HC Deb 16 February 1866 vol 181 cc597-8

said, he rose to ask the Attorney General for Ireland, What arrangements are made to carry on the Government business in that Country without the presence of any Law Officer, the Law Adviser, contrary to precedent, being now in Parliament, as well as the Attorney and Solicitor General?


in reply, said, that he was not aware that any charge had been made, or could be made, as to the mode in which the business of the Irish Government was being carried on. It was true that he and his Colleague had seats in the House, but that did not in the least interfere with the proper discharge of their duty. In fact, that duty was discharged as effectually in London as in Dublin. With respect to that part of the question which referred to the circumstance of the Law Adviser having a seat in that House, he thought it right to correct any misapprehension which might exist as to the hon. Member for Dungarvan, who did not now fill the office of Law Adviser of the Irish Government. The hon. Member resigned that office, and his resignation was accepted before the general election; but as, in the then state of affairs in Ireland, it was not deemed expedient to make any change, he (Mr. Lawson) had requested the hon. Gentleman to continue to assist him. This the hon. Gentleman had done, but he received no salary for his services. With respect to the last part of the question of the hon. and gallant Member, which seemed to complain of there being so many of the Irish Law Officers in the House, he (Mr. Lawson) must confess that he did not see why that fact should he brought forward as a charge against the Government. Indeed, if his memory served him right, the Government had been taunted on former occasions on account of the absence of the Irish Law Officers from that House.