§ (Mr. Anderson, Mr. Duncan M'Laren, Sir David Wedderburn.)
§ Lords Amendments considered.
§ On the Motion to agree with the Lords in the Amendment to omit Clause 7,
§ MR. WEBSTERsaid, that it was quite impossible, at that late period of the Sitting, to discuss the Amendment they were asked to agree with. He was unable to agree with the proposal; and yet he must say that, from what he had heard of the circumstances under which the Amendment was brought forward, and agreed to in the House of Lords, it would be perfectly vain for him, an individual Member, to attempt to get from the Scotch Members such an expression of opinion as would persuade the House to differ from the House of Lords in this Amendment. At the same time, if it were earlier in the evening, he would, by way of a protest against this proceeding of the House of Lords, have reminded the House of some of the circumstances. This Bill, which would effect an important change in the Law of Scotland, was submitted to a Select Committee, which took evidence, and that of the most distinguished Members of the Scotch Bar among others, and it was only after receiving this evidence, and much deliberation, that the Select Committee allowed the Bill to leave their hands in the shape in which it went up to the House of Lords. This 7th clause was the deliberate expression of the Committee's opinion, and he desired to make this final, though unavailing, protest against its being struck out.
§ MR. ANDERSONsaid, this clause was omitted at the special wish of the Lord Chancellor, who did not see the objections to its omission that his hon. Friend did; but the Lord Chancellor did see grave objections to leaving the clause in, one of which was the opportunity it would give a dissolute husband to sponge upon a wife with a small estate. It was thought right to strike out the clause, therefore, and leave it to the good sense of the parties.
§ Lords Amendments agreed to.