HC Deb 15 June 1888 vol 327 cc320-1

Bill considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

DR. TANNER (Cork Co., Mid)

said, it really seemed to him unseemly at such an hour as this to attempt to make progress with an important Bill of this character. It would be improper to proceed with a Bill even smaller than this; indeed, he should think it would be impossible to push any measure through at such an hour. He supposed the hon. Member who had the Bill in charge, like other hon. Members, was at this time of the evening rather hungry and waiting for his dinner, and he (Dr. Tanner) should think that the five minutes time which was all that was left for hon. Members to discuss matters of public interest would be a great deal better employed in the fulfilment of one's natural functions, which not even hon. Gentlemen opposite could ignore, than trying to run through measures in this manner. He sincerely hoped that further discussion on the Bill would be deferred until a more seemly opportunity.

MR. MARJORIBANKS (Berwickshire)

said, he would appeal to the hon. Gentleman to withdraw his objection. The present Bill was not only an innocent one, but one which would be of the greatest benefit to the North Sea fishermen; therefore, he trusted the hon. Gentleman would allow it to pass this stage. The Bill was founded upon a Convention agreed to by all European nations bounding on the North Sea.

SIR WILFRID LAWSON (Cumberland, Cockermouth)

said, he would add his appeal to that of the right hon. Member for Berwickshire (Mr. Marjoribanks). This Bill was one of the best which had been brought in this Session. It was one for total prohibition on the sea. It only remained for Her Majesty's Government to bring in a measure to carry out total prohibition on the land, and their legislation upon the subject of the liquor traffic would be perfect.

DR. TANNER

said, he did not care much for appeals which were made to him from the other side of the House. Her Majesty's Government and hon. Gentlemen on the opposite side invariably obstructed Irish measures when they were brought forward; and he, therefore, felt in duty bound, when Ministerial measures were brought forward, to try and get them discussed in an adequate fashion. He was always anxious to prevent the misuse on the part of the Government of the privileges the House conferred upon them. Seeing that the Bill was of the character described by hon. Gentlemen who had spoken from those (the Opposition) Benches, he would not proceed with his objection. If he refrained from offering opposition, however, it was not because of any love he bore the other side. He should not persist in his objection out of compliment to Gentlemen on his own side with whom he was proud to be associated.

Bill reported, without Amendment.