HC Deb 29 May 1846 vol 86 cc1421-3

rose to move, in pursuance of notice, that the House at its rising do adjourn to Friday next, and took that opportunity of explaining in what order it would be his duty, on the part of the Government, to propose to bring on public business immediately after the recess.


wished the right hon. Baronet to state what was intended by the Government with respect to the Poor Removal Bill. It had been a long time before the House, and there was a great deal of interest felt in it out of doors; and it was therefore desirable that the country should be informed what were the intentions of the Government with respect to it.


said, he should give the earliest day after the Irish Bill had been disposed of to the Poor Removal Bill.


begged to give notice, on the part of himself and his friends, that so long as the Irish Coercion Bill was before the House, they would feel it their duty, as Irish Members, to oppose the Motion for giving precedence to Orders of the Day over Motions on Thursdays; and, failing in that, it would be their duty to move Amendments on the Orders of the Day as they came on.


said, of the Poor Removal Bill, that it had been originally settled, as he thought, to proceed with it, pari passu with the Corn Importation Bill. Now, however, it seemed that the Poor Removal Bill was to be postponed indefinitely, as well as the Highway Bill and other Bills connected with it. The House was to be called upon to waste week after week on the Irish Coercion Bill; and in the meantime what was to become of the Poor Removal Bill? He trusted that in a short time the other House would have passed the Corn Bill; but, as he had apprehended early in the Session, the Poor Removal Bill would be left to shift for itself. There was another Bill of which the right hon. Baronet had said nothing, and regarding which he (Mr. T. Duncombe) must ask for some information from the Secretary at War. He alluded to the Bill for the enrolment of the militia. He had mentioned it long before Easter, and had been informed, that it would be brought in before Easter; but now Whitsuntide had arrived, and it had not been heard of. He had all along feared that it would not be introduced till it was too late to consider its clauses. It had not been even seen yet, though the least that could have been expected was, that it would have been upon the Table before Whitsuntide, and a good deal of interest was felt about it by the public. As to the Poor Removal Bill, he must say that the right hon. Baronet would not be using the House quite fairly if he did not enable it properly to discuss, and afterwards to pass the measure.


admitted frankly that he had justified some expectation that the Poor Removal Bill would be brought on on an early day; but he hoped the House would make allowances for the difficulty of the position of Government. He and his Colleagues were ready to devote sixteen or eighteen hours a day to their public duties in the House; still they had hitherto only had two days in the week for Government business. So anxious was he to fulfil every expectation he had raised, that he was ready to take the Poor Removal Bill on Friday next, instead of the Votes in Supply. He believed that there was still money enough in the Treasury to go on with the public service; but he considered Ministers bound to press forward the Irish Bill.


said, that the hon. Member for Malton (Mr. E. Denison) had given notice of an instruction to the Committee on the Poor Removal Bill, and if it were carried, it would be indispensable to alter the whole framework of the measure. It must be recommitted pro formâ, in order that it might be remodelled. He apprehended, however, that one night would be sufficient for the discussion.


expressed a strong desire that the Poor Removal Bill should have precedence, as he knew that great anxiety was felt upon the subject in agricultural districts. He recommended that the Irish Coercion Bill should be postponed to other business, with a view to save time. If the right hon. Baronet intended to stop all the useful business of the country for the sake of that measure, he would find himself involved in new difficulties. He stated not only his own opinion, but that of almost everybody out of the House. There was hardly one person who did not express a hope that Government would not interfere with the progress of the Poor Removal Bill.


said, the right hon. Gentleman would recollect that it was distinctly understood that an opportunity should be given of discussing the principle of the Poor Removal Bill. That could not be done if the debate were confined to the Motion of the hon. Member for Maldon; and he trusted that, in assenting to the course proposed by the Government, he should be understood as doing so in the anticipation of having an opportunity for fully discussing the general principle of the measure.

Motion for the Adjournment agreed to.

Back to