PUBLIC BUSINESS—SESSIONAL ORDERS—GENERAL POLICE AND IMPROVEMENT (SCOTLAND) SUPPLEMENTAL BILL. (Hansard, 2 August 1872)

THE EARL OF MORLEY
said, that in order to be in a position to take the second reading of the Bill, he should move that the Standing Order of the 22nd April be dispensed with.

§ LORD REDESDALE
said, that every year he moved certain Sessional Orders prescribing the time within which measures could be pushed forward in that House, and the Order which was now sought to be set aside was one of these. He therefore protested against a Bill being proceeded with at such a late period of the Session, and more particularly on account of the peculiar manner of its introduction. This Bill ought to have been read a second time in June last. There was nothing to prevent it, and he could not understand why it should be introduced at this part of the Session. That an attempt should be made to press it now surprised him much. He believed that this was all through the negligence on the part of the public officials, and through the negligence of the promoters of the Bill, This Bill had been a week in the House. 298 and no Notice had been given of the second reading till last night. He was therefore much surprised when he took up the Minutes that morning to see the Notice of the second reading without as much as a single notice to him of the fact. He also found another Notice, by a Member of the Government, respecting a Bill which had been three weeks before the House, and which he thought had been allowed to drop through. No intimation had been given to him of this either. He was quite ready to continue to serve their Lordships as Chairman of Committees; but he should certainly not submit to treatment like this, if he were to continue to hold that office. The fact was, that if one day more had been allowed to elapse in regard to the Bill now before the House, the noble Earl (the Earl of Morley) could, not have moved in the matter. This was really no way to conduct Public Business.

THE DUKE OF ARGYLL
said, he felt bound to give their Lordships some explanation about this Bill, although he knew nothing himself about the promotion of it, yet he understood it was one of considerable importance to Dumbarton. There was no opposition to it, and it proposed to effect a very great improvement, for its object was to vest the roads in the Town Council instead of in the Road Trustees, who had no funds to maintain them; and if it did not pass, Dumbarton would be left without new roads for another year. Persons who were acquainted with the facts had waited upon him and assured him that the delay in having the Bill forwarded in their Lordships' House was owing to a technical cause—namely, circumstances which had had to pass between the Sheriff and the magistrates. He promised the persons who came to him that he would communicate with his noble Friend the Chairman of Committees, with a view to the suspension of the Order of the 22nd of April, but it had entirely escaped his memory. He regretted this, and begged pardon of his noble Friend the Chairman of Committees, assuring him at the same time that he meant him no disrespect, and that the fault of not having informed him that the second reading was to be put down for this evening was his, and his alone. In no way whatever was it the fault of his noble Friend on his right (the Earl of Morley), in whose name the Motion 299 stood; and he thought it would be hard on the burgh of Dumbarton, which possessed a growing trade, by refusing the requisite facilities, that they should have a difficulty thrown in the way of the maintenance of their statute-labour roads.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
was sure their Lordships generally would agree with him that the loss of his noble Friend the Chairman of Committees would be a greater one than that of any private Bill. He knew nothing of the merits of the proceedings in respect of this Bill, but he thought that the Sessional Order, which was valuable in itself, would suffer if it were maintained to this degree—that even when there was no opposition to a Bill their Lordships would still refuse to set the legislative machinery of the House in motion because a certain date had been passed. In the case of an opposed Bill, or of a Bill to which there was a reasonable objection on the merits, the rigid maintenance of the rule would be another thing; but he put it to his noble Friend whether he would not be endangering the existence of his own valuable Rule, if he pressed it in such a case as that now before their Lordships.

§ LORD REDESDALE
said, he had never pressed this Rule, except when it was necessary to keep up the Order of their Lordships' House. It was all very well to say that this Bill was not opposed, and therefore that the Order should be relaxed; but could their Lordships say that the reason it was not opposed was, that persons had refrained from opposing it in the belief that it had no chance of being read a second time? It was reasonable to suppose that the people outside acted on the belief that their Lordships would act on their own Rules. Several Bills had been stopped under the Sessional Order because they were behind time; and, however useful this and other measures might be, they should be brought forward in proper time.

§ VISCOUNT HALIFAX
said, he wished to explain that he had undertaken to move the suspension of the Sessional Order referred to in the case of the Provisional Certificate Confirmation Bill, because he had been assured that the delay had arisen from technical reasons. If the Bill had been three weeks in their Lordships' House, he knew no- 300 thing about it. He concurred with his noble Friend opposite (the Marquess of Salisbury), that where there was no opposition whatever to a Bill, it was neither necessary nor desirable to insist on the maintenance of a Sessional Order in its utmost rigour; but, at the same time, he would be the last man in that House to take any course which would seem wanting in respect to his noble Friend the Chairman of Committees, and therefore he should not take the course to which he alluded.

§ LORD REDESDALE
said, he could assure his noble Friend that the Bill had been three weeks in the House, and one day longer it would have died out of the Standing Orders. If they were to be treated in that sort of way, there was no use for them.

THE EARL OF MORLEY
said, the objects of the Bill before their Lordships was exactly what had been stated by his noble Friend the Secretary for India. He begged to assure the noble Lord the Chairman of Committees that he meant nothing disrespectful to him in moving the suspension of the Sessional Order. He did so, because he thought the circumstances warranted such a Motion, and if the noble Lord looked to the Minutes, he would find that Notice of this Motion was given on the 30th ult.

§ EARL GRANVILLE
rose and said, that, though his own opinion was that this was a case in which the Sessional Order might well be suspended, and though he regretted the noble Lord the Chairman of Committees had not yielded to the appeal of the noble Marquess, yet he, for one, would not vote after the protest of the noble Lord.

§ LORD REDESDALE
said, that after the statement just made by the noble Earl, he would withdraw his opposition to the suspension of the Standing Order. The noble Earl said more than had been said before. His objection was not to that particular Bill. The difficulty he felt was that if they suspended the Rule in one case it was scarcely fair to refuse suspension in favour of other Bills.