[BILL 189.] SECOND READING. (Hansard, 24 May 1883)

§ COLONEL KING-HARMAN
said, he would move that the Order for the Second Reading be discharged. The Bill had not been printed, and it was 879 not a good example to set, for the Government to bring in Bills, and place them on the Orders of the Day before they had been printed. This was the third time during this week that the same course had been taken, the other occasions being those on which the Board of Works (Ireland) Bill and the Charitable Trusts Bill were put down for second reading. The House was being treated not only with scant courtesy, but with unfairness. If the same thing were done by private Members, it would certainly be resented by the Government. He would move that the Order be discharged, in consequence of the Bill not having been printed.

§ MR. SPEAKER
The hon. and gallant Member (Colonel King-Harman) proposes to take a course which is most unusual, and without precedent. I understand the hon. Member in charge of the Bill only proposes to postpone this stage of the Bill.

§ MR. COURTNEY
Yes; till Thursday next.

§ COLONEL KING-HARMAN
said, he would not have called attention to the case, had it been an isolated one. In consequence of the New Rules of Procedure, hon. Members had to be exceedingly careful how Bills were brought in, and they had to remain night after night to watch the proceedings.

§ MR. TOTTENHAM
asked the hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill whether, before Thursday, the Bill would be printed and distributed?

§ MR. COURTNEY
said, the action taken by the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Dublin County (Colonel King-Harman) considerably surprised him. The course taken in respect of the Bill was one of a usual kind. Leave was given to bring in the Bill, and a day fixed for second reading. It was hoped that, in the interval, the Bill would be printed and circulated; and it was never intended to take the second reading on the day fixed if the Bill had not been printed. When the Bill was called just now, he (Mr. Courtney) at once moved that it be deferred till Thursday; and he hoped that before next Thursday it would be in the hands of hon. Members. It would be very inconvenient to prevent Bills being brought in unless they were ready to be printed and circulated. The hon. and gallant 880 Gentleman was hardly correct in his reference to the Charitable Trusts Bill, because that Bill was printed before the Whitsuntide Holidays. The hon. Gentleman the Member for Leitrim (Mr. Tottenham) might rest assured that before the second reading of the Bill was taken ample time would be given for its perusal.

§ MR. R. N. FOWLER
said, he thought there was no fault to find with the course suggested by the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Courtney); but there was one remark of his to which he (Mr. R. N. Fowler) must take exception, and that was that the Charitable Trusts Bill was in the hands of hon. Members before the recent Holidays. It was perfectly true the Bill was distributed during the Recess; but it stood for second reading on Monday the 21st instant. When he asked the right hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill (Mr. Shaw Lefevre) if he intended to bring it on on that day, he expressly said he did. They had certainly reason to complain that the Government proposed to move the second reading of a Bill which had only been delivered during the Recess, and which, of course, hon. Members had had no opportunity of considering.

§ MR. THOROLD ROGERS
said, he received the Charitable Trusts Bill on the Saturday before the Recess.

§ MR. WARTON
said, that the Charitable Trusts Bill was distributed on the 12th, and it was put down for second reading on the 21st, the day the House re-assembled. If such proceedings were adopted by the Government, it would be his duty to block second readings. Such sharp practices were unworthy of Members of even the present Government.

§ MR. MOLLOY
asked if the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Courtney) would promise not to take the Bill on Thursday, if it was not then in the hands of Members?

§ MR. COURTNEY
Yes; I promise that.