[BILL 179.] COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 22 June 1882)

§ MR. WARTON
wished to ask the hon. Member for Gloucester (Mr. Monk) whether he intended to go through with this Bill at this time of night, as there were many hon. Gentlemen who were thoroughly dissatisfied with the measure, and it was only the hon. Member for Gloucester who wished to push it on. He moved that Progress be reported.

§ MR. MONK
said, he would have been willing to postpone this Bill if it had been, the desire of hon. Members having Motions on the Paper; but he had been strongly requested by the hon. Member for South Essex (Mr. T. C. Baring), and by the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Christchurch (Mr. Horace Davey) to proceed with the Bill. Therefore, when he was asked the question earlier this evening, by the hon. and learned Member for Christchurch, whether he should proceed with the Bill, he said he should do so, as he believed there was no possibility for the rest of the Session of bringing the Bill on earlier than 1 o'clock. He hoped the hon. and learned Member would not persist in his Motion, as the hon. Members interested in the Bill were all present, and there was no other Bill on the Paper of any importance. He hoped the Committee would go through the Amendments.

§ MR. HORACE DAVEY
said, as the hon. Member had referred to him, he ought to say that he was not responsible for asking the hon. Member to go on with the Bill at this hour. He held a very strong opinion as to the impropriety of attempting to codify the law at that hour, and. in the House attended as at present. What he did say was, that it was a matter of indifference to him whether it was taken to-night or not; but if he was asked whether it was a proper proceeding for the House to proceed with a Bill of this importance, which never had been considered in the House at such a time of night, he should say it was certainly not a proper course.

§ MR. T. C. BARING
said, he must take upon himself the responsibility of having recommended that this Bill should be taken to-night; and that view he took simply because he disliked having it put down on the Paper night after night, and then, when but few Members were present, slipped through the House. He did not love the Bill; but by putting it off to-night the House would not shelve it, but, on the other hand, would run the risk of its passing through without proper consideration at some late hour when Members interested in it were not present. He could not conceive anything more mischievous to the commercial community than that a Bill so closely concerning them should be passed in such a way. Therefore, he preferred that it should be considered to-night, although if the House could, by a Resolution, table it for the Session, he should be very pleased.

§ MR. CHAMBERLAIN
said, he hoped the hon. Member would withdraw his Motion. He thought the hon. Member for Gloucester (Mr. Monk) would not be justified in pressing this Bill against the wish of a considerable minority of the House; but he submitted that it would be proper, now that all those who took a particular interest in the Bill 164 were present, to proceed with its consideration. If the Bill was postponed, he was afraid the prediction of the hon. Member for South Essex (Mr. T. C. Baring) would be verified, and the Bill would be put down night after night.

§ MR. T. C. BARING
said, he knew that many Members who were interested were present to-night; and he had only discovered to-night how little the Bill was understood; and he had himself put down sundry Amendments. He had spoken to several commercial Members of the House, who, like himself, were unaware that they had been systematically breaking the law for many years, and were entirely ignorant of judge-made law, which was hundreds of years old in many cases. He should vote for the Motion because he thought a Bill affecting the whole commercial community ought not to be passed at such an hour of night.

§ MR. MONK
said, the Bill had been before the House for several months, and had been read a second time. It had been sent to a Select Committee, and carefully considered and amended by that Committee, and sent back to the House in the form in which they thought that it should pass into law. It obtained the unanimous approval of that Committee in its present shape, and some Members—for instance, the hon. Member for Liverpool (Mr. Whitley)—who opposed certain portions of the Bill, as originally introduced, were now, he believed, as anxious, on behalf of the commercial community, as he himself was that the Bill should pass. He thought it very unreasonable that hon. Members who did not understand the Bill, and did not know the difference between Judge-made Law and Statute Law, should oppose the progress of this Bill. If it was the desire of the Committee that the Bill should be considered at a more convenient season, he should be glad if hon. Members would point out what would be a more convenient season.

§ MR. A. J. BALFOUR
said, he thought the argument of the President of the Board of Trade insufficient, because all those who were present were Members who had spoken in favour of the Bill.

§ MR. R. N. FOWLER
said, the hon. Member opposite seemed to complain of the hon. Member for South Essex; but he would remind the Committee that 165 there was no higher authority upon this question than that hon. Member.

§ MR. MONK
said, that as it was evident the House did not wish to go on he would move that Progress be now reported.