§ Order for Consideration, as amended, read.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be re-committed in respect of Clause 24."—(Mr. Chamberlain.)
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, he rose to move the adjournment of the House. The House sat until 4 o'clock this morning, and met again at noon. It was understood from the Prime Minister that the Government would not ask the House to sit beyond a reasonable hour this evening. On Wednesdays, according to the Standing Orders, the House rose at 6 o'clock. A "reasonable hour" this evening must be presumed to mean an hour earlier than the dinner hour—say 6 o'clock. The character of the Bill they were asked to consider was such that it was not reasonable to believe that any practical 188 progress could be made before the dinner hour, and no public advantage could result from a discussion in that time.
§ MR. CALLANseconded the Motion for Adjournment.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—(Mr. Arthur O'Connor.)
§ MR. CHAMBERLAINsaid, he hoped the House would allow them, at all events, to get the Bill into Committee. The Prime Minister had said that the House would not be asked to sit very late, and he did not see why the House should sit very late if hon. Members would address themselves to the Question. But when they got into Committee it would be for the House to decide whether they cared to proceed further.
§ MR. CALLANsaid, that he was prepared to sit if necessary so as to break the Sabbath.
§ MR. DALYsaid, he hoped his hon. Friend would not press the Motion for Adjournment. They must recollect that this was a very important Bill, and owing to the lateness of the Session they ought to be willing to make some personal sacrifices for the purpose of passing it. There was great anxiety for this Bill amongst the commercial classes of Ireland.
§ MR. BLAKEsaid, he would join in the appeal to his hon. Friend. Outside the City of Dublin all the mercantile classes most earnestly desired this Bill. He could speak most positively for his own constituency, because the Corporation of Waterford had sent to him as well as to the City Members a very earnest request that they would do all in their power to get the Bill passed.
§ MR. PARNELLsaid, he hoped his hon. Friend would not proceed with his Motion. Of course, it was open to everybody to have an opinion on the merits or demerits of the clauses extending the Bill to Ireland, and he supposed they would have a proper opportunity for discussing them; but upon this Motion nobody appeared desirous of saying very much. He thought that any Member moving such a Motion at this period of the Session took a great responsibility on himself in regard to other questions of importance in which the people of Ireland were interested. He did not wish to use his influence with any of his hon. Friends as regarded the passage of 189 the additional clauses; but he certainly did think that when the House had frequently sat on Saturdays until 12 o'clock at night, 6 o'clock was too early an hour to adjourn.
§ MR. M. BROOKSremarked, that the hon. Member for Waterford had told the House that all the mercantile classes in Ireland were in favour of this Bill. ["No. no!"]
§ MR. DAWSON (The LORD MAYOR of DUBLIN)expressed his belief that the Chamber of Commerce and other commercial bodies in Dublin were favourable to the extension of the Bill to Ireland.
§ MR. DIXON-HARTLAND, in supporting the Motion for Adjournment, said, this was the first Bill that had come up from the Grand Committees. ["No, no!"] Well, it was the second; and if it were to be taken now, when they were all nearly worn out, it would be striking a very great blow at the Grand Committees.
§ MR. FINDLATERsaid, he should support the adjournment. There had not been any manifestation of public opinion in Ireland in favour of the Bill. There had been a fictitious public opinion got up by the signing of a certain document by several Members of Parliament, the great majority of whom, he undertook to say, knew nothing whatever about Bankruptcy Law. He knew how those Petitions were manufactured. He had very serious objections to this Bill. ["Order!"]
§ MR. SPEAKERThe hon. Member must confine himself to the Question of Adjournment.
§ MR. FINDLATERsaid, he was opposed to a long Sitting this evening.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, although he still retained his personal objection to proceed with the Bill at this hour, he would, in deference to a request of the hon. Member for the City of Cork (Mr. Parnell), the Leader of the Party to which he owed allegiance, ask leave to withdraw his Amendment.
§ MR. BIGGARwished, before the withdrawal of the Amendment, to direct the attention of the Prime Minister to his statement last night, that he did not intend to ask the House to sit late today. The spirit of that pledge would argue that they should not sit later than 6 o'clock, particularly as they had disposed 190 of one branch of Business which had been put on the Paper.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, he had distinctly conveyed to the House that the Government would not ask the House to sit till a late hour this evening; but it was quite evident by the letter and spirit of that pledge that they had not reached the time at which the House should be asked to desist from its labours. At that hour (6.30) it would be extremely wrong on the part of the Government if, after giving Notice of this Business, they should refuse to proceed with it.
§ MR. P. MARTINsaid, great and important issues would be involved in the discussion, which was not one of the mere re-commitment of the Bill. The measure would have the effect of introducing into Ireland the great evils of officialism.
§ MR. SPEAKERsaid, the hon. and learned Member was not confining himself to the Question of Adjournment.
§ MR. P. MARTINsaid, he was endeavouring to show that the discussion would be one of great importance.
§ MR. MELDONwished to say why he should vote for the adjournment of the House. It was said that the Motion was one for the re-commitment of the Bill; but it must be remembered that the discussion about to take place was one upon the principle of it as applied to Ireland. On the ground that the discussion must be of a lengthened character, and that the Prime Minister gave a distinct pledge that the Sitting should not be a late one, he thought it was a most unreasonable thing that they should now be asked to enter upon a general discussion of the principles of the Bill.
§ MR. PULESTONsaid, that, in his opinion, more harm than good would be done if the Government persisted in proceeding with the Bill after what the House had accomplished during the afternoon.
MR. BARING, on the contrary, trusted the Government would not be deterred from their resolution to proceed, as the Bill, however it might affect Ireland, at any rate was of the greatest consequence to England.
§ Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Original Question put, and agreed to.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."
191§ MR. P. MARTIN, who had the following Notice on the Paper:—
That, in view of the fact that the Second Reading of this Bill was taken, and its committal to and constitution of the Standing Committee assented to on the statement that the provisions did not extend to Ireland or Scotland, that Clauses which proposed to so extend it were proposed in Committee and then withdrawn, and that the Bill has been since in part recommitted, it is inexpedient and unreasonable at this period of the Session to now propose that by new Clauses the Bill shall be extended, and the substantive control in the administration of estates in bankruptcy in Ireland vested in the English Board of Trade, and the abuses and evils incident to the already too widely extended Governmental centralization in Irish affairs increased, it is inexpedient to proceed with the Bill,said, that before the House went into Committee on this Bill, he was anxious to say a few words. The Motion he had placed on the Paper in general terms expressed his opinion in respect to the Bill, and he would now very briefly, so far as the nature of the subject would permit, deal with the question. He respectfully submitted that the time and circumstances under which the present Motion had been made were most inopportune. This Bill was introduced into the House by the President of the Board of Trade, on the 29th of March, and it was then expressly declared that its provisions would not extend to Ireland, and during the discussion on the second reading not a single Irish Member stood up to ask that the Bill should be extended to their country. It was then referred to the Grand Committee, and, of course, as it was a Bill dealing simply and solely with English mercantile interests, the Committee was constituted with that borne in mind. On the 20th March the Bill entered the Grand Committee, and it was not until the 6th of June that the thought entered the mind of anybody to extend it to Ireland. Some discussion then took place, and certain Members asked that it should be extended to Ireland; but up to that time he believed he was true in stating not a single official of the Irish Government was on the Committee, and it was only then the Attorney General for Ireland was placed on the Committee. On being placed on it he put certain Amendments on the Paper, extending the Bill to Ireland. Now, what became of those Amendments? They were presented to the Committee after some days, and were 192 then withdrawn; but he would admit that they were withdrawn on the statement of the President of the Board of Trade for the purpose of consulting Irish feeling in reference to the matter. A "round robin" on the matter was then sent to the Irish Members. Was that the way to consult Irish feeling—was that the way to conduct the Business of the House properly, to send round to Irish Members in the dark hours of the night a paper asking them to sign it and say they were in favour of extending this Bill to Ireland? Was that the way Business was to be managed in the English Parliament, to send round at the fag-end of the Session a paper to the hon. Member for Cork (Mr. Shaw) and his Friends, who were anxious to have local bankruptcy jurisdiction in their counties, and not allow the matter to be properly discussed at the Grand Committee? No doubt, it was stated that the hon. Member for Carlow (Mr. Gray) interfered there to prevent discussion; but the allegation of the President of the Board of Trade the hon. Member repudiated on the spot, stating that he was perfectly prepared then and there to oppose the extension of the Bill to Ireland. Under these circumstances, what had since occurred to justify the right hon. Gentleman in introducing these clauses again? The clauses never had the benefit of public discussion; in point of fact, they had never been examined into or ventilated. What justification now could there be for the sudden and hasty change on the part of the President of the Board of Trade? None that he could see, unless it was because of some gross abuse existing in the Irish system of bankruptcy. Now, he admitted that there might be some defects in the Irish system, as there was in all legal systems, and that it was capable of considerable improvements. He always advocated that small bankruptcy cases ought to be tried in the counties in which they arose, and he believed there was ample machinery existing at the present moment to give effect to that object. Why should not his own county of Kilkenny and the other counties in Ireland that had at present the benefit of Chairmen of Quarter Sessions have also the benefit of local Courts of Bankruptcy for the trial of small cases? But if this Bill passed it would be impossible to establish Courts of that character. Now, 193 let them see whether there were such gross abuses in the Irish system as would warrant this sudden change. He would give the words of a man who had studied the question of localization of Bankruptcy Courts with great care (Mr. James Campbell), and who had read several papers on the subject before the Statistical Society. What did he say? He said that the Irish bankruptcy system could not fail to be viewed in a favourable light, inasmuch as it would be found to contain all the virtues, whilst it was free from the vices, of the English and Scotch systems. The debts of the Irish Court, Mr. Campbell said, were collected economically and expeditiously by the Official Assignees; while the English system did not escape the unfavourable comments in this respect of the Commission of 1864. What did Mr. Justice Harrison say—a Belfast man, whose opinions ought to have some weight with the hon. Members from Belfast who were in favour of this Bill. Mr. Justice Harrison spoke in most favourable terms of the Irish system, and stated that while debts in England took 30 and 40 per cent to collect, they were collected in Ireland for 14 per cent. Now, these were important matters, which he submitted ought to be borne in mind before a hasty and sudden change was made. The President of the Board of Trade, when introducing this Bill, stated that £5,000,000 sterling had been wrongfully and fraudulently withheld from its owners. That, in fact, was the raison d'être of this Bill. Now, compare that state of affairs with what occurred in Ireland, and it would be found that not one shilling had been lost by the Irish Bankruptcy Court. It was, therefore, a very strange and a very curious thing that when, by this system, the money of the creditors was realized so cheaply and so expeditiously, that a great change should be made, and a new system of officialism introduced. What was the advantage of this Bill? The Official Referee, whom it was now proposed to extend to Ireland, introduced a most complicated system. First of all, a receiving order was to be made, under which the Official Referee was to take possession of the assets; then there was to be a Committee of Inspection as to which of the number fell below a certain limit, and report was to be made to the Judge. Altogether the whole of the 194 proceedings under the clauses of the Bill were of the most complicated and difficult character, and would entail waste of money and unnecessary expense upon the traders who were brought under its operation. What was gained by the substitution in Ireland of the Official Receiver for the old system? Nothing at all. The abuses and the abstraction of money which was complained of under the present system in England did not exist in Ireland. There the Official Assignee was a public officer; the dividend list was made out at a certain time, and it was the right of any creditor to walk into the Official's Office and ask for his dividend. If he did not get it, even on the next day the creditor could walk down to the Courthouse; and, without the assistance of attorney or counsel, could make an application to the Judge, who would not only direct payment of the dividend, but would probably make such a report as would incapacitate the Assignee from holding any such office in future. So far from this Bill providing an expeditious system, it, on the contrary, put into operation a scheme terminating in that great and important body, the Board of Trade, to which the Irish trader would have to resort to obtain his order. Instead of providing Bankruptcy Courts easily accessible to every suitor, this Bill created a body of irresponsible officials throughout every part of Ireland, from whom the unfortunate creditor would at last be driven to seek the aid and protection of the Board of Trade. As a general principle, therefore, this was a very singular system for the right hon. Gentleman to ask the House to adopt, especially as some men of the very highest authority and experience had condemned in the strongest terms this system of officialism altogether. On the second reading of the Bill an opinion of Lord Sherborne was quoted, pointing out the danger of relegating to a political body like the Board of Trade functions of this character. What was this system, too, but a wholly now and untried one? He could understand the proposal to extend this to Ireland, if it had been in successful operation in England; but, on the contrary, it was well known that in England they had muddled this question of bankruptcy, and introduced into it almost every wrong system they could introduce. 195 The right hon. Gentleman, too, was quite wrong in saying that these clauses, which were now, at the tenth hour, presented to the House, were the same as those originally brought before the Grand Committee. The very first of the latter proposed to extend the Bill to Ireland in a very different manner from what was now suggested. So far from creating small local Courts in different places, these clauses did the very opposite; for, in point of fact, they transferred to the Lord Lieutenant a power which the House of Commons ought not to vest in him—a power, namely, to create Bankruptcy Courts in such places as he thought fit. Some hon. Members might think this right; but he should be surprised if the majority of the House were in favour of such policy. If the Bill had not received the sanction of the Board of Trade, he should have stamped it as a piece of privileged and gross jobbery. He would assume that five Courts were appointed—Cork, Belfast, Limerick, Waterford, and Derry. How were these five Judges to be controlled, and from what fund would they be paid? Clearly, the Recorders could not fill the offices; and the curious spectacle was afforded of such an advocate of economy and retrenchment as the right hon. Gentleman pressing forward a Bill which, in regard to Ireland, would lead only to extra expenditure. Let them go a step further. These Courts would require a permanent staff, and from what fund were they also to be paid, or was the cost to be met out of the assets of the estates? These points furnished abundant reasons why there should be a full and adequate discussion of this Bill, so that the Irish people might really know what they had before them. Do not let anyone suppose that if this Bill were passed bankruptcy expenses in Ireland, of which many people now complained, would be any smaller. He trusted the President of the Board of Trade would not propose such a monstrous thing as that these expenses should be borne out of the estates of the debtors. This new Official Referee was to be paid from a percentage charged on the presentation of petitions; but he would have the House observe that plus that there would be the expenses of attorney and counsel—gentlemen whom many people would like to get rid of altogether in these transactions. The 17th section said, that— 196The official referee shall take part in the examination of the debtor, and for the purpose thereof, if specially authorized by the Board of Trade, may employ a solicitor with or without counsel.Here the inevitable solicitors stepped in—who might not be an Irishman, but an English attorney appointed by the Board of Trade, who would thus obtain the right to practice in Ireland without having obtained the necessary call, and without paying one farthing. But the grievance did not end there. Under the present Irish system there were limited provisions with respect to rights of appeal; but the 104th section of this clause proposed a power of appeal without stint or limit, and conceived on a most liberal principle. In this he recognized the hand of the English Solicitor General; and when the whole round of appeals up to the House of Lords had been carried out nothing but the proverbial oyster shell would be left for the unfortunate creditor. Then, again, for the sake of uniformity, economy, and expedition, the English Bankruptcy Judges had been constituted a part of the Supreme Court of Judicature; whilst there were separate clauses now to be moved by the Government, excluding this provision in respect to Ireland.Notice taken, that 40 Members were not present; House counted, and 40 Members being found present.
§ MR. P. MARTINresuming, said, that when the Conservatives were in power they carried out these provisions; and on the Irish Judges being consulted all they advised was that the Bankruptcy Court in Dublin should be attached to the Chancery, and not to the Common Law Division. So little regard, however, was shown to Ireland that an express provision was to be moved excluding from that country this very moderate measure of reform. It was shown very clearly, by a Return presented on the Motion of an hon. Member opposite (Mr. Arthur O'Connor), that there was not work enough for even the two existing Judges; and he could not see why one of them, at least, should not be utilized in the Equity Courts. Mr. Walsh was a gentleman enjoying a large Equity business before he was made a Judge, and no one was better fitted to adorn the Irish Bench. The system of this Bill was intended to meet large and congested business, and it was a cruelty to 197 introduce those complicated and expensive provisions into Ireland, where they were not wanted. Another wholesome and just distinction drawn by the existing Irish law was that between trading and non-trading defaulters. It would be a great hardship to non-trading classes in Ireland to be subjected to stringent acts of bankruptcy. The result would be, that if a man, in a moment of error or folly, were to tell his servant when a man called for payment of an account—"I don't want to see him," he would thereby commit an act of bankruptcy, on which adjudication could take place, because it would be inferred he had acted with intent to defeat his creditors. It would be cruelty to apply such an Act of Bankruptcy to the non-trading classes throughout Ireland. Was there not, he asked, something behind the conduct of the Government in regard to this Bill? Was not this an attempt to extend the accursed centralization in Ireland? The President of the Board of Trade had got in the thin end of the wedge already with the tramways, and he now tried to get control of bankruptcy. He would, under the Bill, have enormous patronage in respect of bankruptcy; and it would not be very difficult then for the Dublin Lights Board to fall at his hand, and he who decried centralization would secure the control and leave every Irish matter in the hands of an English Board. It was no longer to be the Lord Lieutenant who would have the real control of Ireland, but the President of the Board of Trade. At the same time, such was his high opinion of the right hon. Gentleman that, if all that multifarious business could possibly be supervised personally by the present President of the Board of Trade, he would have loss objection to such an arrangement; but they could not hope that any one man could bestow upon it the vigilant attention which was required, and still less could they expect that the right hon. Gentleman would remain permanently in Office.
§ MR. EWARTsaid, that, judging from the speech just delivered, legal and commercial men from Ireland took very different views of that question; but, although the present state of things might be very satisfactory to the lawyers, it was anything but satisfactory to the mercantile community. To describe the present system of bankruptcy in Ireland as being cheap, simple, and expeditious 198 was to draw a sketch from fancy only. The reverse was the opinion of the entire community in Ireland, except a small knot of gentlemen connected with the Legal Profession, many of whom were deeply interested in the existing system. Bankruptcy business in Ireland was now dear, complex, and tedious, so much so that the merchants allowed the traders to do almost what they liked rather than go into a Court of Bankruptcy. As to there being a small amount of business in that Court in Ireland, the fact was that a great amount of business which should go into Court did not go there at all for the reasons he had indicated. The hon. and learned Member for Kilkenny (Mr. P. Martin) had spoken slightingly of what he called the "round robin;" but it had been signed by 62 Gentlemen, while others gave it their approval, although objecting to put their names on the paper. In the town which he represented (Belfast), the Town Council, the Chamber of Commerce, the Linen Merchants' Association, and men of eminence in the banking world supported that measure. Indeed, there was a general consensus of opinion entirely in favour of the Bill. They wished to cast in their lot with England in regard to that legislation. The hon. and learned Member had quoted Judge Harrison as speaking in favour of the Bankruptcy Laws in Ireland; but that was when comparing them with the existing laws in England. He (Mr. Ewart), therefore, sincerely hoped that the Government would go forward with the measure.
§ MR. DALYsaid, he must deny that that measure had been either conceived in haste or pressed forward with confusion. He also maintained that it had been considered in Ireland, and was approved by the mercantile community. As a matter of fact, no proceedings had been more carefully watched and discussed than the proceedings of the Grand Committee on the Bill; and the announcement of its extension to Ireland was received with satisfaction by commercial men throughout the country. The hon. and learned Member for Kilkenny (Mr. P. Martin) had had the audacity to state that the Bill had never been discussed by the Irish people. To that statement he gave a categorical denial. He knew, indeed, of no subject which was more freely canvassed and discussed in Ireland. The Irish Bankruptcy Law was 199 only good in comparison with the existing state of Bankruptcy Law in England; and the opinions quoted by the hon. and learned Member for Kilkenny, of Mr. Campbell, and Judge Harrison, who were both theorists, were in opposition to the unanimous opinion of mercantile men in Ireland. No one felt where the shoe pinched more than the wearer; and the opinion of men who had 20 or 25 years' experience of the operations of the Bankruptcy Court in Ireland must weigh heavier than the opinion of an outsider who read a mere theoretical opinion before the Statistical Society in Dublin. When the Bill was introduced he sent it to every Society and Chamber of Commerce and Commercial Institute in Cork that was capable of examining it, and also to the Southern Law Association, composed of experienced solicitors; and from all these—from Mercantile Associations and Legal Associations alike—there came the opinion that it would be a great boon if the Bill were extended to Ireland. The Bill, as now before the House, had the approbation of the Dublin Mercantile Association and Council of Commerce, and of the most influential merchants of Belfast. He himself had the pleasure of meeting at the Board of Trade the Mayor of Belfast, surrounded by men representing its commercial interests, who came there with the head of his own Corporation and a number of the most influential men in Cork to pray that these clauses be extended to Ireland. There might be details which could be amended in Committee; but, in his opinion, the Bill contained that germ of a principle which had been desired throughout Ireland—namely, the establishment of local Courts of Bankruptcy. He had presented a Petition from 750 firms in the great centres of trade in England doing business with Ireland, who prayed that the great boon enjoyed here of a local Bankruptcy Court should be established in Cork, Belfast, and other centres. He, therefore, asked the English Members not to look upon this as an exclusively Irish question, but to consider the immense amount of business done from the English side of the Channel with Ireland. Was it unfair that Irish Members should ask that in their smaller operations at home they should be put on the same platform as Englishmen, and have a cheap and expeditious method of bankruptcy, in place of the costly and 200 protracted system at present carried on in Dublin? The evils of the present system comprised the delay in adjudication, whereby the trader, if he was dishonest, gained an immense advantage over his creditors. Again, where small estates had to be administered, the expense of taking witnesses to the Court in Dublin often absorbed nearly the whole of the assets; while the process of distributing the assets was also very expensive and dilatory. The establishment of local Courts would go far to remedy those evils. The extension of that Bill to Ireland was unanimously supported by the mercantile men of Belfast, Cork, Limerick, and Waterford. By whom was the measure opposed? Looking over the 30 pages of Amendments, he found, by an odd coincidence, the name of lawyer after lawyer, who did not represent the commercial classes, but presumably acted from esprit de corps, or from some other motive in defence of the Dublin legal gentlemen who were interested in the existing system. He would only add, in conclusion, that he hoped he had succeeded in establishing the fact that in the arguments used by the hon. and learned Member for Kilkenny there were a great many inaccuracies; and he trusted that the House would not be deterred by the threat of factious opposition from conferring on the mercantile community in Ireland the boon which they anxiously anticipated.
§ DR. LYONSsaid, he desired to put the House in possession of the views which a number of commercial men had addressed to him in regard to this Bill. This day, on it becoming known in Dublin that the Government was in earnest in their intention to extend this Bill to Ireland, he had been addressed by a body of individuals representing so many interests that it was impossible to ignore their high position and their right to speak on behalf of the commercial community. From the large number of telegrams which he held in his hand he would only enumerate a few, though they were all from persons of the most independent position. It was unworthy to impute to them that their position, as opponents of this Bill, was in the interest of a small clique of lawyers, or in the interests of Dublin alone. The Directors of the Royal Bank of Ireland had telegraphed to him that until experience was had of this Bill, and of its working 201 in England, they in Ireland should not be asked hastily to abandon a system of Bankruptcy Law which had hitherto given full satisfaction. These Directors, he said, were gentlemen who could be mentioned alongside some of the greatest commercial men in England. He had received telegrams from many other representative men and firms and Associations. It was not necessary for him to specify names. The senders all agreed in expressing their satisfaction with the working of the existing system. He only desired to put the views of the great body of the commercial community before the House. The right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade had stated he was desirous of being guided by the Representatives of Irish constituencies, and by those who represented the great commercial interests of the country. That, he pointed out, was not to be taken from a numercial comparison; but when they took the position of gentlemen of great commercial status, of perfect independence, and integrity of character, he thought that expressions of opinion such as he had the honour of conveying to the House were worthy of respectful consideration, and he was sure they would receive such consideration at the hands of the President of the Board of Trade.
§ MR. DAWSON (LORD MAYOR of DUBLIN)said, the hon. Member for Dublin (Dr. Lyons) was not alone in receiving telegrams with regard to this Bill. He himself had also received telegrams; and it was quite evident, from their similarity with messages received by the hon. Member for Dublin, that they all emanated from a certain source, which would have found itself very weak indeed in the expression of Irish opinion without these Whips. The fact that they had all been received to-day was a condemnation of them as a genuine or representative expression of opinion. The Bill had been before the House since the 19th March; and it was strange, if the commercial people of Ireland felt so keenly on the subject, that they should have waited until now in order to inspire their Representatives to oppose it. They had not only inspired their Representatives, but he believed they had been themselves inspired, and the very phraseology of the telegrams they had sent had been forwarded to them. The Royal Bank was a peculiarly Dublin 202 institution, which had no branches to any extent throughout the country. Notwithstanding the telegrams referred to by the hon. Member (Dr. Lyons), there was no pronouncement from any distinguished house of business, except that which was an emphatic pronouncement in support of the Bill. Let them see what was the public opinion held by Ireland on this question. They were told by the hon. Member for the City of Cork (Mr. Daly) that most of the Amendments upon the Paper appeared in the names of Members of the Legal Profession; and, that being so, it would be well to see what was thought in Ireland on the subject. One of the first commercial circles in which he had heard this Bill criticized was a meeting of the Irish Commercial Travellers' Association in Dublin on April 7th. These were the men who held in their hands the threads of the commercial operations of Ireland; and one of them, Mr. Macdonald, who presided at the meeting, pointed out how the traders were injuriously affected by the present system, and how they, as a rule, took little notice of bad debts, because it would only be throwing good money after bad to go into the Bankruptcy Court. Honest traders in Ireland could not get on, because of the system which permitted the frequent appearances in the Bankruptcy Court of those who paid only 3s., 4s., or 5s. in the pound. Those who desired to see the commercial position of Ireland improve ought to welcome the introduction of such a measure as this, which would tend to make Irish traders business-like and prudent. The only reason which for a time had made him hesitate about supporting this Bill was that it was opposed by an hon. Gentleman with whom he had always desired to act most harmoniously—namely, the hon. Member for Carlow (Mr. Gray); but the hon. Member for Carlow was accountable, to some degree, for the sound opinion which he now held. The Freeman's Journal of the 23rd April commented on the meeting of the Commercial Travellers' Association, and expressed its belief that the need for the improvement of the Bankruptcy Law, recommended by that Association was obvious, and that their suggestions were sound. He found from a return that there were in the year 14,000 and odd bankruptcy cases, and 203 that for each case there were 15 or 16 sittings. As Judge Walsh, the Judge of the Bankruptcy Court, stated in May last, it was no wonder it was proposed to make some change in the system, considering the frequent adjournment of the cases pending before the Courts. Under the present system a man could open a place of business one day and shut the next; and, in his opinion, if this Bill was passed, it would introduce such good commercial habits into the country that it would go far to promote the prosperity of the country. In Dublin he remarked the case of a man who had closed several times and opened again; and, wishing to understand how he was able to do that, he inquired of the Official Assignee, and the Official Assignee told him that the man made declaration that he gave the best account he could give—the best account he could give being no account at all. Now, what was the view of the commercial traders in Ireland on the question? The Chamber of Commerce in Dublin was in favour of it, so were the Chambers of Commerce in Limerick, Belfast, Waterford, and Derry—in fact, all the towns in Ireland gave an unqualified support; and it was not until the telegrams were received a while ago, the identity of phraseology of which showed a common origin, that there was any indication of opposition to it. That opposition came entirely from the Dublin Legal Profession, and he should say that Profession took a very narrow-minded view of this matter. The fact was, there was no great amount of commercial business in Ireland, owing, to a considerable extent, to the state of the Bankruptcy Law; and he believed that a reform of that law would lead to a rapid increase of trade. One of the reasons alleged against the Bill was that it would deprive Ireland of a local institution, and centralize it in London. Now, such an opposition would entirely have his sympathy; but the President of the Board of Trade told him that he intended doing no such thing, but that it was proposed to establish in Dublin a branch of the Board of Trade—in fact, a new institution over which he would have control, and which would be only responsible to him. It was said—"Try the Bill in England, and then, if it succeeded, apply it to Ireland." Well, he would say—"Try it in England and Ireland, and if it does not succeed 204 deprive both of it." And now he came to the climax of the argument in favour of this Bill, and that was that there was a national element in the desire for it. He hoped, therefore, that the President of the Board of Trade would persevere with the Bill, and extend to Ireland a measure which would lay the foundation of that commercial prosperity which they so much wanted, and which they were so much in hopes of getting.
§ MR. M. BROOKSsaid, he had listened with attention to the speech of the hon. Member for Cork City (Mr. Daly), and the right hon. Gentleman the Lord Mayor of Dublin (Mr. Dawson); and he failed to see that they pointed out one blot in the existing Irish Bankruptcy Law. Their arguments were entirely confined to a condemnation of the administration of an Irish system which was carried on by Irish gentlemen, and a condemnation of an institution which he never heard condemned before, and which he had always heard spoken of as being most satisfactory. If there was such a feeling in Ireland in favour of the Bill, why did not the Lord Mayor of Dublin ask the Body over which he presided to express an opinion on the matter? The Corporation of Dublin always took a deep interest in anything that concerned the commercial interests of Ireland; and why were they not asked to express their opinions on this question? He was amazed to hear the attacks made on an honourable Profession, to the effect that Amendments had been placed upon the Paper from mean and selfish motives. Now, he would be ashamed to suggest a doubt; but might it not be asked whether the Legal Profession in Cork and Belfast had personal interest in the matter also? He represented the unanimous feeling of the mercantile, manufacturing, and shipping interests of the City of Dublin, and they had but one feeling, and that was that, unless some weighty reasons were given, the Government ought not to make the changes proposed in the Bill. The more the subject had been examined, the more clearly did it appear that great injury would be done to the public interest by the application of the Bill to Ireland. Trade would be restricted and money interests injured; and he, therefore, hoped the House would negative the present proposal, which ought not to be proceeded with 205 without fuller discussion. He would move the adjournment of the debate.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, before that Question was put, and before it found a Seconder, he would make some observations which might have some influence on the mind of the hon. Gentleman. The experience which the Government had obtained since the close of the debate on the Judicature Rules and Orders had been very valuable in the light it had cast upon the future. It had enabled the Government to make a forecast of the future with sufficient accuracy, and to point out what was their duty under existing circumstances. In the few remarks he had to make, he would confine himself to an estimate of the facts of the case. The first point of importance was that they had arrived at the 11th of August. On this, the 11th of August, his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade had made a Motion to extend the enactments of the Bankruptcy Bill to Ireland, in pursuance of an announcement he had made to that effect; and there had been placed upon the Table of the House, almost entirely on account of that announcement, 39 pages of Amendments, which, he believed, amounted to more than 300 in number. It had not been found practicable to discuss these Amendments. Hon. Members from Ireland had felt it their Parliamentary duty to initiate a discussion on the principle of extending the Bankruptcy Bill to Ireland. Some half-dozen Irish Members had addressed the House upon the subject; and there remained, so far as he could form an estimate, no less than twice that number who also felt it incumbent on them, as Irish Members, to address the House.
§ MR. T. P. O'CONNORNot half that number.
§ MR. CALLANTwice that number, Sir.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, he might be excused for attaching as much value to his own estimate as to that of other persons. It came, therefore, to this—that it would be impossible to name a day for resuming the discussion. Supposing they were now, or shortly, to adjourn the debate, the earliest day for resuming it would be Wednesday next; and though it might be possible to bring the Speaker out of the Chair at the close of the Wednesday Sitting, they 206 would only be at the beginning of the 39 pages of Amendments. Under these circumstances, the end of August would be reached before the Bill could be sent up to the House of Lords; and he was bound to say that would be making a draft upon the patience and forbearance of the House of Lords which would be hardly justifiable; and, undoubtedly, this was a Bill upon which the Legal Authorities of the other House had eminently a title to a fair opportunity of full discussion and consideration. The Government had not scrupled to ask the House in the past to make considerable sacrifices. It was a serious matter for the House to be entreated—and it had listened most cheerfully to the entreaty—to continue its daily discussions to hours so unreasonable as those at which it had recently adjourned. Besides that, they were reaching the outside limit of the Parliamentary Session in contemplating the transaction of the Business which they had before them, apart from the discussion of the extension of this Bill to Ireland. With regard to the measure itself, Her Majesty's Government attached to it the very greatest importance; and desirous as they were that Ireland should have the benefit of this measure, and that she should have the benefit of it without delay, yet they had another duty to perform—their duty to England, which substantially had got the measure; and it would be a heavy responsibility if, in the anxiety at once to extend it to Ireland without delay, they were to entail upon the House such a prolongation of labour as might even end in endangering the passing of the Bill as a Bill for England, but a Bill which he hoped would, in the next Session, serve for an extension to Ireland. [A laugh] He witnessed the glee of the hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. Biggar), who, no doubt, looked upon this as another of the many achievements which had marked his career in the House. The hon. Member must be content to take a rational view of public affairs, and form but a modest measure of the achievements within the power of the Government. They considered that it was within their power to secure the passing of such a valuable measure; S and they did not think they ought to do anything that would endanger this result. They thought there was a limit on the demands which they were justified in 207 making on the House. The debate which had taken place was enough to show that the field opened by the Motion for extending the Bill to Ireland would practically be a very wide one. He had been careful not to say a word about Obstruction, or anything which could give offence to anyone. But he had now, on the part of his right hon. Friend (Mr. Chamberlain), and on the part of the Government, to say that while, of course, they would at once prosecute this measure, and would name an early day next week for that purpose, they would desist from any attempt to extend its provisions in the present year to Ireland; and it was his duty to ask leave to withdraw the Motion made three hours ago by his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade.
§ MR. T. P. O'CONNORsaid, that, before the Motion was withdrawn, he would like just to say a word. The right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister was perfectly justified in stating that he had not said a word which would wound the susceptibilities of Members of the House. He had not been one of those who had taken any part in signing the request to the President of the Board of Trade; but he did not sympathize with the insinuation that the six Members who had taken part in the opposition to the Bill had been actuated by anything mean or selfish in that opposition. The opposition had been almost essentially of a local character, and was supported by enemies of centralization, and by lawyers; but it was only fair to add that it had not been obstructive. The Government were a little to blame in the matter, because they ought to have given the House an earlier opportunity for discussion. He hoped, however, that next Session any Bill for extending the provisions of the English Bill to Ireland would be introduced at a sufficiently early period to insure proper discussion.
§ MR T. A. DICKSONwished to say, before the debate closed, that 70 Irish Members were in favour of the application of the Bill to Ireland; but that the influence and wishes of those Members were thrown aside by the Prime Minister, and the clauses relating to Ireland cast aside, in deference to the opinion of six Members. He had learned from these facts the value of Obstruction, and, in the end, it would prevail if persevered in. They had also seen the interests 208 of the entire commercial class in Ireland sacrificed to a clique of Dublin lawyers.
§ MR. CALLANsaid, he had at no time during the past 15 3years admired the Prime Minister more than he had that evening, because there had been nothing more becoming in the Bill than its withdrawal. To show how the Prime Minister could gauge the opposition to the Bill, notwithstanding that the hon. Member for Tyrone (Mr. T. A. Dickson) and the hon. Member for Galway (Mr. T. P. O'Connor) had spoken of only six Members, and that the opposition had been confined to a Dublin clique of lawyers, he would point out to the House that, although he had opposed it, he was not, unfortunately, a practising barrister; also the two hon. Members for Monaghan (Mr. Healy and Mr. Findlater) had opposed it—["No, no!"]—also the hon. and learned Member for Kildare (Mr. Meldon), the hon. and learned Member for Kilkenny (Mr. P. Martin), who had retired with a large fortune; the hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. Biggar), who was a merchant; the two hon. Members for the City of Dublin (Mr. M. Brooks and Dr. Lyons), one eminent as a merchant and the other as a medical man; the other hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. Fay), the hon. Member for Wexford County (Mr. Small), and the hon. Member for Carlow (Mr. Gray). There had been 13 Members opposed to the Bill altogether, and who were prepared to oppose it at all lengths; and then the hon. Member for Tyrone had got up to oppose his old Friend the Prime Minister, on behalf of the 62 Members who had signed the requisition, not half of whom had really known what it was about. He was proud to say that he had killed two of the most objectionable Bills which had been brought on during the Session—the Sunday Closing Bill and the Bankruptcy Bill as it was proposed to be extended to Ireland.
§ MR. FINDLATERsaid, he must deny that the opposition to the Bill had been promoted by a clique of Dublin lawyers. He had opposed it because he conscientiously believed it was fraught with injury to Ireland.
MR. O'BRIENsaid, that there was one consolation, at all events, in the course the Government had taken, and that was that it would show the Irish people what power even half-a-dozen 209 determined men had in that House. He only hoped that the hon. Member for Dublin and his Friends, who had distinguished themselves by their prowess in upsetting these clauses, would expend as much energy in the cause of Ireland as they had in saving the Dublin Bankruptcy Court.
§ MR. BIGGARsaid, the reason he signed the requisition to the Prime Minister was because he received a Memorial to that effect purporting to come from the Town Commissioners of Cavan; but he subsequently found that the Memorial really came from the chairman of a local bank at Belfast. Then he examined the Bill for himself, and came to the conclusion that it would not be desirable to extend it to Ireland, and that the opinion in favour of that extension was a manufactured opinion. He had to complain, further, that the conduct of Business with respect to the Bill when before the Grand Committee was unsatisfactory. One hon. Member was threatened that if he were to raise any difficulty on Report he would never get on a Grand Committee again. An hon. Member found that all his Amendments were opposed by the President of the Board of Trade, and he was outvoted; but the moment that hon. Member put down Amendments in the name of somebody else they were immediately accepted by the right hon. Gentleman.
§ MR. LEAMYsaid, he was bound to complain that the Irish clauses were not pressed on the Grand Committee. Those Members who signed the Memorial had every reason to believe that the Government would carry out their promise, and bow to the wishes of the majority of the Irish Members. The blame of the present failure rested entirely with the President of the Board of Trade. It was certainly within their rights for those who objected to the extension of the Bill to Ireland to give it all the opposition in their power—he himself would do the same if he were opposed to it—but if the President of the Board of Trade meant to extend the Bill to Ireland, why had he kept it back till the last moment, when he must have known that it would encounter opposition that would destroy its chance of passing?
§ MR. MARUMsaid, he was opposed to the extension of the Bill to Ireland, 210 although he had put no Amendments on the Paper. He denied however, that the Motion of the right hon. Gentleman was opposed solely by half-a-dozen Dublin lawyers.
§ Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Order for re-committal of Bill discharged.
§ Bill, as amended, to be considered upon Monday next.
§ House adjourned at a quarter before Nine o'clock till Monday next.