HC Deb 11 August 1877 vol 236 cc807-8

said, he was one of those who thought it would have been very much better to have had one Prisons Bill for the United Kingdom instead of three Bills—one for each country. But as the Government took another course, and had three Bills, he could not but acquiesce. He protested, however, against the manner in which the Bill had been dealt with. He had taken a great deal of interest in the subject, and felt that had the Bill been considered by Scotch Members the result would have been more satisfactory. The Bill had not been fully discussed at any stage, and when it came to the final stage in Committee he must say that he was astonished to find that it was taken at 3 o'clock in the morning, when all respectable Scotch Members were in bed. It seemed to him, in order to appease the Scotch Members, Amendments were placed in the care of the hon. Member for Meath, and Notice was given for the Scotch Members to discuss them. However, it seemed that the Government were determined to pass the Bill. Having taken a great interest, and having had much experience of Scotch prisons especially, he did protest against the manner in which the Bill had passed through the House. The science of the punishment of criminals had not yet been discovered, and it would have been for the benefit of the Bill had it been more thoroughly discussed. He, therefore, very much regretted what had been done, especially as it affected local self-government in Scotland.


pointed out that the hon. Member was out of Order in discussing the Bill generally.


said, he had no more to say.

Lords Amendments agreed to.

House at rising to adjourn till Tuesday next.

Adjourned accordingly a a quarter after Three o'clock till Tuesday next.