to occasionally vindicate his nationality persevere in pressing it on. The Bill by making a blunder of that kind; but was only printed on Saturday and dewhat he had intended to say was, that livered this morning, therefore there both could not survive the struggle. had been hardly any time to consider it. He was an advocate of the eviction of The matter, altogether, was one of little landlords. He agreed with the Secretary moment, and should not be brought on of State for India (the Marquess of for discussion at that hour of the mornHartington) that the eviction of the ing — 1.30 A.M. therefore he would landlords was the final solution of this formally move the adjournment of the question, and he was not going to vote debate, which would enable the Attorney for a Bill which impeded rather than General for Ireland to speak now withaccelerated the final solution as to which out interfering with his right to address he and the noble Lord agreed. He the House on the second reading. should be making bankrupt the hopes

Motion made, and Question proposed, of the Irish tenants, playing false to

"That the Debate be now adjourned.” their interests and betraying their trust, if he told them that this Bill gave them

-(Mr. Gorst.) a victory for which victory they had still The ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR to fight, and he was more afraid of de- IRELAND (Mr. LAW) said, the meaceiving them than of offending the pre- sure was identical in terms with the Bill sent Ministry. He would be no party which had already been before the to bringing them into the Fools' Para- House five times, therefore he thought dise, where hopes would be excited only it was unreasonable to stop its progress to be bitterly disappointed by-and-bye. on the ground that it was too late an Motion made, and Question proposed, time the Bill had been submitted to the

hour to discuss it. If this were the first “That the Debate be now adjourned." House, he would not have objected to the -(Mr. Chaplin.)

course taken by hon. Members; but such Motion agreed to.

was not the case. The subject was introDebate further adjourned till Thursday. in the Irish Judicature Act of 1876; and

duced by Lord Cairns when he brought

the noble and learned Lord, drawing a LOCAL COURTS OF BANKRUPTCY

contrast between the Bankruptcy Law (IRELAND) BILL [Lords. ]—[Bill 164.]

of England and Ireland, pointed out (Mr Attorney General for Irelana.) that there was a Bankruptcy jurisdiction

in every County Court of England, Order for Second Reading read.

whilst there was only one Bankruptcy Motion made, and Question proposed, sirable that Bankruptcy Courts should

Court in Ireland, and said that it was de“That the Bill be now read a second be established in some of the principal time."-(Mr. Attorney General for Ireland.)

centres of industry in Ireland. He

thought it desirable that a measure MAJOR NOLAN said, this Bill was should be passed as soon as possible, down for second reading for the first and in 1878 the Irish Attorney General time; and, under the circumstances, he brought in a Bill--believed it was competent for him to MAJOR NOLAN: I rise to Order. I block it. He did not wish to block it wish, Mr. Speaker, to have your decision for himself

, but on behalf of the hon. on this point. The first time a Bill is Member for Louth; and he should not put down for second reading, is it not continue to do it when the hon. Member, competent for an hon. Member to block who was at present absent, returned to it? London. The hon. Member had tele- MR. SPEAKER: This is an Order of graphed to him requesting him to block the Day; there is no Notice of Opposithe Bill.

tion on the Paper, therefore the right MR. P. MARTIN said there were hon. and learned Gentleman can go on. three or four Notices to block the mea- MAJOR NOLAN: It is the first time

the Bill has appeared on the Paper. MR. GORST was sorry it was the de- THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR sire of some hon. Members to discuss IRELAND (Mr. Law) said, the measure the measure, but hoped they would not was first of all brought in in 1878, again



in 1879, next in the first Session of 1880, men of the several counties in insol. a fourth time in the second Session of vency matters was taken away, so that 1880, and now, for a fifth time, it was small creditors in the different Probrought in this Session; whilst the vincial towns of Ireland were deprived measure had been four times passed by of the means of recovering debts under the House of Lords, being approved of jurisdiction analogous to the Law of by the late and present Lord Chancellors Bankruptcy. In England there were of Great Britain, as well as by the pre- Provincial Bankruptcy Courts, and he sent Lord Chancellor of Ireland. A num- thought that the Attorney General would ber of hon. Members representing the do well to introduce a Bill which would commercial centres of Ireland had been facilitate the recovery of debts and aranxious to see the measure pressed for- rangements with creditors in the seveward last Session; but there had been ral counties in Ireland by conferring the same kind of opposition to it then as on the present County Court Judges a there seemed to be now, and at the close jurisdiction limited in amount and exof the Session the Chief Secretary to the tent. This Bill inforced no such prinLord Lieutenant withdrew it, as he (the ciple. The Government sought to perAttorney General for Ireland) believed, petuate an old and vicious system, on the understanding that it would be and, in seeking to do that, they would brought in again this Session, read a purchase the silence of Belfast by girsecond time, and referred to a Selecting it a local Court of Bankruptcy, Committee. The large Provincial towns and in the same way they sought inof Ireland wished the measure to be geniously to deal with Cork, and to passed, and he thought the House was silence its opposition by giving it, also, a inclined to favour it; and the Govern-Court of Bankruptcy. But the people of ment were prepared, directly the present the greater part of Ireland were to be stage was passed, to send it to a Select deprived of the means of getting their Committee, as arranged last year. He debts, to please, forsooth, the merchants of

. hoped the House would not yield to the Belfast and Cork, with whom the right opposition sought to be raised by a few hon.and learned Gentleman, it appeared, lawyers, who resisted the measure merely had made some sort of arrangement, for on professional grounds.

the purpose of facilitating the passing of Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

the Bill. No doubt the right hon. GentleOriginal Question again proposed.

man's own constituents and the Cork

merchants would deem it convenient to Mr. P. MARTIN, so far as he per- have a local Court in which to settle their sonally was concerned, desired to deny little difficulties, and to aid them in the that this proposed measure was opposed process of whitewashing; but he hoped on professional grounds. He objected the House would not listen to their oneto the measure because he believed it sided appeal. Let the right hon. and wholly overlooked the interests of small learned Gentleman devote a little of the traders and farmers in all other places time at his disposal, either to the prepain Ireland except the centres named in ration of a Bill such as he suggested, so as the Bill. Th Bankruptcy Code in Ire- to extend, for the general benefit of Ireland was in a very confused and unsatis- land, such of the provisions of the new factory state. A most desirable oppor- Bankruptcy Code as were valuable, and tunity now presented itself for the per- to amend the present complex and conmanent reform of the system in Ireland fusing Acts in force in Ireland. If a Bankin the Bankruptcy Bill for England before ruptcy Act was to be passed its benefit the House. They ought not to have one ought to be extended all over Ireland. Bankruptcy Law for England and an- Therefore, he trusted that the House other for Ireland ; but there should be would not allow this Bill to be hurried one complete and perfect Code for the through that night, and that it would two countries. Ho (Mr. P. Martin) accede to the Motion he now made. said that everyone should know that Mr. BIGGAR said, in rising to second one of the great disadvantages of the the Motion for the adjournment of the Irish law at this moment was that, in debate, he did not intend to go into point of fact, by the Bankruptcy Amend- the merits or demerits of this par. ment Act passed in 1872, the local juris- ticular measure, inasmuch as it had only diction theretoforo vested in the Chair- been delivered to him that morning.

The Attorney General for Ireland

[ocr errors]

Indeed, he had been informed by one very properly sent to a Select Committee.
hon. Member interested in the question The hon. Member for Cavan (Mr.
that the Bill had not even then been de Biggar) said that very little notice had
livered to him. For that reason alone, been given of the Bill. But he ven-
he thought they were fully justified in tured to say there was no Gentleman
asking for an adjournment, and that no in the House interested in the ques-
further Progress be made until there tion who did not know the Bill by
had been time sufficient for full con- | heart. The hon. and learned Mem-
sideration of the measure. He found ber for Kildare (Mr. Meldon) had op-
that the Bill proposed to create a num- posed the Bill rather strongly last year,
ber of new offices out of money to be but seemed to welcome the idea that it
voted by Parliament. That was a ques- would be considered by a Select Com-
tion which concerned both English and mittee. The Government were some-
Irish Members. Then it proposed to times taunted with not considering Irish
give compensation to certain parties in interests; but it seemed to him they
Dublin for any part of their business could not show their wish to do so
taken from them by the operation of the better than by saying "Here is a Bill
Bill. It seemed to him preposterous which has been brought forward year
that large monetary engagements should after year, it is very influentially sup-
be entered into at half-past 1 or 2 ported in Ireland, and all we ask is that
o'clock in the morning, without the it should be placed in a position that
slightest explanation whatever being will enable it to be fairly considered by
afforded by the right hon. and learned a Select Committee representing the dif-
Gentleman who moved the second read- ferent interests concerned." He did not
ing of the Bill. The right hon. and see how any proposal to remedy what
learned Gentleman had pointed out that had been alleged to be a grievance in
similar Bills had been introduced in Ireland could be more fairly made; and
former Sessions of Parliament; but he he trusted that hon. Members opposite
took very great care not to give the least would allow that consideration to weigh
hint to the House with regard to the with them.
creation of the new offices which he MR. HEALY thought the proposition
asked to be created under the Bill. It of the Government a very reasonable
appeared to him a very curious thing one. He had not given the Government
that the House should be asked, as a a vote since he had been a Member of
mere matter of form, to commit itself the House ; but, with mixed feelings of
and the country to a very large ex- pain and pleasure, he should do so on
pense. He, therefore, cordially seconded the present occasion.
the Motion for adjournment.

MR. R. POWER said, he rose to Motion made, and Question proposed, oppose the Bill because it did not apply “ That the Debate be now adjourned.'

to Waterford. He was at a loss to --(Mr. Patrick Martin.)

understand why Londonderry, Galway,

and Limerick should be included and MR. W. E. FORSTER said, that cer- Waterford omitted from the Bill. The tain representatives of large trading in- latter had quite as much claim to be interests in Dublin had waited upon his serted as the other places; and he obright hon. and learned Friend the Attor-jected to its exclusion in favour of ney General for Ireland and himself Londonderry, amongst other reasons, on with reference to this subject. They account of the Representatives which had pointed out that there were no Bank- Londonderry returned to the House. ruptcy Courts in the large towns in Ire- But he objected to the Bill on higher land, and that all Bankruptcy business grounds. "It really meant the establishhad to be transacted at great inconveni- ment of unequal laws. The Government ence and expense in Dublin. A stronger proposed to bring in one Bill for Engcase, in his opinion, could not have been land and another for Ireland. Both made out. The hon. and learned Mem- were entirely different in their character, ber for Kilkenny (Mr.P. Martin) had also and the result of this legislation would pointed out that other towns were simi- be that a few years hence there would larly situated, and it was precisely that ar- be agitation amongst the people of Iregumentof the hon. Member that made the land, and Irish Members would come to Government think that the Bill could be that House and ask for equalization of the laws. If Her Majesty's Govern- were of a very important character, and ment proposed to establish Bankruptcy required examination at the hands of Courts in Londonderry, Galway, and hon. Members, especially those who Dublin, why, he asked, did they not also represented Irish constituencies. Among propose to place them in every large other things, he observed that the Bill town in Ireland ? But he was quite raised the question of pensions, which prepared to admit that a Bankruptcy the Petty Sessions Clerks were to reBill was most necessary in Ireland at the ceive. That was a matter which deserved present time. The opposition which the full consideration, and it was utterly Bill had met with from lawyers was cer- impossible to deal with it in a satisfactainly a very significant fact. For his tory manner at that hour — 2.5 A.M. own part, he looked with a certain He trusted that hon. Members in charge amount of suspicion upon any Bill that of the Bill would not persist in proceedwas entirely opposed by lawyers, and ing further in Committee that night. especially by Dublin lawyers. The pre- Motion made and Question proposed, sent Bill would, of course, put into the “ That the Chairman do report Prohands of the lawyers in the towns named


and ask leave to sit again."therein the practice and fees of the law-(Mr. Biggar.)

( yers who resided in Dublin. The opposition of the latter was, therefore, per

MR. LITTON said, he should be the fectly intelligible to him. He had

last person to ask the House to proceed already stated his reason for opposing with the Bill before hon. Members had the second reading of the Bill; but he fully considered its provisions; but the trusted that Her Majesty's Government Amendments on the Paper were of a would render further opposition unne- formal nature, and these, he thought, cessary by including Waterford in its might very well be taken. When the provisions.

Superannuation Clause, to which the Mr. T. D. SULLIVAN said, he rose

hon. Member for Cavan objected, was simply for the purpose of supporting the reached, if the House thought proper, second reading of the Bill.

and the hon. Member deemed it right to Question put.

renew his objection to the clause, he

(Mr. Litton) would not object to report The House divided :-Ayes 9; Noes Progress. 57: Majority 48.-(Div. List, No. 203.) MAJOR NOLAN thought the present

Original Question put, and agreed to. a favourable opportunity for passing the Bill read a second time.

Bill. There were so few chances of Motion made, and Question proposed, getting Irish Bills into Committee that That the Bill be committed to a Select he trusted the hon. Member for Cavan Committee."-(Mr. Attorney General for

would withdraw his Motion. Ireland.)

MR. BIGGAR was willing, after the

appeal of the hon. and gallant Member MR. P. MARTIN begged to oppose for Galway, to agree to the formal that Motion on the ground that no Amendments being taken. He should Notice had been given.

feel it his duty, however, to renew his Mr. SPEAKER: I must point out to Motion to report Progress when the the hon. and learned Member that no Superannuation Clause was reached. Notice is necessary in the case of a Mo- MR. R. POWER asked what had be. tion of this kind.

come of the Amendments which had stood Question put, and agreed to.

in the name of the hon, and learned Bill committed to a Select Committee.

Member for Kildare (Mr. Meldon)?

MR. LITTON said, they had been PETTY SESSIONS CLERKS (IRELAND) included in the Amendments which he BILL.-[BILL 41.]

was about to move by arrangement with (Mr. Litton, Mr. James Richardson.)

the hon. and learned Member. COMMITTEE.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn. Bill considered in Committee.

Clause 1 (Salaries of clerks of petty (In the Committee.)

sessions in Ireland not to depend on MR. BIGGAR pointed out that the amount of fines or petty sessions stamps), Amendments upon the Paper to this Bill agreed to.

Mr. R. Power

Clause 2 (Provisions for securing

MOTION. Petty Sessions Clerks Fund from variation).

On the Motion of Mr. LITTON, Amend- CHURCH PATRONAGE (No. 2) BILL, ment made, in page 1, line 20, after

MOTION FOR LEAVE. "salaries," by inserting "and retiring

Motion made, and Question proposed, allowances.”

That leave be given to bring in a Bill to MR. HEALY thought the hon. and amend the Laws relating to patronage, simony, learned Member for Tyrone should give and exchange of Benefices in the Church of the Committee an explanation as to why England.”-(Mr. E. Stanhope.) the Amendment standing in the name of Sir WILFRID LAWSON asked the the hon. Member for Armagh (Mr. De hon. Gentleman opposite to explain the La Poer Beresford) had not been moved. nature of this Bill.

MR. LITTON said, the Amendment MR. E. STANHOPE pointed out that in question had been put down to meet the proposed Bill contained exactly those certain objections which had been raised proposals which the Prime Minister had by some of the Town Commissioners in said would meet with the support of the Ireland. The hon. Member was now Government. The other portions of the satisfied that the Definition Clause with former Bill would stand over for further regard to “ local authorities” rendered consideration. As soon as leave was it unnecessary for him to propose his given to introduce the Bill, he should Amendment.

move that the former Order bo disClause, as amended, agreed to.


MR. ILLINGWORTH rose to Order. On the Motion of Mr. LITTON, the He wished to know whether it was comfollowing Clauses were added to the petent for an hon. Member, having alBill :

ready one Bill before the House, to

introduce another “ It shall not be necessary for a Petty Ses

the same sub

upon sions Clerk to enter into a new bond with ject before the original Order was dissureties on each occasion of increase in his charged ? salary, nor, except when by reason of the death MR. SPEAKER: The procedure of or insolvency of his sureties or for other sufficient the hon. Member is quite regular. reason the Lord Lieutenant may consider such to be necessary, shall a new bond be required,

MR. T. P. O'CONNOR said, he had but the original bond as against the original given his hon. Friend opposite (Mr. Bureties shall remain of full force and effect not. Illingworth) his assistance on a previous withstanding such increase of salary.

occasion in dividing against the former (Definition Clause.)

Bill. He hardly knew what course his «« Local authorities' shall mean the treasurers hon. Friend was about to pursue; but of counties and treasurers of boroughs to whom if he intended to persist in obstructive the surplus moneys arising from the sale of action, as formerly, he should give him licences are payable under "The Dogs Regulation (Ireland) Act, 1865,' and any Act amending

his cordial support. the same.

MR. DILLWYN asked whether the * • Petty sessions clerks' shall include the Motion should not have been brought registrar of petty sessions clerks and his clerks." before the Committee of the Whole

Motion made, and Question proposed, House? " That the Chairman do report Pro

Mr. SPEAKER: I see no ground for gress, and ask leave to sit again."- that course being taken. (Mr. Litton.)

Motion made, and Question proposed, Motion agreed to.

"That the Debate be now adjourned.”.

(Mr. Tillett.) Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Wednesday.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir HENRY JAMES) said, he thought the course proposed was somewhat dis

courteous to the hon. Gentleman oppoResolutions [May 13] reported, and agreed to. site, who was simply asking leave to

Instruction to the Committee on the Customs introduce a Bill which the Prime Miand Inland Revenue Bill, that they have power to make provision therein, pursuant to the said nister had intimated would receive the Resolutions,

support of the Government.


« ForrigeFortsett »