HC Deb 09 August 1877 vol 236 cc738-9

(Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, Mr. Attorney General for Ireland.)

COMMITTEE. [Progress 8th August.]

BILL WITHDRAWN.

Bill considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

MR. BIGGAR

, in moving that Progress be reported, said, he did not do so out of objection to the Bill, but simply because the period of the Session precluded the discussion so necessary in an Act of this importance. The Bill was a Consolidation Act, so there would be no inconvenience in a postponement for another Session.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Biggar.)

MR. MELDON

hoped the hon. Member for Cavan would not persevere in his opposition to the Bill. The consolidation of the Acts applying to England had been effected in England in 1874, and the necessity for a like measure for Ireland had been continually felt. This Bill was introduced last Session, and again this Session it was by the unanimous concurrence of Irish Members referred to a Select Committee, and he believed no Irish Member had pointed out a flaw in the Bill to justify a further delay. There was no point of principle raised, and the single Amendment by himself upon the Paper was one that was accepted by the Chief Secretary. The Bill was urgently wanted in Ireland, and the hon. Member had taken a great responsibility on himself in moving to report Progress. Nothing but the isolated action of the hon. Member had hitherto prevented the passing of the Bill. It had received a full discussion in a Committee composed, with the exception of the Chief Secretary, of Irish Members.

MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY

hoped the Bill would not be proceeded with. It was all very well to say it was a Consolidation Bill; but it only professed to consolidate existing Acts without effecting reforms, so these reforms would have to be proceeded with by piecemeal legislation.

MR. PAENELL

joined in the appeal that the Bill should not be proceeded with that Session. He agreed that some interests might suffer from a postponement of the Bill; but it was better that some interests should suffer for a short space of time than that wider interests should suffer indefinitely. A Select Committee was not sufficient for the discussion of a Bill of the kind, and it was necessary to have the more varied opinion of the Committee of the Whole House.

SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH

said, he was anxious to pass the Bill, and it was with deep regret he found he could not do so. The account of the Bill given by the hon. and learned Member for Kildare was accurate. It had been before the House for 18 months, and after the inquiry of the Select Committee, he had been sanguine of its becoming law. But from what he had heard both inside and outside the House, he found there was sufficient opposition to make it impossible to carry through a Bill of 300 clauses on the 10th of August. He, therefore, did not propose to proceed with the Bill that Session; but he must express a hope that what had been done would not be lost, but that the Bill might be allowed next year to proceed without discussion to the same point as that at which it had now arrived.

Question put, and agreed to; Committee report Progress.

House resumed.

Bill withdrawn.

House adjourned at a quarter before Two o'clock.