Session. The Bill of 1871 was a Hybrid Bill, and notices had to be given in October, 1870. This course would have to be repeated for any future Bill dealing with the Water Companies' property. He hoped that the transfer of the powers from the Board of Trade to the Local Government Board would take place before October next. MR. F. S. POWELL regretted that the powers conferred by the Alkali Acts were not to be transferred at once. MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK said, he hoped the attention of the Government would be directed at the earliest possible moment next Session to the subject of the water supply of London. He had been under the impression that the Act of last year was an operative one, and that he might obtain a constant supply; but after he had gone to considerable expense with this view, his agent was laughed at by the water company when asking for a constant supply. Question, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to. Clause 42 (Repeal of s. 151 of Public Health Act, 1848). He was glad that the powers conferred | vernment Board in all Local Board dison the Board of Trade were to be trans-tricts. Great difficulties existed with ferred to the Local Government Board. regard to the highways and turnpikes. MR. CAWLEY approved of the suggested Amendment, but he believed that great alterations would be required before the powers in question were brought into operation. No single individual could obtain a constant supply till such supply was generally asked for; and Gentlemen must be contented to submit to some difficulty till they could bring their fellows to express a desire in that direction. A constant supply and the present fittings were incompatible. There was no reason for fixing the date of the operation of the Act at the 1st of October. MR. STANSFELD stated that by inadvertence the Resolution as to expenses on which this clause was founded had been expressed in terms insufficient to cover the object. It would, therefore, be necessary to omit the clause, and immediately after the Report to re-commit the Bill for the purpose of re-inserting the clause founded on a Resolution which had been agreed to by the whole House. Amendment proposed, to leave out Clause 42.—(Mr. Stansfeld.) MR. LOCKE said, it had been remarked that if an inhabitant could not obtain a constant supply it was his own fault, and that he could not obtain it without the general consent of his neighbours. It had been suggested that the transfer of the powers of the Board of Trade to other Departments would not be sufficient without some further legis-emption which the clause was intended lation on the subject. to repeal should continue to enjoy it as heretofore. Amendment agreed to. MR. VERNON HARCOURT said, he must divide the House against the clause unless a proviso were added that Oxford and other places having the ex MR. STANSFELD said, the clause Clause 36 (Transfer of the powers and had been carried on a division by a conduties of Secretary of State under High-siderable majority, and it was not.just way and Turnpike Acts to Local Govern- to accuse him of adopting an unfair ment Board). course with respect to it. MR. VERNON HARCOURT asked order to move the re-committal of the Mr. Speaker, whether it would be in Bill for the purpose of inserting a clause which the House had struck out? MR. KNIGHT said, the present management of the roads was very good, and he doubted whether any benefit would arise from a change from King Log to King Stork, but this would be the result of the clause. He supposed that MR. SPEAKER: It is open to the there would be 30 or 40 Inspectors ap-committal of the Bill for the purpose right hon. Gentleman to move the repointed. In fact it was usual, when a Government was going out of office, to appoint a number of Commissioners. There would be Inspectors and auditors sent about the country, and this would be offensive. But all this had nothing whatever to do with the public health. He moved that this clause be omitted. Amendment proposed, to leave out Clause 36.-(Mr. Knight.) which he has stated. When the Bill has been re-committed the hon. and learned Gentleman will have the opportunity of moving his Amendments. Question, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill," put, and negatived. Clause 44 (Public Works Loan Commissioners may lend to sanitary authority on security of rates). MR. RATHBONE moved an Amendment, with a view to enabling local obtain loans in the same manner as if authorities acting under local Acts to they acted under sanitary Acts. Amendment proposed, MR. HIBBERT said, it had been decided that highways and turnpikes In page 22, line 8, after the word "Acts," to should be transferred to the Local Go-insert the words "or by any local Acts which confer borrowing powers for the same purposes for which the said powers are conferred by the Sanitary Acts, provided that the works in respect of which the said powers are conferred shall not have been undertaken at the time of the passing of this Act."-(Mr. Rathbone.) MR. STANSFELD explained that under Clause 33 the Local Government Board would have power by provisional order to give local authorities the advantage desired. Question, "That those words be there inserted," put, and negatived. case in regard to the Education Acts, where the expenditure was to be incurred within a very short time. But what was now proposed was, when they were passing an enactment without any limit of time to authorize the borrowing of money, that they should insert one fixed rate of interest which could not possibly be applicable except in a given state of the money market. Words struck out. Clause 48 (Audit of accounts). MR. PELL proposed, after "any" to insert "and shall be audited in such manner.' ." The effect of his Amendment was to provide that the accounts of urban sanitary authorities should undergo a sufficient and proper audit as well as the accounts of rural sanitary authorities. Amendment proposed, in page 23, line 29, after the word " year," to insert the words "and shall be audited in such manner."-(Mr. Pell.) MR. GOLDSMID moved, in page 22, line 10, to leave out "not less than." He thought the Public Works Loan Commissioners should be at liberty to make advances at less than 3 per cent if they were in a position to do so. On a former occasion, he cited the Scotch Education Bill, which fixed the rate of loans for the erection of schools at 3 per cent, in support of this view, but the First Lord of the Treasury told him the precedent of the English Education Act was against him. On referring, how-be there inserted." ever, to that Act he found that it agreed with the Scotch Bill. He had ascertained, moreover, that in many cases the Commissioners had made loans at 31 per cent. MR. GLADSTONE wished to set himself right with the House in this matter. His hon. Friend was quite correct in stating that the Scotch Education Bill agreed with the English Education Act, and in questioning this on a former occasion he acted on misinformation, proceeding from a source from which he had reason to expect accuracy. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, however, was not prepared to assume the responsibility for clauses in existing Acts with regard to interest for loans, and he himself had been astonished at finding that they contained such provisions. It might sometimes happen that money clauses got inserted in Bills without the knowledge of the Treasury. It was a matter of regret to him that clauses involving the lending of money at the rate of 3 per cent should ever be allowed to get into a Bill, subject, however, to one important reservation-namely, that in cases where the loans were to be made at a particular time then it was not unreasonable that there should be such a provision, because they could judge of the condition of the money market at a particular time. That was no doubt the Question proposed, "That those words MR. STANSFELD opposed the Amendment, but hoped that the time_might come when a more uniform and satisfactory plan might be adopted. SIR MASSEY LOPES pressed upon the Government the necessity of securing uniformity in this respect. MR. RYLANDS hoped the Government would maintain the position which the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Stansfeld) had taken. Question put. 112: Majority 58. MR. HIBBERT moved that the Bill be re-committed, with the view of inserting a clause to repeal the exemption clause with reference to stamps on deeds and conveyances, which was omitted in the previous Act. MR. VERNON HARCOURT expressed his opposition to such a course. They were told that this proceeding was to be taken on the ground of the sacred principle of non-exemption. This was one of those cheese-paring, irritating things which saved very little money and gave very grievous offence. It was one of the flies in the pot of ointment which caused it to stink. Though the Government were economical in small affairs, when they had a matter be COMMONS} fore them involving the expenditure of £3,500,000 they were not so particular, for a clause of exemption from stamps were to be inserted. Now that they had got rid of Clause 42, he appealed to his right hon. Friend to let the Bill remain as it was, and not ask the House to recommit the Bill. MR. STANSFELD said, he hoped the House would not be deceived by the lawyer-like arguments of his hon. and learned Friend who had urged that because the Army Localization Bill contained an exemption, a similar clause ought also to be introduced into the present measure. It required, however, no knowledge of the law, but only common sense to detect the fallacy of such an argument, because the exemption in the latter case was merely an enactment that the Imperial Government should not pay stamp duty to itself. With regard to the present Bill, the Government proposed not to continue an exemption which was partial and unjust. Under the law which it was now proposed to modify, Town Councils were not exempted from the payment of stamp duties, but only local Boards, and this was in itself an injustice to those urban districts whose interests his hon. and learned Friend seemed so anxious to promote. If his hon. and learned Friend's proposal were adopted, every local Board in the country would be exempted from the payment of stamp duties on documents, and all individuals who were also parties to the deeds would enjoy the same exemptions, whereas Boards of Guardians would have to pay for a stamp on every document. Bill re-committed in respect of a Clause (Repeal of section 151 of Public Health Act 1848); considered in Committee, and reported; as amended, considered; to be read the third time To-morrow, at Two of the clock. SUPPLY. Order for Committee read. House and Storey's Gate. 280 tion for to-morrow (Friday) evening relating to the Admiralty, to consent to postpone it on consideration of the state of the Business of the House, and at the same time expressed a hope that other hon. Members would not be unwilling to make a similar concession. MR. SEELY (Lincoln) consented to waive his right to precedence, although he confessed that he did so with considerable reluctance. He gave Notice that he would bring forward the Motion early in the next Session. LORD ELCHO said, that, in order to facilitate the conduct of Public Business, he would not bring on his Motion respecting the case of Lieutenant Tribe; but he trusted the Government would put down Supply some other night in order that he might submit the matter to the consideration of the House. METROPOLIS-ROAD BETWEEN MARL- OBSERVATIONS. QUESTION. MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK said, he had a Notice which had stood on the Paper a very long time, and as it related to a great public improvement in the metropolis, he proposed to mention it briefly to the House. The Session ought not, in his opinion, to be allowed to close without the House being informed what action the Government proposed to take in regard to granting permission for private and public carriages to use the new road between Marlborough House and Storey's Gate. His right hon. Friend the Chief Commissioner of Works stated a long time ago that public carriages would be allowed to pass between those points, subject to the same regulations as were in force with reference to the road between Marlborough House and Buckingham Gate. The privilege to which he referred was limited to Members of Parliament only during the Session. But it was absolutely necessary for the convenience of the public that the privilege should be further extended, owing to the crowded state of the traffic in Parliament Street, which was likely to become aggravated in consequence of the indecision of the Government. Any person passing through Parliament Street would perceive that it was quite imposMR. GLADSTONE appealed to the sible that reasonable facilities could be hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr. Seely), given for the traffic which passed through who had on the Paper a Notice of Mo-it. Under these circumstances, he wished PARLIAMENT BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. OBSERVATIONS. 281 Road between Marlborough {AUGUST 1, 1872) House and Storey's Gate. 282 to ask his right hon. Friend-for the | because, instead of Parliament Street Motion which stood in his name he would defer to a more convenient time-whether he could give any information to the House as to the intentions of Her Majesty's Government on this subject? He would simply point out that without any additional, or, at all events, at a very slight additional expense, a great benefit might be conferred on the inhabitants of London, and not only upon them, but upon all their constituents who visited the metropolis. He trusted Her Majesty's Government would sanction this great improvement, especially as they did not intend to open a new road-Street, who thought they ought to be way over the ornamental water. pro He had pointed out to the noble Lord that it would not meet the convenience of Members of this House nor serve the object he had in view, and consequently the Motion was withdrawn. He mised, however, that he should be prepared to make a road for the use of Members of both Houses of Parliament during the construction of the public offices; but his hon. Friend wished now to alter that arrangement, and to throw the road open for the use of all the world. The object, however, for which the road was made would be defeated if that were done. He stated at the time that in consequence of the great throng of traffic in Parliament Street during the Session of Parliament, Members were obstructed in coming to the House; that the ordinary traffic also was obstructed, and that the true way to meet the difficulty would be to allow Members to pass as rapidly as they could across the Park. But if the road were thrown open to the public, Members would experience, as they did before, considerable difficulty in getting to the House. He had not discovered any persons who found the least inconvenience from the present arrangement. On the contrary, the public had derived great benefit from it; being impassable, as it used to be, at certain hours of the day, it was now as free at one time as at another. [“Oh!"] Any person who saw Parliament Street during the Recess knew well that there was no obstruction whatever in that street, and there could therefore be no claim for the general public to go through the Park, who were not compelled, like Members of Parliament, to discharge a great public duty, and to whom time, even a minute or two, was a great and important object. There were certain gentlemen, having offices in George put on the same footing as Members of Parliament. But there was this difference-that those gentlemen went there for their own profit, and a large profit they often made. He did not think, therefore, that any change ought to be made in the present arrangement, nor had he any authority to make it. King MR. W. H. SMITH regretted that the right hon. Gentleman should have thought fit to refuse the small boon asked for at his hands by his hon. Friend the Member for Whitehaven. Street had been closed without any compensation to the people of the metropolis, and the road wanted was very much needed for the traffic from the North to the South. He could not help thinking that it would be very much to the advantage of the metropolis, and not by any means inconsistent with the position which the right hon. Gentleman occupied as Chief Commissioner of Works, if he took into consideration the rightful claim of the public to the use of this road. MR. BOUVERIE thought it very wrong that Members of the House of Commons or of the House of Lords should have any privileges outside the walls of Parliament. As Members of Parliament they had privileges to enable them to discharge their duty to their constituents in the House, such as freedom from arrest; but it was not right that outside Parliament the Members of either House should have some special advantage conferred upon them by the right hon. Gentleman who, one would have supposed, would be the very last person to confer it. He (Mr. Bouverie) could not understand why the public had not taken up this matter much more strongly than they had done, and insisted that the road should be open to all traffic, |