TYNWALD COURT.

DOUGLAS, TUESDAY, JANUARY 24, 1899.

Present: In the Council, the Lieut.-Governor, the Lord Bishop, Deemster Sir James Gell, Deemster Gill, the Attorney-General, the Receiver-General, and the Vicar-General; and in the Keys: the Speaker, and Messrs J. A. Mylrea, J. Joughin, J. Qualtrough, J. D. Cluoas, J. R. Kerruish, T. Clague, T. Corlett, T. Allen, R. Cowley, W. Quayle, D. Maitland, F. G. Callow, J. R. Cowell, J. T. Cowell, E. H. Christian, J. J. Goldsmith, J. Mylchreest, W. Quine, J. C. Crellin, and T. Corlett. Mr Aitken was in attendance as clerk to the Council, and Mr R. D. Gelling, the sec- retary of the House of Keys, was in attendance.

Jap, NEW SPEAKER. Mr Mylrea: May it please your Excellency, I have the honour of presenting to your Excel- lency our newly-elected Speaker, Mr Arthur William Moore, whom the House of Keys have unanimously elected, and in whom we have the strongest possible confidence that he will follow in the footsteps of his distinguished predecessor. The Governor : I am very glad to welcome you to this Tynwald Court for the first time as Spanker, and to congratulate the House of Keys on the choice they have made. It has been my good fortune since I came here to claim him as a friend, and as long as I am here I hope we shall be friends, and work together for the good of the Island. The Speaker: I thank your Excellency for your very kind good wishes, and I cordially recipro- cate them. While upholding the rights and pri- vileges of the House of Keys, it will be my pleasant duty to co-operate with you in maintain- ing the good relations which have, almost uni- formly, existed between the two branches of this ancient Court of Tynwald. (Hear, hear.)

THE LATE SPEAKER. The Governor : Perhaps the Court will join with me in standing up for a minute while I try

The New Speaker.—The Late Speaker. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, l899. 73 — -- - to say a few words upon our late Speaker. I have been here of course only a short time, but I had learned to know Sir John Goldie-Taubman very well. I knew his worth and good character in many ways towards us all, and all he has done for this Island, and I trust you will join with me in offering our sincere sympathy to Lady Taubman and family at the loss which has fallen upon them. I am perfectly certain of one thing, that he would have been quite pleased that it has been your pleasure to elect in his place my friend Mr Moore, the new Speaker. I am sure you will join with me most heartily in according our sympathy to Lady Taubman and family at the loss which has fallen upon them. If you will allow me to do so, I will draft a resolution and send it on to her from you—from us all in this Court—of sincere sympathy with her in the ter- rible trouble which has fallen upon her. (Hear, hear.) The Speaker : I thank your Excellency on be- half of the Keys for What you have said in refer- ence to our late lamented Speaker. The course which you have proposed to adopt will have our unanimous approval. As we have already paid our own tribute in our own chamber, it is not necessary to add anything to what you have said. The proposition was seconded by the Lord Bishop and unanimously agreed to.

BOARD OF ADVERTISING. Mr J. R. Cowell: With regard to the Board of Advertising, I may explain to the Court that I have taken the somewhat unusual course with the object of saving time to approaCh your Excel- lency, and get your permission to have the report printed and circulated before it is laid before (le Court. That I did, of course, with the object of saving time, and giving members the earliest in- timation possible with regard to the proceedings of the Board. I trust the Court will accept what 1 have done, and will allow me formally to pre- sent the report and lay it on the table. (Agreed.)

EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY. Mr Mylrea : The question which I have given your Excellency notice of, is to ask whether it is your Excellency's intention to introduce legis- lation into the Island dealing with the liability of employers. The Governor : In answer to the question which has been asked by the hon. member, I have

Board of Advertising.—Employers' Liability. 74 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899.

11.3 intention of introducing that measure into this Court. I have suggested already to the hon. member, and he courteously listened to what I said, that the proper place to introduce this Bill was in the popular assembly of this Island. When this question comes forward, I shall be only too pleased to consider it very carefully, and I am perfectly certain the Council will join with me in doing so. But, at the present time, I think it is the right thing for the popular branch of the Legislature of this Island to deal with the ques- tion in the first instance. Mr Myfree : I think I shall have to give your Excellency notice that at the next Court I shall wove that a committee of five members of this Court be appointed to consider the existing state of the law as to the liability of employers, and the expediency, or otherwise, of introducing legislation, and that the committee have power to take evidence. The Governor: I have no possible objection to that, if you wish to do it in that way, instead of the other. I think the other way would be best.

BUILDING GRANT FOR ANDREAS. The Governor : I have received private notice of a question from the hon. member for Ayre. Mr Allen. The question I have asked your Excellency is whether you will be prepared to sanction a vote for a building grant in the school committee district of Andreas. The Governor: In answer to the hon. member, I have only to say this—that the expenses of education at the present time are very large and are increasing greatly. I hope that before long, as I have said before in this Court, that some arrangement will be made with regard to our loans which may be of service to the Island. Of course the time has not yet arrived for it. The money market is very disturbed at present, and I think the best way will be for me to answer in this way—that I cannot promise the grant. At present, I am not in a position to promise any further grants with regard to building until the end of the financial year, when I shall know the position of the finances of the Island better than I do now. It is my desire to promote education. But it is not my business alone to do that, but I have also to protect the finances of the Island. That is the answer I have to give to the hon. member.

Building Grant for Andreas. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 75 DOUGLAS TOWN COUNCIL. Mr Kneen presented a petition of the Douglas Corporation for authority to borrow a sum not exoeeding L1,225 for acquiring the Oddfellows' Arms, North Quay, Douglas. The Attorney-General suggested that he should, first of all, read a report of the Oommittee upon the application, and that afterwards counsel should have an opportunity of addressing the Court. This course was assented to. The Attorney-General then read the following report : - The matters referred to the Committee were the purposes numbered 2 and 3 respectively is the said application. The Committee met at the Court House, Dou- glas, upon Tuesday, the 19th July instant, when the whole of the members of the Committee were present. Mr Kneen appeared as advocate for the Cor- poration, and certain witnesses were called is and heard. The Committee first took into consideration Purpose No. 3, viz., the application to borrow "12,450 for improving the existing buildings, said for the erection of additional buildings, at the Borough Isolation Hospital." The hospital at present consists of the main building and of a small pavilion at the back, situated at a distance of from 70 to 100 yards from the main building, and which was erected some five or six years ago to meet a possible outbreak of smallpox. It appears that nurses do not form a portion of the Permanent staff, but are engaged, from time to time, as occasion requires. According to present arrangements, nurses when so engaged have to reside in the main building, but there is no pro- per provision for accommodating them. On dif- ferent occasions, when the hospital has been crowded, and a large number of nurses required, it has been impossible to provide a bedroom for each nurse, and bedrooms have had to be occu- pied by the nurses night and day for sleeping purposes. The Committee have no hesitation in condemning this condition of affairs. Further beds for patients are also desirable. The present mortuary is badly placed, and the arrangements thereof are quite inadequate, and, in some respects, objectionable. A new scullery is also required, as are certain alterations to the main building. The proposals of the Corporation are: (1) To remove the smallpox pavilion to another part of the grounds of the hospital, and upon the pre- sent site of the same to erect a new pavilion, a building of one storey, which will provide 12 beds for patients. By this means sufficient accom- modation will be freed in the main building for the use of nurses, and, in addition, certain new beds will be secured for patients. (2) To remove the old, and to erect a new mortuary: and (S) To erect a new scullery, and to make the afore- said alterations in the main building. The cost of the works proposed and incidental thereto is estimated at £2,450. The Committee is of opinion that the woske Douglas Town Council. 76 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899.

proposed are necessary, and that the Corporation should be authorized to borrow the said sum of 42,460, as prayed for .

The Committee next took into consideration purpose No. 2—viz., the application to borrow " £1,225 for acquiring the Oddfellows' Arms, North Quay, Douglas, in connection with the scheme for widening North Quay, Douglas, from the Coffee Palace corner to Parade-street." It appears that, for some time past, the Cor- poration (or their predecessors, the Douglas Town Commissioners) have been purchasing properties for the purpose of widening the North Quay and Parade-street. Upon the 8th December, 1897, a resolution was passed by the Corporation order- ing their surveyor to prepare a plan showing the widening of the North Quay from Parade-street to the Coffee Palace corner, so as to make such portion of the quay a minimum width of 60 feet. The plan made in pursuance of this resolution was produced to the Committee. It did not ap- pear that this plan had been formally approved by the Corporation, or, indeed, that there had been any scheme so approved. The Corporation have, however, already, from time to time, purchased 9 properties, at a total cost of £7,318, for the general purpose of widen- ing the part of the quay referred to, and these purchases have been approved by the Tynwald Court. There was no estimate presented to the Com- mittee of the total cost of the whole scheme if carried alit, nor of the number of properties which must necessarily be acquired. The Committee is satisfied that the property now proposed to be purchased must necessarily be acquired should any scheme for widening this portion of the quay be carried out. The Com- mittee is also of opinion that it is very impro- bable that any such scheme as proposed could ever be carried out without compulsory powers of purchase being obtained by the Corporation. The Committee is of opinion that the price agreed upon—viz., £1,225—is a fair and reasonable one, and that the purchase would be an advantageous one. Taking into consideration the fact that no definite scheme has been formally approved by the Corporation, which is, consequently, under no obligation to carry out any scheme; that no scheme has ever been submitted to and approved by this Court; that there is no information as to the probable cost of any such scheme, the Committee submit that, in the circumstances, it is a matter for the consideration of the Court whether leave should be given to borrow the money for the purpose proposed. G. A. RING. D. MAITLAND. The Attorney-General suggested that the Court Should first dispose of the application of the Cor- poration for authority to borrow £2,450 for im- proving the existing Isolation Hospital, and for erecting additional buildings thereat. He moved that leave be given to borrow the sum required. Deemster Gill : I have great pleasure in second- ing that. The improvements which are proposed

Douglas Town Council. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 77 to be made are very great improvements, and improvements which are wanted for the town of Douglas. The motion was carried. The question of widening the North Quay was then resumed. The Attorney-General: Perhaps it would help counsel if I state that it is my intention to MTVe that this matter be referred back to the Corpor- ation to submit a complete scheme, and that this purchase should not "be approved of, except as part of the whole scheme," Mr J. T. Cowell: I am in a peculiar position. I was a member of that Committee, and my name is not appended to the report because I differ from it. I think before Mr Kneen is heard, I had better explain my opposition to the report. The Attorney-General claimed that he was in possession of the Court, and that it was out of order for any other member to speak until coun- sel had been heard. Mr J. T. Cowell thought it was imperative that the Court should be aware of the difference of opinion that existed on the Committee. Deemster Cell said it was not right that those explanations should be given before counsel was heard; otherwise counsel would be commenting on the remarks of members. Mr J. T .Cowell: I am perfectly willing, but I do not know how counsel is to be aware of the difference of opinion until he has heard it stated. The Governor : He has nothing to do with differences of opinion. He must state his case in the ordinary way, and then we will discuss it. Mr J. T. Cowell: I contend that my constitu- ents may be at a loss from the fault of their counsel not being able to put his views, after hearing what difference of opinion exists on the part of the Committee, and counsel ought not to be placed in that position. The Governor : I am afraid I must call the hon. member to order. Deemster Gell : The hon. member ought to have put his remarks at the foot of the Commit- tee's report. Mr J. T. Cowell: I stated that I differ from the report, and I never got a chance to put my name to the report, or to put in a minority re- port. I said that I differed, and the next thing I heard was that the report was in the hands of members. Douglas Town Council. 78 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899.

Mr Kneen : Of course, I labour under a very considerable disadvantage, as the hon. member for North Douglas has stated, but I must submit to the ordinary rule of this Court, that counsel must be heard in these private matters, and must not reply to the arguments of members of the Court. It is not the practice in England with regard to private bills, where matters are dis- cussed by members of the Court and counsel ap- pearing for them. When all the matters are threshed out, they consider the matter, but not without counsel having the opportunity of reply- ing to argunients which he had not anticipated. The Governor : I must contradict the learned counsel. I have been on committees of the House of Commons and House of Lords, and we always heard counsel before hearing members. Mr Kneen : I was present at a Parliamentary inquiry—however, it is not a matter of very great consequence. It is the ruling of the Court, and I must submit. I feel very great difficulty in ad- dressing the Court, in the absence of argument on tlu, other side; but I submit to the Court that there is nothing in our Aot binding the Court to take the course suggested by the majority of the Committee--that is, before we can buy any pro- perty by consent, that we have to come before this Court with a complete scheme showing what we are going to do with this property and the adjoining property, and say at once that we are going to take this property compulsorily and carry out the scheme. Such a suggestion was never made before when there have been pre- vious applications on this matter. It is well known that an important scheme of some sort is in the very near future in that part from the Coffee Palace corner, round by the Royal Hotel, to Bath-place and the Victoria Pier. But there are many grave difficulties in the way. The matter was before the Court several years ago, when it was proposed to make a straight street sunning from the Coffee Palace to Bath-place. It was referred to a Committee of this Court, and, after many days occupied in taking evidence, the Committee reported against that very improve- ment. At the present time there are many differ- ences of opinion as to how this work should be carried out. Many people think that a tramway is a necessary part of any improvement along that quay, and that a very large contribution should be obtained from the Tramway Companies —the Douglas Head Tramway, or the Isle of

Douglas Town Council, TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899 79

Man Electric Tramway, or the Isle of Man Rail way Company, perhaps—for the right to lay down rails on that portion of the quay, and so connect the Victoria Pier with the Tramway or the Railway system, or possibly with that on Douglas Head. Or it may be that the rails should be laid down by the Corporation for the common use of these other bodies under working agreements.. But there are great difficulties in coming to a conclusion on all these points. From time to time owners of property in this district have approached the Corporation and asked them to buy their property, or certain portions have come into the market. The Corporation knowing that it is only a question of a short time as to when that scheme will be carried out, have bought the property, conditionally upon getting the ap. proval of this honourable Court, and that ap- proval has, as I have said, been given on several occasions. Now, it is quite true that where it is sought to take land compulsorily, the Court has to see for what purpose that land is required, but in the absence of some express authority for saying that such is the rule where land is taken by agreement, I deny it. The learned Attorney- General may have some printed matter which I have not been able to obtain. I cannot find that the Local Government Board have laid down any rule mat where land is taken by agreement—with the consent of the owner or occupier and the Corporation—that you require to come forward in such a case and submit a complete scheme. If there is such an authority, I have no doubt it will be produced, but there is certainly nothing I can see in the English Local Government Act, and nothing in our Act which makes it a sine qua non that such a scheme should be produced. If that is the ruling of the Court—that they will only entertain a petition in this way—then this agreement must fall to the ground, and the result will be this—that it will compel us to take all the rest of the property by compulsory purchase. We know how prices jump up when people know that their property is bound to be taken. It will cost the town of Douglas many thousands more if we have to take this land compulsorily. We know very well that very large claims are made by owners and occupiers, and very large costs are incurred at arbitration, and altogether it is the experience of those who acquire land that, if possible, they should always avoid taking land compulsorily. I do submit that there is nothing in the Local Government Act, and

Douglas Town Council. 80 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. nothing in the present petition which should in- duce this Court to say we will not allow the Cor- poration to buy another inoh of property between the Market and Parade-street, unless you come forward with a complete scheme, and unless you show what land you propose to take, and the scheme you propose to carry out, when you have purchased this property. There is no sug- gestion of any lack of good faith on the part of the Corporation. We would not be allowed to apply the property to any other purpose even if we wished it. There being no suggestion that the Corporation are not acting in perfect good faith, in the interests of the ratepayers. I submit that the prayer of the petition should be granted. The Attorney-General : I move that, in the opinion of this Court, the leave asked for should not be granted in the absence of a complete scheme of the whole work proposed. The per. mission is asked for under section 151 of the Local Government Aot, 1886. It is as follows: "The Commissioners may, when authorised by Tynwald Court, purchase or acquire any premises for the purpose of widening, opening, or enlarg- ing, or otherwise improving any street or making any new street." Now, what I ventured to sub- mit when this matter was first before the Court, was that the Court could not reasonably be asked to approve of a scheme piece-meal—that before sanction was given to borrow a sum of money, and make it a charge on the rates by way of loan, the Court Should know what its destination was, should know the whole sohome when it was asked to approve of a part, and that it was un- reasonable to ask his Court from time to time to approve parts of a scheme the whole of which was unknown, and had never been shadowed forth at ail. I shall refer for a moment to the practice in England in analogous oases, but just for a moment bear in mind the position which this occupies before this Court. It is a most ex- ceptional position—I should say it is almost un- paralleled. Leave is asked for to borrow in order to buy a certain property for the purpose of widening the North Quay, but when the matter comes up and is inquired into, it is found that there is no scheme before this Court showing what the proposed widening is to be, what the extent of the work is, what will be the ultimate cost of the work, and what are the properties re- quired to be taken in; that it is not only this Court which is in total darkness on the subject: the Corporation themselves do not know. They Douglas Town Council. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 81 have passed no scheme. I thought that when we had the Corporation befcre the Committee they would have been able to say that, although it was not made public and brought to the know- ledge of this Court, yet still, in their own minds, there was a definite plan which had been deter- mined upon, and that this was part and parcel of the scheme. But there is no such scheme in existence, and although they had bought several properties for the purpose of widening the Quay, still, as to what extert it is to be widened, how it is to be widened, and what precise direction it is to take—those are all things which have not yet been decided upon, and as to which no de- finite information can be given. All I can say is this: that if the sanction of the Court is to be given under euch circumstances, then it is purely illusory; it is no guarantee to the public at large; it is given completely in the dark, and we really do not know what wo are sanctioning. Now, I thought that could not be the practice under similar provisions of the Publio Health Act in England, and I, with the consent of his Excel-. lency, put myself into communication with the permanent secretary of the Local Government Board in London, Sir Hugh Owen, who has held that office with such distinction for years, and has only just resigned, and is a great authority and a great writer upon subjects pertaining to local government, and I put the matter before him fairly, and I have his reply, which confirms the view I originally told you. I would point out the only distinction between the English law and the Isle of Man law on this subject: for merely widening a street in England the local authority may purchase property without the sanction of the Local Government Board, but they cannot make a new street, but, even for widening a street, if they wish to borrow the money, they must go before the Local Government Board in London and obtain the consent of that Board. Now, in the Isle of Man, local bodies are more restricted in their powers, because to purchase for widening or improving a street requires the sanction of this Court in the same way as an ap• plication to buy property for the purpose of mak- ing a new street in England, so that you see the approval of the Clourt here is required in either case. For widening a street, according to the English Act, it is only required if they wish to borrow the money. There is no harm in my reading the letter which I got. I am reminded that if in England the Corporation or local Douglas Town Council, 82 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899.

authority willies to widen a street they may do it, but then they must defray the cost out of cur• rent revenue out of the rates for the year; if they wish to borrow, to create a loan for the purpose, then they are bound to get the sanction of the Local Government Board, even although their purpose is merely the improving or widening of a street. The point is dealt with very clearly and briefly in the letter from Sir Hugh Owen. Mr J. T. Cowell: Are we to have the letter which you sent also? The Attorney-General: Yes, I think we had better have that first. Mr J. T. Cowell: It puts the thing clearly before us. The Attorney-General: Very well; I have no objection. 13, Athol-street, Douglas, 10th October, 1898. Dear Sir,—I am anxious to obtain certain m- formation as to the practice of the Local Gov- ernment Board in sanctioning loans by local authorities, and Lord Henniker, the Governor of the Island, has been good enough to say that he will inform you that I am writing for this pur- pose, and that lie feels sure that you will kindly give me the information required. It is in my capacity as Attorney-General for the Island, and ex-officio member of the Governor's Council, that I require this information. By the Local Government Act, 1886 (Isle of Man), sec. 151, the Corporation of Douglas is empowered, " when authorized by the Tynwald Court, to purchase or acquire any premises for the purpose of widening, opening, enlarging, or otherwise improving any street," and by section 253 of the same Act they are empowered, with the sanction of the Tynwald Court, to borrow any sum of money ' necessary for defraying the cost of the purchase of any lands, or the cost of any permanent work, or of any work which the Court may consider of a permanent character (includ- ing under this expression any work of which the cost ought, in the opinion of the Court, to be spread over a term of years)." The Tynwald Court in such matters is placed much in the same position as the Local Government Board with respect to analogous legislation in England The Corporation of Douglas has applied to the Tynwald Court for its sanction to the purchase of certain premises for the widening of a street. The application by the Corporation merely stated that the premises were required for this pur- pose, but laid no plan or description of the work as a whole, or of the cost thereof, or of what other properties would be required, before the Court. The Corporation, admitted that the exact scheme to be carried out had not been formally decided on. Would you kindly say whether, under such circumstances, the Local Government Board would sanction the loan, or whether the Board would require the whole scheme to be placed before it before giving such sanction? I fancy

Douglas Town Council. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 83 that in England the local authcrity can purchase land for the purpose of widening a street, with- out the sanction of the Local Government Board, but I presume such sanction is necessary for a, loan, and that the case to which I refer is sufficiently analogous to cases which would occur in England to render the practice of the Local Government Board applicable. I shall be exceedingly obliged if you cal furnish me with the information in question.— I remain, yours faithfully, (Signed) G. A. RING. Sir Hugh Owen, Permanent Secretary, Local Government Board, Whitehall, S.W. Local Government Board, Whitehall, S.W., 17th October, 1898. Sir,—I am directed by the Local Government Board to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 10th instant, inquiring as to the Board's practice in dealing with applications for sanction to the purchase of premises for the widening of streets, and I am to state in reply that, by the provisions of section 154 of the Public Health Act, 1875, any urban authority may purchase any premises for the purpose of widening any street. and the sanction of the Board to the purchase is not required. If the authority applied to the Board for sanc- tion to a loan for the purpose of defraying the purchase money, the Board would require the whole scheme to be laid before them, accom- panied by plans, illustrative of the proposals of the local authority, and a detailed statement as to the estimated cost of the scheme. They would also require to be satisfied that the local authority had provisionally arranged for the purchase of the premises proposed to be ac- quired. If the application included a proposal to bor- row money to defray the cost of any works incidental to the widening of the street, the Board would require to be furnished with plans. sections, and detailed estimates of the cost of the works, before sanctioning a loan for the purpose —I am, sir, your obedient servant, ALFRED D. ADRIAN, Assistant Secretary. The Attorney-General, for the Isle of Man. That letter puts beyond question that the prac- tice of the Local Government Board is to require the whole scheme to be placed before it, and not to allow a scheme to come before the Board in detached portions in the way which is now pro- posed, and I would submit to this court that in a matter of such importance as this we should be guided by the practice which prevails with a Government department in a matter of the same description. We cannot be wrong if we do that, and no local governing body in the Isle of Man can complain when the restrictions placed upon them, and the safeguards used with respect to their actions are simply those which are em- ployed and have been in practice for many years in England. Now, with regard to the argument

Douglas Town Council. 84 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899.

which has been urged before us this morning, that acquiring property in other ways is far more expensive and so forth. Surely this is not an argument for flying in the teeth of a statute, It. is a ground for expediency, and it might be urged as a reason for making a different law, but it is certainly no ground for asking us to depart from what has plainly been the practice of the depart- ment in London. Under the construction placed upon this Act, if the Court is not going to inquire into the whole scheme, I am at a loss to see what is the authority of the Court or what the funotim of the Court is. Is it merely to see that the pro- perty is worth the money? If so, that is a matter we might with very great security leave to the discretion and judgment of the local governing body. The higher and more important duty which this Court has to decide is this: to see that the money which is going to be a oharge upon future generations and upon the produce of future rates, to see that the work is of such a character that a loan ought to be allowed in res- pect of it, and I would ask the Court—how is it to form any judgment worth pronouncing upon such a question when the scheme is not before it ; when no ono, from the petitioners upwards, have any real idea. what the scheme will ultimately be? Then, with regard to this report. I was sorry to hear the dissenting member of the Com- mittee say that he had not an opportunity of put- ting his views in print. Of course, a Committee can only report as a whole; I submit there is no such thing as a minority report upon a Conimit- tee. Commissioners have a right to present min- ority reports, and they may give their reasons. Mr J. T. Cowell: I know it is not formally a minority report, but they have had an opportun- ity of expressing their reasons. The Attorney-General: The hon. member had his opportunity as fully as could be desired. The draft report was handed to him, and he marked out the portion which he objected to. We met again after that, and it was discussed between us all, and he refused then to agree with the major- ity, and then, after that, the report was com- pleted and signed by the majority. Be never asked that, before it was handed in, I or any one else should give him an opportunity of putting his reasons into print, he never forwarded them to me as Chairman of the Committee, nor did he ask me to hold over the report until he had done it. From the time of my appointment till now I

Douglas Tos,n Council, TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 85 never heard anything in the shape of complaint as to the hen, member not having had an oppor- tunity of putting his reasons fairly before the Court. I am only saying this in justification of myself. Surely the hon. member does not wish to say that I tried to suppress the expression of his reasons. I hope he will not think that I would be guilty of that If I did, I did so with out intending it, I very muoh regret that it should have happened. Nothing is further from my view than to try and keep down discussion in any form whatever, but I felt it my duty the first time I had control of a matter of this kind to try and advocate the adoption of a sound policy in deal ing with the matter. I beg to move the resolu- tion. Mr Maitland: I beg to second that. Mr J. T. Cowell: I rise to oppose that, and 7 trust that I shall be able to make out a case that, notwithstanding the earnest and eloquent plead- ings of the Attorney-General, may lead this Court to consider its position and come to a con- elusion which will be wise. Personally, I do not care whether I had a chance to sign the report or not, but it was dragged out of me here this morning why I did not issue a minority report, and I said that I had never had a chance. My simple statement in reply to the Attorney- General's view is this: he knew I dissented, and dissented most strongly. I had no idea that the report was going to be signed by the Committee in December, when there was no probability of a Tynwald Court being held for some months, and I know your Excellency, as Chancellor of the Ex- chequer, has an objection to needless expense, and, therefore, I did not submit a separate report after the report was printed. The first intima- tion I had was receiving it as a member of this Court, and I concluded that, in the interests of economy, it would suit my purpose as well to state my objection here rather than by issuing a minority report. The Attorney General: The report was pre- sented by ine at the Court at St. John's in August, and the hon. member was present. Mr J. T. Cowell : I still say that, as a member of a Committee of three, it might have been courteous for the other members of the Com- mittee to have asked me, previous to the issuing of this report, and handing it to the printers, had I any wish on the matter. I am not at all displeased with what has occurred. The Attor-

Douglas Town Council. 86 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899.

ney-General can please himself how he acts. He will always find me ready to work with him, but I am not bound to agree with any man or any member of the Court if I disagree with him, and, therefore, I must have an opportunity of being free and unfettered. The first portion of the report we unanimously agreed upon, and we make a recommendation. What I object to is the second portion of the report, where, afte, hearing the evidence, we make no recommenda- tion at all : it has been left to the Attorney- General this morning, by special pleading, to put his case before the Court, instead of it being put before the Court in the nature of a recommenda- tion from this Committee. What do we say as a Committee—the report is signed by two mem- bers of the Committee—after going into a good deal of what in the opinion of this Court is un- necessary evidence? Your Excellency must be aware that this is not the first occasion upon which we have been called upon to deal with matters of this sort. I hold in my hand a report laid before the Tynwald Court, and ordered to be printed ,n the 3rd December, 1897, not a very long time ago, in which we have an application of exactly a similar character to this. There was a Committee of five on that occasion, and those five gentlemen met, and we considered the ques- tion, and we did what we did not do on this occasion—we visited the property, and took into account its value and the interests at stake. We did not give our opinion until we had visited the property and knew its value, and then what did we state in our report presented on the 3rd December?—" As regards the acquisition of pro- perty on the North Quay, the Committee also beg to report that they have visited the sites and buildings to be purchased, and believe that the Corporation are acting judiciously, not only in a financial, but in a general point of view, in acquiring them." That report is signed by the Lord Bishop ; by our learned and esteemed friend the Vicar-General; by the late Speaker of this House, a man who had an intimate acquaintance with the rules of procedure ; by my friend the hon. member for Ramsey, a man whose know- ledge of this Court goes almost as far back as that of any other member ; and by myself as the fifth member. If this is not conclusive on this question, which has been argued such length to-day, I can show you from the reported debates where this Court has agreed to such votes with-

• Douglas Town Council. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 87 out it being referred to a Committee at all. What has this very important Committee of three to say on this latest aspect of the question? After looking at it, we say : " The Committee next took into consideration purposes No. 2—viz., 'the application to borrow £1,225 for acquiring the Oddfellows' Arms, North Quay, Douglas, in con- nection with the scheme for widening North Quay, Douglas, from the Coffee Palace corner to Parade-street.' " And then we go into a matter which I contend was unnecessary. It is well within the knowledge of the members of the Court that sums of money have been voted from time to time, and, therefore, it is dragging into this report something that is unnecessary, and which nobody but a lawyer would bring in. What is the conclusion we arrive at? We are unani- mous in saying that " the property now proposed to be purchased must necessarily be acquired should any scheme for widening this portion of the quay be carried out. The Committee is also of opinion that it is very improbable that any such scheme as proposed could ever be carried out without compulsory powers of purchase being obtained by the Corporation." It has been said, over and over again, in this Court that the Douglas Corporation do not seek to carry out this scheme without first putting a full plan of the scheme before the Court, and I shall show you why it was unnecessary to do that at present. We go on further, and say : "The Committee is of opinion that the price agreed upon—viz., £1,225—is a fair and reasonable one, and that the purchase would he an advatageous one." What more does this Court want? You have it as tin opinion of those who have taken evidence on the matter, and two of them have put their names to it, though I refused to do so because the report went further, and says: " Taking into consider- ation the fact that no definite scheme has been formally approved by the Corporation, which is consequently under no obligation to carry out any scheme; that no scheme has ever been submitted to and approved by this Court; that there is no information as to the probable cost of any such scheme, the Committee submit that, in the circumstances, it is a matter for the consider. ation of the Court whether leave should be given to borrow the money for the purpose proposed." I can only regret that this addition has been made to this report, and I think the proceedings in this Court this morning have shown that my view would have been a better one. We have

Douglas Town Council 88 TYNWALD 6DUKT, January 24, 1899.

now had a legal case put before this Court, and the advocate for my constituents has been de barred through the ruling of this Court from answering it, and I say he is the only person who could have answered it. I make bold to say that the Attorney-General has failed utterly to reply to the challenge of the learned advocate on behalf of the Corporation; that he has failed to show any authority for his statement. He has certainly brought forward what is the practice in England. I admit that ; but I am only a layman, and not qualified to discuss that matter, and, therefore, I think we have acted rather unfairly in closing the mouth of the advocate for the persons concerned in this matter, who are now, unhappily, unless the Court wills it, shut out from answering that point of the argument. But I say that the challenge thrown out by the learned advocate has net been answered in prov- ing to us that there are authorities in support of his statement. But this is a very little matter, and it is a question that there should be no heat brought into. This Court has always been anx- ious to do justice to the town of Douglas, and I say that the Attorney-General has 'utterly failed— The Governor : May I ask who was the advo cote shut out? I do not understand. Mr J. T. Cowell : I am showing that by the decision of the Court in taking the statement of the learned advocate before wo had heard the case before the Court, you have debarred the advocate from answering the legal argument which has been brought forward by the Attorney- General in his speech. I am not arguing that you were wrong, but I am arguing that my plan would have been the best one notwithstanding. I was saying to the Court that this matter is very small one apparently, but it is a very serious one, and one in which, I think, the Court will be very slow to depart from their usual procedure, unless a very strong case has been made out, and I would contend that the case made out by the Attorney-General for this Court to depart from its usual mode of dealing with it, has been exceedingly slight, and not worthy Df the consideration which he asks for it. This scheme might be one that would place the country in a very serious position. But what is the scheme? The only thing my friend asks for is that we should have a definite plan of the new street improvement leading from one part of the town to another within which these properties

Douglas Town Council. TYNWALD COURT, January 24., 1899. 80 are being taken. Now, I contend that the ques- tion which has been asked by the Attorney- General has been answered. He argues we should know where this is leading to. Everyone knows that the destination is a new street which will probably commence somewhere about the Victoria Pier, and land in the Market Place or the Railway Station. It is nothing more serious than that, and this Court has repeatedly on similar evidence before it granted the request. And the scheme has been shadowed forth, the scheme is before the country, and was before the Committee, but all the details were not before the Committee. We see that the plan made in pursuance of a resolution of the Douglas Cor- poration was produced to the Committee. It did not appear that this plan had been formally approved by the Corporation, or that any scheme had been approved. There is no approved scheme, but there is a scheme which the Douglas Corporation are working for, and which will ultimately, when it is decided what are the best details, be carried out. The plan was put before us, and the resolution passed by the Corporation. The A ttorn,:y-General : No resolution approv- ing of the scheme! We were told the reverse that they did not bind themselves to any scheme. Mr Maitland : I would draw attention to the fact that th..?, learned counsel said so this morn- ing. He admitted there were differences of opinion. The Attorney-General : There is no scheme approved of at all. Mr J. 1'. Cowell: What is the plan prepared for? The Attorney-General: You might prepare a dozen plans: that is the fact. Mr J. T. Cowell: But, your Excellency, it shows clearly to any impartial person, that if a plan is prepared they have some scheme in mind. The Douglas Corporation have no officials who can prepare plans for schemes in the moon. The schemes they prepare plans for are under con- sideration and may some time come off. To my mind these trivialities are of no moment what- ever. In disoharging my duty to my consti- tuents I am bound to put it to members of this Court whether these technical questions are of such moment to the Court? If so, where hare our legal advisers been in the past? They have allowed us to pass resolutions of this kind, which Douglas Town Council. 00 'I'YNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899.

have been prudent, and in the best interests of the town of Douglas. The Attorney-General has said that the position is exceptional—that it is almost unparalleled. These are very strong words to use. The question has been before us on former occasions and we have answered it, and no harm has re- sulted to Douglas or to the Island, or to this Ccurt. Therefore, I ask this Court what harm will he done to anyone if we do to-day what we have clone previously. Again, this is a question which can only affect the people of Douglas. If there is any loss financially, it is not the country or the revenue that will have to bear it, but the people of Douglas, who are represented by the Corporation. Will you to-day put a slight on the representatives of the people, and are you going to throw this petition out because two members of this Court say this scheme ought not to go further, and that we ought not to grant any money for this purpose until you have the scheme before the Court. It is a very serious matter for the town of Douglas. These arbitrations may, to some minds, appear as a flea-bite, but to the great majority of the people of Douglas they are not approved of, they have been very costly pro- ceedings indeed; and if the representatives of the people have an opportunity of buying by private treaty in the manner they have done, if they have convinced a Committee of five members of the Court in 1897 and a Committee of three in 1898 that their proposals are reasonable, it would he improper for the Court now to refuse this petition. Even the present Committee admit that the price is a fair and reasonable one. Then why should this Court stand between the repre- sentatives of the people and persons interested in the matter, who are trying to make a fair and right bargain? Why should we say that we will not give an opportunity to Douglas to curry out an improvement in the cheapest way, and say to them—"you must present a full scheme." Does it not commend itself to members that if a full scheme is put before the Tynwald Court, in a great many cases the price of property would go up very considerably? That is a result which the Town Council have been trying to avoid; they have been trying to oonserve the best interests of the ratepayers by doing nothing that would jeo- pardise their interests. I feel very strongly on this question and I move, as an amendment, that the prayer of this petition of the Corpora-

Douglas Town Council. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 01 tion of Douglas be granted on this occasion, as it has been granted on so many former occasions. Mr Mylrea formally seconded this amendment. The Lord Bishop: Reference has been made to the action of the Committee in the month of December, 1897, of which I had the honour of being Chairman. Having listened to the learned Attorney-General, and likewise to the hon. mem- ber for North Douglas, who has just so ably ad- dressed us, I confess there are two questions to which I should like to have a definite answer before I decide how to vote. In the first place, I wish to know whether leave has been given by this Court on any occasion for the purchase of property for the furtherance of the general end which, we are told the Corporation of Douglas has in view. There has been a great deal of diffi- culty in my mind in deciding between the two con- tradictory statements which have been laid be- fore the Court. On the one hand, the Attorney- General tells us that there is no definite formal scheme; on the other hand, the hon. member for Ncrth Douglas tells us that there is a scheme which, if not formulated, is tolerably clear in the minds of the Douglas Corporation. My question is this. Has this Court allowed any property to be bought in Douglas for this general, if un- formulated, end? If we have allowed it, I do not see why we should step in now, and go back. We cannot with consistency go back on what we have done in the past, and refuse to allow any more property to be bought. The second ques- tion I wish to ask has reference to what has been said by the Attorney-General. He drew a paral- lel between what has taken place in England, where the local authority asks leave to purchase property, and what has taken place before this Court to-day. To a certain extent I see there is a parallel, but I am not certain that the parallel can be followed out closely. I want to know— where a local body in England applies to a Local Government Authority for powers such as are in question here—whether that is done publicly in every ease? I could understand that they might appeal to the authority privately, and set forth a plan, and in such a case the price of the property to be ac- quired would not be raised. But here it is quite evident that if a detailed plan of all that is in the minds of the Corporation is presented to this Court, and then published at large, it will have the effect of enhancing the oost of the

Douglas Town Council. 02 TYNWALD COURT, January N, 1899. scheme, and I quite follow the learned counsel when he says that would oonsiderably raise the price of the property.'Unless the Attorney- General can give us the assurance that in every case where they apply to the local authority there is publicity, I do not think that a parallel can fairly be drawn. I should like to have an answer to those two questions before I say which way I shall vote. We have heard two admirable speeches, the case has been laid before us clearly on either side; and I wish, by eliciting this in- formation, to know in what direction I shall give my vote. Mr J. R. Cowell: I think that the Court will feel that it is indebted to his Lordship for throwing a very strong and clear light upon this subject. The Lord Bishop, I think, may be con- gratulated upon having a very well developed business mind, and he is able to see through a lot of entanglement, and to state the real position in a very few words as a prompt experienoed business man would do; and I think he has assisted in bringing this question nearer to a satisfactory settlement. Now that is a most im- portant point—with regard to the publicity or otherwise of the application to the Local Govern- ment Board in England. So far as I understand it, I believe there is no such publicity. The Local Government Board in England is hardly a Board at all; it really is a department. There is no body or committee as there is here, but there is a department of officials presided over by a gentleman who is well known, and he has under him a number of permanent officials. Deemster Gell : But there is a Board constitu- ted by Act of Parliament. Mr J. R. Cowell: I should like to know who the members of the Local Government Board are. I have been told by those in authority that it is a fiction, and that the Local Government Board, as we understand the term, does not exist. I be- lieve the Bishop is correct in saying that the application is made to a department, and that that department is concerned to inquire whether the application is in proper form, whether it is according to law, according to the power which the local authority have a right to exercise; and if there is no objection on those grounds, ap- proval is given in a formal way. But, I venture to believe—and I submit it to the Attorney- General—that it is not a parallel to the case in the Isle of Man. Here the matter is openly ex-

Douglas Town Council. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 93 posed in the Court in the first instance ; it is then laid before a committee in all its details ; the Committee sit in public, and take evidence which is open to the world ; and it is perfectly manifest that grave injustice and loss might be occasioned to the authority making the applica- tion by exposing the whole of its policy and open- up the details of the scheme which it wishes to carry out. I think when the Bishop is answered —as I presume he will be answered by the Attor- ney-General--we shall find that the answer will explain to the Court that the two cases are by no means on a parallel. But I want to remind the Court that—as his Lordship has said—the Court is to-day in a very peculiar position, and must be careful that it does not make itself ridi- culous before the world, because there is no question that the Court to-day is only asked to follow a practice which has been prevalent for years; repeatedly a similar application to this Court has been made in connection with this proposed improvement in Douglas, and the Court has approved of the purchase without demur. My hon. friend has stated—and his Lordship, having been on one committee together with myself and some others, will remember—that the matter passed as good business, as a scheme which recommended itself to the judgment of the Court. So, unless there is some grave, well- grounded legal reason why you should not act as we have acted before, I fail to see why the Court should adopt a different policy, without notice with regard to the local authority of Dou- glas. I presume this Court is not here to raise technical objections to public proceedings. The Attorney-General spoke exceedingly well this morning, and made his case as clear as light. He said all that a lawyer could say on this subject. He put it with all the precision and technicality of phraseology that a lawyer would put a case if he were before a body of judges—in the best possible language and the clearest manner. But I want to submit that his stand-point is not the stand-point of the Tynwald Court. There must always be a difference between the legal view and the view that the Legislature takes. I am speak- ing now to members of a legislature. While some- thing might be said about the legal view of the matter, what we ought to be chiefly concerned about is—are we doing justice to the parties—are we proposing anything that will be a wrong to anyone—are we going to commit any injury to anyone Douglas Town Council, 94 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. with regard to any interest?—and I hold and argue that unless there is something in the pro- posal contrary to law, what we have to consider next is—is this good business? Is it a course which wise business men of the world would fol- low" Does it contain any element of danger to the parties? No one has attempted to show that anyone is materially injured in pocket or person by the proposal. But we all know that there are reasons why this should be done with the object of saving the ratepayers of Douglas a very considerable sum of money. Therefore, I ask this Court, notwithstanding what has been said by the legal gentlemen who sit around your Excellency, to regard the application as one made by business men to business men; to set aside the bare technical objections which the Attorney-General has made to-day. Let us deal with the matter as our common sense suggests, especially as we remember that no evil is done by anyone if we grant the application. With re- gard to the argument of the Attorney-General, I should like to say that, while it is a very clever and attractive one in its appearance, it seems io contain several fallacies and weaknesses. In the first place, I ask this question—why should we follow the exact procedure of the Local Govern- ment Board in England, supposing that two cases were parallel? I think we have the very best reasons why we should not follow that practice. In England the local authority has to go before that department and make certain applications. Now, who constitutes that department ? The President and certain fixed officials, who go through the papers and plans. They are totally ignorant of the cir- cumstances of the locality, unless they are brought before them in a formal way. Be- yond the documents and evidence submitted to them they know nothing. The Local Govern- ment Board or department, sitting in Whitehall —or wherever they do sit—know nothing what- ever about the applications that come before them from Wales and the North of England, or from the Midland Counties—any more than if they never heard of the places at all. What is the case in the Isle of Man? We rejoice in the little system of Home Rule that we have here, and one of the great features which seems to me to be its rttraotion and strength is this—that in this little Island, with the representation which we have from all parts, we are able in this Court to bring our own knowledge with respect to

Douglas Town Council. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 95 localities to bear on the subject under notice and add very materially to the knowledge of the sub- ject, and thus be able to take a sound and judi- cious part in the treatment of the question. We are not confined to the formal examination of the business, and often do I hear my friends remark on what their constituents say, and what the neighbourhood says on particular questions that come up. We are infinitely stronger as legislators than even members of the House of Commons are. A member of the House of Commons only sees his constituents perhaps once in twelve months, but we are in touch with our constituents, we know what the man in the street says, we know the feeling of the ratepayers, the sentiment of the public. We can deal with this question on simple business lines, and not be blocked by purely technical procedure. For instance, here is an application before us, with regard to this town. Where are the ratepayers of Douglas? Where are the people who are going to pay the money? They do not object. If it had been thought that the lines which the Town Council had been following for some time was an im- proper line of proceeding, or if any wrong was going to be done, surely the ratepayers of Dou- glas would have been here. I argue that, as one of the reasons why the local authority is to come to this Court, not that the Court should, as a kind of superior authority, sit in the judgment seat above the local authority ; but I take it the chief safeguard which exists in the case of this Court having the final settlement or judgment upon a matter of this kind is that the application to be made to this Court is a public one. The matter is often referred to a Committee, and the ratepayers appear before that Committee and give evidence and oppose, if they think fit. And in this Court there is the safeguard that public in- terests shall be served, and that no injustice shall be done to any man or any section of the public. But our local authorities are really the rate- payers. They represent every ratepayer in this town. There are here making an application, and I have a right to argue that this proceeding is approved of by the town of Douglas ; and un- less some one comes here to oppose, and chow good grounds why the prayer of the petition should not be granted, the Court must feel itself under very serious obligations indeed, if it per- sists in refusing to grant the expression of the feeling and listen to the voice of the ratepayers of Douglas in an application of this nature, unless

Douglas Town Council. 96 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. it is shown that some great mistake is going to be made, or something to be done contrary to law or calculated to be a source of misohief to the ratepayers of the town. Having endeavoured to show that there is a great differ- ence between the state of things in England and in this country, I think the Court will follow the lead of the representative of Douglas who has spoken to-day, in doing as we have done in the past, with our eyes open under the advice of the Attorney-General, under the keen observation and lynx eye of the members of the Council. As we have in the past granted applications for similar purposes and the same scheme, the Court will be slow to go back on its own action and stultify itself by declining to do that which seems to be reasonable and proper and best as good business, by the men who are authorised to act for the ratepayers of this town. Mr Goldsmith: A question has been asked by the Lord Bishop, which really goes to the root of this whole matter, and I W0111,1 ask that the Town Clerk's evidence might be taken with re- ference to previous purchases for town improve- ments. The Governor ruled this out of order. Mr Goldsmith: Then I am prepared to name a few. (Hear, hear.) One is Bath Place, which meant an expenditure of 26,000; another is the Cattle Market, which meant an expenditure of £3,000; and a third is Cretney's property in Hanover-street-21,970. Now, these properties have all been purchased for town improvements in recent years, with the sanction of the Court. Why should the Court go back now and stultify these previous amounts being sanctioned, and say they won't grant leave in this case? It is a serious matter for the Corporation. They are getting this property on fair and reasonable terms. It is admitted by the Attorney-General and the hon. member for Middle that the price is a fair and reasonable one. Then why not act upon it? I think that is the prope^ course to take. The Lord Bishop: I think the hon. member has misunderstood my question. I did not ask whether this Court in the past had sanctioned the purchase of property for any purpose, but fov the particular purpose which we are asked this morning to support, in short for the re-further- ance of this scheme. If so, and we refuse this Douglas Town Cortina, TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 97 application, we render almost useless what we have done before. Mr Goldsmith : Property has been purchased for this particular scheme Mr Kneen : I think there are about seven properties purchased. There are Hogg's pro- perty, the Ellan Vannin Arms, Lancashire House, Mr Fleming's property—there are certainly four or five properties in this particular district. The Lord Bishop : For this general object? Mr Kneen : Certainly. Mr J. T. Cowell : If the Lord Bishop will only read the report which we signed on a former occasion, he will see that the property refers to this North Quay scheme the same as this. The Lord Bishop : I am quite satisfied. Deemster Gill: I think we are indebted to the Attorney-General for having raised this question, which is a technical matter, and I think that, although the Court has departed from the rule which the Attorney General thinks ought to be adopted, in every one of these cases, still the explanation which has been given to-day may- work for good in the future. I thick this matter may he allowed to pass, under the peeuliar cir- cumstances which surround it. This matter is not a large one—only £1,200—and it is for the Purchase of a property for widening a street. Now, if we take the practice which is said to have existed in England, we find that, for pur- poses of that kind, the local authority may purchase property if it pays for it out of funds in hand ; but if it has to be paid for out of moneys to be borrowed, then certain consents are required, and the authority of the Local Govern- ment Board must be obtained. The Attorney-General : Under the 151st section, however they buy, whether out of current rates or loan, they must obtain the sanction of the Court to purchase. Deemster Gill : Here we do not follow —nor can we fol'ow—the course in Eng- land; because in England the local authority have power to pay out of funds in hand, and need not come for sanction unless it is for bor- rowing. The Attorney-General puts it very strongly that the safeguard is there for the sake of posterity—the local board might spend its own moneys Lial have the living ratepayers to

Douglas Town Council. 98 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899.

call them to order ; whereas, if they borrow, .posterity must be protected, and sanction must be got. But, in this case, the matter is, as I say, a very small one. It is said there is no scheme before the Court. Of course, I do not know what evidence was before the Committee, but I see the evidence which is laid by the Com- mittee before this Court, and it appears to me a very simple matter indeed. They tell us that the improvement which is to be made is the widen- ing of the quay to a certain extent, giving 60 feet width, over an area extending from the Coffee Palace corner to Parade-street. Indeed, all of us who ale acquainted with Douglas know that short distance from point to point, and the scheme is to widen that street to sixty feet. Well, now, wthat more do we want? What more could we get if this matter was sew. hack again to the Town Council? They would, perhaps, show us a plan, but what more informa- tion would that give us? But then it is said that the scheme is not sanctioned by the local authorities. Well, I do not know what kind of sanction we must expect. Here we find, at any rate, that the Town Council are presenting the:: petition to this Court. It is their petition lyin; before us—the very scheme which now is to be sent back. The Attorney-General : They have not done that. They refused to bind themselves to the scheme. They merely said they had asked their Surveyor to prepare a scheme to submit to they,. Deemster Gill : They tell us what they want to do, and they want the authority of this Court for carrying that scheme into execution. If this money is devoted to any purpose foreign to that scheme, this Court will know what to do. The Attorney-General: They did not ask for the money for any scheme. They said they would not state what the scheme was. The only purpose they state is for widening the quay. They say they won't commit themselves to any scheme. Mr Kneen : I think the Attorney-General has hardly put it fairly to the Court when he says we refuse to bind ourselves to any scheme. We had not passed a formal resolution passing any scheme. Deemster Gill. It is very difficult to get on amidst these interrupi ions. (Laughter.) My con- tention is that there is sufficient shown on the

Douglas Town Council. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 99 face of this report to acquaint the mind of the Court as to what, in a general way, this scheme is. I quite agree with the learned Attorney-General that greater care should be observed in these matters, that more information should be given, and that the Court, perhaps, in the past has gone too far_ in taking matters for granted. On the other hand, it is said we have to deal with -t body that is elected by the ratepayers, and as a Legislature we have here representatives of Dou- glas, as well as of the other parts of the Island. But, in this case, I think, it is unnecessary to send rhe matter back again to the Committee and delay it. Because what do we find? His Lordship has asked has this scheme been already recognised by the Court. It has, and so it ap- pears on the face of the report. We find that nine properties have been purchased, at a tot :1 cost of £7,318, for the general purpose of widen- ing that part of the quay—for carrying out this general scheme. That money could not have been borrowed without the sanction of this Court. I ask, having gone that far, will the Court stop at this trifling amount of £1,200, and say the whole thing must be reopened, plans must be made, and so on? I think, looking at this as an exceptional ease—because I give no opinion as to what ought to be done in the future, or what ought to have been done in the past—in this particular case, I think, the Court should be satisfied with the case before it, and grant the petition. Mr Mylroa : The learned Deemster who has last spoken has put an obligation on me, which I think all of us might fairly adopt without any derogation to the strong views he may originally have held as to the particular oourso to be adopted. There is no question whatever that the point raised by the Attorney-General is a very important and interesting one for future proce- dure, and which it might be wise for the Court at a future time to take into consideration, with a view to making a standing order, or regulating its procedure so as to secure what is expedient. But I think this is hardly the case and hardly the position upon which to strike. I think there are circumstances in the present case which should, at all events, show the Court that it would be wise at the present time to grant this application, and take steps in future as may be advisable to see that the matter is placed on a proper footing.

Douglas Town Cour,cil. 100 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899.

The Attorney-General: Will your Excellency allow me to say, in the first instance, that I shall not vote. The Governor (interrupting): Do not you think you had better let the hon. member finish? The Attorney-General! I hesitated myself whether I would not, under protest, vote for it this time, on the clear understanding that a different procedure was adopted afterwards. I do not wish the Town Council to be caught in a trap, seeing that it has been approved before. It that will meet the view of the Court generally; if the petition is granted on the understanding that before sanctioning any further scheme-- The Governor! I think you had better let the hon. member go on. Mr Mylrea: I think the Attorney-General is coming to a reasonable view, though he has hardly come the whole way yet. I think if such a course was, adopted we could not adopt it on the present occasion by binding ourselves to deal in future, with any other ease in a particular way. My own point is this. There is no statu• tory application in this matter. it. is merely a matter of the procedure of the Local Government Board in England, which requires ocr;ain things to ba done before a scheme is sanctioned. We in this Court occupy the position of the Local Government Board. Therefore, we ought to have had, long before this, standing orders which should have definitely dealt, with such a case as this. My suggestion is that in the present case this should be allowed to pass; that we should not lay down a hard and fast line to-day; but that we ought to deliberately adopt whatever standing orders the Court may see fit to deal with such business as it arises. Mr J. T. Cowell: I would not for a moment accept the compromise which the Attorney- 'Ieneral suggests. The Attorney-General: I am not suggesting any now. Demeter Gell: I certainly do not agree with the arguments which have been made use of by the hon. member for North Douglas. The line of his argument was that this Court has really nothing to do with the matter. (Mr Cowell: Oh no.) We must accept what is put before us, and the hon. member for Ramsey took very much the same line. I have heard him take a very differ- ent line in another Case. But I do not want to

Douglas Town Council. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 101 lay clown any line. This Court must deal with cases as they come before it. I have always thought that this Court was not the best place to come to with all these questions as to raising money and loans. If the Local 'Government Board had to deal with them I think it would meet the case far better. I do not think this Court is the best tribunal for these matters, and supposing the matter were to come before the Court of Chancery, they would not be dealt with in this way. I must protest, however, against the notion that this Court has not the power, by its own rules and decisions, to control the ex- penditure of money or the borrowing of money. They have a right to review and consider, and decide the whole circumstances of a matter if they choose to do so. It has been pointed out that we have already sanctioned the borrowing of £7,318 on account of this scheme, and I am not going to vote against this sum of money to-day. But just look at the consequences. We have no certainty that the money will ever be spent at all on this work. I do not say that the Town Council will ever spend the money on any other purpose, but the ratepayers are called on to pro- vide this money, which may be lying idle for many years without any advantage to them. I do not think that it is the intention of the Local Government Act that the Town Council should become land owners in the town for an inde- finite length of time, until there is an opportun- ity of buying the rest of the property required. We are told that this is required for the purpose of widening the Quay, but we do not know that the Corporation will do it, and the Town Council have not made up their minds about it. In the meantime we are asked to vote this on the chance of their doing it. The Attorney-General : I shall occupy a very short space of the time of the Court in reply. This motion is evidently to be lost, but I think I have served my purpose by having called the attention of the Conit to the irregularity of the proceedings in reference to the purchase of the property. I think I may well rest satisfied in having elicited from his Honour Deemster Gill remarks that "more care must be exercised in the future," and that "the Court has gone too far in the past." The arguments which I ad- vanced, and the strongest one of all is not one of a technical obartteter at all. It is this, and it does not depend on the practice in England : the Corporation have not yet made up their mind

Douglas Town Council. 102 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. what the purchase of the property is for, and, except as regards the widening of the Quay, sanctions have rot been given for the purchase of property without it being shown to the Court that the Corporation had made up their mind what the property was to be used for. In con- nection with the purchases referred to by the hon. member for South Douglas, the property at the corner of Drumgold-street and Strand-street was purchased for a definite widening of the street, and the scheme was submitted to this Court, and so in other cases, and this, I take it, is almost the only instance in which properties have been bought without the Corporation itself having decided what line the proposal is to take. Mr Goldsmith: I rise to order. The purchase of the Cattle Market was not for the widening of the street. The Attorney-General: It only appears that the same loose kind of practice has prevailed in re- gard to other matters besides this. Now, that does not depend upon whether or not the prac- tice here ought to be assimilated to the practice of the Local Government Board in England, but it is a matter of substance whether or not we can be called upon to sanction a scheme which had not been formulated in the brain of the Cor- poration itself. I protest a.gaint it, and if it is done here it will be found we are perfectly unique in it, and that there is no position outside the Island analogous to it. It appears that something like £7,000 has been expended in the purchase of properties—oyer nine properties have been pur- chased for the indefiMte purpose of widening the North Quay, and although that has been going on for many years, there is no attempt made to formulate a scheme. It will be the same ten years hence, if they come here with a proposal to purchase any property, and there is no power to compel them to do it, because this Court sanc- tioned it without a scheme before them. It is not part and parcel of any improvements, and there is no means in law of calling upon the Cor- poration to discharge their duty Mr J. R. Cowell: The ratepayers may call upon hem. The Attorney-General: Who are the ratepayers? Mr J. T. Cowell: The people who have to pay. (La ghter.) The Attorney-General: It is the future gene- ration who have to pay in this case: we can quite understand that the present ratepayers do

Douglas Town Council. TYNWALD COURT, January 24-, 1899. 103 not think anything of it. I submit that the facts before the Court only show the evil of wrong-doing—(laughter)—and that it leads to a succession of wrong-doings. It is argued here to- day briefly that, because the Court has done what is wrong in the past, it ought to go on per- petuating the wrong. That is not an argument which commends itself to my mind, and I think I have the support at any rate of the legal mem- bers of the Court in my argument, that this was not contemplated by the Act, and, whatever may be the result, to my mind this is a leave which ought not to be given until a proper and ade- quate scheme has been placed before the Court upon which the Court can formulate its judgment. The amendment was carried without a division, Mr Clucas dissenting.

BY-LAWS AS TO NEW BUILDINGS. The Governor : There is the matter of the peti- t:on for the approval of the Court to certain by- laws with regard to buildings. Mr Kneen : I would ask that that stand over until after the luncheon adjournment, and also the two other petitions. The petition for the sale of land to Mr Alexander Gill will not come on tc-day, as notices will have to be given to the publi

LAXEY AND ONCEIAN VILLAGE DISTRICTS. APPLICATION OF BY-LAWS. Mr Kneen appeared for the Laxey Village Com- missioners to have certain of the provisions of part 4 of the Local Government Acts, 1886 to 1897, made applicable to the village district of Laxey. He said : I would ask that the matter be referred to a committee of three members of the Court to consider the application, I have also received instructions from i he village district of Onchan, and with the leave of the Court I will present the petition formally on their behalf, asking for the same powers, and I would ask that both petitions he referred to the same committee. Mr F. G. Callow : If I am in order, your Ex cellency, I would move that a committee of three be appointed. Mr Goldsmith seconded the motion. Mr Chivas : I would suggest: that if these mat tern of the by-laws are to come on, that they

By-Laws as to New Beildings.—L,xev and Onchan Village Districts. 104 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. should be referred to the same committee, and that a committee of five members be appointed. Mr Kneen: In that case we will require a com- mittee of five, and I was not intending to ask same by-laws to be made applicable to each? Deemster Gell: Are they asking for exactly the same by laws to be made applicable to each? Mr Kneen : Exactly the same. The motion was carried. Mr Kneen: Might I suggest, your Excellency, that it might be desirable that members who are on the Local Government Board should be ap- pointed on the committee? Mr Goldsmith: I beg to nominate the hon. member for Middle, Mr Maitland. Mr J. R. Kerruish : I second that. Mr Maitland : Mr Callow resides in the dis- trict of Onchatt and would be much more familiar with the matters referred to when the petition comes before them. I beg to propose Mr Callow. Mr Allen: I second that. Mr Clucas : I propose that Mr Goldsmith be a member of the Committee. Mr Maitland : I second that. The Speaker There are three members before the House for election. Mr Maitland : I will withdraw, with the con- sent of my proposer and seconder. Mr Goldsmith: I wish to withdraw. The Speaker : There is no cciirse open for me but to ask hon. members to ballot for the three. Mr Maitland was elected. The Governor : The Council have selected his Honour Deemster Gell, the Keys Mr Maitland, and the Speaker and myself have selected Mr Kerruish to fill the other position. The Court adjourned for luncheon.

DOUGLAS IMPROVEMENTS. On resuming, Mr Kneen, appearing for the Douglas Corpor- ation, said : On the agenda paper, there is a petition for the u,pproyal of amended by-laws re- lating to new buildings. Those were approved of some time since, and have since been signed, so that matter falls. The next petition is for ap- proval of sale of certain land on the North Quay, Douglas, to Alexander Gill. I do not propose to go on with that to-day. I think it will probably

Douglas Imp ovemeht 6. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 105

require notice on three successive Saturdays. The next petition on the agenda is for approval of the purchase of certain land at the corner of Victoria streetand John-street, Douglas, from S. K. Broadbent and Co., for the price of £180. I produce the conveyance and plan attached, showing the property proposed to be acquired. It is a small portion-20 yards in area—of what is known as Goole's property, at the corner of Vic- toria-street or Ridgeway-street, and immediately opposite the new municipal buildings. The re- sult will be that John-street will be widened to 40 feet at its junction with Ridgeway-street. The price is £9 lOs per yard, and it has been a pur- chase by agreement. We consider that, under the circumstances, it is a judicious purchase. Alfred Ernest Prescott, sworn, said I am bcrough surveyor of Douglas. I know the land proposed to be acquired at the junction of John- street ani Victoria-street. It contains about 20 square yards of land, and the price is £280. Mr Kneen: I believe it enables you to con- siderably widen the entrance to North John- street? Witness: Yes. It widens John-street con- siderably, and adds a piece to Ridgeway-street. I think the price is very reasonable indeed. Mr Kneen : The plan shows the portion re- quired, and the whole of it will be added to the thoroughfare. It really straightens the line of building on the west side ef Ridgeway-street, and gets rid of a corner as well. The Lord Bishop moved that the prayer of the Petition be granted. Mr Maitland seconded.—Carried.

IMPROVEMENTS AT PORT ERIN. Mr Kneen submitted a petition of the Port Erin Commissioners for authority to borrow, on the security of the district fund of Port Erin, a sum of money not exceeding £650 for 'the following ptrposes, viz., £450 to complete the ciutfall sewer ; £325 to construct a sea wail and promenade, 200 yards in length, to protect road- way od south side of Port Erin bay.—Counsel lead the petition, which showed that at an ad- journed Tynwald Court on 3rd December, 1297, petitioners were authorised to borrcw a sum not exceeding £2,200 for carrying out main sewerage works in Port Kin, for a term of 45 years, at a rate of interest not exceeding £3 lOs per cent. per annum. In consequence of extra rock cut-

Improvements at Port Erin. 106 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899.

ting that was required, and other causes, an additional sum of L-I-50 vas required to complete the work. It was also proposed to construct a sea -call, about 200 yards in length, on he shore sale of the roadway on the south side of Port Erin, to protect the roadway and for the impro,e- ment of the district, at a cost of £325. I have Mr Kay, engineer, at the bar of the Court. I do not know whether the proposal will be re- ferred to a Committee. 1 think the former Com- mittee consisted of his Honour Deemster Mr Goldsmith, and Mr Clucas. Mr Clucas moved that the matter of the peti- tion be referred to a committee to consider and report to the Court. Mr Quine thought au opportunity should be given to the fishermen, who would be affected by the proposed works, to express an opinion with regard to them. The Receiver-General said the Port Erin Com- missioners had applied to the Harbour Commis- sioners for leave to do this work, as a portion of t he sea wall would rest en ground belonging to the latter. They said that, until they saw the plan, they could not give a ixomise in any way. Since that they had received a petition from a large number of boatowners requesting them not to give permission for the wall to be made. Mr Kneen: We will make a slip to provide for the wants of the fishermen, but we are quite will- ing that (he matter should go to a committee. The motion was agreed to, and the Committee was appointed to consist of Deemster Gill, Mr Clucas, and Mr James Mylchreest. On the motion of Mr Clucas, seconded by Mr Qualtrough, it was agreed that the Committee have power to take evidence.

NEW BY-LAWS. The following items appeared next on the agenda— Peel Town Commissioners—Petition for ap- proval of new by-laws. Castlekown Town Commissioners—Petition for approval of new by-laws. Port Erin Commissioners—Petition for ap- proval of new by-laws. Port St. Mary Commissioners—Petition for ap- proval of new by-laws. Mr Kneen: I appear in all the four petitions, which are practically identical, except for some

New By-Laws. 'TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 107 odd by-laws which refer to one particular place I will ask that these four petitions be referred to one committee. Mr Clague: I beg to move that the petitions be referred to a committee of five, with power to take evidence, and report to this Court. Mr Qualtrough seconded the motion, and it was agreed to. The Committee was elected as follows :—Deem- ster Sir James Gell, and Messrs Clague, Qual- trough, Mylrea, and Callow.

RUMEN 13151U.Al. GROUND. Mr Fleming presented the petition of the vicar and wardens of Rushen for power to pur- chase part of the globe lands of the parish of Rushen—the approval of the Court being neces- sary under the Glebe Lands Act of 1893. The ground in question was required for additional burial ground for the parish. The glebe lands adjoined the pre sent burial grounds for the parish of Rushen. The price was at the rate of about £206 an acre, and the extent of ground to be acquired was 1 acre 1 rood and 39 perches. Mr Claims said the matter was urgent. George Kay deposed : I am an architect and surveyor, aril know the land in question. i t ad- joins the present burial ground. I consider the price which is being paid a fair amount for the land. I think it would be an advantage to the petitioners if it was purchased for that vice. On the motion of the Lord 'Bishop, seconded by Mr Clucas, the prayer of the petition was granted.

DOUGLAS HARBOUR.—REPAIR OF QUAY W ALL. The Receiver-General moved .— That this Court do authorize a grant to th9 Harbour Commissioners, out of the harbour dues and passenger duty raised or to be raised at the harbour of Douglas, under the Isle of Man Har- bour Acts, 1874 to 1884, of a suns not exceeding £450, for the purpose of rebuilding a portion of the wail of the North Quay at that harbour. The Receiver-General said that the wall in question was just in front of the Temperance Hotel, near the upper end of Douglas Harbour. According to Mr Neville's report—" The length of wall affected at present is about 18 feet, but, as the adjacent wall is of the same kind and under similar conditions, further failure of the

Rushen Burial Ground.—Douglas Harbour. 108 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. wail is probable. The wall is of dry coursed rubble masonry. It is founded on loci ground, a sort of quicksand, and has been in a very un- satisfactory condition for many years. A large sewer passes through this wall where it has failed, and this may have contributed to the damage. The wall has been shored up, and is safe for a time. To make the best job of this quay wall it should be taken down for a length of, say, 25 feet and rebuilt on a piled or other sufficient foundation. As there are no records of this wall, and the data of the backing and foundations is unknown, it is difficult to give more than a very rough estimate of the cost of the above renewal but it would probably be about £450." Mr .Toughin seconded the motion. Mr J. R. Cowell did not wish to offer any opposition, but it did seem an extraordinary sum for 18 feet of a wall. At this rate, the re• pairing of any considerable length of sea wall would run into thousands of pounds. The Receiver-General explained that the wall might have to be built entirely on pile founda- tions, the whole ground underneath being mud and rubbish, so that Mr Nevill did not consider it safe to estimate a less sum. The work, how- ever, would be done as cheaply as possible. The vote was agreed to

PORT EP,1N HARBOUR REPAIRS. The Receiver General moved:— That this Court do authorize a grant to the Harbour Commissioners, out of the general rev- enue of this Island, of a sum not exceeding £920, for the purpose of effecting repairs to the south ern wall of Port Erin Harbour. He said the wall was one which ran from the root of the breakwater to what was called "the little harbour." He read the following report by Mr Nevill : — November 16th. 1890. I have recently inspected the southern wall of Port Erin Harbour, and beg to report that I find same in a very bad condition. For years past I have expected this wall, which is nearly a quarter of a mile in length, to give way. Itis pre'ent condition is such as to necessitate imme- diate attention. In places it bristles with wooden wedges, which have been driven in between the stones to keep them in place. I need hardly say that wooden wedges are not a permanent means of conserving a seawall. Should this wall give way, and I am of opinion that it is likely to do so with any exceptionally heavy inshore the whole stretch of the Harbour Commissioners' ground frmal the present Inner Harbour towards the Breakwater, as also the Harbour Offices and Port Erin Harbour Repairs. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 109 engine sheds, will be seriously endangered. I estimate the cost of making this wall secure. where it is most exposed, at the sum of £921 I would further beg to point out that this work should be done before building any projecting pier from the southern wall, as the backwash or rebound of the sea from the latter would almi)st certainly bring down the adjacent wall. The destruction of the sea-wall would also involve a portion of the new main drainage sewer.—I remain, sir, your obedient servant, PERCY NEVILL. Mr Joughin seconded the motion, and said the wall was in a very weak condition, and the sooner the work was coped with the better it would be and it might save lives. Though the sum seemed great, the vote asked was not exceeding £920, and the Commissioners would do the work as cheaply as they could, consistent with strength. Mr Qualtrough believed that this was a much- needed expenditure for preserving a wall from tumbling down, but he hoped it would not pre- judice the granting of money for a much more needed expenditure for the protection of pro- perty by the extension of the little pier at Port Erin. There was just one point that might be worth the Court's attention. They were called on to grant sums of money upon the estimate of one gentleman, who was quite competent to givc, all the information in his power to the Court ; but, at the same time, while they granted these Rims they should have some further assistance in arriving at a fair and more correct estimate. If the Harbour Commissioners would adopt the sys- tem of obtaining tenders, it would assist the Court in deciding upon the sum whioh would be really required. Mr Quin° said the Port Erin harbour question had been for a long time before the Court, and £920 was not a very large sum, and he believed the Harbour Commissioners knew that this wall wanted looking after. But surely the time had come to take inti consideration the requirements of Port Erin in a more comprehensive way. There was no protection whatever for fishing boats, yachts, and small boats. If the matter was brought befcre the Harbour Commissioners, and they decided to do some larger work, per- haps this expenditure of £920 might be used more serviceably in connection with it. He sug- gested that this motion should be held over until they came to seine conclusion by which some- thing might be done for the benefit of the plaoe. Mr Mylehreest: I would be sorry to put any- thing in the way of the improvement of Port Erin ;

Port Erin Harbour Repairs. 110 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. but every time that I have brought anything for- ward for this benefit of Castletown, Mr Quine has always begun to play second fiddle, and to ask for something for Port Erin. Your Excel- lency, about twelve months ago, promised to bring forward a general scheme of harbour im- provements in the Island. I made inquiries on the subject, and Mr Allan made a statement in this Court that the work was to be proceeded with. On hearing that. the matter was occupying the attention of the Harbour Commissioners, I kept quiet with respect to it, and this has pre- vented us from having a public meeting. Over and over again I have said that we are losing £E00 a year by extra freight on goods imported into Castletown from want of a few extra feet of water. We have had promises now from three successive Governors that something would be done, so I hope, before anything is done in build- ing harbours elsewhere, that the requirements of Castletown will be considered. We had a return from a very influential Committee about seven years ago, strongly recommending works at Castletown. Mr J. J. Goldsmith drew attention to the fact that the proposed grant to Port Erin was to be taken from the Insular revenue, while Douglas had to pay for its own repairs for the harbour out of the passenger duty and harbour dues. Clearly what was sauce for the goose was sauce for the gander. He thought the passenger duty of Port Erin should also be liable for the repairs of Port Erin quay, and £920 was a considerable sum to take from the revenue. He would like to know what the amount of the passenger duty at. Port Erin for the year was, and whether it was sufficient to pay five per cent. on the sum now advanced. Mr Clucas pointed out that at Douglas various SUMS had been spent in providing harbour accom- modation, which had enabled masters of vessels to carry passengers and goods into the port. Unfortunately at Port Erin the Court had not yet seen fit to grant money for the protection of Port Erin, so that tne harbour dues at the pre- sent time were small, and could not possibly bear the cost of maintaining the harbour. He (Mr Clucas) had hoped that bef ore this the Court would have seen its way to bring forward an improve- ment for the protection of Port Erin harbour. His Excellency had promised to a deputation from the district that he would take the matter into consideration. He (Mr Clucas) would like Port Erin Harbour Repairs. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 111

to know if there was any prospect of something shortly being done in that line. The Governor said he hoped to do something at Port Erin some day. He did not think it a good plan to spend money out of the Insular Revenue on harbours that required the least improvement, unless the money came out of the passenger fares. But what passenger tax was there at Port Erin? Mr Goldsmith said that before £920 was granted for a work of that kind some plan should be placed before the Court. Surely it was a large amount to spend at Port Erin. Douglas had to pay for its own works, and now it was proposed that Port Erin was to get them out of the general revenue. The Receiver ?General, replying, said the reso- lution was quite different from the various ques- tions which hon. members had introduced. The Harbour Commissioners had been bound to bring this matter before the Court. They had not made any plans or asked for any money which was not necessary to stop the sea breaking in on the works. Of late years that was everything they had asked for. The question was whether they should allow the wall to go. It was a question for pre- serving some ground that the Harbour Commis- sioners possessed in that place, which might ulti- mately become valuable. The roads all along to the breakwater lay close alongside of this work. As to the amount of dues taken in Port Erin, they were practically nil, and hardly paid for the hired boat which was used to collect them. With respect to the suggestion about contracts, the Harbour Commissioners had no reason to congra- tulate themselves so far with regard to contracts. The contract for the work at Cast'letown, which they did not accept, was £1,500 more than it cost them to do the work. Mr Quine : Am I to understand that there are no dues? The Receiver-General : The dues are so small that they do not do much more than pay for the boat. The dues of Port Erin are all spent upon the place. They are really returnable to the Board of Trade, but that is of no consequence. They do not pay half the harbour-master's salary. Mr Kerruish moved as an amendment "that the matter of harbour repairs at Port Erin be referred to a committee to take evidence." Mr Mylchreest seconded, and added that plans should be shown of the work.

Port Erin Harbour Repairs 112 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899.

Mr Clucas supported the amendment. The Receiver-General I would like to know how far the scope of this committee goes. Is it to inquire if it is worth ‘,.,ie to repair this wall, or not? Mr Kerruish : My amendment is only in re- ference to repairing this wall at a cost of £920. Mr J. R. Cowell : It seems to me that if the amendment only means a committee to inquire into the repair of the wall, it is certainly not worth while for the Court to reject the motion of the Harbour Commissioners. I could well under- stand them being desirous of having a larger pro- tective work and a landing place. But they can- not do that under a motion for the repair of a wall. Unless my friend wishes to go further, and take into consideration the requirements of Port Erin with regard to a jetty or landing place, it is hardly treating the Harbour Commissioners with proper respeot to ask for a committee to sit with regard to their application to repair a wall. As regards the defective wall, I can trust the Harbour Board, and shall vote for the motion, but if the wider question were raised on a fair issue, I think it deserves and demands full in- quiry. Mr Quine : The point is that if this wall is taken in hand and repaired, the larger work will be put off for an indefinite period. If it is pro- posed to do something to make Port Erin safe, I shall change my vote. Mr Joughin: The repairing of the wall has no connection with the larger work. The repair of this wall is necessary to protect six or eight acres of land that would otherwise be washed away by the sea. Mr Mylehreest : Whose property is it? Mr Joughin : The property of the Harbour Commissioners. The dues of Port Erin are al- most nil ; it is not so at Douglas. Residents in the south will do a very bad job to stop this work. If we get this work put into good order, we might get on with the larger work, but the one work has no connection with the other. Mr Goldsmith : It is not my intention to sup- port the amendment. After the explanation that has been given by the Harbour Board I feel bcund to vote for the motion. But we should have been in possession of this information in the first instance. Port Erin Harbour Repairs. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 113 The vote was agreed to, Mr Kerruish and Mr Qualtrough assenting to the withdrawal of the amendment.

CASTLETOWN POLICE STATION. Deemster Sir James Gell : I have been asked to propose this resolution, which is not on the agenda paper, and his Excellency is very de- sirous that no time should be lost in this matter with regard to the police station at Castletown. The police station is a most wretched one, and it is not fit to take prisoners in, and it will not hold more than two at a time. I have known, years ago, one time there was a riot there, and 10 or 11 people were arrested, and the constable had to put them inside the gaol to keep them in custody until they were brought before the magistrates. It is a damp place, except where the policemen sit. Now an opportunity occurs. The Commissioners of Woods and Forests, with the consent of the Treasury, have handed over the custody of Castle Rushen to the Insular Govern- ment, and the effect of this is that there is a plot of land now available which is a very convenient site for a police station. Various sugges- tions wero made about this station, and plans have now been drawn up and approved. I think we are all on our honour now about keep- ing the Castle in proper order, and preventing excrescences which are not in harmony with the main building. The building now suggested is in harmony with it. This building will not in- jure the appearance of the Castle in any way, but it will eort a little more to have it done neatly and properly. It is assumed that it will cost somewhere about £450 altogether. It is not a large sum compared with what has been paid for polio, stations in other parts of the Island. What I propose is this: that a sum not exceeding £500 be applied from the general revenue of this Island for the purpose of erecting this police station. It really is a necessary work : the present station is really not fit to put people into. Mr J. R. Cowell : Are you proposing to refer it to a committee? Deemater Gell: I was not proposing that. I do not care how it is done, but it is very necessary to have it done at once. The Governor : I recommend it very strongly to the Court. I have had a great deal of trouble ha getting the Castle handed over to the Insular Government. I have taken cognisance of all the

Castletown Police Station. 114 'TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899.' excrescences there, and I think this will be a good place. I think nothing better can be done, and we shall have a good place convenient for the building. It would be a pity to stop this plan which has been agreed to by the Woods cnd Forests on behalf of the Crown. Mr Mylrea : I do not gather quite clearly from his Honour the position of this building. I rather think it is putting down an excrescence, instead of taking one away. I have a strong view myself as to the wisdom of clearing the Purviews of Castle Rushen entirely, and I would be strongly inclined not to favour anything, even a police station, valuable even though it may be. I beg to move as an amendment that this be re- ferred to a committee of three members to con- sider the site and report to the Court. The Governor : I am perfectly certain that, whatever committee you appoint will come to the same conclusion. The great thing is to get the thing done during the time the trippers are not here. Mr Qualtrough : I rise to support the motion. I think it a very necessary work. Anyone ac- quainted with the Castletown police station will coincide with the statement made, and more par- ticularly when the oportunity of erecting one in a very suitable place presents itself. I think this Court should grant the sum required; it will be very wisely and properly expended in a permanent work which will be worth the money expended on it. Mr Mylchreest : It is not intended to crowd the Castle. There was a boathouse there occupy- ing the ground, and a portion about 18 feet high against the Castle wall has been removed. The new building will be outside the Castle wall, if I understand it properly. The outer wall is clean taken away; so that it will give a better view of the Castle. Mr Maitland : I second Mr Mylrea's amend- ment. I do not say it should not be done, but nothing should spoil the view of the Castle. Mr Joughin : I think we have the report of a very good committee on the question; your Ex- cellency is in favour of it, Sir James Gell is in favour of it, and Mr Qualtrough, the hon. mem- ber for Rushen, is in favour of it. I think we will act fairly in voting for the motion, and let- ting this small matter pass, as it is a question of urgency. When you three gentlemen think it the best for Castletown we might adopt it.

Castletown Police Station, TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 115

The amendment was then put and carried. The Council elected Deemster Gen, the Keys the Speaker, and the Governor and the Speaker Mr Mylrea, to serve on the Committee. The Governor : I hope the Committee will meet and bring forward a report as soon as possible.

ADVERTISING THE ISLAND. Mr ,T. R. Cowell : I am sure the members of the Court will agree that if I take up as little time as possible it will meet their convenience, and, perhaps, be in the best interests of us all. I do not now wish to enter on an exhaustive examination of the report of the Board of Advertising last year, but I will move a resolu- tion and make a very brief statement, and I hope the Court will be able to dispose of the vote within the next 20 minutes. When I say that I do not for a moment desire to check or stifle discussion, but I will cut my remarks into a very small compass, with the object of helping the Court to decide the matter to-day. I move: That a sum of £750 he applied from the general revenue of this Isle for the purpose, during the year ending 31st March, 1900, of giving increased publicity to the advantages afforded by the Island as a pleasure and health resort. I may inform the members of the Court that this Board a very short time ago waited upon his Excellency with regard to this vote, and we had an object in thus waiting early upon his Excellency, the object being to induce him, if possible, to increase the amount of the vole for advertising purposes. I may say that his Excel- lency met the deputation from the Board with his usual affability and courtesy, and I feel sure that we have, at all events, in his Excellency, one very warm and friendly convert—perhaps I should not say convert, but supporter—of adver- tising; but, for reasons which I will nut enter upon now, his Excellency could not see his way to increase the amount. I shall leave t!_e ■ sa::ons to hiitirelf, as I think it is his proper province. I may say that I think his reasons were good reasons, which we are bound to submit to. I will indicate to the Court that they were financial reasons which influenced his Excellency, and lie will explain them as he thinks fit. We asked for a larger sum for advertising, because we felt sure we could use it well, and that we could produce from that larger sum result, beneficial to the Island. And I can only say that we regret that the Committee are not in possession of mote

Advertising the Island, 116 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899 funds, and that his Excellency does not see cis way to grant more; because it is my privilege, if necessary, to show this Court that the money expended is certainly in the true interests of the entire Island, and that it is money well spent, and which brings in a very large profit indeed. Possibly no strong contention will he made to th contrary, and, therefore, I shall not, waste your time replying to it. The report which I have to-day laid upon the table, I think, new claim, without being egotistical, as the most compre- hensive report ever presented to the Court. It is indeed fully comprehensive. I think it in- cludes all matters of leading interest in this connection, and I think members who have done the Board the justice of reading that report will say that it is a thorough and complete justifica- tion for the existence of the Board, and thor- oughly justifies the expenditure of the money- now under its control. The Court will, there- fore, allow me to say this much: that, inasmuch as you have had that report in your hands some time, and as I hope each member of the Court has studied it, it will, in my opinion, be un- necessary for me to repeat the points there mentioned, or to refer to them or emphasise them. I could address the Court at great length, and go into many details of illustrations and correspond- ence, and in a number of ways demonstrate to the Court all that the report refers to ; but with a report so ample and full, I trust that member,: will he satisfied, and not expect me to go at great length into a defence of the Board or thi, reasons for its existence. I would just say that this is a business proposal, and that it is in the general interests of the Island, and I think all business men will agree with me that one of the last items of expenditure which a business man should cut down is the item for advertising. In this age all those who have anything to offer to the general public, who wish to secure the patron. age and support of the million, must place their business fully before the multitude. The Isle of ➢Zan has attractions which we, no doubt, are ail fully aware of, but there are, I venture to say, yet millions of people in the British Islands who are not acquainted with the many attractions and beauties of this place, and its many advan- tages as a health and pleasure resort, and, as that number is increasing yearly, it is manifest that if we are to keep abreast of the times, &LI compete on favourable terms with the great schemes which are in existence everywhere to

Advertising the Island, TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 117 enlighten and inform the British public with regard to places of great attraction, we must keep up this work, and, if possible, extend it and increase its usefulness. I may say that when we asked his Excellency this year for an increased grant, it was with a definite object. One or two members of the Court have in the past intimated that they have not seen large posters on the walls in England as other water- ing places are in the habit of advertising their attractions. It is utterly impossible for us to do anything more than we have done with regard to placarding hoardings unless you place us in possession of more funds. We cannot do it with- out a very considerable sum of money indeed. One of our objects was to placard special places. Another object we had in view is this : Our office in London has been of immense service to the Isle of Man—that I can prove in many ways, and there can be no question whatever about it that we have a footing in London and are influencing a large number of people. But there is one serious drawback, and that is that the office is on the second floor, up a considerable flight of steps. If we could have an oflice on the ground floor in Ludgate Circus, we feel that we would be able to influence 10 persons for every- one we influence now, because many people decline to climb up long flights of stairs to make inquiries over matters of this kind, and we canuot possibly pay the increased cost of an office on the ground floor with the funds at our disposal. There are many other matters the Board has from time to time to decline and to set aside. We have had often to set aside the most admirable schemes ior bringing the Island under the notice of the British public, because we had not the where- withal to deal with them. I confess to believing that no Board in this Island is more economical and more careful than this Board. The amount of trouble that members go to is admirable. When I tell you that our handbills and leaflets and various other publications are open to com- petition, when we bring the best firms in the world into competition, and often bring down the price by one halfpenny per thousand, I :think the Court will see we take every means to get good value for our money in every way, and make the closest bargain and get the best possible terms, and I am sure the money is well spent, and could not he spent better. There are many things we do not mention in the report, and it is exceedingly undesirable that they should be • Advertising the Island. 118 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. mentioned. The Secretary is constantly getting communications from rival watering-places ask- ing him if he will be good enough to explain the methods of advertising the No of Man, paying many extravagant compliments, and they even write to me, as chairman of the Board. If imita- tion is the sincerest form of flattery, we have been flattered by many watering-places in the United Kingdom, and many are endeavouring to follow in our footsteps I will just make one or two observations in a hurried manner, to emphasise one or two points in the report before I sit down. The first is this, that although last year was not apparently a great success as regards numbers, as a matter of fact, the actual arrivals of bona fide visitors to the Isle of Man was a small in- crease over the previous year. But apparently, on the face of it, it was not so ; the fact being that trippers from the various ports to the Island and round about were oounted by the Harbour Board, and though, of course, they paid the penny tax, they were not bona fide arrivals from the other side, and here there was a small decrease. But there was a small increase in bona fide visitors to the Island, and when I inform members of the Court that the increase was secured last year notwithstanding very dis- tressing circumstances of weather---most inclement weather prevailed in Whit-week, when I believe there was a decrease of 5,000 persons, which we had to make up during the season—then, as I say, there was an increase as well. Hon. members of the Court will also see that the advance in num- bers during the years the Board has been in exist- ence has totalled about 25 per cent, and, there- fore, I think, o•n the Whole, our increase has been ay satisfactory indeed. During the last year the Board received 16,473 letters. There is no sham about this : it means real genuine applications for information about this Island, and my hon. friend the member for North Douglas, speaking at a meeting where your Ex- cellency, I believe, was present, showed that one of those applicants who received information came to the Island with his family, and resided here for three months. We have innumerable testimonies from all sorts and oonditions of men that have been induced to come to the Island and to stop here for a few weeks, or even months, directly by the agency of the Board of Advertis- ing which you have appointed. Of the 16,473 letters which have been received, the majority have been from heads of families, fathers and Advertising the Island. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 119

mothers, school teachers, heads of institutions, secretaries of great industrial organisations—per- sons representing half-a-dozen, or, it may be, many persons. So the 16,473 letters really represent a large body of persons who have been interested in coming to the Isle of Man. This is an increase of about 1,200 letters on the previous year, though that was, in itself, of course, a great success. The total number we have received since the Board cams into existence is over 60,000 letters. I need not repeat the publica- tions which are enumerated in the report. I feel that we have the sympathy of this Court, and that the whole Island is benefitted, and we be- lieve that during next season, by the good grace of this Court being placed in possession of suffi- cient funds for present demands, at an early stage in the present year we shall be able to enter on or work with renewed diligence, and I feel as satisfied as I have over been of anything I know of, that every pound which this Court places in the hands of the Board will be well spent for the benefit of the Island. I hope the Court may never go back on its policy with regard to this matter, nor close its fist to refuse this grant to ibis very impertant work, for if we should cut off our present efforts, and make it difficult, if not impossible, for the Board to carry out this ex- cellent work throughout the British Islands, then the words of the wise man would be shown to be true: "There is that scattereth and yet in- creaseth, and there is that withholdeth more than is meet, and it tendeth to poverty." Mr Joughin: I second the resolution. Mr Clucas : At this late hour I do not intend challenge this vote, but, still, I am one of those who do not see the benefit. What I wish to know on this occasion is whether you intend to provide the thousand pounds in aid of the Asylums Board this year as for the last few years, or not, as that will have a very considerable in- fluence on the voting. The Governor : I can only repeat what I said tc, the Advertising Board the other day, that at present the revenue is not coming out as well as I should 'like it to do. I should like to see it ten times better than it is, but I cannot possibly tell the state of the revenue until the end of March. In the meantime I can only grant £750. I am very glad to do that. I have no doubt that the hon. member is perfectly right in saying that the Board is doing a very great work for the Island, but it is my work to protect the Insular

Advertising the Island. 120 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899.

finances. At the end of March I shall see what my position is, and I will be able to advise the Court as to what is right. I cannot make any promise beyond that. I certainly would like to pass this vote for £750, because then the Adver- tising Board can get on with its work. Mr Qualtrough : I just want to say a word to show that this Court is not entirely unanimous on this subject. The time has gone by, and I will not say anything contrary to what has been said. I will vote this time for the motion, but, at the seine time, I am strongly of opinion that it is not at all the best course to be bringing this Court down in repute, and bringing it to the level of a trading association. I will, therefore, just in- timate that my opinions are contrary to the spirit of advertising. The motion was carried nem con. Mr Mylrea : I rise to move that the members of the Committee for last year be re-elected— Messrs J. R. Cowell, J. T. Cowell, E. T. Chris- tian, J. R. Kerruish, T. Clague, the Mayor of Douglas, and the chairmen of the Commissioners of Castletown, Peel, and Ramsey. Mr E. H. Christian seconded the motion. Mr Qualtrough : I move as an amendment that Mr James Mylchreest be added. The south is entirely unrepresented on the Committee. Mr Quine seconded the amendment. Mr Clucas: Are we able, under the present Standing Orders, to elect this Committee en bloc? The Governor : No, I suppose not. The Receiver-General : Is Mr Clague chairman of the Commissioners? Mr Clague: I am at present. The Receiver-General : Then you are doubly qi alified. The Governo-: I think that, if there is no ob- jection taken to those proposed en bloc, we can do it, because A saves time; but otherwise, if there are a certain number of members appointed, I think the best way will be for the Court to do it in th3 usual way. Mr Clucas: Would it not be better to move the suspension of the Standing Orders for that pur- pose? Mr Quine : I think it would be a wise proceed- ing to elect the members en bloc, for I think the members do a lot of work for very little pay, and no one will be anxious to get on the Committee

Advertising the Island. TYNWALD COURT, Tannai y 24, 1899. 121 when there is i:othing for it. This time they might be re-elected. The Governor : If you do that, this other mem- ber will have to be withdrawn. Mr Mylroa : I do not think there is any wish to ess the matter. Mr Qualtrough: I would like to meet the Court as far as possible, but I think the Island is not at all fairly represented on this Board, and that a member of the Court representing the south of the Island should be placed on this Committee. Mr J. T. Cowell: The Act says that the Com- mittee shall consist of nine members, five of whom shall be nominated by the Tynwald Court. They are to be elected triennially members of the Committee. The Act is somewhat contradictory, because it also says that members of the Commit- tee are to be nominated from time to time on each occasion when a resolution of the said Court is passed for providing funds for adverti- sing. Deemster Gell: By a previous clause you see who the ex-officio members of the Board are. At this stage a question arose as to the ad- jcurnment, and on the motion of Mr J. R. Cowell, seconded by Mr Clucas, the Court de- cided to sit on and conclude the business. After some further discussion as to what was necessary under the Act, the old members of the Committee were re-elected.

AGRICULTURAL GRANTS. Mr R. Cowley : I beg to move the following resolution:— Whereas it is expedient, with a view to im- proving the breed of horses, that prizes be given to horses of the following classes, viz.:—(1) Clydesdale, and (2) Shire; such horses to be ap proved by the Agricultural Society of this Is- land, and to be used for stud purposes; the prizes to be paid in the proportions of two- thirds by the Insular Government and one- third by the Society: And whereas it is also expedient that prizes to the amount of £50 be offered for mares and fillies, and £50 for year- lings, to be approved by the said Society: Re- selved,—That a sum not exceeding £200 be voted from the general revenue of this Island for the foregoing* purposes. Continuing, Mr Cowley said: It is not my wish or intention to take up the valuable time of this Court at any great length in asking for support to this vote, inasmuch as it is my firm persuasion

Agricultural Grants. 122 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. that we are all so fully acquainted with the ques- tion that practically the vote will be a unanimous one. There are just one or two facts which it may be useful to call to memory, and one is that a vote for the same purpose has now been annually given by this Court fora period of something like 1) years. We first of all started with giving a gremium in aid of the improvement of the breed of cattle, next, a few years following that, we took a step forward by adding to that a premium for horses. Four years after that we took another step by adding to the former premiums one for bulls for the improvement of cattle, and last year a further step forward was taken, and a vote was given in aid of the improvement of mares. This year is is desired to go still further, and that the Court should encourage the keeping of the young stock on the Island to a larger extent than previously. I reed hardly say that I am heartily in support of this movement. If time had permitted I should have been able to give particulars proving that the agricultural indus- try in this Island is the main industry which we have to depend upon, and that anything in the shape of encouragement of that industry is one that must heartily commend itself to this Court. I need not enlarge on the desirability of this inasmuch as it has been already sanctioned, and is really put forward by the Agricultural Society of this Island—a Society whidh represents very successfully the agricultural interest of this Island—for a. large number of years; and when it is approved by that Society, I feel confident that this Court will agree with it without any hesitation. I understand that there may be some differences of opinion amongst some members as to the method of procedure. With that I have no objection whatever. If any improvement can be suggested, I am quite sure that the members of the Agricultural Society will very heartily fall in with anything shown to be an improvement. But before sitting down, I should like to urge upon the Court the desirability of this vote being passed at this fitting, inasmuch as one of the main features of the scheme is the improve- ment of horses, and February, next month, is the great period in London when the selection is made of the very best horses for the different districts in the Kingdom, and if the vote is passed on the present occasion, it means that the Agri- cultural Society will be strengthened, and will be able to make their, arrangements in London in February at the very best time ; otherwise a

Agricultural Grants. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 123

disadvantage wooll arise which, I am sure, would be a cause of regret. I, therefore, place this before the Court, confident that they will see their way to a unanimous vote for this sum of £200. I may say that the Court is not asked to under- take this expense entirely : the funds of the Agri- cultural Society contribute an additional sum, so that they are proving by their acts and works that they have the fullest confidence themselves in this movement. Mr Maitland seconded the motion. Mr Quine : There is a very strong feeling in the country that no premiums ought to be offered for breeding mares. Gentlemen bring them over here and breed with the very best horses and then the foals are sold out of the country, and no one is the better off, except the owner of the mare. But when the premium is offered to horses and bulls the whole country gets the benefit. Mr J. T. Cowell : On a former occasion, when this vote was taken, I had occasion to call your Excellency's attention to some objections that were felt with reference to this vote. On page 556 of the published debates I find that your Excellency stated : " I told the gentlemen that I would be very glad, if they liked to try it as an experiment, to see if it did not answer better than the old plan, which the deputation told me was not successful. If the money is given, we ought to see that it is spent to the best advan- tage, and, node: these circumstances, I think the motion is a good one, and I hope the Court will aceede to it." That is what I want to see : that this vote is m.ot made to the Agricultural Society on wrong lines. The conditions last year were a perfect farce, and, unless I see there is a strong feeling on the part of agricultural gentlemen who have a big stake in the matter, and have the best interests of the Island at heart, that they are determined to alter this state of things and go back to L he old conditions, I cannot agree to this vote at all. The vote, as will be seen, is an inereased amount on last year. Last year the total sum was £225, and this year the sum is £268. I am not going to oppose this matter. I am not an agriculturist. I do not pretend tc know the differences between certain classes of stock ; but all I want to do is, in the interests of the Island, to take care that the sum of money voted by the Insular revenue is well spent, and that, to an extent, it is spent under the

Agricultural Grants. 124 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899.

supervision of this Court. I think the time has arrived that, seeing that the Legislature provides two-thirds of the amount given in prizes, this Legislature ceght to have some voice in the making of the conditions along with your Excel- ler cy and the Agricultural Society. It would then go forth to the Island that not only are Are voting this money, but that we are voting it under conditions which make it possible for us to have some control, and, therefore, I am going to move that there be three members added to consult with your Excellency and the Agricul- tural Society as to the conditions and the rules upon which this money should be granted. At this late hou.• it is not wise to take up the time of the Court, and I would suggest to acid to the resolution proposed by Mr Cowley—I shall have to do it here, and again when the subsequent motion with regard to cattle comes up—" that the following members of this Court be elected to act with his Excellency and the Committee of the Agricultural Society to draw up rules and conditions to make this vote effective, and to secure the most beneficial results to the agricul- tural interests of this Island." The members of the Committee .I have to name are—I am doing it en bloc, although it may be out of order, but so that members may see that I am not antago- nistic to the agricultural interests of this Island, I am naming gentlemen who have agricultural matters at heart—the Lord Bishop, who, I know, takes a deep interest in all such matters affect- ing agriculture; and Mr T. Alien and Mr Mait- land, one a representative of a northern par'sh, and. the other a southern gentleman. Mr Clucas seconded the amendment. Mr Cowley : Perhaps a word or two of ex- planation is necessary here. I do not see why the resolution should necessarily be one vote for £200 and another for £68. Of course, the £68 is for a, different purpose, but it would be better business to include the two resolutions in one, and that will do away with the necessity of adding the Committee twice. The Governor : I um perfectly ready to have a small Committee to help me. We have hitheric done it with great care, and I took the greatest trouble I possibly could over it. I had two gentlemen of the Agricultural Society, and they all helped me very much, and the money has been well spent. There was £225 voted last year, and only £132 was spent, so that it has not been paid out. As to the extra amount this year,

Agricultural Grants. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 125

I was very anxious that the mares should be en- couraged, because it seemed to me that the horses which came over here should meet some good mares, and that we should give prizes for mares to encourage the owners to keep them. We had a long talk to-day with regard to yearlings, whether we might keep some of the best horses on the Island; so I propose to try a kind of experiment. If we could improve the breed, it will, be for the good of the agricu:tural com- munity of the Island, and I fell in with a sug- gestion which was proposed to me that we should give £50 in prizes for yearlings on the Island, ro that small. farmers who have good mares and good stock should keep these animals on the Island, rather than immediately send them off to England for sale. We are very glad to give prizes to eneourap the breed, but, at the same time, we can very well do with the well-bred horses here. I do not see why we should give our Insular reveran to improve horses to go away to England, though, of course, they will all go away eventually. Deenaster Gill : The hon. member has only moved half his resolution. Mr Cowley : I understood that it was in two parts. I also beg to move :— And whereas it is also expedient, with a view to improving the breed of cattle, that special prizes, amounting in the aggregate to £136, be offered for bulls to be exhibited at the Society's spring show, to be hold at Douglas, during the currant year, on the understanding that one- half of the amount of such prizes shall be de- frayed out of the Insular revenue: Resolved,— That a sum not exceeding £68 be voted from the general revalue of this Island, being one moiety of the amount of the proposed prizes. The con- ditions on which the money is, in either of the foregoing cases, to be given to be subject to the approval of his Excellency the Lieutenant- Governor. The Governor : It would be better to put it all in one. The Lord Bishop : I do not see that the sugges- tion of the hon. member for North Douglas is an amendment at all. It is a rider. We should not accept the one against the other : the ques- tion is, will you accept them both. I venture to suggest that the hon. member who moved the resolution should say whether he is willing to accept the rider. Mr Cowley : I have no objection whatever. would, however, like to say that I differ from the hon. member in his argument that the matter has to some extent been a failure. It is entirely Agricultural Grants. 126 TYNWALD COURT, January 24,1899. contrary to the experience of everyone connected with the Society during the past year, and I never heard so unanimous an expression of opin- ion that the heavy horses exhibited last year were a credit to any exhibition in the kingdom, and that the improvement was most marked. It is a very slow process. It is two or three, or four or five year- before the improvement can be manifested. I would like to see the farmers take the matter up more vigorously than they do. I am sorry to find there is not sufficient energy in some of the parishes to actually pro- vide an animal so that they can take part in the competition. I should like to see every parish in the Island taking an active part in this corn- petition, Mr J. T. Cowell : I do not want to take up one moment of time, but I would not like the remarks of the hon. member to go unchallenged that the competitions have bean a unanimous success. So far as the bulls are concerned, they have been an utter failure. (Mr Cowley : No.) I have it on very goof authority. I want the conditions to be roo made that , he agriculturists shall get the very best advantage out of these grants. Mr Cowley : I accept the amendment, and move the resolution with that addition. The motion was carried.

THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACTS. BY-LAWS APPLICABLE TO PARISH DISTRICTS. Deetairter Gill moved the following resolu- tion : - Whereas by section 142 of the Local Govern- ment Act, 1886, hereinafter referred to as the "principal Act," it is enacted that part four of such Act (comprising sections 142 to 212, both inclusive) shall, except where otherwise pro- vided. apply to town •restricts only : And whereas, by section 4 of the Local Government Act, 1897, it is enacted that the Tynwald Court may .bv resolution, make any provisions of the Local Government Acts which apply to town districts only applicable to any parish or village district: And whereas, by resolutions of this Court dated 30th December, 1888, and 20th October, 1892, cer- tain sections of part four of the principal Act were made applicable to the village districts of Pert Erin and Port St. Mary respectively: And whereas it is necessary, in order to empower vil- lage and parish commissioners to make by-laws under the provisions of the principal Act, that seetio's 209 to 212, inclusive, of such Act should be made applicable to village and parish dis- tricts: Resolved.—That, cithout preitclice to the said resolutions of the 30th December, 1888, and

The Local Government Acts, TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 127

20th October, 1892, sections 209 to 212, inclusive, of the principal Act shall, from and after the of the principal Act shall, from and after the date hereof, apply, and they are hereby made appli- cable, to the whole of the village districts aml Parish districts from time to time existing under the L >cal Government Acts. His Honour said: That really contains the whole history of this matter. The Local. Government Act, when it was passed in 1886, applied to towns and to villages only, and there were certain provi- sions in that Act which applied to towns only. The whole Act applied to towns, but there were cer- tain provisions contained in Part IV. of the Act, which did rot apply to village districts unless they were made applicable by resolutions of this Court. Resolutions of this Court were passed from time to time—and they are mentioned in this resolution—to make Part IV. applicable to certain villages. Port St. Mary was one of them. Then the Act of 1894 was passed, which made the Local Government Act applicable to parish dis- tricts as well, which were not contemplated origi- nally, and the original Act of 1886 was made applicable to these parish districts, except Part IV. The whole of Part IV. was then excepted, and nothing was said about its being made a.ppli- cable to the parish districts in the same way the original Aot said it might be made applicable to the village districts, so that Part IV. could not be adopted by the parish districts at all. That was, no doubt, an oversight in the Act. That was amended by the Act of 1897, which is also recited in the resolution, and which gave power to this Court to make that part of the Act, and any other part of the Act which did not already apply to parishes, applicable to the parish districts. Well, now, it is found that in Part IV. of the Act, there are provisions giving power to the Commissioners to make by-laws, and it is found very necessary indeed that by-laws should be made in respect of the pariah districts just as they are made with respect to village and town dis tricts. But until this Act makes Part IV. appli- cable to the parish districts, there is no power to make by-laws. Well, now, this resolution asks only that these provisions of the Act which authorise the making of by-laws shoUld be made applicable to the parish districts. It does not g any further than that. If that is adopted by this resolulion, then the parish districts will be in a position to make suitable by-laws for the regula- tion of their districts just as town and village districts are now, but with the same restriction

The Local Government Acta. 128 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. that applies to towns and villages, that the by- laws, Nfter they are made, must be approved by the Tynwald Court before they have any author- ity, so that safeguard is maintained. The effect of passing this resolution goes a step further than that. The Act of 1897 provides that the Local Government Board shall have power to make by- laws for airy district in the Island, and in sorne cases, no doubt, I think it will be found more advisable that the by-laws should emanate from the Local Government Board, rather than from the country districts. Of course the same safe- guard applies u well—that even if made by the Local Government Board, the by-laws must come to this Court for approval. But by the wording of the Act, which is a little peculiar, the Local Government Board have no power to make by- laws, except on such subjects as the Com- missioners have power to make them. If the Commissioners have no power to make by-laws, then the Local Government Board have no power to make them; so it is necessary they should have power to make by-laws in order to empower the Board to make these by-laws. So the Court will see that the matter is a necessary one, and that this power to make by-laws should be made appli- cable to all the districts of the Island. Now, it may be said that the by-laws which are contem- plated by the 209th section of the original Act are not all applicable to the country districts. Well, that may or may not be. Some of them very likely are not. But we know this—that the country districts are continually altering ; and we know of one country district especially, which abuts upon Douglas—upon which a new suburb of Douglas is now being built with very great rapidity—and which is really becoming a town of itself. Well, now, the by-laws which suit the town must be made for that district, and although it is a country district, and ti ey are country Commissioners, they ought to have power to make by-laws which are suitable for a suburb of Douglas—unless, indeed, Douglas will stretch out its arms and include this district within its own boundary, when, of course, the difficulty is at an end. But at the present time all those houses, with a population of nearly 2,000, are outside Douglas, and now the parish of Coaehan and the Parish Commissioners at present ought to have power to deal with them. At present there is no power ; they have no control beyond their boundary. The Commissioners have no control, because no control is given by the

The Local Government Acts. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 129

Act. I ask now that that control should be given not only to that parish, but to other parishes in the Island. Mr Mylrea seconded the leso!ution. Mr Crellin : I should like to ask his Honour whether his motion is only to enable the ■.:om- mioioners to make by-laws, or whether they are to be male for them by the Local Government Board. Deemster Gill : It does not go a step further than that. The Board cannot make them until the Parish Commissioners have the power given them, as they can only make such by-laws as the Commissioners have power to make. So this gives power to both parties. The Attorney-General : I think the hon. mem- ber for Michael is still under a misapprehension. Under this resolution the Commissioners of any parish or village can make by-laws on all the same subjects as the Commissioners of the towns can make them. In addition to that, the Local Gov- ernment Board can make by-laws. There are two bodies, with concurrent powers to make by laws. Deemster Gill : And both bodies have to come to !his Court for confirmation of any by-laws they- may make. The Attorney-General : There will be cor cm - rent power of the two parties, subject to the ap- proval of this Court. The resolution was then agreed to.

REDEMPTION OF TITHE. The Lord Bishop : I rise to move the following resolution :— That a committee of five members of this Court be appointed to consider the advisability of making provision for the apportionment of tithe rent charges, and for the redemption of such charges, if of small amount, and, if con- sidered advisable, the mode in which such ap- portionment and redemption can be effected, and to report thereon, to this Court. The com- mittee to have power to examine witnesses. I think (added his Lordship) it will be within the recollection of every member of this Court that his Honour Sir James Gell, while Attorney-General, introduced a Bill into this Legislature for the purpose of redeem- ing small tithe payments. This was, I think, about 15 months ago. The circumstances under which it was introduced may be very briefly re- ferred to. The tithe owners—and the tithe

Redemption of Tithe. 130 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. owners include the Crown, the Bishop, the Arch- deacon, and a large number of the clergy in the Island—had long become aware that, partly owing to the sale of titheable land in small plots for building purposes, and partly owing to the vast and increasing body growing up in this Island who are charged with the payment of tithe rent in extremely small sums, there are 1,112 persons paying one shilling and under, and 373 paying sums of one penny and under. Now, I think, if I state that this is a nuisance to the public, I may also be allowed to say it is an intolerable nuisance to the tithe owners to have to collect these sums, and the object of the Bill which was introduced by his Honour was to provide for their compul- sory redemption. The period fixed was 25 years' i urchase—and by this .um these payments could be redeemed, and the property subject cleared of tithe—that being the period fixed in England for similar operations. When the Bill came down from the upper branch of the Legis- lature another view was taken and the tithe owners were strongly urged to consent to reduce the 25 years to 20 years. I have already stated that the tithe owners do not only include persons in Holy Orders in this Island, but the Crown has to be consulted as well. There was some difficulty in getting the Crown to take the view that the clergy were willing to take, in view of the nuisance which they wished to remove, but after full consideration, and regarding it as an exceptional case, the Crown gave way and con- sented, in order to abate this nuisance, to come dcwn from 25 to 20 years' purchase. I then ven- tured to hope that the matter would be disposed of and settled, but another difficulty arose, to which I now allude. It was held—at least it was stated as being held—in the lower branch of the Legislature in this Island that there were some persons who felt that, because the tithe owners were willing to accept 20 years' purchase for these extremely small amounts, all the tithe should be redeemable at this price. May I venture to say that I have so high an opinion of the House of Keys that I can hardly think that this matter can be thoroughly under- stood, and that is why I want a Committee to look into it. I cannot make myself believe that many gentlemen whom I know very well, and personally, and whose views I know en questions of business can possibly think it is a fair thing to ask the tithe owners of this Island with respect to the whole of the

Redemption of Tithe. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 131

tithe which amounts to £5,000 a year to accept 20 years' purchase. What does it mean? It means , his: As I have said, for the last 60 years we hav2, reaaived £95 or £96 for every £100 worth of property, and the proposal made is, hat the tithe owner should now receive 20 years' purchase, or £2,000 down, as its equivalent But 1 put it to the Ccurt. Is that a reasonable pro- position to make to gentlemen whose incomes are certainly not over large? You know perfectly well that some five years ago it was tolerably easy to get four per cent. for small sums on mortgage in this Island. If you were to redeem £5,000 a year at 20 years' purchase, you would have £100,000 to deal with. Except you were prepared to mortgage the whole Island we should have to go across the water for an investment, and what investment could we possibly find which would yield £5,000 a year? We should hardly get two- and-a-half per cent., which means £50 a year, whereas I have shown you that we have actually received £95 or £96 a year for every £100 a year for the last 60 years. Now, I do not think that has been thoroughly understood, or the difficulty would not have arisen under these circumstances. I ask first that in the redemption of these small sums no such embargo should be laid on the tithe owners as to accept £2,000 for property which has annually brought them on an average £95 at least since 1839. It is a hard thing to say that, because there is a nuisance in the Island which presses hardly on the tithe payer and owner, that that nuisance should not be removed, unless we accept terms which would be unfair in any business transaction, and which not one of you would accept for yourselves. Now, I come to the second point. A little dwiculty has arisen likewise with respect to the body which is to apportion the tithe where land is sold for building plots. Say an acre of land chargeable with 2s 6d a year is divided into 30 or 40 plots, and you have to levy the tithe on that area. Well, it was proposed in the Bill that that matter should be dealt with by the Assessment Board. Some members took ob- jection to that, and thought that it was not the proper body for the purpose. Some thought that special Commissioners should be appointed to deal with it. I suppose in that case the payment of these Commissioners would have to fall equally between tithe owners and tithe payers. But I do not want to go into that matter. If there is

Redemption of Tithe, 132 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. to be a Committee, I think it far better that that Committee should go into it fully, and I have perfect confidence that if a Committee is ap- pointed—upon which I will not sit, because I am interested in the matter, and I have the authority of my friend, the Archdeacon, for saying that he will not sit—but if an inquiry is held by abso- lutely independent persons, who will look into it, and report to this House, I say I have every ecnfidence that the matter will be easily settled. I will not detain you longer, but I will move that we have a Committee to look into this subject from all points. I earnestly hope that they will sit as soon as possible, in order that we may bring up a Bill which will become law next July. Mr Allen seconded the resolution. Mr Clucas moved as an amendment that the words in the fourth line of the motion—" if of small amount " be struck out. Deemster Gell : That is the whole question at issue. Mr alucas : It leaves it in the discretion of the Committee to advise the Legislature as to what sums should be redeemed. If you put in the words "if of small amount" it ties them down. Deemster Gell : It means that the small amounts are not to be redeemed unless the whole are dealt with. Mr Clucas : I leave it to the Committee to de- cide that. Mr Quine: I second the amendment. The Attorney-General : I rise to support the motion, and I have only risen in consequence of the amendment which has been moved. I think, to adopt the amendment would be to put the whole question in a false light before the Court. A case has been made out for the re- demption of the small tithes on two strong grounds—the difficulty of collection and the annoyance to the tithe payer. But what case has been made out for the redemption of tithes other than small amounts? None whatever. And, therefore, by adopting the suggestion contained in the amendment, we are really tacking on some- thing to the original question which has no bear- ing upon it at all. I have followed with great interest the remarks of the Lord Bishop, and from what he says it seems to me that an attempt was made to mix up the general question of the redemption of large tithes with this question which only deals with the difficulty of collecting

Redemption of Tithe. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 133

small tithes. Well, now, I will put it to the Court : to put any difficulty in the way of re- deeming the small tithes is only invoking a kind of duress. We are confusing the merits of one question with another, because, whether the larger tithes are to be redeemed or not on par- ticular terms must be an entirely different ques- tion based upon its own merits. It cannot de- pend upon whether or not on account- of the difficulty of collecting these small tithes there ought not to be some legislation, some means for their redemption. I submit, then, that we should only be putting a false colour on the question before the Legislature were we to adopt the amendment. Mr Goldsmith : I was going to say that the words "if of small amount" should be defined. They are very indefinite. What is a small amount? It may appear small to one man and large to another. Mr Cowley : I intended to call attention to that as well, and I rise to support the amendment. I think it would not be desirable for the Legis- lature to deal with this matter piecemeal. It has been before the House for some considerable time now, and I heartily support that it should be referred to a Committee. I think it is de- sirable that redemption should be provided for. In many cases it may be desirable that not only amounts up to one shilling, but up to 20s should be commuted. I, therefore, support the amend- ment, that the whole matter should be referred to this Committee. Deemster Gell: I hope the amendment will not be carried. We had it plainly before us that there was a very great grievance existing in two or three respects. First of all, it was as to these very small sums of money of one shilling and under. To commute these was one object of the Bill. A second object of the Bill was to make compulsory redemption in certain cases, where lands are not now ,,ut up, but which might be cut up for building I trposes into very small parts. That is proposed n the interests of the people generally, and not merely in the interests of the tithe owners. Thirdly, there was provision made in the Bill that in certain eases larger sums might be redeemed by agreement between the tithe-payers and the tithe-owners. When the Bill came to the Council :rout the House of Keys, is contained a provision that no redemption at all should take place, in regard to any of the larger sums, by consent, except on certain terms. For R°demplion of Tithe. 134 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. instance, if a tithe-owner and tithe-payer agreed to redeem the tithes for 25 years' purchase, the ural said: "No—you may redeem, but you shall not redeem for more than 20 or 221 years' pur chase." So it provided hat there should be no contract outside the Act, although the parties concerned were agreeable. Therefore, the Bill in th et form was extremely unreasonable. Now as to the small amounts, it is a matter of simple justice that something should l.e done--that these small sums of one shilling and under should be dealt with. The House of Keys say that, unless the other question is conceded, they will not agree to the ab.- lition of those small tithes. Is that fair, is it right? I appeal to those who are land owners--will they take advantage of such a position as that? Take the second matter—the absence of any effectual provision for the recovery of contributions by persons who have to pay tithes to which others are in part liable. The effect is this. There is at present no simple or inexpensive mode for the apportionment of tithes, and binding on the tithe-owners a matter of great importance where, since the Tithe Com- mutation Act was passed, lands chargeable with a specified amount have been divided amongst several, and frequently numerous land owners, which is a very important matter. It is not like the Lord's Rent, where the Setting Quest can make a legal division or apportionment The only way provided in the Tithes Act is this— that land owners may, with the consent of the Bishop, apply for an apportionment by the Set- ting Quest. But there has never been an appli- cation of that kind under the Act, and to have an apportionment so made would be an expen- sive process in regard to putting the Setting Quest, in motion ; and now I want to point out that the law is the same with regard to tithe as with regard to other rent charges and ground rents. Every particle of the land on which the legally unapportioned charge exists is liable to be taken for the payment of it. A case of this kind was not long ago tried in Douglas, with respect to part of the Hills Estate, which had been cut up for building purposes. The tithe ..caner has the right to resort to any one person, and that person must get contribution as he best can from the scores or hundreds of persons who have bought portions of land. If the pre- sent law was rigorously enforced as to payment of these tithes, the tithe owners would not have the same difficulty as they have at present. They

Redemption of Tithe. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 135 could levy on any tithe payer, and he would have to seek contribution from all who were liable to contribute. As far as the tithe owners are con- cerned, it is an act of justice to allow the re- demption of small sums. I, therefore, hope that the House will not insist on the amendment. The Lord Bishop : I may say that if the amend- ,nent moved by the hon. member for Rushen is not accepted, I intend to propose to alter the words in question to read—" if of the annual value of one shilling or under." Mr Clucas: I suggest as a compromise "twenty shillings and wider." I do not say that it should be compulsory to that amount. It would be com- pulsory, perhaps, below one shilling. The point is, I think, you could get a better price for the tithes if that was done. The Lord Bishop : We have had the greatest possible difficulty in getting the Crown to consent to 20 years' purchase for the redemption of these sums of one shilling and under. I am quite satis- fied we shall not get the Crown to take anything like that price for the larger tithe payments to which the hon. member refers. We have gone as far as we can possibly go. I can say for the clergy that they could not accept 20 years' pm- chase for the larger tithes. They are willing to accept 20 years' purchase for the smaller tithes, but if I were to accept what the hon. member for Rusben suggests, we should have ilia same diffi- culty again that we had before. I cannot but express Ty honest conviction that this House will not say that a public nuisance shall be maintained in the Island, that 1,112 persons shall be called or. to pay a miserable sum of a shilling and under unless the clergy, and Bishop, and Archdeacon will accept a sum which would mean beggary and ruin all round. I cannot think that the Court will dictate such terms to the clergy a this Island. Mr Clucas I suggest that for the larger sum.• we would get more than 20 years' purchase. Under the English Act the amount is 20s, and the purchase is 25 years. Mr Qualtrt.ugh : 1 do not think we are in a position to discuss the merits of the financial question, seeing that a committee is about to take it up. 1, therefore, think it would not be wise for this Court to tie their hands as to what the limits for redemptions would be. Of course the Committee will take evidence with respec:, to that point, but there are several difficulties in

11, dem pti en of Ti I he. 136 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899.

the Isle of Many that require solving. For instance, if enybody lays out a field for building, and sells it to 20 persons or more, if that person had power to suggest a scheme to pay out the tithe in re- spect of the whole field, there would be a rem- edy for both parties, and it would prevent the recurrence of theso shilling or penny payments which we have heard of. I think that the Com- mittee should go into the principle in question, and when wa have heard the report of the Com- mittee, this Court will be able to decide what they will do. Deemster Gill : I would appeal to the fairness of this Court to adopt the resolution in the way suggested by the Lord Bishop. Here we find his Lordship and the clergy of this Island coming here and asking for a Committee to inquire into what they suppose, rightly or wrongly, to be a grievance. Well, now, I do not think that we should be churlish in this matter. If they prefer their reference in the way his Lordship has put it, why should we quarrel with them? If we want to put it in some other form, there is nothing to prevent any honourable member ask- ing for another Committee and going into a larger question. This question applies only to a certain state of things, and they ask that the in- quiry should be restricted to i hat. I say it is an unfair and vexatious thing to say to them : " No, we will not give you a Committee : we will not have this inquiry." I say it is open to any member afterwards to have further inquiry on any basis, but I think a sufficient grievance has been shown by his Lordship, and it is evident, from what took place before the Legislature some time ago, that some remedy is necessary. (Hear, hear.) A division was taken on the amendment to leave out the words " if of small amount." For : Messrs Joughin, Cowley, Kerruish, T. Corlett, Qualtrough, Clucas, and Quine-7. Against : Messrs E. H. Christian, Crellin, Allen, Maitland, Clague, J. R. Cowell, J. A. Mylrea, J. T. Cowell, Goldsmith, and the Speaker-10. The amend- ment was lost in the Keys and also in the Council. The Lord Bishop proposed to substitute the words " if of the annual value of one shilling and under" for the words " if of small amount." Mr Goldsmith seconded. The Governor put the motion that the resolu- tion as amended be adopted. Mr Clucas called for a division.

Redemption of 1 ithe. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 137

The Keys voted as follows : For : Messrs Joughin, E. H. Christian, Crellin, Allen, Callow, Maitland, Clague, J. R. Cowell, Mylrea, J. T. Cowell, Goldsmith, and the Speaker-12. Against : Messrs Quine, Clucas, Cowley, Kerruish, T. Corlett, and Qualtrough-6.—Carried.—The motion was carried unanimously in the Council. The motion was carried. Some confusion occurred when the Speaker was putting the motion to the House of Keys. The Speaker put the motion as for or against the amendment. The Governor said the motion ought to be that the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the clause. The Speaker, referring to the interruption, said it was his duty to put the motion in the lions.) of Keys. The Governor said he had put the motion ac- cording to the usual parliamer tary practice. The Speaker : In case any difficulty arises in future, I should like to say that, though it may be unfortunate with regard to the voting that we have in the Keys a different method of putting the motion, it is for me in this Court to put the vote to the Keys in the way in which they are accustomed. A little confusion arose on account of some members of the Council, with the best intentions, no doubt, speaking to certain members of the Keys. The Governor : I will have a conference with you some day, and we will adopt a standing order which will avoid confusion. Deemster Gen : The Speaker says that he puts the motion in his way, but many cases might arise in which his way of doing it might not be understood by the Council. In many cases ■ here might be a dispute as to what way the Keys had voted. The Speaker : I put it in the traditional way. Mr J. R. Cowell : In the Keys we are bound to say that the way the Speaker puts it is the right way. In this House we shall support our Speaker in his method of putting it. Deemster Gell: I submit that the Governor, as President of the Court, may prescribe how every motion shall be put. There can only be one right way. If the Keys put it in one way, it may be a different motion altogether to the motion that was before the Court. Mr J. II. Cowell: We would never suggest to the Council that his Excellency should put a

Redemption of Tithe. 138 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899.

question to them in the way we approve of. I hope the President will not attempt to dictate to the Speaker how he should put a motion to the House. The Governor : We will have a conference to make it quite clear. I have only endeavoured to see mci icns put in the way I have heard them put in the House of Lords for many years past. If I do not understand it, I cannot help it. Mr J. R. Cowell : I do not suggest that you have not done what is perfectly right, but I venture to say this : that the Speaker must .:10 supported in this House. The House has a method of determining what is right, and the Speaker is the judge of the right manner of put- ting a vote. The Court then proceded to the appointment of it Committee. The Committee was appointed as follows: Deemster Gell, the Attorney-General, the Speaker, Mr Clucas, and Mr J. R. Cowell.

NORTH DOUGLAS ELECTION EXPENSES. REVISION OF VOTERS' LISTS. Deem•s-ter Gill : I beg to move:— That a committee of this Court be appointed to examine the accounts connected with the election of a member for the House of Keys for North Douglas in November last, and also the accounts of expenses incurred in forming and revising the lists of voters under the House of Keys Election Acts for the year ended 30th September, 1898. I do not know, your Excellency, that it will be necessary to dwell on the matter, and, to shorten the proceedings, I would suggest that the previous Committee be re-appointed. We had last year myself, with Mr Mylrea, and I would add to these t he hon. member for North Douglas, Mr J. T. Cowell. Mr J. R. Cowell seconded the motion, and it was agreed to.

PUBLICATION OF LEGISLATIVE DEBATES. The Deemster Gill : I rise to move :— That a committee of five members of this Court be appointed to consider and report on the agreement recently existing with the proprietors of " The Isle of Man Times" newspaper for the publication in book form of the debates of the Legislature, and the advisability of continuing the said publication in its present or any other form, and to consider generally the question of preserving a record of such debates; the Com- I (rtb Douglas Election Expenses.—Publication of Legislature Debates. TYNWALD COURT, January 24,1899. 139

mittee to confer with his Excellency the Lieut.- Governor. and to have power to take evidence. At this time of the night I will not enter into the history of these debates further than saying that the contract which now exists between the Government and the proprietors of " The Isle of Man Times" is this : that the Government pay yearly the sum of £75; that the publishers should for that sum publish debates and sell them at lOs a volume. If there is any profit beyond that, then, beyond a certain amount, it is divided be- tween the Government and the printers; but so far from there being any profits this has been done by "The Isle of Man Times" at a very con- siderable loss for the seven years during which the arrangement has existed, and they have now taken advantage of a provision in the contract, and have given six months' notice to terminate the arrangement. I might say that the cost of producing this publication is something like £150 a year. The number of copies sold is under 40 ; so that that leaves a very large sum to be borne by the printer, and they now come to us and say they cannot continue this further, and the ques- tion for the Court is to decide what is to be done. I thought it better to put it in this form, and refer the metier, as it was referred before, to a Committee, who would look into the whole mat- ter as to whether it was desirable to have these debates printed at all, or whether they can be epitomised in some way so as to bring them to a more reasonable cost, and to decide upon the form generally. It is certain that it cannot go on at the present rate, and I do not know whether the Court would be ready to increase the subsidy of £75. The unfortunate part is that the hon. members and members of the public, whom one would have thought would have taken some in- terest in these prints of the legislative debates, da not buy these reports, and they are left on i he hands of the publishers. I want to draw the at teution of the Court to another point, and I wish that also to he considered by ihe Committee, and it is that there is no satisfactory method at pre- sent of preserving an authentic record of the prcceedings of this Legislature. In former days, when there was not so much business done by the Court, the minutes of the Court were taken by the Clerk of the Rolls. They were taken by several of them: Mr McHutchin, Mr Quayle, Mr Adams, and by Mr Dumbell, but it was found that those gentlemen, wishing to join in the de- bates of the Court, found it difficult, as members

Publication of Legislature Debates. 140 TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. can easily understand, to take minutes of what was going on, and at the same time join in the debates themselves. The matter was then thought over, and it was found that they were not obliged to take these minutes, and they ceased to take them, and no minutes, therefore, are taken. This was unsatisfactory. I do not know whether any minutes are taken by the shorthand writer. I re- member a shorthand writer coming into this House some Courts ago, and being summarily ejected by the Court. I do not know whether he was here for the purpose or not. I am satisfied that the method of keeping the records is not a satisfactory one, and I think it would be a good thing if this were included, and if the Committee were authorised to inquire into that branch of the subject, and report to the Court, so that something better and more satisfactory may be arrived at. I merely ask now that a Committee be appointed to investigate the whole matter, and report to the Court I, for one, would regret very much if the reports were altogether discon- tinued. To those who take an interest in the debates of the House they are very valuable in- deed for reference. I have no doubt that the Committee may suggest some shorter way of doing it in a smaller volume, and so bringing the price within the reach of the people who cannot pay it at present. Mr J. R. Cowell: I beg to second that, and to express the hope that the Court will not debate the matter now, but wait till the Committee's re- port, so as to save time. The motion was carried. The Council elected Deemster Gill and Mr Crellin to the Committee; the House of Keys elected the Speaker and Mr Mylrea; and Mr Cowley was appointed by the Governor and the Speaker.

HARBOUR BOARD. The Governor : I shall nominate the present Speaker of the House of Keys to fill the vacancy on the Harbour Board caused by the late Speaker's much regretted loss. The nomination was approved of in both branches unanimously,

ASYLUMS BOARD. Messrs J. R. Cowell and Clucas were proposed and seconded for the vacancy on the Asylums

Harbour Board.—Asylums Hoard. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 141 •-- Board caused by the late Speaker, and Mr Cowell was elected by ballot.

MEMBERS WANT THE TELEPHONE. Mr Mylrea : I might take the opportunity, your Excellency, of mentioning that I think ii would be a great advantage to the Court if we were connected with the telephone. A large number of members of the House are connected with the system, and it would be a great con- venience to us. To-day, for instance, it would have enabled us to let our families have notice of our unexpected detention. (Hear, hear.) The Governor promised to bear the matter in mind.

VENTILATION OF THE CHAMBER. THE PRESS ACCOMMODATION. Mr Kerruish: I beg to move that Mr Speaker be appointed in the room of the late Speaker on the Committee dealing with the ventilation of the Chamber ; and whilst I am on my feet I would like to call the attention of this Court to the inadequate provision made for the mem- bers of the Press. It is something disgraceful that the members of the Press should have to sit for two hours, and by the light of a half- penny clip take down the proceedings of this Court. (Hear, hear.) Mr J. R. Cowell: I second that. The motion was agreed to. The Governor : I hope we shall come to some arrangement soon as to the ventilation, and most certainly I want better accommodation for the Press, and, also, I should like better accommoda- tion for the Bar.

REVISION OF STANDING ORDERS. The filling of the vacancy on the Committee to whom was referred the consideration of the Standing Orders with regard to the appointment of Committees stood on the agenda. Deemster Gill: I do think we might take up the Standing Orders generally. Mr Goldsmith: I do not know about the other Standing Orders, but it must be apparent to everybody that the Standing Orders for the ap- pointment of Committees are very faulty. I beg Members want the Telephone.—Ventilation of the Chamber.—The Press Accommodation.— Revision of the Standing Orders. 142 TYNWALD COURT, January 24,1899. to move, if the Speaker is not already a member, that he be appointed a member of the Committee. The appointment of the Speaker was agreed io.

MU-URNS OF OFFENCES AND CON VICTIONS. Mr Kerruish: I beg to move for the following returns for the year ended 31st March, 1898:- 1. Offences and convictions under Lottery Act, 1839. 2. Offences and convictions under section 45 of the Licensing Act, 1876. 3. Number of persons declared habitual drunkards 4. Offences and convictions under Brewer Act, 1874. 5. Offences and convictions under the Mer- chandise Marks Act, 1885. 6. Offences end convictions undo: the Bread. Flour. and Corn Act. 1880. 7. Offences and convictions under Weights and Measures Act. 1880, and Inspector's quarterly reports. 8. Offences and convictions under Adulteration Acts, 1874 and 1888. 9. Offences and convictions under Wild Birds Pr Rection Act, 1887. 10. Offences and convictions under Sea Fisheries Act, 1894: and for copy of bye-laws, and return of number end salaries of Fishery Officers appointed. 11. Statement of accounts, duly audited. of the Trustees of Common Lands for the years ended 12th November, 1896, and 12th Nov- ember, 1897. The Governor : I was going to say that I have inquired about these returns. I think the hon. member had this notice down on a former occa- sion. I have come to this conclusion: that what- ever returns we have in the Government Office we shall be very glad indeed to provide, but cannot say that I can recommend the Tynwald Court to go to the expense of collecting these returns. I do not think there is much object in getting them collected. Deemster Gell : With reference to No. 1, the lottery offences, I can answer that, for the time I was Attorney-General—for they have to be prosecuted by the Attorney-General—there was nut one. Mr J. T. Cowell: I move that this matter be deferred. Whatever is done now will be done hurriedly and unsatisfactorily. The Attorney-General : I second that motion. I made an analysis of all these Acts in order to find out before whom the offences were triable,

Returns of Offences and Convictions. TYNWALD COURT, January 24, 1899. 143 and it was quite obvious on the face of it that there is no information in the Government Office which could provide these returns. In a variety of cases they come before the High-Bailiffs or magistrates. If the information I have will be of any use to the hon. member for G-arff, I shall be only too glad to assist him by giving it to him. Mr Kerruish: My sole reason for introducing these matters is this: I do not wish to be a com- mon informer, but I contend„ with reference to the first section, the Lottery Act, that it has been constantly evaded. The motion for adjourning the debate was then put and carried, and the Court rose.

•

Returns of Offences and Convictions.