CORONERS—WARWICK AND LANCASTER. (Hansard, 3 August 1842)

Lord Stanley
requested the hon. Member 980 for Warwick, whose bill stood for a committee, to give precedence to the Newfoundland Bill.

§ Sir Charles Douglas
said: Sir, I feel myself placed in a situation of considerable difficulty in consequence of the request made by my noble Friend, and that difficulty is increased in consequence of the absence of my right hon. Friend, with whom I have been in communication upon the subject of this bill. 1 have every disposition to facilitate the views of the Government upon the subject of Newfoundland, but I am placed in this situation with respect to the Coroners' Bill, that if I have no opportunity of bringing it on to-night, unless the Government give me considerable facilities hereafter, I do not see any chance of getting the bill passed this Session. If the Government will give me facilities on Friday, so that I can get the third reading on Saturday, may have some chance of getting the bill through, if not I do not see how I can. If I give way to-night, I do it at the expense of those whose claims I advocate upon public grounds, and solely in consequence of their justice. Under these circumstances, I should be glad to know, whether my noble Friend will persevere in his request. I have no reason to suppose that the Coroners' Bill will lead to any lengthened discussion. I believe the parties will offer no opposition to the clause of the hon. Member for Cockermouth for confirmation of the charters in this House. I understand there is no active opposition from Birmingham upon this point in this House, and I do not apprehend any opposition to the other clauses, and I have every reason to believe it would not take any considerable time this evening. I am most anxious not to inconvenience the Government, who, no doubt, have many matters which press very much upon them, and if I should consent to postpone the consideration of these claims, which I urge solely upon the ground of their justice, I trust my noble Friend will give me some day, and some facilities by which I hall be able to pass the bill this Session.

Mr. Aglionby hoped,
that the hon. Member for Warwick would not postpone his bill.

§ Mr. M. Philips
said, it was necessary they should know what were the views of the right hon. Baronet (Sir J. Graham) on this subject, as he (Mr. Philips) understood the right hon. Baronet intimated that he would give the hon. Member for 981 Warwick an opportunity to proceed with his bill. He was quite ready to go on with the bill himself.

§ Sir James Graham
wished, before he answered the question of the hon. Member for Manchester, to know if the hon. Member for Warwick would accede to the request of his noble Friend, and consent to the postponement of the discussion on the bill.

§ Sir Charles Douglas
It is well known I believe to the House generally that only brought forward this bill upon the understanding that as far as the second reading was concerned, 1 should have the support of the Government and 1 had reason to believe, that with the exception of one point the parties would agree in the support to be given to the proposition of the hon. Member for Cockermouth, I infer that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department is perfectly aware of all the objects of the hon. Gentleman. I am only desirous of consulting the interests of those for whom I have brought forward this bill, anti it is solely with a view to justice being done them. I hope if the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Colonies says it ought to be postponed for the convenience of the Government, he will see the necessity of making some arrangement by which this bill shall be carried into a law during the present Session.

§ Mr. T. Duncombe
understood that it had been proposed that the House should meet to-morrow at twelve o'clock, in order to dispose of unopposed Orders of the Day. Now, as to-morrow was the only day on which Notices of Motion had precedence of Orders, he thought it was unfair to bring forward a proposition of that sort without due notice. There were several notices on the paper, and if the Government got the business done at twelve, it was pretty certain there would be no House at four. He himself had several notices on the paper, and if he were prevented bringing them forward tomorrow, he would bring them on when the Orders of the Day should be proposed; so that the Government would find the business obstructed, instead of gaining anything by these proceedings.

§ Sir R. Peel
said, that, fearing business might prevent him from coming down to the House, he had requested his hon. Friend (Sir G. Clerk) to make the proposition alluded to by the hon. Member, and he told his hon. Friend not to make the proposal unless he thought it would 982 meet with the general concurrence of the House; and lie also understood that his hon. Friend had communicated with several hon. Gentlemen opposite on the subject.

Mr. T. buncombe
said, there was a great difference between the right hon. Baronet himself bringing forward such a proposition at the time of public business, when the House was full, and his sending down the Secretary to the Treasury, at a quarter after four o'clock, to make it, while there were not twenty Members in the House. When he entered the House, at half-past four o'clock, there were only two Members sitting on the Opposition side of the House, and then he was told that the proposition had been made. It was taking an unfair advantage to bring forward such a proposition at such an hour. Would the right hon. Baronet guarantee that there should be a House at four o'clock? If he would not, such conduct was most unfair.

§ Sir Charles Douglas
My right hon. Friend sees the difficulty to which I am reduced, having brought forward the claims of these individuals solely on the ground of justice, I am most anxious that no unnecessary delay should take place, and I hope the right hon. baronet will now state the assistance he will give me, and what he will do to forward the progress of this bill.

§ Sir James Graham
said, that if the bill were withdrawn, lie would move for leave to bring in a bills to confirm the charters of Manchester, Birmingham, and Bolton.

§ Mr. T. Duncombe
said, that lie could see no reason to justify the proposal of the Government, that the House should meet at twelve o'clock. It appeared to him that the only motive for such a motion was a desire to get rid of the House early in the evening. He hoped that the proposal would not be persevered in.

§ Sir R. Peel
said, that he should not press the motion if it were objected to. The right hon. Baronet then gave notice that he would tomorrow (this day) move that the House should meet at twelve o'clock on Friday.