HC Deb 21 July 1859 vol 155 cc249-50

Order for resuming adjourned Debate on Second Beading [12 July] read.

SIR WILLIAM SOMERVILLE moved that the Order of the day for resuming the adjourned debate on this Bill should be discharged as he had examined the Order-hook, and found it impossible to fix any day for continuing the debate.

THE O'DONOGHOE

said it would have been better not to have introduced the Bill at all than to withdraw it.

LORD FERMOY

denounced the Bill as ill-constituted and ill-timed, and as a retrograde step in the direction of an effete system of legislation. It was a piece of Kip Van Winkle legislation, which came into existence after the necessities for it had long gone by. He did not object to the Chancellorship being thrown open to Roman Catholics, but then the office itself ought to be changed for the purpose, and made a secular office.

MR. BRADY

, whilst he was prepared to advocate the admission of Roman Catholics barristers to the highest honours of the profession, was opposed to the present Bill, which he considered as an attempt to bribe them.

COLONEL DICKSON

, who moved the adjournment of the debate on the former occasion, expressed a hope that the Govern- ment had not given way in consequence of an influential deputation which had waited on them. If the Bill had been proceeded with it would have had his strenuous support.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, the Bill was introduced by the right hon. Baronet (Sir W. Somerville) without any concert with the Government, and it was withdrawn without concert with them.

SIR WILLIAM SOMERVILLE

repeated that his only reason for withdrawing the measure was his conviction of the impossibility of carrying it this Session.

MR. NEWDEGATE

justified the course he had previously taken of moving, as an Amendment, that the Bill be read a second time that day three months. Nothing was more calculated to rouse the Protestant feeling of the country than the measure in question.

Order discharged. Bill withdrawn.