not pass this Bill, worse will come." land in the country. They wanted to break up the grazing farms in Ireland. The lands which now formed grazing farms were lands held from the people. Let the Government give their Commission, as they had the right, power to expropriate these lands at a fair price, and relegate them to the surplus population in Connaught and other agricultural districts. But what was his great objection to emigration? If they were to put emigration in the one, and migration in the other scale, which would overbalance the other? Migration was a difficult process, emigration was an easy process; migration required care, emigration meant that they had only to give the emigrant a ticket and he was disposed of. The temptation to the authorities to get rid of disturbance in Ireland by the short, and summary, and easy process of sending people out of the country was overwhelming. It was evident that the emigration clauses must be struck out of the Bill. They must ask the Government to give their Commission larger powers than it had at present; they must ask the Government to make their plans of migration more definite and better. He did not think they would have much difficulty in getting leaseholders included in the Bill; and they ought to ask the Government to deal at once with the position of the agricultural labourer. They were tired of agitation in Ireland; they wanted some peace, if the English Parliament would let them have it. They did not want any more tempestuous agitation in order to educate the mind of the Chief Secretary for Ireland, and accordingly they asked that the Bill should deal at once in a large and generous spirit with the agricultural labourer. These being his views with regard to the Bill, he would be actually stultifying himself if he voted for the second reading. He did not want to say anything unpleasant; but, between the Amendment of the noble Lord the Mem-liament. What was his duty as a Reber for Haddingtonshire (Lord Elcho) and the Amendment of the ex-Postmaster General (Lord John Manners), it was evident confusion and obstruction were in the Conservative camp. The principles of the Bill were principles which no one seriously contested at this time of day. The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr. John Bright) had said of the House of Lords-"If you do Mr. T. P. O'Connor presentative of what were called the was only printed on Saturday and delivered this morning, therefore there had been hardly any time to consider it. The matter, altogether, was one of little moment, and should not be brought on for discussion at that hour of the morning-1.30 A.M.—therefore he would formally move the adjournment of the debate, which would enable the Attorney General for Ireland to speak now without interfering with his right to address the House on the second reading. to occasionally vindicate his nationality | persevere in pressing it on. The Bill by making a blunder of that kind; but what he had intended to say was, that both could not survive the struggle. He was an advocate of the eviction of landlords. He agreed with the Secretary of State for India (the Marquess of Hartington) that the eviction of the landlords was the final solution of this question, and he was not going to vote for a Bill which impeded rather than accelerated the final solution as to which he and the noble Lord agreed. He should be making bankrupt the hopes of the Irish tenants, playing false to their interests and betraying their trust, if he told them that this Bill gave them a victory for which victory they had still to fight, and he was more afraid of deceiving them than of offending the present Ministry. He would be no party to bringing them into the Fools' Paradise, where hopes would be excited only to be bitterly disappointed by-and-bye. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned." -(Mr. Chaplin.) Motion agreed to. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned." -(Mr. Gorst.) THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. LAW) said, the measure was identical in terms with the Bill which had already been before the House five times, therefore he thought it was unreasonable to stop its progress on the ground that it was too late an time the Bill had been submitted to the hour to discuss it. If this were the first House, he would not have objected to the course taken by hon. Members; but such was not the case. The subject was introduced by Lord Cairns when he brought Debate further adjourned till Thursday. in the Irish Judicature Act of 1876; and LOCAL COURTS OF BANKRUPTCY (IRELAND) BILL [Lords.]-[BILL 164.] (Mr Attorney General for Irelană.) SECOND READING. Order for Second Reading read. "That the Bill be now read a second time."-(Mr. Attorney General for Ireland.) MAJOR NOLAN said, this Bill was down for second reading for the first time; and, under the circumstances, he believed it was competent for him to block it. He did not wish to block it for himself, but on behalf of the hon. Member for Louth; and he should not continue to do it when the hon. Member, who was at present absent, returned to London. The hon. Member had telegraphed to him requesting him to block the Bill. MR. P. MARTIN said there were three or four Notices to block the mea sure. MR. GORST was sorry it was the desire of some hon. Members to discuss the measure, but hoped they would not the noble and learned Lord, drawing a contrast between the Bankruptcy Law of England and Ireland, pointed out that there was a Bankruptcy jurisdiction in every County Court of England, whilst there was only one Bankruptcy sirable that Bankruptcy Courts should Court in Ireland, and said that it was debe established in some of the principal centres of industry in Ireland. thought it desirable that a measure should be passed as soon as possible, and in 1878 the Irish Attorney General brought in a Bill He MAJOR NOLAN: I rise to Order. I wish, Mr. Speaker, to have your decision on this point. The first time a Bill is put down for second reading, is it not competent for an hon. Member to block it? MR. SPEAKER: This is an Order of the Day; there is no Notice of Opposition on the Paper, therefore the right hon. and learned Gentleman can go on. MAJOR NOLAN: It is the first time the Bill has appeared on the Paper. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. Law) said, the measure was first of all brought in in 1878, again vency matters was taken away, so that small creditors in the different Provincial towns of Ireland were deprived of the means of recovering debts under jurisdiction analogous to the Law of Bankruptcy. In England there were Provincial Bankruptcy Courts, and he thought that the Attorney General would do well to introduce a Bill which would facilitate the recovery of debts and arrangements with creditors in the several counties in Ireland by conferring on the present County Court Judges a jurisdiction limited in amount and extent. This Bill inforced no such principle. The Government sought to perpetuate an old and vicious system. and, in seeking to do that, they would purchase the silence of Belfast by giv in 1879, next in the first Session of 1880, | men of the several counties in insola fourth time in the second Session of 1880, and now, for a fifth time, it was brought in this Session; whilst the measure had been four times passed by the House of Lords, being approved of by the late and present Lord Chancellors of Great Britain, as well as by the present Lord Chancellor of Ireland. A number of hon. Members representing the commercial centres of Ireland had been anxious to see the measure pressed forward last Session; but there had been the same kind of opposition to it then as there seemed to be now, and at the close of the Session the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant withdrew it, as he (the Attorney General for Ireland) believed, on the understanding that it would be brought in again this Session, read a second time, and referred to a Selecting it a local Court of Bankruptcy, Committee. The large Provincial towns of Ireland wished the measure to be passed, and he thought the House was inclined to favour it; and the Government were prepared, directly the present stage was passed, to send it to a Select Committee, as arranged last year. He hoped the House would not yield to the opposition sought to be raised by a few lawyers, who resisted the measure merely on professional grounds. Motion, by leave, withdrawn. and in the same way they sought ingeniously to deal with Cork, and to silence its opposition by giving it, also, a Court of Bankruptcy. But the people of the greater part of Ireland were to be deprived of the means of getting their debts, to please, forsooth, the merchants of Belfast and Cork, with whom the right hon. and learned Gentleman, it appeared, had made some sort of arrangement, for the purpose of facilitating the passing of the Bill. No doubt the right hon. Gentleman'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 opportunity now presented itself for the permanent reform of the system in Ireland in the Bankruptcy Bill for England before the House. They ought not to have one Bankruptcy Law for England and another for Ireland; but there should be one complete and perfect Code for the two countries. He (Mr. P. Martin) said that everyone should know that one of the great disadvantages of the Irish law at this moment was that, in point of fact, by the Bankruptcy Amendment Act passed in 1872, the local jurisdiction theretofore vested in the Chair The Attorney General for Ireland Bankruptcy Code as were valuable, and to amend the present complex and confusing Acts in force in Ireland. If a Bankruptcy Act was to be passed its benefit ought to be extended all over Ireland. Therefore, he trusted that the House would not allow this Bill to be hurried through that night, and that it would accede to the Motion he now made. MR. BIGGAR said, in rising to second the Motion for the adjournment of the debate, he did not intend to go into the merits or demerits of this particular measure, inasmuch as it had only been delivered to him that morning. Indeed, he had been informed by one hon. Member interested in the question that the Bill had not even then been delivered to him. For that reason alone, he thought they were fully justified in asking for an adjournment, and that no further Progress be made until there had been time sufficient for full consideration of the measure. He found that the Bill proposed to create a number of new offices out of money to be voted by Parliament. That was a question which concerned both English and Irish Members. Then it proposed to give compensation to certain parties in Dublin for any part of their business taken from them by the operation of the Bill. It seemed to him preposterous that large monetary engagements should be entered into at half-past 1 or 2 o'clock in the morning, without the slightest explanation whatever being afforded by the right hon. and learned Gentleman who moved the second reading of the Bill. The right hon. and learned Gentleman had pointed out that similar Bills had been introduced in former Sessions of Parliament; but he took very great care not to give the least hint to the House with regard to the creation of the new offices which he asked to be created under the Bill. It appeared to him a very curious thing that the House should be asked, as a mere matter of form, to commit itself and the country to a very large expense. He, therefore, cordially seconded the Motion for adjournment. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned." -(Mr. Patrick Martin.) very properly sent to a Select Committee. The hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. Biggar) said that very little notice had been given of the Bill. But he ventured to say there was no Gentleman in the House interested in the question who did not know the Bill by heart. The hon. and learned Member for Kildare (Mr. Meldon) had opposed the Bill rather strongly last year, but seemed to welcome the idea that it would be considered by a Select Committee. The Government were sometimes taunted with not considering Irish interests; but it seemed to him they could not show their wish to do so better than by saying "Here is a Bill which has been brought forward year after year, it is very influentially supported in Ireland, and all we ask is that it should be placed in a position that will enable it to be fairly considered by a Select Committee representing the different interests concerned." He did not see how any proposal to remedy what had been alleged to be a grievance in Ireland could be more fairly made; and he trusted that hon. Members opposite would allow that consideration to weigh with them. MR. HEALY thought the proposition of the Government a very reasonable one. He had not given the Government a vote since he had been a Member of the House; but, with mixed feelings of pain and pleasure, he should do so on the present occasion. MR. R. POWER said, he rose to oppose the Bill because it did not apply to Waterford. He was at a loss to understand why Londonderry, Galway, and Limerick should be included and Waterford omitted from the Bill. The latter had quite as much claim to be inserted as the other places; and he ob MR. W. E. FORSTER said, that certain representatives of large trading interests in Dublin had waited upon his right hon. and learned Friend the Attor-jected to its exclusion in favour of ney General for Ireland and himself with reference to this subject. They had pointed out that there were no Bankruptcy Courts in the large towns in Ireland, and that all Bankruptcy business had to be transacted at great inconvenience and expense in Dublin. A stronger case, in his opinion, could not have been made out. The hon. and learned Member for Kilkenny (Mr. P. Martin) had also pointed out that other towns were simifarly situated, and it was precisely that argument of the hon. Member that made the Government think that the Bill could be Londonderry, amongst other reasons, on account of the Representatives which Londonderry returned to the House. But he objected to the Bill on higher grounds. It really meant the establishment of unequal laws. The Government proposed to bring in one Bill for England and another for Ireland. Both were entirely different in their character, and the result of this legislation would be that a few years hence there would be agitation amongst the people of Ireland, and Irish Members would come to 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 present Bill would, of course, put into the hands of the lawyers in the towns named therein the practice and fees of the law-Mr. yers who resided in Dublin. The opposition of the latter was, therefore, perfectly intelligible to him. He had already stated his reason for opposing the second reading of the Bill; but he trusted that Her Majesty's Government would render further opposition unnecessary by including Waterford in its provisions. MR. T. D. SULLIVAN said, he rose simply for the purpose of supporting the second reading of the Bill. Question put. The House divided:-Ayes 9; Noes 57 Majority 48.-(Div. List, No. 203.) Original Question put, and agreed to. Bill read a second time. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be committed to a Select Committee."-(Mr. Attorney General for Ireland.) MR. P MARTIN begged to oppose that Motion on the ground that no Notice had been given. MR. SPEAKER: I must point out to the hon. and learned Member that no Notice is necessary in the case of a Motion of this kind. Question put, and agreed to. Bill committed to a Select Committee. PETTY SESSIONS CLERKS (IRELAND) (Mr. Litton, Mr. James Richardson.) Bill considered in Committee. (In the Committee.) MR. BIGGAR pointed out that the Amendments upon the Paper to this Bill Mr. R. Power Motion made and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Proand ask leave to sit again."gress, Biggar.) MR. LITTON said, he should be the last person to ask the House to proceed with the Bill before hon. Members had fully considered its provisions; but the Amendments on the Paper were of a formal nature, and these, he thought, might very well be taken. When the Superannuation Clause, to which the hon. Member for Cavan objected, was reached, if the House thought proper, and the hon. Member deemed it right to renew his objection to the clause, he (Mr. Litton) would not object to report Progress. MAJOR NOLAN thought the present a favourable opportunity for passing the Bill. There were so few chances of getting Irish Bills into Committee that he trusted the hon. Member for Cavan would withdraw his Motion. MR. BIGGAR was willing, after the for Galway, to agree to the formal appeal of the hon. and gallant Member Amendments being taken. He should feel it his duty, however, to renew his Motion to report Progress when the Superannuation Clause was reached. MR. R. POWER asked what had become of the Amendments which had stood in the name of the hon. and learned Member for Kildare (Mr. Meldon)? MR. LITTON said, they had been included in the Amendments which he was about to move by arrangement with the hon. and learned Member. Motion, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 1 (Salaries of clerks of petty sessions in Ireland not to depend on amount of fines or petty sessions stamps), agreed to. |