§ SIR WILFRID LAWSONsaid, he wished also to put a Question to Mr. Speaker on a matter of emergency. The House was aware that the hon. and learned Member for Bridport (Mr. War-ton) asked permission to bring in a Bill on Monday, called the Sunday Closing (Wales) Act (1881) Amendment Bill, an amendment to the Welsh Sunday Closing Bill. As the House knew, the hon. and learned Member was not allowed to bring in that Bill. The next day, however, he placed on the Paper a new Notice, in these words—"Mr. Warton. Sunday Closing (Wales).—A Bill to explain the Sunday Closing (Wales) Bill." He (Sir Wilfrid Lawson) was under the impression that it was the duty and privilege of the House to initiate legislation by Bill to repeal previous legislation or amend it; but he was not aware that it was the purpose of the House to explain. He thought that was the function of a Court of Law. They repealed when the Courts had explained. He therefore wished to know whether the hon. and learned Member was in Order in asking leave to bring in a Bill which was substantially the same as that which had been refused?
§ MR. SPEAKERI am not prepared to say that the Notice which has been given by the hon. and learned Member for Bridport is irregular; but if the Bill he now proposes to introduce is substantially the same as the former Bill upon which his application was refused, it will be irregular to ask leave to introduce such a Bill. But the question whether it is substantially the same or not can only be answered by the hon. and learned Member himself.
§ MR. WARTONsaid, that the Bill he proposed now to introduce was for objects entirely different from those of the other. On the former occasion, when asked by an hon. Member in the Library what the object of the Bill No. 1 was, he replied that it was to exempt certain places in Wales from the operation of the Sunday Closing Act.
§ MR. SPEAKERIt is not in accordance with the practice of the House for an hon. Member to recite conversations 790 arising in friendly intercourse with other Members.
§ MR. WARTONsaid, he was calling the hon. Member's attention to what had occurred, and intimating that the two Bills were for totally different objects. The second Bill was introduced in order to explain the meaning of the Act, which had not been understood by the promoters themselves.
§ SIR WILFRID LAWSONsaid, that that was the very point he wanted to know, whether it was in order to bring forward a Bill to explain a legal question? That was not legislation.