HC Deb 06 August 1883 vol 282 cc1645-7
MR. GRAY

asked the President of the Board of Trade, Whether, if he perseveres in his intention of seeking to extend the Bankruptcy Bill to Ireland, he will frame the Irish portion of the Bill upon the same principle as the English portion—that is to say, make it a code of Bankruptcy Law as is proposed by the Bill for England, by repealing the English Acts, and re-enacting such portions as are to be retained, instead of, as is proposed by the Attorney General for Ireland, retaining the Irish Acts and amending them?

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. PORTER)

, in reply, said, that the clauses put down in his name embedied the views of the Government in reference to the extension of the Bill to Ireland. It was not intended to abolish the Irish Court of Bankruptcy; and, therefore, it would be improper to repeal the Acts upon which it was founded, as it was perpetuated in more than one Act. It was hoped, if the Bill passed in its present form, that, so far as law was concerned, there would be a complete Code; and, so far as procedure was concerned, a complete guide.

MR. GRAY

I do not think the right hon. and learned Gentleman quite understands my Question. I understand that the procedure with regard to the portion of the Bill applying to England is that all the Acts relating to Bankruptcy are to be repealed, and to be embedied in one Bill, now to be passed. I want to know whether the new procedure will be adopted with regard to Ireland; and if the Government will not adopt that course whether they will raise any objection to its being adopted by Irish Members who may wish to make the Bankruptcy Law in Ireland simple instead of confused, as the proposal of the right hon. and learned Gentleman would make it?

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. PORTER)

replied, that it would not be convenient or in Order for him to discuss the subject with the hon. Member now. He had already answered the Question by stating that the clauses proposed by him represent the ideas of the Government.

MR. GIBSON

Have the Government finally decided to apply the Bill to Ireland?

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. PORTER)

Yes, Sir.

MR. HEALY

I wish to ask the President of the Board of Trade, if the Government have finally made up their minds to force this Bill through the House without passing it through Committee, so far as the Irish clauses are concerned?

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

I think I should state, in answer to the hon. Gentleman, that these clauses were proposed in the Grand Committee. [Mr. HEALY: Not discussed.] These clauses were submitted—["No, no!"]—and, at the instance of the hon. Member for Carlow, they were temporarily withdrawn—[Mr. GRAY: No, no!]—in order that public opinion in Ireland might be more accurately obtained. ["No, no!"] The hon. Member desired more time should be given in order that public opinion should manifest itself. [Mr. GRAY: No, no!] That time has since elapsed. Public opinion has manifested itself; and, under these circumstances, I think we are justified in asking the House and Irish Members, the great majority of whom are in favour of our proposal, to consider the clauses as placed on the Paper.

MR. GRAY

The right hon. Gentleman has, quite unintentionally no doubt, totally misrepresented the position I took on the Grand Committee. I never asked the clauses to be withdrawn. These clauses were not submitted in Committee. Different clauses were submitted, and they were not discussed at all.

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

I am sorry there should be a difference of opinion between us. All I can say is that I appeal to the Members of the Grand Committee when the hon. Member came to our deliberations for the first time—["No, no" from Mr. GRAY, and laughter]—as to whether what I have stated is not accurate? Although not virtually the same, those clauses are in the principal proposals the same as the clauses submitted to the Grand Committee.

MR. GRAY

I am sorry to occupy the attention of the House again, but that was not the first time I attended the Committee, and I never asked that these clauses should be adjourned, or that they should be considered. I opposed thorn from the beginning.