On Friday week, the House of Lords dealt with the
allot- ments clauses of the Parish Councils Bill. On the motion of Lord Winchilsea, the County Council was substituted for the District Council, as the authority which should inquire into representations made by Parish Councils as to difficulties in regard to getting suitable land for allotments. Lord Salisbury also carried, by 150 to 54, the omission of the words making it unnecessary that the orders of the Local Government Board, in regard to compulsory acquisition, should require confirmation by Parliament. Amendments were also passed declaring that, in cases of compulsory hiring, the term must not be less than fourteen years or more than twenty-one. After the passing of a few more limiting amendments, the Duke of Devonshire appealed to the Government to leave the allotments question alone, and to be content with setting up the Parish Councils, and allowing them for the first year or two to work with the existing law,—an appeal which drew forth quite a burst of righteous indignation from the Lord Chancellor. On Monday, the clause under which the elected trustees were to be in a majority on Parish Charities was omitted; but it was agreed that on the report words making them one-third of the whole should be added. The debate ended in a passage-of arms between Lord Salisbury and Lord Herschell. Lord Salisbury said that, in view of the way in which Magistrates were now made, he would not make any struggle to keep the ex-officio Guardians. This Lord Herschell warmly resented as an unfair attack on his ad- ministration. Lord Salisbury's attack on the Chancellor was most unjust. It is a pity that the leader of the House of Lords should yield to the temptation to repeat the indiscre- tions of the Saturday Review.
Previous page
