§ (Mr. Solicitor General for Ireland, Sir Michael Hicks-Beach.)
§ COMMITTEE. [Progress July 20th.]
§ Bill considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress and ask leave to sit again,"—(Mr. Biggar.)
1627§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, there were only two or three lines of the Schedule to dispose of, and he thought that five minutes would be sufficient to pass the Bill through Committee. He hoped that the Motion would not be persisted in.
§ MR. BUTT and MR. M'CARTHY DOWNINGspoke in favour of the Bill being disposed of that night.
§ MR. PARNELLprotested against proceeding with the Bill that night. Nobody in Ireland wanted this Bill except the lawyers.
§ MR. O'DONNELLobjected to the Bill being proceeded with at that time (one o'clock).
§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. GIBSON)hoped the Motion for Adjournment would not be persisted in, and pointed out that the only Amendments remaining on the Paper were those of the hon. Member for Cavan himself, which could be discussed in five minutes.
§ MR. O'SULLIVANsaid, the Irish Members had had enough law and justice that evening, and were determined to have no more. If the Motion for Adjournment were defeated, it would be followed by others.
§ MR. BULWERwas glad of what had occurred, as it would enable the country to judge of the conduct of three or four hon. Members opposite, and would show them that their sole object in moving to report Progress, was to stop a discussion which would only occupy five minutes.
§ MR. BIGGARexpressed a hope that in future hon. Gentlemen would make their speeches before instead of after dinner. ["Order!"]
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERthought that such discussions, if continued, would not be conducive to the dignity of the House. He hoped the Motion would be withdrawn, and the Committee be permitted to conclude their duties that night.
§ MR. PARNELL,on the other hand, thought it would be to the advantage of the country that this Bill should not pass this Session.
§ After some further discussion,
§ SIR WILFRID LAWSONexpressed his disapproval of the course which was being taken by some of the Irish Members, but he hoped, nevertheless, the Government would spare the House a 1628 repetition of the unpleasant scenes of a recent occasion. Some hon. Members from Ireland seemed to forget that there were English Members, and to think that the whole business of the House was to be conducted with a view to their convenience.
§ MR. M'CARTHY DOWNINGhoped the Committee would divide against the Motion. He protested against the system of obstruction of all Business which had been adopted by some hon. Members.
§ MR. MELDONsaid, the hon. Member for Cavan had already occupied more time in Committee upon this Bill than all the other Members put together. He appeared to be prompted by some legal person, for he had placed on the Paper a long string of Amendments, which it was quite evident he did not understand. He protested against the general body of Irish Members being supposed to be linked to the policy of obstruction.
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, the Government in resisting the Motion to report Progress, did so because they believed it was really for the advantage of the country that they should, if possible, endeavour to advance the Bill though this stage. The only Amendments were those of the hon. Member for Cavan, and they could very well be discussed at a later stage.
§ MR. BIGGARsaid, he did not see why he should depart from the principle which he had determined to act upon—to oppose the transaction of Business after one o'clock in the morning.
§ MR. E. JENKINSsaid, it was evidently as useless to appeal to the generosity or sense of justice as it was to appeal to the common sense of hon. Members who were thus obstructing Business. He had received a letter from a person associated politically with those hon. Members stating that next Session they would see in that House more serious scenes than had ever yet been seen there. The hon. Member for Cavan said he had determined upon a course which would obstruct the Business of the House. It was time the Government should take some steps to crush this sort of thing; and he wished publicly to dissociate himself from all connection with hon. Gentlemen who resorted to such tactics.
§ MR. CALLANsaid, he was as ready to repudiate the hon. Member for Dundee 1629 (Mr. E. Jenkins) as that hon. Gentleman was to repudiate Irish Members.
§ MR. PARNELLsaid, now the hon. Member for Dundee had had an opportunity of vindicating his respectability, by dissociating himself from the Irish party, he only hoped it would do him a great deal of good in the eyes of his constituents. Nothing he had said was worthy of further notice.
§ After some remarks from Major G'GORMAN and Mr. CALLAN,
§ MR. RITCHIEsaid, he hoped the Government would not give way, but would sit till Sunday if necessary.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes 7; Noes 112: Majority 105.—(Div. List, No. 242.)
§ AYES—Callan, P. Kirk, Or. H. O'Brien, Sir P. O'Donnell, F. O'Gorman, P. O'Sullivan, W. Power, J. O'C.
§ TELLERS—Mr. Biggar and Mr. Parnell.
§ MR. O'SULLIVANmoved that the Chairman do leave the Chair.
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, the division which had just taken place had sufficiently marked the sense of the House; and as it was useless to make any appeal to the hon. Members who constituted the minority, and he wished to avoid the repetition of a recent scene, he would consent that Progress should now be reported, and that the House should meet at 12 on Saturday to further proceed with this Bill, but with no other Business.
§ House resumed.
§ Committee report no Progress; to sit again To-morrow.