CONSIDERATION OF LORDS AMENDMENTS TO COMMONS AMENDMENTS. (Hansard, 11 August 1882)

§ MR. HEALY
said, the proceedings of the hon. and learned Gentleman were somewhat extraordinary. No one knew what on earth the Lords Amendments were, so far as he could gather, and he thought he was asking nothing but what was fair and right in requesting that they should appear on the Notice Paper. This Bill had hitherto involved some attention in connection with Amendments by the Lords; and, for anything he knew, the Amendments to be considered might provoke a conflict between the two Houses. Yet they were, almost immediately that the House met, asked to take the Amendments into consideration before they ever knew what they were. The least thing that the Government could do was to have them printed. The Amendments might be trifling, and only formal, and, for his own part, he might possibly propose a consequential Amendment upon the Amendments of the Lords. But the Solicitor General for Ireland introduced the matter as if it was a second-class Bill. He felt so strongly upon the subject that he should divide the House on the question.

§ THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. PORTER)
said, that the Amendments were of a purely formal character. The only one of the slightest 1511 consequence was an Amendment to give effect to an Amendment which had been introduced at the instance of the hon. Member himself. The position in which that hon. Gentleman's Amendment was placed rendered its meaning ambiguous. Its position was, therefore, changed from one part of the clause to another. The other Amendment was of a formal character, and would have no effect on the purpose of the Bill.

§ MR. WARTON
said, he felt bound to condemn the practice of considering Amendments that were inaccessible to the great majority of the House. Some weeks ago, in the small hours of the morning, and in an angry and impatient House, composed mainly of Liberals, he had called attention to the inconvenience of thus dealing with the measure then before the House—the Bills of Sale Bill. No printed copy of that Bill was obtainable by hon. Members generally, and in the copy which he was able to procure through the courtesy of an officer of the House of Lords, the references did not correspond with those given on the Notice Paper. He protested against a similar course being taken on the present occasion. The Amendment referred to by the Solicitor General for Ireland was one which he had himself opposed; but he was cried down by hon. Members opposite, and they now saw the result of it.

§ MR. SEXTON
said, he must state that he considered that the proceeding of the hon. and learned Gentleman was one which he could not but stigmatize as objectionable at all times, and it was extremely so as applied to such a Bill as this. This Bill had only been further considered in the House of Lords on Thursday evening, and they had not received any Notice whatever of the Amendments. These had not been placed on the Paper of the House that morning, as they might have been. These Amendments appeared to be the result of an interview between the Government and the managers of the Conservative Party in the House of Lords; and, knowing as they did the character of some of the Lords Amendments in the past, they ought to have the exact nature of these placed before them, so that they might protect them, if necessary, by consequential Amendments. There could be no want of time in this matter. He might remind the Government that 1512 they took five days to consider the Lords Amendments, although it was now notorious that that delay was entirely useless. It was now apparent that the greater part of that five days was wasted, and that the Government and the majority of the House of Lords had all along agreed between them what course was to be pursued. He thought that they should insist either that the Lords Amendments should be placed on the Paper of the House, or that they should be laid before the House, and for that purpose he moved the adjournment of the debate.

§ MR. MOLLOY
seconded the Motion.

MR. GLADSTONE
It appeared to me, Sir, that some parts of the speech of the hon. Member for Sligo were irrevelant; but, besides that, he has stated what is absolutely untrue, and of which the hon. Gentleman must have been entirely misinformed. He thinks fit to go back to the five days which elapsed between the receipt of the Lords Amendments and their consideration by this House. They were complicated Amendments, and, of course, had to be printed, and he says it was a waste of time, because the whole thing had been agreed upon between the Government and the Leaders of the Opposition. I never heard a more rash, a more absurd, nor a more groundless statement made in this House. [Cries of "Oh!"] Well, I think I am entitled to speak on a matter of fact as to communications between the Government and the Leaders of the Opposition, and I affirm that there was no communication whatever between them. The hon. Gentleman has been led—why, I know not—into a most injurious, most absurd, groundless, and imaginary statement. That is the state of the case. I do not think this is a very convenient opportunity for raising a general question upon the mode of proceeding with the Lords Amendments; but it is necessary for the House to recollect that, at the close of the Session, the interchange of Amendments, and of Amendments upon Amendments, becomes a nice matter in point of time, and it is greatly for the convenience of the House that such proceedings should be expedited. I think my hon. and learned Friend, 1513 acted strictly according to precedent in asking the House on his own responsibility as to the character of the Amendments, to consider at once Amendments of a purely formal character without getting them printed. The hon. Member for Wexford says he desires an opportunity of bringing forward a consequential Amendment. Whether the Amendment can be admitted or not I have no knowledge, because I do not know what it is; but I quite agree that he should have an opportunity of moving it.

§ MR. HEALY
I said that possibly I might desire to move a consequential Amendment. I do not know that I shall.

MR. GLADSTONE
Undoubtedly the House should have an opportunity of considering that matter; and, therefore, I am sure my hon. and learned Friend will not persevere at this moment with this Motion. Whether it should be postponed until a later period in the evening, or whether it should be postponed from to-day till Monday, which will be a loss of three days in the passing of the Bill, I am not prepared to say; but probably the hon. Member will put himself into communication with my hon. and learned Friend, and the matter may be very easily arranged.

§ MR. MACFARLANE
asked if the Amendments could not be taken tomorrow, Saturday? Hon. Members on that side had naturally a very great distrust of Lords Amendments, and desired to see them and consider them before they agreed to them.

MR. GLADSTONE
I ought to apologize, Sir; but I would remind the House, with regard to a question like the Lords Amendments, that we have always confined the Saturday Business to that of a technical description, and to the performance of legislation of a certain kind; but, of course, it is within the pleasure of the House to take the Amendments if they think fit. It is, however, only fair that I should inform the House that the whole of the Amendments which we have to consider were inserted at the instance of the Government.

§ MR. SEXTON
said, he did not think it necessary further to reply to the strictures passed upon him by the Premier than to remark that the complexion of the proceedings between the Government and the majority in the 1514 other House bore a political interpretation, and in putting that interpretation upon it he thought he was quite within his right. He begged to withdraw the Motion for Adjournment.