COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 5 June 1861)

§ MR. MURE
objected to the Bill that it required claimants for the suffrage to take the initiative instead of adopting the system now adopted in the boroughs which gave universal satisfaction, where a public 598 officer made up the list of claimants leaving it to any person whose name was omitted to send in his claim. According to this Bill the applicant must in every case send in his own claim, and the assessor's roll was only to be made up after the parties had sent in their claims. He begged to move that it be an Instruction to the Committee on the County Voters (Scotland) Bill to make the rules and regulations contained therein conformable with those of the Act 19 & 20 Vict. c. 58, in so far as they are applicable to counties.

§ MR. SPEAKER
said, it would be competent to the Committee to do that which the hon. and learned Gentleman desired to do without an Instruction, and that being so it was contrary to rule that any formal Instruction should be moved. Besides this, the Resolution should have been moved before the Motion that the Speaker do leave the chair, because it was now an Amendment upon the Motion, and would thus, if successful, supersede the very Committee which it was the purpose of the hon. and learned Gentleman to instruct.

§ MR. BLACKBURN
thought they ought not to take the Committee on this Bill that day. The Bill as if stood was very imperfect, and many of its provisions would require to be materially altered. There was a separate paper before the House, which was not printed with the Votes, which contained sixty Amendments to be proposed in Committee by the right hon. Gentleman himself who had charge of this Bill (Sir Edward Colebrooke). He thought it would be more convenient to the House if the hon. Gentleman would agree to commit the Bill pro formâ, to have it reprinted with the Amendments he intended to move, and then to take the Committee on the Bill on another day. With that view he moved that the House resolve itself into Committee on that day week.

§ SIR EDWARD COLEBROOKE
said, he could not help thinking that the most convenient course to take would be to allow the House to go into Committee on the Bill. Hon. Members on both sides of the House were generally agreed as to the 599 principle of the measure. Most of the Amendment which he had to move referred chiefly to matters of detail, and were simply intended for carrying out the suggestions that had been made to him for assimilating the county with the borough registration. He was willing to leave the case in the hands of the House. His object was to conciliate, and if the House thought it better only to go into Committee pro formâ he should be glad to meet their wishes.

§ MR. ROEBUCK
characterized the Bill as an alteration of the Constitution of the country, and said that the Lord Advocate ought to make that alteration on his own responsibility, if it wore to be made at all. Things of this kind were becoming rather frequent in the present day on the part of private Members; but it was a proceeding which the House ought not to permit. Wednesday was rapidly becoming the most pestilent day of the week. From day to day, and almost from hour to hour, the House was making alterations in the Constitution of this country. A sort of higgledy-piggledy mode of doing business was being introduced by private Members interfering in matters which properly belonged to the Government, and the House should set its face against such proceedings. What were they to say to a Bill like the present, to which its own promoter had appended sixty Amendments before the Bill had got into Committee? It was plain that its Mover was not fit to make such a law, and that it was the business of the Lord Advocate to do so.

THE LORD ADVOCATE
was sure the representatives of Scotland would be very glad if the hon. and learned Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck) would give them the benefit of his assistance. But he must say that he did not think the views expressed by the hon. and learned Gentleman were sound, or in accordance with the usages of the House. The hon. and learned Gentleman said that no alterations of the Constitution of the country should be proposed except by the Government. He (the Lord Advocate) entirely denied that that was sound. It was the privilege of every hon. Member to make proposals for any alterations he pleased; and he thought his lion. Friend (Sir Edward Colebrooke) was more particularly entitled to bring this proposition forward, from the fact that he had done so some years before. The Bill was of great importance, and would effect a very useful reform, and 600 he saw no reason why it should not be proceeded with now when they had the whole day before them. As for the number of Amendments they were mostly simply changing September to August in the various clauses, and they could easily be taken as the clauses were put.

§ SIR JAMES FERGUSSON
agreed with the hon. and learned Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck) that a measure of this kind ought to be brought in by Government. He thought the proposal to assimilate the registration of counties to that of boroughs was a great change, and of very questionable advantage. He objected to the compelling persons to be on the register. There were frequently parties who did not wish to be mixed up with party politics, and did not wish to be subjected to the annoyance of being canvassed and solicited for their votes at elections. He should support the proposal to adjourn the question for a week.

§ MR. DUNLOP
hoped that the measure would have general support. He reminded the hon. Baronet (Sir James Fergusson) that, by Clause 13 of the Bill, any person might have his name taken off the register by sending a written note to the assessor. The greater number of the Amendments were merely formal; still he would not object to a postponement, if it were understood that every assistance should be given to pass the Bill.

§ MR. LOCKE
said, it was within his recollection that several important measures proposing alterations of the Constitution had been brought in by independent Members. He might refer to the Bill for the admission of the Jews, the Bill which did away with the property qualification, and the Bill for the Ballot. Those were very great and important changes, and yet they were introduced by private Members. He really thought the recommendation of the Lord Advocate should be adopted, because a vast number of the proposed alterations were of a very trifling description.

§ MR. MURE
allowed that many of the Amendments were very great improvements, but it would be much more convenient to discuss the Bill with these Amendments printed in it. That course would have to be adopted sooner or later, and it would be more expeditious to do it at once.

§ MR. BLACKBURN
said, he would withdraw his proposition for adjournment of the debate for a week.

THE LORD ADVOCATE
moved the adjournment of the debate till Friday, with the understanding that the House should go into Committee on the Bill pro formâ.