§ Bill considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ Clause 1 (Hours of polling in counties).
§ SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACHsaid, he should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman (Sir Charles W. Dilke), who had charge of the Bill, what was the course he proposed to take with regard to it? The Committee would remember that when the second reading of the Bill was discussed in December last there was a very general expression of opinion in favour of the measure, contingent, of course, upon the passing into law of the Franchise Bill, which would so materially increase the number of voters in counties—voters who, being mainly of the working classes, would require to have the hours of poll extended for their convenience. That view was met by the clause which stood on the Paper in the name of the right hon. Baronet (Sir Charles W. Dilke)—namely, that this Act should not come into operation before the Franchise Act. But there were other matters which were mentioned by more than one speaker, some of which he (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) himself took the opportunity of bringing under the notice of the House. In the last Session an Act was passed extending the hours of poll in Parliamentary boroughs above a certain size—he thought boroughs containing more than 3,000 electors. Some years ago an Act was passed extending the hours of poll to 8 o'clock in the Metropolitan boroughs, and now a Bill was brought in to extend the hours of poll in counties. This was an important matter, no doubt for the convenience of the electors; but it was a very simple matter of legislation, and it did seem to him an absurdity that such a question as the extension of the hours of poll should require to be embodied in three Acts of Parliament. Even this Bill did not complete the series, because it left outside the operation of the Acts the small borough constituencies which would retain a separate Parliamentary representation 1863 under the Parliamentary Election (Redistribution) Bill—that was to say, boroughs containing less than 3,000 voters. What he had now to suggest to the right hon. Gentleman—and he assured the right hon. Baronet his suggestion was made with no intention of impeding the progress of the Bill—was that the law should be made uniform. He would now ask the right hon. Gentleman to repeal all previous legislation on the subject; and, on Report, remodel the Bill so as to make the law uniform in all constituencies. It was very desirable there should be a measure dealing with the whole matter in a satisfactory manner. It might also be well to consider a case which had happened under the existing Acts—namely, the case of a polling place at which very few voters polled being kept open for 12 hours to the great inconvenience of all those who were engaged in taking the poll, and with no commensurate convenience to the voters themselves. It was worth considering whether it would not be possible to shorten the hours in those cases in such a way as would not be inconvenient to the working classes. It might be well in some places to open the poll at 10 o'clock in the morning instead of at 8. It might also be well to consider the possibility of making the hours of poll different in winter and summer, making the polling hours long in summer when the labour hours were long, and short in winter when the day's work, at any rate in the country, was practically done by half-past 4. If anything could be done in this way to meet the legitimate convenience of those officials who were engaged in taking the poll, it was very proper it should be done. He did not propose, however, to press the matter; but what he did press was that the law should be made uniform in all constituencies, and comprised in one Act of Parliament.
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, that when the Speaker left the Chair during the Autumn Sitting of the present Session he (Sir Charles W. Dilke) threw out the suggestion that it would be desirable, on Report, to amend the Bill in the way proposed by the right hon. Baronet (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach), and he was quite disposed to so amend it, subject to one doubt he had in his mind. He said he would take steps to find out during the Recess the opinions of Mem- 1864 bers from various parts of the United Kingdom on the subject. He did take those steps. He had quite made up his mind as to the desirability of taking the course suggested with regard to England and Scotland; but he was not yet acquainted with the opinion of Irish Members on the subject. The only Irish Member he had had any communications with on the subject was the hon. Member for the City of Cork (Mr. Parnell), and the hon. Gentleman only informed him that he would inform him of his views as to what Amendments in the Bill were desirable. The hon. Member had not informed him what those Amendments were; but he had intimated that, so far as he was concerned, there was no objection to the Bill coming on to-night for consideration. He (Sir Charles W. Dilke), therefore, spoke with some doubt as to the Irish opinion on the subject. At the same time, the changes which would have to be made in the Bill were changes which could not be made at the present stage of the Bill, because they were limited in Committee to the scope and title of the Bill. It was a Bill to extend the hours of poll in counties. It was because there were a large number of municipal boroughs in which the hours of poll were not extended by the present Bill or by former Bills the right hon. Gentleman (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) suggested that, as regarded England and Scotland, at all events, the law should be made uniform; that whatever the hours were they should be made the same in municipal boroughs, which were not at present covered by the Bill. That change could only be made on Report, because to make it in Committee would have required an Instruction to the Committee. If between this and Report or to-night he should find that the opinions of the Irish Members did not differ from those of the English and Scotch Representatives he should be glad, on Report, to make the change suggested applicable to the Three Kingdoms, and of course it could be made in a single clause. With regard to the second suggestion of the right hon. Baronet, he very much doubted whether it was advisable to attempt to close the poll during any portion of the day. At the present time, in the case of school board elections the system of closing the poll during a portion of the day prevailed. It was, how- 1865 ever, an optional closing, and it had been found to have its inconveniences. Neither could he accede to the right hon. Baronet's suggestion to open the poll later in the day. Between 8 and 9 o'clock in the morning was an hour when very heavy polling took place in almost all parts of the country. There were, too, great numbers of what were called suburban voters—not only round London, but round all large towns—who had to go to business early, and who generally voted between 8 and 9 o'clock. Between 8 and 9 o'clock was an hour which suited those voters best; and, therefore, it would be most undesirable that the poll should be closed at that time of the day. If it was determined to close the poll at some portion of the day, between 3 and 4 in the afternoon would be the most convenient time. He, however, was not disposed to make any change in the present arrangement—indeed, he thought it was better to run the risk of a long day's work. The suggestion that the hours of poll should vary according to the time of year was made many years ago. It was embodied in a Bill; but it was rejected, if he remembered rightly, by the House of Lords. He did not think such a proposal would meet with general favour in the country.
§ MR. SEXTONsaid, he had had the opportunity of communicating with the hon. Gentleman the Member for the City of Cork (Mr. Parnell) with reference to the Bill; and the desire of the hon. Gentleman, and, indeed, the desire of every Irish Member, was that every facility should be afforded, so that every person entitled to the franchise could, if he chose, go to the poll. There was just one matter to which he wished to call the attention of the Committee. Under the Prevention of Crime Act, now in force in Ireland, the police had the power to arrest any person who was out of his house after dark. Now the Irish Representatives were certainly indisposed to give an unquestioning assent to the passing of a measure which lengthened the hours of the poll far beyond the period of daylight, if it were open to any constable to arrest and imprison for the night any person he might meet returning from the poll. What they were anxious to obtain was the insertion of a clause in the Bill to prevent any man being arrested on his way from 1866 the polling booth. It seemed to be amusing to the hon. and learned Gentleman the Solicitor General; but Gentlemen who were connected with the law in England and were in Office in this country did not know what the humble citizen had to bear from the officers of the law in Ireland. Unless the Irish Members were given some reasonable explanation on this subject he should move to report Progress.
§ MR. HEALYsaid, he would remind the hon. and learned Gentleman who seemed to be so amused that it was provided in the Parliamentary Elections (Corrupt and Illegal Practices) Bill that offences under it should not be tried under the provisions of the Prevention of Crime Act. The hon. and learned Member would, perhaps, remember the little Amendment of his (Mr. Healy's), which was accepted after considerable discussion. The suggestion of the hon. Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton) should be taken into consideration; and an amalgamated Bill—that was to say, a measure dealing with the Metropolis, with boroughs and counties—should be brought in. The general practice of the Government was to bring in a Bill dealing with some county, some town, or some village; and when that had been carried, to bring forward another on the same subject also dealing with a county, town, or village. The Government seemed to be actuated by some little common sense for the first time, and there was some prospect of the three Bills being rolled into one. He wished to call attention to the action of the Clerks at the Table in regard to this Bill. These gentlemen seemed to be omnipotent in the House—to have all kinds of power. How was it? They could hardly be said to be acting directly under the inspiration of Heaven. This Bill was marked on the Paper with an asterisk, and, referring to a corresponding asterisk lower down, he found that Bills so marked were Government Orders of the Day. He turned to the Bill itself, and found that it was brought in by Mr. Arthur Elliot, Mr. Grey, Mr. Stafford Howard, and Mr. Cochran-Patrick. Were these Members of the Treasury Bench? Mr. Cochran-Patrick he believed to be an honest Conservative, and Mr. Grey voted against the 1867 Government on the Vote of Censure. It could hardly be said, therefore, that these Gentlemen were Ministerialists. What security had hon. Members that Bills purporting to be Government Bills were really so, when they found that a measure marked with an asterisk was really a private Member's Bill'? He considered that, in this matter, the Clerks at the Table were trifling with the House. It seemed to him to be a great liberty on the part of the Clerks to mark this Bill with an asterisk; and he objected to Bills introduced by private Members being trotted out as Government measures without the House having an opportunity of knowing what the measures really were. Before the hon. Gentleman the Member for Sligo moved to report Progress, they should have some Amendment promised to test the bona fides of the Government—an Amendment providing that the Prevention of Crime Act was not to apply to what might happen under this Bill. Last Thursday night 14 men were dragged out of their beds in Kerry, and kept all night in gaol, and the greater portion of next day, on a charge of being supposed to have fired into a house. The case against them was really that they had been out after nightfall. The fact was, that a policeman, having shot a bailiff by mistake, arrested 14 innocent persons. When 14 persons could be arrested in this way—in consequence of a policeman having discharged his rifle—he (Mr. Healy) wished to know what security they would have in Ireland that a man going to record his vote after nightfall would not be arrested? The Government would, he thought, be doing a wise thing in accepting an Amendment providing that the Curfew Clauses of the Prevention of Crime Act should not be put in force on a polling-day in Ireland.
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEwished to offer an explanation. The Bill appeared as a Government measure under the following circumstances. He had stated publicly in the House—acting on the express wish of Members sitting on both sides—on the last occasion the Bill was under discussion, that it would be taken up by the Government. It was in consequence of that pledge that the measure was now on the Paper as a Government Bill. With regard to the place it occupied on the Paper as an 1868 Order of the Day, on Monday night, and on all Government nights in fact, the Government had control of the Business, and could put Bills down in the order they thought proper. As to the asterisk, he knew nothing about it; but it could, no doubt, be explained by the officials. As the Clerks, however, could not answer or speak in the House, any question to them must be put to and answered by Mr. Speaker.
§ MR. HEALYAs Mr. Speaker is not in the House, I would ask you, Sir Arthur Otway, to explain this matter. I think an explanation is necessary, for we have reason to look with great suspicion on every act of the gentlemen at the Table, who are becoming every day more and more inclined to encroach on the rights of private Members.
THE CHAIRMANThe Clerks at the Table have in this case followed the usual course. When a Bill is taken up by the Government——
THE CHAIRMANIt is usual to mark it in the way indicated—by an asterisk. If this Bill had not become a Government Bill, the Clerks at the Table would not have been able to put it in the position in which it now stands on the Paper. It is because it has become a Government measure that it is marked with an asterisk.
§ MR. HEALYsaid, he should like to ask the right hon. Baronet (Sir Charles W. Dilke), who said he knew nothing about the asterisk, whether he had instructed the Clerks to deal with this as a Government Order of the Day? They had a statement from the Chairman that the Clerks in some way or other knew that this was a Government Bill.
§ SIR CHAELES W. DILKEI believe the noble Lord the Secretary to the Treasury (Lord Richard Grosvenor) informed the Clerks that this had become a Government Bill, in order that they might make no mistake about it.
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEThat is a mere detail. I have nothing whatever to do with it. It became a Government Bill, and, of course, was placed amongst the other Government measures.
§ MR. SEXTONsaid, he did not wish to further refer to this mysterious matter 1869 of the asterisk. Could not the Government, for the convenience of the Irish Members, allow them a night for the discussion of this Bill? Thinking that such an opportunity should be given, he would now move to report Progress.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Sexton.)
§ MR. HEALYsaid, he would appeal to the right hon. Baronet to give the Irish Members a night to debate this subject. This was the first time the Bill had appeared on the Paper, and it must not be forgotten that the House had only been sitting a few days. The Bill should be put off for one or two nights. It would not be unreasonable to ask the Government to put it off until Thursday; at the same time, he did not desire to enter into a wrangle on the subject. The Government were very fond of getting into wrangles—and were also fond of getting out of them. He would ask the Government to postpone the consideration of the measure until Thursday.
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, the Bill had been down on the Paper some days, and ample opportunity had been afforded to hon. Members for the preparation of Amendments.
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEOn Report; it could not be done on the Committee stage.
§ MR. HEALYsaid, he understood what the right hon. Baronet meant. Suppose they allowed the Bill to pass through Committee now, in order to have Amendments inserted at a later stage, would there be any objection to re-committing the Bill? If they were going to put in the Bill the whole of one Act, and repeal a former Act which consisted of four or five clauses, it was only reasonable that they should re-commit it. The old Act did not deal with Aldermen in Ireland, who were elected in a different manner to Aldermen in England.
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEI do not know whether it is competent to recommit the Bill after Report.
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEYes; for a definite purpose, I know; but I am not sure whether it can be done generally. According to the way in which the hon. Member puts the matter, I understand that he would like to see the Bill in a new form, in order to consider it before moving Amendments. I am not sure that that could be done; but the Committee stage can be disposed of now, and, if it will be convenient to hon. Members, the Report stage can be taken on Friday, and it can then be re-committed.
§ MR. SEXTONI think that course would be satisfactory.
§ MR. HEALYThen we will prepare our Amendments, and put them on the Paper; the Report will be taken on Friday, and then we will re-commit the Bill.
§ Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clause 2 (Definition).
§ Amendment proposed, after the Clause, to insert the following Clause:—
§ (Commencement of Act.)
§ "This Act shall not come into operation until the end of this present Parliament."—(Sir Charles W. Dilke.)
§ Question proposed, "That the Clause be read a second time."
§ MR. HEALYsaid, he did not wish to oppose the clause; but he desired to know whether any provision would be made in this Bill, or in the Parliamentary Elections (Redistribution) Bill, or in the new Registration Bill, dealing with places for counting votes? In Ireland, the place fixed upon was a matter of great importance. It should be central. Where there was a district split up into four divisions, and where railway communication might be defective, what course would be followed?
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, it would be out of Order to deal with that subject in the present Bill. It could be dealt with in the Parliamentary Elections (Redistribution) Bill.
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEWe have not dealt with it in the Bill as it 1871 it before us; but it is quite competent for the hon. Member to move to amend the measure.
§ Question put, and agreed to.
§ MR. WARTONsaid, it would be better if the clause was put in a positive form, and he would move to leave out the word "not," and to substitute for the word "until" the word "at."
§ Amendment proposed, to leave out the word "not."—(Mr. Warton.)
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Amendment proposed, to leave out the word "until."—(Mr. Warton.)
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Motion made, and Question, "That the word 'at' be there inserted," put, and agreed to.
§ Clause, as amended, agreed to.
§ Remaining Clause agreed to.
§ Bill reported; as amended, to be considered upon Friday.