§ Order for Second Heading read.
MR. COWPERsaid, that in moving the second reading of this Bill, although he believed there would be no opposition made, he thought it might be advisable to say a few words in explanation of its purposes. He took it for granted that the necessity of legislation on this subject was universally admitted. This was not questioned even by those who objected to the measure. By the common law any person was entitled to practice medicine, provided he was competent, and a number of statutes had been passed from the time of Henry VIII., regulating the powers of the bodies entitled to decide this question of competency. The law, however, were now in an unsatisfactory condition, and required revision, and if there were any objection to such a revision anywhere, it probably arose from those persons who were not members of the medical profession, but who wished to be supposed to belong to it—the class of uneducated ignorant quacks who practised on the credulity of the public, and who hoped, in the present disorganized, anomalous, and chaotic state of the profession to pass for what they were not. There were three objects Which all the persons who had prepared Bills on this subject had kept in view. These were—1. To raise to a uniform and sufficient standard the education and acquirements of all persons who entered the medical profession. 2. To have an authoritative register, accessible to ordinary persons, clearly defining those who have attained the prescribed qualification. 3. The removal of all those local jurisdictions which restricted a competent man from practising in any other part of the country than that in which the licensing body which passed him had authority—these three objects should be sought in conjunction. The attempt to secure any one of them singly, would be mischievous instead of beneficial. if registration and an extension of area only 1407 were adopted, a temptation would be created to the smaller bodies to compete with the larger by lowering the standard, candidates might prefer the easiest examination instead of that in the highest repute, if it gave them equal rights; and the corporations which got the fewest fees might be tempted to increase them by indulgence in passing. The University of St. Andrews was accused at one time of giving a degree on the mere payment of fees; that was now altered, but the smaller bodies ought not to have unlimited right of licensing unless security was taken that the education was of a sufficiently high standard. The Council proposed by his Bill, would fill the functions of visitors to the existing licensing bodies, and ensure efficiency of teaching and examination. It had been objected that if the tests of education were raised, the supply of medical men would become insufficient. He believed that was an unfounded apprehension; on the contrary, at present there were more young men entering the profession than could gain a livelihood by it. Provision was made in the Bill for improvement of the examinations, by enacting that the Council should decide whether the examination was sufficient to entitle a candidate to his license. The constitution of the Council would be such as to guard against any suspicion of undue or improper partiality; it would be elected by the different examining bodies, so that if any injustice were complained of as having been done to one of these examining bodies, it would have a representative on the Council to defend it or offer such explanations as might be required; and in the event of the Council being suspected of unfairness or error, an appeal would lie to the Privy Council in the last resort. With regard to the registry, some difficulties had been raised, and he understood that the objection to it on the part of the College of Physicians was, that it did not sufficiently distinguish between physicians and other members of the medical profession. This Bill did not define physicians, but it proposed to extend the power now possessed by the Universities, the Apothecaries, and other societies, of coming under the general term "practising medicine," to persons who were registered under the Bill. He did not believe that it was possible by law to erect physicians into a distinct class, separate from the remainder of the profession; because their position was one which had not been created by law, the position of a consulting physician being, in 1408 fact, created by the general opinion of the public who required his services. The term was applied to those who did not practise pharmacy or surgery and who were called in in difficult cases. That position would in no respect be effected by the Bill; consequently he could not see that physicians would, on this account, have any reason to complain. If, however, the plan were adopted, which they themselves had recommended, of providing that every person who wanted to practise medicine should belong to the College of Physicians, the result would be to lower the status of that branch of the profession by the admission of inferior men. So far as any of the privileges they enjoyed under their charter were concerned, the Bill would in no way interfere with them. The Colleges of Surgeons represented that the measure would occasion a diminution in their resources, but that, he thought was an unfounded apprehension. He believed that a large portion of the revenues of the colleges was derived from examinations, but he could not see why the number of those examinations should fall off. Upwards of a hundred petitions had been presented to the House from members of the medical profession in favour of the Bill, and, up to last week, one only against it. He contended, therefore, that the great bulk of the profession, consisting of surgeons and apothecaries, approved of the Bill; that it met their views of medical reform; and that it was calculated to be a benefit to the public at large by securing an improved class of medical practitioners, by removing the anomalies and local impediments which prevented the best men in the profession from moving to any part of the country without let or hindrance, and by securing a register from which the public might learn who were the properly qualified men. In conclusion, the hon. Gentleman moved the second reading of the Bill.
§ MR. BLACKsaid, he should oppose the Bill. During the last twenty years a vast number of medical Bills had been brought forward by Members of great influence in the House, and not less than five during the three years he had had the honour of a seat in the House. But up to that moment all attempts at legislation had failed; and looking at the nature of the materials with which they had to deal, he had come to the conclusion that the question of medical reform was an impracticable one. On main object of all the Bills was to provid 1409 a register of qualified practitioners. They would have a volume of 500 or 600 pages, with a number of names in it, some with three or four, and some with six initials appended. But the public would not derive the least advantage from that, and the House was not, perhaps, aware that there was already a register published by Mr. Churchill, the medical publisher, which contained the names of all duly qualified medical practitioners. Another thing which the Bill proposed to effect was, that education should be provided for up to a certain standard; but that was done already by the education now required by the medical corporations. And then it should be remarked that none of the Bills proposed to do away with quacks. The Morisons and the Holloways would still flourish, as, he supposed, likewise would that other quack who bore the appropriate name of Coffin. In his opinion the best medical Bill that could now be introduced was one not to add to the legislation upon the subject, but to repeal all Acts hitherto passed which had given a monopoly to the body of physicians in London, and placed restrictions upon the other branches of the profession. If that monopoly and those restrictions were abolished, he believed that the parties who were now engaged in fighting with one another would be perfectly well satisfied at the results. Give them a "fair field and no favour." That was the best course which could be adopted. If, however, out of the three medical Bills lying upon the table they were to choose one, he should certainly prefer that which was promoted by the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. T. Duncombe), for the simple reason that it contained fewer restrictions than the others. What he would propose was that the whole of these Bills should be thrown overboard.
§ MR. SPEAKERthen put the question, "That the Bill be now read a second time."
§ Bill read 2° and committed.
§ MR. SPEAKERdeclared the Motion carried.
MR. HEADLAMobserved, that he understood the hon. Member for Edinburgh (Mr. Black) to say "no," when the right hon. Gentleman put the question. There must be some mistake.
MR. COWPERsaid, he was sitting close by the hon. Member for Edinburgh, and had his ears open to catch what was said; but as he had not heard the hon. 1410 Gentleman say "no," it was most unlikely to have reached the Speaker's ear.
§ MR. ROEBUCKsaid, he had been sitting further off than the right hon. Gentleman, and he certainly did hear the word "no" from the hon. Member for Edinburgh.
§ MR. WALPOLEsaid, there had been clearly a mistake on the part of the hon. Member for Edinburgh, but that was no reason why he need suffer, and upon the Motion for reading the Bill of the hon. Member for Finsbury he could assert the principle he was anxious to maintain in dealing with this question.
§ MR. BLACKsaid, he believed he had not acted in strict accordance with the rules of the House; but he had concluded his observations with the remark that he proposed all these medical Bills should be thrown overboard. He had also said "no" when the question was put.
§ MR. SPEAKERobserved, that he distinctly heard the hon. Member make the remark to which he alluded; but when the question was put, as the hon. Member failed to say "No" at the proper time, he was obliged by the forms of the House to declare the second reading carried. The question now before the House was, when the Bill should be committed.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House will, upon Tuesday next, resolve itself into the said Committee."
§ Amendment proposed, to leave out the words "Tuesday next," in order to insert the words "this day six months," instead thereof.
§ Question proposed, "That the words 'Tuesday next' stand part of the Question."
§ MR. BRADYsaid, that great inconvenience arose out of the present system of rivalry between the various medical bodies. Judging from the tone of his observations he could not conceive that the hon. Member for Edinburgh (Mr. Black) had read either of the Bills before the House. These Bills had been well considered in the various medical corporations, and their principles had received general assent. His experience had been large, and he could solemnly assert that no Bill had ever 1411 been before the House on the subject of medical reform which had received a more general assent from the profession. He did not think that this subject had ever received from the House that consideration its importance demanded; and, further, he thought that if the present measure received their approbation, it would tend to elevate the profession and secure a more efficient body of practitioners.
§ MR. WALPOLEsaid, perhaps it might be convenient if he was to state the views of the Government on the three Bills now before the House. This question of medical reform, as it was called, had been for a long time under the attention of the Legislature, and for some reason it had been found difficult to bring the matter to a distinct head, so that the House could see its way to adopt one of the different Bills which had from time to time been submitted to it. One reason perhaps why the House had failed to do this was, that no definite plan, either with reference to the evils complained of or the remedies to be applied, had been proposed which had met with general concurrence. The Bill of the hon. and learned Member for Newcastle (Mr. Headlam), the Bill of the noble Lord the Member for Haddingtonshire (Lord Elcho), the Bill of the right hon. Gentleman now under discussion, and the Bill of the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. T. Duncombe), all contained principles worthy of adoption; yet in each there were some points to which the House ought not to assent. The difficulties of the case were these:—In the first place, they were dealing with a subject the law regarding which was founded on circumstances which were inapplicable to the times in which we lived. In the second place, in consequence of their dealing with a subject founded on laws in many respects so obsolete, they were involved in many anomalies—and, he might say, many absurdities—with regard to the privileges conferred either on medical bodies or on bodies who had the power of conferring medical degrees—a power that either could not be exercised at this moment, or, if exercised, could not be exercised in a manner advantageous to the community. A third difficulty was this—that, in trying to get rid of these anomalies and absurdities, they were called upon to deal with interests and claims of so opposite and conflicting a character, that in endeavouring to satisfy one they found tehy were totally unable to satisfy another. The House, in trying to deal with this 1412 question, had found itself entangled in so many difficulties, that even his right hon. Friend the Member for Carlisle (Sir J. Graham), with all his weight and authority in the House, and supported by one of the most powerful Governments which had been seen for years, found that he was unable to conquer those difficulties, and to frame a measure which would be acceptable. Then the hon. and learned Member for Newcastle (Mr. Headlam) took great pains to succeed, and although he succeeded so far in Committee up stairs as to induce the Members of the Committee to frame a Bill which they thought would be a settlement of the question, he found, to his astonishment, when the Bill was brought down to the House and the discussion recommenced, the Members of the Committee were so embarrassed by the different views set before them, that they actually branched off in different directions and took different sides on matters as to which they had been unanimously agreed in Committee. These circumstances must be his apology why he, on the part of the Government, was unwilling to undertake the question. It was not from want of consideration. He had turned it over in every point of view, and he came to the conclusion that the best thing he could do was to point out as well as he could the different evils of which the community had a right to complain, to draw attention to the different modes by which those evils might be got rid of, and then to see, with reference to the different Bills now before the House, how far they applied the proper remedies. The first great evil, going back to the original state of the law, was that they started as it were from a wrong point. They found the medical profession not in the hands of those who were most competent, but they found that through the middle ages the matter had got into the hands of the ecclesiastical authorities. Those authorities were unwilling to undertake the surgical part of the profession, but they maintained power and authority over the physicians. Hence arose the separation of those two branches of the profession. By means of the Act of Henry VIII. a medical corporation, with powers of exclusive authority within seven miles of London, was created, while the Universities inherited from the ecclesiastical authorities the power of conferring degrees giving a privilege to practise over all parts of the country. Thus they began as it were upon a wrong basis, and they had the 1413 anomaly introduced of different bodies in different parts of the kingdom having the power to give licenses to practise. They had the College of Physicians, established in 1511. They had the College of Surgeons, established at a subsequent period, more or less connected with the Corporation of Barbers, and not finally dissevered from that body till the reign of George II., and then, by means of their charter in 1800 and 1843, getting a power which they had admirably exercised of granting diplomas, answering, he believed, all the purposes of their noble institution. Thus they had an authority vested in the College of Surgeons; but that authority was not an exclusive authority which could be enforced in law, like that of the College of Physicians. And they had at this moment this absurd state of things—that by the law, if a surgeon were to prescribe for a fever, he was liable to a penalty; but if he prescribed in reference to a matter of a surgical operation, he was no longer liable to a penalty. At the same time, in Scotland, they had the Universities of St. Andrews, of Aberdeen, and of Glasgow, with a power of conferring degrees which extended over the whole kingdom, and not excepting the area of the capital, because the College of Physicians in Edinburgh had not that exclusive authority which was possessed by the College of Physicians in London. He might show that the rivalry between those colleges, in conferring degrees, led to nominal or worse than nominal examinations. Another point of difference between the two countries consisted in the fact, that in England they had surgeons distinct from apothecaries, while they had in Scotland surgeons and apothecaries combined; and they had colleges of physicians and surgeons, some of them with a limited jurisdiction confined to particular counties, and some of them with a jurisdiction supposed to extend over the whole kingdom; so that they had Scotland with a medical law totally different from that of England. Then if they went to Ireland they found that the Dublin University had the same kind of privilege that the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge possessed; and in addition, the new Queen's Colleges at Cork and Belfast, affiliated to the Queen's University, had conferred on them the same privileges as those possessed by the Universities in England, without defining what those privileges were, or there being any statement of what the meaning of those words might be; and at 1414 this moment he did not know whether, by means of those privileges, the new colleges in Ireland affiliated to the Queen's University had not the power of granting to their graduates licenses to practise in other parts of the kingdom besides Ireland. That was a doubtful point; but, doubtful point or not, it was one of those points that could not be sustained much longer. The inference which he wished to draw was this—that instead of continuing this anomalous state of things, instead of preserving an exclusive privilege in one part of the kingdom to the detriment of another, the public should have the right of calling in such adviser as they believed to be the best; and the first great principle that he should submit to the House was that there should be reciprocity of practice in all parts of the United Kingdom. The second point was this—that by the law as it at present stood they had a difficulty in ascertaining who were by law licensed practitioners. Some kind of register therefore ought to be formed, but when they had done this, this register would not indicate to the public whether the party was a duly qualified person to practise. The second point they had to establish therefore was not a mere register of names of persons calling themselves practitioners, but they must endeavour to indicate to the public whether the qualifications possessed by those persons were of such a character that they were entitled to hold themselves out as practitioners. He mentioned that because it would be seen by some of the Bills that different modes had been attempted of ascertaining the fact, whether the persons registered were entitled to practise or not. The third point was, that if they were to have a register of duly qualified practitioners, they must have some authority to supervise and control, and thus they arrived at what was a common provision of all the Bills before them—a Council of some kind. The question then arose, how was that Council to be constituted? One scheme was that the different medical practitioners, or the bodies who had the power of conferring medical degrees, should elect the Council; another proposition was that the Council should be nominated partly by the medical corporations and partly by the Crown. He thought that the latter, which was that proposed by the Bill of the right hon. Member for Hertford, was the best, because a Board so formed would have the confidence of the different medical corporations, and would provide also for the best 1415 interests of the public at large as well as secure that principle of permanence and unity of purpose which was not to be looked for in bodies wholly representative, and therefore constantly changing. If they confined medical reform, as it was called, to these three points—reciprocity of practice, a register of ascertained duly qualified practitioners, and a supervising council—they might accomplish their object without causing a great disurbance in the profession, which would not easily be allayed. If he was right in that, he would venture to call the attention of the House to the mode in which these three Bills differed on this point. First, as to reciprocity. He took the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. T. Duncombe's) Bill, and he found that in the 17th clause he gave the complete right to practise in any part of Her Majesty's dominions to all who were entitled to practise in any particular part. That clause in the Bill, therefore, he thought completely recognized one of the principles which he thought should be established. He then took up the Bill of his noble Friend, and he found that reciprocity of practice, and something more, was conferred by the 28th section. [Lord ELCHO dissented.] His noble Friend shook his head, but, as he (Mr. Walpole) understood, that section, it gave to every registered licentiate in medicine or surgery a right to practise in medicine, surgery, midwifery, and pharmacy, in every part of the United Kingdom. That provision confounded and blended together the licenses given by the different authorities instead of keeping them distinct. That would be a very detrimental change rather than an improvement, as it would destroy the rivalry between the holders of different diplomas. The Bill of the right hon. Gentleman, the Member for Hertford (Mr. Cowper) also contained a reciprocity clause—the 26th, which simply provided that every person registered might practise medicine or surgery, or medicine and surgery. All the Bills therefore agreed on this point. He came then to the second question—the question of the register. The Bill of the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. T. Duncombe) provided for a register, no doubt; but it was one in which any person who chose might have his name entered. There was to be no examination, and the public would have no security for the qualifications of the practitioners. The Bill of the noble Lord (Lord Elcho) provided for two examinations before registration—one by a 1416 preliminary, the other by a professional Board; but it was objectionable, as establishing complete uniformity of examination for all branches of the profession. The result would be a low standard of examination instead of an elevated one. The right hon. Member (Mr. Cowper's) Bill aimed at giving distinct powers to the several examining bodies; but it inserted the words "subject to the Council," which would have the same effect of bringing the standard down to a minimum. As to the third point—the Council—the hon. Member for Finsbury's (Mr. T. Duncombe) Bill provided for no Council at all, but the substitute proposed was such that it would throw the apple of discord amongst all the existing bodies. The noble Lord's (Lord Elcho's) Bill proposed an entirely new Council of twelve members, whose president was to be the President of the Board of Health—a Board which was now extinct. He did not think that the composition of this Council would be satisfactory to the existing bodies. The best Council was that proposed in Mr. Cowper's Bill, but the powers given to the Council were too large—they were, in fact, enormous; they would be able to overrule the independent action of the Universities and the existing medical bodies, thus destroying the benefit now derived from the rivalry of those bodies, and reducing them all to a dead level of a poor, meagre mediocrity. But making due provision for the three points he had noticed, they would do more for the benefit of the public, the elevation of the profession, and the satisfaction of the existing medical bodies, than by pursuing any other course. He suggested that they should take Mr. Cowper's Bill as the basis of their legislation on the subject, and duly consider the details in Committee. As he had already intimated, he thought that the form of Council proposed by the right hon. Member for Hertford (Mr. Cowper) which was a mixture of medical representatives with nominees of the Crown, was the best. But he must ask the right hon. Gentleman to reconsider two points in his Bill; the one was the enormous power given to the Council, which he feared would defeat the independent action of the medical bodies; and the other was that there was no provision for keeping alive the distinct and separate action of those bodies. He had ventured to trouble the Committee with these observations because, having given the subject his consideration, he had thought it would be of advantage to the Committee to be informed of his views with 1417 respect to it. He thought that there were three points which they might well adopt—reciprocity of practice; a registry of duly-qualified practitioners; and the establishment of an authority, constituted partly on the representative principle, and partly by the nomination of persons permanently resident in the metropolis who might watch over the regulations made by the Council. If they agreed to do that they would reconcile conflicting interests and would give a greater degree of general confidence to the public than they would do if they left matters as they were. Though not so extensive a reform as some might desire, be believed it would elevate the profession, give satisfaction to the public, would be a safe and prudent step to take, and would not introduce any serious impediment in the way of any further legislation which it might be found necessary to adopt. If his suggestions were approved of, he should he glad to give every consideration to the details of them in Committee. He therefore wished to ask the hon. Member for Finsbury and the noble Member for Haddingtonshire whether it would not be better to take the Bill before the House as the Bill on which some such measure as that which he had pointed out should be constructed? If they were of that opinion, perhaps they would be able in Committee to introduce such alterations into the Bill as they all had in view, and so give the House a chance of at last coming to some decision on the question.
MR. HEADLAMsaid, he had listened to the speech of the right hon. Gentleman, in some respects, with much pleasure, and to none of the principles laid down by the Right hon. Gentleman in the course of his speech had he any material objection. He should, however, have preferred if the right hon. Gentleman, instead of appealing to the hon. Members for Finsbury, Hertford, and Haddington, to take up the question, had said that he himself would introduce clauses based on the principles which he himself had laid down. [Mr. WALPOLE: I have no objection to do so]. He was glad to hear the right hon. Gentleman say so. The medical profession had too much cause to complain of the course which former Governments bad taken on this question; for though they had admitted the defects in the present system, they had not only declined to remedy them, but had even interfered with independent Members in their endeavours to do so. The present uncertain state of the law had necessarily led to 1418 conflicting interests; but he believed that there was a general desire among the medical profession and the licensing bodies themselves that that uncertainty should be removed. Acting in accordance with their views he had introduced a Bill last Session, which was read a second time by a large majority; and he was only prevented carrying it by the opposition of the then Government. Nevertheless he would not retaliate, but would be glad to give the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Hertford every assistance in his power in modifying his Bill so as to render it acceptable to the public and the profession. He was, therefore, ready to consent to go into Committee on the Bill on some future day. He thought that legislation on the three cardinal points mentioned by the Right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Walpole) would be received with approbation. There was considerable unanimity of opinion in the medical profession as to the reciprocity of practice, and the expediency of establishing as good an education as could be obtained, with an examination which would be at the same time a satisfactory test of proficiency, without being so high as to discourage persons from entering the profession, and so increasing the number of unlicensed practitioners. A Bill, therefore, limited chiefly to these points would stand a better chance of being passed this Session than any more extensive measure. Their aim ought to be, having remedied the practical defects of the present system, to interfere as little as possible with other parts of it. One of his objections to the three Bills was, that they were based on individual theories, which had no chance of being accepted by the country. As far as he was concerned, he was perfectly ready now to vote for going into Committee on the Bill.
§ MR. T. DUNCOMBEsaid, he thought the Right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for the Home Department had very fairly pointed out the difficulties, anomalies, and imperfections of the three Bills on the subject before them. Having done that, he thought the right hon. Gentleman, instead of trying to amend one of the Bills by the introduction of certain clauses, was bound to bring in a Bill of his own. Under the circumstances he should certainly withdraw his Bill, and leave the field open to the Government. As the matter now stood it was clear that all their discussions were a waste of time, and that nothing would be done in the matter this Session. His own 1419 Bill, he must say, he thought was at least a step in the way of what had been called medical reform. It established a registry, and gave free practice as a consequence of registry; but the question of medical education was attended with so many difficulties that he scarcely thought the House could be induced to come to any agreement on it. The question of the granting of diplomas was equally difficult. At present, though the examination of the London University was admittedly the best, those who held its diplomas could not practise within seven miles of St. Paul's. The fact was, the whole question was one of fees. Every one practising in London had to pay ten guineas to the College of Apothecaries or the College of Physicians; in the country, it was only six guineas. The charters of these bodies had been granted by Henry VIII. to gratify the caprice of some of his mistresses; and their operation was a nuisance to everybody in London and seven miles round it. He had seen so much of the jealousies and bickerings of the profession that he was not surprised at the unwillingness of the Government to touch the subject. A register such as that proposed by his Bill was the chief thing needed; and as for the medical reform in general, there could not be a worse tribunal in the House of Commons to judge and decide on it. If they stuck to political reforms and clerical reforms there would be work enough, but he would advise them to have nothing to do with the doctors. He therefore thought they ought to leave the public to take care of themselves in medical matters. Of course his Bill and that of the noble Lord opposite would fall to the ground. He should certainly never again attempt to legislate on the subject.
§ LORD ELCHOsaid, he would rather see a portion of the Bill of the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. T. Duncombe) pass than no Bill at all. That Bill did away with local jurisdiction, and established reciprocity of practice. On the other hand, the registry proposed by the hon. Member would only be a registry of persons who had passed examinations according to the present system, and would give no security that persons placed on it were thoroughly qualified for the profession. It would, in fact, simply be an official Medical Directory. His (Lord Elcho's) own Bill, so far from being based on a theory of his own, embodied the recommendations of a Select Committee, which were made almost unanimously. There were at present 1420 twenty-one licensing bodies—eleven universities, nine corporations, and the Archbishop of Canterbury. With regard to the Bill which had been introduced last year by the hon. and learned Member for Newcastle, the manner in which it proposed to carry out his principles was most objectionable. It benefited the corporations by doing gross injustice to the Universities. The great object was to establish an efficient examining body, and by that means to improve the medical education of the country. In legislating with that view, one of the chief things to be guarded against was the rendering too stringent the powers of these corporations; and he would warn the House against the efforts which those bodies would be certain to make to carry out their aim when the Bill got into Committee. After referring to the leading provisions of the several measures before the House the noble Lord said that his object in introducing a Bill with respect to the medical profession had not been that he might attach his name to a measure of medical reform, but that he might prevent another proposition from becoming law which he believed would have been most unjust in its operation. Recognizing in the Bill of the right hon. Member for Hertford the principle of sound medical reform, and believing that it would have a better chance of passing than his own Bill, he should withdraw the measure which stood in his name, and should be happy to render all the assistance in his power in perfecting the Bill of the right hon. Gentleman. In the event of no Bill being passed this year he suggested to the Secretary of State for the Home Department that he should issue a Royal Commission to inquire into the subject.
§ MR. LEFROYsaid, he could not but express his satisfaction at the turn the discussion had taken. He was glad to find that the three Bills were to be merged in one, and that the Government had consented to support a Bill combining the best portions of these conflicting measures.
§ MR. GROGANsaid, he would congratulate the House on the prospect of a settlement of this long-vexed question. If the Bill should be confined to the three points which had been adverted to by the right hon. Secretary for the Home Department, it would embrace a comprehensive and valuable Amendment to the existing law.
§ MR. CRAUFURDsaid, he acquiesced in the withdrawal of the Bill of his noble Friend (Lord Elcho).
§ Amendment by leave withdrawn.
§ Main Question put, and agreed to.
§ Committee appointed for Tuesday next.