COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 14 July 1884)

§ MR. BRYCE
said, that at that hour he would not ask the House to do any work in Committee on the Bill. He would merely move that they should go into Committee, and immediately report Progress. The measure had been debated at great length on a Wednesday afternoon. It had occupied nearly the whole of the day, and had been carried by a large majority.

§ MR. GIBSON
said, it was perfectly true that the Bill had been debated at considerable length two or three months back; but on that occasion a great number of objections to the Bill were pointed out. The hon. and learned Gentleman, in replying to those objections, certainly conveyed to him (Mr. Gibson), and he believed, also, to many other Members of the House, that he was not in a position to say that he would adhere, or ask the House to ad- 1062 here, to the draft as it then stood. Well, the hon. and learned Member had taken no steps to indicate that he was not prepared to amend the measure. There were several Amendments on the Paper, one in his (Mr. Gibson's) name; but the hon. and learned Member had not intimated that he was willing to accept any of them. It was competent for the hon. and learned Member to say whether he was willing to drop Clause 2, as to which there was grave objection in debate, and in regard to which he (Mr. Gibson) had received a great many communications from people interested in the subject, expressing rooted objection to what was proposed to be done. To the points in the Bill to which he referred he should certainly give the most strenuous opposition. The hon. and learned Member could, by permission of the House, answer the question; and he (Mr. Gibson), therefore, desired to ask him whether he was prepared to accept the Amendment to exclude Clause 2, which clause, if it remained as it was, would introduce litigation into a great many households which were disposed to any opposition or squabbling, and leave the husband and the wife in a position to the last extent undesirable, and also leave the children in a position which could not be desired for any children on the face of the earth? Was the hon. and learned Member prepared to support the Amendment which stood in his (Mr. Gibson's) name? Was he prepared to omit Clause 2, and was he prepared to support the Amendment, which would leave the father the power to associate with his wife who survived him other trusted friends? At present the Bill, as it was drafted, excluded the power which both husbands and fathers at present desired to avail themselves of, and which would meet with the sanction of every sensible wife—namely, to appoint the wife and the mother guardian of the children, associated with other trusted friends of the family in whom the father and mother had confidence. The hon. and learned Member had not given a satisfactory answer to these inquiries; but he was a most sanguine man if he thought the Bill would pass into law, even if it got into Committee.

§ MR. HORACE DAVEY
said, he was glad to hear that the right hon. and learned Gentleman intended to offer the 1063 Bill his most strenuous opposition—and his opposition was always strenuous—but he thought the point raised by the hon. and learned Member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Bryce) would be better dealt with in Committee, when he would have an opportunity of explaining his Amendments. As he understood his hon. and learned Friend, personally he would desire to pass the Bill with certain Amendments; but if the House or the Committee took a different view, he would not, therefore, drop the Bill. He thought it would be best to go into Committee, and then the right hon. and learned Gentleman would be able to give his reasons for objecting to the hon. and learned Member's Amendments.

MR. A. F. EGERTON
urged that 2 'clock in the morning was too late to go into Committee, and he therefore moved that the debate be adjourned.

§ THE SOLICITOR GENERAL (Sir FARRER HERSCHELL)
said, he should not vote for the adjournment; but he entertained just as strong an objection as the right hon. and learned Gentleman opposite (Mr. Gibson) to the 2nd clause. The majority of Members, he was sure, would rather see the Bill thrown out than passed with that clause; but there were real grievances, and he should vote against the Motion, because there were provisions in the Bill which it was very desirable to pass.

§ MR. GIBSON
said, this matter was fully discussed on the second reading. His objection had been mainly with regard to Clause 2; but although he had tried to learn what concessions the hon. and learned Member would make, the hon. and learned Gentleman had studiously maintained his position of silence, and given no satisfaction to the House. He was satisfied, from what had fallen from the hon. and learned Solicitor General, that the Bill had very little chance of passing into law that Session, unless some concession was made.

§ MR. BRYCE
denied the right of the right hon. and learned Gentleman oppo- 1064 site (Mr. Gibson) to put a pistol to his head at that stage of the Bill, and to insist that he should state now what concessions he would make. If they would go into Committee, the arguments of the right hon. and learned Gentleman would, no doubt, weigh with the Committee, especially as the Solicitor General seemed to take a similar view.

§ MR. FINDLATER
said, he had supported the Bill on the last occasion; and he thought it was unfair for the hon. and learned Gentleman to ask the House to go into Committee at such a late hour, and place himself in a better position than he would otherwise be in.