HC Deb 17 June 1836 vol 34 cc589-91
The Chancellor of the Exchequer

stated, that a Committee had been appointed to draw up reasons, to be communicated to the Lords at a conference, for disagreeing to certain amendments introduced by the House of Lords in the Municipal Corporations Bill for Ireland. He begged to move that they be reported.

They were read accordingly. For them, see the Lords, ante p. 676 et. seqq.

On the question that they be agreed to,

Sir Robert Peel

said, that he hoped it would be distinctly understood, that those who did not wish to provoke any discussion on the subject were at the same time not to be considered as coinciding with the reasons. It was impossible to urge any grounds of disagreement to the amendments to the Bill made by the Commons, without provoking a general debate on the point under discussion the other night. A division might take place on each of these amendments, especially as the reasons had not been read at length, and he trusted that it might be understood, that they the (Opposition) dissented; that their acquiescence was given under protest, and with a distinct reservation of their own opinions.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

said, that a similar course had been pursued last year on the English Municipal Reform Bill, and it was then distinctly understood and expressly stated, that the reasons for disagreeing to the Lords' Amendments were only the reasons of the majority, and, therefore, the minority, could not stand in the slightest degree pledged to abide by them. Many clauses of the reasons were not very intelligible, without reference to the Bill; it was not necessary to read them at full length, and they could only be regarded as the reasons of those who agreed to the Bill in its present shape. That was the course pursued on a former occasion, and the one which would prove most conducive to the public convenience.

Sir Robert Peel

remarked, that considering the important charge intrusted to a Committee, in drawing up reasons whether they were such as had no reference at all to the opinions of the minority or not, he doubted, where that was the case, if it would be a good precedent to establish that such a Report should be received without objection. It was not right that the House, as a House, should sanction such a proceeding, and it might materially increase the weight of the reasons assigned, if it were known that they passed as those of the whole House, and that no objection was offered to the Report.

Report agreed to; and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with other hon. Members were deputed to demand a conference with the Lords. The conference was held and the Chancellor of the Exchequer reported that the managers for the Commons had delivered to the managers for the Peers the reasons of the Commons for disagreeing from the Peers' amendments, and had left with them the Bill and its amendments.