§ LORD STRATHEDENsaid, it would ill-become him, after having on the 29th of July endeavoured to insist on the necessity and policy of the Resolution to arrest Bills before that period, to urge upon the House at so late a day as this a controverted measure. It never once occurred to him to do so. He gave notice of the second reading that their Lordships might be made publicly aware of the fact that the other House of Parliament, without any opposition, had sent up a Bill to repeal the Act of 1819, which first imposed securities on publishers and printers; so that if a Bill of this kind next year came before them at an early time in the 1841 Session, it might have whatever weight—he did not wish to over-estimate it—this previous sanction was entitled to confer upon it. And here he should sit down had it not been for a statement which fell last night from the noble Lord, the Chairman of Committees, that the judgment of the House had last year been given on the Bill. Such a statement would entirely mislead them. Last year a Bill on the subject of the press was introduced, but, so far from being identical with the Bill he now had charge of, it related in a great measure to an Act of 1799, which this Bill does not even touch. Unless the present Bill had been framed to meet various objections which last year were started, he (Lord Stratheden) would not have been connected with it. The division last year, besides, was never taken on the merits of the Bill which the House rejected. The Bill was brought forward with no explanatory argument, because no notice had been given to oppose it. It was not defended in reply, because those who viewed it with suspicion were still prepared to grant the second reading; until on a sudden after-thought, when he (Lord I Stratheden) had set down, a noble and learned Lord resolved upon dividing. Having thus explained the object of the notice, he, with their permission, would withdraw it.
§ LORD CHELMSFORDcomplained of the way in which their Lordships were treated with respect to this measure. Although a similar Bill to this had been introduced into the other House of Parliament in every Session since 1859, it had never been discussed by the other House. The Bill of 1860 proposed to repeal three Acts of Parliament, and came up to that House in the latter part of July. He (Lord Chelmsford) having stated his objections to some of its provisions, moved the rejection of the measure. The result was the defeat of the Bill by a majority of 36 to 10, and amongst this majority were several of the Cabinet Ministers. So quietly had the Bill of the present Session been introduced into the other House and passed through all its stages, that he should not have known of its presence upon their Lordships' table had he not been informed of the fact by an anonymous correspondent, who signed himself "Amicus," and who pointed his attention to some of its provisions. Under these circumstances he thought it rather hard that the House of Commons, knowing that a similar measure had been 1842 decisively rejected by their Lordships last year, should have now sent up to them this Bill at this period of the Session
§ EARL GRANVILLEthought it rather hard upon the noble Lord (Lord Stratheden) that the noble and learned Lord should make an attack upon a Bill which, as far as the noble Lord was concerned, was dead and gone.
§ LORD STRATHEDENassured his noble Friend, the President of the Council, that he would not imitate the example of the noble and learned Lord, who might, however, be excused as he had come up from the country, and was, no doubt, extremely disappointed at the withdrawal of the Bill he had intended to attack. If next year it was his (Lord Stratheden's) fortune to address their Lordships on the subject, he should then endeavour to reply to as many of the noble and learned Lord's remarks as he thought at all likely to influence the House.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read and discharged; and Bill to be read 2a on this Day Month.