HL Deb 14 March 1865 vol 177 cc1645-6

On Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee,

THE EARL OF ST. GERMANS

said, that he rose to move that the Order of the Day be discharged, and the Bill referred to a Select Committee, not because its provisions were such as could not be conveniently discussed in a Committee of the whole House, but because some of his noble Friends considered that it would have a retrospective action.

THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE

expressed his regret at the course taken by the noble Earl, inasmuch as the measure was one which ought to be passed without delay. The omission in the Act of 1857 which it was sought to remedy was, he contended, of a purely accidental character, and he was surprised that the noble Earl whom he saw opposite (the Earl of De-noughmore) should have objected to the Bill on a former occasion on the ground that it would operate retrospectively, seeing the course which had been taken in 1849, when it was declared that no railway company should come under the operation of the Winding-up Act. If the law of Ireland were not placed upon the same footing as that of England, every man in Ireland would be made discontented, and that with good and sufficient cause; and a more serious blow would be struck at the prosperity and progress of the country than had been aimed at it by any Ministry either before or since the Union. He did not doubt that if the Bill went to a Select Committee it would eventually pass, but he hoped no time would be lost in proceeding with it.

THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE

admitted that the present state of the law had arisen in consequence of a mistake in the Act of 1857; but that in no way affected the argument. There were credi- tors who, in the present state of the law, had certain rights, on the faith of which they had become creditors, and those rights must be respected. He had been informed that there was one gentleman who was a creditor of a railway company for £25,000, and who stated that before he entered into the contract under which that debt had arisen he took legal advice, and was told that not only had he the remedy of making the company bankrupt, but very probably he might also call upon the shareholders' individually and collectively, to make good the debt. If the House assented to this ex post facto legislation he would lose that remedy. He was willing, nay anxious, to restore the law to the condition which existed before the Act of 1857, and all that he desired was that no injustice should be done to existing creditors who had made their contracts on the faith of an Act of Parliament.

Motion agreed to.

And, on Thursday next, March 16, the Lords following were named of the Committee:—

Ld. Chancellor. L. Somerhill.
Ld. Steward. L. Chaworth.
E. Belmore. L. Cranworth.
V. Hutchinson. L. Belper.
L. Boyle. L. Chelmsford.
L. Silchester.