REPORT OF ADDRESS. (Hansard, 6 February 1867)

§ MR. HADFIELD
complained that no allusion had been made in the Speech to the question of church rates, although it would be in the recollection of the House 77 that a Bill dealing with that subject was actually read a second time last Session.

§ MR. WALPOLE
rose to order. I do not know whether it is usual for an hon. Member to go into a subject not immediately relating to the Address. The course being taken by the hon. Gentleman is somewhat inconvenient, and may lead to some discussion.

§ MR. SPEAKER
It would be open to the hon. Member, on the Question that the Address be read a second time, to refer to any particular passage in the Address, or to move an Amendment, but not to open a discussion on subjects irrelevant to the Address.

§ MR. HADFIELD
believed that he was in order, and that he had a right to notice a palpable omission in the Address, and to argue that an addition ought to be made to it. He did not want to raise any discussion upon the matter; but he thought that reference in the Address ought to be made to a subject of debate in that House for the last thirty years, and that some intimation should be given to the country on the subject of church rates. It appeared to him that they ought not to blink a question of thirty years' standing in that House. The House had by large majorities established the principle that abolition should be either entire, or that persons should not be sued for church rates. He therefore begged leave to move an addition to the Address to the effect that this House represents to Her Majesty its regret that no allusion whatever has been made in the Speech from the Throne to the subject of church rates—a subject which had been repeatedly discussed in this House. In his opinion the matter ought to be disposed of; and that it would be a great relief to the country if it were removed from discussion. He certainly understood last Session that an attempt would be made by the Government to deal with the question, and they ought not to shrink from it.

§ MR. BAINES
, in seconding the Motion, said, that the subject was one of so much importance, and had occupied so very prominent a position in the discussions of this House for many years, and especially last Session, that he could not but think it was exceedingly right for the House to express its regret that no mention was made of the subject in the Royal Speech.

§ MR. SPEAKER
The hon. Member 78 for Sheffield is quite in order in expressing an opinion upon the subject; but with regard to the proposal that he has made, according to the rules of this House, he is not in order. The time for moving an Amendment to the Address is while it is under discussion for the second reading; but after the Motion has been put from the Chair that the House do agree with the Committee in the said Resolutions, the opportunity has passed. Accordingly, he cannot now move the Amendment. The Question for the House is that the House do agree with the said Address.