moved that this Bill, which had come down from the House of Lords, should be now read the second time. He explained that in seeking to fill up the vacant post of Arbitrator, which vacancy had been occasioned by the deaths, in succession, of Lord West-bury and Lord Romilly, the Lord Chancellor was obliged by the existing Act to choose a gentleman who either was, or had been, a Judge, and that, as there were difficulties in complying with this condition, it was proposed by the present measure to make the qualification simply 15 years' standing at the Bar. It was intended, moreover, to provide for an appeal from the decisions of the Judge to the Full Court of Chancery, and also for bringing before the same Court points in regard to which the late Arbitrator, Lord Romilly, had differed from his predecessor, Lord Westbury. With respect to an Amendment which had been placed on the Paper by the hon. and learned Member for Coventry (Mr. Jackson), objecting to the measure being dealt with as a Private Bill, he explained that, under the Rules of the House of Lords, it had been found necessary so to treat it. He was prepared to accede to the proposal made in another Amendment of the same hon. and learned Member—namely, that the Bill should be referred to a Select Committee; five Members to be nominated by the House and four by the Committee of Selection.

, under these circumstances, would not oppose the second reading.

said, there was a strong objection on the part of many persons interested to any one under the status of a Judge being appointed Arbitrator.

remarked that the appointment of a Select Committee would afford an ample opportunity of weighing all objections, and pointed out that it would be especially important to consider whether it was desirable to leave the Arbitrator to decide at his own discretion whether or not there should be an appeal.

said, he thought there had been nothing more lamentable in the administration of justice in this country than the European Assurance Society Arbitration. At the end of five years, and after an expenditure of about £50,000, they had come to the conclusion that nothing whatever had been actually settled. It was to be hoped that this scandal would not be aggravated in the future.

maintained that the policy-holders ought, in justice, to have a right to appeal not dependent on the discretion of the Arbitrator.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether it is the intention of Government to introduce any measure for the relief of highway boards and parishes from the charge of repairing roads (recently turnpike) which has devolved upon them owing to the dissolution of turnpike trusts; and, whether it is intended to compensate in any way those mortgagees who, having advanced money for the purpose of making turnpike roads for the accommodation of the public, have now lost both principal and interest by the discharge of such trusts?

, in reply, said, it was not the intention of the Government, during the present Session, to introduce any measure upon the subject of highways. If any such measure were introduced, no doubt it would make some provision for relieving in certain cases highway districts and parishes from charges which pressed very severely on them. At the same time, during the last quarter of a century a large number of parishes had borne those charges cheerfully rather than have a continuance of toll bars and turnpike tolls. As to the second part of the Question of the hon. Member, the House of Commons and the Home Office in former days had always been very careful of the interests of mortgagees in arranging for the expiration of turnpike trusts, and he was not aware that there was any occasion for the Government to interfere by further legislation on the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether Captains attached to the Musketry and Garrison Instructor's Department are not at present seconded; whether Captains holding appointments for five years in the Topographical, Adjutant General's, and Quarter Master General's Departments are at present seconded; and, if not, whether there is any objection to seconding Captains holding such appointments in the three last mentioned departments?

Sir, the question is of a very technical character, and I am afraid I cannot make my answer to it very clear to the House generally:—1. Captains of the Line are seconded, or, rather, made supernumerary, when employed as Assistant Adjutant Generals or Deputy Assistant Adjutant Generals for Musketry, or as Instructors at Hythe, or as Garrison Instructors. In the Artillery, officers employed as Garrison Instructors are also made supernumerary; but this is not the case in the Engineers. 2. Captains of the Line and of the Engineers holding appointments for five years in the Topographical, Adjutant General's, and Quartermaster General's Departments are not at present seconded; but all officers of Artillery employed in these Departments are borne supernumerary to the establishment. In reply to the third Question, I have to state that the matter is under consideration.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether he intends during this Session to bring in any Bill dealing with the question of Union Eating?

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether he intends during the present Session to bring in any Bill dealing with the Irish Jury Laws; and, if so, when he will introduce it?

, in reply, said, that a measure on the Irish Jury Laws had for some time past been drafted; but, as the progress of Public Business had not been encouraging, it was, he was afraid, utterly hopeless that it could be proceeded with this year. He expected, however, to be able to introduce, at the earliest possible period next Session, a general Bill dealing with the question. As to Union Eating, the subject was one which he thought could be best dealt with in a measure dealing with the Grand Jury Laws, which was even a larger question, and it would be for the same reason impossible for him to propose legislation on it this Session.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, with reference to the recent communications between Her Majesty's Government and those of Germany and France as to the relation of those Powers with each other, Whether he is prepared to state that Her Majesty's Government have given no occasion for the statements in the public journals of Berlin, or others, that this country "has ranged herself amongst the possible adversaries of the German Empire in its contest with the Papacy?"

Sir, I have not seen those "public statements in the journals of Berlin, or others," to which the Question of the hon. Gentleman refers. I beg to add, on the part of the Government, that we are not responsible for anything which appears in newspapers, either foreign or domestic.

asked the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Go- vernment, Whether he will give an assurance that every facility will be afforded to resume the debate on the Sale of Intoxicating Liquors on Sunday (Ireland) Bill?

Sir, I cannot give the hon. Gentleman any assurance of the nature he requires. The time at the disposal of the Government to carry through important Bills, so as to endeavour to prorogue the House at the usual time is very short indeed, and to accomplish that I have been obliged to appeal to the House to give us Morning Sittings. There is a rule, certainly, that in the case of Bills which have been considered and their principle adopted by being read a second time, we should in the month of June give every assistance in their further progress. In the case, however, of Bills not thus read, as in that of the Monastic and Conventual Institutions Bill, there is, as I told my hon. Friend the Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Newdegate) the other night, no precedent for asking the House to waste a considerable portion of precious time in discussing them. The same course applies to the adjourned debate on the Bill to which the hon. Gentleman (Mr. B. Smyth) refers, and I mean him no disrespect in saying that there is no use, as it seems to me, in carrying on debates which lead to no public benefit.

asked, after the announcement of the right hon. Gentleman, differing so very materially from that made on a former memorable occasion, Whether the Lord Advocate hoped to proceed with the Sheriffs' Court (Scotland) Bill—the only Government legislation for Scotland of any importance this year?

replied that the statement of his right hon. Friend tallied exactly with what he said on a former occasion, but he was then misunderstood. The Lord Advocate would undoubtedly bring this Bill before the House at an early period.

moved, in page 162, after line 9, to insert the following clause:—

(Local board to be burial board in certain cases.)

"When a vestry of any parish comprised in a local government district resolves to appoint a burial board, the local board may at the option of the vestry be the burial board for such parish, and all expenses incurred by such burial board shall be defrayed out of a rate to be levied in such parish in the same manner as a general district rate: Provided, That if such parish has been declared a "ward for the election of members of the local board, such members shall form the burial board for the parish, and shall be deemed to be a burial board elected under the Burial Acts for the time being in force."

pro-posed to insert words which would give the Local Government Board power in cases where the local authorities neglected to provide a sufficient supply of water to take proceedings for the purpose of compelling them to do so.

said, he believed the Amendment to be entirely unnecessary, because the Local Government Board had power under the Bill, when complaints were made of a want of supply of water, to compel the local authorities to provide it. The great difficulty, however, they would have to contend with was in cases where builders of houses neglected to provide sufficient accommodation.

moved the insertion of words to the effect that the provisions as to cellar dwellings should hold good, notwithstanding the provisions of the local Act to the contrary.

said, he did not know how far this Amendment would carry them, or how many local Acts would be disturbed by adopting it. The Local Government Board, on the application of the local authorities, had now the power to alter the terms or vary the provisions of local Acts, and he should be ready to exercise that power if application were made to him. He, however, thought it would be dangerous to interfere with local Acts in the way now suggested.

suggested that it was desirable, in any Act relating to corporate property, that the recommendations of such bodies should be embodied in the Bill. He wished to know whether there was any security as to the period of the Session when a Bill embodying the Provisional Orders would be submitted to Parliament? He thought such a Bill should be laid on the Table of the House early in the Session, so that it might receive the due consideration of Members.

replied, that the only security which he was aware of was a Standing Order of the House of Lords, which provided that these Bills should not be introduced into that House after a certain day in June. He should only be misleading the House if he were to say that it would be practicable to have them all introduced at the beginning of the Session.

said, he would not press an Amendment of which he had given Notice, the effect of which would be to give power to the authorities to deal with cases in which premises were in such a state as to be "either" a nuisance or injurious to health. If it was found necessary, the Amendment could be made when the Bill got into the House of Lords.

objected to the matter being allowed to stand over until the Bill reached "another place," of which they knew little, and moved the insertion of the word "either," in accordance with the Amendment of which the President of the Local Government Board had given Notice.

, in assenting to the Amendment, remarked that the point could still be dealt with in the House of Lords.

moved, in line 23, to leave out "may," and insert "shall." It had been provided that in certain circumstances where the best materials had been employed and the furnaces properly constructed, and where complaint was made of "smoke nuisance," the magistrates might dismiss the complaint. The object of his Amendment was to guide the discretion of the tribunal before which a case of smoke nuisance was brought.

said, the Amendment of the hon. and learned Member was one of great importance. He (Mr. Muntz) had had great experience in matters of this kind, and he was aware of cases in which thousands of pounds had been expended in the vain endeavour to effect the consumption of smoke. To his knowledge, manufacturers had been periodically fined for not doing that which it was impossible to do. The Bill expressed the words, "as far as practicable;" but who was to be the judge of what was practicable? He should support the Amendment.

said, he had no objection to accept the Amendment to the extent as applied to the Justices of substituting the words, "shall dismiss the complaint," instead of "may dismiss the complaint," in such cases as were described in the Amendment.

moved, in page 39, lines 31, 33, and 34, to leave out "urban," and insert "local."

moved in page 39, line 41, after "effluvia," to insert "which is a nuisance or."

, in reference to some shop fronts projecting beyond others in the line of street, and thus constituting a disfigurement, moved, in page 53, line 30, after the word "build- ing," to insert "or the front thereof." He said, that in numerous instances where the local authorities were desirous of setting back a street, the owners of houses had refused to pull down their shop fronts, although provision was made for compensation. They held out for exorbitant compensation.

said, he thought the weight of authority was undoubtedly considerable on the point; but it seemed to him that the pulling down a shop front might prove so great an injury to the owner that nothing could compensate him for it. He acquiesced, not without considerable reluctance, in the Amendment; but he thought that some modification of it was required.

said, the clause at present left the appointment of the umpire, when the arbitrators disagreed, to the Court of Quarter Sessions. To obviate the inconvenience which might arise through the necessary delay of three months between the sittings of the Court of Quarter Sessions, he moved, in page 65, line 40, to leave out "Court of Quarter Sessions," and insert "Local Government Board."

accepted the Amendment.

moved, in line 30, to add the following Proviso:—

"That no justice of the peace who is also a member of the local authority shall act as such justice in any court of summary jurisdiction in any proceeding in which such local authority is complainant or defendant."

said, he could not accept the Amendment, and hoped it would not be pressed. The justices of the peace would not, so far as the purposes of the Bill were concerned, be "interested" in the sense of partizanship.

moved, in line 25, to leave out the words—

"In any case in which the penalty imposed or the sum adjudged to he paid exceeds twenty shillings or in which imprisonment is awarded."

moved an Amendment, to the effect that not only boroughs having separate Courts of Quarter Sessions, but also "other urban or rural districts containing a population of 25,000 and upwards," should not be included in any union of districts for the purpose of appointing a medical officer of health, without the consent of the local authority.

moved, in page 116, after line 24, to insert—

"(9.) The foregoing provisions shall apply to any Provisional Order amending a local Act, although such Act may relate to a district or districts of several urban sanitary authorities,

and such order may be made upon the application of any one or more of such, authorities."

said, he thought the proposal not unreasonable, but it was inconsistent with the spirit of the clause. He would consider, however, whether it could not be embodied in another part of the Bill.

moved, in page 10, line 7, to leave out all after "to" to "provide," in line 8, and insert "one or more auditors approved by the Registrar," his object being to secure that in future those who audited the accounts of these Societies should be fit and proper persons to discharge the duty.

opposed the Amendment.

said, the Societies were, no doubt, competent to appoint efficient auditors, but unfortunately they did not always do so, and anybody who had read the Report of the Evidence taken before the Royal Commission must see what evils had arisen even among Societies of considerable standing from the inefficiency of the law. He hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would apply his mind to secure, in some way or other, an efficient and independent audit. At present auditors were too often the mere creatures of the committeemen, who practically appointed them.

remarked that the auditors, if of any standing, considered themselves responsible for accounts. He opposed the Amendment as being inconsistent with the principle that the Government were not to give a guarantee.

said, that this was not merely a question of expense, but of the position which the Government should take in this matter. No doubt, the Commission found that there had been very great laxity in the matter of audit, some of the auditors appointed being exceedingly slack in performing the most ordinary and obvious duties of their office. There was one case in which forms were printed with the signature of the auditor, and the figures were filled in afterwards by the authority of the committee. But there might not be another such case. There were also cases of a more delicate character, where the auditors did not think it right to do more than examine into the arithmetical correctness of the accounts submitted to them, without inquiring whether the committee had authority to incur the expenditure. Steps would be taken by which public auditors would be appointed by the authority of the Government, whose services could be obtained for the proper audit by these Societies; and he trusted the appointment of those public auditors might be of use in other matters besides Friendly Societies. He hoped the general effect of that Bill would be much to improve the system of audit; because it would enforce by penalties the fulfillment of their duties by auditors and other officers of those Societies. He proposed to amend Clause 32, providing for the imposition of a penalty for falsification of accounts, by adding to the words "if any person makes or orders "any false entry the word" allows, "and also by adding words extending the penalty to an intentional evasion of the provisions of the Bill on that subject. That was as far as he thought they could reasonably go, and he objected to the Government undertaking to approve the auditor. If there was sufficient publicity given to the proceedings and sufficient watchfulness exercised, they might hope to check the abuses which had hitherto prevailed. At all events, he was not able to accept the Amendment of his hon. Friend.

said, he did not think the explanation of the Chancellor of the Exchequer met the requirements of the case. The audit was insufficient in the Bill and required improvement. He had an Amendment of his own to propose which would much strengthen it, and which was not open to the same objection. He would suggest that those Societies should be required to choose their auditors from the body of public accountants—say, of five years' standing.

pointed out that the Bill did not define the duties of the auditor.

said, he did not think that what the right hon. Gentleman proposed would be a sufficient guarantee that the audit would he satisfactory. He should he very glad to withdraw his own Amendment and to allow the hon. Member for Glasgow (Mr. Anderson) to move his, though he thought some of the small clubs might have a difficulty in finding such a person as was described in the hon. Gentleman's Amendment. He would suggest the advantage of inserting a Proviso that the auditors should not be members of the Society.

pointed out that if a Society wished to defeat the law it might easily do so by asking the treasurer and secretary of another Society to audit the accounts and promising to perform the same task for the other Society. It was for this reason that he did not persevere with the Amendment he had placed upon the Paper. He trusted the Committee would hesitate before it accepted the hon. Member for Glasgow's Amendment. It would be difficult to say what was meant by a "public accountant."

moved, in page 10, line 8, after "provide," to insert—

"But in cases where only one person is appointed, such person, or where two or more persons are appointed, one at least of such persons shall he a public accountant of at least five years standing, and a member of some incorporated society of accountants, and."

said, he thought that the more they looked at this matter the more they would see the difficulty in providing for a proper audit. Most of these Societies did their work so well that no different kind of audit was required. This being so, what right was there to insist upon auditing their accounts for them? He believed that the Chancellor of the Exchequer could not go farther than he had done in this matter; and if the Bill were made too stringent he was sure that it would do more harm than good.

said, there was great force in what had fallen from the hon. Member for Birmingham, and he agreed with him that many of those who audited the accounts of Friendly Societies were more competent for their work than most public accountants would be, and whilst they did their work gratuitously they were responsible to their respective Societies. He thought, perhaps, it might be well to amend the clause by saying that the auditors should certify the accounts to be correct "and in accordance with the law." This would throw upon the auditors the duty of seeing that the items could be properly allowed.

said, he thought that if they were to compel Societies to submit to a new kind of audit they would inflict upon them an injustice which was not inflicted upon other people.

suggested that the audit might be improved by the appointment of a supervising auditor to inquire into the affairs of Societies in regard to which doubts were entertained.

said, he was afraid that the object of the Bill would be, to a great extent, defeated if an outside auditor were not appointed. If they had perfect faith in all those Societies, of course there was no necessity for any audit; but when they recollected the rogueries which had taken place in regard to these Societies, he thought they would see the necessity for having an outsider as an auditor.

suggested, instead of the words which the Chancellor of the Exchequer thought necessary, these, "duly vouched and in accordance with law." It was most desirable to secure independent auditors; for at present they were frequently appointed by the very persons whom they were appointed to check.

proposed to insert the words, "not being members of the Society," which meant that auditors who checked the accounts should not belong to the Society. This, he thought, would secure an independent audit.

objected to the Amendment which treated all the gentlemen connected with Friendly Societies as though they were rascals. Most of the Societies, especially the large ones, were perfectly able to manage their own affairs; and, in fact, did so exceedingly well. They had within the Societies persons perfectly competent to audit the accounts, and it would be very objectionable to prevent such persons performing the duty. The expense of public accountants would prevent many Societies being registered.

, who had an Amendment on the Paper similar to the one under discussion, said, he did not think the audits would be satisfactory unless some such provision were made. It was to be remembered that there were Societies of a different kind from those referred to by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He thought the object they had in view might be secured by making it necessary for one of the auditors not to be a member of the Society, and to be approved by the Registrars.

remarked that, so far as the Societies referred to by the Chancellor of the Exchequer were concerned, no legislation whatever was required. They did their duties efficiently, but the legislation was to check a different class of society.

, whilst acknowledging that the proposed words might suggest a slur upon the Societies, was yet convinced that Societies would do well to adopt the rule suggested in the Amendment. "What was required in the auditors was not only competence but independence.

suggested that instead of adopting the Amendment in the form in which it had been moved it should be provided that at the instance of a fixed number of members the committee of any Society should be compelled to obtain a perfectly independent audit of their accounts.

said, he thought the members of any Society would be better able to audit their accounts than any outsider could possibly be. In provincial towns public accountants were, as a rule, bankrupt attorney's clerks; and he therefore objected to the proposal to employ them in preference to the members of the Societies themselves.

said, he thought that such an arrangement should be provided as would give confidence, not only to the members, but to the outside public, in reference to the accounts.

said, he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would maintain the Bill as it stood. The question was a most important one. If the accounts were cooked—as someone called it—at all, he believed they would be more thoroughly cooked by a professional cook than an amateur. Let the inspection of the accounts of each Society be left in the hands of the members.

said, that many hon. Members seemed to think this clause was not strong enough; but all these suggestions had been before him, and he had considered them over and over again. He opposed the Amendment on the ground that if the Societies were respectable and straightforward better audits would be obtained by the appointment of members as auditors than if outsiders were chosen; and that if the Societies were bad it would be as easy to engage outside auditors who would play into the hands of the committee as for the committee to obtain tools among the members themselves.

said, he was afraid that the smaller Societies would be very liable to appoint inefficient auditors. Many of them would very likely appoint the publican at whose house the Society held its meetings. If it were best, as suggested by the hon. Baronet (Sir Andrew Lusk), to leave the Bill as it stood, they must, to carry that to its proper result, have no audit at all. The sort of audit would really depend more on the auditors than on any rules the Committee could lay down. What the Committee wanted was to get as many as possible of these weak Societies within the scope of the Bill, and thus make them safer and more useful. If the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer would put into the clause the words "approved by the Registrar," the result would be that the public auditor would be taken.

suggested that the hon. and gallant Baronet (Sir Walter Barttelot) should alter his Amendment to "one of the said auditors not being a member of the Society." It would add greatly to the security of the Society if one auditor was always a non-member.

objected to the Amendment because it would interfere with what had been the ordinary practice of a large number of well-regulated Societies. In numerous instances these audits were conducted, and efficiently conducted, by some of the honorary members. They were persons generally well-qualified; they were amongst the more respectable classes of the place; and it would be a great misfortune if such persons were shut out from the performance of this duty. It could not be said that there was any necessity to have persons qualified to go into nice legal questions. All they had to see was that the different monies were carried to the right accounts, and that no money had been fraudulently dealt with.

said, that as the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had thought fit to introduce auditors as a means of seeming to give security, they should be very careful how it was done. It was always a delicate matter for Parliament to decide upon the best course under such circumstances; but if they were to hold out to these Societies that by the appointment of auditors the Bill was going to give them security, the least they could do was to take care the auditors were of the best kind, and especially of a kind in which those who were concerned had confidence. Anyone who had had any experience of the world knew there was such a thing as "cooking" accounts; and if the affairs of these Societies were likely to go wrong the persons most likely to be cognizant of and wink at the cooking of the accounts would be those within the limits of the Society. He therefore thought the proposal of the hon. Baronet opposite (Sir Harcourt Johnstone), to have at least one of the auditors a non-member, was a most valuable one.

thought that the appointment of auditors at all by Act of Parliament was objectionable in principle as interfering too much with the freedom of the Societies, If official auditors were appointed they ought to be men of high standing, and they would require heavy fees, and the expense would tend to keep the smaller Societies out of the scope of the Bill.

considered that an auditor who was himself interested in and belonged to the Society would be the most likely person to insist upon the accounts of a Society being well kept.

said, he thought the provision in the Bill in reference to the appointment of auditors was a good one.

said, he was sure that those who agreed with him did not wish to cast any slur upon the members of the Society; but he felt himself bound to go to a division if his Amendment received any support from hon. Members.

said, he thought if the hon. and gallant Member was resolved to go to a division, he would improve his Amendment by inserting the word "benefit" in it.

moved, in page 10, line 8, after "provide," to insert "one at least of whom shall not be a member of the society, and shall be approved by the registrar." The hon. Member said, there was a very strong feeling that the Bill did not give all the guarantees which it might do for a satisfactory audit.

said, his objection to these propositions was that the whole proceeding would be a sham; because names would be sent up and receive the sanction of the Registrar which would give the appointments a kind of authority they were really not entitled to. He thought the Bill, in its present shape, would go very far towards bringing about a satisfactory and efficient audit.

was of opinion that, unless something of the kind proposed were done, the Bill would not really very much improve things as they stood.

said, it did not follow because an Act of Parliament did not succeed in making everything perfect it therefore did no good. Under the present law nothing was required except that the rules should contain a provision for periodical or annual audit. But there was no provision as to the way in which the accounts should be prepared, no penalty on the auditors for mistakes or wilful omissions, the whole thing being as loose as possible. This Bill, though it did not go the length the hon. Gentleman wished, went a considerable way. It provided that there should be an audit by auditors; it gave the Registrar power to regulate the way in which the accounts should be prepared, and made other improvements where all was now in confusion. What the auditor would have to do was to see whether the items posted under the various heads—such as Sick Fund, Management, Death Fund, and so on—were properly posted. Besides, a penalty was imposed on the auditor if he did not do his duty properly. Therefore, it was nonsense to say that the Bill did nothing.

said, the Committee had decided this question already.

suggested that if the members of a Society disapproved an audit by their own members, the members of the Society should be at liberty to appoint an additional accountant to be recognized by the Registrar or the Government.

said, if the members of a Society at one of its ordinary meetings disapproved an audit by persons who were members of the Society they would have the power of appointing other persons to audit the Society's accounts.

did not see why the Government should shrink from throwing this responsibility on the Registrar.

believed that if the payment of small fees for auditing the accounts of a Society were made compulsory considerable damage would be done. He approved the option which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had proposed to give to Societies of appointing public accountants. He hoped the Amendment would be withdrawn, as the clause was much better as it stood.

proposed that after the word "provide" should be inserted—

"And whose names and addresses shall be sent up to the registrar and published by a notice put up in the lodge-room or board-room of the society, if any, three months before the period of audit."

said, the Amendment was quite in accord with the spirit of the Bill, and he was prepared to accept it.

said, he thought it would be necessary to provide for cases in which the auditor appointed might die or become incapacitated from performing the duty, or the result would be that the audit would have to be delayed, which would be very objectionable.

said, experience had proved that every audit ought to be a continuous one. Therefore, he would suggest that the auditor should be appointed at the beginning of the year, and be authorized to audit the accounts half-yearly, quarterly, or in any other mode he might think proper.

moved the insertion of words making it incumbent on auditors not only to see that the accounts were correct, but that they were in accordance with law.

said, that when a certain number of the members of a Society thought the audit had not been fairly conducted, they ought to have the power to obtain an official investigation into the affairs of the Society. He therefore moved an Amendment giving the Registrar power to appoint at his discretion an official auditor, who was to be invested with all the powers possessed by the ordinary auditor.

pointed out that the object of the hon. Member would be substantially obtained by the 23rd clause, which empowered the Registrar, on the application of a certain number of members, to cause an inquiry to be made into the) affairs of the Society.

moved, in page 10, line 30, after "Parliament," to insert—

"Provided, That in those cases where societies send to the registrar, with the annual returns of receipts and expenditure, returns of sickness and mortality experienced by the society during the year, quinquennial returns as provided by this section shall not be compulsory."

moved, in page 10, line 36, after "by," to insert with a view to secure the appointment of a competent valuer—

"Some person not an officer of the society, carrying on publicly the business of an actuary, or approved by the registrar."

said, the objection to this Amendment was similar to the objection he had urged to the Amendment respecting audit. The great security was that the valuation should be made upon an uniform principle, and a power was reserved to the Registrar by one of the sub-sections to prescribe the form and particulars of every annual, quinquennial, or other Return. Thus there would be a security for a valuation on a uniform plan.

suggested that the valuation should be conducted by a committee of three experienced persons appointed by the Society. In almost every Society there were men who, though perhaps in humble life, were competent to discharge this duty.

supported the Amendment, because he felt that the greatest care should be taken to make this quinquennial audit and report in particular as real as possible.

said, the valuation of a Society's assets and liabilities required an amount of technical actuarial information which they could hardly expect from the ordinary members of a Society. He had hoped, however, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would adopt the principle of the Amendment.

said, he thought the valuation would be best arrived at under the influence of regulations provided by the Registrar. An actuarial valuation would add a great expense to the Societies. He trusted the Committee would not adopt the Amendment.

said, he thought that the Committee should adopt either the Amendment of the hon. Member for Paisley (Mr. W. Holms), or that of the hon. Member for Mid-Lincolnshire (Mr. E. Stanhope), because it was essential that these valuations should be accurate. The small Societies would certainly not be able to find amongst their own members any one fairly competent to take an account of the assets, and if Parliament were going to help them in that matter they must find a fit officer to undertake the duty, instead of leaving it to the members themselves, who might be guided solely by an interested person—namely, the publican.

objected to the Amendment, because it would throw a great impediment in the way of the registration of small Societies. One of the main difficulties with regard to valuations at present was that even the most eminent actuaries, when called in, arrived at different conclusions, because they proceeded on totally different principles in making the valuations. Then the cost of valuations would be beyond the means of small Societies. It would be better that the Registrar should draw up a list of matters that should be taken into account in making the valuation.

complained that they were forcing too much upon working men, in the way not only of professional accountants, but professional actuaries and valuers. He thought valuers would do all that was required of

agreed that actuaries belonged to the class of men who would not do their work without large payment, and that certainly was a difficulty in the present case.

disclaimed any intention to force actuaries upon Societies. A competent man would, however, be required, and his appointment should have the approval of the Registrar. All he wanted was to protect poor people by ensuring a proper valuation of the assets and liabilities of Societies.

approved of steps being taken to prevent the impression that the accounts of the Societies were not fairly and fully gone into at the proposed quinquennial periods, and that the Societies were not capable of meeting their liabilities. It would be objectionable to put any unnecessary-expense upon these Societies, because that would be a discouragement.

suggested that the valuer should be compelled to make a declaration of his duties before the magistrates in petty sessions. He considered if his suggestion was adopted that it would bring the persons appointed before the public, and would secure efficient persons being appointed.

believed the Amendment would have the effect of strengthening the position of members of the Societies whom it concerned.

said, it had been suggested that those Societies should be allowed to work out their own affairs, and he thought so too. With regard to the question of the proposed mode of valuation of the effects of the Societies, he considered it would be so expensive as to seriously diminish their property. He had received a communication informing him that there was a Society in Glasgow numbering 50,000 members, and that the cost of making a valuation of their property amounted to 500 guineas. He hoped, therefore, that the right hon. Gentleman would accept the Amendment.

said, the Amendment would be productive of considerable deviation from the principle of the clause; and he was sorry to say he could not accept it.

moved, in page 11, line 6, to add at end—

"Provided, That if the Society shall consist of less than one hundred members, and the registrar shall find that the assets and liabilities have not previously been valued by any actuary, he may direct the first valuation to be made at half the usual charge to the Society."

entirely sympathized with the object of the Amendment, because he was most anxious that small Societies should come in under the Bill, and he would take care that the fees were so fixed as to give the greatest possible encouragement to small Societies. Probably he might be able to go even further than the Amendment with regard to the cost of the first valuation, and he might possibly be able to make it almost a nominal charge.

said, many Societies would object to the valuations on the ground of the expense which they would involve, and which, in the case of a Glasgow Society, he was informed, would amount to £500. He was afraid the result would be that such Societies would remain unregistered, and to guard against this he moved, in page 11, line 6, at end, to add—

"Provided always, That the valuations required by this section shall not be compulsory in the case of societies who shall comply with the following provisions: (1.) Shall have their tables of payments by members certified as sufficient to yield the benefits assured by an actuary qualified as provided for by section 11 of this Act, if such actuary shall have declared, by a certificate under his hand, the amount of loading allowed in computing such payments for the total expenses of collection and management; (2.) Shall satisfy the chief registrar that the average expenses of collection and management for each quinquennial period fixed by this Act do not exceed the amount allowed therefor by the actuary; and (3.) Shall satisfy the chief registrar that the sums saved, and which are added to the capital account during each quinquennial period, amount on an average to fifteen per centum of the gross income of the society."

said, he had been fighting the battle of the Societies, and endeavouring to secure them as much as possible against Government interference; but the present clause went a great deal further than was desirable, and would defeat the object of the Bill. The payment of an actuary, according to the scale required in the Amendment, would involve the Societies in a considerable expense.

moved, in p. 11, line 8, after "books," to insert "other than the minute books of the Society," which ought to be regarded as of a confidential character, on account of the financial transactions therein recorded.

desired time to consider the special reasons urged in support of the Amendment, which he could not accede to, lest it should open the doors to the concealment of irregularities. He mentioned a case which was known to the Commission as the "Scotch joke;" there was a minute to the effect that the rail- way fares of agents attending the meetings were to be paid, but this was qualified by another minute to the effect that the fares were to be paid only if the agents supported the directors.

said, nothing could be more dangerous than to close the books of the Society from the members; but he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would never consent to anything of this kind.

moved an Amendment to restrict the power of Registrars to dispense with quinquennial returns.

said, the provision, as it now stood, had been made at the request of a very large Society, the "Hearts of Oak," which represented that the cost of sending in a separate return would be very large, and all the necessary information could in their case be given otherwise.

moved in page 11, line 19, after the word "person," to insert the words "whose death is entered in any register of deaths."

moved, in page 11, line 22, after the word "entered," to insert the words "or of a duly qualified medical practitioner," these words having reference to the importance of medical certificates and the question of fees.

said, he was afraid he could not agree to the insertion of those words. The effect of their insertion would be to inflict a considerable loss on the Registrars.

said, he hoped the hon. Member for Birmingham would not press his Amendment.

said, he thought the Amendment was unnecessary.

moved, in page 11, line 25, before the word "fails," to insert the word "wilfully."

hoped the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not accept the Amendment of the hon. Member for Hackney.

agreed that it was undesirable to weaken the clause by the insertion of the word "wilfully."

moved, in page 13, line 11, to leave out from "being," to "member," in line 13, both inclusive. The third sub-section of the clause enabled certain persons nominated to receive certain benefits at the death of a member; and the words he proposed to leave out limited the description of such persons. He thought a member of the Society should be able to nominate any person to receive those benefits.

said, he hoped the Amendment would be agreed to.

said, he had already enlarged the number of persons to whom benefits would be payable; but he was not disposed to be crabbed in this matter, if the feeling of the Committee appeared to be in favour of giving further extension. He would accept the Amendment; but, as there might be danger in allowing the nomination of officers of the Society in certain cases, he would add the words, "not being an officer or servant of the Society."

said, he had no objection to these words being inserted.

called attention to this—that, in the event of the death of an officer, the money of the Society in his hands would be protected for the Society; but there was no such protection given in the event of bankruptcy taking place, though this was now the law under the Friendly Societies Act. He moved in page 14, line 16, sub-section 7, after "death," to insert "or bankruptcy or insolvency."

said, he knew there was a strong feeling upon this point, and he was prepared to adopt the principle. If the words were inserted, he would see if they fully carried out the intentions of the Committee, and unless they did so, he would bring up a complete clause upon the Report.

said, that Sub-section 8 would allow Societies to be registered which consisted "wholly or partly" of members under 16 years. He proposed to leave out "or partly," because great inconvenience would arise from Societies composed of adults and young persons being registered.

said, the object was to allow Societies consisting partly of parents and partly of young persons to be admitted to registration; but the Registrar was to have the power of making proper regulations.

said, the Committee ought to know what those regulations were, because otherwise the Societies might be placed in a position with which the Committee were unacquainted.

said, he thought there was some force in the objection, and he would propose a clause to meet it.

said, the clause did not meet the case of Societies managed by delegates, and he proposed to make the matter clear by moving in page 15, line 17, after "meeting," to insert "or where the society is managed by delegates, a majority of the delegates present at a delegate meeting."

said, he did not think the words necessary, but he had no objection to their introduction.

moved, in page 15, line 28, after "being," to insert "the purchase of or loan upon shares in any joint-stock company."

said, he thought it very undesirable that trustees should invest in joint-stock companies; but if the Government restricted investments they would, to a certain extent, make themselves responsible for the investments. He believed that in Lancashire some Societies had invested in property of that character.

moved, in page 21, line 2, after "society," to insert "or the committee of management," in order to make the meaning of the clause more clear.

said, he was willing to accept the Amendment.

moved, in page 21, line 33, to leave out "or, if such office or place of business be closed, by posting such copy on the outer door of the same." He said, as the clause was drawn a summons might be issued and even held to be sufficiently served if it was posted outside the office. But, by keeping those words in the clause, the officer might go and post up a notice on the door when the office was closed, and then send some one to take it down, and in that way judgment might go by default. Cases of this description had occurred in Scotland.

said, the proposal contained in the clause was recommended by Mr. Littledale, the Assistant Registrar in Ireland, who had had great experience. It was represented that it was desirable that care should be taken that the summons was served. He was willing to modify the clause by inserting that the summons should be left at the registered office, if the hon. Gentleman would withdraw his Amendment.

said, that would not meet his objection.

suggested that the summons should be posted in the Post Office.

said, he thought that would meet the case, if the summons were also sent by registered letter.

said, he was willing to add to the clause that the summons should be posted by registered letter.

proposed to amend the clause, by providing that the summons should be sent by registered letter to the registered office of the Society.

moved, in page 21, line 35, to add—

"But in all cases where said summons, writ process, or other proceeding shall not he served at the registered office of the Society, a copy thereof shall be transmitted by post addressed to the committee of management at the registered office of the Society, and the same shall be enclosed in a registered letter delivered at said office at least four days before the calling of such summons, with process or other proceeding in Court."

accepted the principle of the Amendment, but suggested that the words should be drawn up by his hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General.

moved, in page 22, line 6, to leave out "otherwise direct," and insert "expressly forbid it,"

moved an Amendment to extend the register to Ireland and Scotland.

moved, in page 22, line 26, after "summary jurisdiction," to insert—

"Provided that in every case of dispute cognizable under the rules of a society in a court of summary jurisdiction, it shall be lawful for the parties thereto to enter into a consent referring such dispute to the County Court, which may hear and determine the matter in dispute."

said, the clause seemed to him to be perfectly intelligible as it stood. He had no objection, however, to accept the Amendment.

moved, in page 23, line 7, to leave out "three-eighths," and insert "one-fifth."

said, that as in all these cases the consent of the Treasury must be obtained, the Amendment of the hon. Member would have but little practical effect.

moved, in page 23, line 11, to leave out, "more than ten thousand members," and insert—

"Ten thousand members and not exceeding fifty thousand, or of one thousand members in the case of a society of fifty thousand members and not exceeding one hundred thousand, or of two thousand members in the case of a society exceeding one hundred thousand members."

moved, page in 23, line 12, to leave out the words "by his direction," as he thought that the Assistant Registrar for Ireland or Scotland should be allowed to act without being obliged to apply to the Chief Registrar for authority. He did not see why the Chief Registrar should be interposed.

said, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer thought it necessary to retain the authority of the Chief Registrar as proposed in the clause.

moved, in page 24, line 34, after Sub-section 3, to insert the following sub-section:—

"4. A society may by special resolution detach and sever absolutely from itself any distinct section of its members, whether called a lodge, branch, or otherwise, after due notice of not less than one year: Provided, That such portion of the capital stock as would be due to such section, if the society were dissolved at that time, be paid to it from the funds of such society."

said, he could not accept the Amendment. It was going further than he thought they ought to go in the way of legislation for these Societies.

moved, in page 28, line 40, after "appropriated," to insert—

"That the Chief Registrar may suspend his award for such period as he may deem necessary to enable the society to make such alterations and adjustment of contributions and benefits as will in his judgment provide sufficient and equitable remedy in the premises, and prevent the necessity of such award of dissolution being made."

accepted the Amendment. It was desirable to avert the extreme measure of a dissolution, and it might be prevented by a re-adjustment. There were two ways of getting out of a financial difficulty, by reducing the benefits or increasing the contributions, and the Amendment would throw the onus upon the Society of extricating itself from the difficulty.

proposed, as an Amendment, to leave out so much of the clause as enabled certain societies certified before the 23rd of July, 1855, to levy an additional contribution on members serving out of the country, or to suspend their claims of the society whilst serving abroad, provided that on their return they should forthwith be replaced on the same footing as they were on before going abroad. If the Society could not be relieved from the risk and danger to life from a Militiaman becoming a soldier of the Line—which risk they did not wish to incur—it would be better to omit the clause altogether.

said, that the section simply repeated the existing law, which it would not be wise to alter.

did not see why the limit should not be extended.

explained that the reason was that members of these Societies were exempt from stamp duties and other charges, so that they received benefits at the expense of the Revenue. There had always been the limit which was in the Bill.

moved that the Chairman report Progress, the clause being a most important one, relating to death and burial insurance.

objected. He said the clause was one which, no doubt, would elicit discussion; and as it was desirous, if possible, to get through the Bill, he hoped the hon. Member would withdraw his Motion.

said, that the clause provided that no Society should pay more than £3 upon the death of a child under three years, and he proposed to insert "five" instead of "three." The clause provided a hard-and-fast line which would inflict much hardship on large towns, and he trusted that the right hon. Gentleman would consent to substitute the word "five" for "three."

observed, that the clause had given him considerable anxiety, and the Government had had to contend with circumstances of peculiar difficulty. They desired to avoid casting a stigma on the working classes which was not deserved; and, on the other hand, they had no desire to neglect doing their duty to the Societies. It was never their intention to favour the odious charge that parents of any class were guilty of the crime of infanticide. But they did think that there was some evidence to show that in the case of children insured in Burial Societies there was more neglect and less care than in any other Societies. They did not consider that as applicable to the great masses of the working classes; but there were a certain number of persons of low and degraded cha- racter who were not insensible to the temptations thrown in their way. He referred especially to the case of illegitimate children, and there was evidence to show that some Societies declined to insure illegitimate children at all. There were cases in which a child had been doubly insured by the parent and by another person who had contributed nothing towards its funeral expenses. Many of the clubs were conducted on principles which nobody could approve of. Under these circumstances, it was necessary to take steps to introduce more order and regularity into the proceedings, and to prevent abuse in the granting of certificates. The first question was the amount to be insured. It must be remembered that to allow the working classes to insure their children at all was a privilege granted to Friendly Societies, and that according to the general law no other person could insure the life of a child or any other person who had not an insurable interest. Their object should be to fix the sum at such a figure as would not give parents a profit on the death of their children; but he found it was difficult to arrange with those interested in the matter what the amount should be. He had entered into a careful investigation of the subject himself, and he was bound to say that the further he went into the matter the more difficult it was to arrive at a satisfactory sum. In some parts of the country 30 would be sufficient; but in other parts the funeral expenses were much higher. Under these circumstances, and after consulting his Colleagues, he had come to the conclusion that it would be the best, the most reasonable, and the most satisfactory course, to accept the Amendment of his his hon. Friend the Member for Manchester.

hoped that the Committee would not be too precipitate in disposing of this point. The Chancellor of the Exchequer himself did not know his own mind on the subject. The House had previously had three different propositions from him within a short space of time. He now quite suddenly asked them to adopt a fourth. The Committee ought to report Progress, and have leisure to consider it. This was a matter of such difficulty and delicacy that no time should be grudged in its discussion.

said, he had an Amendment on the Paper which dealt with this matter, and was of great importance. He could not hope to get it fully discussed that evening, and therefore he thought he was justified in moving that the Chairman report Progress.

said, he was very glad that the Government had, by what the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said, removed the odious imputation under which Lancashire had so long laboured.

agreed to the Motion to report Progress, but intimated that he would resume the Committee at 2 o'clock tomorrow. In the event of the Bill being disposed of at the Morning Sitting, the Land Titles and Transfer Bill would be proceeded with.