HC Deb 19 April 1864 vol 174 cc1376-8
MR. O'HAGAN (THE ATTOENEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND)

said, he rose to move for leave to bring in a Bill to alter the constitution and amend the practice and course of proceeding in the High Court of Chancery in Ireland. Owing, however, to the lateness of the hour, he would reserve any remarks he might have to make until the second reading of the Bill.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to alter the constitution and amend the practice and course of proceeding in the High Court of Chancery in Ireland."—(Mr. Attorney General for Ireland.)

MR. WHITESIDE

said, he must protest against the Bill being brought in without any statement of the places which it purposed abolishing, and, above all, of the places which it would create.

MR. SCULLY

said, he was of opinion that the second reading would be the fit- ting opportunity for the discussion of the details of the Bill.

MR. O'HAGAN

was ready to make the statement at once if it was wished. The object of the Bill was to assimilate the Chancery practice according to the recommendations of the Royal Commission, whose Report was laid on the table of the House last Session. He thought the more convenient course would be to print the Bill, and make the statement at the second reading.

MR. HENNESSY

said, that hon. Members had not yet had time to read the Report of the Royal Commission; and he therefore begged to move the adjournment of the debate.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned."—(Mr. Hennessy.)

SIR JOHN SHELLEY

said, he thought that it would be more convenient to allow the Bill to be introduced and printed before a statement was made.

LORD NAAS

observed, that hon. Members on his side of the House had no wish to obstruct the public business, but the Bill was one of enormous importance, and the House ought to be informed of the reasons which induced the Government to propose it.

SIR ROBERT PEEL

said, his right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General for Ireland was quite prepared to make his statement; and, as it would only occupy about an hour, he hoped his hon. Friends on the other side would not prevent him from making it at that early hour (ten minutes past twelve o'clock), seeing that a Session or two ago Irish Bills were frequently introduced at one or two in the morning.

MR. WHITESIDE

remarked that he had introduced several Irish Bills, but he had never ventured to introduce a Bill of such importauce as the present one without a word of discussion.

MR. MALINS

said, he thought that the Government ought not to persevere in introducing the measure without a statement when there was such a strong party in the House against their adopting such a course.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

submitted that, as the Bill was introduced for the purpose of carrying out the recommendations of a Royal Commission, it was not necessary to make a detailed statement on the Motion for the first reading.

LORD CLAUD HAMILTON

said, he was of opinion that Irish Bills of importance ought not to be brought in without that full and clear explanation which was invariably given in the case of English measures.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, it was a very common practice on both sides of the House, and served the purposes of general convenience, to allow the introduction of a Bill, and to explain its details at a subsequent stage.

MR. GEORGE

said, the Bill involved matters of very considerable importance, and had reference to the abolishment and creation of offices. He thought it was due both to the House and to the public that some explanation should be offered on the introduction of the Bill.

MR. CRAUFURD

said, that the course proposed by the Government was often pursued with reference to Scotch Bills.

VISCOUST PALMERSTON

said, that no Irish Member could be ignorant of the objects and arrangement proposed by the Bill. He therefore trusted that the discussion of the details would be postponed until the second reading.

MR. SEYMOUR FITZGERALD

said, that the uniform practice was that Bills were not brought in without explanation, when hon. Members declared that the public interests required such explanation.

SIR JAMES FERGUSSON

thought they had a right to insist upon explanations being given before the Bill was proceeded with.

Question put.

The House divided:—Ayes 28; Noes 57: Majority 29.

Original Question again proposed.

MR. WHITESIDE

said, that those entrusted with the business of the country were not taking a wise course in endeavouring to force laws upon Ireland, the nature of which they would not state.

COLONEL DUNNE

moved the adjournment of the House.

MR. O'HAGAN

said, he must protest against the assumption that he had acted disrespectfully towards the House, whose convenience he endeavoured to consult. After what had occurred, and the feeling which had been shown, he should certainly not press the measure that evening.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.