HC Deb 03 August 1842 vol 65 c979
Mr. Labouchere

said, he was given to understand that before half-past four o'clock, the time at which public business commenced, an hon. Baronet, one of the Secretaries for the Treasury, had passed several Orders of the Day, and carried a motion for the meeting of the House at twelve o'clock to-morrow. It was probable that those motions would not have been opposed, but it was hardly fair to bring them on before the hour fixed for the commencement of public business.

Mr. O'Connell

said, the motion for the meeting of the House tomorrow ought not to have been made without notice. To consent to morning sittings was holding out a bonus to Ministers to ged rid of business rapidly. If Ministers were behind-hand with their business, it was their own fault. Take the case of the Newfoundland Bill—an important measure, which was to destroy the constitution of a colony—it was not laid upon the Table till the month of June; it was then postponed, and now, forsooth, it was to be passed in a hurry.

Lord Stanley

expressed his astonishment at the observations which the right hon. the Lord Mayor of Dublin had made respecting the Newfoundland Bill. That measure was introduced in May; it was then postponed for six weeks, in conformity with a notice of motion which the right hon. Gentleman gave. It was subsequently postponed a fortnight more, at the right hon. Gentleman's request, and on his assurance that he did not intend to interpose any unnecessary delay in the way of the passing of the measure; and, now, the right hon. Gentleman turned round and accused the Government of a desire to hurry the bill through the House?

Mr. O'Connell

said, the bill was not postponed six weeks at his instance; he had only put a notice of motion to that effect on the book. It was the business of the Government, which had prevented the bill being brought forward sooner. On one occasion, when the bill was fixed for a Monday, he asked him to postpone it till Tuesday, but the noble Lord postponed it to Friday. He was not answerable for that. He disclaimed having asked for any indulgence, except with respect to a single day. He had said that he would offer no factious opposition to the bill, and he would not.